PDA

View Full Version : Whitlock is trying to hit for the Cycle....


Reerun_KC
09-14-2006, 08:31 AM
Hope this is not Germans, But Jason hit the nail on the head agian... Dude is rolling Peterson and Edwards...

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/15513164.htm

Chiefs send message: They’ll stay conservative
JASON WHITLOCK
The Kansas City Star

Previous columns
Let me translate the message Herm Edwards, Carl Peterson and the entire Chiefs organization put out Tuesday afternoon.

The Chiefs are going to run the football, punt the football and play defense the rest of this season, and they don’t particularly care whether Chiefs fans have a problem with that plan of attack.

You might have missed the message because Edwards and Peterson disguised it somewhat cleverly by insisting that the Chiefs ran the old, Dick Vermeil-Al Saunders offense in the season opener against the Bengals.

They told you that because that’s the last time you’ll see it.

Good. I’m happy. The announcement should’ve been made the moment Willie Roaf announced his retirement, the moment the Chiefs failed to upgrade their receiving corps, the moment Dick Vermeil retired.

Instead, Edwards and Peterson didn’t feel comfortable telling Kansas City fans the truth about the Dick Vermeil and Al Saunders fireworks show until the reality of Trent Green strapped to a gurney sobered KC football fans.

Now, Peterson and Edwards believe you can handle the truth, though they didn’t quite muster the tummy to deliver that truth personally.

Peterson trotted out his trusty mouthpiece, Bob Gretz, to do the heavy lifting. Under the headline “It’s Broken,” Gretz viciously attacked the Vermeil offensive era on the Chiefs’ official Web site, characterizing Saunders’ unit as totally self-serving, glory-hungry and unconcerned about the team as a whole.

Now, I happen to agree with Gretz, and complained throughout the Vermeil era that the head coach and offensive coordinator came to Kansas City with the No. 1 priority of proving that they — not Mike Martz — orchestrated St. Louis’ Greatest Show on Turf.

It’s interesting to learn — through his lapdog — that Peterson agrees with me on something. Unfortunately, King Carl isn’t bold enough to point the finger at himself or even in the direction it truly belongs. On Tuesday, The King took a not-so-subtle swipe at Saunders, who is a known traitor to The King and is the $2 million offensive coordinator of Washington, 0-1.

“The Kansas City offense didn’t score many points in Washington, D.C., (Monday night), either, did it?” Peterson rhetorically asked reporters.

Saunders isn’t the true culprit. It’s Vermeil. He hated the way he was run out of St. Louis in favor of Martz. He hated the way the media gave Martz the credit for St. Louis’ offense. Vermeil fancies himself as an offensive innovator and Hall of Fame coach. He came to KC to complete his Hall resume. He already owned a Super Bowl appearance (Philadelphia) and a Super Bowl ring (St. Louis). He needed to establish a rep as a “genius.” You do that by scoring points and leading a great offense (Bill Walsh, Don Coryell, Mike Holmgren).

Martz stole Vermeil’s “genius” label.

Peterson and Edwards, Vermeil legacies, can’t say it. So Peterson blasts Saunders. And Edwards is trying to bait his critics into saying it’s stupid to continue to run Vermeil’s offense.

“Conservative? I was conservative in (the Cincy) game?” Edwards ranted in his Tuesday news conference. “If people went to watch the Kansas City Chiefs play, that’s the same offense they’ve watched for the last five years — shifts, motions. … Maybe I should change, because if we’re only going to score 10 points and we’ll get the quarterback killed, then maybe I should change the offense.”

Edwards’ point?

The Dick Vermeil offense got Trent Green smoked, and any of you fools who expect to see the Vermeil offense again better pass me whatever you’re smoking.

Why not just come out and say it? Why not just look Chiefs fans in the eyes and say: “We don’t have the personnel to run the offense anymore. The offense puts our defense in a terrible bind. And, if you look closely at what they were doing to score all of the points, you’d realize it wasn’t necessarily conducive to winning.”?

Because when you work for a general manager/president who is in his 18th year of operation without a Super Bowl appearance and has gone more than a decade without a playoff victory, you don’t have the necessary credibility with your fan base.

