PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Remember when Chiefs were as fun to watch as tonite's teams on Monday Nite?


chiefsfan1963
09-15-2008, 11:05 PM
DV was our HC and it was in 2004 against the Titans. One of the all time highest combined scores on Monday Nite!

Until Herm his entire coaching staff and CP and his entire FO are gone we will never be able to witness the kind of game we witness tonight!

Hopefully it won't be in 2010 before we have that chance.


:banghead::banghead::banghead:

|Zach|
09-15-2008, 11:06 PM
Did we win a playoff game under DV?

Guru
09-15-2008, 11:09 PM
Hell, two games came to mind for me...

Buffalo slaughter
Monday Night Meltdown

|Zach|
09-15-2008, 11:09 PM
Did we win a playoff game under DV?

Looking forward to 63 answering this simple question about the great DV.

ChiefsCountry
09-15-2008, 11:10 PM
Hell, two games came to mind for me...

Buffalo slaughter
Monday Night Meltdown

Yeah all the great Chiefs games that came to mind for me didnt involve the Dickey V Chiefs in shootouts.

ChiefsCountry
09-15-2008, 11:11 PM
Looking forward to 63 answering this simple question about the great DV.

He won't.

BigRock
09-15-2008, 11:11 PM
Yeah, that Titans game was great fun to watch. Nevermind that we were 4-8, nobody outside the markets watched it, and ABC was embarrassed to have us on MNF. Chiefs/Titans is the reason they started flex scheduling.

Baconeater
09-15-2008, 11:11 PM
Chiefsfan1963's 2008 Dick Love Thread-o-meter is up to 2 now.

L.A. Chieffan
09-15-2008, 11:12 PM
DV was our HC and it was in 2004 against the Titans. One of the all time highest combined scores on Monday Nite!

Until Herm his entire coaching staff and CP and his entire FO are gone we will never be able to witness the kind of game we witness tonight!

Hopefully it won't be in 2010 before we have that chance.


:banghead::banghead::banghead:

We went 7-9 that year. Thanks for the reminder.

ChiefsCountry
09-15-2008, 11:13 PM
Billy Volek tore it up that night as well. That was so much fun to watch.

tk13
09-15-2008, 11:13 PM
Yeah all the great Chiefs games that came to mind for me didnt involve the Dickey V Chiefs in shootouts.
I don't know if I'd go that far. The Tait game against the Browns? The Green Bay comeback when they were unbeatable in Lambeau? Those were great games.

|Zach|
09-15-2008, 11:14 PM
Did we win a playoff game under DV?

Bumping this question.

morphius
09-15-2008, 11:15 PM
Do you remember when you posted something like this thread this morning?

Mecca
09-15-2008, 11:16 PM
I understand the point of the Chiefs didn't win anything but at the same time now they aren't winning and are about as exciting as paint drying.

|Zach|
09-15-2008, 11:20 PM
Did we win a playoff game under DV?

Bumping.

Again.

Stinger
09-15-2008, 11:20 PM
Other than the 13-3 season when did the Chiefs inspire all this winning during the DV era?

I seem to remember DV going on a tangent on a few occasions at the end of the season to pad the the W column and stats so to speak ... instead of playing rooks that we could evaluate after yet another so so season.

keg in kc
09-15-2008, 11:21 PM
Do you remember when you posted something like this thread this morning?Times about 1000.

Jesus Christ, expand the repertoire. Learn a second song.

L.A. Chieffan
09-15-2008, 11:22 PM
Bumping.

Again.

Dude google it. We gotta do all your work for ya?

|Zach|
09-15-2008, 11:23 PM
Dude google it. We gotta do all your work for ya?

:D

Yes.

Guru
09-15-2008, 11:26 PM
Dude google it. We gotta do all your work for ya?
Heh, Google would be worthless for that one.

chiefsfan1963
09-15-2008, 11:26 PM
We went 7-9 that year. Thanks for the reminder.

7 more wins than in 2008! :D

|Zach|
09-15-2008, 11:27 PM
Did we win a playoff game under DV?

Bump.

chiefsfan1963
09-15-2008, 11:32 PM
Did we win a playoff game under DV?

You don't have a point dude!

You can feel good about that all you want. DV is 10,000 times a better coach than Herm and Chiefs fans had a ball watching DV's Chiefs.

If he had a better GM and FO he would have succeeded here. He was definitely headed in the right direction unlike where we are going now.

Rebuilding is a bunch of bull.

Like last season, Chiefs fans are going to have watch/follow other teams for entertainment in 2008 and 2009. Pretty sad. :(

|Zach|
09-15-2008, 11:47 PM
You don't have a point dude!

You can feel good about that all you want. DV is 10,000 times a better coach than Herm and Chiefs fans had a ball watching DV's Chiefs.

If he had a better GM and FO he would have succeeded here. He was definitely headed in the right direction unlike where we are going now.

Rebuilding is a bunch of bull.

