PDA

View Full Version : If Vermeil and Saunders were still here:


kc1977
09-21-2007, 07:04 PM
Do you really think we'd continue on the offensive tear we were on 2002-2005?

1. Roaf would have still retired.
2. Shields would have still retired.
3. Larry would have still held out.
4. Kennison would still have been our #1 WR - Vermeil/Saunders never addressed this while they were here - what makes you think they would have the last 2 years? Perhaps they still draft Bowe - but likely they would have drafted defense because Vermy could never get the defense fixed and they likely would still be trying to patch this up.
5. Trent would likely still be here. Would we even have drafted Croyle? Perhaps - or perhaps another draft pick is our so called QB of the future.
6. The one thing I believe may have been different is that I believe we likely would have kept T-Rich. While certainly an upgrade over Kris Wilson/Boomer, he's not the missing link.

So, we'd have basically the same team now, only with Trent as QB (and certainly not Brodie Croyle, or some other so-called QBOTF). Look at Trent with the Dolphins - he's not taking anyone anywhere anymore. We'd still be a team with a veteran offense that isn't going anywhere led by a veteran QB with no competent succession plan.

For those of you who think Herm is the one that ruined this offense - convince me that it wasn't Vermiel who really left this team on the verge of an offensive breakdown (and perhaps even he left because he saw this coming).

Count Alex's Losses
09-21-2007, 07:05 PM
I honestly think we'd be worse. The defense wouldn't be close to fixed.

KCChiefsMan
09-21-2007, 07:05 PM
well the offense couldn't be worse

kc1977
09-21-2007, 07:07 PM
Exactly - We'd still be watching Eric Hicks for the Chiefs and Donnie Edwards who knows where.

Frazod
09-21-2007, 07:35 PM
Dick would have resigned Black to a $50,000,000 contract because he's the best offensive lineman *sniffle* that he's ever seen. :shake:

kc1977
09-21-2007, 07:55 PM
So, why does everyone think it was Herm who ruined this offense. I think Vermy left the team, perhaps intentionally to further his "legacy", in a state that this was inevitable.

Ari Chi3fs
09-21-2007, 07:56 PM
8Dick would have resigned Black to a $50,000,000 contract because he's the best offensive lineman *sniffle* that he's ever seen. :shake:

ROFL *sniffle*

Mr. Laz
09-21-2007, 08:23 PM
the offense would be much better

the defense would be significantly worse

HemiEd
09-21-2007, 08:27 PM
Exactly - We'd still be watching Eric Hicks for the Chiefs and Donnie Edwards who knows where.
I was going to say Willie Roaf would still be here, but the thought of Hicks still being here would offset it. What a sickening thought, now if only Bell would get moved.

HemiEd
09-21-2007, 08:31 PM
So, why does everyone think it was Herm who ruined this offense. I think Vermy left the team, perhaps intentionally to further his "legacy", in a state that this was inevitable.

Your comments about the team being left bare of WRs, is kind of unfair. If you will remember, they were not drafting high enough to pick up any top WRs in those years. You sure as hell weren't going to pass on, LJ or DJ for any of the WRs that were available. They took a couple later round shots, remember Crap? Samie.

Easy 6
09-21-2007, 08:33 PM
You make some outstanding points 77.

Count Alex's Losses
09-21-2007, 08:35 PM
Why is Vermeil exonerated for crappy draft picks?

If he knew his shit we'd have drafted Bernard Berrian instead of Kris ****ing Wilson in '04. He would be the IDEAL replacement for Kennison. He also took Parker over Jerrico Cotchery.

kc1977
09-21-2007, 08:38 PM
You comments about the team being left bare of WRs, is kind of unfair. If you will remember, they were not drafting high enough to pick up any top WRs in those years. You sure as hell weren't going to pass on, LJ or DJ for any of the WRs that were available. They took a couple later round shots, remember Crap? Samie.

I agree with you - but that's my point. I'm not saying they should have taken WRs over LJ or DJ. Or, over Tamba last year. I'm simply saying, that if Vermeil was still around, it is hard to see how this offense would be much better than it is now. Vermeil left at the right time - and he knew it.