You can’t shoot straight. You have to play public-relations games. You throw pity parties. You paint the picture that you’re absolutely shocked that Willie Roaf didn’t report to training camp. You call the commissioner and complain that the hit on your quarterback was well outside the rules. You petition the competition committee to expand the number of playoff qualifiers.

When you’re in over your head and you’ve stayed too long, you make excuses, you point fingers and you speak in riddles hoping someone translates your points.



Bravo Agian!

the Talking Can
09-14-2006, 08:43 AM
it would be smarter to just say "Trent and Willie are gone, so is the offense..."

Rain Man
09-14-2006, 08:44 AM
Whitlock is our greatest weapon in the revolution to remove the Carl regime from power. He is the Thomas Paine of the upcoming revolution.

Carl has gassed the metaphoric Kurds one too many times. He has dined on the crumpets of sellouts while his people starve for a playoff victory. Revolt! Revolt, I tell you! Let us charge the towers of Arrowhead and free our hopes and dreams from the tyranny of the King! Viva la revolucion!

Reerun_KC
09-14-2006, 08:45 AM
Whitlock is our greatest weapon in the revolution to remove the Carl regime from power. He is the Thomas Paine of the upcoming revolution.

Carl has gassed the metaphoric Kurds one too many times. He has dined on the crumpets of sellouts while his people starve for a playoff victory. Revolt! Revolt, I tell you! Let us charge the towers of Arrowhead and free our hopes and dreams from the tyranny of the King! Viva la revolucion!


just spit dr pepper out the nose... Thanks!

Archie F. Swin
09-14-2006, 08:54 AM
You need an offensive line to play Martyball too.

Kyle401
09-14-2006, 09:06 AM
You need an offensive line to play Martyball too.

WE'RE DOOMED!11!!:banghead::banghead:

DAMMIT CARL!!1111!!!!!!

:cuss:

LesterLyles
09-14-2006, 09:10 AM
For your sake, I hope this doean't mean you'll abandon the explosive Chiefs offense for the Herm/Jets offense of recent years.

Warrior5
09-14-2006, 09:14 AM
...He has dined on the crumpets of sellouts while his people starve for a playoff victory...

Crumpets? They only sell those at Incrisco, along with green tea.

I'd believe Filet mignon.

Rain Man
09-14-2006, 09:23 AM
Crumpets? They only sell those at Incrisco, along with green tea.

I'd believe Filet mignon.

No. Too manly. One of the first goals of the revolution will be to isolate the king in the media, emasculate him in image and persona, and eliminate any points of commonality between his tastes and those of the people. It's Revolution 101.

Warrior5
09-14-2006, 09:40 AM
No. Too manly. One of the first goals of the revolution will be to isolate the king in the media, emasculate him in image and persona, and eliminate any points of commonality between his tastes and those of the people. It's Revolution 101.

Well then now about "cake"? I mean c'mon, crumpets? They suit the flaccid bourgoise at Pile High perfectly, and I simply refuse to make that association with anything related to the Chiefs.

On the glide path to an "F" in Revolution 101...

MOhillbilly
09-14-2006, 09:41 AM
KC fan has suffered enough of along slow death of the cancer that is carl peterson.
now we find ourselve praying for sweet sweet release.

only to discover the cruel joke continues on.


& on.


till the break of dawn!!!




yeah BOY!


i couldnt help it....lol

jrowe
09-14-2006, 09:48 AM
While I hate Whitlock's body of work, that was actually a good article. The offense is definately gone. I feel it may have more to do with the play calling and offensive coaches than merely personnel. Saunders excelled at calling plays to keep the defense off balance. So far, I see that lacking under our current coaching staff and OC. Personnel on the offensive line had definately taken its toll, but I have a feeling Vermeil and Saunders could still get great results with this group.

Also, contrary to the myth put forth by CP and Herm, Vermeil and Saunders weren't the aggresive, "hurt your defense by being too agressive" coaches they are currently made out to be. Vermeil felt that by having an aggressive offense and getting out to a big lead, you put pressure on the opposing offense to play catch ball by passing. An offense limited to passing plays into the hands of the defense. A big lead also allows you to salt away the clock by running late in the game. Vermeil's offense was designed to help the defense. Unfortunately, it came at the expense of the defense and the never committed the resources and control the defense needed to be successful.

