PDA

View Full Version : Posnanski: The thrill is gone on offense


tk13
01-20-2006, 01:06 AM
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/13666746.htm

The thrill is gone on offense
JOE POSNANSKI
Kansas City Star

Well, it’s official now. The Chiefs have made their choice. They chose old-fashioned, old-school, old-time, old-yeller, helmet-crashing, mouth-smashing, shoulder-bashing, teeth-gnashing, low-scoring, punt-adoring, awfully boring, field-goal-soaring, old-man-is-snoring football.

They chose Herm Edwards. In the process, they lost Al Saunders.

This was inevitable, I suppose. I wanted to believe — as many fans did — that the Chiefs would make a big-money, big-hearted offer to keep Saunders as some sort of associate head coach in charge of offense. As far as I know, they did not. But that might not have worked anyway. It’s clear now that the Chiefs made promises to Saunders the last couple of years — spoken or unspoken or both — and when they hired Edwards to be head coach, Saunders had to feel betrayed. He certainly felt like it was time to go. He took the top offensive assistant job in Washington. More on that in a minute.

A few hours after Saunders left, Edwards announced the hiring of offensive-line coach Mike Solari to be offensive coordinator. The coup is now complete. The Chiefs are now a run-the-ball, play-defense football team. Simple as that. Are you ready for some 17-14 football? You better be. Get ready for a whole lot of runs on third and 5. Get ready for field-position battles. Chiefs punter Dustin Colquitt might want to start getting his leg warmed up now. The circus is over, folks.

Now, maybe that’s not a bad thing. The circus did not yield much. The Chiefs’ offense scored more points than any other team in the NFL the last four years, and they don’t have a playoff victory to show for it. So maybe it’s time for a change in philosophy. Maybe great defense is the best way for the Chiefs to win. Maybe after watching so many 41-38 losses, it’s time for something new.

Still, I don’t know; it seems to me that blaming the Chiefs’ high-scoring offense for the team’s failings the last four years is like blaming George Michael for the demise of the band Wham! The offense was the one good thing happening, remember? The offense was Super Bowl-caliber. The defense was lousy. I’m not sure building around the Chiefs’ defense is the best strategy here.

Well, Chiefs president Carl Peterson decided to build around defense anyway. He hired a head coach so conservative, Michael Moore is making a movie about him. Edwards, in turn, hired Solari, a great — and I mean great — offensive-line coach, who last called plays in 1986 for Mike Gottfried and the University of Pittsburgh (who can forget the 56 points the Panthers hung on Navy). There’s no telling how Solari will do as a coordinator, but if we see quarterback Trent Green hitting the blocking sled in training camp, we’ll know that it’s not going well.

In the process, Peterson passed on Saunders and all those touchdowns. He probably went back on a few assurances as well. Saunders deserved better. We might never know for sure what was said in private moments, but it’s clear Saunders was led to believe he would be the next Chiefs coach. Remember a couple of years ago when Nebraska offered Saunders the head coaching job? He stayed in Kansas City. Why? It doesn’t take Hercule Poirot to figure it out. I suspect promises were made. I suspect promises were broken.

This is how much Peterson wanted to hire Herm Edwards. This is how much he wanted to get this team away from the high-flying Dick Vermeil style of football. This is how much he wanted to get the Chiefs back to the defensive, no-mistake, there’s-a-gleam-men football they played under Marty Schottenheimer in the 1990s. Peterson says that he respects Saunders and admires Saunders and has a relationship with Saunders that goes back 30 years. Maybe in the end, he felt Saunders was expendable.

A quick word about Saunders: It’s lunacy that he did not get a head coaching job. He has a proven record as one of the great offensive minds in the game.

Meanwhile, the Jets hired a 35-year-old former public-relations intern named Eric Mangini. New Orleans hired Dallas Cowboys passing-game coordinator Sean Payton, for obvious reasons — the Cowboys had the 15th-ranked passing attack in the NFL. The Rams hired Miami offensive coordinator Scott Linehan because, whoo boy, those Dolphins had some kind of wild scoring offense. And Detroit hired Ed Marinaro, who was fabulous in a recurring role on “Falcon Crest” and, no, wait, sorry, they hired Rod Marinelli. He has as much coordinator experience as Ed Marinaro.

In the end, Saunders did all right. According to reports, Washington will pay him around $2 million per year. He will work for a great football coach and NASCAR owner, and he will have the immensely entertaining and certifiably insane Clinton Portis in the backfield. He will have a good time.

What about the Chiefs? We’ll see. Edwards has been in the job for a little more than a week now, and you can begin to see his style. He brought back fiery Gunther Cunningham to run the defense. He told Larry Johnson that he’s the man. He’s hired an offensive-line coach to be his coordinator.

From this, you can guess that the Chiefs are going to try to win by:

1. Running the ball.
2. Playing good defense.
3. Making fewer mistakes than the other team.

That’s a great plan, if the Chiefs win. If not, well, to quote one of the dozens of Jets fans who have written in with the same sentiment: “Good luck with Herm. I recommend No-Doz.”

picasso
01-20-2006, 01:24 AM
Trent Green? What about Trent Green? Get real Posnanski geez!! It won't be much different than what we did this last season only without the stupid ass parallell(sp) passing attack to Dante Hall.
All down hill baby. That's the way it should be.

BigRock
01-20-2006, 01:28 AM
Talk about a ridiculous overreaction, good lord. You heard it here first: Mike Solari will never let Trent Green throw the ball! Did they screw up at the Star and Posnanski's name went on a Whitlock column?

Count Zarth
01-20-2006, 01:33 AM
Definitely an overreaction.

We still have the league's finest offensive line, a top five running back and tight end and a smart veteran QB.

chefsos
01-20-2006, 01:40 AM
JoPo really, really likes Al. And that Wham! reference was unfortunate.

Taco John
01-20-2006, 01:53 AM
Seriously. Wham?

tk13
01-20-2006, 01:58 AM
I never wanna dance again

Guilty feet have got no rhythm

It's not easy to pretend

Our offense is really doooomed

John Matrix
01-20-2006, 02:38 AM
I should have known better than to cheat Saunders
And waste a chance that I've been given
So we're never gonna pass again
The way we passed with Allllllllll, ohhhhhhh....

DaWolf
01-20-2006, 03:48 AM
Don't perople realize by now that just coordinating a good offense does not necessarially translate into being a good head coach? I mean look at Norv Turner, hailed by his peers in the NFL as a great playcaller and hailed by Troy Aikman and company as the major reason the Cowboys won those super Bowls, yet he sucked big time as a head coach twice.

Our offense is predicated on the run and being aggressive with the pass. How the hell does Posnanski know that we won't be doing that anymore? The big thing Al brought was the shifting and motion and trying to get mismatches. Now if DV is questioning whether Solari needs help with the passing game I'm not sure how well that would be maintained. But the playbook will remain the same. Solari just needs to call plays that fit his comfort level/philosophy...

