PDA

View Full Version : Gambling Robinson: Avoid Being Cornered


ThaChop
07-16-2001, 11:19 AM
New commentary at....

http://KCChopper.homestead.com/KCChopper.html

Take care!

ThaChop

KCTitus
07-16-2001, 11:28 AM
another proctor diatribe...gee thanks.

KCJohnny
07-16-2001, 12:09 PM
Guys,
This column was designed to be Whitlockesque in its deliberate appeal to the opposite opinion.

I hope Robinson fields the NFL's best defense this fall, really.

KCJ
Idolatrous stat worshiper

nickman
07-16-2001, 02:16 PM
Sorry it fails....

Clint in Wichita
07-16-2001, 03:02 PM
KCJ,

McGlockton being gone improves the defense. Any DT can amass 30 tackles and 3 or 4 sacks as a starter.

Damn, Hobgood-Chittick's best season nearly matched Glock's best as a Chief.

The only real loss was Hasty, and he was apparently a malcontent off the field.

KCJohnny
07-16-2001, 06:57 PM
Glock actually led the Chiefs in the most important category for a DT, which is QB pressures (now an official NFL stat). This created the opportunities for the DEs (mainly Clemons and Hicks). KC actually finished 2nd in the AFC in sacks (51) and that will not be easy to repeat without Glock. I admit, he jumped offsides too often, but that was because of his tenacity and competiveness, the opposite of what many KC fans thought of him being.

I am not saying that the '01 Chiefs defense will be bad. In fact, as long as the Chiefs have a 10-14 point lead, we may have the best D in the AFC. And with the O geared the way it is, that is a reasonable prospect IMO.

KCJ
World famous columnist:D

Chiefs Pantalones
07-16-2001, 07:29 PM
"tenacity and competiveness"


More like, stupidity and stubborness, IMO.


Watch the ball Chester!!!:D

CG

never jumped offsides in a game...well, I'm an ex QB so...:p

kcred
07-17-2001, 05:27 AM
Let me preface this with, I am glad Glock is gone. However, the one thing he did, other than jump offside, was command double team blocking, which freed up our ends. I hope one of our oft injured vets, Williams or Browning, will command that same amount of blocking. All of his other negatives, especially attitude, offset his one positive.

KCJohnny
07-17-2001, 05:38 AM
How bout the Chiefs' Cornerbacks?
KCJ
Hoping raw talent emerges to cover for coaching defecit

MrBlond
07-17-2001, 07:45 AM
"Greg Robinson hired ex-Rams defensive coordinator Peter Guinta to coach the secondary, which is a little like hiring Bill Clinton as an ethics advisor. "

Some snipets from KCChiefs.com

"Giunta's unit led the league in rush defense in '99, allowing just 74.3 yards per game, while ranking sixth in total defense by permitting a mere 293.6 yards per contest.

"The Rams '99 defense led the NFC with 29 interceptions, a figure which ranked second in the NFL behind only Seattle (30)."

"St. Louis was also opportunistic, returning nine takeaways (seven INTs and two fumbles) for touchdowns in '99. Those turnovers were due in large part to a Rams pass rush which racked up 57.0 sacks, a figure which tied Jacksonville for the league lead."

"During his first season as the Rams defensive coordinator in '98, St. Louis ranked third in the NFL in passing defense, allowing 176.9 yards per game. With Giunta serving as defensive backs coach in '97 the Rams snared 25 INTs, a figure toped only by the Giants (27)."

"Giunta spent two seasons as the defensive backs coach for the N.Y. Jets from '95-96. In his initial campaign with that club, the Jets defense led the league in pass defense (171.3 ypg)."

He sound qualified to coach DB's.(IMO)

I also like this quote:
"...flawed soft-zone implemented in '00 under the influence of then CBs coach Willie Shaw."

I distinctly remember KCJohnny lauding the ability of Willie Shaw last year. I hope he is as wrong about Guinta and the rest of the coaching staff as he was last year.

KCJohnny
07-17-2001, 12:13 PM
"Giunta's unit led the league in rush defense in '99, allowing just 74.3 yards per game, while ranking sixth in total defense by permitting a mere 293.6 yards per contest."

Yes!
The Rams played the NFL's weakest schedule that year, set a record for scoring, and was out in front by 2 TDs early in nearly every game, taking away the opponents' option to run the ball and forcing the pass.

"The Rams '99 defense led the NFC with 29 interceptions, a figure which ranked second in the NFL behind only Seattle (30)."

Again, teams were passing like crazy to try and make up the point deficits. 29 INTs is still an outstanding accomplishment, however.

And how about 2000? Gunita was struggling so badly that Martz rehired Bud Carson to come in and stop the hemmoraging. The Rams averaged allowing 29.4 ppg, dead last in the league, including 255 ypg passing defense. Pair that with Robinson, who's secondary was the NFL's worst (262 ypg), and considering the senior CB in the new Chiefs secondary is ex-donk Ray Crockett, and you get the picture.

KCJ'
Hoping that the Chiefs secondary steps up

bkkcoh
07-17-2001, 12:17 PM
What is going to help with the defensive backs is if we get constant pressure on the QB. I think if you look back in Chief's history, when the DB's have played the best, we had excellent DL play. This year would be same thing. We don't need 75 sacks for the season, it would be nice. We just need a lot of hurries on the QB.


