PDA

View Full Version : New Teicher on the Coaching Situation


nychief
12-30-2005, 09:46 PM
Would the Chiefs consider Saunders?
BY ADAM TEICHER
Knight Ridder Newspapers

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - As many as 10 NFL coaching positions will become vacant as soon as next week, so the chances are better than ever that Al Saunders will receive one of them.

But will it be with the Chiefs?

No one would talk about the possibility publicly, not with the job still being Dick Vermeil's at least through the weekend. It's likely that president/general manager Carl Peterson would grant Saunders, the Chiefs' offensive coordinator, an interview should Sunday's game against Cincinnati be Vermeil's last with Kansas City.

Saunders has never confirmed that the Chiefs promised him he would receive strong consideration as Vermeil's eventual replacement and declined to answer questions on the subject this week.

Sources have indicated, however, that the Chiefs did make that promise. Vermeil has campaigned for Saunders to be his successor for most of his time with the Chiefs.

If the Chiefs are interested in Saunders, they may have to move quickly. He may wind up talking to the Lions, who weeks ago fired Steve Mariucci.

Next week should bring vacancies in St. Louis, Oakland and Houston, among other places. Saunders has a history with each franchise. He was an assistant coach for the Rams for two seasons between coaching jobs with the Chiefs.

He once interviewed for head coaching jobs with Houston and Oakland - the Texans in 2001 and the Raiders two years ago.

"With the way the Chiefs have played offense, he'd be a guy you'd have to consider, that some team would have to consider," ESPN analyst Mark Schlereth said. "There's going to be a lot of opportunity out there."

Saunders' age - he will be 59 in February - may wind up working against him.

"He's a guy that's been around for a long time, and it seems like the trend has been to go younger and with defensive coordinators," Schlereth said. "That's guys like Marvin Lewis and guys like Lovie Smith. They've had success."

With the Chiefs still struggling on defense even after the return of coordinator Gunther Cunningham, Peterson may be thinking the Chiefs need a coach with a defensive philosophy.

"If I were the Chiefs, I'd start looking to defense," Schlereth said. "Gunther Cunningham has been great, but the Chiefs' defense has just been bad. I would want to get myself a young, energetic coach who can handle the grind and is excited about the grind and brings a defensive philosophy to my football team."

Either way, it would appear that Saunders' run as Chiefs offensive coordinator is over. If the team did decide to take a pass on him as head coach or go with someone more defensive-minded, it seems likely that Saunders would pursue his options elsewhere.

Saunders was head coach for the San Diego Chargers from 1986 through 1988, going 17-22. The situation was, by most accounts, a difficult one. The aging Chargers had drafted and traded poorly for years, leaving a mess for Saunders.

Since then, he polished his resume as one of the NFL's most creative offensive minds. He coached wide receivers with the Chiefs and Rams and helped St. Louis win the world championship after the 1999 season.

The Chiefs have been one of the league's highest-scoring teams since he returned as offensive coordinator in 2001.

He interviewed with the Raiders and the University of Nebraska two years ago and probably could have had either job. He declined, perhaps with the idea he would someday

chefsos
12-30-2005, 09:54 PM
He interviewed with the Raiders and the University of Nebraska two years ago and probably could have had either job. He declined, perhaps with the idea he would someday

....??? Shit. I'm not a premium member.

siberian khatru
12-30-2005, 09:55 PM
The aging Chargers had drafted and traded poorly for years, leaving a mess for Saunders.

And he wants to coach the Chiefs ... why? :hmmm:


;)

nychief
12-30-2005, 10:05 PM
He interviewed with the Raiders and the University of Nebraska two years ago and probably could have had either job. He declined, perhaps with the idea he would someday take over for Vermiel.

TRR
12-30-2005, 10:15 PM
Al Saunders needs to be the next KC Head Coach. What he's done with KC's offense is nothing short of amazing. I believe Peterson at least owes Saunders 2-3 years to see what he brings to the table. If not, KC might be coaching against him as Al had serious interest in the Oakland job last time around.

Logical
12-30-2005, 10:19 PM
.. The situation is by most accounts, a difficult one. The aging Chiefs have drafted and traded poorly for years, leaving a mess for Saunders.

This could just as easily been written.

Frankie
12-30-2005, 10:26 PM
Al Saunders needs to be the next KC Head Coach. What he's done with KC's offense is nothing short of amazing. I believe Peterson at least owes Saunders 2-3 years to see what he brings to the table. If not, KC might be coaching against him as Al had serious interest in the Oakland job last time around.

