PDA

View Full Version : As much as it pisses me off to say it, I was right...


htismaqe
10-16-2005, 02:41 PM
Everybody blaming McCleon can all quit now.

The problem with this pass defense is 100% GUNTHER.

Vermeil said before the game that he wanted to activate Warfield to play at least on special teams but the defensive coaches didn't want him active and Vermeil "gave in".

If McCleon (or lack of Warfield) was the SOLE reason for the soft zone, then you'd think Gunther would have been chomping at the bit to get him in. Instead, Gunther goes against the head coach and has him inactive while we give up another 300-yard passing game...

Extra Point
10-16-2005, 02:52 PM
It would have been Washington or Warfield today. Washington doesn't have a rap sheet. Maybe Gun said, "If I can't have him on D, piss on it." Did Warfield's absence on D come at the expense of putting Bo on O?" WGAS? The Chiefs won!

Mecca
10-16-2005, 02:54 PM
I agree with you on this, Gunther has lost his mind.

Bwana
10-16-2005, 02:56 PM
I agree with you on this, Gunther has lost his mind.

He has been spending to much time with Dick.

Skip Towne
10-16-2005, 02:59 PM
This shit sounds a whole lot more like VD than it does Gun.

htismaqe
10-16-2005, 03:00 PM
Vermeil said twice in pre-game that he wanted Warfield active, if for nothing else for special teams.

He said the defensive coaches were adamant and the discussion was "heated". And he ultimately gave up and Warfield was inactive.

luv
10-16-2005, 03:01 PM
DV didn't have to "give in". He needs to take some responsibility. If his defensive coaching staff is making bad calls, he's the one that needs to call them on it.

RedThat
10-16-2005, 03:03 PM
In all honesty, I think Warfield hurt himself. I don't entirely blame Gunther, or even Vermeil. Warfield created a problem, and it's his job to fix it.

Simplex3
10-16-2005, 03:03 PM
"Defensive coaches" doesn't mean Gunther. For all we know it was freaking Giunta.

Deberg_1990
10-16-2005, 03:04 PM
Vermeil said twice in pre-game that he wanted Warfield active, if for nothing else for special teams.

He said the defensive coaches were adamant and the discussion was "heated". And he ultimately gave up and Warfield was inactive.

DV is the head coach. His descions should be final. IM surprised he let himself be overuled??

htismaqe
10-16-2005, 03:06 PM
So when the defense sucks ass and Vermeil has input, it's all Vermeil's fault.

And then when Vermeil does EXACTLY WHAT EVERYBODY HERE WANTED and let's the defensive coaches make the decisions, it's STILL HIS FAULT?

Pure bullshit. People will go to great lengths to defend Gunther, even though he sucks.

chiefs4me
10-16-2005, 03:07 PM
DV is the head coach. His descions should be final. IM surprised he let himself be overuled??






:shrug: I feel as if he doesn't care......

luv
10-16-2005, 03:07 PM
So when the defense sucks ass and Vermeil has input, it's all Vermeil's fault.

And then when Vermeil does EXACTLY WHAT EVERYBODY HERE WANTED and let's the defensive coaches make the decisions, it's STILL HIS FAULT?

Pure bullshit. People will go to great lengths to defend Gunther, even though he sucks.
That's the risk you take of being a head coach. EVERYTHING is your fault, good or bad, because you have the final say in things.

Valiant
10-16-2005, 03:09 PM
My understanding is Gun wants Warfield as teh starter, but DV wanted McCleon... DV wanted Warfield to play as a part-timer and special teams player.. So Gun said **** you, you want McCleon he is starting and Warfield will sit until he can be my starter..


thats my take... Gun is taking on DV because the guys loyalities are pathetic to halfassed players...

Count Zarth
10-16-2005, 03:11 PM
Why was Dewayne Washington covering Santana Moss on the last defensive play?

Sure-Oz
10-16-2005, 03:12 PM
we need warfield out there bad, he will be a good #2 cb with surtain covering the main guys....i didnt like the fact i saw Bell on Moss a few times, wtf

kc1977
10-16-2005, 03:17 PM
My understanding is Gun wants Warfield as teh starter, but DV wanted McCleon... DV wanted Warfield to play as a part-timer and special teams player.. So Gun said **** you, you want McCleon he is starting and Warfield will sit until he can be my starter..


thats my take... Gun is taking on DV because the guys loyalities are pathetic to halfassed players...

Exactly...

Htismaque's disdain at all things 1990's Chiefs and anything to do with Marty and Gun grows as tiring as it is to listen to Kc Johnny defend all things 1990's Chiefs.

htismaqe
10-16-2005, 03:21 PM
Exactly...

Htismaque's disdain at all things 1990's Chiefs and anything to do with Marty and Gun grows as tiring as it is to listen to Kc Johnny defend all things 1990's Chiefs.

ROFL

This has NOTHING AT ALL to do with the 1990's Chiefs or Marty.

Thanks for trying to make the connection, Proctor.

Last time, I checked Gunther is the CURRENT defensive coordinator for a defense that THOROUGHLY SUCKS ASS.

htismaqe
10-16-2005, 03:22 PM
My understanding is Gun wants Warfield as teh starter, but DV wanted McCleon... DV wanted Warfield to play as a part-timer and special teams player.. So Gun said **** you, you want McCleon he is starting and Warfield will sit until he can be my starter..


thats my take... Gun is taking on DV because the guys loyalities are pathetic to halfassed players...

