View Full Version : AirCoryell or RamsWest you make the call !!!

04-28-2001, 10:03 PM
I was convinced it would be an AirCoryell derivative, but I am beginning to have doubts based on a DV quote after today's mini-camp about how Green could be ready for a game in two weeks because he knows this offense. It takes more than two weeks for a QB to pick up the offense if it is even moderately different, in my opinion.

Tell me what offense you think they are going to run.

The third choice is just for Procter and Caudle, I will be shocked if it gets more than two votes!

04-28-2001, 10:14 PM
I suspect the offense will look like the rams in some respects: lots of motion, very few plays where the receiver is coming back to the ball, and everyone involved. Without Faulk though, I'm not sure how it works. He is a triple threat on every play as 1) Runner
2)Receiver 3) Decoy. He commands so much attention that he opens up the rest of the offense. I'm not convinced priest holmes can play that role. Maybe Tony Gonzales is the additional piece that the chiefs have that can make it work. It will also be interesting to see how this speed and timing oriented offense works on grass for 11-14 games per year vs. turf.

04-28-2001, 10:26 PM
My vote is Rams all the way, which is a derivative of Air Coryell and most of the various passing offenses on third down. What is Ram like is that everydown is third down. It is more like back yard football seeing who is open--real quick. Once you get near the goal line a more normal pro-type offense. It is just as much about philosophy as it is about a system. Just about anything you can think of is possible. They could put into two tes and two fb on the goal line or a no back shotgun. That is why there is such emphasis on athletic multiskilled players.

04-28-2001, 10:34 PM
It'll be a hybrid! I loved the D but I'm not so closed minded that I won't fly "Air Midwest".

04-29-2001, 07:48 AM
I voted for the Air Saunders dirivative. I think it actually think it might start out as Rams West, with minor adjustments, but evolve into "Air Midwest" as they continue to make the necessary adjustments to fit KC's personell.

Phil, the Air Midwest is the right name for this new offense, for the long term.
Another name that someone on TEBB (the expired BB) suggested that works, for the short term, is Green Acres.

04-29-2001, 10:42 AM
Because of Gonzo, my vote would have to go with the Raiders and Dave Casper, Bilitnikoff, Branch, and Stabler type of days. I loved that offense, even if it was the Raiders!!!

04-29-2001, 12:33 PM

Who are all those posters that think they are KCJ, 6 votes who will miss Maulball so far. I am truly surprised. Now its up to 10.

04-29-2001, 01:57 PM
I cannot recall any time in modern pro-sports where a team so obviously, comprehensively and shamelssly copied another team. And it happens to be a team they plastered 54-34.

Now, FWIW, the Rams production dropped off an amazing % when on grass. They went 2-3 on grass, had 13 INTs and truckload of sacks. In those 5 games, Faulk rushed for 390 yds (still very good, but nowhere near his carpet #s).

The Chiefs will play at least 10 games on grass. They will not get the kind of boost that we are looking for by wholesale copying the Martz system.

Green will have to get rid of the ball quickly. He has a career sack/attempt ratio of 1/10.

Bottom line: This is a huge gamble based on what worked for the Rams for 1 season.

Its not just Rams West, its Martzyb... (I almost said it)

04-29-2001, 02:36 PM
Why don't we just call it the Midwest offense? I always wondered the same thing when we were under the West coast guise. Are offense was not a carbon copy of the 9ers, and are current one won't be a carbon copy of the Rams. So let's pick something that shows we are different.

04-29-2001, 02:39 PM
Oops! I didn't see that Philfree had already suggested something along the lines of the Midwest offense.

04-29-2001, 10:41 PM
Why is it a gamble? I mean we've missed the playoffs the last three years and haven't been to the Super Bowl in thirty!


04-29-2001, 11:53 PM
I want to clarify...
I voted Who gives a damn, it's not MaulBall...

That can be interpreted 2 ways. I am excited by the fact that we aren't doing the maulball thing. others may have voted the same way, and disagree with me.

