PDA

View Full Version : Peterson has totally let down Vermeil


FringeNC
12-11-2005, 10:50 PM
Carl Peterson lures Vermeil out of retirement...Tells him, "you bring the offense, and I'll take care of the defense -- that's my specialty".

With the "talent" that CP had assembled, GR's 2001 year was about like 2000. D collapes in 2002 to become one of worst units of all-time. CP tells DV he'll fix it. He doesn't. It's just as bad in 2003 as 2002. CP blames not himself, but GR. Fires GR. Tells DV he'll fix it by bringing in Gunther, that Gunther is a D genuis. Fails miserably in 2004. Gunther and CP convince DV it is a talent defenciency, and that they will fix it. Fails yet again...

It seems to me that DV has done exactly what he was brought in to do. Deliver the best O in the NFL. Record-setting even. The offense was developed by DV and AS, with little assistance from CP. (Seems to me drafting LJ as insurance policy was all he has done.)

There has been a massive failure in this organization to correct the problems on D, and CP signs the players, and with GC, even forced a DC down DV's throat.

DV would have been much better off without any of Carl's "help".

When DV and AS leave, this organization is going to go all to hell, because CP will be in charge of both acquiring offense and defense talent.

Sure-Oz
12-11-2005, 10:51 PM
peterson is good at that.

chris
12-11-2005, 10:55 PM
Carl Peterson lures Vermeil out of retirement...Tells him, "you bring the offense, and I'll take care of the defense -- that's my specialty".

With the "talent" that CP had assembled, GR's 2001 year was about like 2000. D collapes in 2002 to become one of worst units of all-time. CP tells DV he'll fix it. He doesn't. It's just as bad in 2003 as 2002. CP blames not himself, but GR. Fires GR. Tells DV he'll fix it by bringing in Gunther, that Gunther is a D genuis. Fails miserably in 2004. Gunther and CP convince DV it is a talent defenciency, and that they will fix it. Fails yet again...

It seems to me that DV has done exactly what he was brought in to do. Deliver the best O in the NFL. Record-setting even. The offense was developed by DV and AS, with little assistance from CP. (Seems to me drafting LJ as insurance policy was all he has done.)

There has been a massive failure in this organization to correct the problems on D, and CP signs the players, and with GC, even forced a DC down DV's throat.

DV would have been much better off without any of Carl's "help".

When DV and AS leave, this organization is going to go all to hell, because CP will be in charge of both acquiring offense and defense talent.

Cool!

It must be great having your internal spies in the Chiefs front offices to know the intimate working relationship between CP, DV, and AS.

Mr. Laz
12-12-2005, 03:31 PM
oh i don't know...

a case could be made that Vermeil has let Peterson down just as much.



1. Peterson waited too long before going after Defensive talent


2. Vermeil hasn't maximized the talent he does have (especially on defense) and doens't seem to know how to coach during a game.

2a. hires coaches who's scheme doesn't match players

Lurch
12-12-2005, 03:34 PM
Would this be an appropriate place for, a "Dammit, Carl!!!" :banghead:

tk13
12-12-2005, 03:36 PM
oh i don't know...

a case could be made that Vermeil has let Peterson down just as much.



1. Peterson waited too long before going after Defensive talent


2. Vermeil hasn't maximized the talent he does have (especially on defense) and doens't seem to know how to coach during a game.

2a. hires coaches who's scheme doesn't match players
I think there are some valid points in this thread, but what coaches do we have that don't match the scheme?

Calcountry
12-12-2005, 03:37 PM
Would this be an appropriate place for, a "Dammit, Carl!!!" :banghead:You rang?

The Bad Guy
12-12-2005, 03:37 PM
Cool!

It must be great having your internal spies in the Chiefs front offices to know the intimate working relationship between CP, DV, and AS.

Why are you on this board?

All you do is try to criticize someone's OPINION.

Wahh, you guys aren't coaches so you shouldn't question them, wahhh.