So Gunther couldn't possibly be at fault, right?

Sure-Oz
10-16-2005, 03:24 PM
i cant wait till dick leaves, regardless if we win the SB this year

RedThat
10-16-2005, 03:26 PM
Does anybody wish we hired Gregg Williams instead of Gunther? I'll take the Gunther move back, and replace it with Williams. That was the guy we were initially supposed to hire as our def. co-ordinator till Snyder came in and made more of an aggresive offer, beat us to the punch. If their is one move I can take back it would be this one. Gunther is an idiot! Not a smart coach at all.

luv
10-16-2005, 03:27 PM
Does anybody wish we hired Gregg Williams instead of Gunther? I'll take the Gunther move back, and replace it with Williams. That was the guy we were initially supposed to hire as our def. co-ordinator till Snyder came in and made more of an aggresive offer, beat us to the punch. If their is one move I can take back it would be this one. Gunther is an idiot! Not a smart coach at all.
So what are we doing about that?

RedThat
10-16-2005, 03:30 PM
So what are we doing about that?

Nothing. what can we do? The guy is here. Im just saying if there is a move I could take back it would be this one.

Mecca
10-16-2005, 03:31 PM
I think it's time for alot of people to buck up and admit Gunther Cunningham isn't a good coach. If you take a look at his "scheme" when it actually worked here we had star defensive talent. Apparently the only way his defense works if it's loaded with great players. Almost any NFL coordinator should be able to make great players into a good unit.

Gregg Williams on the other hand has alot of no namers yet they play very good defense. I'm not even sure they have more talent than we do, Yea who's a good defensive coach and who's not.....

cdcox
10-16-2005, 03:31 PM
Paker is right that Gunther is as much of the problem as Saudners and Vermeil. I can't fathom the decisions that the coaching staff has made this season. Benching Warfield; soft zone; abandoning the run; passing on 3rd and 11 with 2 min left, ball at mid-field and the other team out of time outs. And it goes back futher than that. How many years did it take to see that we were not going to win with that defense? Evidently enough years for the offense to lose its edge.

Dunit35
10-16-2005, 03:32 PM
Im not sure how Impressive Warfield wouldve been today anyways. McCleon again didnt look to good out there, Dewayne looked fairly well out there. But the zone crap is rediculous, zone isnt working. Gun needs to realize that immediately. Theres no time to waist on screwing around with the coverage schemes. Im not so sure with what Bell is doing out there. Man to man with Surtain on the best reciever, no matter where the #1 WR is on the field. McCleon or Warfield on the #2 WR. Johnson covering the TE. Passing situations Mitchell/Bell could drop back and cover the slants or anything else that is 8-12 yards beyond yard of scrimmage. Middle of the field should be shut down and Knight and Wesley over the top for any long throws. With a pass rush, the RB's have to stay in to help block. But, of course it all starts with the Pass rush.

Valiant
10-16-2005, 03:37 PM
So Gunther couldn't possibly be at fault, right?


Seems he is doing a PR fight agianst DV... He is doing what he can to get his players on the field... Of course this is just speculation from both sides... None of us really know, who is to blame...

Tribal Warfare
10-16-2005, 03:38 PM
I also believe this could be Gun's last year . The KC defense allowed Brunell to pass over 300 yards. The blame should be shared equally towards the talent, and the scheme.

DaWolf
10-16-2005, 03:43 PM
Look, I said this a few days ago and I'll say it again, Gunther has never been much of a Warfield fan. He benched Warfield in favor of Pat Dennis when he was the head coach, and he totally disrespected Warfield in training camp when he told Julian Battle in a team meeting that he wanted him to take Warfield's job. You don't do that to a player if you are on their side. If Gunther wants to play Warfield he'll play Warfield. DV will stand up for his players, whoever it is. He'll take the heat. But some of you people need to get beyond your Gunther asskissing and scapegoating everyone else. Gun is in charge of this defense 100% and if it's not working, it's his own damn fault. He got everything on his wish list, he needs to figure it out and produce...

kc1977
10-16-2005, 03:46 PM
i cant wait till dick leaves, regardless if we win the SB this year

I'll second that. He just better take Saunders with him - no telling what cutesy crap we'll be pulling all the time with him as H.C.

Cochise
10-16-2005, 03:49 PM
We only gave up 20 points, bottom line. We should win every week that we only give up 20 points.

Defense was servicable today but only because of a couple of guys making a few key plays. There are still the same obvious holes that have existed for years now.

If we're going to win, we're going to have to win like we did in 2003 - the offense carry the team, and the D chip in a few turnovers and a couple of key stops because you can't count on them to slow the other team's O down much. But just like in '03, once the turnovers stop we'll be losing consistently.

Cunningham got everything on his Christmas list in the offseason and still hasn't improved the D much. I put the D's problems squarely on his shoulders.

htismaqe
10-16-2005, 03:50 PM
Seems he is doing a PR fight agianst DV... He is doing what he can to get his players on the field... Of course this is just speculation from both sides... None of us really know, who is to blame...

Maybe it's time for ALL OF THEM to go then...

Count Zarth
10-16-2005, 03:51 PM
I don't know about you guys, but it seemed to me that our defense was getting better as the game wore on.

I think we made some adjustments.

htismaqe
10-16-2005, 03:52 PM
I'll second that. He just better take Saunders with him - no telling what cutesy crap we'll be pulling all the time with him as H.C.