DJJasonp
09-14-2006, 09:49 AM
Yep...I read the same thing between the lines in Herm's press conference....this is what I heard:

"I believed the hype of this so-called power-house offense....I gave it a one game chance....and now you'll never see it again."

From here on out....it's a battle for field position with Colquitt the most important offensive player on the field.

MOhillbilly
09-14-2006, 09:50 AM
Unfortunately, it came at the expense of the defense and the never committed the resources and control the defense needed to be successful.

not according to the powers that be.

Rain Man
09-14-2006, 09:53 AM
Well then now about "cake"? I mean c'mon, crumpets? They suit the flaccid bourgoise at Pile High perfectly, and I simply refuse to make that association with anything related to the Chiefs.

On the glide path to an "F" in Revolution 101...

Okay, I can go with cake. Plus, that generates a great visual of Marie Antoinette.

(Ahem. ***clear throat***)

Whitlock is our greatest weapon in the revolution to remove the Carl regime from power. He is the Thomas Paine of the upcoming revolution.

Carl has gassed the metaphoric Kurds one too many times. He has dined on the cake that is sellouts while his people starve for a playoff victory. Revolt! Revolt, I tell you! Let us charge the towers of Arrowhead and free our hopes and dreams from the tyranny of the King! Viva la revolucion!

KCChiefsFan88
09-14-2006, 09:58 AM
Yawnnnnnnnn another example of scapegoating Vermeil/Al Saunders for the Chiefs' current mess.

You'll never convince me that having an explosive offense that can score 30+ points a game is a liability and you'll never convince me that an offense that was near the top of the league in yardage, points per game and first downs was somehow hurting the defense.

What hurts the defense is having an unqualified FRAUD in Goonther as defensive coordinator and having a massive void in the middle of the D-line.

FringeNC
09-14-2006, 10:13 AM
Whitlock is a hit-or-miss writer, and he usually misses. This column, he really misses.

How exactly does our offense put tremendous pressure on the defense? We were near the top in time of possession and one of the leading rushing teams in the NFL. The Patriots have a much more wide-open offense than we do, pass more, run less, and have a much better defense. Same with Colts.

What puts pressure on a defense is an offense that is shitty and has a lot of three and outs and gets behind.

Yes, our offensive appears to be not what it once was, but how much of the poor showing Sunday is attributable to one player -- Jordan Black?

Whitlock and Gretz have been hinting that the Pittsburgh Steeler's model is the only way to win a Super Bowl. Tell that to the New England Patriots. In fact, had the refs not given the game to Denver, New England at home in my mind would have beaten Pittsburgh. Every year that a defensive team that doesn't throw a lot wins the SB, there is constant chirping about how that is the only way to win. Of course, what's neglected is all the other years.

Given that we appear to run-block better than pass-block, we will probably run more than we pass. But we did that last year. If our pass protection is as bad for the rest of the season as it was Sunday, we're ****ed no matter what type of offense we run.

Instead of real analysis, Whitlock just throws DV under the bus.

oldandslow
09-14-2006, 10:22 AM
All I can say is that DV owns 2 things none of the current crew have come close too (including Whitlock).

Until they can come up with one of their own, they probably ought not trash the guy who actually knew what a SB victory was.

Moo
09-14-2006, 10:35 AM
Whitlock is a hit-or-miss writer, and he usually misses. This column, he really misses.

How exactly does our offense put tremendous pressure on the defense? We were near the top in time of possession and one of the leading rushing teams in the NFL. The Patriots have a much more wide-open offense than we do, pass more, run less, and have a much better defense. Same with Colts.

What puts pressure on a defense is an offense that is shitty and has a lot of three and outs and gets behind.

Yes, our offensive appears to be not what it once was, but how much of the poor showing Sunday is attributable to one player -- Jordan Black?

Whitlock and Gretz have been hinting that the Pittsburgh Steeler's model is the only way to win a Super Bowl. Tell that to the New England Patriots. In fact, had the refs not given the game to Denver, New England at home in my mind would have beaten Pittsburgh. Every year that a defensive team that doesn't throw a lot wins the SB, there is constant chirping about how that is the only way to win. Of course, what's neglected is all the other years.

Given that we appear to run-block better than pass-block, we will probably run more than we pass. But we did that last year. If our pass protection is as bad for the rest of the season as it was Sunday, we're ****ed no matter what type of offense we run.