DeepSouth
12-12-2005, 03:38 PM
CP did:
trade for Willie Roaf
signed free agent Priest Holmes
signed free agent Casey Weigman
drafted Sammy Parker
signed free agent Brian Waters
signed free agent Jason Dunn
signed free agent Eddie Kennison

Taco John
12-12-2005, 03:39 PM
This reminds me of the time that Obi Wan Kenobi told Grand Chancellor Palpatine that Sith Lords were his speciality, only to turn Anakin into one

1punkyQB
12-12-2005, 03:40 PM
I'm no apologist for CP, but the irony is the players he signed to help (Surtain, DJ, Bell) were some of bigger screw-ups on Sunday. Hard to fault him for Surtain, a guy who has made his share of INTs in his career, deciding to catch the ball the way a 4 year-old girl would.

jidar
12-12-2005, 03:40 PM
Why are you on this board?

All you do is try to criticize someone's OPINION.

Wahh, you guys aren't coaches so you shouldn't question them, wahhh.

Your opinion sucks shit.

Mr. Laz
12-12-2005, 03:41 PM
I think there are some valid points in this thread, but what coaches do we have that don't match the scheme?

actually i was referring to the first years of the vermeil tenure when we had Greg Robinson has defensive coordinator.


Robinson's read and react scheme calls for big road grader defensive line who can eat up blocks and protect the linebackers.

but we didn't have those AND VERMEIL doesn't like fat defensive lineman.

vermeil's player type preferences didn't match the scheme of the defensive coordinator he chose to hire.


secondary preferences didn't match either.


vermeil + Robinson was doomed from the very beginning.

Otter
12-12-2005, 03:45 PM
Cool!

It must be great having your internal spies in the Chiefs front offices to know the intimate working relationship between CP, DV, and AS.

How's this for you Chrissy:

16 years without a playoff win.
35 years without a super bowl APPEARENCE.

Is that concrete and factual enough for you?

Now shut your pie hole bitch.

The Bad Guy
12-12-2005, 03:48 PM
Your opinion sucks shit.

Thank you.

FringeNC
12-12-2005, 03:48 PM
This thing didn't get in responses when I posted it last night. It seems to have resurfaced.

"CP did:
trade for Willie Roaf
signed free agent Priest Holmes
signed free agent Casey Weigman
drafted Sammy Parker
signed free agent Brian Waters
signed free agent Jason Dunn
signed free agent Eddie Kennison"

I think CP did all or most of those things on order from Vermeil. On D, where Vermeil doesn't know much, and can't guide Peterson, Peterson ****ed all up.

Brock
12-12-2005, 03:55 PM
Vermeil hired Greg Robinson. Greg Robinson brought in a bunch of castoff donkeys. The downfall began there.

htismaqe
12-12-2005, 04:04 PM
Seeing as I currently get a paycheck, I know personally that Carl Peterson has done everything in his power to field a winner.

The one thing he takes the blame for is hiring Vermeil, who isn't that good of a coach.

FringeNC
12-12-2005, 04:06 PM
Vermeil hired Greg Robinson. Greg Robinson brought in a bunch of castoff donkeys. The downfall began there.

The evidence is not clear at all that Greg Robinson is worse than Gunther. His first year here, 2001, we were 22nd the league in D. In 2002, we were last. In 2003, we were 29. Under GC, 31st last year, and 27 this year.

So...

GR:
22
32
29
AVG: 27.7

GC:
31
27
AVG: 29

No other team in the NFL has been consistently at the bottom like that. It is unbelievable, and tragic at the same time. CP has been able to do nothing...nothing at all to fix the D. And Gunther is not one bit better than GR. In fact, one can argue Gunther has more to work with, so therefore is actually worse.

Brock
12-12-2005, 04:09 PM
And Gunther is not one bit better than GR. In fact, one can argue Gunther has more to work with, so therefore is actually worse.

That's wrong. KC's defense under Robinson was worst or near-worst in every single category. Cunningham's defense is not.