Can you call 5-11 "cutesy"? Because that's what I think we'd be in for with Saunders as head coach.

:toast:

cdcox
10-16-2005, 03:53 PM
We only gave up 20 points, bottom line. We should win every week that we only give up 20 points.

Defense was servicable today but only because of a couple of guys making a few key plays. There are still the same obvious holes that have existed for years now.

If we're going to win, we're going to have to win like we did in 2003 - the offense carry the team, and the D chip in a few turnovers and a couple of key stops because you can't count on them to slow the other team's O down much. But just like in '03, once the turnovers stop we'll be losing consistently.

Cunningham got everything on his Christmas list in the offseason and still hasn't improved the D much. I put the D's problems squarely on his shoulders.

I've seen 2Q of football all year that reminded me of the 2002-2004 offense. I'm a little concerned.

Count Zarth
10-16-2005, 03:53 PM
Saunders was OK today. We FINALLY threw a fade pass to Boerigter. I sincerely hope we see more of that in the red zone to take pressure off Gonzalez.

htismaqe
10-16-2005, 03:55 PM
I don't know about you guys, but it seemed to me that our defense was getting better as the game wore on.

I think we made some adjustments.

I think Sammy Knight had more to do with that than did the playcalling.

crazychiefsfan
10-16-2005, 04:00 PM
331 yrds given up!!!!!!!!!!!! 331 yrds!!!!!! I believe with Warfield in there it wouldn't be that much.

milkman
10-16-2005, 04:08 PM
Maybe it's time for ALL OF THEM to go then...

No, it's well past time for all of them to go.

Dick is soft.

Gun has never been anything more than inconsistent at best, even with the 90s Chiefs, and before that with SD and Oakland.

And Al just can't seem to see that he needs to adjust, something that I thought, at one time, he had figured out.

This team needs a fresh start, period.

Oh how I wish Lamar hadn't extended Carl.

cdcox
10-16-2005, 04:10 PM
Saunders was OK today. We FINALLY threw a fade pass to Boerigter. I sincerely hope we see more of that in the red zone to take pressure off Gonzalez.

If I'm standing next to him on 3rd and 11, with 2:00 left on the clock, ball at mid field, and he calls a pass, I'm gonna kick him in the nutz.

KC Jones
10-16-2005, 05:32 PM
I give the defensive coaches the benefit of the doubt. Odds are decent Warfield showed up to work out of shape with a beer gut and a bad attitude.

tk13
10-16-2005, 05:35 PM
Surprise surprise... everybody thought I was nuts for suggesting this. I could just see Gun saying "F*** him, we don't need him".

milkman
10-16-2005, 05:36 PM
I give the defensive coaches the benefit of the doubt. Odds are decent Warfield showed up to work out of shape with a beer gut and a bad attitude.

I give the D coaches the benefit of doubt, also.

I doubt they have a clue.

CupidStunt
10-16-2005, 06:21 PM
331 yrds given up!!!!!!!!!!!! 331 yrds!!!!!! I believe with Warfield in there it wouldn't be that much.

Take out 80 on a play that Warfield wouldn't have stopped where our safeties whiffed and that total is **** all. 250? Average NFL day.

Chiefs Pantalones
10-16-2005, 09:46 PM
I can't wait until DV, Gun, all these guys are gone and we start fresh with a whole new coaching staff. Carl will still be here, maybe, but as long as we get some new blood in here besides him, great. I'm tired of the Kansas City "Groundhogs day" Chiefs. Same crap every year.

philfree
10-16-2005, 09:59 PM
When gun came back the one thing he promised was "we'll stop the run". Besides the Donks game we've done exactly that. We still have alot of improving to do but the whining after a hard fought win............. :shake: He'll if I gave you guys $5.00 each you'd bitch because it wasn't $10.00. If Warfield get's toasted next week because Dex is out what will be your Battle Cry then?

PhilFree:arrow:

Halfcan
10-16-2005, 10:09 PM
Hey we won, and thats all that matters.

jjjayb
10-16-2005, 10:15 PM
Take out 80 on a play that Warfield wouldn't have stopped where our safeties whiffed and that total is **** all. 250? Average NFL day.

And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

Redcoats58
10-16-2005, 10:33 PM
Don't know if this has been brought up but did you guys see that stat they threw up during the game, that the Redskins game was the 15th consecutive game the Chiefs defense had given up 300+ total yards.


That is an embarassing stat. Now I believe that the defense is gonna gel its gonna happen somewhere around week 8. If it doesn't then the Chiefs basically wasted their money on the players they picked up this year. I'm calling for improvement and I give them till week 8. The mob is ready with their torches soaked in gasoline, prove to me you're better!

Count Zarth
10-16-2005, 10:38 PM
15th consecutive game of 300 TOTAL yards, not passing yards.

Still pathetic.

Redcoats58
10-16-2005, 10:42 PM
15th consecutive game of 300 TOTAL yards, not passing yards.

Still pathetic.
yes total sorry for the wrong quote, fixed the post.

Pants
10-17-2005, 12:02 AM
Have you guys considered the idea of Warfield sucking really bad after not playing for a while? I don't see any reasons for any conspiracy theories. We won. McLeon didn't do that bad... that one holding play, that took away the GWes INT was total bullshit.

picasso
10-17-2005, 12:03 AM
I think it's time for alot of people to buck up and admit Gunther Cunningham isn't a good coach. If you take a look at his "scheme" when it actually worked here we had star defensive talent. Apparently the only way his defense works if it's loaded with great players. Almost any NFL coordinator should be able to make great players into a good unit.

