View Full Version : What holes do we really have? [No, I am not talking about Broncos Fans]

01-11-2001, 01:58 PM
OL. We are set with Tait and Riley did very well this year. Szott is gone and Shields is probably gone for superstar $$$. Blackshear is good at pass protection but not so good at run blocking. So we need at least an ORG, if not ORG and OLG. Alford is lurking in the background, but all we know of him is "tons of potential" and we know what Sir Charles said about "potential."

QB. Grbac has become a very good QB. He will renegotiate, so the QB position is nicely filled. Is Collins an acceptable #2? The fact that we did not put him in when Moon looked SO bad gives us pause. And where is our QBOTF #3? Do we draft him now and let him "season" on the bench, or do we wait until Grbac is nearer to retirement?

RB. Moreau might become a decent HB and we know Richardson is a great FB. For all we know, Richardson might make a good HB. Whether we make Richardson the HB or draft a HB or get a FA HB, we need a RB.

TE. Gonzalez, Dunn, Drayton and Gammon. Either Dunn or Drayton is out. Once we ink Gonzo to a long-term contract, this position is settled.

WR. Alexander and Morris will continue to start. Lockett will not start for the Chiefs, but he could start elsewhere. Color him gone. We do not know if Ricks can take his place, as there is some doubt about Ricks' hands.

DL. Actually, this is in pretty good shape, despite the wailing over McGlockton and Williams. We are probably stuck with McGlockton and Williams for cap reasons, but we have Browning as a capable backup who might even force one of our overpaid boys onto the bench. Can we improve on Clemmons at DE? Is Stills ready to start? There is never enough QB-crushing to satisfy some folks…

LB. Bush was a disappointment and Patton is showing his age. Maslowski is a huge find that brings a tear of joy to us old-timers, but he should be moved to MLB. That leaves a hole at OLB. This is a serious weakness and deserves the utmost attention.

CB. Were Dennis and Bartee victims of the Stooge and his stinking soft zone, or are they not up to the task? More importantly, will Hasty stay another season? In either case, we need CB help. If Hasty stays, it is worrisome, if Hasty leaves, it is critical.

S. Wesley is an incredible find and Woods is a good safety, if not a great safety. While there is room for improvement on Woods' side of the field, this position is not a major weakness. Perhaps we will see if Atkins is ready to take Woods' job.

K. After a shaky start, Peterson stabilized. We could hope for better [like a bald, drunken deportee], but this is not a major weakness.

P. Sauerbrun kicks an awful lot of line drives. On the other hand, he also kicks some beauties. Is this coachable? He is certainly an upgrade from the previous punter and kickoff guys.

KR. Hall did not pan out. This position is broken and requires immediate attention.

sorting out the positions.

01-11-2001, 02:23 PM
So, what are our real holes, and how to we fill them?

1. LB. Hope and pray that Morgan is there at pick #12.
2. DL. Draft future starters, particularly a QB-crushing DE.
3. HB or FB [depending on Richardson]. Get a FA HB and keep Richardson at FB or get a FA FB and move Richardson to HB. Either way, go FA [now that our #2 pick is gone]. Le Committee est mort!. La vie longue le dos offert! Woo-Hoo!
4. CB. Go FA for this position. We have enough rookies in the secondary. We need some more veteran leadership, even if Hasty does not retire.
5. OL [assuming Shields is gone]. Draft ORG and future starters. Get depth via FA.
6. WR. We need depth. FA.
7. P/KR. Draft.
8. QBOTF. Draft.

Okay, let the brickbats fly…

hunkering down.

01-11-2001, 02:36 PM
A Few Thoughts...

OG - A Position of need in the upcoming draft.

QB - I would think we will use FA to obtain Grbac's back-up and draft a "project" for #3. I would think Collins will be cut during camp unless he somehow beats out the new #2.

TE - The 'Old' coaching staff favored Dunn over Drayton as the year wore down. Drayton is getting up there in years. If he makes it to camp, he'll have to beat out Dunn to a roster spot.

WR - I heard whispers it was Ricks inability to learn the patterns that held up his progress last season, while Gun & Co. praised him to the skies in public.