Instead of real analysis, Whitlock just throws DV under the bus.

I don't believe that you understood the article.

Chiefs Pantalones
09-14-2006, 10:49 AM
Hope this is not Germans, But Jason hit the nail on the head agian... Dude is rolling Peterson and Edwards...

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/15513164.htm

Chiefs send message: They’ll stay conservative
JASON WHITLOCK
The Kansas City Star

Previous columns
Let me translate the message Herm Edwards, Carl Peterson and the entire Chiefs organization put out Tuesday afternoon.

The Chiefs are going to run the football, punt the football and play defense the rest of this season, and they don’t particularly care whether Chiefs fans have a problem with that plan of attack.

You might have missed the message because Edwards and Peterson disguised it somewhat cleverly by insisting that the Chiefs ran the old, Dick Vermeil-Al Saunders offense in the season opener against the Bengals.

They told you that because that’s the last time you’ll see it.

Good. I’m happy. The announcement should’ve been made the moment Willie Roaf announced his retirement, the moment the Chiefs failed to upgrade their receiving corps, the moment Dick Vermeil retired.

Instead, Edwards and Peterson didn’t feel comfortable telling Kansas City fans the truth about the Dick Vermeil and Al Saunders fireworks show until the reality of Trent Green strapped to a gurney sobered KC football fans.

Now, Peterson and Edwards believe you can handle the truth, though they didn’t quite muster the tummy to deliver that truth personally.

Peterson trotted out his trusty mouthpiece, Bob Gretz, to do the heavy lifting. Under the headline “It’s Broken,” Gretz viciously attacked the Vermeil offensive era on the Chiefs’ official Web site, characterizing Saunders’ unit as totally self-serving, glory-hungry and unconcerned about the team as a whole.

Now, I happen to agree with Gretz, and complained throughout the Vermeil era that the head coach and offensive coordinator came to Kansas City with the No. 1 priority of proving that they — not Mike Martz — orchestrated St. Louis’ Greatest Show on Turf.

It’s interesting to learn — through his lapdog — that Peterson agrees with me on something. Unfortunately, King Carl isn’t bold enough to point the finger at himself or even in the direction it truly belongs. On Tuesday, The King took a not-so-subtle swipe at Saunders, who is a known traitor to The King and is the $2 million offensive coordinator of Washington, 0-1.

“The Kansas City offense didn’t score many points in Washington, D.C., (Monday night), either, did it?” Peterson rhetorically asked reporters.

Saunders isn’t the true culprit. It’s Vermeil. He hated the way he was run out of St. Louis in favor of Martz. He hated the way the media gave Martz the credit for St. Louis’ offense. Vermeil fancies himself as an offensive innovator and Hall of Fame coach. He came to KC to complete his Hall resume. He already owned a Super Bowl appearance (Philadelphia) and a Super Bowl ring (St. Louis). He needed to establish a rep as a “genius.” You do that by scoring points and leading a great offense (Bill Walsh, Don Coryell, Mike Holmgren).

Martz stole Vermeil’s “genius” label.

Peterson and Edwards, Vermeil legacies, can’t say it. So Peterson blasts Saunders. And Edwards is trying to bait his critics into saying it’s stupid to continue to run Vermeil’s offense.

“Conservative? I was conservative in (the Cincy) game?” Edwards ranted in his Tuesday news conference. “If people went to watch the Kansas City Chiefs play, that’s the same offense they’ve watched for the last five years — shifts, motions. … Maybe I should change, because if we’re only going to score 10 points and we’ll get the quarterback killed, then maybe I should change the offense.”

Edwards’ point?

The Dick Vermeil offense got Trent Green smoked, and any of you fools who expect to see the Vermeil offense again better pass me whatever you’re smoking.

Why not just come out and say it? Why not just look Chiefs fans in the eyes and say: “We don’t have the personnel to run the offense anymore. The offense puts our defense in a terrible bind. And, if you look closely at what they were doing to score all of the points, you’d realize it wasn’t necessarily conducive to winning.”?

Because when you work for a general manager/president who is in his 18th year of operation without a Super Bowl appearance and has gone more than a decade without a playoff victory, you don’t have the necessary credibility with your fan base.

