An addition to the ***** resume

[OnTheWarpath58]

I was bored, thought I'd run some numbers - hadn't done any Chiefs-related homework in a while.

Anywho, discussion in another thread got me to thinking about the "talent level" on this team. People seem to be getting back in the habit of blaming specifically the QB and coaching, while claiming that this roster, and those before it are loaded with talent.

For a team that supposedly has talent, all they've done is beat up on the weak sisters of the poor over the last 4 years of the ***** Nightmare.

23 wins in 4 years.

Those 23 wins came against teams with a collective 152-214 record and a .415 winning percentage. You can thank Green Bay dropping a metric ****ton of passes back in December of 2011 - take them out of the equation, and you're looking at a .375 winning percentage.

1 win in 4 years against a 10-win or better team.

3 wins in 4 years against a 9-win or better team.

20 wins against 8-8 teams or worse - 11 of those wins against teams with 6 wins or less.

So the "Executive of the Decade" was responsible for 5.75 wins per year, and we should consider ourselves lucky we "earned" that many.

In this era of parity in the NFL, a team with this much "talent" would be winning more than 5.75 games per year. Even without a QB. Even without a QB and HC.

Folks say that Mark Sanchez is a POS, and that we have more talent than the Jets. The same Jets that have won 34 games in the last 4 years. 11 more than the Chiefs.

Buffalo has shit for talent, plays in a brutal division, and has 2 fewer wins over the same time period.

Cleveland is hot garbage, and they've won 4 fewer games over the past 4 years. 1 game a year difference.

Jacksonville has 1 fewer win.

Miami has 4 MORE wins.

Oakland has 2 MORE wins.


The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that we have more "talent" than every one of the above teams.

The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that our QB play has been at least as good as the above teams, and in most cases, better.

The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that our coaching has been at least as good as the above teams, and in most cases, better.


The overwhelming majority of this board would be dead wrong on one of those three assessments. One of these things is not like the other.

Folks, it's time to wake up and realize that QB and HC are just part of the problem.

I see a lot of bad teams with bad QB's and bad HC's that have won as much or more than we have.

Sadly, the bottom line is that there isn't nearly as much "talent" on this roster that you think there is - and that we're a lot closer to the Cleveland's, Buffalo's and Jacksonville's of the NFL than you want to admit.

[aturnis]

How many points have been scored off of turnovers this season? I wouldn't know where to find a state like that.

[OnTheWarpath58]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Do you agree or disagree with my assessment of the following players:

Albert (if healthy) is a solid LT.
Bowe is a fringe #1 WR.
Hali is a solid OLB.
Houston is a solid OLB.
DJ is a solid ILB.
Flowers is a solid corner.

That's a pretty talented core, IMO, and those positions are pretty tough to fill. A competent GM could supplement this talent pretty quickly, IMO, but it all hinges on first getting the QB.

If you're talking to me...

Yes. I would agree with that assessment.

EDIT: This is the same core (minus Houston) we all thought would be easy to build around in 2009.

Yet four years later, we've won 23 games in four years.

Because we don't have much talent outside the core.

[theelusiveeightrop]

Don't enjoy being lumped in with OAK, BUFF and CLE. Shitholes. Guess that makes the Chiefs shitty by association. Sad.

[Dave]

With Peyton Manning on this team, it wins 10.

Or Rodgers, Brady, etc.

Add a solid coaching staff and it wins 12 or 13.

This years debacle is a direct result of 30 turnovers from 2 shitty QBs.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

If you're talking to me...

Yes. I would agree with that assessment.

Now - how would you compare that core to the "core" of Oakland, Buffalo, Cleveland, Miami and Jacksonville over the past 4 years?

Let's just take OAK. The only position I'd trade with them would be their DTs. Different scheme, of course, but they're stout along the line.

Cleveland is interesting. Better OT play, overall. Pretty close in terms of WR and RB play.

They also have a #1 CB.

In terms of age, they might be better situated than KC, but it's damn close.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

If you're talking to me...

Yes. I would agree with that assessment.

EDIT: This is the same core (minus Houston) we all thought would be easy to build around in 2009.

Yet four years later, we've won 23 games in four years.

Because we don't have much talent outside the core.

Yep. My first post in this thread:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

We're in much the same position now as in '09. There is a talented core of players. Unfortunately, the majority of this core is now four years older because ***** was truly terrible at his job.

[unnecessary drama]

Originally Posted by Dave

With Peyton Manning on this team, it wins 10.

Or Rodgers, Brady, etc.

Add a solid coaching staff and it wins 12 or 13.

This years debacle is a direct result of 30 turnovers from 2 shitty QBs.

And terribly soft, anti-aggressive defensive scheming

[OnTheWarpath58]

Originally Posted by theelusiveeightrop

Don't enjoy being lumped in with OAK, BUFF and CLE. Shitholes. Guess that makes the Chiefs shitty by association. Sad.

That's the point.

People would rather make excuses for, or flat-out overvalue the talent level on this roster than admit that we really are as bad as tire fire organizations like Jacksonville, Oakland and Cleveland over the past four years.

[theelusiveeightrop]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

That's the point.

People would rather make excuses for, or flat-out overvalue the talent level on this roster than admit that we really are as bad as tire fire organizations like Jacksonville, Oakland and Cleveland over the past four years.

Quit insulting tire fires.

[OnTheWarpath58]

Originally Posted by Dave

With Peyton Manning on this team, it wins 10.

Or Rodgers, Brady, etc.

Add a solid coaching staff and it wins 12 or 13.

This years debacle is a direct result of 30 turnovers from 2 shitty QBs.

So it's going to take one of the greatest QB's in the history of professional football to win 10 games with this roster in the weakest division in the NFL.

Case closed, Your Honor.

[Dave]

With average QB play and fewer turnovers, there is 5 or 6 more wins this season.

[unnecessary drama]

well thank God that didn't happen

I'll call this season a total success once *****/Crennel get canned, Cassel gets cut, and we draft Geno. Best season in a long, long, long, long, long time

[OnTheWarpath58]

Originally Posted by Dave

With average QB play and fewer turnovers, there is 5 or 6 more wins this season.

And if my aunt had a cock and balls, she'd be my uncle.

[unnecessary drama]

*****'s best move?

Letting Orton walk and bringing in "competition" named Brady Quinn for Matt Cassel!

Thanks, Scott!!

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Capt Tasty Cheeks

*****'s best move?

Letting Orton walk and bringing in "competition" named Brady Quinn for Matt Cassel!

Thanks, Scott!!

Yep. We might look back on all of this and decide that ***** was the biggest blessing in disguise if Geno lives up to his potential.