I totally agree. Especially about what I highlighted in your post.

KCChiefsFan88
12-30-2005, 10:44 PM
Al Saunders and my boy Mike Martz as offensive coordinator/assistant head coach.

And Jim Haslett (assuming he isn't back in New Orleans and doesn't get a head coaching job) as defensive coordinator

I'd take that

Mecca
12-30-2005, 11:24 PM
Al Saunders needs to be the next KC Head Coach. What he's done with KC's offense is nothing short of amazing. I believe Peterson at least owes Saunders 2-3 years to see what he brings to the table. If not, KC might be coaching against him as Al had serious interest in the Oakland job last time around.

Of course the reason he didn't take that job is being the Chiefs OC pays more than being the Raiders head coach.

chefsos
12-30-2005, 11:38 PM
Of course the reason he didn't take that job is being the Chiefs OC pays more than being the Raiders head coach.

Ha. I keep envisioning Norv as Roscoe, and Davis as Boss Hogg. All he needs is the hat.

cdcox
12-30-2005, 11:53 PM
Compared to all the rumors flying around TV and the internet, this article was snoozeville. And to think it is still 4 hrs from hitting the streets.

chefsos
12-31-2005, 02:50 AM
He interviewed with the Raiders and the University of Nebraska two years ago and probably could have had either job. He declined, perhaps with the idea he would someday replace Vermeil.

Last two words complete the sentence in the thread starter that vexed me so.


And, of somewhat more than mild interest: Hide your nachos! He's coming!

■ PRIEST IS BACK: Pro Bowl running back Priest Holmes is expected to be at Sundayís game, a Chiefs official said Friday. Holmes went on injured reserve in November because of a neck injury. Heís back in Kansas City this week and will have tests within two months to determine whether heíll return to football.

No link, I don't feel like it. It's in the Star. Look it up, ya lazy bastage.

JohnnyV13
12-31-2005, 10:08 AM
The situation is by most accounts, a difficult one. The aging Chiefs have drafted and traded poorly for years, leaving a mess for Saunders

This could just as easily been written.


Hate to tell ya Vlad, the Chiefs have drafted WELL the last 3 years. Take a look at the evidence, we have had 1 star quality starter the last 3 drafts:

2003
1. Larry Johnson-A stud, could be best back in the NFL
2. Kawicka Mitchell-good MLB, really developed this season
5. Jordan Black-clearly not a LT, but a credible starter at RT.

2004
4. Jared Allen-11 sacks and 7 forced fumbles. This guy is legit.
4. Samie Parker-definitely a solid 2. I think EVERYONE will be very happy we have him in 06. Could be a Steve Smith kind of player.
3. Keyaron Fox-tore up camp in 05, and could start in 06 if we cut Bell

2005
1. Derrick Johnson-had solid rookie season, likely to become a star.
3. Dustin Colquitt-yeah his average sucks, but he leads the NFL pinning the other team inside the 20.


Thats 8 credible NFL starters in 3 seasons. By any measure that's good drafting. Forget about whining about the Siavii and Kris Wilson "bust" labels, EVERY team has busts in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Hitting on Jared Allen made up for those missed picks in 04.

Messier
12-31-2005, 10:19 AM
Good post Johnny, couldn't have said it better myself. People (Vlad) on this board have some idea the Chiefs are bad at drafting, they aren't.

Mr. Laz
12-31-2005, 10:22 AM
Hate to tell ya Vlad, the Chiefs have drafted WELL the last 3 years. Take a look at the evidence, we have had 1 star quality starter the last 3 drafts:

Thats 8 credible NFL starters in 3 seasons. By any measure that's good drafting. Forget about whining about the Siavii and Kris Wilson "bust" labels, EVERY team has busts in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Hitting on Jared Allen made up for those missed picks in 04.

all that you listed still doesn't not equal "well" ... maybe passable


besides your making some big assumptions


2003
1. Larry Johnson-A stud, could be best back in the NFL - agreed

2. Kawicka Mitchell-good MLB, really developed this season - Good? he misses 3 plays for every one he makes. improved? yes. Good? not yet.

5. Jordan Black-clearly not a LT, but a credible starter at RT. got burned at LT, got burned at RT. we don't know what he is yet.