You can’t shoot straight. You have to play public-relations games. You throw pity parties. You paint the picture that you’re absolutely shocked that Willie Roaf didn’t report to training camp. You call the commissioner and complain that the hit on your quarterback was well outside the rules. You petition the competition committee to expand the number of playoff qualifiers.

When you’re in over your head and you’ve stayed too long, you make excuses, you point fingers and you speak in riddles hoping someone translates your points.



Bravo Agian!

Great, great article. Once again, he truly does nail it.

I can't wait until we clean house...

MichaelH
09-14-2006, 10:59 AM
So the greatest show on turf is over. I don't really care. I just want the Chiefs to win more than ten games and actually win a playoff game. The problem I have with Herm's logic is he has to rely on a defense to keep the other team from scoring. So far this defense cannot stop that from happening. It's a lot better at stopping the run but still sucks at dink and dunk 12 yards gains. Without some sort of explosive offense to offset that, the Chiefs won't win more than 5 games this year.

Logical
09-14-2006, 11:01 AM
ROFL

Whitlock nails it but I was nuts when I said this would happen under Herm literally months ago.:harumph:

FringeNC
09-14-2006, 11:07 AM
I don't believe that you understood the article.

I understood the article. The premise to the article is this:

The offense puts our defense in a terrible bind. And, if you look closely at what they were doing to score all of the points, you’d realize it wasn’t necessarily conducive to winning.”?

And that premise is b.s. What we were doing to score all those points was running the football more than passing, getting a lot of first downs and eating up a lot of clock time. If we're going to be a good team this year, we will have to pass the ball well in addition to pounding it with LJ. Either we'll start pass blocking better or we'll lose a lot of games. What this has to do with DV's resume I don't really know.

Moo
09-14-2006, 11:08 AM
ROFL

Whitlock nails it but I was nuts when I said this would happen under Herm literally months ago.:harumph:

We were hoping that you had taken leave of your mental capacities, when you said it. Now we can truly appreciate you for the genius you are. You AND Gochiefs are genius, pure genius. What sucks, is how right you were. And I am glad that Gochiefs is right with Huards abilities.

Moo

NaptownChief
09-14-2006, 11:16 AM
ROFL

Whitlock nails it but I was nuts when I said this would happen under Herm literally months ago.:harumph:

It is normal for the majority of the fan base to want to believe what they are doing is the right thing....Only a small minority can evaluate the moves of their own team without extreme bias.

Herm Average was another disastrous move made solely on the fact that Carl Peterson knows him well and knows that he can pistol whip him around and get his way on everything. Carl would have paid more than a 4th rounder for that benefit regardless of the quality of coach he would receive in return. Carl would much rather lose and get his way than win and have to play second fiddle at One Arrowhead Drive.

This is a pitiful franchise and deserves the 3 win season Herm Average is about to bless us with.

frankton
09-14-2006, 11:23 AM
This is a pitiful franchise and deserves the 3 win season Herm Average is about to bless us with.

If this does come to pass, I would hope you would revisit the Herm "Average" moniker. 3 wins is hardly average!

NaptownChief
09-14-2006, 11:28 AM
If this does come to pass, I would hope you would revisit the Herm "Average" moniker. 3 wins is hardly average!


He will quickly and comfortably come to be known as Herm Well Below Average...

keg in kc
09-14-2006, 11:31 AM
What we have here is a bunch of people waiting for what they want to happen, that being the castration of the offense, so they can bitch about it. It didn't happen week 1, so it must be happening week 2. When it doesn't happen week 2, we'll start talking about "well, they needed the bye week to get the martyball scheme implemented".

chiefsfan1963
09-14-2006, 11:32 AM
To blame Vermiel and Saunders regarding last week loss is crimminal!

CP is to blame IMO for DV not getting at least another SB appearance here at KC. All CP had to do from the day he hired DV and his staff is to make sure they had the right players and coaching personnel to produce a Top 20 D, and Vermiel would have done the rest.

CP has hired his last HC in KC. We have 3 more years to sit and wait until CP walks out that door with or w/o a SB appearance.

HC_Chief
09-14-2006, 11:32 AM
Holy crap, Fatlock gave King Carl a serious nutshot with this one.

NaptownChief
09-14-2006, 11:34 AM
What we have here is a bunch of people waiting for what they want to happen, .