LB - I guess everybody, including myself, thinks Maz should move inside. What to do with the OLB position? Draft. I really wish we had that #2 draft pick this year, but we don't and, what's done is done. We must get the besta available from the draft pool. Hopefully, Edwards will not be used in protecting the secondary so much and will become the impact player I thought he would have been at the beginning of '00.

CB - Position that worries me the most. I can't help thinking (with nothing very concrete to go on, either) that Dennis is a bust, soft zone or not. Bartee, with time and training, might be salvaged. Certainly a postion of need. I would draft 2 corners and, if Hasty doesn't return, go out and obtain the best FA available as well.

KR - It is a mess. Draft whoever looks likely to work, I guess. We don't need Mike Cloud back there running directly into heavy traffic, that's for sure

01-11-2001, 02:58 PM
Great post; glad there are no broke planes today.
Agree on all accounts with these caveats.

WR. I hope there is some way we can keep Lockett (UFA?). He's battle-tested, soft-handed, and dependable. Still need more depth here so we can have one assume KR duties

OL. Hope Grunny will play one more year, more for the intangibles (leadership, mentoring youngsters on O-line).

RB. Contrary to majority here, I'm convinced FA is way to go for RB.

Well stated in all other areas.

01-11-2001, 03:01 PM
I really cannot believe people think LB is more of a need than TB! FFS, we have Edwards, Maslowski and Patton. George, Stills and Bush as backups. Now, Patton is 'showing his age', but that does not mean he cannot play... the guy has at least one more year left in him. George is a decent backup. Stills is still an unknown, and Bush is useless (unless he works his arse off this offseason).

TB: Moreau is slow and plodding (younger Donnell Bennett), Cloud is a tad on the small side (does not make up for it with speed, elusiveness or attitude - basically, we ruined this kid by wrecking his confidence).

FB: TRich. Donnell & Kimble are probably gone.

It is <i>obvious</i> - our need is at RB! Our runningback corps is a mess - in <i>much</i> worse shape than any other position on this team.

01-11-2001, 03:07 PM

Believe it, my man.

I regret to inform you that your Presidency of the Travis Henry Bandwagon, Inc. special interest group casts serious doubts on your objectivity…

HB is a need, but OLB is a greater need.

It's obvious.

junta leader of the Dan Morgan bandwagon.

01-11-2001, 03:10 PM

My job is rife with ups and downs. Today is a quiet day, so I had time to entertain myself with a post guaranteed to irritate HC_Chief.

There are a few perks with my job.

settling into his new career as major irritant.

01-11-2001, 03:11 PM

01-11-2001, 03:12 PM

Actually, I am just messing with you. I want to hear alternate versions of "Fixing a Hole."

preparing a ska version.

01-11-2001, 03:12 PM
Assuming(the worst case) and Morgan goes to SF...would it be a bad move for the Chiefs to move down a little in the draft for a second round pic and take someone like Polley? I don't really think so, and there should be a good RB available in the higher 2nd round...from what I keep hearing, Polley, caver, or another guy?? are considered lower first round pics....

CB, I'm not ready to call Dennis a bust yet...If I recall, even Woodson was torn up a few times as a Rookie...A different scheme and another camp, and I think he and Bartee will both be ok...I'm hoping Hasty gives 1 more year and would like a solid FA...of course they could play Gray:rolleyes:

I think several decent project QB's are coming out of this draft...the more JRs that come out, the deeper its getting...I still like Rosenfels, and wouldn't disagree with Mario Tapioca...if there in the 3rd or 4th...

OL...there are some nice picks available at center and guard..Riolla would look pretty good in red...making Waters and Willis available at guard?

DL, I'd like to see some attention here, but the guys like Rogers and Seymour will be long gone...maybe hold out for Henry Thomas? next year...

01-11-2001, 03:22 PM
I want to stay on the Dan Morgan bandwagon for a while longer, however, a trade down and picking up a #2 works for me too. Then again, we are just now getting in the evaluation season, i.e. all star games, combine, etc. I live here in Knoxville, and have watched T Henry for the past 3 years, general opinion is, that Fulmer told Jamal Lewis he should turn pro, because Henry was going to be the man last season. So, I could get on that bandwagon too.