Anyong Bluth
01-20-2006, 03:52 AM
and since when did Solari or anyone else for that matter come out and say he wouldn't do the same. Hell, I hope he calls more plays for Tony. Seems to me the O would improve in the red zone if his number was called a bit more often... but hey, I'm no Norv Martz

the Talking Can
01-20-2006, 04:47 AM
this article would make sense if a) we hired Paul Hackett or b) Posnancy and AS were dating....

MichaelH
01-20-2006, 04:58 AM
While the offense may change a little, I'm not really worried. Even with the #1 offense, the Chiefs had one playoff appearance in five years. I won't be happy if the offense turns back to Martyball but it was clear the greatest show on turf offense wasn't getting it done.

Baby Lee
01-20-2006, 05:49 AM
All this time, and I had no idea that Poz was such a pissy little bitch.

siberian khatru
01-20-2006, 05:52 AM
Are you ready for some 17-14 football?

Oh, for the love of God ... pop some Zoloft, Joe.

tomahawk kid
01-20-2006, 05:56 AM
You think this is an overreaction, you should have heard St John on 810 this morning.

He was literally throwing a temper tantrum because Saunders didn't stay here as the OC. Chiefs didn't make an effort, Carl's letting his ego get in the way of this team winning a SuperBowl, Solari shouldn't be the OC because this coaching staff hasn't won anything etc....

It was unbelievable. When Fescoe asked him who the Chiefs should have hired, he couldn't bring up any names...he just DIDN'T want Solari.

I had to turn it off after 5 minutes of his negative sh!t.

Inspector
01-20-2006, 06:06 AM
I guess Saunders carried off the brains of the entire offense.

Must have got their nuts too.

They'll probably just sit on the field and weep like broken hearted 14 year old girls.

Without Saunders, they simply don't exists anymore.

I think the reality will be an offense that still knows how to score and a coordinator that will use the strengths of these players.

I have to admit there were a few times where Al would leave me scratching my head trying to figure out what he was thinking. Also a lot of times that he was very impressive too....

philfree
01-20-2006, 06:07 AM
What I find really ammusing about all this whoa is me in regards to Saunders is that he didn't have a hand in building this offense. All he did was call the plays for DV. DV brought Green, and signed Holmes, Kennison and Weigman. Gonzo was already here along with the O line save Roaf and and DV brought him in a year later. Saunders keeps getting all this credit for being the "arcitect" of our O but it was really DV. Saunders did a great job calling plays and racking up numbers and my hat is off to him for that but that's it.


PhilFree:arrow:

the Talking Can
01-20-2006, 06:10 AM
AS WAS NEVER COMING BACK.

There is no one to blame.

And why does Poznancy think Solari, who is also a "proud papa" of this offense, is secrectly waiting to install Martyball? It makes NO SENSE AT ALL.

Solari has been integral in the success of this offense. He's seen it work close up.

This is the first time I've seen Poz completely miss the point. If Herm had gone out of house for the OC, then we would have reason to worry. But he didn't. Christ.

siberian khatru
01-20-2006, 06:14 AM
AS WAS NEVER COMING BACK.

There is no one to blame.

And why does Poznancy think Solari, who is also a "proud papa" of this offense, is secrectly waiting to install Martyball? It makes NO SENSE AT ALL.

Solari has been integral in the success of this offense. He's seen it work close up.

This is the first time I've seen Poz completely miss the point. If Herm had gone out of house for the OC, then we would have reason to worry. But he didn't. Christ.

Exactly.

I thought the whole point of keeping Solari, Shea, Saxon, Joiner, etc. was to keep the offense as intact as possible BECAUSE they want to keep scoring 30 points a game, not because they're throttling it back.

Or were all the offensive assistants the last 4 years begging Al to go conservative, and like some drunken madman he tossed the empty beer can out the window and floored the accelerator, screaming like a banshee while DV and Carl sat in the back seat with their eyes wide and their hair standing on end?

the Talking Can
01-20-2006, 06:18 AM
Or were all the offensive assistants the last 4 years begging Al to go conservative, and like some drunken madman he tossed the empty beer can out the window and floored the accelerator, screaming like a banshee while DV and Carl sat in the back seat with their eyes wide and their hair standing on end?

ROFL

that's how Marty felt when we scored more than 9 points a game...."Whoa...slow down, what's the rush?"

Chris Meck
01-20-2006, 06:24 AM
.

Or were all the offensive assistants the last 4 years begging Al to go conservative, and like some drunken madman he tossed the empty beer can out the window and floored the accelerator, screaming like a banshee while DV and Carl sat in the back seat with their eyes wide and their hair standing on end?



LOL!


Chris

ChiefsFan1965
01-20-2006, 06:28 AM
I'm actually thrilled at the Chiefs promoting Solari to OC. I think he's been around the offense long enough ( 9 yrs? ) to know how to run it. It's who I hoped for if/when A.S. didn't come back. This offense starts with the offensive line. As we all know, Solari's line has been the best over the last few years. I think we'll have a very similar look all the way around if only scaled back a bit.

Looking forward to Solari-in-charge.

KC Jones
01-20-2006, 06:39 AM
I think the thing that disturbed me the most about this article was the Wham reference. JoPo has now proven beyond all doubt he is the most effeminate man to ever write about football. God forbid he ever gets on one of those sports reporters type of shows, he'll make Woody Paige look like a real man.

Hog Farmer
01-20-2006, 06:39 AM
I look at it this way, what was the strength of our offense? That's right our Offensive Line. By making Solari our OC we will maintain the things that our O-Line enabled us to do. When our line stumbled then our passing game sucked. And heres another question to think about, who would you rather lose if you had to pick one, Al Saunders or WILLIE ROAF ? Think about it. Not that we were going to lose Roaf but we have ProBowl players on the O and an OC that knows what our offense is all about. We will never revert back to Martyball because Marty never had a premier RB . If Marty had of had a Larry Johnson or a Priest Holmes we would have had a SB team back then. I would like to have retained Saunders but I am really thinking things are going to be OK with the Offense next year and the Defense will only be better.

NewChief
01-20-2006, 06:59 AM
I don't know. I guess I'm not that convinced one way or the other of the Solari promotion. Sure, he was great as our O-line coach, but that doesn't mean he's going to be able to put together a playbook that's as productive and "genious" as Al's was. In addition, him having to turn to focusing on the playbook and coordinating the entire offense could take him away from the line, causing a dropoff in performance there.

Of course, I'm no more convinced of Po's stance (that we're going to become a non-productive, low-scoring team) than I am that Solari is going to take over without missing a beat.

I guess I'll just have to join the wait and see bandwagon.

MahiMike
01-20-2006, 07:10 AM
I'm so proud of Joe. He finally wrote an article that's not as a "yes" man for the Chiefs!

This is his best work. And dead-on accurate. How the F&*K Carl let him go is beyond belief.