04-30-2001, 06:54 AM
I was just tickled that we're dropping maulball so I voted for #3. It's not Ram's West, it's not necessarily Air Coryell, it'll probably be Air Midwest (a derivitive of last year, remember Grbac did toss the ball for 4000+ yards).

At least, I'm pretty damn sure we won't be handing the ball up the middle for 3 yards and a cloud of dust (or in Bennett's case last year, -1 yard and a cloud of dust).

<Font ="+1"><b>Maul Ball is Dead, long live an exciting, balanced offense!!!!</b></Font>

04-30-2001, 08:19 AM
Oleman 47, a regular here, was at the mini camp and he stated in unequivocal terms that it IS Rams West, make no mistake. They ran over 80 plays with out using the I formation at all. So much for your FB! (Good bye, Tony).

Face it guys, we are COPYING the Rams in everyway possible. I would rather be 10-6 with a distinct KC attack than be anything with the wholesale sell out to the Rams that we are seeing.

I know I will get flamed for my opinion, but that's how I feel. I am so sick of being criticized because I have the guts to notice that the Emperor is naked. Oh, sure, be happy! Exult and rejoice! We are maulball no more!
Only, have a good time getting smaqued around by Rams Trolls when they come to rag on us for the whole sale copying of their team, including getting their cocahes, coordinators, players, system and philosophy.

Damn you, Carl. You are more desperate than a pimple-faced kid on prom night.


04-30-2001, 08:47 AM

Look, with all due respect, you're entitled to your opinion.

That said, you're the ONLY person here who could take such a positive report like HC Chief posted and turn it into doom and gloom.

Now, my humble opinion is :

I could care less about Ram Trolls (there is an ignore function on this board, works real great on Packfan). I could care less about being accused of copying someone. I could care less about whether we use an I formation, a T formation or a damn Wing-T set, <b> as long as it works </b>. If we pass 50 times a game and <b>win</b> a championship, I'm all for it. We ran the ball about that much and didn't win squat when we had too. The only thing running 3 times up Grunny's butt is we kept Grunny, Szott and some other fine OL men, and other Chiefs out of the SuperBowl.

Another opinion of mine is:

<B>Chiefs Football = Winning Football</b>

Not running football, not dominating defense, not tricky patterns, not Air Midwest, not anything OTHER than winning football. What ever style we need to adapt to win is what <b>I</b> want my Chiefs doing. Anything less than that is <B>WRONG</b>

Let's try something else (and I mean actually try it, not go into sack cloth and ashes just because we're suggesting something different) before we all scream about how horrible something is.

I'll even bet you hated carrots before you tried them the first time :D

California Injun
04-30-2001, 08:49 AM
Would Daniel Snyder qualify for "pimple-faced" since he is "aping" what your idol did here in Kansas City?

04-30-2001, 09:59 AM
I find it humorous that the third response was written by me in an incorrect fashion so that both sides could take that selection and be satisfied they had voted properly:

Meant: It does not matter which it is I am pi$$ed off because it is not maulball

Taken by many: It does not matter as long as it is not maulball I am happy.

English as used in this case was totally imprecise, so I must:

Laugh At My Ownself (LAMO)

04-30-2001, 10:13 AM
I represent the Gallup Poll.

We have an opening for someone with your obvious talent at vaguely wording poll questions.

Benefits are based on the gratuities from the political parties for polls that support their positions (simultaneously is even better as we then receieve our contributions from both for the same poll.)

Please contact me at 212-555-POLL

A. Shyster

04-30-2001, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by KCJohnny
Face it guys, we are COPYING the Rams in everyway possible. I would rather be 10-6 with a distinct KC attack than be anything with the wholesale sell out to the Rams that we are seeing.

Would you rather be 6-10 with a distinct KC attack?

If we use the system for 3 years and have success with it, it won't matter where we got it from, it will be a KC attack. If it brings wins, I can live with that. Also, if it brings wins, you can call it whatever the hell you want to...the fact is that it's the Chiefs Offense.