2004
4. Jared Allen-11 sacks and 7 forced fumbles. This guy is legit. - agreed

4. Samie Parker-definitely a solid 2. I think EVERYONE will be very happy we have him in 06. Could be a Steve Smith kind of player. - He's not a #2 receiver yet. He's just starting to be an acceptable starter. 35 catches for 517 yrds is hardly a lock. Maybe, hopefully ... not yet

3. Keyaron Fox-tore up camp in 05, and could start in 06 if we cut Bell
- i've yet to see Fox tear up anything but his knee.

2005
1. Derrick Johnson-had solid rookie season, likely to become a star. - agreed.

3. Dustin Colquitt-yeah his average sucks, but he leads the NFL pinning the other team inside the 20. - he's a kicker

nychief
12-31-2005, 10:27 AM
all that you listed still doesn't not equal "well" ... maybe passable


besides your making some big assumptions


2003
1. Larry Johnson-A stud, could be best back in the NFL - agreed

2. Kawicka Mitchell-good MLB, really developed this season - Good? he misses 3 plays for every one he makes. improved? yes. Good? not yet.

5. Jordan Black-clearly not a LT, but a credible starter at RT. got burned at LT, got burned at RT. we don't know what he is yet.

2004
4. Jared Allen-11 sacks and 7 forced fumbles. This guy is legit. - agreed

4. Samie Parker-definitely a solid 2. I think EVERYONE will be very happy we have him in 06. Could be a Steve Smith kind of player. - He's not a #2 receiver yet. He's just starting to be an acceptable starter. 35 catches for 517 yrds is hardly a lock. Maybe, hopefully ... not yet

3. Keyaron Fox-tore up camp in 05, and could start in 06 if we cut Bell
- i've yet to see Fox tear up anything but his knee.

2005
1. Derrick Johnson-had solid rookie season, likely to become a star. - agreed.

3. Dustin Colquitt-yeah his average sucks, but he leads the NFL pinning the other team inside the 20. - he's a kicker


sorry laz - it is hard for a reasonable fan to complain about these last few drafts. Drafts have to be judged on how many starting football players you get out of them.

Mr. Laz
12-31-2005, 10:30 AM
sorry laz - it is hard for a reasonable fan to complain about these last few drafts. Drafts have to be judged on how many starting football players you get out of them.
didn't say i was complaining about them ... just saying they aren't extraordinary or anything.


besides, drafting a starter for our defense should be relatively easy compared to other teams.

ImAWalkingCorpse
12-31-2005, 10:45 AM
Hate to tell ya Vlad, the Chiefs have drafted WELL the last 3 years. Take a look at the evidence, we have had 1 star quality starter the last 3 drafts:

2003
1. Larry Johnson-A stud, could be best back in the NFL
2. Kawicka Mitchell-good MLB, really developed this season
5. Jordan Black-clearly not a LT, but a credible starter at RT.

2004
4. Jared Allen-11 sacks and 7 forced fumbles. This guy is legit.
4. Samie Parker-definitely a solid 2. I think EVERYONE will be very happy we have him in 06. Could be a Steve Smith kind of player.
3. Keyaron Fox-tore up camp in 05, and could start in 06 if we cut Bell

2005
1. Derrick Johnson-had solid rookie season, likely to become a star.
3. Dustin Colquitt-yeah his average sucks, but he leads the NFL pinning the other team inside the 20.


Thats 8 credible NFL starters in 3 seasons. By any measure that's good drafting. Forget about whining about the Siavii and Kris Wilson "bust" labels, EVERY team has busts in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Hitting on Jared Allen made up for those missed picks in 04.

What makes Siavii a huge bust is because he was their 1st pick that year, and he should have been drafted at around the 3rd or 4th round. Other than that the top picks in the last couple of years have gotten better. Sims was a really bad pick considering who was taken after him and cost this franchise dearly.

JohnnyV13
12-31-2005, 10:53 AM
Sims was a really bad pick considering who was taken after him and cost this franchise dearly.

I totally agree. We could have taken Dwight Freeney or John Henderson if we had stayed in our original draft position AND had an extra 3rd.

Mr. Laz
12-31-2005, 10:59 AM
I totally agree. We could have taken Dwight Freeney or John Henderson if we had stayed in our original draft position AND had an extra 3rd.
wrong year iirc ...... Sims is the guy we took over Freeney and henderson i believe.

cdcox
12-31-2005, 11:01 AM
I totally agree. We could have taken Dwight Freeney or John Henderson if we had stayed in our original draft position AND had an extra 3rd.