01-11-2001, 03:26 PM
I see our greatest needs as follows:

<b>#1</b> Tailback
<b>#2</b> Center (unless Grunny comes back, in which case, drop to #6)
<b>#3</b> Corner
<b>#4</b> LB
<b>#5</b> OG
<b>#6</b> DT(unless we make a statement & dump Glock or Williams, then, move this up to #2)

ONLY way I'd be happy using our #1 pick on D: Dan Morgan. The guy is too damn good to pass up.

FA RB options = Dillon(HA! we do not have the dough... unfortunately); Garner(injury-prone); Fred Taylor(injury-prone); Skip Hicks(injury-prone); Ricky Watters(cancer); Jerome Bettis(bad knees)

It is clear, we need a RB. It is clear Dillon is the best FA option. It is clear we cannot afford Dillon. It is clear all the other FA options are risky propositions. Deductive reasoning suggests you use your highest pick since '89 to improve your team in the <i>one</i> place where it is obviously weakest: RB.(and, where the team owner has expressly stated he wished to see an upgrade!)

T Henry is <i>my</i> choice to fill that need - but that should not cloud the fact that the #1 need is indeed TailBack! :)

01-11-2001, 04:34 PM
To clarify: I want a stud RB via FA, NOT the draft. Your reasoning concerning available FA RBs is evidence of some serious analysis on your part (kudos); however, I offer that draft picks are equally risky.
As I stated in a previous post (pre-New BB), a TON of posturing will take place between now and the draft. Hopefully, CP can wheel and deal the Chiefs into a better draft/salary cap posture between now and April. If not, I'll welcome a drafted RB with open arms.
As for now, I want the Chiefs' first pick to be Dan Morgan.

01-12-2001, 07:52 AM
If I may co-opt Gaz's template:


DBs: Woods and Wesley are solid and entrenched at safety. Walker is a capable backup and ST'er. I forsee a move by Atkins to OLB so we need another player here. I'm thinking a late round pick of undrafted FA since this guy will mainly be a ST'er. I also don't see a major problem at CB. Hasty will be back. You can't call Dennis a bust. Fifth rnd picks are not busts by difinition. And since he was usually paired up with opposing #1 WR's in that soft zone I'd say he didn't do so bad. Bartee's name was never called when he was on the field and that's a good thing for a CB. He's simply a matter of coaching and experience. Warfield is a capable backup. If an intrigueing prospect falls to the mid-rounds or a Hastyesque reclamation project becomes available I'd jump on it. Otherwise I'd pass.

LB: Maz and Edwards are entrenched in the middle and OLB. That leaves the other OLB as a dogfight between Stills, Bush, George, Patton, Atkins, and O'Neil. Stills is a pass-rusher and should be used as such. George is a backup and ST'er. Offhand I'd give the nod to Atkins with O'Neil as the first backup. If Morgan falls to us I'd jump on him. Otherwise I might pass on this position.

DL: Contrary to Gaz I see this as our major weakness. I'm satisfied (dare I say gleefull?) about the QB killing conducted by Hicks and Clemmons. I see Browning as a DE and the fact that he beat out Williams speaks volumes to me about Williams. Inside we have Williams, Glock, Martin, and Ransom. I'm mentally ignoring Williams and considering any contribution as gravy. Martin was an ok backup but clearly not a starter. Ransom? Who knows? Glock was an enigma. At times dominating. At times missing in action. Our run defense was our biggest weakness. And we play six games a year against strong running teams. Hence I'm a big proponnent of S. Rodgers, or D. Lewis. These guys pick their teeth with the legs of RB's. They also bring the heat against QB's and can destroy the middle. The best way to stop a play is to tackle it in the backfield. Pair a motivated Glock with either of these guys and the middle should be solid. Then Hicks/Clemmons can wreak havoc from the outside. I'm also seeing a mid-round pick or FA pickup of a DE for depth.

