Originally Posted by O.city:
Are we supposed to give him a break for being hurt? I don't remember people doing that for Berry last year, but i'm a bit out the loop.
Berry wouldn't play, period. Clark at least suits up. That's the difference. That being said, this chode better get his ass on the field and wreck the Patriots. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
What standard do you have for Hitchens? Where is his thread?
Say what you want about Clark or Sammy. At least those guys have looked elite in a Chiefs uniform.
Hitchens was paid a fuck ton of money and has looked slow with no instincts. I could make a comparison that Hitchens isn’t much of an upgrade from what we got from Josh Mauga a few years ago.
AND Veach redid his contract keeping him here longer. If these is one guy on this team you should be pissed at Veach for, its Hitchens.
People had high standards for Hitchens and there have been threads about his poor play. Wtf are you even talking about?
Isn't it telling that you're comparing Clark to Hitchens? In your rush to defend him, you fucked your whole argument up [Reply]
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties:
Really sad to see this behavior.
Big time hissy fit after DJ refused to hold this L following the Chargers game.
When I said he played really well and looked really explosive and that I REALLY hoped he'd be able to carry that forward into a critical gaem against a tough matchup?
And then saw him give us virtually a carbon copy of the other 80% of the season he's played when he was "just doing his job"?
You hand waive every single disappointing effort he gives and act as though it wasn't disappointing.
Straight out - was this the performance you were expecting when we signed him? Was Sunday's game the "STUD!" efforts you were calling for with Frank Clark?
Or was it just another disappointing effort to throw on his ever-increasing pile of really mediocre games. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
He was a top 3 paid ILB when he was signed. People shit all over Clark everyday when the guy is hurt and rarely bitch about Hitchens.
If you’re gonna have standards, have them for everybody not just magnifying one player.
He cost us no draft capital and 1/3 the cap outlay that Clark will.
If Clark were sporting Okafor's contract (who's also been lousy), he wouldn't have a thread dedicated to him. All you need to do as proof of that is look for the "Okafor fucking sucks" thread.
It doesn't exist. And Okafor is a LOT better analogue than Frank Clark.
And none of them are feathers in Veach's cap. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
You didn’t watch the dude kick ass in the Broncos and Chargers game?
They said the same shit about Hitchens. Have you seen him be an ass kicker in any game for us?
I’m against any of these big moves bc they rarely work out. It’s too much pressure and expectations (Pat is obviously worth that).
How often has a team traded high resources for a player and it worked out for that team better than it did for the team that traded them?
So your whole argument is that people shouldn't be mad at Clark not playing up to expectations because our big deal players rarely play up to expectations?
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
Berry wouldn't play, period. Clark at least suits up. That's the difference. That being said, this chode better get his ass on the field and wreck the Patriots.
And I'm saying that at this point the only way to salvage the trade is for him to wreck shit in the post-season. And that would go a LONG way to salvaging the deal.
So just sit the guy and get him healthy at this point. Stop sending him out there to 'justify' the deal if this is the kind of scattershot effort we're going to get out of him.
Get him right and get your second bite at the apple. Have him come back in week 17 to knock the rust off and be ready to go in the post-season. And then if he comes out and rapes faces you're right - all will be forgiven.
The way he's being handled to this point doesn't seem to help that possibility though. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
So your whole argument is that people shouldn't be mad at Clark not playing up to expectations because our big deal players rarely play up to expectations?
....I guess that's one way to look at it.
In fairness, that's kinda been Run's thing for a few months now.
His argument really has been that we shouldn't be critical of Clark because ALL big-money defensive acquisitions seem to fail. And as such, the problem isn't Clark, it's big money defensive FA's writ large.
You're right...it's a novel way to look at it. It's damn sure better than "he's just doing his job". It's really the argument I made at the time of the trade - I wasn't even anti-Clark as much as I was wholly opposed to using that kind of draft capital on a guy we ALSO had to give big money to.
I don't disagree with him on his underlying premise - but it's not really a defense of Frank Clark at all. It's just a different sort of indictment on both him AND Veach. [Reply]
Clark also replaced a very good player for us. As many jokes as could be made about Dee Ford, the difference between him and the players Hitchens was replacing is night and day. Hitchens will replacing dog shit. We weren't choosing him over another person. We essentially picked Clark over another good player. Add contract and draft picks and I think there is quite a gap between Hitchens and Clark.
I understand and am fine with the decision to make the switch, but expectations are reasonably higher for Clark than Hitchens. BTW Hitchens had his time as the whipping boy on here. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties:
Damn, still going?
Sad.
I do think it's legitimately funny that DJ couldn't even wait an hour after we blew the Raiders out before starting in on his weekly Clark tirade, but he's not wrong. That wasn't the Clark from the Chargers or Broncos games. He had one play then went MIA. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
So your whole argument is that people shouldn't be mad at Clark not playing up to expectations because our big deal players rarely play up to expectations?
....I guess that's one way to look at it.
Your whole argument for bitching at Clark when he’s hurt was that you would rather have one dimensional brokedick Dee Ford aka worst player in the history of the franchise.
You should probably review your own stance before criticizing others. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Your whole argument for bitching at Clark when he’s hurt was that you would rather have one dimensional brokedick Dee Ford aka worst player in the history of the franchise.
You should probably review your own stance before criticizing others.
No my whole point is that we could have spent a first and second round pick and $105 Million better. And yeah Dee Ford (franchised) + 1st round pick + $100 million saved is a better use of that money.
Even better would be Justin Houston + 1st round pick + 2nd round pick + ~$80 milliom saved. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
No my whole point is that we could have spent a first and second round pick and $105 Million better.
Ah yes, I’m sure the board would have been completely fine with Veach relying on draft picks in an “all in year” after being a penalty away from the SB. I’m sure they would be okay after being furious with him drafting Breeland Speaks :-)
Originally Posted by :
And yeah Dee Ford (franchised) + 1st round pick + $100 million saved is a better use of that money.
Anyone who advocates continuing employment for Dee Ford, aka worst Chief of all time, should have some sense beaten into them with a branch from the AID’S tree.
Originally Posted by :
Even better would be Justin Houston + 1st round pick + 2nd round pick + ~$80 milliom saved.
Houston would have cost us over $20 million this year. Clark is $6.5 million. We wouldn’t be able to get Honey Badger this year if we keep Houston. Goes both ways. [Reply]