Just made Gaz's day :D

MrBlond
07-17-2001, 12:23 PM
KCJ,

If not Robinson and Guinta, who would have you preferred? You have acknowledged poor coaching by K. Schottenheimer and Willie Shaw. You know they had to be replaced. Who would you have been excited by? My feeling is that you would have found fault in anyone.

The Bad Guy
07-17-2001, 12:38 PM
Proctor,

This is truly comical. The stat pimp is finding holes in a stat-based argument. Amazing. I'm glad you finally realize Proctor that stats aren't always something to hold your hat on in an argument.

Guintas bio when coaching defensive backs is pretty impressive. He's not running our defense, so it matters little about what he did against the run, or managing the Rams 99 defense.

But Proctor, if your so down on Guinta, why were you on the Shaw bandwagon last year? Both fielded horrible defenses, and both were released from their post with their previous teams.

Heres a bit on what he has done as a defensive backs coach courtesy of KCChiefs.com

With Giunta serving as defensive backs coach in '97 the Rams snared 25 INTs, a figure toped only by the Giants (27). Giunta's star pupil that season was CB Ryan McNeil, who led the league with nine interceptions.

Prior to joining the Rams, Giunta spent two seasons as the defensive backs coach for the N.Y. Jets from '95-96. In his initial campaign with that club, the Jets defense led the league in pass defense (171.3 ypg). Giunta was also instrumental in the development of Jets CB Aaron Glenn, who would go on to become the only Pro Bowl corner in that club's history, getting all-star nods in '97 and '98.

If we need talent developed in the secondary then I believe that Vermeil made a wise choice for his DB's coach.

Gaz
07-17-2001, 01:05 PM
It is a mistake to put your pass defense emphasis on the secondary. The current rules are stacked overwhelmingly in favor of the receiver. The only way to consistently and successfully defend against the pass in the modern NFL is to attack it in the backfield, before the pass is in the air. If the QB releases the ball when he wants, you have already lost half the battle.

Now, given the propensity of some folks on the BB to put words in my mouth, let me assure you that I am not proposing the "empty net" defense. Yes, you need cornerbacks. You need them to mug the receiver; abuse him, make those five yards a living hell. You need them to shadow the receiver, to bat down balls and to pick off the errant balls resulting from a well-crushed QB.

But the battle for air supremacy is fought in the enemy backfield, not in the skies. Crush the QB often. Shake him up. Destroy his timing. Give him happy feet.

And you will control the skies.

xoxo~
Gaz
Much more interested in the DLs than the CBs.

Rausch
07-17-2001, 02:19 PM
Frank,


you've got to do something about that Bon Jovi pic....really...



It makes it hard for me to take you seriously....:D

TEX
07-17-2001, 03:30 PM
:) :cool: :D :p

TEX
07-17-2001, 03:32 PM
Don't know why it's doing this :) :D :cool: :eek: :p ;)

KCJohnny
07-18-2001, 06:53 AM
Mr. Blond,
That is a totally fair assessment and a fair question. I hate it when other people complain and do not forward a positive suggestion. I am OK with Robinson but I get the willies thinking about Guinta's pathetic defense last year. My beef is actually with Vermiel, who seems to be so focused on offense that the D appears to be an afterthought, which was the formula that won SBs for Denver (Elway, Davis, Sharpe) and StL (Warner, Faulk, Bruce) but hasn't even been tried in KC.

I am probably going to look like the biggest dummy in the universe when the Chiefs scorch the AFC West and finish 12-4, but I'll be the HAPPIEST dummy out here.

Go Chiefs!
KCJ
Healthy Green = playoff appearance

htismaqe
07-18-2001, 07:55 AM
Chaplain,

Go back and read your stats AGAIN.

My beef is actually with Vermiel, who seems to be so focused on offense that the D appears to be an afterthought, which was the formula that won SBs for Denver (Elway, Davis, Sharpe) and StL (Warner, Faulk, Bruce) but hasn't even been tried in KC.

The 2 years that Denver won the SuperBowl, their D was ranked in the top 10 in nearly every statistical category, including top 3 rankings in takeaways, rushing yards per game, and total defense.

You set yourself up for this argument with all your god-forsaken stats, now spin those...

ADDENDUM: I went back and looked for stats on the Rams Super Bowl season and found some startling ones. The Rams defense had 13 games (1 playoff) where they gave up 14 points or less. Pretty remarkable for a terrible defense.

I'm still scouring for those stats you love Johnny. I'm waiting to hear your response.

htismaqe
07-18-2001, 09:28 AM
I'm having a bit of trouble going back in the stats that far, so I'll shift gears...

My beef is actually with Vermiel, who seems to be so focused on offense that the D appears to be an afterthought, which was the formula that won SBs for Denver (Elway, Davis, Sharpe) and StL (Warner, Faulk, Bruce) but hasn't even been tried in KC.

Actually, it has been tried in KC before. LAST YEAR Our defense was horrible and we tried to rely on outscoring our opponents. Obviously, that didn't work for us, or the Donks, or St. Louis.

You want to take last year's St. Louis or Denver defense and assign their poor showing to the Super Bowl campaigns of 97,98, and 99. Sorry, John, but the STATS don't support that. The years they won the Super Bowl, they're defense played well, top ten even. What did they have that the KC defense didn't have during the 90's? Offense.

