PDA

View Full Version : Whitlock - silver lining about Roaf


Count Zarth
07-30-2006, 12:14 PM
JASON WHITLOCK
The Kansas City Star

There is an upside to Willie Roaf’s retirement, I guess.

You have to rack your brain to find it, but it’s there. It probably doesn’t lead to any additional regular-season victories for the Chiefs. It might not have anything to do with wins and losses.

You’ve heard it before: For every action, there’s an equal and opposite reaction.

Roaf’s departure should be liberating for new coach Herm Edwards and new offensive coordinator Mike Solari. They should feel no pressure to duplicate Dick Vermeil’s and Al Saunders’ offensive fireworks.

Edwards can now stay within his personality in terms of offensive strategy without anyone second-guessing his choice. Edwards may have been groomed by Dick Vermeil as a player, but he has far more in common with Tony Dungy and Bill Cowher when it comes to coaching.

Edwards doesn’t want to coach in a shootout. He wants to run the football, control the clock, play solid defense and play field-position football. Cowher’s Steelers used that philosophy and a few trick plays to win the Super Bowl a season ago.

Roaf’s retirement will also shield Edwards from any criticism of his “soft” training camp and practice regime. Roaf pointed to Vermeil’s strenuous practice routine as a factor in his retirement.

For years, Chiefs players complained about Marty Schottenheimer’s and Vermeil’s long practices. Other coaches, such as Denver’s Mike Shanahan, believe in 70-minute practices and keeping the players’ legs “fresh.”

Deion Sanders, at the behest of veteran Chiefs players, once came on my old radio show specifically to complain about Vermeil’s long practices. Priest Holmes hated Vermeil’s practices and often complained.

When I first heard the complaints, I thought the players were just being spoiled and lazy. But the reality is NFL coaches have gone overboard with their training programs. Most of the players do a good job of staying in shape year round on their own. Also, you can’t ask 320-pound linemen to practice and train all year. It’s going to create back, joint and knee problems. It’s just way too much stress.

So Roaf has given Edwards freedom, and this freedom should benefit the Chiefs.

There was nothing wrong with MartyBall. The problem was Marty. The Chiefs never reached the Super Bowl and rarely advanced in the playoffs because Marty made horrible decisions while playing MartyBall. He’d choose the wrong quarterback, bench a running back after a long run and stick with the wrong coordinator.

Let’s hope that Herm is a better decision-maker than Marty.

And let’s hope that Gunther Cunningham is as good a defensive coordinator for Edwards as he was for Marty. Gunther is the man who should be feeling pressure now that Roaf is retired.

You can’t play Herm Edwards football without a strong defense.

We all expect Kansas City’s offense to take a step back. The Chiefs have lost both of their starting tackles — Roaf and John Welbourn — and their fullback, Tony Richardson, and Priest Holmes.

Meanwhile, Gunther returns everybody who matters, and the defense has added a five-time Pro Bowl corner, Ty Law, and a first-round-pick defensive end, Tamba Hali. Chiefs fans have a right to expect KC’s defense to improve dramatically. Edwards is a defensive coach. His expertise is in building defenses.

Kansas City once fell in love with 17-14 football games. We better learn to love them again.

JBucc
07-30-2006, 12:20 PM
If our D is good enough to win 17-14 games consistently that would be splendid and we would definately be playoff bound.

FringeNC
07-30-2006, 12:29 PM
Okay...I think it's time to look at the numbers...

What was the pass-run ratio with Herm and Hackett in NY? Let's just assume that is what we will have here...my guess, and it's just a guess, is that those numbers were very similar to the Chiefs' ratio under Vermeil/Saunders. (I'll look them up at some point today.)

All this talk of running more, I just don't think Edwards realized how often we ran the ball under Saunders.

When the Jets had Pennington / Hackett running the offense, it was similar to ours...lots of motion, play-action...the difference being they ran the short WCO passing routes.

If we have the same ratio as Herm did with Hackett/Pennington, we'll be fine. If for some reason Herm wants to run 75% of the time, obviously we're ****ed.

htismaqe
07-30-2006, 02:49 PM
Whitlock is a shill.

We've already been assured there is no silver lining.

htismaqe
07-30-2006, 02:50 PM
There was nothing wrong with MartyBall. The problem was Marty. The Chiefs never reached the Super Bowl and rarely advanced in the playoffs because Marty made horrible decisions while playing MartyBall. He’d choose the wrong quarterback, bench a running back after a long run and stick with the wrong coordinator.

I see that Whitlock understands the definition of Martyball better than most here...

GOOD.

the Talking Can
07-30-2006, 02:54 PM
I agree that in an unfortunate and perverse way it helps Herm transition from DVball. I also agree that it doesn't help us when any games. It just helps manage perceptions.

arrowheadnation
07-30-2006, 02:58 PM
Screw all this speculating and worrying crap. Bring on opening weekend 2006 already.

Moooo
07-30-2006, 02:59 PM
Why doesn't Whitlock replace Roaf?

He's got the size, and I really can't forsee anyone intentionally running towards him...

Moooo

Count Zarth
07-30-2006, 03:00 PM
Why doesn't Whitlock replace Roaf?

He's got the size, and I really can't forsee anyone intentionally running towards him...


Whitlock's contract will stipulate that the Chiefs must sign Jeff George.

Moooo
07-30-2006, 03:04 PM
Whitlock's contract will stipulate that the Chiefs must sign Jeff George.

We CAN sign him... as a peanut dealer.

GoChiefs, I'm being serious about this. I think Whitlock could do it. I mean, it's like Jabba. He wouldn't have to move in order to be good.

Moooo

Coach
07-30-2006, 03:20 PM
We CAN sign him... as a peanut dealer.