I'm no fan of Gunther, but even I can see that the defense is somewhat better than it was.

FringeNC
12-12-2005, 04:14 PM
That's wrong. KC's defense under Robinson was worst or near-worst in every single category. Cunningham's defense is not.

I'm no fan of Gunther, but even I can see that the defense is somewhat better than it was.

The figures I posted were for total yards, which seem to be one of the best, if not the best, metric for measuring D. For example, we all know Chicago has a great D this year, and they are #1.

Maybe turnovers should be in there, but there is a lot of luck in getting those. Having said that, I'd be suprised if Gunther's D is averaging more turnovers per game than Robinson's Ds.

Brock
12-12-2005, 04:17 PM
The figures I posted were for total yards, which seem to be one of the best, if not the best, metric for measuring D. For example, we all know Chicago has a great D this year, and they are #1.

Maybe turnovers should be in there, but there is a lot of luck in getting those. Having said that, I'd be suprised if Gunther's D is averaging more turnovers per game than Robinson's Ds.

Interestingly, KC was number 1 in takeaways at least a couple of times under Robinson. But what did that matter? Teams ran at will, any time they wanted to.

htismaqe
12-12-2005, 04:18 PM
Total yards is one of the worst, if not THE worst, statistic for judging the overall effectiveness of a defense...

FringeNC
12-12-2005, 05:01 PM
Total yards is one of the worst, if not THE worst, statistic for judging the overall effectiveness of a defense...

Look at the top 3...

Is there really anything to argue there:
Chicago
Tampa
Carolina

Why exactly do you think total defense is a bad metric?

DeepSouth
12-12-2005, 05:03 PM
This thing didn't get in responses when I posted it last night. It seems to have resurfaced.

"CP did:
trade for Willie Roaf
signed free agent Priest Holmes
signed free agent Casey Weigman
drafted Sammy Parker
signed free agent Brian Waters
signed free agent Jason Dunn
signed free agent Eddie Kennison"

I think CP did all or most of those things on order from Vermeil. On D, where Vermeil doesn't know much, and can't guide Peterson, Peterson ****ed all up.

You know you sound like, "Everything good that's happened we give credit to DV. Everything bad that's happened we give blame to Peterson". Where would you put Johnny Morton? Was he a good thing or a bad thing? Since he was bad, do we blame Peterson even though he's an offensive player?

I think there is enough credit/blame to go around for both management and the coaching staff.

FringeNC
12-12-2005, 05:17 PM
You know you sound like, "Everything good that's happened we give credit to DV. Everything bad that's happened we give blame to Peterson".

Yeah, I am almost to that point. I think DV has final say on offensive personnel decision, and that CP/Gun control the D. I do not know this, it's just my guess...

My main point I guess is that there is absolutely no excuse for still being 27th in the league in D. CP has done nothing to fix the defense for five years. The only team that is at the bottom of the rankings every year is Kansas City. And I could be wrong, but it's kinda tough to blame Vermeil for this considering he admits he has little to do with the D. (And I don't think this is unusual. A head coach usually has a specialty in either offense or defense.)

If it was simply poor coaching, Gunther has had ample time to turn things around. There are tons of examples of immediate improvement in this league. It's been two years now, and there is little or no improvement in the D. I ask, who is to blame? I say Carl Peterson. He did not bring any talent in for Greg Robinson, and he brought in Gunther, and the talent those two have brought has failed to elevate this unit from the bottom of the league.

I say keep Vermeil and fire CP and Gun, and bring in someone who knows D to be our GM.

Raiderhader
12-12-2005, 05:31 PM
Yeah, I am almost to that point. I think DV has final say on offensive personnel decision, and that CP/Gun control the D. I do not know this, it's just my guess...


How do you explain LJ then? It was DV who wanted to draft defense, and it was Carl who drafted offense.

FringeNC
12-12-2005, 05:35 PM
How do you explain LJ then? It was DV who wanted to draft defense, and it was Carl who drafted offense.

