PDA

View Full Version : DAWES: Things We Know Now


KingPriest2
12-01-2004, 01:31 PM
DAWES: Things We Know Now
Nov 30, 2004, 5:32:56 AM by Media Watch by Rufus Dawes


Neither oxygen tanks nor defibrillator paddles will resuscitate this season. The 2004 Kansas City Chiefs season, although not officially in the books, is on life-support. It has become very much like the 1998 season – minus the character issues. This team is, by all printed accounts, a tight bunch of high-character players. Perhaps that is why today’s 3-8 record is all the more disappointing. We could, to some degree, understand the 1998 free-fall given some of the off-the-field issues.



But in other ways, 1998 and 2004 are very much alike. The former started with a string of four victories and just one defeat and this pre-season was met with at least the public’s attitude that this could be the year. The losses this season, as in 1998, have been close ones but that has made the outcome all the more puzzling. The team seems jinxed, I heard one fan grumble as he stomped out of Arrowhead Sunday night following the loss to the Chargers.

Back at the season’s opening – which seems like a lifetime ago – I recalled something that much maligned secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld once uttered: “There are no knowns. There are things we know we know. There are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.” (Rums-Filled Thinking)

Well, we know plenty about the 2004 Chiefs now and, in the spirit of fair play, it might be profitable to revisit those things we thought we knew, the things we knew we didn’t know, and finally, the things we didn’t know we didn’t know. Let’s review that column based on what has taken place to date…


Things we know we know

“Arrowhead Stadium will be full for all eight regular season games.” Well, paid attendance for certain. Chiefs fans are a resilient bunch but the combination of the holidays and the record might impact the actual in-house crowd. Still, with the Broncos and Raiders on tap we can count on whoever is here to be spirited.
“The Chiefs have one of the best offensive lines in the NFL.” The offensive line has been the Dante Hall of 2004, a chapter in the story of this year’s team. The New York Times, The Sporting News, and too many television commentators to count have celebrated the Chiefs center, guards and tackles in more ways than you can count. Their sacks are up but they still rank among the best at what they do among league teams. The performance against the vaunted Baltimore Ravens defense on Monday Night Football helped to build on that reputation.
“The Chiefs have one of the best running backs in the league.” He was on the way to one of the greatest seasons that a running back – surely a Kansas City running back – ever had until he was cut down by injury. He’s been missing for most of November and that’s one reason the team finds itself with the record it has.
“The Chiefs have the best tight end in the NFL.” The San Diego Chargers might protest, but statistically and on the basis of performance over time, Gonzalez need not take a back seat to anyone. He’s still feisty in interviews and plays with a willful focus that is a testament to his professionalism. In time, San Diego’s Gates may be better but let’s at least see it before we declare it so.
“The Chiefs have one of the best QB’s in the AFC.” His numbers are up in most areas, but Trent Green has had his share of mistakes and bad luck in the month of November, none more harmful than last week’s interception in the closing minutes of the San Diego game. If it’s true that all life is a winding staircase, Green knows the path by now. Too easily dismissed by media who are mesmerized by more celebrated signal callers like Favre and Manning, he’s still among the best of this conference and, to think, where would the Chiefs be without him?
“The Chiefs have a more difficult schedule than last year.” The record of Chiefs opponents to date is 72-49. Last year they were a combined 107-149. The remaining teams on the schedule have a 23-21 record.
“The offense will be better than the defense again this year.” Not hard to do and statistically that is true. (See today’s lead news story under the heading, ” Chiefs Seeking to Construct Three-Game Winning Streak Against the Raiders,” by Pete Moris) But it’s not been as good as last year’s in certain situations and there’s the rub, as they say.
“While we know he may not score on a single return, we know every Chiefs opponent will have to prepare for Dante Hall.” They have prepared and prepared well but Hall is still a threat as San Diego learned. His heroics of a year ago are as much the reason for the team’s 13-3 record as anything. That we surely know.
“The defense again will be under the microscope and in particular Ryan Sims and the cornerbacks.” This has surely been the case, but Sims is largely a forgotten figure while the cornerbacks have been maligned as much as any unit, save the linebackers, on the defense.
“Kicker Lawrence Tynes’ first missed field goal will raise questions among media and fans as to why the team didn’t keep Morten Andersen.” Not much outcry on the departure of Andersen given his struggles kicking off. But Tynes’ kicks haven’t made anybody forget about Jan Stenerud and in Kansas City that will be case for the lifetime of the franchise.
“A loss to Denver will lead to selected fans and media determining that the season is over for the Chiefs before it has really begun.” It was a signal, that’s for sure. But a loss in Denver wasn’t so much a surprise as a foretelling of what may be in store. That game still ranks as the only one this team was never really in.
“Kansas City Star columnist Jason Whitlock won’t like Carl Peterson, Ryan Sims, Eric Warfield and William Bartee.” No doubt here, although I haven’t read or heard him singling out Warfield as much. I must not have been listening.
“Kevin Kietzman will accuse the Chiefs of price-gouging and drawing dollars away from whatever team occupies the new downtown arena in 2000-whatever.” He did the former in a nasty, irreverent interview with beloved team owner Lamar Hunt. Frankly, I haven’t listened to him as much after that.
Things we don’t know