Gregg Williams on the other hand has alot of no namers yet they play very good defense. I'm not even sure they have more talent than we do, Yea who's a good defensive coach and who's not.....

Bullshit!!
Our defense was pretty good in the 90's but be honest with yourself they were good because they fit the system. Other than that they were average at best. Where did they go and how did they do once they left the Chiefs? Dale Carter, James Hasty, Neil Smith. What did they do? Sure Neil Smith went on to another rival AFC team and went to a superbowl but that wasn't because of Neil Smith that was because of Elway. Name one person from the 90's defense that will make it to Canton other than the late D Thomas. And IMHO D Thomas wasn't the best in the NFL at the time. Lawrence Taylor was.
We didn't have star talent in the 90's, we had communication on the field, a push up the middle and a bump and run system that couldn't handle the pansy ass crap calls they call today. We were the Redskins of today. We also LOST in the 90's many times because of that defense you covet just like the Redskins lost today.
So quit bitchin (everybody) about Gunther if you don't fit in his system then let your closet Steeler fan feelings be known and cheer for the Steel Curtain. Oops! they lost today to. sorry.

onescrewleftuntwisted
10-17-2005, 12:07 AM
DV is the head coach. His descions should be final. IM surprised he let himself be overuled??


he is loosing his spine, piece by piece

go walk the sidelines after a game you will find all the eggs he lays, all of the bone headed ideas he thinks of, and yes pieces of his spine

OzArK KrAzO
10-17-2005, 03:47 AM
Yes 300 yards is alot but........ dont event try to say that the early 90,s chiefs defence could do alot better. the new no touch rule for wide recievers would have killed us then if it were in place like it was now. Carter and hastings mugged recievers thats kinda what i liked so much.Dont get me wrong i loved the old chiefs and miss of the old players. But our offence is sputtering and the defence is solid all but the secondary.I was proud of the run defence it held great what with sims out and all. hell we even have a decent kicking game what with the colquit kid making people drop punts. I,m still a gunther fan. He hasnt screwd up enough to kill all the great stuff ive seen his defences do most everywhere he has coached. wait and see

T-post Tom
10-17-2005, 04:08 AM
Great win. Glad to see the Chiefs at 3-2. Here's to 4-2 after next week's win over Miami. And don't forget the donko loss to the GIants shortly thereafter. :)

BigRedChief
10-17-2005, 05:22 AM
Chief nation is seething underneath the surface. Only the most homer of homers think (as of right now) we can go on the road and beat Indy at home in the playoffs.
Playing Washington over McCleon :hmmm:
This play off the ball 10 yards soft zone crap? :hmmm:
Blowing a 17 point lead at home :hmmm:
Where did our offense go? Did it get old in the off season? Has Saunders lost his mind?:hmmm:

the Talking Can
10-17-2005, 05:31 AM
Gregg Williams on the other hand has alot of no namers yet they play very good defense. I'm not even sure they have more talent than we do, Yea who's a good defensive coach and who's not.....

bingo

the Skins have lost Bailey and Smoot, and their leading tackler last year - a LB named Washington (??) to the giants - plus Arrington is benched....and they're still a top 10 defense....what has Gun does for us?

Gary
10-17-2005, 05:39 AM
What REALLY concerned me(mainly in the first half) was the complete lack of intensity from the defensive linemen. It did really pick up in the second half. I detest watching these guys casually stroll to the line & lazily get into their 3 point stance a split second before the ball is snapped just to see them get stood straight up after the ball is snapped(which is what happened consistently throughout the first half). After Dalton got that penetration & Browning got the sack, I literally saw the fire light under Dalton's ass(just like the fire I saw from Allen when he made the 2 great plays in a row). You could see a "pep in his step" when he went to the line for the next play. That's the kind of fire & attitude that needs to be EXPECTED from all the D-linemen for 4 full quarters!

NewChief
10-17-2005, 06:48 AM
Vermeil said before the game that he wanted to activate Warfield to play at least on special teams but the defensive coaches didn't want him active and Vermeil "gave in".



Not sure where and when Dick said this, but this is also what I've heard from "inside sources" (yeah, yeah...I know). It was entirely Gunther who didn't want Warfield to play. On top of that, it gets worse. This is the story I was told:
Warfield asked the team if he should go to a speed camp or something during his 4 week break. He said he'd do whatever they thought he should do to be the best he could be when he came back. The team told him that they wanted him to stick around and attend team meetings and such instead, so he would be up on the scheme and what was going on..inferring that thus he'd be more ready to start when the suspension was over. Warfield agrees and sticks around and plays good soldier over the last 5 weeks. Evidently he worked out hard, did everything the team asked of him, attended all meetings, etc..etc.. Then it comes time to activate him this week, and he finds out on Friday that he was inactive. He was severely pissed off, needless to say. On top of that, he was told he was inactive because "he's rusty and unready to play." Evidently the entire team thinks that is BS, because he looked good in practice all week.

Warrior5
10-17-2005, 07:30 AM
I don't know about you guys, but it seemed to me that our defense was getting better as the game wore on.

I think we made some adjustments.

Harumph. In addition to actually adjusting, I actually saw more press coverage at LOS from the CBs. The fact that McMe-owned was penalized twice for illegal yse of the hands sustained two Redskins drives, but it was still good to finally see less of the soft zone yesterday. I think it gave Allen and the D-line more time to get to Brunell.

