Jump to content


Photo
* - - - - 1 votes

If we added the contract numbers of all the guys we've signed from other teams this offseason...


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#46 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    Freddy Frashbear

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,791 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 06:19 PM

I cant believe this thread isnt locked yet


Maybe it's because you wouldn't know a good OP if it flew into your face since your OPs are some of the worst ever posted here

#47 Stroupe-a-loop

Stroupe-a-loop

    Señor Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,671 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 06:20 PM

I cant believe this thread isnt locked yet


I'd be cool with that.

#48 Growl

Growl

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,227 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 06:27 PM

I'm still waiting for you to show me how marty Hurney's roster performed. Not the ones built on the back of a different regime. It's like saying Jon Gruden really had an eye for talent when he won it all with tony dungy's team. You must have been one of those people pining for Gruden a few months ago, huh?


What I also find remarkable is your blatant disregard for those analysis of marty's drafts. It was such a strong notion that you held so tightly to only a few short posts ago, and now that I've provided to you the true perception of the players in those drafts, it's like you magically have no interest in it for some inexplicable reason. What happened?

#49 Stroupe-a-loop

Stroupe-a-loop

    Señor Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,671 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 06:35 PM

I'm still waiting for you to show me how marty Hurney's roster performed. Not the ones built on the back of a different regime. It's like saying Jon Gruden really had an eye for talent when he won it all with tony dungy's team. You must have been one of those people pining for Gruden a few months ago, huh?


What I also find remarkable is your blatant disregard for those analysis of marty's drafts. It was such a strong notion that you held so tightly to only a few short posts ago, and now that I've provided to you the true perception of the players in those drafts, it's like you magically have no interest in it for some inexplicable reason. What happened?


What happened? I brought it back to tne original argument to quit wasting time. So you can explain to me, in any way, how Millen is better. Use whatever bullshit reasoning you want, but I would ask that you quit using deflections to try and get me to read posts by chiefs fans (great source). Frankly I would just like to see someone dislike Hurney so much that they list Millen's "strengths".

#50 Growl

Growl

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,227 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 06:51 PM

What happened? I brought it back to tne original argument to quit wasting time. So you can explain to me, in any way, how Millen is better. Use whatever bullshit reasoning you want, but I would ask that you quit using deflections to try and get me to read posts by chiefs fans (great source). Frankly I would just like to see someone dislike Hurney so much that they list Millen's "strengths".



Lol what original argument? The original argument is that marty hurney was a terrible general manager. In response to said argument, you've done two things:

1. I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SAID MATT MILLEN WAS BETTER THAN HURNEY!! (Nobody said this)

And

2. I JUST WON'T READ THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST HURNEY! YOU ALL JUST WANNA BE TRENDY!!


You've been linked to articles which offer in depth analysis of just how poorly our drafts have been. You choose to ignore it. You've been asked to back your claims by making your research a little more pure, rather than trying to group in whatever you could find to benefit said argument, even if its misleading. Every method of viable Internet debate has been presented to you and you've chosen to ignore it because, frankly I think you're coming to grips with the reality that your opinion on marty Hurney is wrong and it would be pretty Embarassing to admit such after your little tirade a few posts back. I'm assuming that's why you tried to change the argument entirely and for some reason make it about Matt millen.


It was never about Matt millen. It was about how terrible marty Hurney was. The very fact that you're even trying to defend Hurney by saying "I mean sure, yeah, he's awful! But he isn't Matt millen" is a downright huddle gem in itself.


You've reached rock bottom.


Marty Hurney was a horrible general manager. There's no shame in admitting this.

#51 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,262 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 06:59 PM

Guys it's been almost a quarter of an offseason all of Hurneys contracts are long gone by now and you just make yourself look bad by criticizing him.