“What impact injury may have on the team, particularly if it involves Green, Holmes, one of the five offensive linemen, or a receiver.” Injuries to Holmes and at the start of the season to the receivers have impacted the team greatly. Injuries to the linebackers and defensive backfield have been devastating.
“How quickly the defense will come together and embrace Gunther Cunningham’s scheme and if it can hold its own against the better offensive teams – a Vermeil concern.” It has taken longer and there are signs it may not be this year. The run defense has been better but the pass defense has not and the big plays have been disastrous.
“If Priest Holmes can continue to ascend or if he will begin to slow as most 30 year old running backs do.” He was ascending before he got hurt. Does the length of his recovery have anything to do with being 30-years old? From what we know, no. But he’s still out and it’s been a debilitating loss.
“How big a liability the lack of depth at linebacker will be or if someone will emerge to lead the unit.” It’s turned out to be a big liability and with the loss of Mike Maslowski and Shawn Barber for the season veteran leadership is all but gone.
“If Steve Cheek will be a more consistent punter than Jason Baker or if the coverage teams will be better.” See Lawrence Tynes, “Things we know we know.”
“If NFL officials will be consistent in enforcing the new contact penalties, particularly as they apply to Tony Gonzalez.” Gonzalez would appear to be the exception in this area. He hasn’t reaped the benefits that the tight end position has around the rest of the league.
“What condition an opposing team will be in when the Chiefs meet it.” It hasn’t made much of a difference; the Chiefs have struggled no matter what condition an opponent was in (see New Orleans). This week the Chiefs meet the Raiders, coming off a dramatic upset of first place Denver – on the road mind you!
“If this might be Dick Vermeil’s last year and who his successor might be if it is.” He’s said it’s not but stay tuned for the successor story which likely will be making the rounds in media circles as the season winds down.
“If the Chiefs can repeat as AFC Western champs and, if they can’t, can win enough games to secure a playoff spot.” The Chiefs are in last place in the division and not even in line for a playoff spot.
“Who Jason Whitlock may add to his list of least favored players over the course of the season.” Some old favorites but Whitlock has expanded his list to include the team’s scouting department.
“How long Kevin Kietzman can continue to insist that Arrowhead Stadium doesn’t need any upgrades and is fine as it is.” This sort of rant will last as long as WHB remains on the air and he has is a voice on it. Besides, he really isn’t interested in Arrowhead per se, only the occupants of the higher posts who make their offices there.
Things we don’t know we don’t know

“We can only predict that part of the iceberg we can see,” I wrote back on September 7. We didn’t know then just how responsible those kickoff returns for touchdowns and turnover ratio were for last year’s 13-3 season. Well, the iceberg has hit and the ship is listing on its side. As to if it will sink or limp back into port is yet to be determined.
The opinions offered in this column do not necessarily reflect those of the Kansas City Chiefs.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 02:05 PM
All that, Dawes , yet we still suck ass in the record department. Blow it out your ass, you smoke blowing tallywacker. How about mentioning the 3rd highest ticket price? How about mentioning going on vacation the first week of FA? How about mentioning the Chiefs have played one playoff game in SEVEN years!!!! This article makes me sick.

John_Wayne
12-01-2004, 02:07 PM
I agree with is assesment of Kevin Keitzman. KK is anti-Chiefs and doesn't care about improving Arrowhead. He has tunnel vision. He wants a downtown baseball stadium at any cost. He doesn't care of the Chiefs and Arrowhead suffer. I haven't listened to KK for quite some time.

Iowanian
12-01-2004, 02:11 PM
This team could use a couple of skull crushing Thugs.

Hoover
12-01-2004, 02:12 PM
We knew all this shit last year too.

Its pretty simple

Our Defense sucked ass last year, no changes were made, and thus our defense sucks this year too, wow!

You can't count on huge game changing Kick Returns, and we got 4 of them last year.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 02:13 PM
Hey BTW, Dawes, if we can't predict like you said
“We can only predict that part of the iceberg we can see,” I wrote back on September 7. We didn’t know then just how responsible those kickoff returns for touchdowns and turnover ratio were for last year’s 13-3 season. Well, the iceberg has hit and the ship is listing on its side. As to if it will sink or limp back into port is yet to be determined."

then maybe we should have taken measurements to not have to count on all things going our way, like being active in FA and the draft. Trading down in the draft when you have one of the worst defenses for 3 years in a row(at the time it was 3 years) reeks of arrogance and has cost us big time. Blow sunshine up somebodies ele's ass, you puffer.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 02:14 PM
Is there anyway to write this turd?