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 07:59 AM
Not sure where and when Dick said this, but this is also what I've heard from "inside sources" (yeah, yeah...I know). It was entirely Gunther who didn't want Warfield to play. On top of that, it gets worse. This is the story I was told:
Warfield asked the team if he should go to a speed camp or something during his 4 week break. He said he'd do whatever they thought he should do to be the best he could be when he came back. The team told him that they wanted him to stick around and attend team meetings and such instead, so he would be up on the scheme and what was going on..inferring that thus he'd be more ready to start when the suspension was over. Warfield agrees and sticks around and plays good soldier over the last 5 weeks. Evidently he worked out hard, did everything the team asked of him, attended all meetings, etc..etc.. Then it comes time to activate him this week, and he finds out on Friday that he was inactive. He was severely pissed off, needless to say. On top of that, he was told he was inactive because "he's rusty and unready to play." Evidently the entire team thinks that is BS, because he looked good in practice all week.

Dick said it in his pre-game show on the radio.

Gunther is obviously in charge of the defense.

NewChief
10-17-2005, 08:04 AM
Dick said it in his pre-game show on the radio.

Gunther is obviously in charge of the defense.

How did the idiot talking heads on 810 and 610 not pick up on this? After the game yesterday, they were insisting that Warfield wasn't out there because of DV. They claimed that GUnther didn't really want Dexter on the field, and it was DVs fault that we're still starting Dexter not Warfield.

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 09:48 AM
How did the idiot talking heads on 810 and 610 not pick up on this? After the game yesterday, they were insisting that Warfield wasn't out there because of DV. They claimed that GUnther didn't really want Dexter on the field, and it was DVs fault that we're still starting Dexter not Warfield.

Because they've bought into the hype. Gunther was here during the "vaunted" years and can do no wrong.

Calcountry
10-17-2005, 09:54 AM
This shit sounds a whole lot more like VD than it does Gun.Put that mean ole Gun away, you don't want to catch DV.

Calcountry
10-17-2005, 10:05 AM
So when the defense sucks ass and Vermeil has input, it's all Vermeil's fault.

And then when Vermeil does EXACTLY WHAT EVERYBODY HERE WANTED and let's the defensive coaches make the decisions, it's STILL HIS FAULT?

Pure bullshit. People will go to great lengths to defend Gunther, even though he sucks. So what you are saying, is what I have been suspecting, Gunther gets way too much props from the fans for the talent of DT and Niel Smith.

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 10:18 AM
So what you are saying, is what I have been suspecting, Gunther gets way too much props from the fans for the talent of DT and Niel Smith.

I've thought that for over 10 years now. I was never really impressed with Gunther...

burt
10-17-2005, 10:31 AM
I've thought that for over 10 years now. I was never really impressed with Gunther...

So far theis season, I haven't been overly impressed with Gun, Saunders OR DV..... It seems as if we have talent, but is is misguided, and unfocused. :cuss:

stevieray
10-17-2005, 10:36 AM
style points or not, gun's defense won this game.

Calcountry
10-17-2005, 10:41 AM
I've thought that for over 10 years now. I was never really impressed with Gunther...Its all about the big play for his D, heck, any D would have looked good with 4 turnovers.

They still looked chitty, and I was holding my breath till the end. Why couldn't our O get just one more first down?

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 10:41 AM
style points or not, gun's defense won this game.

They won this game.

Can they do it week in and week out?

Or better yet, can they win a playoff game?

It's time for this team to take the next step.

Calcountry
10-17-2005, 10:41 AM
style points or not, gun's defense won this game.No, Allen won the game.

stevieray
10-17-2005, 10:45 AM
No, Allen won the game.

disagree. defense shut out Washington in the fourth qtr.

one guy does not make a team.

Frazod
10-17-2005, 10:46 AM
I must disagree.

I was at the game. I first noticed the defense playing great after they had sucked ass all day. It was like a switch was flipped. Then I noticed McPasson standing on the sideline wearing a ballcap.

I don't think this is a coincidence.

I never want to see McPasson in a Chiefs uniform again. EVER. He is the weak link.

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 10:48 AM
I must disagree.

I was at the game. I first noticed the defense playing great after they had sucked ass all day. It was like a switch was flipped. Then I noticed McPasson standing on the sideline wearing a ballcap.

I don't think this is a coincidence.

I never want to see McPasson in a Chiefs uniform again. EVER. He is the weak link.

Whether or not McCleon sucks is not the issue. We all know he sucks.

At question is whether or not McCleon's presence is FORCING Gunther to play this ridiculous defensive scheme. Obviously, it's not.

Frazod
10-17-2005, 10:54 AM
Whether or not McCleon sucks is not the issue. We all know he sucks.

At question is whether or not McCleon's presence is FORCING Gunther to play this ridiculous defensive scheme. Obviously, it's not.

My confidence in Gunther pretty much dissolved when we were absolutely slaughtered in Denver, by the Broncos doing nothing more than the same shit they always do. I think the man is incapable of learning.

If both Gun and McPasson left town on the same bus, I wouldn't mind. I also wouldn't mind if Dick was driving.

siberian khatru
10-17-2005, 10:58 AM
My confidence in Gunther pretty much dissolved when we were absolutely slaughtered in Denver, by the Broncos doing nothing more than the same shit they always do. I think the man is incapable of learning.