It's Marty ball all over again and the great ride IS over.

StcChief
01-20-2006, 07:13 AM
Over reaction to the max.

They will still throw the ball, Green to Gonzo, Kennison, Parker, Horn, anybody the can. It won't be all LJ.


Get real.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 07:23 AM
I'd much have rather had Al Saunders as head coach over Herm Edwards. I'm with Poz there. The ironic thing is that if Al Saunders were head coach, Solari most likely would have been promoted to OC anyway. If you loved Saunders' offense, Solari was in my opinion the best option at OC.

On a side note, Poz hints that the reason Peterson believes we were so bad on D is that Vermeil only cared about the high-powered offense. Carl's gigantic ego forces him to believe that: no way could it be Carl's hand-pick coordinator and players that are the problem. It has to be some intangible associated with Vermeil/Saunders. Otherwise, how can you NOT hire Saunders as HC and let him walk away....Retaining Gun fits right in there. Hiring a defensive head coach fits in there. Carl can't accept the fact HE was the reason the Vermeil era's record-breaking offense didn't produce playoff success.

I just don't think any other franchise in the league would have failed to try to keep this offense going indefinitely, and have hired their record-setting O coordinator as head coach....but no other team has a GM with Carl's ego.

KCTitus
01-20-2006, 07:44 AM
I guess I have too much Missouri in my blood...I will believe it when I see it.

I'll save my venom for when Edwards and Soliari decide to sit on a 3 point lead late in the 4th quarter and punt the ball away to the other team.

Attacking football...playing not to lose doesnt work.

Im not even going to attempt to pretend I know what happened behind the scenes and I really dont care.

This offense does have issues, primarily, on the OL, but also at FB and WR. This offense is going to get pedestrian really quick, if those things are not seriously addressed soon.

PastorMikH
01-20-2006, 07:46 AM
Over reaction to the max.

They will still throw the ball, Green to Gonzo, Kennison, Parker, Horn, anybody the can. It won't be all LJ.


Get real.



Yep. The Sky Is Falling, The Sky Is Falling!


How does he know this is what will happen? Has he even seen Solari run the O yet? As for the mindset that he's an O-Line coach which means he will emphasize the run, the O-line also pass protects. This O has always been better, even with Al, when they emphasised the run then went play-action. I seriously think that the run emphasis has more to do with the personel we have and what they are able to do than it does with which coach is calling the plays.

But hey, even if all we do is run, as long as LJ is back there, every run has the potential to go all the way - something that doesn't happen too often in the pros.

KCTitus
01-20-2006, 07:50 AM
On a side note...the Washington fans and sports radio is all agog over Saunders. They're going to SB XLI.

kc rush
01-20-2006, 07:52 AM
He lost me at Wham. I couldn't read any more.

It read like a spoiled little girl not getting her way.

Sorry to hear that quarterback isn't taking JoPo to the fairy princess ball this year. He must have found a better looking girl who puts out.

skky man
01-20-2006, 07:56 AM
Name me one team left that doesn't run the ball and play solid defense! When your don JOE doing that then right another brilliant article!

Brock
01-20-2006, 08:00 AM
You mean the Chiefs are going to be more like the 4 teams remaining in the playoffs? OMG! what a tragedy!

morphius
01-20-2006, 08:01 AM
I guess I have too much Missouri in my blood...I will believe it when I see it.

I'll save my venom for when Edwards and Soliari decide to sit on a 3 point lead late in the 4th quarter and punt the ball away to the other team.

Attacking football...playing not to lose doesnt work.

Im not even going to attempt to pretend I know what happened behind the scenes and I really dont care.

This offense does have issues, primarily, on the OL, but also at FB and WR. This offense is going to get pedestrian really quick, if those things are not seriously addressed soon.
Heck, 3 points in the 4th? I still have nightmares of Marty trying to sit on a 3-0 in the first quarter.

But as it goes, I'm also in the wait and see mode. We have no idea what Solari playbook looks like, and neither does Posnanski. We know his running plays are pretty impressive, but we have yet to see what his passing schemes are like, or how quick he can decide on a play and get it in. It ought to be interesting to see. The fact that we hired someone from within who knew our previous O says to me that we are looking to keep something similar going.

Chiefnj
01-20-2006, 08:01 AM
I agree with 99% of the article. I don't think there was really any way to keep Saunders after passing him up.

Other than that, I agree that Peterson is returning to his conservative roots which is why he picked a conservative coach.

Extra Point
01-20-2006, 08:12 AM
Now I'm going to inadvertently piss off the native americans by rooting for both the Redskins and the Chiefs....

You can't blame Saunders for walking, and you can't blame Peterson & Edwards for appointing the Solari-powered offense.

Baby Lee
01-20-2006, 08:15 AM
It has to be something more than the general wish to be a HC, because didn't Gregg Williams' contract have a clause giving him like a bajillion dollars in bonus if he's not named the successor to Gibbs?

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 08:18 AM
It has to be something more than the general wish to be a HC, because didn't Gregg Williams' contract have a clause giving him like a bajillion dollars in bonus if he's not named the successor to Gibbs?

Well, I do think Saunders doesn't care for Peterson....but taking Washington's shitty offense, and making them a top 5 unit would all but ensure Saunders just about any job he wants next year...

If he stayed here, there is nowhere to go but down.

siberian khatru
01-20-2006, 08:31 AM
You mean the Chiefs are going to be more like the 4 teams remaining in the playoffs? OMG! what a tragedy!


ROFL

Mike in SW-MO
01-20-2006, 08:31 AM
Ok, so he is overreacting a little bit.

But he is not unreasonable in his assessment.

It's not unreasonable to say that Peterson and Edwards did not try very hard to retain Saunders. Certainly he was slapped by Carl by not being appointed HC. Edwards is on record as saying he wants a guy that will be there for a while. Saunders isn't that guy since he is expected to pick up a top job sooner or later.

Will Solari be a conservative play caller?
Well let's see. It's generally accepted that a team takes on the characteristics of the head coach. Peterson is a conservative coach. You can expect that he will name someone to OC with a philosophy he is comfortable with.

Solari coordinated the running game. They had someone else to shephard the passing attack under Saunders. Offensive line guys purportedly love to run the ball. Solari is the penultimate offensive line guy.

Don't get me wrong. I love the hiring of Solari as OC since it was obvious Saunders wouldn't be around.

It's one of the things that really pisses me off about the firing of Irv Eatman. And I'm so excited that they are looking at the Rams offensive line coach.

The upshot of the whole thing is Joe is disappointed in the loss of Saunders. The fact that Solari has almost no resume or track record as an OC is just a sidebar.

The fact is the OC will call plays in a fashion dictated by the head coach. You could bet that Saunders would push the envelope. Solari won't have the kind of job security that would allow him to be more aggressive than Edwards is comfortable with.

So yeah. Get ready for some conservative football. With a back like Larry available, it may work like a charm.

