View Full Version : CNNSI: Chiefs are one of 4 teams who could be this year's Saints...

06-12-2001, 05:43 PM
Just figured I'd post this because it's football...


Who'll be this year's Saints?

When Jim Haslett and Randy Mueller took over in New Orleans last year, they used free agency to change the fortunes of the club overnight. Many criticized the Saints' strategy at the time, saying they were merely adding a bunch of average players to an already-average team. But Jeff Blake, Joe Horn and Norman Hand were among 13 free agents who helped lead New Orleans to the playoffs. Not all 13 newcomers panned out but more good than bad occurred.

I spent most of the last week talking to executives around the league about which teams have the best shot of success following the Saints' model this year.

Carolina has signed 10 free agents, virtually rebuilding its line with center Jeff Mitchell, guard Kevin Donnalley and tackle Todd Steussie. The recent addition of running back Richard Huntley is another good move. But as one personnel man in their division said to me, "The Panthers' QB situation isn't good enough to make them this year's New Orleans."

San Diego lost six games last year by less than a touchdown. One AFC West executive told me that new GM John Butler's first draft and the acquisition of Doug Flutie could spell trouble for everyone in that division.

Dick Vermeil and 11 new players have landed in Kansas City. With Trent Green, Priest Holmes and Tony Horne adding some spice to the offense, the Chiefs could be back on track.

But New England gets the nod from executives as the team with the best chance this fall. The Patriots spent little money to sign 13 free agents. Mike Compton and Joe Panos will upgrade the offensive line, while Mike Vrabel and Larry Izzo will add depth and contribute on special teams. Antowain Smith gives them a sorely missed power back. And they added four new receiving targets for Drew Bledsoe. As one GM said to me, "The Patriots have come the closest to putting together a Saints offseason, as long as Terry Glenn doesn't distract them."

I'm not sure the Pats will be saintly in 2001, but it will be fun to watch them and the other three teams go through the season with their personnel overhauls.

06-12-2001, 05:51 PM
The biggest difference between the 4 teams mentioned is that the Chiefs didn't overhaul the o-line, we just tweaked it a little(BTW, who's taking Blackshears place?). Of course, the only one of those teams without a new QB is New England, and all 4 will have new RB's.

06-12-2001, 06:00 PM
There's a couple of guys competeing for that spot, including Spears and Willis.

Am I the only person that thinks that Bledsoe is one the most overrated QB the NFL has ever seen.
When the Pats went to the SB, they went there on the strength of defense and the running of Curtis Martin. Bledsoe's contribution was marginal in the playoffs.
IMO, the guy is only a step above Grbac.

California Injun
06-12-2001, 07:17 PM
Is it just me or does the title of this thread mark the lowpoint for this team.

Comparisons to the Saints in years past was like comparing your favorite NBA team to the Clippers.

Now being compared to the Saints is a compliment?

Oh the humanity!!!!:(

Mile High Mania
06-12-2001, 08:16 PM
Cal... I was going to say the same thing.

Baby Lee
06-12-2001, 08:49 PM
Comparisons to the Saints in years past was like comparing your favorite NBA team to the Clippers.

A year ago, one could have said the same thing about being compared to the Rams [or the Ravens or the Giants]. Is anyone seriously suggesting that the 2000 Saints were not a quality team?

06-12-2001, 08:54 PM
I would not exactly call it a lowpoint. The topic is this years Saints in regards to "CINDERELLA" or 180 degree turnaround team last season. The Saints really did have a well deserved season last year and I personally would love to see the Chiefs have the same type of success this year.

If we can have the Saints season last year this year, I would consider the Vermiel hiring an "INSTANT" success!

Not being a smart a$$ just being honest :cool:

California Injun
06-12-2001, 11:12 PM

I know the gist of this thread. I'm responding historically to the Aint's comparisons.

It just doesn't look right.

06-12-2001, 11:34 PM
I'm sure the same could have been said for Tampa Bay not too long ago.

Heck, I still remember the days when we just were coming out of the doldrums. I got excited in 1990 when OJ Simpson was the only NBC Studio analyst who gave the Chiefs any love and picked us as his dark horse team to make the playoffs.

A lot has transpired since then... :) :( :eek:

06-13-2001, 07:10 AM
I really think this is right on...

The Chiefs have a great chance to win 10 games and make the playoffs...they could have done it last year if it wasn't for the Stooges...

06-13-2001, 08:05 AM
I tell you, thinking back on last year really makes you want to weep.

It was highly frustrating to listen to the games, wondering when the coaching staff would scrape up enough money to buy a clue. Too many of the games slipped away from us and I lay the blame for that on the coaches. The Tennessee game epitomized the entire season...we play hard pressure defense all game, we knock out the starting quarterback, and as soon as his back-up comes in, a slow, relatively non-mobile quarterback, we drop back into a soft zone prevent defense and play right into Tomzack's strenghts.:mad:

Then, against the Raiders, <b>TWICE</b>, knowing that Gannon probably can't throw the ball long against us more than twice without hurting his arm, we lay back and let him pick us apart with 4-7 yard passes. What the hell is up with that? We scored 30+ points that one game, that should be <b>MORE</b> than enough to win a professional football game, but again our defense played directly into Gannon's strengths.:mad:

I don't know about winning more games, but firing Gunther and the Stooges certainly helpled my blood pressure.:D

06-13-2001, 08:16 AM
that's exactly what I mean...

Mile High Mania
06-13-2001, 08:23 AM
Anything 'could' happen and I think the Chiefs can reach the 9 win mark, but the division will beat the hell out of other this year. The division winner may win only 9 or 10 games, but that's only due to the increased quality of the teams in my eyes.

It could be tough to squeeze out a wildcard from the West, unless teams like SD and Sea lay down and fall flat. SD could sneak up on Oak or Denver and catch them sleeping, if they're not careful.

I think Oak and Denver are the frontrunners, but KC and Sea could cause some trouble and compete for the division title until the very end.

I'm really expecting a slobberknocker type of fight in the AFC West, and if the division winner still only wins 9 or 10 games... I think that team will be ready for the brutality of the playoffs and make a serious run to the AFC Title game.

I think the AFC Title game will feature one of the following teams: Baltimore, Oakland, Denver or Tenn. Sure, almost everyone is picking those 4 teams, but that's what I think.

06-13-2001, 08:28 AM

I think Denver is the wildcard. If they gel, they cruise...if they don't, they join the pack. I think Oakland comes down to Earth this year, and the other 3 teams are dramatically improved.

I could realistically see all 5 teams separated by 3 or 4 games with no records worse than 7-9.

06-13-2001, 08:34 AM
There are a lot of unknowns this year wich makes it one of the hardest in recent memory to try and predict. Green being the biggest unknown at this point. We certainly COULD have a cinderella season though. The best thing about watching this year is going to be not having to watch us throw for 2 yards on 3rd and 7 anymore. That alone is encourageing. :D

Lightning Rod
06-13-2001, 10:21 AM
Iíve been saying this for years and eventually I am going to be right. S.D canít continue to play this incompetently for ever. They are a team of average talent. Should they play with average competency they should win 6-8 games. This translates to 3 or 4 victories in the division. 4 SD victories in the west would truly muddy the waters.