Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Chiefs suck

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by broncosjf View Post

    No, rational people understand that there are ups and downs in professional sports, and they appreciate the big picture. In the big picture the Broncos have established a decades long culture of winning while the Chiefs spent 50 years embarrassing themselves in the postseason, when they could even get there.

    Rational people who root for successful teams don't mind when their rival teams are strong because it makes the games more interesting. Welcome back to the table. The West will be more fun with at least 2 competitive teams, and even if the Chiefs have an edge for the moment, it will make the wins against them even better.

    Either way, you can rest assured that I'm not the only Broncos fan who doesn't care even a little bit what you think about the Broncos. We are indisputably the alpha dog in this division over the long term, even if you have a current advantage, and we don't need you to acknowledge that or accept it to make ourselves feel better. I do understand, though, why you are seeking our approval. It's natural for subordinates to seek validation from superiors.
    Bahaha....good stuff. You badly want to convince us that we're insecure, yet everything that you post reeks of insecurity and desperation.

    Answer me this: what has Denver won without a HOF QB? What have they won with a QB that they drafted? Because that's what franchises with a longterm winning culture do. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Denver was a pretty awful franchise before Elway, a period that spanned about two decades. And they didn't win much post-Elway, pre-Manning. And they've stunk it up since Manning. Did I say anything inaccurate? This would seem to be a case of lucking into two HOF QBs rather than a consistent culture of winning.

    Just as KC couldn't beat the Manning Broncos, there is no reason to expect Denver to beat KC any time soon. Your best argument is "we've won before so we'll win again!"

    Sure. If you find a HOF QB who is lying on his couch and searching for a new gig.

    Comment


    • at the end of the game, andy will say, " I wish we could have run the ball better, "
      and I will be the winner.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by broncosjf View Post

        No, rational people understand that there are ups and downs in professional sports, and they appreciate the big picture. In the big picture the Broncos have established a decades long culture of winning while the Chiefs spent 50 years embarrassing themselves in the postseason, when they could even get there.

        Rational people who root for successful teams don't mind when their rival teams are strong because it makes the games more interesting. Welcome back to the table. The West will be more fun with at least 2 competitive teams, and even if the Chiefs have an edge for the moment, it will make the wins against them even better.

        Either way, you can rest assured that I'm not the only Broncos fan who doesn't care even a little bit what you think about the Broncos. We are indisputably the alpha dog in this division over the long term, even if you have a current advantage, and we don't need you to acknowledge that or accept it to make ourselves feel better. I do understand, though, why you are seeking our approval. It's natural for subordinates to seek validation from superiors.
        Denver has a lot of work to do if they want to catch KC. Like, A LOT.

        KC is in the driver's seat in the AFC for the foreseeable future. They have the best player in the NFL (and he's only 24) and their elite players with the exception of Kelce are 26 or younger.

        They're probably going to run the division/conference for a long time.
        Last edited by ILuvBroncos; 01-30-2020, 02:35 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by RockyMountainOyster View Post


          Answer me this: what has Denver won without a HOF QB?
          What a dumb question...

          What has any team won without a HOF QB? Sure you have the Trent Dilfer type outliers once in awhile, but seriously, you could use that idiotic question to try to undermine every great franchise...

          Jim Plunkett
          Joe Theismann
          Jim McMahon
          Phil Simms
          Doug Williams
          Jeff Hostetler
          Mark Rypien
          Trent Dilfer
          Brad Johnson

          Every QB in the first 40 Super Bowls who isn't in the HOF. McMahon, Simms, Hostetler, Dilfer, and Johnson were carried by all time great defenses, and that's just off the top of my head. I would have to look up what the other 4 guys were working with, but if I remember correctly, Rypien and Williams had generally great all around teams. Plunkett and Theismann were before I was watching.

          The only guys in the latest group who probably aren't getting in are Joe Flacco and Nick Foles. Flacco was carried by another all time great defense, and Foles had a great all around team.