ChiefsOne
01-20-2006, 08:34 AM
Not one play has been called and the reporters are all ready screaming Martyball. Different players and coaches, I doubt the results will be the same.

wolfpack0735
01-20-2006, 08:36 AM
isnt LJ running the ball around 30 times a game now? he cant run much more than that and stay healthy. i think they will still pass the ball alot, but maybe not with all the pre-snap motion. hermie nows his offense is getting older and they will not or wont re-learn a totally new book. i will wait and see on the offense.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 08:38 AM
Name me one team left that doesn't run the ball and play solid defense! When your don JOE doing that then right another brilliant article!

How is playing conservative on offense going to give us a good D?

BigMeatballDave
01-20-2006, 08:39 AM
I should have known better than to cheat Saunders
And waste a chance that I've been given
So we're never gonna pass again
The way we passed with Allllllllll, ohhhhhhh....
ROFL

jAZ
01-20-2006, 08:43 AM
Worst. PozArticle. Ever.

I would take Marty back with the talent we now have on offense.

We have talent like we NEVER had in KC during the Marty years.

I don't expect our scheme to change much at all, we ran the hell outa the ball last year under.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 08:48 AM
WE'RE DOOMED!!!!!!

KCTitus
01-20-2006, 08:56 AM
We have talent like we NEVER had in KC during the Marty years.

There's a reason for that...

Marty has just as much talent in SD as KC does today, if not more, how's that working out for him?

No thanks.

jAZ
01-20-2006, 09:00 AM
There's a reason for that...

Marty has just as much talent in SD as KC does today, if not more, how's that working out for him?

No thanks.
Good news is that we have Herm. From all of the reports, he owned the respect and commitment from ALL of his players even to the bitter end of this past season.

Mr. Laz
01-20-2006, 09:34 AM
i expect our offense to suddenly look very,very old. At least that will what the determine "coaching doesn't matter" people will insist.

"we lost the best guard in the history of the game in Will Shields and we knew that the offense was gonna get older eventually"




jabberwocky

Rausch
01-20-2006, 09:36 AM
How is playing conservative on offense going to give us a good D?

Own the TOP and keep the defense off the field...

Mr. Laz
01-20-2006, 09:36 AM
Worst. PozArticle. Ever.
ROFL ROFL


quality of the article depends on how good it makes you feel?!?



when poz writes happy,happy fluff he's an award winning columnist.

when he writes something less happy ... "worst pos article Evah"



ROFL

jlscorpio
01-20-2006, 09:38 AM
the key phrase in this article is...the circus did not yield much...

HC_Chief
01-20-2006, 09:38 AM
Posnanski is acting like the system = AS. The system will not change under Solari. We may run a bit more, which is a GOOD THING, but the system is not going to be overhauled.

I expect the offense to still be one of, if not THE best in the league. We will simply be apt to run the ball a bit more than we have in the past. In other words, we'll play more to our strengths.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 09:39 AM
Own the TOP and keep the defense off the field...

We already did THAT. We were near the very top.

RedThat
01-20-2006, 09:40 AM
"we lost the best guard in the history of the game in Will Shields and we knew that the offense was gonna get older eventually"




jabberwocky

Losing Shields wouldn't be too bad. Losing Roaf on the other hand, would be tough to swallow.

I think Shields play was starting to decline anyway. If he does go, Welbourn would be a solid replacement.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 09:41 AM
Posnanski is acting like the system = AS. The system will not change under Solari. We may run a bit more, which is a GOOD THING, but the system is not going to be overhauled.

I expect the offense to still be one of, if not THE best in the league. We will simply be apt to run the ball a bit more than we have in the past. In other words, we'll play more to our strengths.

Why is running more a good thing? We were near the top of the league every year in yards per pass attempt. I'm not necessarily advocating more passing, but we already ran the ball more than almost every team in the NFL. What do you people want? Woody Hayes?

RedThat
01-20-2006, 09:42 AM
Actually losing Shields would save us a lot of money.

jlscorpio
01-20-2006, 09:43 AM
the key phrase is "the circus did not yield much". I personally hope we can now erase the double fake reverse from our playbook forever.

Rausch
01-20-2006, 09:46 AM
We already did THAT. We were near the very top.

And the only reason we weren't in the playoffs were Games like Philly and NY where we didn't protect the defense or execute on offense...

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 09:54 AM
It's not about running more in general.

It's about running (or passing) at the appropriate time.

Just like it wasn't appropriate for Marty to run 3 straight times with 1st and 10 at the 40 so that his rookie kicker can miss the game-tying FG, so too is it inappropriate to pass 3 straight times when you have 1st and goal at the 2.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 10:12 AM
It's not about running more in general.

It's about running (or passing) at the appropriate time.

Just like it wasn't appropriate for Marty to run 3 straight times with 1st and 10 at the 40 so that his rookie kicker can miss the game-tying FG, so too is it inappropriate to pass 3 straight times when you have 1st and goal at the 2.

Second guessing is fine. I'll second guess Gun all day long because his rankings tend to support that. I've second-guessed Al a few times myself, but it appears to me that his resume speaks for itself. He led the ****ing league in yardage and TDs over the the five years he was here. I think the reasonable presumption is that our offense is not going to get better overall because Saunders leaves. If it does, great!

Poz is wrong in my opinon that hiring Solari means a return to Martyball, but he is correct in his take that Saunders is something special. Regardless if one has occassional qualms about his play-calling, there is no doubt Vermeil, Saunders, and Solari did a hell of a job teaching these guys how to play this offense. How many teams have ever led the league in offense picking their #1 WR off the scrap heap? If only Robinson and Gun had been able to teach guys how to play some ****ing defense....

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 10:46 AM
Second guessing is fine. I'll second guess Gun all day long because his rankings tend to support that. I've second-guessed Al a few times myself, but it appears to me that his resume speaks for itself. He led the ****ing league in yardage and TDs over the the five years he was here. I think the reasonable presumption is that our offense is not going to get better overall because Saunders leaves. If it does, great!

Poz is wrong in my opinon that hiring Solari means a return to Martyball, but he is correct in his take that Saunders is something special. Regardless if one has occassional qualms about his play-calling, there is no doubt Vermeil, Saunders, and Solari did a hell of a job teaching these guys how to play this offense. How many teams have ever led the league in offense picking their #1 WR off the scrap heap? If only Robinson and Gun had been able to teach guys how to play some ****ing defense....

You're looking at Al by his aggregate numbers.

His aggregrate numbers look great, but you have to remember that they are an AVERAGE. The average of games where we scored 45 points and games where we failed to score 10. That average is 27.5, near tops in the league. However, if we are 1-1 in those games - well, now you might see what I'm talking about. The boldest example of this is this year's Buffalo game. Average that into Al's season numbers and it looks pretty good. But we all know that the offense failed that game and it's quite possible that that was THE game that kept us out of the playoffs.

