Originally Posted by Easy 6:
Can't undo the past, its a pointless discussion that goes nowhere
Lets focus on what CAN be done
I get what you're saying, but it's not pointless. Those who disregard history tend to repeat it. It needs to not be forgotten because the same people will be making the decision to draft the next RB. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TEX:
I get what you're saying, but it's not pointless. Those who disregard history tend to repeat it. It needs to not be forgotten because the same people will be making the decision to draft the next RB.
The whole deal is predicated that said RBs weren't sleepers but known commodities [Reply]
Yes it is pointless....CEH isn't the first time we've missed (I wouldn't call it a miss..just overdrafted) on a pick and it won't be the last. It's on the coaches to scheme around his strengths and weaknesses while the FO continues building the roster [Reply]
Originally Posted by CatfishBob2:
Yes it is pointless....CEH isn't the first time we've missed (I wouldn't call it a miss..just overdrafted) on a pick and it won't be the last. It's on the coaches to scheme around his strengths and weaknesses while the FO continues building the roster
With that line nihilistic thought there shouldn't be a BB in general because it's useless to discuss anything [Reply]
Originally Posted by Tribal Warfare:
With that line nihilistic thought there shouldn't be a BB in general because it's useless to discuss anything
Nah I understand the thinking. Hell the RB and WR I wanted in that draft went to the steelers in Claypool and Anthony Mcfarland.... But that was two years ago. When do we quit bringing it up? [Reply]
Originally Posted by CatfishBob2:
Nah I understand the thinking. Hell the RB and WR I wanted in that draft went to the steelers in Claypool and Anthony Mcfarland.... But that was two years ago. When do we quit bringing it up?
Knowing this board?
2081 or so.
Hell, some people are still fighting Grbac/Gannon here and that was 20+ years ago. [Reply]
Like the pick or not, he was the guy Mahomes wanted so I support it even if he ends not not working out long term. I think it's still too early to judge since he's only played about a seasons worth of games due to the injuries. He had a couple flashes but can't disagree that he hasn't lived up to expectations yet. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TEX:
I get what you're saying, but it's not pointless. Those who disregard history tend to repeat it. It needs to not be forgotten because the same people will be making the decision to draft the next RB.
Okay, if anyone from CP becomes the next GM of the Chiefs, you have a really good point. We probably should even be discussing it more given the likelihood of Red Dawg succeeding Veach. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
Okay, if anyone from CP becomes the next GM of the Chiefs, you have a really good point. We probably should even be discussing it more given the likelihood of Red Dawg succeeding Veach.
If we ran out offense the same way we ran it in the AFCCG against the Tits with Clyde, we’d kill people. Those 4th quarter offensive calls and plays were just demoralizing to the Tits. They couldn’t stop what we were doing, and if we ran those exact plays in that same order again, I feel like the same results would occur. [Reply]
Originally Posted by CapsLockKey: Like the pick or not, he was the guy Mahomes wanted so I support it even if he ends not not working out long term. I think it's still too early to judge since he's only played about a seasons worth of games due to the injuries. He had a couple flashes but can't disagree that he hasn't lived up to expectations yet.
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
People actually believe this?
the story was widely reported. Veach asked Mahomes who he wanted, and he said, " Give me Clyde".
I don't expect it was in such a way as that they would just draft whomever Mahomes said, but rather that Veach was curious what Mahomes thought he needed. [Reply]