Yeah, but I don't see how that is inconsistent with my overall point.

DV has built an offensive machine here, but it was established well before the arrival of Larry Johnson.

Raiderhader
12-12-2005, 05:38 PM
Yeah, but I don't see how that is inconsistent with my overall point.

DV has built an offensive machine here, but it was established well before the arrival of Larry Johnson.


Your point is that DV is in charge only of the offense and CP with the defense. The circumstances surrounding the drafting of LJ pretty much blows your theory out of the water.

Deberg_1990
12-12-2005, 05:42 PM
CP has done nothing to fix the defense for five years.

He hasnt done "Nothing" He drafted Sims, Freeman, Siavii and Wilson. He brought in Holliday, McCleon, Barber, Surtain, Hall and Bell. Its not like he hasnt tried, he just basically sucks at it.

jjchieffan
12-12-2005, 06:15 PM
Anyone have the stats on points allowed in the GC era vs. the GRob era? As far as I am concerned, that is the only stat that matters. It seems like GC has improved in that area, but I could be mistaken. Take into account also that KC has had one of the toughest schedules in the league during Cunninghams reign. Yeah the bears have turned around their team on defense, but look who they play. Their D didnt look to great either against Pittsburgh

htismaqe
12-12-2005, 06:53 PM
He hasnt done "Nothing" He drafted Sims, Freeman, Siavii and Wilson. He brought in Holliday, McCleon, Barber, Surtain, Hall and Bell. Its not like he hasnt tried, he just basically sucks at it.

Exactly.

Carl brought in all of those guys because his head coach WANTED THEM.

You wanna blame Carl? Blame him for bringing Dick here in the first place...

chiefs4me
12-12-2005, 08:56 PM
How's this for you Chrissy:

16 years without a playoff win.
35 years without a super bowl APPEARENCE.

Is that concrete and factual enough for you?

Now shut your pie hole bitch.







Not really, can you please repeat it?????ROFL

shaneo69
12-12-2005, 08:58 PM
With the majority of the cap money being spent on offense, it was imperative that our recent drafts produce defensive talent. Instead, we got:

2000---Morris and Bartee
2001---Downing and Minnis
2002---Sims and Freeman
2003---Battle (and for two years, crappy play from Kuhveeka)
2004---Siavii, Wilson, and Fox

I don't care who the head coaches wanted, or who the scouts recommended, this falls on Carl's shoulders.

pak1983
12-12-2005, 09:03 PM
Your opinion sucks shit.
Rep!

Mr. Laz
12-12-2005, 09:13 PM
Carl brought in all of those guys because his head coach WANTED THEM
link?

FringeNC
12-12-2005, 09:26 PM
Exactly.

Carl brought in all of those guys because his head coach WANTED THEM.

You wanna blame Carl? Blame him for bringing Dick here in the first place...

I'm not sure he wanted those guys with the possible exception of McCleon. I have a feeling it's more like DV said "get me some D talent Carl". And CP suggested these guys, and DV said "okay".

DV knows he doesn't know D, and I have a hard to believing he requested specific players for CP to go out and get....however, I believe on offense, he did play a big role.

I don't know what happened to CP. He used to know D, but either the game has passed him by, or he has been packing it in the last few years, because his drafts and FA acquisitions have been pathetic.

Deberg_1990
12-12-2005, 11:06 PM
I don't know what happened to CP. He used to know D

Was it Carl or was it Marty, Cowher, Dungy and Herm Edwards those first 3-4 years that knew D in KC??? Hmmm.......

CoMoChief
12-12-2005, 11:10 PM
"Peterson has totally let down Vermeil"

You forgot to mention that Peterson has totally let down virtually everyone in the KC area.

ChiefsCountry
12-12-2005, 11:14 PM
How's this for you Chrissy:

16 years without a playoff win.
35 years without a super bowl APPEARENCE.

Is that concrete and factual enough for you?

Now shut your pie hole bitch.

That would be 11 years without a playoff win. 1994.

