View Full Version : Seattle Times: Chiefs could be as bad as San Diego was last year...

05-12-2001, 07:29 PM
LOL. So much for the new coaching staff getting any respect. Same old story from an AFC West rival city, Chiefs being underestimated as usual. Seems cities we sweep get especially bitter.

Anyway, thought it was funny they had their predictions in and it's not even June 1 yet. Nice to see they have such faith in Hasselbeck. Nice to also see they didn't do their homework and have our 2000 record at 8-8. IMO, if Gun does not go 6-10, and if this team and this coaching staff is such an improvement from Gun's staff, there is no way we finish 6-10 unless we have devestating injuries. It's cool though. We were predicted to go 6-10 in '97 and we went 13-3, Vermiel was predicted to go 5-11 in his Super Bowl year, we'll see...


Raiders: 11-5
Seahawks: 10-6
Broncos: 9-7
Chargers: 8-8
Chiefs: 6-10

Kansas City Chiefs

2000 finish/record: Tied for third/8-8.

2001 projection: Fifth/6-10.

What's new: Coach Dick Vermeil and a new coaching staff including offensive coordinator Al Saunders (St. Louis) and defensive coordinator Greg Robinson (Denver); CB Taje Allen (St. Louis); QB Bubby Brister (Minnesota); CB Ray Crockett (Denver); QB Trent Green (St. Louis); RB Priest Holmes (Baltimore); WR Tony Horne (St. Louis); DE Rich Owens (Miami); P Dan Stryzinski (Atlanta); WR Chris Thomas (St. Louis); C Casey Wiegmann (Chicago).

What's missing: RB Kimble Anders, RB Donnell Bennett, TE Troy Drayton, LB Ron George, QB Elvis Grbac, C Tim Grunhard, CB James Hasty, WR Kevin Lockett, DT Chester McGlockton, QB Warren Moon, DT Ty Parten, P Todd Sauerbrun, G Dave Szott.

Drafted: 3a. DT Erick Downing (Syracuse); 3b. WR Marvin "Snoop" Minnis (Florida State); 4a. DE Monty Beisel (Kansas State); 4b. George Layne (Texas Christian); 5a. TE Billy Baber (Virginia); 5b. RB Derrick Blaylock (Stephen F. Austin); 6. G Alex Sulfsted (Miami, OH); 7a. DB Shaunard Harts (Boise State); 7b. DT Terdell Sands (Tenn.-Chattanooga).

Still need: Reserve help in the backfield and along the offensive line.

Summary: If the Chiefs aren't lucky, they could suffer a fate similar to San Diego last season. Green will have to win games by himself, because Kansas City still has a limited running game and the offensive line is suspect. The defense isn't good enough to keep opponents under 20 points and Vermeil will need time to turn the Kansas City offense into the one he had in St. Louis.

The Bad Guy
05-12-2001, 07:49 PM
You have to take it with a grain of salt Dawolf.

Look at what the Seahawks have done. They added two aging defensive vets who are mere shadows of who they once were.

They trade for a QB who has never started a regular season game.

And their best receiver right now is Darrell Jackson.

Yet this Seahags homer picks a 10-6 record.

That is comedy.

If he did any research, he would understand that our backfield isn't in question with the signing of Priest Holmes. And our offensive line is fine with Blackshear, Willis, Weiggman, Shields, Tait, Riley, Alford, Spears and Waters.

Our "suspect" offensive line gave up 28 sacks last year.

I guess he forgot we have weapons in the passing game to help out Trent. I guess he never heard of Tony Gonzalez, Derrick Alexander or Sylvester Morris.

He will know who they are after week 2.

05-12-2001, 10:05 PM
Listening to sports talk all day, reading what the media prints, I've found that the national and west coast media have absolutely no idea how horrendous the coaching in KC has been in the last 2 years.
I'm not on the VD bandwagon, but even I realize that this coaching staff will be a vast improvement over the stooges, and will, at the very least keep KC from falling as far as the Chargers of last season.

Chiefs Pantalones
05-12-2001, 10:12 PM

Am I the only one that thinks this is gonna be a good season?!


feeling alone here

05-12-2001, 10:18 PM
You're not alone.

There's a couple people that live in the same fantasy world that you live in. ;)

Chiefs Pantalones
05-12-2001, 10:22 PM
Sorry Milkman, but I can't help it, sometimes my friends say I'm too optimistic, but I do believe this year is gonna be a 10-6 or an 11-5 year. I expect good things from this staff and crop of players. The learning curve SHOULDN'T be too big, these players are professionals. The same with the coaching staff, they've won Super Bowls, I expect the same with this team...nothing less.

Chiefs Pantalones
05-12-2001, 10:26 PM
Is that asking too much? No, I don't think so, I pay good money to go watch the team WIN, not lose.