I just think people are all unfair to think that Herm ruined this offense. If Vermeil was still around, we'd be marginally better, mainly because we would still be QB'd by Trent, but he is certainly showing signs of decline. We'd be marginally better, with either no Croyle at all, or no chance that we'd play the young guy once we fell to 1-3 or 1-4. If we even had a prospective QBOTF at all.

Vermeil left an aging offense with no capable players to step in where others left and/or declined.

Easy 6
09-21-2007, 08:41 PM
Why is Vermeil exonerated for crappy draft picks?

If he knew his shit we'd have drafted Bernard Berrian instead of Kris ****ing Wilson in '04. He would be the IDEAL replacement for Kennison. He also took Parker over Jerrico Cotchery.

I cant see that he did exonerate DV.

As for Berrian & Cotchery, its easy in hindsight to say "what about these guys"...but their first 2 or 3 years were pathetic, this whole board would have been calling for their summary executions.

kc1977
09-21-2007, 08:42 PM
Why is Vermeil exonerated for crappy draft picks?

If he knew his shit we'd have drafted Bernard Berrian instead of Kris ****ing Wilson in '04. He would be the IDEAL replacement for Kennison. He also took Parker over Jerrico Cotchery.

Ha! Reminds me of my fantasy draft this year, taking Ahman Green and Brandon Jackson 2 picks ahead of Randy Moss.

Buehler445
09-21-2007, 08:42 PM
I agree with you - but that's my point. I'm not saying they should have taken WRs over LJ or DJ. Or, over Tamba last year. I'm simply saying, that if Vermeil was still around, it is hard to see how this offense would be much better than it is now. Vermeil left at the right time - and he knew it.

I just think people are all unfair to think that Herm ruined this offense. If Vermeil was still around, we'd be marginally better, mainly because we would still be QB'd by Trent, but he is certainly showing signs of decline. We'd be marginally better, with either no Croyle at all, or no chance that we'd play the young guy once we fell to 1-3 or 1-4. If we even had a prospective QBOTF at all.

Vermeil left an aging offense with no capable players to step in where others left and/or declined.

I agree with the personnel aspect of your post, but I have to say the playcalling would be better I have to think.

Easy 6
09-21-2007, 08:42 PM
Vermeil left an aging offense with no capable players to step in where others left and/or declined.

QFT.

Mr. Laz
09-21-2007, 08:42 PM
I just think people are all unfair to think that Herm ruined this offense.
have you seen the POS offense we are running ... please.

Herm is still trying to run martyball ..... you whining about vermeil has nothing to do it.


Herm grabbed the offense by the balls and then squeezed until there was nothing left but pulp.

Count Alex's Losses
09-21-2007, 08:42 PM
I cant see that he did exonerate DV.


He sure did. He said blaming DV for the lack of WR was unfair. It's not unfair at all. It's totally fair. He blew draft picks. **** Vermeil.

Count Alex's Losses
09-21-2007, 08:43 PM
Ha! Reminds me of my fantasy draft this year, taking Ahman Green and Brandon Jackson 2 picks ahead of Randy Moss.

I took Randy Moss. :D

kc1977
09-21-2007, 08:46 PM
have you seen the POS offense we are running ... please.

Herm is still trying to run martyball ..... you whining about vermeil has nothing to do it.


Herm grabbed the offense by the balls and then squeezed until there was nothing left but pulp.

You're saying that give this offense to Vermeil/Saunders and give them back precious Trent, that they'd put out more than a marginally better offense than this?

In my opinion, I don't think so.

To top it off, there would be no hopes of putting in any young guy in to see if we might have QBOTF hope. At least if we fall out of contention this year, we can at least evaluate what we have with Croyle. I'm guessing we'll tell him good-bye, but at least we'll know. That is, if we don't get this turned around somehow in the next week or two.

kc1977
09-21-2007, 08:47 PM
I took Randy Moss. :D

I wanted to - I took L.T. #1, T.O. and Reggie Wayne #24 and 24, and then Ahman and Brandon Jackson. I wanted to take Moss, but he had not even practiced yet and I just couldn't pull the trigger, so I took a washed up and a never will be RB. Smart.

kc1977
09-21-2007, 08:49 PM
I agree with the personnel aspect of your post, but I have to say the playcalling would be better I have to think.