#52 Stroupe-a-loop

Stroupe-a-loop

    Señor Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,671 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 07:18 PM

Lol what original argument? The original argument is that marty hurney was a terrible general manager. In response to said argument, you've done two things:

1. I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SAID MATT MILLEN WAS BETTER THAN HURNEY!! (Nobody said this)

And

2. I JUST WON'T READ THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST HURNEY! YOU ALL JUST WANNA BE TRENDY!!


You've been linked to articles which offer in depth analysis of just how poorly our drafts have been. You choose to ignore it. You've been asked to back your claims by making your research a little more pure, rather than trying to group in whatever you could find to benefit said argument, even if its misleading. Every method of viable Internet debate has been presented to you and you've chosen to ignore it because, frankly I think you're coming to grips with the reality that your opinion on marty Hurney is wrong and it would be pretty Embarassing to admit such after your little tirade a few posts back. I'm assuming that's why you tried to change the argument entirely and for some reason make it about Matt millen.


It was never about Matt millen. It was about how terrible marty Hurney was. The very fact that you're even trying to defend Hurney by saying "I mean sure, yeah, he's awful! But he isn't Matt millen" is a downright huddle gem in itself.


You've reached rock bottom.


Marty Hurney was a horrible general manager. There's no shame in admitting this.


I've stayed on point with my posts. You can twist it around and make it about me all you want, but this all started specifically what you said about Hurney being worse than Millen, kid. You want to make me justify the 03 team and read Chiefs fan's posts that defend Scott Pioli, but that's a gigantic waste of time. I challenged you about one thing you said, and now we've written a novel. Congratulations.

#53 Growl

Growl

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,227 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 08:42 PM

I've stayed on point with my posts. You can twist it around and make it about me all you want, but this all started specifically what you said about Hurney being worse than Millen, kid. You want to make me justify the 03 team and read Chiefs fan's posts that defend Scott Pioli, but that's a gigantic waste of time. I challenged you about one thing you said, and now we've written a novel. Congratulations.


Lol you've constructed your entire recent debate around the apparent notion that I suggested Millen was better than Hurney. Now that I've shown that to be incorrect, you quickly alter your stance and act as if nothing has happened, all the while saying "I've stayed true!!"

You're the one circling the wagons. I find it cute you keep referencing the chiefs website as it contains the same information that the CBS article had-an in depth breakdown of just how poor our drafts have been. Of course great drafting was a prominent point in your defense of marty hurney a few short pages ago, but once that was revealed to be a false premise, you've yet to acknowledge the new information and instead tried to put words in my mouth about Matt millen (here's another hint: I never said he was worse either)


You can complain all you want about writing a "novel" but until you make an actual effort to address the information provided against your argument or just call it quits, we'll sit here going back and forth with you pretending and hoping that I don't know you're simply talking in circles and inserting "friendly" comments in an effort to get me to back down so you can have your final say and peace of mind.

If you want to debate the issue, then let's debate the issue. But quit dancing around the subject at hand or let it die. I'm not stupid and it's plainly apparent to anybody and everybody that that's what you're doing.

#54 Stroupe-a-loop

Stroupe-a-loop

    Señor Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,671 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:57 PM

Lol you've constructed your entire recent debate around the apparent notion that I suggested Millen was better than Hurney. Now that I've shown that to be incorrect, you quickly alter your stance and act as if nothing has happened, all the while saying "I've stayed true!!"

You're the one circling the wagons. I find it cute you keep referencing the chiefs website as it contains the same information that the CBS article had-an in depth breakdown of just how poor our drafts have been. Of course great drafting was a prominent point in your defense of marty hurney a few short pages ago, but once that was revealed to be a false premise, you've yet to acknowledge the new information and instead tried to put words in my mouth about Matt millen (here's another hint: I never said he was worse either)


You can complain all you want about writing a "novel" but until you make an actual effort to address the information provided against your argument or just call it quits, we'll sit here going back and forth with you pretending and hoping that I don't know you're simply talking in circles and inserting "friendly" comments in an effort to get me to back down so you can have your final say and peace of mind.

If you want to debate the issue, then let's debate the issue. But quit dancing around the subject at hand or let it die. I'm not stupid and it's plainly apparent to anybody and everybody that that's what you're doing.


Jesus, I hope you are a happier person in real life than you appear to be on here. I can make a post tomorrow about Hurney's draft record if that's what you want to talk about, but that's not what this was about. You said something stupid about Millen, I called you on it, and your weird ability to not let anything go made it go this far.

Go get some more links to websites nobody takes seriously and we'll hash it out in a thread that doesn't start with an iguana fart. That iguana fart is far more entertaining than some cat practicing sophistry on a message board.