I'll give you Henderson, although he was considered a risk because of his back.

But Sweeney was considered a surprise and a huge reach at the 11 slot in 2002. It has paid off for Indy, but when the pick was made they took some heat for it. There was zero chance that we were going to use #9 pick for Sweeney. No one on this board was even pimping him.

redbrian
12-31-2005, 11:15 AM
Al Saunders and my boy Mike Martz as offensive coordinator/assistant head coach.

And Jim Haslett (assuming he isn't back in New Orleans and doesn't get a head coaching job) as defensive coordinator

I'd take that

I don't want Martz anywhere near the Chiefs, he is a back stabbing prick.

Gun needs to be kept on the D, let him keep bringing in his type of players and building on what he has done and the Chiefs D will be what it used to be.

Al Saunders deserves the Head Coaching spot, as far and the new OC, I donít have a clue who it should be (only one person is off the list and thatís Martz).

JohnnyV13
12-31-2005, 11:18 AM
all that you listed still doesn't not equal "well" ... maybe passable




Actually, draft choice projections are overly positive and create overblown expectations for drafting performance. I looked at 10 years of drafts. Some of the results are surprising.

I counted what I saw as "solid starters, stars and backups". The results were that getting two solid starters (by that i mean guys that won't be weaknesses that kill you) and 2 credible backups per year is "par" drafting. Getting a star player every other year is above average. The last 3 years the Chiefs have done better. Getting a guy you can build around in each of last three drafts is great performance.

The guys here ARE correct that our drafting between 94 and 02 sucked balls. Take a look at our no. 1's over that time period:

94-Greg Hill
95-Trezelle Jenkins
96-Jerome Woods
97-Tony G.
98-Victor Riley
99-John Tait
00-Sly Morris
01-Traded for Trent Green
02-Ryan Sims

Of those 8 picks only 3 can be considered good:

Tony G.
Trade for Green
Tait

Only 2 are what I would consider stars (Green and Tony G.) while Tait is an above average LT.

JohnnyV13
12-31-2005, 11:25 AM
I'll give you Henderson, although he was considered a risk because of his back.

But Freeney was considered a surprise and a huge reach at the 11 slot in 2002. It has paid off for Indy, but when the pick was made they took some heat for it. There was zero chance that we were going to use #9 pick for Sweeney. No one on this board was even pimping him.

Uh, I liked Freeney. I read a lot about the pre draft questions (what to do with Freeney, b/c he's a LB/DE tweener). I wrote that I saw Freeney as a Derrick Thomas type in the NFL. Guess what, I was dead on.

Messier
12-31-2005, 12:04 PM
Actually, draft choice projections are overly positive and create overblown expectations for drafting performance. I looked at 10 years of drafts. Some of the results are surprising.

I counted what I saw as "solid starters, stars and backups". The results were that getting two solid starters (by that i mean guys that won't be weaknesses that kill you) and 2 credible backups per year is "par" drafting. Getting a star player every other year is above average. The last 3 years the Chiefs have done better. Getting a guy you can build around in each of last three drafts is great performance.

The guys here ARE correct that our drafting between 94 and 02 sucked balls. Take a look at our no. 1's over that time period:

94-Greg Hill
95-Trezelle Jenkins
96-Jerome Woods
97-Tony G.
98-Victor Riley
99-John Tait
00-Sly Morris
01-Traded for Trent Green
02-Ryan Sims

Of those 8 picks only 3 can be considered good:

Tony G.
Trade for Green
Tait

Only 2 are what I would consider stars (Green and Tony G.) while Tait is an above average LT.

I would say Woods, and Riley were good. Woods started for 8 years and made a pro bowl. Riley only started sucking after he left the Chiefs. He was a solid starter for the 4 years he was here. I remember a game against the Giants in which he dominated Strahan. So 50% worked out.

KCChiefsFan88
12-31-2005, 12:20 PM
Gun needs to be kept on the D, let him keep bringing in his type of players and building on what he has done and the Chiefs D will be what it used to be.



Gunther brought "his type" of players to the defense this past offseason with Surtain, Bell, Hall, Knight, etc and the defense is no better.

People like yourself who are obviously Gunther-zombies and refuse to admit he can do any wrong are quite funny.

Let me spell it out for you clearly...

Gunther is a FRAUD. He looked good in the mid-1990's when the Chiefs had HOF caliber talent on defense. Just like Paul Hackett looked like an offensive genius when he was coaching the likes of Joe Montana in SF.