This here is the one thing I think the Vermeil era is MOST guilty of - emphasizing stats over actual observable performance.

It's absolutely a reasonable presumption that our offense isn't gonna get better. It's already the best - there is no better.

Chiefnj
01-20-2006, 10:48 AM
It's not about running more in general.

It's about running (or passing) at the appropriate time.

Just like it wasn't appropriate for Marty to run 3 straight times with 1st and 10 at the 40 so that his rookie kicker can miss the game-tying FG, so too is it inappropriate to pass 3 straight times when you have 1st and goal at the 2.

Did Marty call the plays on offense?

KCChiefsFan88
01-20-2006, 10:57 AM
I think JoPo is dead on in his column. Al Saunders was the key to keeping this offense, in terms of its attacking/aggressive philosophy status quo because he had enough stature that Herm wouldn't have meddled with the offense.

Solari was a great offensive line coach and he may have had a lot of input on the Chiefs ground game in the past, but the fact he doesn't have much experience with the passing game is a concern.

Having a great running game and a good defense (and that good defense part isn't going to happen as long as Fraud Cunningham remains defensive coordinator) is fine, but ultimately you need an effective passing game to win in the playoffs.

The Chiefs already tried this Martyball, conservative offense/good defense approach during one of Peterson's previous "5 year plans" and it didn't result in any playoff success.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 11:02 AM
You're looking at Al by his aggregate numbers.

His aggregrate numbers look great, but you have to remember that they are an AVERAGE. The average of games where we scored 45 points and games where we failed to score 10. That average is 27.5, near tops in the league. However, if we are 1-1 in those games - well, now you might see what I'm talking about. The boldest example of this is this year's Buffalo game. Average that into Al's season numbers and it looks pretty good. But we all know that the offense failed that game and it's quite possible that that was THE game that kept us out of the playoffs.

This here is the one thing I think the Vermeil era is MOST guilty of - emphasizing stats over actual observable performance.

It's absolutely a reasonable presumption that our offense isn't gonna get better. It's already the best - there is no better.

Did our O really fail in Buffalo? We played pretty well through 3 quarters until we had to pass every down and couldn't pass block. Doesn't that game have to go on the shoulders of Trent Green and his 3 or 4 interceptions? I think it's hard to blame Al Saunders for that loss. We moved the ball, and then Trent would turn it over.

Also, what would other offensive teams look like if you took out their big games? I think our O is better than Indy. They have been shut down a few times this year, and at home when it mattered most.

KCChiefsFan88
01-20-2006, 11:06 AM
Also, what would other offensive teams look like if you took out their big games? I think our O is better than Indy. They have been shut down a few times this year, and at home when it mattered most.

Yeah certain people on this board who hate Al Saunders and want to slobber over Herm as he transforms this offense into a Martyball, punchless attack are looking for anything possible to dis-credit Saunders.

Some of these Al Saunders-haters are the same people who stop at nothing to defend Gunther.

DaneMcCloud
01-20-2006, 11:07 AM
Seriously, there is a parallel between promoting AS to head coach now and when AS was promoted during the 1986 season.

In 1986, Coryell abrubtly quit the Chargers and Saunders was promoted. He took over formerly high scoring, weak defensive football team with age issues at QB, RB, TE and WR. His record was 17-22. Not horrible considering the cirumstances but certainly not a successful run.

If he were to be the head coach of the Chiefs, he would have faced many of the exact same issues. Would he have handled it differently this time around? Probably only Carl Peterson knows for sure. Whatever the case, it's obvious that CP didn't care for the direction that AS would have taken with the Chiefs an decided to bring in Herm.

I don't think that it's exactly the "End of an Era" offensively, but we are all aware of the age (and likely multiple retirements) of the offensive players, the lack of truly skilled WR's and the age of the QB.

The Chiefs need a QOTF, two solid offensive tackles and at least one good WR prospect through the draft in order for this success of the offense to continute. That's a pretty hefty order.

In the meantime, the only way to keep this team productive will be to play solid defense and ball control offense. It might be boring, but the talent level is dictating that this may be the best course of action this upcoming season.

Chiefs Pantalones
01-20-2006, 11:10 AM
What?

Solari is a Coryell guy, right? The reason we kept him is so we could keep the same offense, right? What is Posnanski talking about?

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 11:39 AM
Yeah certain people on this board who hate Al Saunders and want to slobber over Herm as he transforms this offense into a Martyball, punchless attack are looking for anything possible to dis-credit Saunders.

Some of these Al Saunders-haters are the same people who stop at nothing to defend Gunther.

I'm not sure Herm is going to try to transform us into Martyball. Now, I don't like the hire at all, and I think Herm is an emtpy suit, but I do think he will allow Solari to do what he wants.

If Herm does try to transform us into Martyball II, he better be prepared for a ton of losses. If we quit scoring, I have zero confidence in the braintrust of Edwards/Cunningham to have a good enough defense to win games by themselves.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 11:51 AM
Yeah certain people on this board who hate Al Saunders and want to slobber over Herm as he transforms this offense into a Martyball, punchless attack are looking for anything possible to dis-credit Saunders.

Some of these Al Saunders-haters are the same people who stop at nothing to defend Gunther.

You might want to be careful what kind of blanket statements you make. I'm not an Al Saunders hater, and I certainly won't defend Gunther.

The simple fact is, you don't know what is going to happen. This whole idea that Herm is gonna "Martyball" this offense is, plain and simple, cry-baby logic.

I'm simply willing to admit that Al Saunders wasn't perfect and one man does not the offense make. If anything, that one man is WILLIE ROAF, not Al Saunders.

You can continue with your crying now.

siberian khatru
01-20-2006, 11:56 AM
Did our O really fail in Buffalo? We played pretty well through 3 quarters until we had to pass every down and couldn't pass block. Doesn't that game have to go on the shoulders of Trent Green and his 3 or 4 interceptions? I think it's hard to blame Al Saunders for that loss. We moved the ball, and then Trent would turn it over.


Trent was pressured a ton because of Roaf being out. Al didn't alter the game plan. He should've called more play action and draws to beat the pass rush.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 11:57 AM
If anything, that one man is WILLIE ROAF, not Al Saunders.


Did New Orleans have a juggernaut offense with him? How come we only had to give up a 3rd-round pick. Fact is, Saunders and Solari rejuvanated his career. That's what good coaches do.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 12:02 PM
Did New Orleans have a juggernaut offense with him? How come we only had to give up a 3rd-round pick. Fact is, Saunders and Solari rejuvanated his career. That's what good coaches do.

Absolutely they rejuvinated his career. And we KEPT Solari. ;)

I'm not at all saying Saunders sucks, that he wasn't a good coordinator, or even that he wasn't the best OC in all of football.

I'm just saying he's not ****ing Superman. He wasn't perfect and this offense is not gonna go from 1st to last just because he left.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 12:04 PM
Trent was pressured a ton because of Roaf being out. Al didn't alter the game plan. He should've called more play action and draws to beat the pass rush.