KCJohnny
07-18-2001, 11:06 AM
Parker,
I have addressed that ad infitum. It's in my column. Basically, a lot of Defenses look great playing the #31 schedule with a 17 point lead by halftime every week.

KCJ

MrBlond
07-18-2001, 11:08 AM
I may or may not be in the minority but I think the defense could be very good. The safety position is a strength with Woods and Wesley. Belser is excellent depth. The linebackers are fast and active. Edwards is a given. Maz is an up and comer. Patton and Bush are better than they played last year and have proven it in years past. Cadrez is versatile, experienced depth. The ends in Hicks and Clemons are excellent to very good. Experienced depth is there in Owens, etc. Tackles are at least serviceable and may be very good if Williams is properly motivated. The young corners are big, fast and physical. Crocket was a terrible signing. No excuses. I don't start him. I would have liked to have Terrell Buckley with Warfield starting backed up by Dennis and Bartee. Still this defense is far from a liability. (now that Kurt is in Washington.)

KCJohnny
07-18-2001, 11:09 AM
Parker;
I've addressed this topic ad infitum. It's in my column. Basically, a lot of defenses look great against the #31 schedule with a 17 point lead by halftime every Sunday.

And last year's Chiefs were an abberration, not typical Chiefs ('99 was more typical) and certainly not based on the Rams/Donx model). At least IMHO.

KCJ
Taking some of the pressure off of Packfan;)

htismaqe
07-18-2001, 02:05 PM
Johnny,

I see you choose to spin and squiggle rather than refute my points. You are the master of stats, produce some stats that show that the Denver 97-98 defense, or the St. Louis 99 defense "looked good because they were ahead by 17 at half time"...

We all know tha't's a crock of bull and my bet says you'll avoid my questions yet again...

Addendum: I'm at work, but just perusing through the first few games of the 1999 St. Louis season, I'm seeing that they scored MOST of their points in the THIRD QUARTER. The simple fact here is that POINTS ALLOWED is only a relevant stat if YOU are using it to support Gunther or one of the stooges. If someone should, heaven forbid, use it against you, it suddenly becomes "Oh, they were ahead by 17 at half time"...

How about this: The Rams defense in the first 8 games of 1999 allowed 8 redzone touchdowns, in 8 games. But then again, redzone efficiency only counts if it supports Gunther.

KCJohnny
07-18-2001, 02:14 PM
You say bull, I say the opposite, so what...?
KCJ

htismaqe
07-18-2001, 02:15 PM
Johnny,

Last years Chiefs were an "aberration"...

Last years Donks or Rams were "model"?

Selectively spinning stats again...take a look at the Rams defense of the 90's (even in their worst days) and the Donks of 95-99 and you'll find that, statistically, last year was an "aberration"...

Take OFF the homer glasses...

Feel free to spin away...

htismaqe
07-18-2001, 02:20 PM
Because Johnny, when it supports your argument, you say

stats are facts and the facts say I'm right

When it doesn't support your argument you say

You say bull, I say the opposite, so what...?

You're becoming a hypocrite of the highest order, and the only other one of those I know only posts at the other Chiefs' BB...

The really simple fact here is that the VERY same stats that you use to defend Gunther Cunningham REFUTE everything you say about Dick Vermeil and Greg Robinson coming in here to ruin our glorious past, our beloved Chiefs' defense, and all that other crap.

If you can't handle the fact that Martyball might actually be dead in Kansas City, so be it. But please cease with the "superiority under the guise of self-pity" diatribe...it's very old.

KCJohnny
07-18-2001, 05:03 PM
OK Parker, put your tongue back in your mouth and cool it with your 'nanny nanny boo boos.'

You want facts?? Can you deal with the truth?

Now here are the 'facts' from Dick Vermiel (of course you all are so much smarter than he, but he was the best 'fact' guy I could come up with):

"Our approach last season was to be very aggressive with the passing game in the first quarter. We wanted to put opponents on their heels, take a lead, then rush to control the game in the second half.
Knowing the coaches' demands for rushing output, our offense linemen were always asking about the early play calls. Every week, I'd have the same answer: "Don't be misled by the high percentage of first-quarter passes. If we execute as we should, the runs will come."

Look it up yourself, smart guy.

http://www.realnfl.com/insiders/PublishedArticles/10312.jsp

http://www.realnfl.com/insiders/PublishedArticles/10322.jsp

Ciao!

KCJ
Arch hypocrite

KCJohnny
07-18-2001, 05:07 PM
"That's the NFL. Most of that differential occurs in the fourth quarter, depending on who's winning. We always planned to attack aggressively at the start, take a lead, then finish the game with tough running and clock control in the fourth quarter."

-Dick Vermiel, 5 December 2000

keg in kc
07-18-2001, 05:41 PM
(This is a copy of my reply to all of this on PigSkin park.)

Misperception number 1: Glock was a pass-rusher.

(Misperception number 1b: Glock was a run-stuffer.)

Misperception number 2: Glock drew double-teams.

Misperception number 3: "It may be observed without too much strain that Robinson benefited from being ahead by 14-17 points nearly every Sunday before the half ended under the Elway-led offenses."