BigRedChief
12-01-2004, 02:15 PM
Dawg is a pr tool of King Carl against the media. Nothing to see here. Move along.

nmt1
12-01-2004, 02:22 PM
Is there anyway to write this turd?

Contact The Chiefs (http://www.kcchiefs.com/contact/)

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 02:24 PM
Contact The Chiefs (http://www.kcchiefs.com/contact/)Thank you.

nmt1
12-01-2004, 02:26 PM
Thank you.

You're welcome.
Most of their columnists do "From the Mailbag" columns every once in a while and I believe at least one of our members has had their question answered in such a column.

Phobia
12-01-2004, 02:29 PM
Contact The Chiefs (http://www.kcchiefs.com/contact/)

I know the guy who reads that. He'll read it, laugh, and toss it.... or just toss it.

They get so much email, they can't possibly read them all.

Phobia
12-01-2004, 02:30 PM
In fact, the guy that reads email from that link also lurks here. He's probably laughing right now.

Rausch
12-01-2004, 02:31 PM
This team could use a couple of skull crushing Thugs.

We cut Freeman...

FAX
12-01-2004, 02:32 PM
Does anybody get the feeling that, under Peterson, the Chiefs org uses individual player statistics, records, and noteriety to offset the blatant failure of the team to consistently compete with the best in the league?

FAX THE WONDERING MINSTRAL

nmt1
12-01-2004, 02:36 PM
In fact, the guy that reads email from that link also lurks here. He's probably laughing right now.

I'd have to admit I would find it pretty amusing too if I was in his position.

BigRedChief
12-01-2004, 02:36 PM
In fact, the guy that reads email from that link also lurks here. He's probably laughing right now.

He also probably heads up King Carls complaint department.

gblowfish
12-01-2004, 02:39 PM
10 Tips on How to Speed Read Anything Written by Rufus Dawes
By George Blowfish

1) Carl Peterson is Omnipotent. How dare you question him.
2) Lamar Hunt is God. Criticism is Blasphemy!!!
3) Jason Whitlock is an axe grinding idiot. Ignore him.
4) Kevin Keitzman is a rude, ego-maniac Chiefs Hater. Ignore him.
5) Jack Harry is a old school irrelevant media hack. Ignore him.
6) Dick Vermeil is brilliant. Worship him, drink the Kool Aid.
7) Renew your tickets. You're lucky to have them. Kiss our feet.
8) Ticket & parking increases are necessary. Deal with it. Kiss something else.
9) Things are not as bad as they seem, suckers.
10) STFD & STFU.

Dr. Facebook Fever
12-01-2004, 02:45 PM
In fact, the guy that reads email from that link also lurks here. He's probably laughing right now.
All the way to the bank no doubt to put Carl's check in.

I sent an e-mail anyway. I feel somewhat better for having done it.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 02:45 PM
In fact, the guy that reads email from that link also lurks here. He's probably laughing right now.
That's there problem, they are untouchable. They can do no wrong and they don't take the fans seriously, you know the guys that pay the bills.

Phobia
12-01-2004, 02:48 PM
That's there problem, they are untouchable. They can do no wrong and they don't take the fans seriously, you know the guys that pay the bills.

Well, the dude gets thousands of emails a week in the box. The people the Chiefs want to talk to know direct email addresses. Most large companies have a bottomless "Contact us" pit. They can afford it. Not every team has an owner like Mark Cuban.

BigRedChief
12-01-2004, 02:50 PM
Well, the dude gets thousands of emails a week in the box. The people the Chiefs want to talk to know direct email addresses. Most large companies have a bottomless "Contact us" pit. They can afford it. Not every team has an owner like Mark Cuban.

Are you saying that Mark Cuban is interested in buying the Chiefs?:p

Phobia
12-01-2004, 02:51 PM
That would kick ass. I'm a big fan.

KCTitus
12-01-2004, 02:53 PM
That's there problem, they are untouchable. They can do no wrong and they don't take the fans seriously, you know the guys that pay the bills.

I thought the TV contracts paid the bills...

Rausch
12-01-2004, 02:55 PM
I thought the TV contracts paid the bills...

Revenue sharing as well...

Calcountry
12-01-2004, 02:58 PM
We knew all this shit last year too.

Its pretty simple

Our Defense sucked ass last year, no changes were made, and thus our defense sucks this year too, wow!

You can't count on huge game changing Kick Returns, and we got 4 of them last year.
Yeah, that is part of our strategy. Hurry up and let the other team score so Dante can have another chance to run one back.

A winning strategy to be sure. :shake:

KCTitus
12-01-2004, 02:59 PM
Revenue sharing as well...