Deberg_1990
12-12-2005, 11:18 PM
That would be 11 years without a playoff win. 1994.

and to think, the expansion Carolina Panthers didnt come into existence until 1995 and went to an NFC Championship game, rebuilt then went to a Super Bowl all in that time period.

Taco John
12-12-2005, 11:48 PM
With the majority of the cap money being spent on offense, it was imperative that our recent drafts produce defensive talent. Instead, we got:

2000---Morris and Bartee
2001---Downing and Minnis
2002---Sims and Freeman
2003---Battle (and for two years, crappy play from Kuhveeka)
2004---Siavii, Wilson, and Fox

I don't care who the head coaches wanted, or who the scouts recommended, this falls on Carl's shoulders.



Ouch... In fairness, Carl Peterson could say that Greg Robinson was Dick's guy... But the paradox is that those are the guys that Robinson had to work with... Yeah. Ouch.

Mecca
12-12-2005, 11:51 PM
link?

Peterson has routinly said he drafts who the coach wants. That way the coach will be likely to play the guy because that's who he wanted. They can't go to Peterson and go "I didn't want this guy so that's why he's not playing.

The one exception is Larry Johnson and look how that turned out, with both the good and bad things.

DaWolf
12-13-2005, 04:29 AM
actually i was referring to the first years of the vermeil tenure when we had Greg Robinson has defensive coordinator.

Robinson's read and react scheme calls for big road grader defensive line who can eat up blocks and protect the linebackers.

Actually, the opposite is true, at least according to GRob while he was here. The talk was that he was a big proponent of speedy linemen who could move, because he liked to switch them around a lot and even drop them back into coverage (sound familiar?) and the really big guys couldn't do that, which is why we were never interested in a fella like Sam Adams during GRob's time here.

Either way, Vermeil is the one who made that hire, and he suffered for it. Meanwhile I think Carl pushed hard to get Gun hired and DV went along with it, and I think that was also a huge mistake. Gunther is not the right man for this defense and this team. I don't really get the love affair people have with him. He plays an exciting brand of D and he loves the city, but I am a results oriented person and I haven't seen results from Gun since 1998...

Rausch
12-13-2005, 04:32 AM
That would be 11 years without a playoff win. 1994.

Try 93.

htismaqe
12-13-2005, 08:54 AM
and to think, the expansion Carolina Panthers didnt come into existence until 1995 and went to an NFC Championship game, rebuilt then went to a Super Bowl all in that time period.

:bravo:

Just goes to show how pathetic the franchise is, from top to bottom.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 08:56 AM
Try 93.

January 1994 is what I think he means. 1993 season.

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 08:58 AM
The only one that has let down anyone this year is Gunther. He got his guys. We've improved on D, but only marginally.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 08:58 AM
and to think, the expansion Carolina Panthers didnt come into existence until 1995 and went to an NFC Championship game, rebuilt then went to a Super Bowl all in that time period.

Yep.

But, y'know, they've had some bad seasons, too, and we've been competitive (i.e., 8-8/9-7) a lot of those years, and that's better, right?

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 09:00 AM
Yep.

But, y'know, they've had some bad seasons, too, and we've been competitive (i.e., 8-8/9-7) a lot of those years, and that's better, right?

Carolina's only had 2 seasons worse than 7-9.

Granted they've only had 3 winning seasons in franchise history, including this year.

Of course the Chiefs have 3 winning seasons in the last 8 years, if we can win another game this year, that is.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 09:07 AM
Carolina's only had 2 seasons worse than 7-9.

Granted they've only had 3 winning seasons in franchise history, including this year.

Of course the Chiefs have 3 winning seasons in the last 8 years, if we can win another game this year, that is.

They've had 4-12 and 1-15 seasons since 1998. It's been 18 years since we were that bad. Some folks here argue that it's better to be 8-8/9-7 every year, with a shot at the playoffs, then to suffer a horrid season.