1994: Donkos scored 347 points (21.7 per game) and gave up 396 points (24.8). The defense was ranked 28th in the NFL.

1995 (Robinson's first season) Donkos scored 415 points (25.9) and gave up 345 (21.6). The defense improved from 28th to 15th.

1996 Donkos scored 391 points (24.4) and gave up 275 (17.2). The Broncos were now the 4th ranked defense in the NFL.

1997 Donkos scored 472 points (29.5) and gave up 287 (17.9). Number 5 ranked defense.

1998 Donkos scored 501 points (31.3) and gave up 309 (19.3).

1999 Donkos scored 314 points (19.6) and gave up 318 (19.9). They had the number 7 ranked defense in the NFL despite an offense that scored only 314 points on the heels of the retirement of John Elway and the injury of Terrell Davis.

Misperception number 4: "Vermiel's scheme (consists) of expanding the capability of the league's 8th best offense at the expense of it's 20th ranked defense". That is simply a ridiculous statement. There is absolutely no indication nor evidence of this at this point.
____________________________________________________

Here's a snipett taken from Robinson's bio on the Chiefs website, I'd suggest you read it and digest the details:

"Robinson built his reputation in Denver by turning a struggling defense into a championship contender. After inheriting a club with ranked 28th in total defense in '94, Robinson made an immediate impact in his first season with the club, as the Broncos finished the '95 campaign 15th in the same category. By '96, he had turned the club into the league's fourth-rated defensive unit and by season number three in '97, the club was on its way to its first of two straight Super Bowl triumphs.

During his stellar six-season stay in Denver, the Broncos made four playoff appearances and claimed back-to-back World Championships with wins in Super Bowls XXXII and XXXIII, making them team one just six clubs in NFL history to accomplish a Super Bowl repeat. Over that six-year span, the Broncos compiled an a 64-32 (.667) regular season record, including an NFL-best 33-15 (.688) mark against their divisional foes. Denver went 11-1 mark vs. Oakland and posted identical 9-3 ledgers against both San Diego and Seattle from '95-00. The only AFC West foe Denver had a losing record against during that span was Kansas City (4-8).

Robinson's experience, particularly against AFC West opponents, was a key factor in head coach Dick Vermeil's decision to bring the talented defensive coach to Kansas City, as well as his ability to consistently construct effective and opportunistic defensive squads. The Broncos produced a +28 turnover ratio in six seasons under Robinson and ranked in the NFL's top 10 in total defense during three of his six seasons at the club's defensive helm, finishing seventh in '99 (297.1 yards per game), fifth in '97 (291.9 ypg) and fourth in '96 (279.4 ypg).

The Broncos were among the NFL's top five teams in terms of turnover ratio three of the past four seasons. In 2000, the Broncos posted a +19 mark to rank second in the league behind only Baltimore (+23). Last season, Denver racked up 27 interceptions, just one shy of Miami's league-best total of 28. The Broncos defense was also responsible for scoring six touchdowns, the second-highest tally in team history. Five of those return scores came on interceptions, tying the team mark set by Robinson's '97 Denver squad.

Denver's defenses were also stingy in the scoring column during Robinson's reign with the Broncos, producing three top 10 rankings in the all-important scoring defense category - eighth in '98 (19.3 ppg), sixth in '97 (17.9 ppg) and seventh in '96 (17.2 ppg). The team's pass defense also ranked among the league's top 10 teams in four of Robinson's six seasons with Denver, finishing eighth in '99 (188.5 ypg), fifth in '97 (179.3 ypg), 10th in '96 (196.2 ypg) and ninth in '95 (206.1 ypg).

Most dominant defensive units typically begin with the ability to stop the run, something Robinson's units did with regularity in Denver. The Broncos run defense ranked in the league's top 10 three times during Robinson's tenure with the club. In '96, Denver led the NFL by permitting just 83.2 ground yards per game. Denver ranked third in the NFL in rushing defense in '98, allowing just 80.4 yards per game, breaking the single-season franchise record Robinson's troops had established just two years earlier. Over the final 11 games of the '98 regular season and playoffs, Denver allowed just 56.6 rushing yards per game and permitted just two individual 100-yard rushers.

The performance of Robinson's defense throughout the '98 playoffs was paramount to Denver's quest for a second straight title. The Broncos allowed opponents just 53.0 rushing yards per game in the postseason and forced a remarkable 13 turnovers in just three games, giving the Broncos an impressive +12 playoff turnover ratio. Including the +10 takeaway/giveaway ratio the club posted in the regular season, Denver boasted a +22 ratio for all of '98. In each of the Broncos first two postseason games, the defense allowed opponents a team playoff record low of 14 rushing yards. Over the course of the entire postseason, the Broncos defense allowed just 25 points, culminating with a 34-19 victory in Super Bowl XXXIII vs. Atlanta.

The Broncos defense was equally impressive in '97, when Denver won its first Super Bowl. Robinson crafted the gameplan in Super Bowl XXXII which controlled the explosive Green Bay offense, resulting in a 31-24 win. Robinson's defensive unit rose to the occasion when most challenged, limiting the Packers to an 0-of-8 showing on third and fourth down attempts.