I know that the visiting team gets a certain percentage of the gate of each game...I dont remember exactly but somewhere between 20 and 30%.

BCF can take faith that his money goes to the other team so CP doesnt get any--should make him sleep better at night.

John_Wayne
12-01-2004, 03:01 PM
3) Jason Whitlock is an axe grinding idiot. Ignore him.
4) Kevin Keitzman is a rude, ego-maniac Chiefs Hater. Ignore him.
5) Jack Harry is a old school irrelevant media hack. Ignore him.


Well, I do agree with 3, 4 & 5. :cuss:

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 03:05 PM
I thought the TV contracts paid the bills...
Oh I didn't get the memo that the tickets were free. Cool, sign me up for the free tickets.

KCTitus
12-01-2004, 03:07 PM
Oh I didn't get the memo that the tickets were free. Cool, sign me up for the free tickets.

You shouldnt be buying tickets or going to the games, you've got them all figured out. Save that moronic excercise for the 'snowed' fans.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 03:41 PM
You shouldnt be buying tickets or going to the games, you've got them all figured out. Save that moronic excercise for the 'snowed' fans.
What the **** is wrong with you, that you can't actually handle somebody being displeased with the Chiefs? You have the answers for everything, so apparantly you have it all figured out.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 03:50 PM
Oh I didn't get the memo that the tickets were free. Cool, sign me up for the free tickets.
Again, please let me know about those free tickets. I'm very interested.

KCTitus
12-01-2004, 03:55 PM
What the **** is wrong with you, that you can't actually handle somebody being displeased with the Chiefs? You have the answers for everything, so apparantly you have it all figured out.

Actually, Ive never stated as such...

KCTitus
12-01-2004, 03:56 PM
Again, please let me know about those free tickets. I'm very interested.

See post #30.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 03:59 PM
See post #30.
So in other words you are sweeping it under the rug, because last time I checked the Chiefs do keep some of that money on TICKETS sold.

Rausch
12-01-2004, 04:06 PM
So in other words you are sweeping it under the rug, because last time I checked the Chiefs do keep some of that money on TICKETS sold.

No, he's saying you're nearsighted. You appear, from your posts, to want to place all the blame for this team on Peterson. That's myopic.

There were numerous failures this year, not all of them Peterson's fault. Peterson did not tell DV or Saunders to make poor in game decisions. He did not tell 22 players to miss time due to injury. He did not tell Trent to throw INT's, Holmes to fumble, or Dante to puke up a sure TD on a return.

All add up to why we are a losing team. Pointing out that there were failures including, yet beyond Peterson is not being an apologist. It's looking at the big picture.

The Bad Guy
12-01-2004, 04:26 PM
Things we know:

The Chiefs are a 3-8 team in the cellar in the AFC West.

Keep spinning Moore.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 04:37 PM
No, he's saying you're nearsighted. You appear, from your posts, to want to place all the blame for this team on Peterson. That's myopic.

There were numerous failures this year, not all of them Peterson's fault. Peterson did not tell DV or Saunders to make poor in game decisions. He did not tell 22 players to miss time due to injury. He did not tell Trent to throw INT's, Holmes to fumble, or Dante to puke up a sure TD on a return.

All add up to why we are a losing team. Pointing out that there were failures including, yet beyond Peterson is not being an apologist. It's looking at the big picture.
I agree with that, however somebody has to be held accountable and that starts at the top. Carl has failed 16 years in a row.

Chiefnj
12-01-2004, 04:42 PM
We now know: The Chiefs will gladly pay the salaries of two columnists to defend the organization but won't fire the persons responsible for the atrocious drafting that has gone on the last 4 years.

Rausch
12-01-2004, 04:44 PM
I agree with that, however somebody has to be held accountable and that starts at the top. Carl has failed 16 years in a row.

No, the team has failed. Carl is definitely a part of that, and responsible at the end of the day. But I wouldn't place the blame 100%, or even 50% on Peterson.

Mr. Laz
12-01-2004, 06:44 PM
10 Tips on How to Speed Read Anything Written by Rufus Dawes
By George Blowfish

1) Carl Peterson is Omnipotent. How dare you question him.
2) Lamar Hunt is God. Criticism is Blasphemy!!!
3) Jason Whitlock is an axe grinding idiot. Ignore him.
4) Kevin Keitzman is a rude, ego-maniac Chiefs Hater. Ignore him.
5) Jack Harry is a old school irrelevant media hack. Ignore him.
6) Dick Vermeil is brilliant. Worship him, drink the Kool Aid.
7) Renew your tickets. You're lucky to have them. Kiss our feet.
8) Ticket & parking increases are necessary. Deal with it. Kiss something else.
9) Things are not as bad as they seem, suckers.
10) STFD & STFU.
hehe ROFL

or how about:



"ignore the man behind the curtain, i am the great and powerful Oz!! ... "

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 06:52 PM
We now know: The Chiefs will gladly pay the salaries of two columnists to defend the organization but won't fire the persons responsible for the atrocious drafting that has gone on the last 4 years.
Ouch.