If both Gun and McPasson left town on the same bus, I wouldn't mind. I also wouldn't mind if Dick was driving.

And it plunged into a ravine and burst into flames.

DJJasonp
10-17-2005, 10:58 AM
Its all about the big play for his D, heck, any D would have looked good with 4 turnovers.

They still looked chitty, and I was holding my breath till the end. Why couldn't our O get just one more first down?


I think we still need to give our D a few more weeks to come together (Bell especially needs to learn his role)....but not sure if this has been brought up or not....but why the hell did we pass the ball on 3rd down, when, if we run the ball, the redskins would have had the ball with approximately 1:10 left on the clock (rather than the 1:46 they had after the incomplete pass). I like the idea of trying to put away a team with a first down and end the game, but with no timeouts for WASH you have to play the numbers (and clock). That was idiotic of Saunders.

kregger
10-17-2005, 11:13 AM
That was idiotic of Saunders.[/QUOTE]

UH.... Uncle Dick can and probably did overrule AS on this one. DV cannot manage the clock. THat is why he has Mike White stalking the sidelines. Seems he can't manage the clock either. Something about too many chefs(pun intenteded) in the kitchen...

shaneo69
10-17-2005, 12:06 PM
I've thought that for over 10 years now. I was never really impressed with Gunther...

Yeah, we know.

CrazyHorse
10-17-2005, 12:40 PM
Everybody blaming McCleon can all quit now.

The problem with this pass defense is 100% GUNTHER.

Vermeil said before the game that he wanted to activate Warfield to play at least on special teams but the defensive coaches didn't want him active and Vermeil "gave in".

If McCleon (or lack of Warfield) was the SOLE reason for the soft zone, then you'd think Gunther would have been chomping at the bit to get him in. Instead, Gunther goes against the head coach and has him inactive while we give up another 300-yard passing game...

I can appreciate your being "pissed off".


You must think that everyone here has not had the benefit of knowing just what you're about.

It pisses me off to say this, but it seems that because you cant get anyone else to stroke your ego, you have to do it yourself. And of course.....

.....I'm right.

What a dildo.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 12:45 PM
Give me a break.

If htismaqe doesn't call everyone out on the McCleon bullshit, NO ONE WILL.

BTW, CrazyHorse, those Donkeys at the Mane banned me again. Give them hell! :cuss:

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 01:01 PM
I can appreciate your being "pissed off".


You must think that everyone here has not had the benefit of knowing just what you're about.

It pisses me off to say this, but it seems that because you cant get anyone else to stroke your ego, you have to do it yourself. And of course.....

.....I'm right.

What a dildo.

ROFL

You got me all figured out. Congrats!

Calcountry
10-17-2005, 01:11 PM
My confidence in Gunther pretty much dissolved when we were absolutely slaughtered in Denver, by the Broncos doing nothing more than the same shit they always do. I think the man is incapable of learning.

If both Gun and McPasson left town on the same bus, I wouldn't mind. I also wouldn't mind if Dick was driving.The Broncos did nothing more than the same shit to the Super bowl Champions and smacked the chit out of them.

Calcountry
10-17-2005, 01:14 PM
I think we still need to give our D a few more weeks to come together (Bell especially needs to learn his role)....but not sure if this has been brought up or not....but why the hell did we pass the ball on 3rd down, when, if we run the ball, the redskins would have had the ball with approximately 1:10 left on the clock (rather than the 1:46 they had after the incomplete pass). I like the idea of trying to put away a team with a first down and end the game, but with no timeouts for WASH you have to play the numbers (and clock). That was idiotic of Saunders.I was thinking the same thing. I wanted them to run the ball, then run the 45 second clock all the way down, take the penalty even to take that extra second off, then punt it into the end zone to not risk a run back. Force Washington to go 80 yards on us in a minute when we know they are going to pass and Allen was getting off.

They got a little too close to the end zone with that extra 45 seconds.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 01:15 PM
Yup. I was unbelievably pissed at that last playcall. We gave them 40 seconds.

Calcountry
10-17-2005, 01:22 PM
Yup. I was unbelievably pissed at that last playcall. We gave them 40 seconds.What happened to your post count Chiefie? Did you start a 20k post thread or something?

lmao.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 01:29 PM
What happened to your post count Chiefie? Did you start a 20k post thread or something?

lmao.

What? Post count? I do not pay attention to such trifling matters.

Chief Faithful
10-17-2005, 01:42 PM
I must disagree.

I was at the game. I first noticed the defense playing great after they had sucked ass all day. It was like a switch was flipped. Then I noticed McPasson standing on the sideline wearing a ballcap.

I don't think this is a coincidence.

I never want to see McPasson in a Chiefs uniform again. EVER. He is the weak link.

I saw the same thing watching the game on a screen at the local sports bar. Dewayne Washington did a great job with Santana Moss. It leads me to believe that Warfield could have a hugh impact when he is ready.

BigChiefFan
10-17-2005, 01:48 PM
Whether or not McCleon sucks is not the issue. We all know he sucks.

At question is whether or not McCleon's presence is FORCING Gunther to play this ridiculous defensive scheme. Obviously, it's not.
Actually if you'll watch the game tape, when McCleon was in the game he still played zone and Surtain played up at the line of scrimmage. There is no question in my mind, Gunther is compensating for McCleon by lining him up the way he is. I don't recall seeing a HYBRID between a one player playing man and the other playing zone, but I did see it with my own two eyes yesterday.