Robinson's defenses in Denver also displayed a propensity for putting pressure on the passer. In '99, the Broncos amassed 50.0 sacks, the third-highest tally in team history and the most the by the club since '92. From '97-00, Denver led the AFC with 185.0 sacks, a total which ranked third in the NFL behind only New Orleans (217.0) and St. Louis (196.0).

A number of current NFL standouts owe Robinson a debt of gratitude for his involvment in their development. During his tenure in Denver, Robinson's defense produced a host of Pro Bowl performers. Defensive tackle Trevor Pryce led the Broncos sack charge with 13.0 QB takedowns in '99 to earn his initial Pro Bowl berth and followed that up with another all-star campaign in 2000 after posting a team-best 12.0 sacks. Robinson's '96 Denver defense produced five Pro Bowl performers, including LB Bill Romanowski, S Steve Atwater, S Tyrone Braxton, DT Michael Dean Perry and DE Alfred Williams.

Robinson joined the Broncos after a five-year stint with the N.Y. Jets ('90-94). He coached defensive line from '90-93 and served as defensive coordinator in '94 when the Jets ranked eighth in the league by permitting just 20.0 points per game. Turnovers and a stingy run defense were also a staple of Robinson's defense at his first NFL stop. During his last four years in New York, the Jets defense forced 151 turnovers, most in the AFC and second-most in the NFL during that span. They also improved from 27th in the league in total defense in '89 to eighth in '93. New York's rush defense also showed significant improvement, jumping to a fifth-place ranking (92.1 ypg) after allowing 133.5 yards per game in '89."


Reasons to like Robinson: 1) A winning record in the AFC west against every team but KC. 2) Turnover production (3 years in the top 10). 3) Defenses that score. 4) Defenses that keep opponents off the scoreboard (3 years in the top 10). 5) Good against the pass (4 years in the top 10) and the run (3 years in the top 10). 6) Defenses that sack the QB. 7) Playoff success.
Reasons not to like Robinson: 1) 2000 Donkos defense sucked (really, really sucked). 2) He's an ex-Donko.
So, one bad year in six and the guy is a moron. That's a pretty myopic way to look at things, to say the least. We should be expecting our defense to improve, not finding reasons for it to get worse. I say we expect Robinson to succeed here, and if he doesn't, then, and only then, do we have any ammunition or reason for worry. He's clearly been successful in the past, and we should expect, or even demand, that we see that type of success here now. Hoping for the best while expecting the worst is the easy way out. I have high expectations and high standards. Vermeil calls this the best coaching staff he's ever assembled and I say we should hold him to that, make them prove it to us over the course of the next two seasons.

John, your last statement regarding scoring in the first half and running out the second half could be from 90% of the coaches in the NFL, including your beloved Marty. How exactly is "martyball" different from "take a lead, then finish the game with tough running and clock control in the fourth quarter." The only difference is that Vermeil is more aggressive at the start. And that statement has absolutely nothing to do with defense, nor does it support your argument in any way, shape or form. In fact, then, could it not be argued, by your very own logic, that the Chiefs defense of the 90's was successful as much due to the offense's ball/clock control as it was due to the defensive scheme?

Myopic views make for difficult discussion...

KCJohnny
07-18-2001, 07:40 PM
Kyle, be careful not to injure your flabby muscles congratulating yourself for your crystal clear analysis and brilliant recommendations for supporting Greg Robinson. Of course, all I can do is thrust my emotional, myopic views with such 'homer spin as

The only AFC West foe Denver had a losing record against during that span was Kansas City (4-8).

Oh. That was you who said that. Dang. And 4 of those losses were against the WORST COACHING STAFF IN NFL HISTORY.

I never said that there was anything wrong with having a brilliant offensive attack that put you up by 2 TDs early; I CLEARLY (for a myopic homer) stated that it WORKS, but deflected some of the credit for Robinson's success to an offense that nearly always led by sizable margins (thanks for the stats!).

Robinson will do well in KC, mainly because we have better talent than Denver did/does. He is a SB coach, and deserves accolades for that. I still maintain that his secondary will be exploited, hopefully because teams are trying to catch up, not pile on.

KCJ
Myopic fool unable to grasp simple logic

Chiefs Pantalones
07-18-2001, 08:03 PM
Are you talking, Proctor?



:D

keg in kc
07-18-2001, 09:05 PM
Kyle, be careful not to injure your flabby muscles congratulating yourself for your crystal clear analysis and brilliant recommendations for supporting Greg Robinson.

That was completely uncalled-for, you self-rightous prick. Maybe people would treat you with a little more respect if you weren't such a complete and total a$$hole half the time. I don't care if you disagree but there's no reason to be insulting. And, no, I don't consider "myopic" to be an insult in the way I used it, so don't bother going that route to make excuses for your immature and ultimately un-Christian-like behavior. You should be ashamed of yourself.

And 4 of those losses were against the WORST COACHING STAFF IN NFL HISTORY.

Where did I ever say that?

I do think that Jimmy Raye and Kurt Schottenheimer are both bad coaches, but I've never referred to that staff as the worst ever. I think Gunther needed to be replaced based on many things that happened last season, but, again, I've never referred to that staff as the worst ever. Don't put words into my mouth.

I never said that there was anything wrong with having a brilliant offensive attack that put you up by 2 TDs early; I CLEARLY (for a myopic homer) stated that it WORKS, but deflected some of the credit for Robinson's success to an offense that nearly always led by sizable margins (thanks for the stats!).