Phobia
12-01-2004, 06:53 PM
10 Tips on How to Speed Read Anything Written by Rufus Dawes
By George Blowfish

1) Carl Peterson is Omnipotent. How dare you question him.
2) Lamar Hunt is God. Criticism is Blasphemy!!!
3) Jason Whitlock is an axe grinding idiot. Ignore him.
4) Kevin Keitzman is a rude, ego-maniac Chiefs Hater. Ignore him.
5) Jack Harry is a old school irrelevant media hack. Ignore him.
6) Dick Vermeil is brilliant. Worship him, drink the Kool Aid.
7) Renew your tickets. You're lucky to have them. Kiss our feet.
8) Ticket & parking increases are necessary. Deal with it. Kiss something else.
9) Things are not as bad as they seem, suckers.
10) STFD & STFU.

That's a great list. But I disagree with #6. I don't recall any recent defenses of DV.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 07:08 PM
No, the team has failed. Carl is definitely a part of that, and responsible at the end of the day. But I wouldn't place the blame 100%, or even 50% on Peterson.I'm not placing 100% of the blame on him, but I'm definitely giving him the majority of the blame. He said the buck stopped with him, if the shoe fits wear it. He has had SIXTEEN ****ing years to get something done, SIXTEEN and HIS team has won only two playoff games in over a decade. We've been to the playoffs ONCE in SEVEN years and lost in the 1st round(again). If isn't his fault, who's fault is it? Regardless if it's 100% his fault or not, somebody has to be held accountable and when you've had 16 years to produce and can't even hardly make the playoffs in recent years, that blame must be placed at the captain of the ship's feet. Carl's the captain of this shipwreck and shares in the responsibilty.As far as I'm concerned, 16 years is ample time to know whether a change is order or not.

Logical
12-01-2004, 07:33 PM
No, he's saying you're nearsighted. You appear, from your posts, to want to place all the blame for this team on Peterson. That's myopic.

There were numerous failures this year, not all of them Peterson's fault. Peterson did not tell DV or Saunders to make poor in game decisions. He did not tell 22 players to miss time due to injury. He did not tell Trent to throw INT's, Holmes to fumble, or Dante to puke up a sure TD on a return.

All add up to why we are a losing team. Pointing out that there were failures including, yet beyond Peterson is not being an apologist. It's looking at the big picture.ROFLROFLROFL

Dude we are a losing team because we are a bad team. We are a bad team because we have crap for defensive players. All the other things you mention are simply excuses for losers, good teams overcome the excuses you threw out.

Rausch
12-01-2004, 07:44 PM
ROFLROFLROFL

Dude we are a losing team because we are a bad team. We are a bad team because we have crap for defensive players. All the other things you mention are simply excuses for losers, good teams overcome the excuses you threw out.

Bad coaching is an excuse?

Bad play is an excuse?

Fumbles, turnovers, and INT's are excuses?

No, excuses are saying "It's all Peterson's fault."

The reason we are losing this year is because of just that mentality. GROB was not the problem, he was a PART of the problem. We did not address our other problems: inconsistent WR play, poor play in the 2ndary, average LB's...

And so we continue to lose. You add in injuries, then you spice it up with poor in game decisions by the HC, toss in some bad offensive play calls, and added to the average to poor defensive talent you have a losing season.

First the org. denied all these issues, now the fans do. Gun pretends we have the CB's to run his defense, Saunders pretends we have the WR's to run the Rams pass happy offense, and we pretend we're a great team on the road to victory...

But we're not, and until we start playing like the team we are instead of the team we wish we were, we'll lose...

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 07:48 PM
Bad coaching is an excuse?

Bad play is an excuse?

Fumbles, turnovers, and INT's are excuses?

No, excuses are saying "It's all Peterson's fault."

The reason we are losing this year is because of just that mentality. GROB was not the problem, he was a PART of the problem. We did not address our other problems: inconsistent WR play, poor play in the 2ndary, average LB's...

And so we continue to lose. You add in injuries, then you spice it up with poor in game decisions by the HC, toss in some bad offensive play calls, and added to the average to poor defensive talent you have a losing season.

First the org. denied all these issues, now the fans do. Gun pretends we have the CB's to run his defense, Saunders pretends we have the WR's to run the Rams pass happy offense, and we pretend we're a great team on the road to victory...

But we're not, and until we start playing like the team we are instead of the team we wish we were, we'll lose...
Who put that team together that makes those INTs, doesn't get turnovers on D, hired the coach who makes head-scratching decisions? Who is the one that knew our lbers were shit and CHOSE to go on vacation the first week of FA? Carl said it himself, the buck stops with him, so then why won't you let it? It's his ****ing fault or at least the majority of it is. Excuses are for losers and that why we have alot of them.