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 02:06 PM
Actually if you'll watch the game tape, when McCleon was in the game he still played zone and Surtain played up at the line of scrimmage. There is no question in my mind, Gunther is compensating for McCleon by lining him up the way he is. I don't recall seeing a HYBRID between a one player playing man and the other playing zone, but I did see it with my own two eyes yesterday.

Don't confuse bump-and-run (ie. where the CB lines up) with zone vs. man coverage. They're 2 separate things and work in conjunction with each other.

Yesterday was the first time they played any man coverage at all. On 3 occasions, I saw McCleon or Surtain follow their man in motion. Yes, I saw McCleon man-to-man on Santana Moss. This is the first week they've done that. But for the most part, both CB's were once again in zone coverage.

There has been several times in week 1 that Surtain has played bump-and-run even though it's still zone (not man) coverage. FWIW, McCleon has also been in a couple of B&R situations (I think it was against Denver but I can't remember exactly).

But take a look at their zone. They're not rolling coverage to McCleon's side (no safety help). Their defense, for the most part, looks exactly the same on the left as on the right. And it's not just the CB's, it's the LB's too.

Which leads me right back where I started.

They're not compensating for McCleon. Gunther has his scheme and he's gonna run it no matter who is out there. He may be the one person at 1 Arrowhead Drive more stubborn than Vermeil.

BigChiefFan
10-17-2005, 02:11 PM
Don't confuse bump-and-run (ie. where the CB lines up) with zone vs. man coverage. They're 2 separate things and work in conjunction with each other.

Yesterday was the first time they played any man coverage at all. On 3 occasions, I saw McCleon or Surtain follow their man in motion. Yes, I saw McCleon man-to-man on Santana Moss. This is the first week they've done that. But for the most part, both CB's were once again in zone coverage.

There has been several times in week 1 that Surtain has played bump-and-run even though it's still zone (not man) coverage. FWIW, McCleon has also been in a couple of B&R situations (I think it was against Denver but I can't remember exactly).

But take a look at their zone. They're not rolling coverage to McCleon's side (no safety help). Their defense, for the most part, looks exactly the same on the left as on the right. And it's not just the CB's, it's the LB's too.

Which leads me right back where I started.

They're not compensating for McCleon. Gunther has his scheme and he's gonna run it no matter who is out there. He may be the one person at 1 Arrowhead Drive more stubborn than Vermeil.
It could be a variation of the bump n run, however, I saw Surtain line up at the LOS while McCleon played 10 yards off the reciever on the same play. I would say that is a CLEAR indication Gunther is compensating for McCleon. Bump N Run means you bump the receiver at the LOS, not play 10 yards off the wide-out.

tk13
10-17-2005, 02:34 PM
I've got no problem with htismaqe calling people out... somebody should. Everybody and their dog ripped DV and called him senile and lost for two whole freaking miserable weeks because he A) gave the team a week off and B) supposedly benched Warfield.

Then the truth comes out and A) giving them the week off worked and B) he was the one coach who actually wanted Warfield to play... then everybody just shrugs it off or avoids the topic so they don't have to give DV credit, funny how that works... but oh well, this is what keg's talking about with the internet. Now you got people calling DV spineless because he let Gun have his way, if DV overruled Gun, people would go back to saying DV is sabotaging the defense. Just wonderful. DV's still a good coach, he knows what he's doing, regardless of what the armchair QB's think....

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 02:37 PM
It could be a variation of the bump n run, however, I saw Surtain line up at the LOS while McCleon played 10 yards off the reciever on the same play. I would say that is a CLEAR indication Gunther is compensating for McCleon. Bump N Run means you bump the receiver at the LOS, not play 10 yards off the wide-out.

Right.

You said:

Actually if you'll watch the game tape, when McCleon was in the game he still played zone and Surtain played up at the line of scrimmage.

Both of them were actually in zone most of the time. Surtain was in bump-and-run while McCleon was playing off.

If they were doing that every down, I would say it's likely because of McCleon.

As it is, they're both doing it at different times. There's also been times when McCleon was in B&R while Surtain was playing off. Without going back and watching all of the games again, I would guess that has to do with which WR was across from them. IOW, soft vs. bump-and-run was determined by Randy Moss, not Dexter McCleon.

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 02:40 PM
I've got no problem with htismaqe calling people out... somebody should. Everybody and their dog ripped DV and called him senile and lost for two whole freaking miserable weeks because he A) gave the team a week off and B) supposedly benched Warfield.

Then the truth comes out and A) giving them the week off worked and B) he was the one coach who actually wanted Warfield to play... then everybody just shrugs it off or avoids the topic so they don't have to give DV credit, funny how that works... but oh well, this is what keg's talking about with the internet. Now you got people calling DV spineless because he let Gun have his way, if DV overruled Gun, people would go back to saying DV is sabotaging the defense. Just wonderful. DV's still a good coach, he knows what he's doing, regardless of what the armchair QB's think....

I've got no love for DV, but it is a blatant double-standard.

BigChiefFan
10-17-2005, 02:43 PM
Right.

You said:

Actually if you'll watch the game tape, when McCleon was in the game he still played zone and Surtain played up at the line of scrimmage.

Both of them were actually in zone most of the time. Surtain was in bump-and-run while McCleon was playing off.

If they were doing that every down, I would say it's likely because of McCleon.

