He was amazing


at being an asshole.
[Reply]

Broncos QB situation is not nearly as bad as you and your chiefs friends want it to be. In fact, KC's situation is worse...
[Reply]

This is true.

Is literally a controversy between two quarterbacks you drafted over the last two seasons? As a Chiefs fan, I didn't even know such a thing was legal.
[Reply]

oh boy! I'm so giddy!
[Reply]

Is it? Your team won less games than KC this season, and your defense carried your shitty qb play the year before. So, even though Smith sucks for the most part, he's still better than anything you've got, or had in more than 2 seasons. Let me guess.... Vajo-na is gonna fix that right??
[Reply]

Semen is basically Assweiler.

At least Smith will be gone in the next couple of years (at least I hope to God).
[Reply]

Fucking Tampering. But, yeah, like they would ever fuck them like they would us..
Seriously, if they sign him, you know there was Tampering,
Couldn't prove it though.

And I'm calling it now. They will sign Romo and the NFL WILL give him the Manning treatment. Guaranteed. Wouldn't surprise me in the LEAST to see them in the SB I FF he stays Healthy. And he probably will because the NFL is going to fine and penalize anyone who touches him.
[Reply]

Prepare to be f***** again Chiefs fans it's happening I'm just about done with football
[Reply]

You are stoned. Denver isn't signing Romo.
[Reply]

If he went to Denver that could be the best team of all time.

Although his health is a major concern. The guy is made of glass.
[Reply]

I'm stoned and telling you romo IS going to denver.

Mark my werds :-)
[Reply]

Best team? The money won't work cosnsidering the other areas of focus. It will be interesting to see what McCoy and Musgraves do with Trevor and Lynch. Lynch's skill set beat matches what those guys like, so who knows. I just don't see them making a big name QB play. I don't think they need to right now. Trevor played well... fix OL and rushing and let's see.
[Reply]

i agree, trevor earned the starting spot. it's not his fault his head coach had to retire. that said, i think elway's ego 'could' and 'will' get in the way. we don't see it, and for a reason, but elway could grab romo, keep lynch, and trade simein to say the jets?

once again, im semi stoned and its the off season for us all :-)
[Reply]

Meh, Assweiler played well too with Denver. I think Semen and Assweiler are one in the same.

Doesn't really matter to me if Denver starts Semen or Lynch. I just don't want them to get Romo.
[Reply]

Siemian is way more accurate than Brent and can throw a better deep ball.

The problem is the OL was historically bad and there was no run game after CJ and then Bibbs went down. Booker was a project pick in the 4th only meant to spell CJ not take the load and he was even bad as a backup.

Siemian is smart, can make the play calls, can read the D and can make all the throws. Did he check down a lot because teams took DT and or Sanders away because there was no TE threat? Sure but when he did have time to make a big throw it was placed where the receiver had a chance to run after the catch. The bomb he threw in the Bengals game was a thing of beauty and then he had that great touch pass to Fowler against you guys that should have won the game.

I think Lynch is the Brent clone and he is a couple years away, that was a need pick, not BPA so John will force them to get him to improve but they have 2 QB's because John believes in drafting and developing QB's every year.

I keep hearing rumors that John prefers Lynch and doesn't like Siemian but Siemian was clearly the better QB last year. Lynch got worse as the year went on.

With CJ back, a drafted RB to compete with Booker, a TE upgrade (either FA or Draft), improving WR depth after DT and Sanders, and of course multiple OL upgrades Siemian should pay big dividends for us under McCoy's scheme and in his 2nd year of starting.

You guys get to trot out alex again and the same old scared Line of Scrimmage O that Andy has coached for the last 5 years while your D atrophies into averageness.
[Reply]