Logical
12-01-2004, 07:50 PM
Who put that team together that makes those INTs, doesn't get turnovers on D, hired the coach who makes head-scratching decisions? Who is the one that knew our lbers were shit and CHOSE to go on vacation the first week of FA? Carl said it himself, the buck stops with him, so then why won't you let it? It's his ****ing fault or at least the majority of it is. Excuses are for losers and that why we have alot of them.

Ding, ding, ding we have a winner!!!:thumb:

Rausch
12-01-2004, 07:56 PM
Who put that team together that makes those INTs, doesn't get turnovers on D, hired the coach who makes head-scratching decisions? Who is the one that knew our lbers were shit and CHOSE to go on vacation the first week of FA? Carl said it himself, the buck stops with him, so then why won't you let it? It's his ****ing fault or at least the majority of it is. Excuses are for losers and that why we have alot of them.

I'd say you have to evaluate someone over the long haul, and if they underperform, make your decision.

I don't think DV has underperformed, to be honest. I don't think Saunders has either. But both are definitely having bad years. I also don't think Gunther has underperformed.

Now, 15 years with no super bowl? You really have to look at that. You have to ask CAN he get it done?

I say to give them both one more year, finish their contracts. They don't win it all, let them get new one's elsewhere. But I don't support scrapping a plan 3/4 in and then starting over from 0 all over again.

Peterson will get his HC, for the contracts he signed him to. If it's not done by then, lets move on...

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 08:05 PM
I'd say you have to evaluate someone over the long haul, and if they underperform, make your decision.

I don't think DV has underperformed, to be honest. I don't think Saunders has either. But both are definitely having bad years. I also don't think Gunther has underperformed.

Now, 15 years with no super bowl? You really have to look at that. You have to ask CAN he get it done?

I say to give them both one more year, finish their contracts. They don't win it all, let them get new one's elsewhere. But I don't support scrapping a plan 3/4 in and then starting over from 0 all over again.

Peterson will get his HC, for the contracts he signed him to. If it's not done by then, lets move on...
I'm not down on Vermeil(although he's made some head-scratching decisions) or Saunders. I'm blaming the man that has had 16 years to get it done and hasn't. I agree with you, I wouldn't scrap the plan this far into it,knowing Vermeil only has one year left, but that's it. Super Bowl or bust, including King Carl. At this rate, we couldn't do any worse. Hell, any scrub off the street could equal Carl's Super Bowl record as the man in charge at Arrowhead.


Now that being said, I do realize Carl has done some decent things in K.C. and I believe he should get some praise for those achievements, however after 16 years, enough is enough in my book.

KCJohnny
12-01-2004, 09:49 PM
We knew all this shit last year too.

Its pretty simple

Our Defense sucked ass last year, no changes were made, and thus our defense sucks this year too, wow!

You can't count on huge game changing Kick Returns, and we got 4 of them last year.
Its pretty hard to improve on Hoover's quote....

Logical
12-01-2004, 09:54 PM
I'm not down on Vermeil(although he's made some head-scratching decisions) or Saunders. I'm blaming the man that has had 16 years to get it done and hasn't. I agree with you, I wouldn't scrap the plan this far into it,knowing Vermeil only has one year left, but that's it. Super Bowl or bust, including King Carl. At this rate, we couldn't do any worse. Hell, any scrub off the street could equal Carl's Super Bowl record as the man in charge at Arrowhead.


Now that being said, I do realize Carl has done some decent things in K.C. and I believe he should get some praise for those achievements, however after 16 years, enough is enough in my book.

I do not see any reason to wait this team is far from being a winning playoff caliber team, certainly more than can be fixed in one off-season but could have been accomplished in two. Now allowing Carl to stay only succeeds in allowing him to further f*ck up this team. I know he will not be gone but I certainly pray nightly that he have a year long health condition that forces him to retire.

KCJohnny
12-01-2004, 09:58 PM
I do not see any reason to wait this team is far from being a winning playoff caliber team, certainly more than can be fixed in one off-season but could have been accomplished in two. Now allowing Carl to stay only succeeds in allowing him to further f*ck up this team. I know he will not be gone but I certainly pray nightly that he have a year long health condition that forces him to retire.

You need to wake up and realize that Carl is a DV worshiper and the blame for the stupid personnel decisions lay squarely on Vermiel. Carl is not free of culpability, but its well known that Carl wanted DV for years and easily yielded to him in personnel decisions. Gunther would have done better had he received a 4th of the preferential treatment DV received. The Chiefs are in the cellar AGAIN, just as they were at the beginning of the DV era (see: Ramifization) and blame Carl if you will, but he's a DV disciple.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 10:00 PM
I do not see any reason to wait this team is far from being a winning playoff caliber team, certainly more than can be fixed in one off-season but could have been accomplished in two. Now allowing Carl to stay only succeeds in allowing him to further f*ck up this team. I know he will not be gone but I certainly pray nightly that he have a year long health condition that forces him to retire.
You think Lamar is just going to give Vermeil $3 million to walk? As much as I want change,I have to be realistic about that change and no way on Earth does Lamar eat $3 million.