I'm not going to say they're wrong, but I will say my personal preference is to trade a load of shit for one Super Bowl. The point holds: Carolina has done more in a shorter period of time than Carl has in 17 years (well, this year's not over yet, so a flicker of hope remains ...)

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 09:10 AM
They've had 4-12 and 1-15 seasons since 1998. It's been 18 years since we were that bad. Some folks here argue that it's better to be 8-8/9-7 every year, with a shot at the playoffs, then to suffer a horrid season.


People wanted to tank games when we were 6-10 and last year at 7-9.

I don't think having a 3-13 year or whatever would have helped us that much.

Last year we got Derrick Johnson. After going 6-10 we could have had Julius Peppers (who Carolina drafted) but instead got Ryan Sims.

So I don't buy the "suck total shit for a year and profit" theory. Carl and Co. have blown the draft most of the time no matter where they drafted.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 09:15 AM
People wanted to tank games when we were 6-10 and last year at 7-9.

I don't think having a 3-13 year or whatever would have helped us that much.

Last year we got Derrick Johnson. After going 6-10 we could have had Julius Peppers (who Carolina drafted) but instead got Ryan Sims.

So I don't buy the "suck total shit for a year and profit" theory. Carl and Co. have blown the draft most of the time no matter where they drafted.

I'm not saying we should tank games.

What I'm saying is the excuse with Carl has always been "We've never been 4-12 under me" or whatever. He takes pride in being "competitive," which is a nice way of saying "mediocre." Mediocrity has gotten us nowhere. Carolina has done more than us in a shorter period of time despite suffering a couple of truly horrid seasons. I'm not saying we SHOULD go 4-12 or 1-15, I'm saying that going 8-8/9-7 isn't proof of doing the right thing. You CAN go 4-12 or 1-15 and quickly rebound.

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 09:24 AM
I'm not saying we should tank games.
.

Neither am I.

I'm saying even if we went 4-12, it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference, because we suck at drafting.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 09:29 AM
Neither am I.

I'm saying even if we went 4-12, it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference, because we suck at drafting.

I think we're coming to the same point from different directions.

FringeNC
12-13-2005, 09:29 AM
Carl had the easiest job of any GM. All he has had to do since 2002 is put together a mediocre D, and has failed miserably. No team in football has been anywhere near as bad on D as we have since that time.

Two huge blunders on Carl's part: after GR was let go, he:

1) Out of all the guys out there, he decides on Gunther. Gunther's rankings: #31, and #27 with less turnovers than GR's defenses.

2) Essentially DOES NOTHING talent-wise after the 2002-2003 defensive debacles. Thinks the talent is there, and Gunther will fix it.

All it would have taken was a damn decent D. All that Vermeil has done on offense here has been wasted because Carl Peterson has been incompetent.

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 09:32 AM
I think we're coming to the same point from different directions.

OK, maybe.

What I'm saying is that going 4-12 WOULDN'T HELP US.

ck_IN
12-13-2005, 10:03 AM
I nor does anyone else on here have inside knowledge of what takes place at 1 Arrowhead drive but historicly CP has done more or less what his coaches have asked.

Personally I blame our horid drafting on DV. The drafts were hit and miss with Marty but at least we got some good defensive talent. Under DV the drafts have been a joke. That fact is a large part of the reason for the teams current state.

DV came in as a player development and eval genious. I'd say he's failed at both. The signature pick under DV was Sims. He's been a complete bust. Meanwhile Henderson stars at Jax. Maybe CP was in love with Sims but I think DV was since he raved about him at the combines.

Don't get me wrong, CP has a large hand in the failure of the last five years but prior to that this team was a contender. Since then they haven't.

kregger
12-13-2005, 10:19 AM
I nor does anyone else on here have inside knowledge of what takes place at 1 Arrowhead drive but historicly CP has done more or less what his coaches have asked.

Personally I blame our horid drafting on DV. The drafts were hit and miss with Marty but at least we got some good defensive talent. Under DV the drafts have been a joke. That fact is a large part of the reason for the teams current state.