This much of your statement is dead on.....Yes most of us are waiting for what we want to happen and that being success from the Chiefs franchise rather than year after year of failure followed by excuses and spin.

Lzen
09-14-2006, 11:39 AM
Whitlock is a hit-or-miss writer, and he usually misses. This column, he really misses.

How exactly does our offense put tremendous pressure on the defense? We were near the top in time of possession and one of the leading rushing teams in the NFL. The Patriots have a much more wide-open offense than we do, pass more, run less, and have a much better defense. Same with Colts.

What puts pressure on a defense is an offense that is shitty and has a lot of three and outs and gets behind.

Yes, our offensive appears to be not what it once was, but how much of the poor showing Sunday is attributable to one player -- Jordan Black?

Whitlock and Gretz have been hinting that the Pittsburgh Steeler's model is the only way to win a Super Bowl. Tell that to the New England Patriots. In fact, had the refs not given the game to Denver, New England at home in my mind would have beaten Pittsburgh. Every year that a defensive team that doesn't throw a lot wins the SB, there is constant chirping about how that is the only way to win. Of course, what's neglected is all the other years.

Given that we appear to run-block better than pass-block, we will probably run more than we pass. But we did that last year. If our pass protection is as bad for the rest of the season as it was Sunday, we're ****ed no matter what type of offense we run.

Instead of real analysis, Whitlock just throws DV under the bus.

Great post. I agree with everything.
:clap:

Chiefnj
09-14-2006, 11:43 AM
The revisionist history being spewed is funny. When DV was hired, wasn't it originally a 3 year deal but Carl wanted him to stay on? If Vermeil sucked so bad why not let him go after the 3rd year?


After years of reading from Gretz and others at 1 Arrowhead Stadium how Vermeil was assembling a TEAM of players of the highest character (profile players) we are told we were mistaken. Vermeil was a divider not a unifier or a team leader. Those great offenses were liabilities. If they didn't score so much the defense would have been better and would have kept us in games.

KC's management makes it difficult to remain loyal to the team.

Moo
09-14-2006, 11:45 AM
I understood the article. The premise to the article is this:



And that premise is b.s. What we were doing to score all those points was running the football more than passing, getting a lot of first downs and eating up a lot of clock time. If we're going to be a good team this year, we will have to pass the ball well in addition to pounding it with LJ. Either we'll start pass blocking better or we'll lose a lot of games. What this has to do with DV's resume I don't really know.

Actually, the premise of the article is that the above is Herms opinion. And basically, Mr. Whitlock is spotlighting-the premise is being force fed down the fans throats, and spun. Not to mention the utilization of Coach Vermeil as a scapegoat, which is very distasteful.

Moo

ck_IN
09-14-2006, 12:11 PM
<i>that the head coach and offensive coordinator came to Kansas City with the No. 1 priority of proving that they — not Mike Martz — orchestrated St. Louis’ Greatest Show on Turf.</i>

Ok now I'm convinced that Whit reads this board. I said from the day DV was hired that it was an exercise in ego stroking. That he was only interested in creating a great O so he could prove he was the brains behind 'The Show' and not Martz. Now Whit comes along and echoes me. *shudder* I feel a little dirty.

As for Edwards he was a status quo pick so typical of CP. CP's not serious about winning and Lamar only seems serious about making money. Edwards and CP will make sure we win enough to get season ticket renewals and anythimg more that happens is just gravy.

shaneo69
09-14-2006, 12:25 PM
DV may have had a big ego, but the offense from 2002-2005 did not hurt our defense anymore than the Rams '99 offense hurt their defense.

The defense's main problem from 2002-2005 was 1) GROB, 2) poor draft picks (I will blame Carl since he has the final say), and 3) poor free agent moves led by the signings of Ray Crockett, Glenn Cadrez, Vonnie Holiday, Shawn Barber, Dexter McCleon, the re-signings of Bartee, Woods, Hicks, and Wesley, and the fact that we let Edwards walk away (I will also blame Carl for these moves since, again, he has the final say).

Whitlock's shot at the lack of credibility within the organization was on target, but the blaming of Vermiel's offense for the defense's woes is totally stupid.

GoHuge
09-14-2006, 12:45 PM
I can't believe I agree with fatty three days in a row now. He pulled the hat trick, but I still can't stand him. On PTI especially. When he's on I just turn if off.