#55 mountainpantherfan2

mountainpantherfan2

    NOT NEWB

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 79 posts

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:05 PM

From 2001 to 2007 Hurney was one of the best and most respected GM's in the league. His one biggest flaw and the flaw that eventually caught up to him was Fox. He never had controll over Fox as a GM should have.

Looking back it is easy to see how bad Fox actually was with such a talented team.

Then came 2008. I can't say this for sure but that draft and then the Delhomme extension after the season I believe came directly from Fox. Once those moves and the fact Peppers wanted no part in playing for Fox ever, caused a snowball effect that Hurney was never able to recover from.

Hurney was in the end a bad GM but not because of contracts or drafts but his lack of management over Fox and the coaching staff.

#56 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,050 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:44 PM

To say that Marty Hurney was a terrible GM is really a simplication of a number of factors some of which were under his control and others are firmly in Richardson's baliwick. Hurney was a good GM from 2002 through 2006. He may have inherited players like Smitty and Kris Jenkins but did a great job in the 2002 draft for example securing Pepper, Deshaun Foster and Will Witherspoon in the first 3 rounds. Then in 2003 he follows up with a great free agency picking up Jake, Davis, and Proehl among others. Throughout the years since, up until really 2009 he had hit and misses. Some good drafts and some awful ones like in 2005 where Davis was the only hit among a number of misses. Still most GMs have as many misses as hits in most drafts. And at one point in 2008 Hurney had more starters that we drafted than any other GM.

It is clear that 2009 was a disaster but not because of Jake but because we felt forced to extend him so we could keep Peppers for 1 more year. We totally crapped out on Peppers paying too much to franchise him and then not being able to trade him for anything. We totally misread his intentions to leave no matter what. Trading picks for Brown to try and find a DE and Edwards were complete misses and smelled of some panic to win now. While we missed on clausen in 2010 we did well with Lafell in the 3rd and Hardy in the 6th was a steal and until Gettis got hurt, which is no ones fault, he had all the markings of a very good receiver.

Up to this point Hurney was better than some and worse than others. When Richardson didn't fire Fox and gutted the team, he told Hurney to win with backups and scrubs. By the end of 2010 we were the laughing stock of the league and while we got the first pick which netted us Newton in 2011, we were so awful we had to overpay so players would stay. We had to outbid Atlanta for Johnson and Denver for Williams. Hurney was desperate to keep the playmakers that were left and he paid through the nose. He could have been okay if he hadn't given away so much guaranteed money. His worst transgression though was not knowing that the cap was going to be flat for several years and structured the deals assuming that by 2014 there would be plenty of money to pay everyone. He was wrong and it has cost us.

Then he compounded the problem giving huge deals to Beason and Stewart. Obviously he couldn't know that Beason was going to get seriously hurt but he surely could have made sure that if he was going to sign Stewart to a big deal, that Rivera and Chud would feature a running attack which featured Williams and Stewart. Instead we go to a majority of passes versus runs without changing the composition of the team to match the new philosophy. Not only did he pay too much for the talent we had but the talent didn't match the philosophy. We might even have been okay with all the mistakes if we had started off the 2012 season quicker and ended up with a winning season as frankly we should have done. In the end it was likely a good thing because Richardson did pull the trigger and while it is too early to tell, Gettleman looks to be an upgrade.

Hurney made mistakes and surely had his share of gaffs. But honestly he wasn't always bad and he is being solely blamed for bad contracts that were largely caused by Richardson's gutting the team and totally misreading the other owners resolve in crushing the union. Hurney wasn't a great GM and surely did his part to hurt the franchise, but blaming him for everything is way over the top.

And the article posted as evidence of Hurney's problems as well as the KC blog is only proof that most folks have only a very superficial understanding of what truly caused the problems we are currently in.