          So there you have it. 42 of 53 Super Bowl winners had HOF QBs running the show. Are all those teams somehow diminished because they didn't do it with a scrub? If the Chiefs win would it make sense for you to question the franchise because they only ever won with Len Dawson and Patrick Mahomes?

          Seriously, what a dumb question...


          Comment


          • Originally posted by broncosjf View Post

            What a dumb question...

            What has any team won without a HOF QB? Sure you have the Trent Dilfer type outliers once in awhile, but seriously, you could use that idiotic question to try to undermine every great franchise...

            Jim Plunkett
            Joe Theismann
            Jim McMahon
            Phil Simms
            Doug Williams
            Jeff Hostetler
            Mark Rypien
            Trent Dilfer
            Brad Johnson

            Every QB in the first 40 Super Bowls who isn't in the HOF. McMahon, Simms, Hostetler, Dilfer, and Johnson were carried by all time great defenses, and that's just off the top of my head. I would have to look up what the other 4 guys were working with, but if I remember correctly, Rypien and Williams had generally great all around teams. Plunkett and Theismann were before I was watching.

            The only guys in the latest group who probably aren't getting in are Joe Flacco and Nick Foles. Flacco was carried by another all time great defense, and Foles had a great all around team.

            So there you have it. 42 of 53 Super Bowl winners had HOF QBs running the show. Are all those teams somehow diminished because they didn't do it with a scrub? If the Chiefs win would it make sense for you to question the franchise because they only ever won with Len Dawson and Patrick Mahomes?

            Seriously, what a dumb question...

            Dud is so stupid he doesn't even realize it's a stupid question. KC fans already consider Mahomes to be the GOAT, so if the Chefs win the Super Bowl, does that invalidate their SB title? What a facking moron!!! Lolol

            Comment


            • Originally posted by broncosjf View Post

              What a dumb question...

              What has any team won without a HOF QB? Sure you have the Trent Dilfer type outliers once in awhile, but seriously, you could use that idiotic question to try to undermine every great franchise...

              Jim Plunkett
              Joe Theismann
              Jim McMahon
              Phil Simms
              Doug Williams
              Jeff Hostetler
              Mark Rypien
              Trent Dilfer
              Brad Johnson

              Every QB in the first 40 Super Bowls who isn't in the HOF. McMahon, Simms, Hostetler, Dilfer, and Johnson were carried by all time great defenses, and that's just off the top of my head. I would have to look up what the other 4 guys were working with, but if I remember correctly, Rypien and Williams had generally great all around teams. Plunkett and Theismann were before I was watching.

              The only guys in the latest group who probably aren't getting in are Joe Flacco and Nick Foles. Flacco was carried by another all time great defense, and Foles had a great all around team.

              So there you have it. 42 of 53 Super Bowl winners had HOF QBs running the show. Are all those teams somehow diminished because they didn't do it with a scrub? If the Chiefs win would it make sense for you to question the franchise because they only ever won with Len Dawson and Patrick Mahomes?

              Seriously, what a dumb question...

              Apparently you forgot the point. You claim that there's a "culture of winning" in Denver which guarantees that annnnnny day now you're going to field an awesome team again. Right? Yet your entire "culture of winning" relied upon two very rare players at the most important position. I assume your idea of a culture of winning includes more than just Super Bowls, because it's not as if you won the SB every other year like NE. Well.....in the 39 seasons that did not include either Elway or Manning, you missed the postseason THIRTY ONE times. So....there's that.

              Arguing that HOF players and SB winners don't grow on trees only proves one of my points. Which is that you're not likely to win big any time soon, OR to win the division over Mahomes any time soon. Unless you get extremely lucky and another Manning or Elway falls into your lap.