05-12-2001, 10:33 PM
Optimism can be a good thing, but it can lead to a lot of disappoitment as well. New coaching staff, professional players aside, there is a lot of questions on this team.
They may find the answers. But it's far to early to raise the level of expectation.
While you may want to see the team win, all that you pay for is the priviledge of watching a football game, and for the price you pay, you should expect to see maximum effort from your team.
Wins are not gaurenteed though.

Chiefs Pantalones
05-12-2001, 10:42 PM
I don't care about disappointment, Milkman. I'm not afraid of that. I understand though, that wins are not guaranteed, but this staff (thank God the stooges are gone) will put the best players on the field, unlike Gun and co., they loved the player so much, that even if he sucked, he'd still play! I liked Gun the person, but he was a terrible HC.

And as far as DV is concerned, the guy has been to 2 Super Bowls, and won one. High expectations? I think so. And I'm not the only one that expects great things from this team.

This team is not rebuilding, DV even said so. I heard that about 3 weeks ago, on Chan 9 Sports when they interviewed him. Sorry, I know you didn't mention anything about rebuilding, but alot of people seem to think this team is rebuilding, when its clear, by the transactions, and by DV, that this team is not rebuilding.

05-12-2001, 10:47 PM
Thats what they're hoping for because they know if we aren't that bad we will beat them twice this year again! LOL!

~Loves the underdog roll~

Chiefs Pantalones
05-12-2001, 10:51 PM
I like both roles, I like the underdog role because you can prove everyone wrong, and I like the favored role, because the expectations are high, and I like the pressure, as well as the challenge, to live up to those expectations.

05-12-2001, 11:03 PM
Not plane or bird nor even frog just little oh me Underdog! If the season was measured by FA acquisition and draft picks the Redskins would be the defending Superbowl Champions. Im not making any predictions but I like our chances. At this point I don't think anybody has a lock!

~Knows why they play the games~

05-12-2001, 11:51 PM
Dudes, we're going 16-0 and we will shut out half our opponents. :)

Like I said before, I expect wild card contention this year, division contention next year, Super Bowl contention year 3, and if they want to move that timetable up, I have no problem with that...

05-13-2001, 01:55 AM
Can I borrow a crystal ball off one of you guys?

I most certainly hope the best for the Chiefs but this has simply got to be one of the toughest seasons to evaluate how they will perform.

They have a new head coach, new offensive coordinator, new defensive coordinator, new special teams coach, new quarterback, new running back, new philosophies all around and the same defense that pretty much sucked last year.

And before its mentioned, I know the defense sucking had a lot to do with soft-zone Kurt.

If anybody can predict with any precision what will hit the field this season you have full access to my bank account to bet as you see fit in Vegas this year.

Donít get me wrong, Iím not painting a picture of doom and gloom but I firmly believe there is no way possible to prophesize what kind of season the Chiefs will have.

This may be one of the most intriguing seasons in a long time, but predictable -- no way.

Donít confuse optimism with foresight; men have gone bankrupt doing that.

05-13-2001, 07:08 AM
It's to bad Vegas doesn't give odds on which team will have the most improved coaching. We could all walk away rich men.

05-13-2001, 07:12 AM
No argument there Milkman.

05-13-2001, 09:23 AM
It is reasonable to assume we would have gone 10-6 or 11-5 last year with competent coaching. The receiving corp is at least as good as last year when we were 5th in the league in yards/passing attempt. Spears, or any o-lineman with more athletic ability than a tree stump, would be an upgrade over Blackshear. We lose more in leadership from Grunhard's retirement than ability and dependability. Shields now has to earn his check in the lockerroom as well as the playing field. I think he'll do both well. Green, assuming he plays as much, is an upgrade over Grbac at starting qb. Brister is younger and, from mini-camp reports, better than Moon. Holmes, in addition to TRich, in our new two back, split back offense gives us two rb's with high per touch averages, and a willingness and ability to block, in the same backfield. This should dramatically improve one of the worst run offenses in the league, both in yards per game, 25th, and yards per rushing attempt, 22nd. If we can dramatically improve our run offense with a two back, split back scheme, which forces defenses to defend both of our running backs instead of just the feature back, while maintaining our 5th ranked yards/attempt pass offense, we should be able to possess the ball and score early touchdowns a lot better than we did last year. That's the best way to protect our suspect defense and give them an opportunity to play with a lead. Last year we only scored 50 points in the first quarter. I expect much better this year. If we increase our yards/rush attempt rank to top 10 without losing our top 5 rank in yards/pass attempt average (not unreasonable), get better special teams play (not unreasonable), and improved tackling and fewer penalties on defense (not unreasonable), it's not unreasonable to expect a 10-6 or 11-5 record.