I must confess I missed that game. My buddy was at the game, and said it was the worst QBing performance he had seen in a long time, that Trent was making rookie mistake. And this guy watches a lot of football.

I think we had over 300 yards offense, which is not great but not terrible. Drawing any conclusions from that game is a bit sketchy, either about Trent or Al. 50mph winds tend to disrupt any offense, I think.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 12:06 PM
Absolutely they rejuvinated his career. And we KEPT Solari. ;)

I'm not at all saying Saunders sucks, that he wasn't a good coordinator, or even that he wasn't the best OC in all of football.

I'm just saying he's not ****ing Superman. He wasn't perfect and this offense is not gonna go from 1st to last just because he left.

I agree 100%.

siberian khatru
01-20-2006, 12:08 PM
I must confess I missed that game. My buddy was at the game, and said it was the worst QBing performance he had seen in a long time, that Trent was making rookie mistake. And this guy watches a lot of football.

I think we had over 300 yards offense, which is not great but not terrible. Drawing any conclusions from that game is a bit sketchy, either about Trent or Al. 50mph winds tend to disrupt any offense, I think.

Well, the offensive coaches were arguing among themselves what should be done in that game. That should tell you something.

I watch a lot football too. And I saw an offense that wasn't prepared for Buffalo's pass rush and didn't make the necessary adjustments to deal with it.

chiefsfan1963
01-20-2006, 12:15 PM
AS will be missed! CP does it again! Just like all his HC's of the past he always fails to provide a complete team. With Marty it was on O, with DV it was on D, now with Herm it's O. We had one of the best OC in the business just walk away and now instead of looking for another top rated OC like Norv we promote a position's coach. I'm not saying he is not up for the challenge, but there is a big learning curve with a new job especially a job where you have to stretch. That means conservatism.

I'm willing to give him a chance, but I won't be surprise with results JoPo
talks about in his article. If it strikes a nerve then there must be an element of truth to it.

TEX
01-20-2006, 12:18 PM
Absolutely they rejuvinated his career. And we KEPT Solari. ;)

I'm not at all saying Saunders sucks, that he wasn't a good coordinator, or even that he wasn't the best OC in all of football.

I'm just saying he's not ****ing Superman. He wasn't perfect and this offense is not gonna go from 1st to last just because he left.

To be sure it certainly won't happen in 1 season, but I'll be curious to see where it stands when Herm's 4 yeras are done. I'm betting bottom 1/3 and it's gonna be a painful process getting there.

By losing Saunders, it means that the D.V. era was a waste of time. I would have preferred to keep Saunders and the offense as something that can be counted on and continue to work on the _efense. Who knows what would have happened if we FINALLY could get new coaches + players on that side of the ball? Herm Edwards is such a tool. I'm happy for Saunders that he refused to be one as well.

TEX
01-20-2006, 12:26 PM
Seriously, there is a parallel between promoting AS to head coach now and when AS was promoted during the 1986 season.

In 1986, Coryell abrubtly quit the Chargers and Saunders was promoted. He took over formerly high scoring, weak defensive football team with age issues at QB, RB, TE and WR. His record was 17-22. Not horrible considering the cirumstances but certainly not a successful run.

If he were to be the head coach of the Chiefs, he would have faced many of the exact same issues. Would he have handled it differently this time around? Probably only Carl Peterson knows for sure. Whatever the case, it's obvious that CP didn't care for the direction that AS would have taken with the Chiefs an decided to bring in Herm.

I don't think that it's exactly the "End of an Era" offensively, but we are all aware of the age (and likely multiple retirements) of the offensive players, the lack of truly skilled WR's and the age of the QB.

The Chiefs need a QOTF, two solid offensive tackles and at least one good WR prospect through the draft in order for this success of the offense to continute. That's a pretty hefty order.

In the meantime, the only way to keep this team productive will be to play solid defense and ball control offense. It might be boring, but the talent level is dictating that this may be the best course of action this upcoming season.

Except for the fact that even with the offensive issues you list, the Chiefs still have less talent on defense.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 12:27 PM
To be sure it certainly won't happen in 1 season, but I'll be curious to see where it stands when Herm's 4 yeras are done. I'm betting bottom 1/3 and it's gonna be a painful process getting there.



That's my concern, too. Calling plays isn't the problem. Reloading, and teaching new guys the system -- will Solari be able to do it? Had we promoted Saunders to HC, and Solari to OC, I think we could have kept this thing going for a long time. With just Solari, it's iffy. The strength of this team has always been the O-line, so there is a reason to be optimistic. Problem is, if the Chiefs O is again #1 next year, Solari will be gone too.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 12:28 PM
To be sure it certainly won't happen in 1 season, but I'll be curious to see where it stands when Herm's 4 yeras are done. I'm betting bottom 1/3 and it's gonna be a painful process getting there.

By losing Saunders, it means that the D.V. era was a waste of time. I would have preferred to keep Saunders and the offense as something that can be counted on and continue to work on the _efense. Who knows what would have happened if we FINALLY could get new coaches + players on that side of the ball? Herm Edwards is such a tool. I'm happy for Saunders that he refused to be one as well.

This offense was always destined to fall. It's called passage of time. You can't stop it, and neither can Al Saunders.

Al Saunders became head coach of a high scoring, aging offense once before. 17 wins, 22 losses. Both defense and offense got worse under Saunders, neither got better.

That's the whole problem with the Vermeil era - everybody wants to just extend it one more year. "All we need is [X] and we're there" it's the same excuse every year.

We tried that when we hired Gunther to replace Marty and it failed miserably.

Futhermore, this idea that keeping Saunders equalled a 100% guarantee that this offense would continue on just as it has must have missed the middle of this season - you know the part where both of our starting tackles were injured.

Chiefnj
01-20-2006, 12:30 PM
Herm has been a very conservative coach with the NYJ. Is he going to change just because he hopped on a plane and flew 3 1/2 hours west? Probably not.

The success of the offense will depend largely, IMO, on whether or not Herm has much of a say in what the O scheme is. If he leaves it to the assistants there is a better likelihood of continued success (if you believe Solari can pick up where Saunders left off). If he has a lot of input, you may see an O more like the Jets - aka Marty light.

The whole idea of getting rid of Al, bringing in Herm and keeping Gunther all seems ass backwards to me, but we'll see. To me it is like having a fishing rod and reel. The reel has performed flawlessly the last few years, but every time you hook a big fish the rod snaps. Most people would probably keep the reel and get a new rod. Carl gets a new model reel and keeps the rod.

Calcountry
01-20-2006, 12:33 PM
Over reaction to the max.

They will still throw the ball, Green to Gonzo, Kennison, Parker, Horn, anybody the can. It won't be all LJ.


Get real.