#57 Growl

Growl

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,227 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 08:56 AM

To say that Marty Hurney was a terrible GM is really a simplication of a number of factors some of which were under his control and others are firmly in Richardson's baliwick. Hurney was a good GM from 2002 through 2006. He may have inherited players like Smitty and Kris Jenkins but did a great job in the 2002 draft for example securing Pepper, Deshaun Foster and Will Witherspoon in the first 3 rounds. Then in 2003 he follows up with a great free agency picking up Jake, Davis, and Proehl among others. Throughout the years since, up until really 2009 he had hit and misses. Some good drafts and some awful ones like in 2005 where Davis was the only hit among a number of misses. Still most GMs have as many misses as hits in most drafts. And at one point in 2008 Hurney had more starters that we drafted than any other GM.

It is clear that 2009 was a disaster but not because of Jake but because we felt forced to extend him so we could keep Peppers for 1 more year. We totally crapped out on Peppers paying too much to franchise him and then not being able to trade him for anything. We totally misread his intentions to leave no matter what. Trading picks for Brown to try and find a DE and Edwards were complete misses and smelled of some panic to win now. While we missed on clausen in 2010 we did well with Lafell in the 3rd and Hardy in the 6th was a steal and until Gettis got hurt, which is no ones fault, he had all the markings of a very good receiver.

Up to this point Hurney was better than some and worse than others. When Richardson didn't fire Fox and gutted the team, he told Hurney to win with backups and scrubs. By the end of 2010 we were the laughing stock of the league and while we got the first pick which netted us Newton in 2011, we were so awful we had to overpay so players would stay. We had to outbid Atlanta for Johnson and Denver for Williams. Hurney was desperate to keep the playmakers that were left and he paid through the nose. He could have been okay if he hadn't given away so much guaranteed money. His worst transgression though was not knowing that the cap was going to be flat for several years and structured the deals assuming that by 2014 there would be plenty of money to pay everyone. He was wrong and it has cost us.

Then he compounded the problem giving huge deals to Beason and Stewart. Obviously he couldn't know that Beason was going to get seriously hurt but he surely could have made sure that if he was going to sign Stewart to a big deal, that Rivera and Chud would feature a running attack which featured Williams and Stewart. Instead we go to a majority of passes versus runs without changing the composition of the team to match the new philosophy. Not only did he pay too much for the talent we had but the talent didn't match the philosophy. We might even have been okay with all the mistakes if we had started off the 2012 season quicker and ended up with a winning season as frankly we should have done. In the end it was likely a good thing because Richardson did pull the trigger and while it is too early to tell, Gettleman looks to be an upgrade.

Hurney made mistakes and surely had his share of gaffs. But honestly he wasn't always bad and he is being solely blamed for bad contracts that were largely caused by Richardson's gutting the team and totally misreading the other owners resolve in crushing the union. Hurney wasn't a great GM and surely did his part to hurt the franchise, but blaming him for everything is way over the top.

And the article posted as evidence of Hurney's problems as well as the KC blog is only proof that most folks have only a very superficial understanding of what truly caused the problems we are currently in.



I have never seen anything that suggests Williams was given a lot of money to keep him from going to Denver. Even if that was the reason then the fact that we made the decision to do so is indicative of nothing but poor team building philosophy anyways. More than likely, Williams was not "overpaid" in Hurney's mind. He had to be kept because he was drafted. We have seen Hurney do it time and again-overpay for undeserving players to help keep our "family" atmosphere in tact. It's done nothing but strand us with heavy salaries on players whose output isn't worth that burden all the while preventing us from acquiring outside talent.

For a team that drafts on the mark consistently this is a passable philosophy, but suffice to say there is nothing superficial about our poor drafting record the past half decade.

#58 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,193 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 09:56 AM

people act like hurney showed up 11 years ago but was already doing at least half the job of GM before he got handed the whole job.

he didn't just show up and take a 1-15 team to the superbowl...he helped make that 1-15 team possible.

#59 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,193 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 10:05 AM

Guys it's been almost a quarter of an offseason all of Hurneys contracts are long gone by now and you just make yourself look bad by criticizing him.

all his contracts are gone? not sure if serious.

williams, stewart, beason....all contracts still on the books and untouched. mare...still on the books. charles johnson....still overpaid (we went way beyond what anyone else would have paid = overpaid).

It's gonna take a couple years to get all that crap worked out. the team is going to be feeling the repercussions of poor cap management and poor contract negotiations and misplaced attentions and loyalties for quite some time.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com