You clearly don't understand the stats then, since in 1999 the defense was ranked 7th in the league without anything resembling "a brilliant offensive attack that put you up by 2 TDs early". Furthermore, if you looked a little further into the stats you love so much, you'd see that it DOESN'T work, as demonstrated by the Rams/Donkos of 2000. More on this shortly.

Robinson will do well in KC, mainly because we have better talent than Denver did/does.

Yes, he should do well with the talent here.

He is a SB coach, and deserves accolades for that.

He's a 2 time SB *winning* coach whose defenses have performed unbelievably-well at playoff time, as demonstrated in my last post.

I still maintain that his secondary will be exploited, hopefully because teams are trying to catch up, not pile on.

If the secondary is exploited it's because we lack talent at cornerback, which I don't believe. We have, potentially, the best pair of safeties in the NFL and I believe both Bartee and Dennis are NFL-calibre cornerbacks.

Interesting how you decided to ignore the statement at the end of my post. I was hoping you might understand what I was saying and run with it, but I guess I'll have to do that myself:

Football is a game of balance. The offense does affect the play of the defense, and vice-versa. To say - in a negative light - that the offensive philosophy of the Rams and Broncos aided their defenses in their championship years is a hypocritical statement if you fail to acknowledge the exact same thing to be true for the Chiefs when they had their 13-3 years. Different offensive philosophy, obviously, but the net effect is the same. And that, John, is the beauty of football. Offense and defense combined win games, and strength in one will make the other stronger. A strong defense will cover a weaker (by this I mean average or better, not bad) offense just as a strong offense will cover a weaker defense. But balance is the key; you must have enough tools on both sides of the ball to succeed or it's all for naught. All offense and no defense nets you the Minnesota Vikings or the Rams/Donkos of 2000 All defense and no offense nets you the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and, sadly, the Chiefs of the last decade. To believe anything other than that, to believe that either an offense or a defense can, alone, carry you to a title, is a mistake. Every facet of the game, offense, defense and special teams, is integral for success in the NFL. That's my message, which you seem to take as something else.

Lay off the insults.

The Bad Guy
07-18-2001, 09:47 PM
Kyle,

I agree about the insults thing. There is no reason that personal slams should take place on this board.

But, I will bet the house on the fact that KCJ will now proclaim how you were out of "intellectual'' ammo, so that is the reason you had to call him a self-righteous prick.

I'm just sick of Proctor spinning whatever he wants to always benefit his side of the argument.

Proctor continually talks about how we had the 8th best offensive stat wise to backup his love affair for Jimmy Raye. But what he doesn't ever look at is the fact that more times than not during the season, we were forced to play catchup due to our terrible defensive schemes Who would have thought, a defensive head fielding a horrible defense, only Gunther Cunningham could do that.

He points that out when he is trying to discredit two defenses that have SUPERBOWL rings, but he refuses to do that when talking about two of the worst coordinaters in the NFL in Raye and Schottenheimer.

It's a double standard. Get used to it Kyle. Since the Stooges were canned, Proctor has revolted. I guess some are willing to accept mediocrity. However, thats not my bag.

IMO, there's no reason to defend Gunther, Raye or Stock. I don't defend when I get a C on a test, and I won't make arguments for a staff that could only pull off a .500 record.

keg in kc
07-18-2001, 09:55 PM
But, I will bet the house on the fact that KCJ will now proclaim how you were out of "intellectual'' ammo, so that is the reason you had to call him a self-righteous prick

Exactly, Frank. And then he'll ignore the actual meat of the post and the stuff that was written after I'd calmed-down.

I'm not going to make any excuses for what I did, either. Frankly I am still overweight, but I'm also working-out 3-5 hours/day (;)!!!) and I found his little flabby muscle comment to be extremely insulting in the face of that, not to mention that I don't ever "pat myself on the back" for anything, something John is increasingly quite fond of doing.

I guess he was out of "intellectual ammo" before he even started his post.

BroncoFan
07-18-2001, 10:06 PM
Dont get to worked up about this issue guys. It is pretty much a done deal. Robinson will be able to pull of decent d at best, and I got to witness what he is capable of at worst.

Chiefs have made quite a few changes over the last season that will help make them a much better football team. To be honest, hiring Robinson was not one of them. Take it from someone that hoped he might make a difference for 5 years, he will let you down. That does not mean that Chiefs cannot be a great team (even win a super bowl) with him. Hell, broncos did it. But having Robinson on your side will make it that much harder. ( it might help when you play the broncos, but you didn't need much help there did you?)

My suggestion, deal with it now. The guy absolutely is terrible. If you allow yourself to hope that he will all of a sudden be different your foolling yourself.

California Injun
07-18-2001, 11:07 PM
Can anyone research some Broncos posts from the last 5 years that slam Robinson?

Only when he moves to the Chiefs that he becomes the "worst", eh?

Hey Broncofan!

We all tried telling you about Dale Carter but you wouldn't hear of it. Now you've got the defensive version of Jeff George (Chesta) all primed to gather encroachment flags each time it is 3rd and 4.