01-12-2001, 08:13 AM

QB: EG is a top five QB. Starter is set for the next five or so years. I wouldn't draft a QB this year. The class is thin. We have other needs. If EG plays for five years and a drafted QB signs for five then in five years we could lose EG to retirement and our drafted QB to FA. As a backup, I'd scout the CFL and Arena leagues and keep an eye on the waiver wire. There's a lot of talent north of the border and on those AFL teams. A cheap project at least as good as Collins should be available.

TE: Gonzo, & Dunn. Nuff said.

WR: DA, Morris, and who? I'm still hoping Lockett will stay. He's not a blazer like Horn but instead a possesion receiver. Those guys don't usually get the major money. I'm confident a deal can be worked out. Especially if DV runs 3 wide. Ricks? I count on nothing from an offensive player released by SD. Parker? Who knows. A guy I'd love to see is Guy from Jackson St. He was the #2 WR behind Morris. He's not as big, but he's quicker. If he's there in the midrounds, I'd grab him. If Lockett leaves we need another WR. If he stays and Parker or Ricks is a dud we need another WR. Draft? FA? That is the question.

OL: Szott is gone. I think Grunnhard will return. Tait and Riley are bookends. Something tells me Alford will become another rock. Willis and Waters looked good in spot duty. Blackshear is an excellent pass blocker but needs to improve in run blocking. Shields is too expensive. Good luck Will. We need some depth here. A FA guard/center would be my choice. Does anyone know if Gammons could snap in a pinch? I honestly don't know his stats.

RB: We have Rich, Moreau and Cloud. Rich can give us a S. Davis dimension but then what do we do at FB? Moreau has shown flashes but seems soft. Coachable? Cloud has yet to be given a chance. He's the one RB we have that has moves and can be dangerous in space. The best run of the season was his 15yrd sweep for a TD against the Hawks. He never ran that play again. We need another RB. This draft is deep in rb's and if we can get a decent 2nd rnd pick I think we can get a Barlow or Jordan. But I also think Cloud can give us a Faulk dimension. We should not discount this kid and we should flush this concept of 'I'm tougher than you so I'll wear you out with my big backs' mentality. It's a dead end. I also see a need for another FB but think a waiver wire guy will suffice.

01-12-2001, 01:21 PM
probably already been said but...our biggest holes lie in RB and CB if Hasty doesn't return...if he does, LB and OL...what a brilliant observationist I am...:)

01-12-2001, 01:34 PM
Considering this group, consensus may not be possible, but let's see if we can find some issues upon which we can all concur:

· RBbC sucks. We need a featured back.
· We must rebuild our OL.
· We need a backup QB.
· We must shore up our run Defense.
· If Hasty leaves, we are screwed at CB.
· We need a return man.

Anyone disagree with those statements?

narrowing it down just a bit.

01-12-2001, 01:38 PM
seems like a pretty fair assessment to me Mr. Gaz man...

01-12-2001, 01:39 PM

also add in WR depth. We went light last year, given that the TE was such a large part of our offense. I assume it will be again under DV, but DA, Morris, Parker and Ricks is not a sufficient corps (assuming Lockett leaves - I hope not).

Otherwise...........what Chuck said :)

01-12-2001, 01:56 PM

Good point. I considered WR depth, but I still don't have a good feel for what Ricks or Parker could bring to the table. Lockett wants to start and he will not start with Alexander and Morris on the roster.

What say, all? Do we add WR depth to our list of holes?

submitting the nomination to the floor.

01-12-2001, 02:11 PM

Sly was pretty inconsistent last year, but that was not all that suprising. He will pick it up this year, as long as he learns to hold onto the ball.

I still think we need another solid possession guy on our team in the likely event that Lockett leaves. The WR pickup should be a FA. Another rookie WR is not a necessity IMO.

01-12-2001, 02:19 PM
I don't see how you can't add WR depth to the list. If we ever plan to run 3 wide we need WR's to run it. If Lockett leaves we only have two WR's that have proven they can catch the ball. If Ricks and Parker pan out fine, but you still should have another WR for depth.

01-12-2001, 02:43 PM
I guess if Lockett was ever thinking of staying, he might now, given that we have the weapons and the coach to run 3 or 4 WR sets (including Gonzo).