PDA

View Full Version : Whitlock on Marty


keg in kc
08-08-2001, 11:36 PM
It's marty night.

Thank goodness we're getting all of this out of the way with the first preseason game...

It looks like same old Marty in Washington (http://www.kcstar.com/item/pages/sports.pat,sports/3acce1ee.808,.html)

By JASON WHITLOCK - Columnist
Date: 08/08/01 23:12

Marty Schottenheimer's 2001 Washington Redskins will wind up being an indictment of the Kansas City Chiefs or a flaming sign that Marty is ill-equipped to lead a new-millennium NFL franchise.

The good-old-Schottenheimer network delivered 15 former Chiefs employees, counting Marty, to the nation's capital. If the revamped Redskins win big this season, Chiefs fans will have to wonder what might've been had Schottenheimer remained in power here.

Marty's Washington Chiefs actually give Sunday's Chiefs-Redskins preseason opener a bit of significance. The importance of Sunday's contest won't resonate with the players, but it will certainly be felt by the coaching staffs and the front offices.

Marty's boys, and Marty himself, have reason to feel that the Chiefs thought they weren't good enough to get the job done in Kansas City. It's no secret that while Marty and Chiefs president/general manager Carl Peterson share respect for one another they also had major philosophical differences during the latter part of their 10-year reign.

You can't call the two men enemies. But it might be fair to state that Sunday's game will be the beginning of a bitter rivalry.

Well, the rivalry actually began when Schottenheimer took all the spare coaching parts from the Chiefs' staff Gunther Cunningham pointed a finger of blame at and was prepared to dump before he was dumped over the Internet.

The assistants many of you loved to hate are all in Washington. Jimmy Raye is the offensive coordinator. Kurt Schottenheimer, Marty's little brother, is defensive coordinator. And Mike Stock is the Washington special-teams coach. The only guy missing is infamous offensive guru Paul Hackett.

I'm sure Marty tried to hire Hackett. He hired everybody else.

Marty's kid, Brian, is coaching Washington's quarterbacks. Russ Ball, Marty's KC right-hand man, is Washington's director of football operations. Longtime Chiefs special-teams stud Greg Manusky is coaching Washington's linebackers. Kevin Lockett is a Washington receiver. Fullback Donnell Bennett landed in Washington. Richard Mann, John Weuhrmann, Joe Pendry, Dave Redding, John Schneider and Bryan Barker all spent time in Kansas City in some capacity and are now Redskins.

I don't have strong opinions about most of these men. But I do have opinions about the big three.

Stock's hiring is an embarrassment. His Kansas City resume should've relegated him to the high school coaching ranks. I can understand why Marty gave his brother one more chance at leading a defense. Kurt never had a chance here working under Cunningham. Raye deserves credit for getting 4,000 yards and a Pro Bowl season out of Elvis Grbac.

That trio -- working in the same roles -- helped the Chiefs go 7-9 a year ago.

Marty will look awfully foolish if that trio helps the Redskins go 7-9 this season. It's not that anyone is expecting the Redskins to be all that good this season, it's just that if you assemble a staff of cronies they had better deliver something more than mediocrity.

I'm a bit shocked that Marty sat out of football for two years and basically returned without any new ideas. I figured that when Marty returned to football he would come back drastically changed. I figured he'd align himself with a few young, promising coaches and turn them loose.

Marty hasn't changed at all. He's seems more committed than ever to MartyBall and a strong defense. It's as if Marty sat out for two years and concluded the only reason he never reached the Super Bowl was because of bad luck.

He might be right. That's what I always believed.

He also might be wrong. We're about to find out.

Saggysack
08-08-2001, 11:42 PM
Old habits are hard to break. IMHO it really wasn't Cunningham's fault for last years failure, but I do put the blame on J.Raye for failing to be able to keep opposing DEF's off balance, K.Chokenhiener inept game planning, and Stock's inability to produce a realiable SpT

Frazod
08-08-2001, 11:43 PM
Wow. I agree with most of what Twitlock said. Mainly the part about Marty being an idiot for reestablishing the most pathetic coaching staff in football. And Donnell Bennett a starter? That moron couldn't fight his way out of a sh!thouse.

Better them than us. Stoogeless and Bennettless and loving it!

DaWolf
08-08-2001, 11:46 PM
Cooter,
While I agree that Gunther's assistants didn't help his cause at all, Gunther's the one who hired and kept them, so essentially, it was his fault...

keg in kc
08-08-2001, 11:48 PM
I wonder if any hardcore Redskin fans are on their bulletin boards bemoaning the "Chiefsification" of their beloved team?

Saggysack
08-08-2001, 11:53 PM
Don't forget when Cunningham took over Raye was already the OC and K.Chokenhiemer was being groomed by Marty as the next DC because he knew Cunningham was more than likely going to end up with the job that Marty left.

Frazod
08-08-2001, 11:55 PM
It might be interesting to check out a Deadskins board. I don't like Washington, but I sure pity them. I'd be looking for an oven to stick my head in right now if I was a Skins fan.