Hydrae
09-14-2006, 12:52 PM
The revisionist history being spewed is funny. When DV was hired, wasn't it originally a 3 year deal but Carl wanted him to stay on? If Vermeil sucked so bad why not let him go after the 3rd year?


After years of reading from Gretz and others at 1 Arrowhead Stadium how Vermeil was assembling a TEAM of players of the highest character (profile players) we are told we were mistaken. Vermeil was a divider not a unifier or a team leader. Those great offenses were liabilities. If they didn't score so much the defense would have been better and would have kept us in games.

KC's management makes it difficult to remain loyal to the team.

The part I bolded is what I am fighting with right now. I don't want to be a bandwagon deserter or anything but I am finding this difficult right now. Not living in the area doesn't help for me either as I have no connections to the KC area other than my love of the Chiefs. Not sure I can hold out for 3-5 more years and praying that Carl really will leave. This last year or so has convinced me the problems for this team start with the man running the franchise and that will not change until he is gone.

Rain Man
09-14-2006, 12:59 PM
The part I bolded is what I am fighting with right now. I don't want to be a bandwagon deserter or anything but I am finding this difficult right now. Not living in the area doesn't help for me either as I have no connections to the KC area other than my love of the Chiefs. Not sure I can hold out for 3-5 more years and praying that Carl really will leave. This last year or so has convinced me the problems for this team start with the man running the franchise and that will not change until he is gone.

Hang in there! (Slap, slap.) Don't leave us!

Woodrow Call
09-14-2006, 01:17 PM
The part I bolded is what I am fighting with right now. I don't want to be a bandwagon deserter or anything but I am finding this difficult right now. Not living in the area doesn't help for me either as I have no connections to the KC area other than my love of the Chiefs. Not sure I can hold out for 3-5 more years and praying that Carl really will leave. This last year or so has convinced me the problems for this team start with the man running the franchise and that will not change until he is gone.

Dont feel bad man I had those same feelings in the middle of last year. I was fed up with the DV era and I had reached my breaking point. I was sitting watching a game and wondering why do I even bother, why put myself through this every year. I had even picked the Browns because of Frye and their games look damn good in HD.

But in the end I couldn't do it. I will always be a Chiefs fan, I am in too deep now.

keg in kc
09-14-2006, 01:18 PM
This much of your statement is dead on.....Yes most of us are waiting for what we want to happen and that being success from the Chiefs franchise rather than year after year of failure followed by excuses and spin.So that's why so many take so much glee in the failures and losses.

It's easy to always predict gloom and doom. When you're wrong, you've won so you don't care; when you're "right" you can chest-thump and say "I'm so smart!". Hell, I don't understand why anybody so convinced that everything is going to continue to be f*cked-up bothers to watch the games. Why turn on the games if we're going to lose? Why turn on the games if you're so convinced you're going to see something you won't like, something that won't entertain you, something that won't leave you fulfilled? If we're always going to lose, if we're never going to make the playoffs, if we're never going to win on the off-chance that we do, then what possible reason is there to watch? Other than to gloat afterwards "see I told you so". Because there's no hope apparently. So why devote the time, why spend the money, why go through the inevitable emotional lows?

And no this isn't a defense of Carl or Lamar or Herm or anybody else. Carl shouldn't still have a job, after more than a decade without a playoff victory and so many years of sub-par teams. Which brings Lamar's will to win into question. Herm at least should get some time to prove himself here one way or the other, although he apparently isn't going to get that, since so many people started writing him off the second he was hired. I guess I'm different in that I like to give a guy a chance; Vermeil's St. Loser superbowl didn't guarantee one here, and, along the same lines, Herm's New York "legacy" doesn't mean the same thing will happen here.

I guess the thing I'm wondering is why, if things are so bad, is anybody still here? Why does anybody care? What's the point? How long are the folks so disgusted with the team going to keep coming back to the well, if all it does is leave them feeling...bad? For lack of a better word. What joy can be derived from the Chiefs, if there's no hope?

Woodrow Call
09-14-2006, 01:33 PM
Great post keg. :clap:

ck_IN
09-14-2006, 02:54 PM
It's probably the same reason people still show up to see the Royals. As fans we hope that this year will be the one. We hope that it's 1985 again and Jorge Orta can leg it out. We hope that maybe, just maybe the sports gods will smile on us and give us that magical season.