04-30-2001, 10:34 AM
Show me where I am predicting doom and gloom!!!!
I am predicting that this offense will be a success, just a hollow one IMO because of the sell out (that you don't care about).
Listen, people. The Chiefs had the NFL's 8th best offense last year. Now, if they have the NFL's 8th best offense again this year, you all will do somersaults and exult in the brilliance of Vermiel, even though he inherited one of the league's best offenses. He will get credit for it however, and Gun and Raye only get blame. Right on!!!!!!!

I am predicting that the Chiefs offense will do great things this year, and that Georgia Frontiere can be very proud of it!

04-30-2001, 10:44 AM
Believe what you wish.

I still stand by my statement

Chiefs Football = Winning Football.

I really <B>DON'T</B> care how they do it.

Because they've shown us the past 10+ years that they couldn't do it when it counts. Maybe this new way can.

And it'll be fun to watch. ;)

04-30-2001, 10:45 AM
WHO CARES ? As long as it produces W's ! Who were we last year ? AIRGUN ! Who cares ! This league is nothing but a copy for sucess anyway !

Call it Saunders Airlines !

Move the ball,produce points,play great defense...WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT ?


Some people b**ch for the sack of b*tching !


04-30-2001, 11:37 AM

Last year we lost 7 games while our offense averaged 14 pt's/gm. That is totally unacceptable, and will not win games, unless you have a record-setting defense. Even the Ravens could not win unless they scored 12 pts.

The two games we lost when we scored more than 20 points were New England and Oakland. Our offense did not lose the second Oakland game, although you could argue that the offense lost the New England game. Don't mean to dredge up that game too much.. our defense did put us in a position to have to score on that final drive.

So, I know this last was a statistically good year for us. However, it only looks good due to erratic play, and a weak defense.

I expect an offense to score 20 points a game to win in the current NFL. And we failed to do that 7 times last year and lost. Our defense saved us against Carolina Denver in the 2nd game. I EXPECT the defense to save us in games like that as well, but we must expect our team to score 20 pts a game.

I will not be jumping up and down if we are the #1 offense in the league at the end of the season, if we do not improve to at least 9-7. And then the following year, that improves to 10-6.

Looking for consistency on Offense.

04-30-2001, 11:41 AM
I think there is a point that we have been missing. In your attempt to support Gun and Jimmy (angry troll) Raye, you have failed to notice our physical stlyle of smashmouth was absent. If what DV and co. say is true, we will run MORE this year than last. And dear god I hope so!

Last year was pass, pass, throw the ball, pass, hit Gonzo, Pass, pass from Girbac to other team for 7.

Pass, run, pass, hit Gonzo, lob one up for DA to battle for, pass, pass, pass, punt....

I think Holmes/TRich/and our new fa fb will be more productive than the motley crue of last year's backfield.

04-30-2001, 01:52 PM
Guys, listen.
The Chiefs offense WILL be successful in '01!
But it will have to score a ton of points to do it better than Raye's. I agree, the 7 games under 20 points is VERY bad. VERY bad. However, with all its flaws, Vermiel still inherited the 8th best O in the NFL.

Now, all I am saying, (I'm NOT looking for agreement) is that people will crawl out of the woodwork to laud DV if he has similar results to those of Gunther. Same results, different standards. I don't think that is fair.

Secondly, (Again, I am not soliciting agreement), as a Chiefs die hard purist, I do not relish "winning whatever way you can." I am frankly insulted by Vermiel's continual references to the Rams, while courting their players, coaches, coordinators and even their playbook. That may be fine to you, but not to me. And the benching of some faves (Maz, Richardson) is bound to reveal Vermiel's pattern of wanting to put a Rams stamp on this team, regardless of the talent he inherited.

Finally, the Chiefs will probably compete until December. By then, other teams will have figured our version of arena ball out, and we'll not have established the running game and defense that December's cold and blustery conditions demand.

Just my obnoxious opinion....