We all know what Marty was thinking when he reassembled the Stooges (absolutely nothing, as usual), but I wonder what the hell Snyder was thinking? Perhaps "Gee, I want to win a Superbowl, so I'll hire a career loser as my head coach and let him hook up with a staff that ran one of the most talented teams of the 90's into the ground!" Great plan.

KCTitus
08-09-2001, 06:04 AM
Keg: while I know of no boards, I live in Skins country and right now all the talk is that they're glad he's here. Well, actually, more glad that Norv Turner is gone.

When I try to explain how Marty will rip your still-beating heart out of your chest come playoff time, they dont wan to hear it.

It's sad.

gh4chiefs
08-09-2001, 06:14 AM
I don't know guys, I've got this bad feeling that the football gods are going to see fit to break our hearts again by having Marty take the Skins all the way. It would be the ultimate insult to injury.

keg in kc
08-09-2001, 06:21 AM
It would seem to fit in with history, wouldn't it.

Frazod and I were discussing the possibility that maybe we need to have someone do the rite of exorcism on Arrowhead and get the bad mojo demons to leave the franchise.

gh4chiefs
08-09-2001, 06:24 AM
I'm thinking that's not a bad idea.

KCTitus
08-09-2001, 06:30 AM
there is no way that Marty takes the Skins anywhere, especially this year. He has no OL, so for the next 5 years, they will draft OL with #1. He has 1 WR who is a rookie. He's implanted RBBC with Carter, Bennett, and Davis. He has no QB.

He does have a couple of DB's and Arrington to build around on the D.

George is going to get mauled and will be out of the lineup by the 3rd week. We might wind up battling against Husak or Rosenfels. Doesnt really matter anyway as long as they can hand the ball off.

I hope their center wears extra pads on his a$$.

gh4chiefs
08-09-2001, 06:56 AM
From a logical, intellectual standpoint, I agree with you KCTitus. But the superstitious side of me (see the thread about Elvis' job getting harder) is worried. It just seems that former Chiefs players find a way to beat the Chiefs and/or win championships. Neil Smith was a Chief for years to no avail and he leaves, and boom, he gets a ring. I know you guys don't like Gannon, but he's another ex-Chief that's been succesful, no ring, but he did make it to the AFC title game and beat us a few times.

Right now I'm about halfway expecting a Ravens/Redskins Super Bowl.

I'm not normally a guy that believes in "fate" but sometimes you have to wonder.

KCTitus
08-09-2001, 07:15 AM
Gary: Cmon...when Neil went to Denver, he went to a team that had Elway, Davis, Sharpe. That team was in SB contention with or without Smith.

As far as Gannon goes, that team goes because of Wheatley's running primarily, but Gannon does make plays. Most teams saw how to defend against a RB-style QB and other teams will start using the same techniques.

I would be afraid, if the Skins had Talent and secondly if Marty had not picked up where he left off with KC and their coaching staff and a few of their players.

Let me say this...Marty CAN be a successful coach and win it all. However, that will require him to change his philosophy to the game come playoff time. His pre season moves, however, indicate he hasnt learned from past mistakes.

htismaqe
08-09-2001, 08:52 AM
Wow, I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Whitlock, but he's right.

Marv Levy is the only ex-Chief I would say went on to be hugely successful. He had ZERO talent while he was here. Marty doesn't have much in Washington.

Neil Smith and Keith Traylor went to teams that were loaded...Gannon is an aberration...forget about them...

Look at Dale Carter, Reggie Tongue, Steve DeBerg, Dan Saleamua, etc...never won anything after being a Chief...

Baby Lee
08-09-2001, 09:00 AM
I guess Whitlock doesn't buy into the "destined by mindset to choke" camp.

I['ve] always believed [that the] only reason [Marty] never reached the Super Bowl was because of bad luck.

California Injun
08-09-2001, 09:00 AM
htismaque,

You took the words right out of my mouth...

"Wow, I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Twitlock."

Hell, a few more positive articles with some backbone attached to them and I may actually read them on the Star page instead of secondhand here.

Oh the humanity!!!!:eek:

Lightning Rod
08-09-2001, 09:17 AM
It has become popular to bash Marty. We really don't know how much control he had of personnel decisions The draft, pursuing free agents etc.. I do know that unlike Gunther Marty had a philosophy and a plan of how he wanted his team to play. Unlike many others, I think that he did show some flexibility of changing his style to fit the personal he had to work with. See the change from the Deberg offense to the Montana left coast style. In terms of success in the entire history of the Chiefs only Hank could be considered more successful. Lets face it anyone who could milk 14 wins out of Steve Bono and the Two headed Gannon/Grback monster has some ability. Vermeil the year prior to the Rams SB victory was considered by many to be out of touch and, certainly was not considered some sort of coaching messiah. Marty is at least an above average coach and will have some success in Washington. Will he take them to the Big dance? Who knows. A different question you might ask yourself would be. How many times would he have already been there had that BASTAGE John Elway was never been borne?