You're right - playcalling would have been better, no doubt, but Vermeil/Saunders had a habit of calling some wacky plays as well. I'm not sure that we'd still be in the position to pull off some of those plays with our offensive line the way it is. It was the athleticism and speed of the OL that allowed a lot of that to work.

HemiEd
09-21-2007, 08:52 PM
I agree with you - but that's my point. I'm not saying they should have taken WRs over LJ or DJ. Or, over Tamba last year. I'm simply saying, that if Vermeil was still around, it is hard to see how this offense would be much better than it is now. Vermeil left at the right time - and he knew it.

I just think people are all unfair to think that Herm ruined this offense. If Vermeil was still around, we'd be marginally better, mainly because we would still be QB'd by Trent, but he is certainly showing signs of decline. We'd be marginally better, with either no Croyle at all, or no chance that we'd play the young guy once we fell to 1-3 or 1-4. If we even had a prospective QBOTF at all.

Vermeil left an aging offense with no capable players to step in where others left and/or declined.

I blame part of the lack of offensive talent restocking issue, on the failures on Defense.
We were so ****ed and consistently missing on defensive draft choices, that the bulk of assets had to continually used on defense. IMO, we are still paying for those failures. Who was recommending those choices? Could Dick Vermeil's biggest mistake be that he trusted his defensive coaches too much? He certainly made some mistakes, no question.

kc1977
09-21-2007, 08:59 PM
I blame part of the lack of offensive talent restocking issue, on the failures on Defense.
We were so ****ed and consistently missing on defensive draft choices, that the bulk of assets had to continually used on defense. IMO, we are still paying for those failures. Who was recommending those choices? Could Dick Vermeil's biggest mistake be that he trusted his defensive coaches too much? He certainly made some mistakes, no question.

No doubt this is true. I don't know that it was that he trusted the defensive coaches too much, but rather neglected the defense too much.

I could debate about the Vermeil era all day. But my point really is that looking at what Vermeil left, it is hard to all out blame Herm Edwards for the state of the offense. If I look at it assuming Vermeil was still here, do I see this offense in much better shape, both now and in the future, and the answer is, I don't really think so. Maybe they get a few offensive free agents, or draft a little different. But, unless the OL somehow gets fixed and with the same type of linemen that Vermeil had in Roaf and Shields, and a younger Waters and Weigman, I don't see how he'd be coming close to replicating the previous years.

Not to mention the fact that I don't think Donnie would have came back and several other defensive upgrades could be questioned. No Ty Law certainly.

HemiEd
09-21-2007, 08:59 PM
I cant see that he did exonerate DV.

As for Berrian & Cotchery, its easy in hindsight to say "what about these guys"...but their first 2 or 3 years were pathetic, this whole board would have been calling for their summary executions.

Exactly!

HemiEd
09-21-2007, 09:03 PM
No doubt this is true. I don't know that it was that he trusted the defensive coaches too much, but rather neglected the defense too much.

I could debate about the Vermeil era all day. But my point really is that looking at what Vermeil left, it is hard to all out blame Herm Edwards for the state of the offense. If I look at it assuming Vermeil was still here, do I see this offense in much better shape, both now and in the future, and the answer is, I don't really think so. Maybe they get a few offensive free agents, or draft a little different. But, unless the OL somehow gets fixed and with the same type of linemen that Vermeil had in Roaf and Shields, and a younger Waters and Weigman, I don't see how he'd be coming close to replicating the previous years.

Not to mention the fact that I don't think Donnie would have came back and several other defensive upgrades could be questioned. No Ty Law certainly.

Well I blame Herm for most of it. I have said it numerous times, the offense was too much for him to understand, plus it was bigger than him.
****, he has even managed to **** up one of his greatest offensive successe stories from last year. Kris Wilson, what has happened to him this year?