              Also...there's a big difference between, say, Eli and top 5-10 all timers like his brother and Elway.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Mile High Salute View Post

                Dud is so stupid he doesn't even realize it's a stupid question. KC fans already consider Mahomes to be the GOAT, so if the Chefs win the Super Bowl, does that invalidate their SB title? What a facking moron!!! Lolol

                What a hockey puck.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by RockyMountainOyster View Post

                  Apparently you forgot the point. You claim that there's a "culture of winning" in Denver which guarantees that annnnnny day now you're going to field an awesome team again. Right? Yet your entire "culture of winning" relied upon two very rare players at the most important position. I assume your idea of a culture of winning includes more than just Super Bowls, because it's not as if you won the SB every other year like NE. Well.....in the 39 seasons that did not include either Elway or Manning, you missed the postseason THIRTY ONE times. So....there's that.

                  Arguing that HOF players and SB winners don't grow on trees only proves one of my points. Which is that you're not likely to win big any time soon, OR to win the division over Mahomes any time soon. Unless you get extremely lucky and another Manning or Elway falls into your lap.
                  While every personnel decision has some element of luck involved, are you under the impression that signing Manning for example, and the team Elway put around him, was nothing but luck? The only difference between Denver and 31 other teams was a cosmic coin flip that Denver won? If so, you're fully entrenched in the loser mentality. Anything bad that happens to you is just bad luck; anything good that happens to your rival is just good luck. It's loser talk. Winners figure out why something didn't work for them and fix it instead of throwing up their hands and lamenting bad luck.

                  KC spent 50 years replacing Len Dawson not because they were unlucky, but because they did a poor job with their personnel decisions. Elway built the best offense in the history of the NFL, then the league's best defense 2 years later, not because of luck, but because of a good job with personnel decisions. For all the criticism he may take right now, it is unarguable that Elway did a fantastic job from 2012-2015.

                  Besides, the Broncos actively traded for Elway and actively recruited Manning to sign. How is that falling into their lap? The Broncos worked for both of those outcomes and reaped the rewards. That is what a winning culture is all about. Not every decision pays off (see Paxton Lynch), but already the Broncos may have their next good QB in Drew Lock. If he lives up to his potential then you're setting yourself up for disappointment to believe the Chiefs run the division uncontested for the next decade.

                  But you do you. I love Chiefs fans' disappointment.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by broncosjf View Post

                    While every personnel decision has some element of luck involved, are you under the impression that signing Manning for example, and the team Elway put around him, was nothing but luck? The only difference between Denver and 31 other teams was a cosmic coin flip that Denver won? If so, you're fully entrenched in the loser mentality. Anything bad that happens to you is just bad luck; anything good that happens to your rival is just good luck. It's loser talk. Winners figure out why something didn't work for them and fix it instead of throwing up their hands and lamenting bad luck.

                    KC spent 50 years replacing Len Dawson not because they were unlucky, but because they did a poor job with their personnel decisions. Elway built the best offense in the history of the NFL, then the league's best defense 2 years later, not because of luck, but because of a good job with personnel decisions. For all the criticism he may take right now, it is unarguable that Elway did a fantastic job from 2012-2015.

                    Besides, the Broncos actively traded for Elway and actively recruited Manning to sign. How is that falling into their lap? The Broncos worked for both of those outcomes and reaped the rewards. That is what a winning culture is all about. Not every decision pays off (see Paxton Lynch), but already the Broncos may have their next good QB in Drew Lock. If he lives up to his potential then you're setting yourself up for disappointment to believe the Chiefs run the division uncontested for the next decade.

                    But you do you. I love Chiefs fans' disappointment.
                    No one but Denver fans expects them to win a division title any time soon.

                    As for Elway and Manning falling into your lap, I can't believe you're even arguing this. Let me be clear: I'm not saying that Denver deserves no credit for making the Manning deal happen. I'm saying that it's incredible luck that a QB at that level (and still in his prime) was available to be had. Extremely rare. Probably unprecedented. And Denver just happened to need a franchise QB at the time. Yes, that's luck.

                    As for Elway? Well, again, it's incredibly rare that a player of that ability is up for grabs, but aside from that, he wanted to be on the west coast. The Colts sent him to Denver to spite him.

