Chiefs Frank Clark fucking sucks - Page 254

Guy has done NOTHING in two games. Barely any pressures to speak of against trash OTs.

Yeah, I'm in bitchy gameday mode. Don't care. I'm tired of paying out the ass for defensive players who don't make plays.

At least Justin Houston could dominate against bad teams after we paid him.
[Reply]

Better than that Clowney abomination sone whined, cried, and screamed about the Chiefs not getting
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball:
Better than that Clowney abomination sone whined, cried, and screamed about the Chiefs not getting

He was #2 behind Dee Ford on my DO NOT WANT list
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball:
Better than that Clowney abomination sone whined, cried, and screamed about the Chiefs not getting

So true!
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball:
Better than that Clowney abomination sone whined, cried, and screamed about the Chiefs not getting

Who whined and cried about not getting Clowney?
[Reply]

Originally Posted by O.city:
I have no clue if he wanted to be or not but he wasn’t gonna get paid that. So he chose to leave instead of take a cut.

Houston was done here. He wanted out for whatever reason. His loss.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
The Chiefs wouldn't have advanced in the playoffs and won the Super Bowl without Frank Clark, so he was worth every goddamn penny and both draft picks that made it happen.

This!

No matter what he does from this point on, that trade and contract was worth it.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by dlphg9:
Who whined and cried about not getting Clowney?

DJs left nut, although to be fair his argument was more that Clowney is a little lesser of a player that would cost way less comparatively to Clark.
[Reply]

What's the over/under on Frank Clark's coverage sacks on Sunday?
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Superturtle:
DJs left nut, although to be fair his argument was more that Clowney is a little lesser of a player that would cost way less comparatively to Clark.

He has been FAR worse than just slightly lesser the last 2 years
[Reply]

Originally Posted by PAChiefsGuy:
What's the over/under on Frank Clark's coverage sacks on Sunday?

At this rate, there probably is no under. You can't have negative sacks.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by htismaqe:
At this rate, there probably is no under. You can't have negative sacks.

No, but the “under” could be more stupid penalties as we’re accustomed to as of late from Clark.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
No, but the “under” could be more stupid penalties as we’re accustomed to as of late from Clark.

That was really just one game, honestly.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by htismaqe:
That was really just one game, honestly.

Never underestimate a whiner’s ability to exaggerate.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by htismaqe:
That was really just one game, honestly.

Two games now if we’re being honest, that offsides before the half last week.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Megatron96:
Never underestimate a whiner’s ability to exaggerate.

:-)
[Reply]

Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
Two games now if we’re being honest, that offsides before the half last week.

That wasn’t a stupid play. He was trying to time the snap, and guessed wrong. Maybe the 4th time in 2 years?
[Reply]