Perhaps the play calling will tighten up a bit under Solari. No more smile and dial style like Al Saunders did. He would have us marching, then all of a sudden some funk ass play that doesn't need to be run, stalls the drive because of it.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 12:33 PM
That's my concern, too. Calling plays isn't the problem. Reloading, and teaching new guys the system -- will Solari be able to do it? Had we promoted Saunders to HC, and Solari to OC, I think we could have kept this thing going for a long time. With just Solari, it's iffy. The strength of this team has always been the O-line, so there is a reason to be optimistic. Problem is, if the Chiefs O is again #1 next year, Solari will be gone too.

Where do you get this?

Al Saunders has NEVER proven that he is a teacher or would be capable of reloading an aging team. In fact, the one chance he got at it was a failure.

Under Al Saunders, we brought in a bunch of aging vets and put them together into a cohesive unit. Kris Wilson has been a disaster. One of our 4th round WR's looks like he MIGHT pan out, the other can't get off the practice squad.

I appreciate that you like what Al Saunders did for KC, I like it too.

But your ascribing attributes to him that he's never displayed.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 12:34 PM
The whole idea of getting rid of Al, bringing in Herm and keeping Gunther all seems ass backwards to me, but we'll see. To me it is like having a fishing rod and reel. The reel has performed flawlessly the last few years, but every time you hook a big fish the rod snaps. Most people would probably keep the reel and get a new rod. Carl gets a new model reel and keeps the rod.

Great analogy.

bogie
01-20-2006, 12:35 PM
Are you ready for some 17-14 football?

As long as we have the 17, YES I AM!

Calcountry
01-20-2006, 12:36 PM
Herm has been a very conservative coach with the NYJ. Is he going to change just because he hopped on a plane and flew 3 1/2 hours west? Probably not.

The success of the offense will depend largely, IMO, on whether or not Herm has much of a say in what the O scheme is. If he leaves it to the assistants there is a better likelihood of continued success (if you believe Solari can pick up where Saunders left off). If he has a lot of input, you may see an O more like the Jets - aka Marty light.

The whole idea of getting rid of Al, bringing in Herm and keeping Gunther all seems ass backwards to me, but we'll see. To me it is like having a fishing rod and reel. The reel has performed flawlessly the last few years, but every time you hook a big fish the rod snaps. Most people would probably keep the reel and get a new rod. Carl gets a new model reel and keeps the rod.A rod that has arguably "snapped" at that. Once they are snapped, you can't glue them back together, even if his name is Gun.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 12:36 PM
Where do you get this?

Al Saunders has NEVER proven that he is a teacher or would be capable of reloading an aging team. In fact, the one chance he got at it was a failure.

Under Al Saunders, we brought in a bunch of aging vets and put them together into a cohesive unit. Kris Wilson has been a disaster. One of our 4th round WR's looks like he MIGHT pan out, the other can't get off the practice squad.

I appreciate that you like what Al Saunders did for KC, I like it too.

But your ascribing attributes to him that he's never displayed.

It's simple. He didn't inherit this offense like George Seifert did, and just maintain it, and then fail in Carolina because he didn't know how to build something.

Al Saunders freaking already built this offense once. Why can't he do it again. How much more obvious can it get??? Now all Solari has to do is maintain it, which is a hell of a lot easier than building it.

Watch Saunders go build another great offense in Washington....

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 12:36 PM
Herm has been a very conservative coach with the NYJ. Is he going to change just because he hopped on a plane and flew 3 1/2 hours west? Probably not.

The success of the offense will depend largely, IMO, on whether or not Herm has much of a say in what the O scheme is. If he leaves it to the assistants there is a better likelihood of continued success (if you believe Solari can pick up where Saunders left off). If he has a lot of input, you may see an O more like the Jets - aka Marty light.

The whole idea of getting rid of Al, bringing in Herm and keeping Gunther all seems ass backwards to me, but we'll see. To me it is like having a fishing rod and reel. The reel has performed flawlessly the last few years, but every time you hook a big fish the rod snaps. Most people would probably keep the reel and get a new rod. Carl gets a new model reel and keeps the rod.

Excellent post.

chiefsfan1963
01-20-2006, 12:38 PM
Herm has been a very conservative coach with the NYJ. Is he going to change just because he hopped on a plane and flew 3 1/2 hours west? Probably not.

The success of the offense will depend largely, IMO, on whether or not Herm has much of a say in what the O scheme is. If he leaves it to the assistants there is a better likelihood of continued success (if you believe Solari can pick up where Saunders left off). If he has a lot of input, you may see an O more like the Jets - aka Marty light.

The whole idea of getting rid of Al, bringing in Herm and keeping Gunther all seems ass backwards to me, but we'll see. To me it is like having a fishing rod and reel. The reel has performed flawlessly the last few years, but every time you hook a big fish the rod snaps. Most people would probably keep the reel and get a new rod. Carl gets a new model reel and keeps the rod.


Nice post :clap:

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 12:40 PM
It's simple. He didn't inherit this offense like George Seifert did, and just maintain it, and then fail in Carolina because he didn't know how to build something.

Al Saunders freaking already built this offense once. Why can't he do it again. How much more obvious can it get??? Now all Solari has to do is maintain it, which is a hell of a lot easier than building it.

Watch Saunders go build another great offense in Washington....

He built this offense from players from other teams. He never DEVELOPED anything. Al Saunders had a puzzle, all he needed to do was plug in the pieces.

There's no reason he can't do it again. That's not the issue. The issue is whether or not Al's departure signals impending doom for this offense. It most certainly doesn't, no matter how you want to spin it.

I have no doubt Saunders can be successful in Washington, most of the pieces are already in place.

TEX
01-20-2006, 12:40 PM
This offense was always destined to fall. It's called passage of time. You can't stop it, and neither can Al Saunders.

Al Saunders became head coach of a high scoring, aging offense once before. 17 wins, 22 losses. Both defense and offense got worse under Saunders, neither got better.

That's the whole problem with the Vermeil era - everybody wants to just extend it one more year. "All we need is [X] and we're there" it's the same excuse every year.

We tried that when we hired Gunther to replace Marty and it failed miserably.

Futhermore, this idea that keeping Saunders equalled a 100% guarantee that this offense would continue on just as it has must have missed the middle of this season - you know the part where both of our starting tackles were injured.


What happened in the past, under a whole different set of circumstances with different players does not guarantee it would happen again. Besides, we had the Stooges back then and they were about as bad as it gets.

I would hope that the Chiefs would have learned something about their depth at Tackle and would take the necessary measures to improve things.

alanm
01-20-2006, 12:44 PM
I'm not so worried as much about the offense changing as I am about the overall playcalling. Going from Saunders to Solari/Shea/Edwards has me a little worried though. :shake:

chiefsfan1963
01-20-2006, 12:46 PM
This offense was always destined to fall. It's called passage of time. You can't stop it, and neither can Al Saunders.

Al Saunders became head coach of a high scoring, aging offense once before. 17 wins, 22 losses. Both defense and offense got worse under Saunders, neither got better.