DV came in as a player development and eval genious. I'd say he's failed at both. The signature pick under DV was Sims. He's been a complete bust. Meanwhile Henderson stars at Jax. Maybe CP was in love with Sims but I think DV was since he raved about him at the combines.

Don't get me wrong, CP has a large hand in the failure of the last five years but prior to that this team was a contender. Since then they haven't.

DV bought into a boatload of shit from John Bunting, Sims coach at UNC and close friend of DV. DV is suck at drafting. CP doesn't have the stones to tell DV no. NOt until LJ did CP tell DV to STFU.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 10:22 AM
OK, maybe.

What I'm saying is that going 4-12 WOULDN'T HELP US.

I understand that. We're both saying Carl's the problem, no? His ways haven't worked.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 10:24 AM
I nor does anyone else on here have inside knowledge of what takes place at 1 Arrowhead drive but historicly CP has done more or less what his coaches have asked.


All I know is the one constant over 17 years has been CP. He's hired the coaches and assembled the scouting staff. If the coaches and staff have fugged up, it's ultimately on CP for hiring and trusting the wrong people.

kregger
12-13-2005, 10:24 AM
I understand that. We're both saying Carl's the problem, no? His ways haven't worked.
According to his boss, Lamar Hunt, things are A-OK at 1 Arrowhead Drive.

NewChief
12-13-2005, 10:31 AM
DV came in as a player development and eval genious. I'd say he's failed at both. The signature pick under DV was Sims. He's been a complete bust. Meanwhile Henderson stars at Jax. Maybe CP was in love with Sims but I think DV was since he raved about him at the combines.


I don't know that anyone really thought that was DV's specialty. I think DV's specialty is turning marginal players into studs through positive reinforcement and repeated opportunities. Sometimes it works (Trent, Dante, Eddie, Priest) and other times it bites him in the ass (too numerous to mention). He doesn't really seem to be that great at picking out the diamond in the diamond field (the draft) but rather finding the diamond in the rough.

jjchieffan
12-13-2005, 10:47 AM
I agree that DV is poor at drafting. Remember his first pick in St. Louis? Lawrence Phillips. point made. I have seen improvement in the last 2 drafts,(defense) which I attribute to Gunther. We probably would have passed on LJ had Gunther not been here.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 10:56 AM
I agree that DV is poor at drafting. Remember his first pick in St. Louis? Lawrence Phillips. point made.

And Carl's was Todd Blackledge. Point made.

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 11:14 AM
And Carl's was Todd Blackledge. Point made.

Uh...I could be wrong, but wasn't Jack Steadman the GM at that point?

kregger
12-13-2005, 11:16 AM
Uh...I could be wrong, but wasn't Jack Steadman the GM at that point?
You are not wrong. CP's first pick was DT.

Brock
12-13-2005, 11:17 AM
Uh...I could be wrong, but wasn't Jack Steadman the GM at that point?

:shake:

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 11:17 AM
You guys are missing the point.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 11:17 AM
Where's Titus when I need him?

Brock
12-13-2005, 11:18 AM
I agree that DV is poor at drafting. Remember his first pick in St. Louis? Lawrence Phillips. point made. I have seen improvement in the last 2 drafts,(defense) which I attribute to Gunther. We probably would have passed on LJ had Gunther not been here.

I think you need to bone up on your draft history.

BigMeatballDave
12-13-2005, 11:20 AM
[QUOTE=Rausch]Try 93.[/QUOTE']'93 season. The game was won Jan. '94. Either way, ****ing SAD!

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 11:21 AM
Where's Titus when I need him?

The point is Carl has never picked anyone that was a huge bust in the first round like Blackledge.

The Chiefs drafts were OK (at least defensively) until Vermeil came along. Coincidence?

BigMeatballDave
12-13-2005, 11:21 AM
Hunt can share in the blame...

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 11:22 AM
Hunt can share in the blame...

Maybe for hiring people. I doubt he looks at college film or is even in the war room on draft day.