Count Alex's Losses
09-21-2007, 09:09 PM
****, he has even managed to **** up one of his greatest offensive successe stories from last year. Kris Wilson, what has happened to him this year?

That is quite a reach. Do you know how many catches Wilson has?

I've explained this to you NUMEROUS times, but last year we did NOT have the personnel to run the offense as it had been run. Herm made the change because it was necessary.

Now, what's going on this year is a whole 'nother ball of wax...if we come out Sunday and pound sand with LJ, I'm gonna be right there with you on the "HERM THE DESTROYER OF OFFENSE" bandwagon.

Mr. Laz
09-21-2007, 09:30 PM
You're saying that give this offense to Vermeil/Saunders and give them back precious Trent, that they'd put out more than a marginally better offense than this?

In my opinion, I don't think so.

To top it off, there would be no hopes of putting in any young guy in to see if we might have QBOTF hope. At least if we fall out of contention this year, we can at least evaluate what we have with Croyle. I'm guessing we'll tell him good-bye, but at least we'll know. That is, if we don't get this turned around somehow in the next week or two.
doesn't matter what Vermeil would of done

it took Vermeil/saunders 1 offseason and 1/2 regular season to get a top ranked offense going.

it took the same about of time for the offense to turn to crap under Herm.


if Vermeil left such an "empty cupboard" then why didn't Herm rebuild the offense the way Vermeil did when he first got here?

Dr. Facebook Fever
09-21-2007, 09:41 PM
I honestly think we'd be worse. The defense wouldn't be close to fixed.
You keep saying things I agree with lately. Stop it.

jaa1025
09-21-2007, 09:54 PM
Do you really think we'd continue on the offensive tear we were on 2002-2005?

1. Roaf would have still retired.
2. Shields would have still retired.
3. Larry would have still held out.
4. Kennison would still have been our #1 WR - Vermeil/Saunders never addressed this while they were here - what makes you think they would have the last 2 years? Perhaps they still draft Bowe - but likely they would have drafted defense because Vermy could never get the defense fixed and they likely would still be trying to patch this up.
5. Trent would likely still be here. Would we even have drafted Croyle? Perhaps - or perhaps another draft pick is our so called QB of the future.
6. The one thing I believe may have been different is that I believe we likely would have kept T-Rich. While certainly an upgrade over Kris Wilson/Boomer, he's not the missing link.

So, we'd have basically the same team now, only with Trent as QB (and certainly not Brodie Croyle, or some other so-called QBOTF). Look at Trent with the Dolphins - he's not taking anyone anywhere anymore. We'd still be a team with a veteran offense that isn't going anywhere led by a veteran QB with no competent succession plan.

For those of you who think Herm is the one that ruined this offense - convince me that it wasn't Vermiel who really left this team on the verge of an offensive breakdown (and perhaps even he left because he saw this coming).

Roaf and Shields probably would have still retired, but Shields loss doesn't hurt anything like the loss of Roafs. Shields wasn't the player he was even a couple years ago, and I've been impressed with the limited and albeit injured McIntosh.

Trent would still be here, but he would be an upgrade to Huard and he could definitely get Croyle better prepared than Huard or our so called QB coach/assist HC.

Larry might have still held out, but he likely would have been traded. Bennett and Holmes would splitting carries.

Kennison would still be #1 regardless, and rightfully so. Who knows if they would have drafted Bowe...imo, if they would have drafted WR...they would have drafted Meachem instead.

T-Rich would definitely still be here...and that helps more than you know it, especially with a week Oline.

The defense would probably been better, but probably not as good as they are now.

The question really is...if Saunders would have been named HC instead of Herman Edwards, where would we be today? He was my pick to take over.

penchief
09-21-2007, 10:12 PM
Dang good thread starter. Not bad at all. I agree with almost everything you say.

I don't think we would have drafted Croyle. And even if we would have drafted defense we would have drafted projects who would missed like every other time.