                    Two of the luckiest situations in NFL history, frankly. And without one of these two players on the roster, all that you seem to do is miss the playoffs. Oh, but Lock is the next Elway, right? The first good QB you've ever drafted? Good luck with that. Even Elway, who was supposedly enamored with Lock before the draft, didn't have enough confidence in his "potential" to take him with one of his first two picks.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by RockyMountainOyster View Post

                      No one but Denver fans expects them to win a division title any time soon.

                      As for Elway and Manning falling into your lap, I can't believe you're even arguing this. Let me be clear: I'm not saying that Denver deserves no credit for making the Manning deal happen. I'm saying that it's incredible luck that a QB at that level (and still in his prime) was available to be had. Extremely rare. Probably unprecedented. And Denver just happened to need a franchise QB at the time. Yes, that's luck.

                      As for Elway? Well, again, it's incredibly rare that a player of that ability is up for grabs, but aside from that, he wanted to be on the west coast. The Colts sent him to Denver to spite him.

                      Two of the luckiest situations in NFL history, frankly. And without one of these two players on the roster, all that you seem to do is miss the playoffs. Oh, but Lock is the next Elway, right? The first good QB you've ever drafted? Good luck with that. Even Elway, who was supposedly enamored with Lock before the draft, didn't have enough confidence in his "potential" to take him with one of his first two picks.
                      You want to talk about luck when you got a QB as good as Mahomes at pick #10 in the draft? Every team’s success ever is a combination of both skill and luck. It’s just a fact.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Agamemnon View Post

                        You want to talk about luck when you got a QB as good as Mahomes at pick #10 in the draft? Every team’s success ever is a combination of both skill and luck. It’s just a fact.
                        Veach and Reid identified Mahomes as their guy LONG before the draft and were going to do whatever it took to get him. There was nothing lucky about it.

                        Not even remotely comparable to the Elway or Manning situations.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by RockyMountainOyster View Post

                          As for Elway and Manning falling into your lap, I can't believe you're even arguing this. Let me be clear: I'm not saying that Denver deserves no credit for making the Manning deal happen. I'm saying that it's incredible luck that a QB at that level (and still in his prime) was available to be had. Extremely rare. Probably unprecedented. And Denver just happened to need a franchise QB at the time. Yes, that's luck.
                          That element of luck is involved in literally every free agent signing. The biggest part of good luck is good planning and the initiative to seize opportunities.

                          Originally posted by RockyMountainOyster View Post

                          Oh, but Lock is the next Elway, right? The first good QB you've ever drafted?
                          I didn't say he was the next Elway, I said he had the potential to be the next good QB. And is this the part where we pretend that it is substantially different to trade for Elway a week after the draft than it would have been to trade for the pick and select him?



                          Good luck with that. Even Elway, who was supposedly enamored with Lock before the draft, didn't have enough confidence in his "potential" to take him with one of his first two picks.
                          Careful, your agenda is showing...

                          Only someone trying to push a narrative would label choosing him with the second of two picks in a row, to save a little money based on QB and draft position, as not having confidence in taking him with the pick right before.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by RockyMountainOyster View Post

                            Veach and Reid identified Mahomes as their guy LONG before the draft and were going to do whatever it took to get him. There was nothing lucky about it.

                            Not even remotely comparable to the Elway or Manning situations.
                            Yeah it totally wasn’t lucky Mahomes was the 3rd QB taken at #10 lol. Are you touched?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Agamemnon View Post

                              Yeah it totally wasn’t lucky Mahomes was the 3rd QB taken at #10 lol. Are you touched?
                              ....he was the 2nd QB taken.....just sayin.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Zerovoltz View Post

                                ....he was the 2nd QB taken.....just sayin.
                                Oh yeah. For some reason I was thinking Watson went before him. Point remains that the Chiefs absolutely were lucky to get a QB of Mahomes’ level at #10. If that draft were redone Mahomes and Watson go #1 and #2, and the Chiefs never sniff him. I mean there’s nothing wrong with being lucky. Pretty much every successful team has some luck going their way. Denying that is just stupid.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X