As it is, they're both doing it at different times. There's also been times when McCleon was in B&R while Surtain was playing off. Without going back and watching all of the games again, I would guess that has to do with which WR was across from them. IOW, soft vs. bump-and-run was determined by Randy Moss, not Dexter McCleon.

I still believe McCleon is a liabilty in man coverage. He's okay in zone coverage, but I think Gunther IS compensating for McCleon's weakness.

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 03:00 PM
I still believe McCleon is a liabilty in man coverage. He's okay in zone coverage, but I think Gunther IS compensating for McCleon's weakness.

Oh, he's definitely a liability in man coverage. I don't agree he's okay in zone -- we've been playing mostly zone and he's still horrible.

IF Gunther is compensating for McCleon (and nothing I've seen suggests he is) then Gunther is an even bigger idiot. He's got ONE GUY at CB that he has to change the ENTIRE scheme for, but instead of benching that guy in favor of either Warfield or Washington, he goes ahead and changes the scheme?

Do you realize that this is what you're suggesting?

BigChiefFan
10-17-2005, 03:25 PM
Oh, he's definitely a liability in man coverage. I don't agree he's okay in zone -- we've been playing mostly zone and he's still horrible.

IF Gunther is compensating for McCleon (and nothing I've seen suggests he is) then Gunther is an even bigger idiot. He's got ONE GUY at CB that he has to change the ENTIRE scheme for, but instead of benching that guy in favor of either Warfield or Washington, he goes ahead and changes the scheme?

Do you realize that this is what you're suggesting?
Yea, I do. I don't recall Gunther ever being a fan of Warfield's. In fact didn't Gunther start Pat Dennis as a rookie ahead of him? I don't believe Gunther thinks McCleon is head and shoulders better than Warfield, but gives the nod to Mickey Leon for effort. I think this is more politics than about skills at this point. Just my take.

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 03:38 PM
Yea, I do. I don't recall Gunther ever being a fan of Warfield's. In fact didn't Gunther start Pat Dennis as a rookie ahead of him? I don't believe Gunther thinks McCleon is head and shoulders better than Warfield, but gives the nod to Mickey Leon for effort. I think this is more politics than about skills at this point. Just my take.

I absolutely agree that it's more about politics than anything else.

That's why it's so infuriating. Winning games seems to be about 3rd on this coaching staff's priority list.

RedThat
10-17-2005, 03:38 PM
You know what also sucks guys? The fact that the Chiefs are droping Bell in zone coverage. I dont get it?

tiptap
10-17-2005, 03:48 PM
I don't know what to say about the defense. Statistically we have the third lowest attempts at running (is it impart because the passing defense isn't there?) The run yds or yards per play average is in the top half of the league. So there is a disconnect in being able to play defense in the passing game. Most teams are running pass plays in the middle of the field because the new guys haven't meshed to be able to defense the passes. Or they are rolling out and getting plenty of time to make plays even with the field cut in half. This is underneath coverage. You got to be just a little tighter in playing those short routes. So I have to wonder if changing up the CB's and giving Warfield a chance isn't a good thing. We seen that McCleon can do good things and get an interception here or there but he can't be a physical CB. Maybe in the new touchy feely coverage you can't have such phycical CB play but if it isn't an option than you don't get a chance to see where the refs are on any given Sunday.
I will say that we might be bettor in the pass defense if we could get a push from the front 4. Jared is getting there but against good WR we will be behind the play if the QB gets to stand and deliver.

Calcountry
10-17-2005, 03:48 PM
What? Post count? I do not pay attention to such trifling matters.ROFL

Cochise
10-17-2005, 03:49 PM
I've got no problem with htismaqe calling people out... somebody should. Everybody and their dog ripped DV and called him senile and lost for two whole freaking miserable weeks because he A) gave the team a week off and B) supposedly benched Warfield.

Then the truth comes out and A) giving them the week off worked and B) he was the one coach who actually wanted Warfield to play... then everybody just shrugs it off or avoids the topic so they don't have to give DV credit, funny how that works... but oh well, this is what keg's talking about with the internet. Now you got people calling DV spineless because he let Gun have his way, if DV overruled Gun, people would go back to saying DV is sabotaging the defense. Just wonderful. DV's still a good coach, he knows what he's doing, regardless of what the armchair QB's think....
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Calcountry
10-17-2005, 03:55 PM
I've got no problem with htismaqe calling people out... somebody should. Everybody and their dog ripped DV and called him senile and lost for two whole freaking miserable weeks because he A) gave the team a week off and B) supposedly benched Warfield.

Then the truth comes out and A) giving them the week off worked and B) he was the one coach who actually wanted Warfield to play... then everybody just shrugs it off or avoids the topic so they don't have to give DV credit, funny how that works... but oh well, this is what keg's talking about with the internet. Now you got people calling DV spineless because he let Gun have his way, if DV overruled Gun, people would go back to saying DV is sabotaging the defense. Just wonderful. DV's still a good coach, he knows what he's doing, regardless of what the armchair QB's think....So what you are saying is BB's lend themselves to becoming bitch fests.

sedated
10-17-2005, 03:58 PM
Bottom line - McNugget sucks and doesn't belong on an NFL roster.

RedThat
10-17-2005, 04:01 PM
Bottom line - McNugget sucks and doesn't belong on an NFL roster.

At the very least we can say he's been better Dewayne Washington. Washington needs to be shown DAH-WAAAYNE outta here.