We are far better off with Edwards, imo, if for no other reason than that he can evaluate talent and he can coach it up. Personally, I like the direction the team is taking. I like defense. I like it.

I think we're going to be okay.

B_Ambuehl
09-21-2007, 10:16 PM
Who knows where we'd be but at least the future would look brighter. Think of it this way: Let's say Herm quit tomorrow and another NFL team hired him as head coach. Would you have any fear of that team as far as ever threatening to be a superbowl contender? What would you tell the fans of that team?

Now say DV came out of retirement and was named as head coach of some team. He's taken 2 out of the 3 teams he's coached to the superbowl and even the one that didn't he took to the best overall regular season record in the NFL.

With Herm you're never gonna get anywhere. He's content just to get into the playoffs and kick field goals. With DV at least he's gonna try to win a superbowl and most likely on any given day you're gonna be capable of beating anyone.

jjjayb
09-21-2007, 10:32 PM
Who knows where we'd be but at least the future would look brighter. Think of it this way: Let's say Herm quit tomorrow and another NFL team hired him as head coach. Would you have any fear of that team as far as ever threatening to be a superbowl contender? What would you tell the fans of that team?

Now say DV came out of retirement and was named as head coach of some team. He's taken 2 out of the 3 teams he's coached to the superbowl and even the one that didn't he took to the best overall regular season record in the NFL.

With Herm you're never gonna get anywhere. He's content just to get into the playoffs and kick field goals. With DV at least he's gonna try to win a superbowl and most likely on any given day you're gonna be capable of beating anyone.

:clap:

Smed1065
09-21-2007, 10:47 PM
I liked DV but felt his time had passed. He was way the grandfathered in type and I believe time had taken its toll.
The reason I say this is because the players did not worry about their jobs if they were a starter. They seemed to expect a job regardless of performance.

(based upon) My dad was a hard nose, tough love type of person for the first 60 years of his life. Now in his elder years, he is very a very different type person towards his family, friends and acquaintances. The first time he gave me a hug instead of shaking hands, I about shat.

I know I do not have the popular opinion here but I still think it takes more than one year to evaluate a HC, especially with an aging team upon arrival. IMO.

I feel HE is getting a lot of residual effects from all the frustrating seasons adding up for Chiefs fans.

RustShack
09-22-2007, 12:40 AM
We would still have Green and Hall, Roaf and Shields could have stuck around another year or two each. Ryan Sims would probably be here, none of our last year years draft picks, we would have a great offense but a horrible defense.

SBK
09-22-2007, 01:05 AM
Dang good thread starter. Not bad at all. I agree with almost everything you say.

I don't think we would have drafted Croyle. And even if we would have drafted defense we would have drafted projects who would missed like every other time.

We are far better off with Edwards, imo, if for no other reason than that he can evaluate talent and he can coach it up. Personally, I like the direction the team is taking. I like defense. I like it.

I think we're going to be okay.

They're handing out nuthooks for people that think we're okay now you know.

RedThat
09-22-2007, 02:27 AM
Who knows where we'd be but at least the future would look brighter. Think of it this way: Let's say Herm quit tomorrow and another NFL team hired him as head coach. Would you have any fear of that team as far as ever threatening to be a superbowl contender? What would you tell the fans of that team?

Now say DV came out of retirement and was named as head coach of some team. He's taken 2 out of the 3 teams he's coached to the superbowl and even the one that didn't he took to the best overall regular season record in the NFL.

With Herm you're never gonna get anywhere. He's content just to get into the playoffs and kick field goals. With DV at least he's gonna try to win a superbowl and most likely on any given day you're gonna be capable of beating anyone.

DV had a vision of what he wanted to do with this team. I give him that. This organization had a better sense of direction when he was here.

his goal obviously was to build a SB contender. The only problem was, he tried to much to win with offense and offense only. Because he knew nothing about defense.

As a consequence the Chiefs were a 1 dimensional team. And defense killed us. I really think if he brought a real defensive mind to help him, the Chiefs would be right up there with the Pats and Colts.

And no that does not include Gunther or Robinson.

Smed1065
09-22-2007, 02:31 AM
GR was the killer in many ways. IMO.