GoChiefs, I'm being serious about this. I think Whitlock could do it. I mean, it's like Jabba. He wouldn't have to move in order to be good.

Moooo

Ha ha. Jabba the Pizza Hutt can do better. He'd eat the DE's. Of course, while we're talking about replacing our T's, Rhonda wouldn't do too bad either. No DE in the NFL would want to go near her.

The Red Sea
07-30-2006, 03:25 PM
Sorry guys & gals but I must be a moron.

Here I thought most of the time L.J Ran right over the top of most attackers.
Sure TR & Big old Willie Helped on Many a play.
BUT L.J got a lot of his last half of the season Rep by leaving his hand or tread mark on a tackler or two on his way to a 15 yrd run.

A monster with an attitude.


Ummm in truth I'm just trying to convince myself the above statement is mostly true.

=)

KcMizzou
07-30-2006, 03:28 PM
Here I thought most of the time L.J Ran right over the top of most attackers.
Sure TR & Big old Willie Helped on Many a play.
BUT L.J got a lot of his last half of the season Rep by leaving his hand or tread mark on a tackler or two on his way to a 15 yrd run.
I don't think even LJ would be very successful with a D lineman in his lap at the hand off.

Moooo
07-30-2006, 03:30 PM
I don't think even LJ would be very successful with a D lineman in his lap at the hand off.

This is true. He's not Barry Sanders, afterall.

Moooo

Hog Rider
07-30-2006, 03:33 PM
Why doesn't Whitlock replace Roaf?

He's got the size, and I really can't forsee anyone intentionally running towards him...

Moooo

Whitlock's trash talk: "Front four, you look like a rack o ribs, I WANT YOU IN MA BELLY!!!!"

chiefsfan1963
07-30-2006, 04:01 PM
I hope Whitlock is wrong. As much as I would like our D to improve to a top 15 ranking, I will be very disappointed to see our O resort to boring unexciting play calling. I don't see why we can't have both a Top 15 D and a Top 5 O.

mcan
07-30-2006, 04:23 PM
this whole idea of our offense taking a big step back goes against everything that is logical.


If 11 guys line up, it is their job to get the BEST possible outcome out of every play. Obviously there is a risk/reward ratio and an expected value for every type of play, situation, and in a larger sense, every drive, every quarter, every half, game, or season...

In the end the offense with the most points is the best offense, and everybody else in the league is inferior. After points, the next important stat is 1st downs. Your ultimate goal is the end zone, but you do it ten yards at a time according to the rules of this game. After 1st downs, comes yards per play attempt. If you know that (on average) your team gets 5 yards every time they snap the ball, that means that on average, the defense will have to get LUCKY twice in a row to keep you from getting a first down.


I find it very unsettling that anybody could speculate that we shouldn't TRY to move the ball down the field like we have for the past five years. If we're capable of moving the ball like we used to, and CHOOSE not to do that, then we have made a HUGE mistake. Playing a ball control type of offense as your default type of offense is a SACRIFICE that you make when you don't think you are capable of scoring a lot of points. To look at any other way is STUPIDITY, and contrary to the point of the game, which is to score more points than the other guy.

mcan
07-30-2006, 04:47 PM
Seattle scored 26.9 points per game just counting offensive TDs, FGs, and PATs for offensive TDs... (Discounting defensive scores and those PATS).


WE scored 23.9 points per game.


They were better than us. In fact, there were 5 teams better than us. Seattle, Indi, Giants, Cinci, San Diego.

The point is, no matter WHO you are in this league, every year, the point is to be the best. Your goal should be to have the number one ranked EVERYTHING.

You should be trying your hardest to score 27 points per game.
You should be trying your hardest to hold everybody else to ZERO.
(to be fair, last year the best defense *chicago* held opponents to 12.6 points/game. 13 points should be the cutoff point and your goal).


Hoping to win games 17 to 14 is just shooting yourself in the foot. If you're capable of scoring DO IT. If you're not capable, then become capable. If you're capable of holding opponents to 13, DO IT. If you're not capable, become capable.

sedated
07-30-2006, 05:11 PM
Let’s hope that Herm is a better decision-maker than Marty.

we're f*cked

jspchief
07-30-2006, 05:36 PM
this whole idea of our offense taking a big step back goes against everything that is logical.


If 11 guys line up, it is their job to get the BEST possible outcome out of every play. Obviously there is a risk/reward ratio and an expected value for every type of play, situation, and in a larger sense, every drive, every quarter, every half, game, or season...

In the end the offense with the most points is the best offense, and everybody else in the league is inferior. After points, the next important stat is 1st downs. Your ultimate goal is the end zone, but you do it ten yards at a time according to the rules of this game. After 1st downs, comes yards per play attempt. If you know that (on average) your team gets 5 yards every time they snap the ball, that means that on average, the defense will have to get LUCKY twice in a row to keep you from getting a first down.


I find it very unsettling that anybody could speculate that we shouldn't TRY to move the ball down the field like we have for the past five years. If we're capable of moving the ball like we used to, and CHOOSE not to do that, then we have made a HUGE mistake. Playing a ball control type of offense as your default type of offense is a SACRIFICE that you make when you don't think you are capable of scoring a lot of points. To look at any other way is STUPIDITY, and contrary to the point of the game, which is to score more points than the other guy.The problem is, you hear "ball control" and somehow interpret that as not trying to move the ball down the field.

It's not like they are saying "gain 3.4 yards then fall down". The difference will come in risk management. When your team gets a sufficient lead, you begin to minimize the risk of losing that lead. You can accomplish that by running plays that consume more clock and have lower turnover risk. I'll guarantee that scoring too fast or gaining too many yards is not something they are trying to avoid.