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 10:02 PM
You need to wake up and realize that Carl is a DV worshiper and the blame for the stupid personnel decisions lay squarely on Vermiel. Carl is not free of culpability, but its well known that Carl wanted DV for years and easily yielded to him in personnel decisions. Gunther would have done better had he received a 4th of the preferential treatment DV received. The Chiefs are in the cellar AGAIN, just as they were at the beginning of the DV era (see: Ramifization) and blame Carl if you will, but he's a DV disciple.
Carl's in charge of the overall decisions of the team. He has the final say. To say otherwise isn't seeing the entire picture. Jim knows what's up.

KCJohnny
12-01-2004, 10:03 PM
Carl's in charge of the overall decisions of the team. He has the final say. To say otherwise isn't seeing the entire picture. Jim knows what's up.
Do you dismiss Carl's love affair with Vermiel?

BigChiefFan
12-01-2004, 10:07 PM
Do you dismiss Carl's love affair with Vermiel?Do you dismiss Carl overriding Vermeil to take LJ in the draft?

Logical
12-01-2004, 10:12 PM
You need to wake up and realize that Carl is a DV worshiper and the blame for the stupid personnel decisions lay squarely on Vermiel. Carl is not free of culpability, but its well known that Carl wanted DV for years and easily yielded to him in personnel decisions. Gunther would have done better had he received a 4th of the preferential treatment DV received. The Chiefs are in the cellar AGAIN, just as they were at the beginning of the DV era (see: Ramifization) and blame Carl if you will, but he's a DV disciple.

We would not have LJ if they were DV's decisions he has announced publicly that he did not want LJ and wanted a defender. He announced that the day of the ill fated draft. I am pretty sure you were embroiled in the Middle Eastern problems so I understand you having missed this.

KCJohnny
12-01-2004, 10:14 PM
We would not have LJ if they were DV's decisions he has announced publicly that he did not want LJ and wanted a defender. He announced that the day of the ill fated draft. I am pretty sure you were embroiled in the Middle Eastern problems so I understand you having missed this.

I was in Baghdad and haven't a clue to the machinations behind KC's perplexing pick...

Chiefnj
12-01-2004, 10:28 PM
I was in Baghdad and haven't a clue to the machinations behind KC's perplexing pick...

Here is the short story. Right after day one of the pick everyone was asking DV and CP why they took Johnson - was Priest not going to return because of his hip injury, etc? CP said Priest was healthy, they expected him to play and Johnson was taken as insurance and because he was the highest ranked player they had at spot #16 (I think) they traded back and were thrilled he was still around at the end of the first round. They got the guy they would have taken at the 16 spot and picked up a 3rd round pick from Pittsburgh with whom they drafted Battle. They asked Vermeil about the choice and he said he would have preferred to have taken a defensive player (he later named Tyler Brayton as the guy he would have taken) but he understood everyone elses position and they had Johnson ranked very high.

KCJohnny
12-01-2004, 10:34 PM
Here is the short story. Right after day one of the pick everyone was asking DV and CP why they took Johnson - was Priest not going to return because of his hip injury, etc? CP said Priest was healthy, they expected him to play and Johnson was taken as insurance and because he was the highest ranked player they had at spot #16 (I think) they traded back and were thrilled he was still around at the end of the first round. They got the guy they would have taken at the 16 spot and picked up a 3rd round pick from Pittsburgh with whom they drafted Battle. They asked Vermeil about the choice and he said he would have preferred to have taken a defensive player (he later named Tyler Brayton as the guy he would have taken) but he understood everyone elses position and they had Johnson ranked very high.
Thanks, Chiefnj, I had no idea, seeing I was concerned with uh, OTHER matters.
Still, the D was horrid and the audacity of drafting a RB of ALL positions #1 is as perplexing as dealing away a #1 draft pick for Trent Green when KC had one of the league's top ranked passers (Grbac) at 4,169 yds, 28 TDs which DV did upon arriving in KC.

YOU tell me?

Iowanian
12-01-2004, 10:58 PM
Grbac had proven the season before that he had no heart.

That was later proven when he was out of the league less than a year later after taking a dump on the next team that gave him money.

Elvis had the Arm, but not the Heart. Even A Paper tiger would have played with a sore Pinky finger. Favre plays with bones sticking out his throwing thumb.