KCTitus
08-09-2001, 09:36 AM
A few points, RCG.

We do know that Marty had say in personnel, draft day and FA after 1995 when he resigned for 6 years. Much had been made about that.

The year prior to the Rams SB, Vermeil did have to change is approach to the game, practice, etc. He has said this many times and there was much talk about the 'player mutiny' in TC in 1999.

The main difference between the two is one has taken teams to SB's the other has not. Marty is his own worst enemy when playoff time comes. I dont blame John Elway for a HC's poor decisions.

Lightning Rod
08-09-2001, 10:30 AM
KCTitus
I am in no way comparing Marty to Vince Lombardi. He certainly had his share of mistakes not the least of which was having his brother on the coaching staff. The point I was making is that for anyone my age (36) or younger he was by far the most successful coach the chiefs have had. Did he win the big one? No he did not. Did he and or Peterson make some huge free agent mistakes in an attempt to make it to the next level? You bet they did. On the other hand I remember the Dark Ages of Chiefs football. The days when you could walk up to the stadium and take your pick of club level seats. The days when we weren't complaining about not having a 1000 yard rusher, we were wondering if we would ever have a player rush for 100 yards in a game again. I remember Todd Blackledge tossing so many interceptions in a game that when he got picked off 40 yards down the field the announcer had the gall to say " well that is as good as a punt". I have a fair amount of homer inspired optimism for this new staff. I don't anticipate us being out coached on a regular basis. But until DV does better, the fact is that Marty is as good as it has been in the last quarter of a century.

KCTitus
08-09-2001, 10:51 AM
I agree w/everything you said RCG. Why I actually worked at Arrowhead, and back in 1987 and I couldnt even sell a program. One cold game, they CLOSED the upper deck and asked everyone to move down to the bottom level.

I guess my point is, Im not bashing Marty as much as critcizing him for his poor decisions which are a result of his philosophy of football--It's a failed philosophy. The game has changed and he refuses to adapt to today's NFL. That's been my beef w/Marty since 1998 and will allways be.

KC has seen quite a bit of success with Marty, but with that we've also experienced excruciating lows.

California Injun
08-09-2001, 01:39 PM
RCG,

I'm STILL wondering if any of our backs will ever get 100 yards in a game.....

HC_Chief
08-09-2001, 01:51 PM
<i>It's as if Marty sat out for two years and concluded the only reason he never reached the Super Bowl was because of bad luck.

He might be right. That's what I always believed. </i>

No such thing as 'luck'. When you dramatically alter your playbook and preparation(s) going into the playoffs, you're destined for failure.

milkman
08-09-2001, 04:05 PM
Originally posted by Cooter Z Chief
Old habits are hard to break. IMHO it really wasn't Cunningham's fault for last years failure, but I do put the blame on J.Raye for failing to be able to keep opposing DEF's off balance, K.Chokenhiener inept game planning, and Stock's inability to produce a realiable SpT

The fact that Gun kept these inept morons after the '99 season makes it all his fault.

And the team's lack of motivation and direction is clearly Gun's fault.

milkman
08-09-2001, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by frazod
And Donnell Bennett a starter? That moron couldn't fight his way out of a sh!thouse.

I don't think Bennett starting at FB is all that bad. But Marty and Jimmy are the morons that hatched the plan to move Bennett to tailback.

My sympathies to Skins fans (and Proctor) if they bring back the Tiger Back in DC.

milkman
08-09-2001, 04:48 PM
Why would anyone think that Marty would learn from previous mistakes.

John Elway came back against Marty coached teams 17 times, if my memory serves me. 16 of those as Chiefs coach.

That's just over 25% of Elway's comebacks.

Why? Because Marty never learned. He got a lead then played to protect it, rather than trying to add to it.

These losses, along with the playoff failures are indictments of Marty's piss poor coaching decisions.

I'll say this again. Playing not to lose, ultimately leads to losing.

KCJohnny
08-09-2001, 05:02 PM
Uh, check those games again.
I served in Colorado at Fort Carson from '93-96. The altitude there is 6,000 feet above sea level. The visiting teams were ALWAYS winded at Pile High Stadium. It wasn't just the Chiefs.
Now, look at the games Marty won in the 4th quarter. Including that classic in '94 beating the donx in the 4th quarter.

The Broncos were used to the thin air at Pile High. The visitors were not. Hence, many teams in prevent in the 4th, winded after covering pass after pass, ran out of gas (literally) at the end of many of those games.

Only people who have been at that kind of elevation know what I am talking about. The Olympic Training Center is there for that very reason. My official Army 2-mile run times 16:30 at Ft. Carson and is 14:30 at sea level.

Just my $0.02. Although I acknowledge Elway seemed to have Marty's #.

KCJ

htismaqe
08-09-2001, 06:31 PM
Montana engineered that Monday night victory in 94...in spite of Marty...

KCTitus
08-10-2001, 05:45 AM
Uh, Proctor, if you're not going to blame Marty for the 1995 and 1997 playoff failures, then dont give Marty credit for the 94 comeback at Mile High.