But I will defer my Chiefs observations for now and let you witness it first hand. Glock will just kill ya in 2001.

keg in kc
07-18-2001, 11:11 PM
Bronco Fan, Robinson may or may not do well here (don't mistake me as a blind homer GR supporter, I'm not, even though I did post reasons why we could support him...). Like I said, he's got to do something for us, or he's outta here. Past history doesn't mean diddly and this entire coaching staff has a job to do, no free passes for anyone from top to bottom.

As for terrible, remember what we've been like on defense lately; I really don't think it can get much more painful to watch (fingers crossed).

BroncoFan
07-19-2001, 12:02 AM
California_Injun,

If you couldn't find any "we hate robinson" thread on every single bronco message board on the internet over the last 3 years, you haven't been looking hard enough (hint, they are usually in bold font)

In fact, i am sure that every denver fan within shouting distance calling for his head didn't leave shani a whole lot of choice (not that I am taking credit for robinson getting fired, although I would like to, expecially now that he is with the chiefs, couldn't have worked out better)

And yes, we got screwed by carter and will no doubt get screwed by Gloc (can't wait until we give kc a free first and goal because fat-a$$ jumped). Got us good with both of those sorry bastards. My only hope is that because Gloc has been called out for being the lazy fat-a$$ that he is, he might step things up(although I doubt it)

Lets not forget that we saddled your D with that crap corner crockett, can't wait until that sorry bastard gets burned by Ed.

Both teams have done a fair job of screwing the other lately, although the Chiefs seem to fair better in our head to head games, the broncos seem to manage to maintain their status as one of the better teams in the league.

Your correct, we have paid for guys that we got from KC. But KC got some of thier own medicine this year. Robinson is the worst DC in the league, and I truly believe that. My guess, you will be agreeing with me mid way through the season (titus I hope you get this one on your hard drive)

milkman
07-19-2001, 12:22 AM
BroncoFan,
I'm not going to debate with you whether or not Robinson is a good DC or not.
But I am going to tell you, the worst DC now resides in DC.

Marty's little brother is still riding big brother's coattails.

Taco John
07-19-2001, 01:27 AM
That article was dead on.

If you can't guarantee at least a 14 point lead by half time, expect to flip a coin by the 4th quarter, because it'll be 50-50 whether or not you win or not if you have to rely on Greg's defense.

Oh yeah... Don't forget to watch closely for Ray's next hammy. He seems to (mysteriously) always limp a little after he just got toasted.

Saggysack
07-19-2001, 01:41 AM
Oh yeah... Don't forget to watch closely for Ray's next hammy. He seems to (mysteriously) always limp a little after he just got toasted


IMHO that will still be better witnessing than Chester's lack or lack off desire to on the field communication with the other players. 1 thing that incensed me more than anything was watching Chester after a play sit his fatass on the ground right next to the ball while his teammates go back to the huddle to discuss what is going on in the game. Chester's actions speaks volumes on his desire to compete competively

KCJohnny
07-19-2001, 05:47 AM
Kyle,
My sincere apologies for insulting your (professed) level of physical fitness. That was too personal. Forgive me.

Funny how the Bronco fans have a totally different take on Greg Robinson.

As bad as Kurt was, he NEVER gave up 264 yds or 403 yds rushing to ANYONE, including Edge James, Marshall Faulk, Robert Smith, etc...

KCJ

KCTitus
07-19-2001, 06:40 AM
Injun: During the SB years, 98 and 99, there was absolutely NO talk by the Bronco Fans about how they were lucky to get as far as they did despite Robinson. At least that's what I read about on the Star BB.

Prior to the 99 season, all of the talk was about how Shanny's system protected Bubby and that they were still favorites to 3 peat. I think we all (old Star BB vets) remember the 3peat nonsense talk. There was no concern about Robinsons defense posted until this season.

milkman
07-19-2001, 07:16 AM
Johnny,
Are you trying to tell us now that Kurt is a better DC?
While I am not sold on Robinson, he has achieved some level of success in the NFL.

All Kurt has managed to achieve is his consistency to put bad defenses on the field.

Robinson may not be the best, or even among the best choices, but I'll take my chances with him any day over The Spineless Jellyfish Stooge.

KCJohnny
07-19-2001, 07:23 AM
Milk,
Draw your own conclusions.
The '99 Chiefs D was pretty tough (scored 9 TDs, 2nd in takeaways, etc... and the 2-deep zone was a pathetic disaster IMO.

Greg Robinson is clearly the more experienced/successful DC, but under his brother (who knows a thing or two about dominating defenses) Kurt will put a top defense on the field, seeing he inherited one.

My point was, as bad as (you say) Kurt was, his defenses never surrendered 250+ yd rushing performancees against almost all the league's elite backs. And as bad as KC's pass D was, Denver's was worse.

KCJ

milkman
07-19-2001, 07:33 AM
Johnny,
Again with stats.

Once again, stats mean jack to me, regardless of who uses them.
I base my opinions on what I see when the team is on the field, and yes it is only my subjective opinion.

What I saw from KS was a lack of anything resembling a defense I would be concerned about as an opposing coach.
His first season he let Dave Adolf influence him entirely to much.
His second season it was Willie Shaw.

Next season it will be big brother.
Maybe, if he ever grows some nads, and puts a defense with his stampout there, rather than someone else's, he might have a decent D.

Even then, I doubt it.