04-30-2001, 02:01 PM

come on guy. You know I'm not a head hunter. I agree with ALMOST ALL of your points relative to football. I loved Martyball/Maulball too. What I was saying was that the offense under Gun's second year was anything BUT maulball. Remember the article in the Star announcing the DEATL of maulball? We threw the ball last year, a lot. Almost every down. We will run MORE this year, and that is to my liking. Keep in mind that we'll be running the offense of THE RAMS 2 YEARS AGO, not Martz's imposters...

ANd think of it this way John, it's not the Lambs offense, it's DV's offense, that he brought to St. Louis. Just like Parcells would bring his offense, or Marty his offense, or Billicheck his offense...It's DV'S and NOT the Lambs...

NOw, as far as defense goes, I hate what he seems to have planned. And yes, I think Mad Mike SHOULD get a starting job and IS the type of player this team needs. I'm also not impressed with Warfield, or most of the free agent slobs we've taken in. I DO Like our new FB's, and I LOVE Mennace...

04-30-2001, 03:01 PM
Hmm.. maybe I should have read Brad's post before placing mine on the duplicate thread.

I wasn't excited that our offense was #8 last year going 7-9, and I certainly won't be excited this year if we end up in similar numbers.


04-30-2001, 03:08 PM
And an ability to play call better is all it will take to be better than Raye's. Hopefully Holmes will help, as well as better coaching. Also, using Tony Richardson, which DV has said he will do. When we are ahead near the end of games and our running game is so ineffective that we keep it in the air, we invite disaster.. and we did this last year.

I am excited about a balanced offense. And I tried not to second guess Gunther, until his plans were obviously run counter to the success of the team.

If Warfield is ineffective for a couple games, I think DV will put in Bartee or Dennis (which will be Gunther's biggest legacy I think... he played this guys as rookies, which hopefully will help quicken their development). I would like to see Maz start, also. But if DV thinks that Patton-Bush are better in the middle and the outside, I will hold complaints until after a couple games.


Tribal Warfare
04-30-2001, 06:17 PM
Neither, KC needs to form their own identity.Red Flight,Red Dawn Rising, or The Flash, are my nominations for nicknames for the offense

04-30-2001, 07:03 PM
I'm optimistic about what I've read (and saw on Sunday) concerning the offense, and I saw a LOT of optimism from the players.
I'm not happy with the reported (and observed) state of the defense. That Maz should be starting is an absolute no-brainer. I understand the Chaplain's discontent concerning all the "Ram" stuff going on at Arrowhead, but I did expect it (just hope the defense isn't "Rams").
I want Mazlowski's personality stamped all over the defensive unit: attack and hit with ruthless abandon. I want to see Red flying to the ball with single-mided purpose. I want opposing QBs quaking in their cleats, and O-lineman still guessing when the ball is snapped. I want opposing receivers to be concerned about where their heads will be after the catch, and to hear Wesley's, Woods', and Dennis' footsteps.
If we get that, I don't care if the offense is a Ram clone. Meanwhile, I'll just patiently wait to see what happens in the next few weeks while the team gels.

keg in kc
05-01-2001, 03:11 PM
Based on what I saw on the field (as opposed to what I heard over the loudspeaker - they did call it the Rams offense) on Sunday, "Rams West" is a complete and utter misnomer.

1) The vast majority of the running plays in the running drills were interior and off tackle running plays, not sweeps or tosses. I didn't notice any traps, but my attention was split between the east and west side of the field.

2) The vast majority of passing plays using the shotgun formation used split back formations, and not multiple wide receiver formations (I do not recall a single snap in the shotgun with a single back, by the way, although it's possible I missed a snap or two).

3) TE's were featured, although I think Baber caught more passes than Gonzo.

We may see some similarities, but I think anyone expecting to see a recreation of the Rams, for good or ill, are going to be sorely disappointed.

The defense, on the other hand, I just don't know at this point.

I'd have posted this sooner, but Roadrunner was down all weekend... :(