Fact is if you want to look at the start of when the Chiefs D began to go downhill, it doesn't begin under Vermeil and Greg Robinson... it begins during Gunther's 2 years as head coach of the Chiefs. Remember towards the end of Gunther's first season in KC... 41-38 loss to the Raiders and the total inability to stop Gannon?

Remember his second year in KC where the Chiefs defense was ripped apart several times (notably that 49-31 beatdown in Oakland)?

The sooner FRAUD Gunther is not in KC the better

htismaqe
12-31-2005, 12:27 PM
all that you listed still doesn't not equal "well" ... maybe passable


besides your making some big assumptions


2003
1. Larry Johnson-A stud, could be best back in the NFL - agreed

2. Kawicka Mitchell-good MLB, really developed this season - Good? he misses 3 plays for every one he makes. improved? yes. Good? not yet.

5. Jordan Black-clearly not a LT, but a credible starter at RT. got burned at LT, got burned at RT. we don't know what he is yet.

2004
4. Jared Allen-11 sacks and 7 forced fumbles. This guy is legit. - agreed

4. Samie Parker-definitely a solid 2. I think EVERYONE will be very happy we have him in 06. Could be a Steve Smith kind of player. - He's not a #2 receiver yet. He's just starting to be an acceptable starter. 35 catches for 517 yrds is hardly a lock. Maybe, hopefully ... not yet

3. Keyaron Fox-tore up camp in 05, and could start in 06 if we cut Bell
- i've yet to see Fox tear up anything but his knee.

2005
1. Derrick Johnson-had solid rookie season, likely to become a star. - agreed.

3. Dustin Colquitt-yeah his average sucks, but he leads the NFL pinning the other team inside the 20. - he's a kicker

I agree with everything except your assessment of Mitchell. Saying he missed 3 plays for every 1 he hits is flat-out false.

unlurking
12-31-2005, 12:41 PM
...

Gunther is a FRAUD. He looked good in the mid-1990's when the Chiefs had HOF caliber talent on defense. Just like Paul Hackett looked like an offensive genius when he was coaching the likes of Joe Montana in SF.

...


Um, just out of curiosity, which HoF players are you talking about? DT will make it one day, but I would not be surprised to see him get passed up for a few more years. I don't see anyone else going.

And, by your reasoning, I guess we can say Al Saunders is a fraud as well. Roaf and Shields are HoF locks, as is Gonzo for re-defining the TE position.

Belichick must be a fraud as well with the like of Brady and Law.

I agree that Gunther has been incredibly disappointing this year, and have not decided whether or not I think he deserves another shot (still on the fence). I just thought I'd point out a flaw in your logic. Convince me with something different, I'm still waiting to make up my mind.

;)

SDChief
12-31-2005, 01:57 PM
[QUOTE=KCChiefsfan88]Gunther brought "his type" of players to the defense this past offseason with Surtain, Bell, Hall, Knight, etc and the defense is no better.

Gunthers D style started going south when the PI rules were changed. If we had Hasty and Carter in their prime as DBs our D still wouldn't compare to the old Gun Ds. They use to mug the reciever off the line and hassle him down the field. They can't do that anymore. Gun hasn't adapted his system for the rule change. That is why his system isn't working. He has made a difference in toughness and tackling (well for the most part on tackling). Not sure if he is the answer or not. We need some D line help.

KCChiefsFan88
12-31-2005, 03:35 PM
Um, just out of curiosity, which HoF players are you talking about? DT will make it one day, but I would not be surprised to see him get passed up for a few more years. I don't see anyone else going.

And, by your reasoning, I guess we can say Al Saunders is a fraud as well. Roaf and Shields are HoF locks, as is Gonzo for re-defining the TE position.


DT obviously is HOF-caliber. I don't think they will ever get in, but you could make an argument James Hasty and Neil Smith are also HOF-caliber.

And comparing Gunther to Al Saunders isn't accurate because the Chiefs offense, talent-wise isn't as complete as the talent on those Chiefs defenses were in the mid-1990's.

The Chiefs offense lacks great WRs, yet Al Saunders has still be able to maintain the Chiefs offense and passing attack as one of the best in the league.

Those Chiefs defenses in the mid-1990's had no weaknesses. You couldn't really say "oh they had weak LBs, or weak safeties, but Gunther was still able to produce a great defense".