That's the whole problem with the Vermeil era - everybody wants to just extend it one more year. "All we need is [X] and we're there" it's the same excuse every year.

We tried that when we hired Gunther to replace Marty and it failed miserably.

Futhermore, this idea that keeping Saunders equalled a 100% guarantee that this offense would continue on just as it has must have missed the middle of this season - you know the part where both of our starting tackles were injured.

This O was destined to fail? What are you talking about? the whole problem with the Vermeil era was the same problem in the Marty era, Carl Peterson!!!!!!!!!! :cuss:

All Vermiel needed from Carl was a Top 20 D. CP could not get that for him.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 12:50 PM
What happened in the past, under a whole different set of circumstances with different players does not guarantee it would happen again. Besides, we had the Stooges back then and they were about as bad as it gets.

I would hope that the Chiefs would have learned something about their depth at Tackle and would take the necessary measures to improve things.

EXACTLY.

That's all I'm getting at.

:thumb:

Chiefnj
01-20-2006, 12:51 PM
That's the whole problem with the Vermeil era - everybody wants to just extend it one more year. "All we need is [X] and we're there" it's the same excuse every year.

We tried that when we hired Gunther to replace Marty and it failed miserably.



Isn't that what is happening now? One more year of the same? Solari was promoted because Herm didn't want to change the offense too much, right? "I'm not stupid", that's what Herm said when asked about changing the O. Keeping Gunther seems like keeping the status quo as well. Oh, that's right, he's not forced to coach with the assistants he worked with previously when he had some success as a DC. That's the big change.

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 12:51 PM
He built this offense from players from other teams. He never DEVELOPED anything. Al Saunders had a puzzle, all he needed to do was plug in the pieces.

There's no reason he can't do it again. That's not the issue. The issue is whether or not Al's departure signals impending doom for this offense. It most certainly doesn't, no matter how you want to spin it.

I have no doubt Saunders can be successful in Washington, most of the pieces are already in place.

Pluggin in pieces, developing....now we're just into semantics. The fact is Al and DV came in here, gutted the old offense, and gave us the best offense in the league. If he can build it, there is absolutely no reason he can't continue to reload, which is easier than building it. Who knows about Solari? And who knows how much impact DV had. I'm happy with Solari as OC, but I'd be a lot happier with Saunders as HC and Solari his offensive coordinator. I think this offense would hum along like the 80s-90s 49ers. Now it's win with DV's and Al's offense in the next year or two, before it's gone.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 12:53 PM
This O was destined to fail? What are you talking about? the whole problem with the Vermeil era was the same problem in the Marty era, Carl Peterson!!!!!!!!!! :cuss:

All Vermiel needed from Carl was a Top 20 D. CP could not get that for him.

ROFL

I love it when you post shit like this.

This O is a unique combination of scheme and TALENTED PLAYERS.

Those players aren't immortal. Wow, what a shock, huh?

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 12:54 PM
Isn't that what is happening now? One more year of the same? Solari was promoted because Herm didn't want to change the offense too much, right? "I'm not stupid", that's what Herm said when asked about changing the O. Keeping Gunther seems like keeping the status quo as well. Oh, that's right, he's not forced to coach with the assistants he worked with previously when he had some success as a DC. That's the big change.

Yep, evidently Carl bought into all the excuses the Guniacs put forward as to why Gun has not been successful. We got rid of DV and Al so Gun could be free to bloom.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 12:56 PM
Isn't that what is happening now? One more year of the same? Solari was promoted because Herm didn't want to change the offense too much, right? "I'm not stupid", that's what Herm said when asked about changing the O. Keeping Gunther seems like keeping the status quo as well. Oh, that's right, he's not forced to coach with the assistants he worked with previously when he had some success as a DC. That's the big change.

I never said it wasn't what is happening now.

It's the pretending that clinging to Al Saunders like some sort of savior ISN'T that bothers me.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 12:57 PM
Pluggin in pieces, developing....now we're just into semantics. The fact is Al and DV came in here, gutted the old offense, and gave us the best offense in the league. If he can build it, there is absolutely no reason he can't continue to reload, which is easier than building it. Who knows about Solari? And who knows how much impact DV had. I'm happy with Solari as OC, but I'd be a lot happier with Saunders as HC and Solari his offensive coordinator. I think this offense would hum along like the 80s-90s 49ers. Now it's win with DV's and Al's offense in the next year or two, before it's gone.

Exactly.

You're talking right past what I'm saying.

ALL I'm saying is that there are no guarantees.

For all we know, the departure of VERMEIL, not Saunders, will be the downfall of this offense.

TEX
01-20-2006, 01:01 PM
Pluggin in pieces, developing....now we're just into semantics. The fact is Al and DV came in here, gutted the old offense, and gave us the best offense in the league. If he can build it, there is absolutely no reason he can't continue to reload, which is easier than building it. Who knows about Solari? And who knows how much impact DV had. I'm happy with Solari as OC, but I'd be a lot happier with Saunders as HC and Solari his offensive coordinator. I think this offense would hum along like the 80s-90s 49ers. Now it's win with DV's and Al's offense in the next year or two, before it's gone.

Yep. I totally agree. I too was hoping that Saunders would be the HC and that he would appoint Solari to OC. Oh well - the more things change in Chiefie Land - the more they stay the same. At least that's been the case since '89. Now we're on year 18 of the 5-year-plan. :shake:

FringeNC
01-20-2006, 01:04 PM
Exactly.

You're talking right past what I'm saying.

ALL I'm saying is that there are no guarantees.

For all we know, the departure of VERMEIL, not Saunders, will be the downfall of this offense.

I dunno. Shanahan does a fantastic job of reloading that offense. How long has it been one of the league's best? I think Saunders could have done that here. We'll see what he does in Washington....

tk13
01-20-2006, 01:04 PM
We have talented offensive players. We're one of the few teams in the NFL where teams can know what's coming and they can't stop us. I mean obviously I'd like to keep Saunders, but there is more than one way to skin a cat. Worst case scenario, as long as our running game continues to produce as it has, we're still gonna have a killer playaction passing game.

htismaqe
01-20-2006, 01:14 PM
I dunno. Shanahan does a fantastic job of reloading that offense. How long has it been one of the league's best? I think Saunders could have done that here. We'll see what he does in Washington....

I ABSOLUTELY agree.

Again, don't misunderstand what I'm saying.

All I'm saying is that the part of your post in bold is the part I would emphasize.

The Bad Guy
01-20-2006, 01:31 PM
I'm so proud of Joe. He finally wrote an article that's not as a "yes" man for the Chiefs!

This is his best work. And dead-on accurate. How the F&*K Carl let him go is beyond belief.

It's Marty ball all over again and the great ride IS over.

You're as dumb as Poz.

I wonder how many handjobs Al had to give JoPo to write that.

Next, he'll be writing how this offense will never be great again because his chess buddy Priest isn't the focal point.