Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
I don't think that most Chiefs fans are willing to give up the prospect of these 10-12 win seasons, even if there isn't a realistic chance at winning anything of consequence.
This is the same argument that has happened on this site for a decade: it's the tug-of-war between people that see wild card flameouts as empty and those that view the pantomime of competitiveness as something not to be trifled with.
Approach the question from the perspective of a bureaucrat: would you rather have a job with extremely high pay and security in perpetuity with little risk, even if you don't achieve goals that will have you recognized at the top of your field, or would you risk losing said job with high salary, if your key evaluation turns out incorrectly?
Alex Smith is a "don't rock the boat, kiss the boss's ass, and hope for the best," pick. It can work, rarely, but it's the kind of chickenshit move made by management the world over. And it's the right move, not because he actually gives you a chance to win anything of consequence, but because most fans are happy enough with 10-6, and are too impatient to undergo a rebuild with both down years and a risk of failure.
Me? Beating Brian Hoyer for your playoff scalp is just as meaningless as 3-13. But I'm not the person tying my identity to Red Friday, treating Arrowhead as a bottomless kegger, and fighting people in the stands over the result of a game.
|
Flacco was a 230 yard/game (22 TD's/10 INT) guy the year he won it all. He just got hot at the right time in the playoffs.
Aikman/Elway/Young Tom Brady were all game managers when they won their set of rings. Brady has only won a single lombardi since he moved to the "elite level" in 2006. Russell Wilson is a premier game manager and has gone to two superbowls in a span of 3 seasons.
Effective game managers = Winners