Alas, we seem to be cursed with an owner that doesn't care about winning and a GM that only wants to sell tickets and a HC that seems to be a puppet for said GM (which I don't entirely believe) who replaced a HC that only seemed to care about building half a team so he could stroke his own ego (which I firmly believe)

The Cubs have fans, so do the Royals, so do the Jets and Chiefs. It's character bulding or so I tell myself.

NaptownChief
09-14-2006, 04:58 PM
It's easy to always predict gloom and doom.


When you are a Chiefs fan...yes it is very easy to predict it and unfortunately way too easy to accurately predict it...When you are about the only team in the league not to win a playoff game in 13 years it isn't exactly like it is a bunch of spoiled fans whinning over a down year or two....This franchise is lucky to have so many fans whether they are dooming and glooming or not.

CoMoChief
09-14-2006, 05:10 PM
[QUOTE=Chiefnj]The revisionist history being spewed is funny. When DV was hired, wasn't it originally a 3 year deal but Carl wanted him to stay on? If Vermeil sucked so bad why not let him go after the 3rd year?
QUOTE]

Offense sells tickets.


However defense wins games.

tk13
09-14-2006, 05:18 PM
When you are a Chiefs fan...yes it is very easy to predict it and unfortunately way too easy to accurately predict it...When you are about the only team in the league not to win a playoff game in 13 years it isn't exactly like it is a bunch of spoiled fans whinning over a down year or two....This franchise is lucky to have so many fans whether they are dooming and glooming or not.
I think that's teetering on the breaking point. The fanbase has been very patient with Carl Peterson. I think that rope is about to get very thin. If this season goes down the tubes there are going to be a lot of unhappy people, i.e. season ticket holders. That last paragraph of the article is kinda how I feel about it. I mean we've had coaches and players that have done some dumb things, but I don't think there's any accountability anymore. Just seems like everytime something goes wrong, it's somebody else's fault. Just like how we heard about all the things DV did wrong all offseason, and now how Al Saunders didn't score 30 points against Minnesota. That may be, but that doesn't matter anymore. Those guys aren't here. Carl is here, Herm is here, Gun is here. If there's a problem, it's their job to fix it. But it's never their problem. First it was we didn't have the right players, then we didn't have the right assistants, then we had a head coach that didn't do things right. There's always an excuse. I think DV had a big ego, honestly, but at least he'd had quite a bit of professional success to deserve an ego. Carl and Gun haven't given us crap. And they still have an ego, and just seem out of touch sometimes. Maybe they're too comfortable.

shaneo69
09-14-2006, 09:23 PM
I think that's teetering on the breaking point. The fanbase has been very patient with Carl Peterson. I think that rope is about to get very thin. If this season goes down the tubes there are going to be a lot of unhappy people, i.e. season ticket holders. That last paragraph of the article is kinda how I feel about it. I mean we've had coaches and players that have done some dumb things, but I don't think there's any accountability anymore. Just seems like everytime something goes wrong, it's somebody else's fault. Just like how we heard about all the things DV did wrong all offseason, and now how Al Saunders didn't score 30 points against Minnesota. That may be, but that doesn't matter anymore. Those guys aren't here. Carl is here, Herm is here, Gun is here. If there's a problem, it's their job to fix it. But it's never their problem. First it was we didn't have the right players, then we didn't have the right assistants, then we had a head coach that didn't do things right. There's always an excuse. I think DV had a big ego, honestly, but at least he'd had quite a bit of professional success to deserve an ego. Carl and Gun haven't given us crap. And they still have an ego, and just seem out of touch sometimes. Maybe they're too comfortable.

It almost appears to me that Carl's goal is to just be better than the worst team (or teams) in the league so that he can point at them and say, "At least we're better than them!"

NaptownChief
09-14-2006, 10:38 PM
Carl and Gun haven't given us crap. And they still have an ego, and just seem out of touch sometimes. Maybe they're too comfortable.


That is the unfortunate byproduct of having an owner that doesn't care much about football or winning anymore. Lamar appears to have the attitude of "if the house isn't burning to the ground, then I guess everything is ok..." However it appears we are close to finally having the house burn to the ground.