BroncoFan
07-19-2001, 09:50 AM
Taco John,

Are you the Taco John from DPO?

keg in kc
07-19-2001, 01:25 PM
John,

Thank you for the apology.

I began getting myself into shape few weeks ago, through walking, biking and weight-lifting. At the start, I had difficulty walking even two miles, but now I have progressed to the point to where I'm walking (vigorously) anywhere from 3 to 6 miles 5 or 6 days a week depending on how the calendar falls - my excersise pattern is broken into 4 day periods (3 days on, 1 day off). Next week I'm going to slowly add some jogging into the mix.

I read your comment last evening upon returning from a 4-mile, 70 minute walk in 95 degree heat. I'm working my *** off, and although I know you weren't aware of that at the time, since I haven't talked about it, reading a comment like that when I'm covered in sweat and sore over nearly every inch of my body really p!ssed me off...

I am self-effacing, generally, and I have talked/complained about my weight/conditioning in the past, but now I'm doing well with this, and I'm, for once, proud of what I'm doing.

So, again, thank you for the apology.

KCJohnny
07-19-2001, 04:50 PM
If time is an issue, try gradually working jogging into your routine. 20-30 minutes of jogging does what an hour of walking does, is better for your heart and strengthens the leg muscles more. I would NEVER jog/run in any climate above 80 degrees; its just not safe. Try to jog an eigth, then a quarter mile with walking in between. Gradually build up to running a mile. After that, its up to you. I am no great runner, my routine is a 40-45 minute run every morning (M-F) followed by 350 reps of push ups, sit ups, crunches, pull ups, dips, flutter kicks, ect... but then again, the Army FORCES me to do it!

Good luck, and stay with it!

KCJ
Old dude fighting to stay in shape

KCJohnny
07-19-2001, 05:07 PM
In the defensive backfield, the Chiefs will be challenged often by opposing passers, especially on th outside. Ray Crockett was signed to a free agent deal this off-season, but he is not an impact player anymore. William Bartee will battle Eric Warfield for the other job. That's not a high-level face-off, as both are young and raw. Warfield played himself off the field for a portion of last season, bur reportedly has made strides this off-season. 2nd year CB Pat Dennis is also in the mix, but considered just as inconsistent. It could get pretty ugly if someone doesn't emerge from the trio of youngsters and Crockett doesn't stay healthy. The are strongest in the deep patrol. Greg Wesley evolved into starting timber and paired well with very sturdy FS Jerome Woods last season. They also signed Jason Belser from the Colts and he should provide more than adequate relief behind both starters. Eight year pro Bracey Walker and 7th round pick Shaunard Harts will compete for a final roster spot... In summary, we see a little less pass rush and declining overall play against the pass this season and perhaps a little productivity against the run too. It won't be pretty defensively in Kansas City this season.

www.nflinsider.com


Of course, the angle here is BETTING (lotsa talk about the spread) but isn't that Robinson's forte'?

keg in kc
07-19-2001, 05:09 PM
I'll have to be very careful with the jogging, John, because I still remember ten years ago when I was a cross country runner used to running 6 miles a day or more. I have to remember that those days are over, I can't run like I used to and I'm going to have to go slowly with it from the beginning. No jumping in the deep end because I can hurt myself and screw up the whole exercise plan..

Although time isn't an issue right now, I'm planning on starting to integrate that phase next Tuesday, and going to do it very early in the day to avoid the daily temperatures approaching 100 degrees that we've had every day (the heat index was 111 when I walked yesterday). Walking in that weather I can handle, but, like you, I'd never run in it - just not a smart move. Eventually I'm going to get back to the 45-60 minute runs, but that's a while off.

I'm also going to get myself back into biking outside (the only biking I do now is stationary), as well. I do my walking on a trail around a lake about 15 minutes from my house, and it seems like it would be a great place for biking, so I might as well take advantage of it. Keeping my routine varied a little bit should help keep me from getting too bored with it, which is always a problem for me...

All-in-all, it's really amazing how much better I feel now than I did just a few weeks ago. I need to improve my diet just a hair (more fruit, less crap...), but other than that, I'm really happy with how things are going right now, and that's not something I say very often.

Kyle G.

Young dude growing older and fighting to get into shape

Skip Towne
07-19-2001, 05:15 PM
Years ago my dad taught me to do whathe called "scout pace". That is: walk 50 paces, then jog 50 paces. Keep alternating these. You can do it for a very long time. And it is amazing how much ground you can cover even when not in shape. He was an Eagle scout so I feel sure it is a Boy Scout maneuver.

KCJohnny
07-19-2001, 05:20 PM
If only we could stay in shape by posting on the BB!
KCJ:(

KCJohnny
09-24-2002, 10:16 AM
Mr. Blond,
That is a totally fair assessment and a fair question. I hate it when other people complain and do not forward a positive suggestion. I am OK with Robinson but I get the willies thinking about Guinta's pathetic defense last year. My beef is actually with Vermiel, who seems to be so focused on offense that the D appears to be an afterthought, which was the formula that won SBs for Denver (Elway, Davis, Sharpe) and StL (Warner, Faulk, Bruce) but hasn't even been tried in KC.


Originally posted July 16, 2001

Brock
09-24-2002, 10:20 AM
Stop scrambling the board, A-hole.