RedThat
09-22-2007, 02:34 AM
GR was the killer in many ways. IMO.

He was. But the personnel on defense was awful.

Smed1065
09-22-2007, 02:37 AM
He was. But the personnel on defense was awful.

I agree but it was also his background that killed me.

kc1977
09-22-2007, 11:17 AM
With Herm you're never gonna get anywhere. He's content just to get into the playoffs and kick field goals. With DV at least he's gonna try to win a superbowl and most likely on any given day you're gonna be capable of beating anyone.

A Super Bowl would have been icing on the cake for Vermeil, but Vermy was far more interested in "proving" that he was the architect for the '99 Rams than Mike Martz was. That's why he built the offense and neglected the defense. That's why it was Vermy who was so content at 10-6 and no playoffs in 2005. That's why Vermy left when the offense was on the verge of the breakdown we are now seeing.

Saulbadguy
09-22-2007, 12:08 PM
Priest would be the starter.

chiefsfan1963
09-22-2007, 03:11 PM
DV would have gone the distance here if he didn't have so many busts for draft choices especially on D. He had to rely on too many free agent vets to make up for this. That was the only difference. He was a great HC and it was nice seeing us getting in the paint every time the O came on the field.

Until our entire front office is let go Chief's will not be able to turn the corner. Come on Clark do the Right Thing!

greg63
09-22-2007, 03:13 PM
If Vermeil and Saunders were still here:

We'd all still be griping about how much our defense sucks.

penchief
09-23-2007, 05:42 AM
We'd all still be griping about how much our defense sucks.

To me, the most humiliating thing in football is to have the kind of inept defense we had under Vermeil. We were everybody's bitches. The emberrassment I felt for the team just took the fun right out of being a fan. They had no heart. With Herman Edwards, at least I get the feeling that the players have heart.

Otter
09-23-2007, 06:13 AM
This is almost as meaningless as the "what if" threads. We have no idea what the team would be like if Vermiel were still here. He basically transformed the team in two years.

I'm not saying for better or worse but there's a very good chance a Vermiel team wouldn't mirror what we have today.

Otter
09-23-2007, 06:16 AM
To me, the most humiliating thing in football is to have the kind of inept defense we had under Vermeil. We were everybody's bitches. The emberrassment I felt for the team just took the fun right out of being a fan. They had no heart. With Herman Edwards, at least I get the feeling that the players have heart.

I don't get that feeling.

Vermiel's team was fun to watch. I really looked forward to football on Sundays, that offense was explosive and yes, sadly, the defense sucked. I'm pretty sure there are greater reasons why this team can't find balance than head coach however.

Edwards team reminds me of... olive drab.

KCChiefsMan
09-23-2007, 08:58 AM
we are just good enough......to be bad.

does that make any sense?

chiefsfan1963
09-23-2007, 12:32 PM
To me, the most humiliating thing in football is to have the kind of inept defense we had under Vermeil. We were everybody's bitches. The emberrassment I felt for the team just took the fun right out of being a fan. They had no heart. With Herman Edwards, at least I get the feeling that the players have heart.


What a joke the biggest embarrassment was last year's playoff loss!
One of the worst lopsided losses in NFL history! Last time I checked DV was not the HC. Get a freakin clue. Herm is not in the same league as DV.

MichaelH
09-23-2007, 12:34 PM
If Dickie and Saunders were still here, the defense would be much worse but a first down wouldn't be as rare as a Bigfoot siting.

TEX
09-23-2007, 01:55 PM
If DV and AS were still here NO WAY IN HELL the Chiefds would be THIS BAD. The offense would be better and the defense would be worse than it is now, but we would NOT be the WORST TEAM IN THE LEAGUE like we are now. I don't know what that would translate to later on down the road, but we wouldn't be this bad now... :shake:

But...but...wait...No need to panic...It's ONLY PRSEASON...Remember that one? ROFL

TEX
09-23-2007, 01:57 PM
we are just good enough......to be bad.

does that make any sense?

Or we're just bad enough to $UCK!