Tribal Warfare
12-02-2004, 12:10 AM
No, the team has failed. Carl is definitely a part of that, and responsible at the end of the day. But I wouldn't place the blame 100%, or even 50% on Peterson.


read my signature it explains it all

philfree
12-02-2004, 12:11 AM
is as perplexing as dealing away a #1 draft pick for Trent Green when KC had one of the league's top ranked passers (Grbac) at 4,169 yds, 28 TDs which DV did upon arriving in KC.

Elvis is the one who left the building and he cost us that #1 pick for Trent Green. Which was a good thing in hindsight IMO. But it was Elvis who made that decision and no one else. Do you think Elvis was worth a $10mil roster bonus? He proved he wasn't and it's all history now. It's time to move on to the present KCJ.


PhilFree :arrow:

Logical
12-02-2004, 12:25 AM
Elvis is the one who left the building and he cost us that #1 pick for Trent Green. Which was a good thing in hindsight IMO. But it was Elvis who made that decision and no one else. Do you think Elvis was worth a $10mil roster bonus? He proved he wasn't and it's all history now. It's time to move on to the present KCJ.


PhilFree :arrow::thumb:

philfree
12-02-2004, 12:31 AM
Posted by Vlad: :thumb:

I love you man.......gotta a bud light? :thumb: Or a shot of Jack? :)

PhilFree :arrow:

BigChiefFan
12-02-2004, 12:44 AM
Thanks, Chiefnj, I had no idea, seeing I was concerned with uh, OTHER matters.
Still, the D was horrid and the audacity of drafting a RB of ALL positions #1 is as perplexing as dealing away a #1 draft pick for Trent Green when KC had one of the league's top ranked passers (Grbac) at 4,169 yds, 28 TDs which DV did upon arriving in KC.

YOU tell me?
Get your facts straight. Grbac CHOSE to leave Kansas City, not the other way around.

KCTitus
12-02-2004, 07:01 AM
So in other words you are sweeping it under the rug, because last time I checked the Chiefs do keep some of that money on TICKETS sold.

Yes, but you can rest assured that your ticket money went to the visiting club as they get a percentage of the gate.

BigRedChief
12-02-2004, 08:28 AM
Get your facts straight. Grbac CHOSE to leave Kansas City, not the other way around.

I for one am very happy he made that decision.

KCJohnny
12-02-2004, 10:57 AM
Get your facts straight. Grbac CHOSE to leave Kansas City, not the other way around.

Its a dead issue now, and I'm glad Green is Chiefs QB, but a case can be made that DV wanted Green all along, even when he was lurking on the Chiefs' sideline in 2000. He was lukewarm toward Grbac (maybe that was Elvis' fault, who knows?) and I think that Grbac's deep drop, vertical game was not what DV wanted in his Ramified offense. JMO! :)

BigChiefFan
12-02-2004, 11:47 AM
Its a dead issue now, and I'm glad Green is Chiefs QB, but a case can be made that DV wanted Green all along, even when he was lurking on the Chiefs' sideline in 2000. He was lukewarm toward Grbac (maybe that was Elvis' fault, who knows?) and I think that Grbac's deep drop, vertical game was not what DV wanted in his Ramified offense. JMO! :)
If it's a dead issue, then why do you keep bringing it up? Ohhhhhh I see-It's a dead issue because you can't dispute it.

Also, who in their right mind wouldn't want Trent Green over Grbac? Grbac went through the motions and was a heartless turd. He had decent numbers but he was a stooge and was NOT a team player. Clearly, Green is a team player.

htismaqe
12-02-2004, 11:49 AM
Its a dead issue now, and I'm glad Green is Chiefs QB, but a case can be made that DV wanted Green all along, even when he was lurking on the Chiefs' sideline in 2000. He was lukewarm toward Grbac (maybe that was Elvis' fault, who knows?) and I think that Grbac's deep drop, vertical game was not what DV wanted in his Ramified offense. JMO! :)

Grbac's $10M roster bonus and "I can't throw it and catch it too" attitude was not what DV wanted in his offense...

htismaqe
12-02-2004, 11:50 AM
If it's a dead issue, then why do you keep bringing it up? Ohhhhhh I see-It's a dead issue because you can't dispute it.

Don't argue with him -- only reasonable people can be reasoned with.

He's a robot, programmed to defend all things Marty/Gunther.

BigChiefFan
12-02-2004, 11:52 AM
Yes, but you can rest assured that your ticket money went to the visiting club as they get a percentage of the gate.
That's funny because I pay for all of it in Full before even going to the first preseason game. The visiting teams may get a percentage, but the Chiefs already have season ticket holder's money in the bank long before we even start preseason.

BigChiefFan
12-02-2004, 11:53 AM
Don't argue with him -- only reasonable people can be reasoned with.

He's a robot, programmed to defend all things Marty/Gunther.
After the season of Hell, I'm up for a good argument, but point well taken. :p