Brock
12-13-2005, 11:24 AM
The point is Carl has never picked anyone that was a huge bust in the first round like Blackledge.

The Chiefs drafts were OK (at least defensively) until Vermeil came along. Coincidence?

Yeah - Trezelle Jenkins was just awesome.

kregger
12-13-2005, 11:25 AM
The point is Carl has never picked anyone that was a huge bust in the first round like Blackledge.

The Chiefs drafts were OK (at least defensively) until Vermeil came along. Coincidence?
Uh, remember Trezelle Jenkins? is he in the HOF yet?

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 11:25 AM
The point is Carl has never picked anyone that was a huge bust in the first round like Blackledge.

The Chiefs drafts were OK (at least defensively) until Vermeil came along. Coincidence?

No, the point was DV DID NOT draft Lawrence Phillips -- just like Carl did not draft Blackledge. The DV/Phillips thing is a myth that just won't die around here. That's why I exposed it by using another (Titus-inspired, tongue-in-cheek) myth.

kregger
12-13-2005, 11:25 AM
Beat me to the punch, Brock.

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 11:31 AM
Uh, remember Trezelle Jenkins? is he in the HOF yet?

Oops. :)

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 11:31 AM
And Carl's was Todd Blackledge. Point made.

LOL :thumb:

Did you also know that Vermeil didnt want to trade for Faulk and that he didnt want to bench Tony Banks, too?

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 11:33 AM
LOL :thumb:

Did you also know that Vermeil didnt want to trade for Faulk and that he didnt want to bench Tony Banks, too?

:rockon:

Count Alex's Losses
12-13-2005, 11:34 AM
Was someone else making those decisions in St. Loser? I'm ignorant on this subject.

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 11:35 AM
Was someone else making those decisions in St. Loser? I'm ignorant on this subject.

Phillips was drafted in 96. DV became coach there in 97. In fact, Phillips didn't last the season with DV.

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 11:36 AM
Was someone else making those decisions in St. Loser? I'm ignorant on this subject.

If it was a good decision -- it wasnt Vermeil.
If it was a bad decision -- it was Vermeil.

and now you know...the rest of the story.

jjchieffan
12-13-2005, 11:51 AM
Oops thats right... Vermeil didnt draft Phillips. My bad. I still dont think that he or CP has much luck drafting, especially on defense. And before someone posts about the 96 draft, probably the best in the CP era. I attribute that to Marty, not CP

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 12:02 PM
Oops thats right... Vermeil didnt draft Phillips. My bad. I still dont think that he or CP has much luck drafting, especially on defense. And before someone posts about the 96 draft, probably the best in the CP era. I attribute that to Marty, not CP

ROFL

The Lexicon is strong with this one....

Brock
12-13-2005, 12:10 PM
Oops thats right... Vermeil didnt draft Phillips. My bad. I still dont think that he or CP has much luck drafting, especially on defense. And before someone posts about the 96 draft, probably the best in the CP era. I attribute that to Marty, not CP

I'd like to understand the logic of that a little better.

Mr. Laz
12-13-2005, 12:34 PM
Maybe for hiring people. I doubt he looks at college film or is even in the war room on draft day.
that all any owner is really ever responsible for


1. control the money
2. hire the people



Hunt keeps the same people because he satisfied with the results enough to not fire them.


Hunt is ultimately responsible for all of it

jjchieffan
12-14-2005, 12:19 AM
I am simply stating that by 96, Marty was more involved in personnel. I think it was him, and Gunther, who influenced those choices, not Carl

greg63
12-14-2005, 02:06 AM
Not to mention that Carl is like in his fifteenth or sixteenth year of his five year plan to get to the Super Bowl. :shake:

KCTitus
12-14-2005, 08:02 AM
I am simply stating that by 96, Marty was more involved in personnel. I think it was him, and Gunther, who influenced those choices, not Carl

Ok, so what happened in 97 and 98? Especially 98's FA's?