Like last season, Chiefs fans are going to have watch/follow other teams for entertainment in 2008 and 2009. Pretty sad. :(

You didn't answer the question.

I will repeat it.

Did we win a playoff game under DV?

Sure-Oz
09-15-2008, 11:49 PM
You didn't answer the question.

I will repeat it.

Did we win a playoff game under DV?

But but but Dick won a SB with STLLLLLLLLLLLL!11111oneeee, which is why he was better, doesn't matter if he didn't win shit here and ignored making an AVG defense that could've led to playoff wins

|Zach|
09-15-2008, 11:50 PM
But but but Dick won a SB with STLLLLLLLLLLLL!11111oneeee, which is why he was better, doesn't matter if he didn't win shit here and ignored making an AVG defense that could've led to playoff wins

I am not sure what is so hard for 1963 about this whole question thing.

It is really really simple...

noa
09-15-2008, 11:57 PM
a

Reaper16
09-16-2008, 12:23 AM
That home game against Atlanta was pretty sweet; both Priest and Blaylock had 4 TDs and the Chiefs rushed for like a million yards. Brian Waters earned AFC offensive player of the week, heh.

DaneMcCloud
09-16-2008, 12:36 AM
Looking forward to 63 answering this simple question about the great DV.


He won't.

He's a childish piece of shit that asks questions, receives answers but won't respond.

In short, a moron.

DaneMcCloud
09-16-2008, 12:37 AM
You don't have a point dude!

You're a borderline retard.

And I say that with all due respect to the other retards that post on Chiefsplanet.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-16-2008, 12:44 AM
From a success standpoint, it wasn't any better. But it was far more entertaining, and I personally always left the stadium feeling more satisfied.

keg in kc
09-16-2008, 12:45 AM
If he had a better GM and FO he would have succeeded here. He was definitely headed in the right direction unlike where we are going nowRetard alert.

Vermeil had carte blanche. He got everything he wanted from coaching staff to personnel.

If you think he had this franchise headed in the right direction, "nowhere" must be your favorite way to go.

btlook1
09-16-2008, 02:13 AM
Retard alert.

Vermeil had carte blanche. He got everything he wanted from coaching staff to personnel.

If you think he had this franchise headed in the right direction, "nowhere" must be your favorite way to go.

I think the point is we didn't go anywhere then and aren't going anywhere now but hell at least is was fun to watch! It was a lot less painful than watching games like Sunday's. I think we are in for a long season!

Mecca
09-16-2008, 02:16 AM
At this point I've been reduced to hoping my friends teams do well, the Chiefs are bad yes but they aren't just bad in terms of wins and losses they are boringly bad they can't move the ball at all....

Guru
09-16-2008, 02:25 AM
At this point I've been reduced to hoping my friends teams do well, the Chiefs are bad yes but they aren't just bad in terms of wins and losses they are boringly bad they can't move the ball at all....
Does this mean we are no longer your friends?

Mecca
09-16-2008, 02:56 AM
Does this mean we are no longer your friends?

Ha no I mean the ones that like other teams.

I only have 2 friends that like other teams.

Guru
09-16-2008, 03:17 AM
Ha no I mean the ones that like other teams.

I only have 2 friends that like other teams.

Yeah, I knew what ya meant. Had to give ya shit on it though. :D

Fruit Ninja
09-16-2008, 03:22 AM
I understand the point of the Chiefs didn't win anything but at the same time now they aren't winning and are about as exciting as paint drying.

At least with watching paint dry you get high off the fumes. lol

Mecca
09-16-2008, 03:24 AM
At least with watching paint dry you get high off the fumes. lol

Yesterday was so bad that I just laughed, I can't bring myself to even get involved enough to get mad, it's not worth it.

Fruit Ninja
09-16-2008, 03:30 AM
Yesterday was so bad that I just laughed, I can't bring myself to even get involved enough to get mad, it's not worth it.

I hear you. Running right into the right side of the offensive line on every first down was pathetic. I was like ughh, try a sweep, try to run off tackle. Do freaking something else not to obvious. lol Thats when they did. Chan went back to Georgia Tech and busted out the option. haha i was like ughhhh..... i didnt know how to react. hah

ChiefJustice
09-16-2008, 03:41 AM
You're a borderline retard.

And I say that with all due respect to the other retards that post on Chiefsplanet.

Thank you.

It's about time we got some respect around this joint.

MNF will never be as great as it was watching Montana lead the Chiefs to a last minute drive and victory at Mile High.That is the stuff of myth and legend.

Ari Chi3fs
09-16-2008, 03:44 AM
Vermeil ball was more exciting to watch, sure. Herm ball is infuriating to watch, sure. Both were equally futile in the playoff departments.

But I didnt hate Vermeil more each week...

ChiefJustice
09-16-2008, 04:00 AM
Vermeil ball was more exciting to watch, sure. Herm ball is infuriating to watch, sure. Both were equally futile in the playoff departments.

But I didnt hate Vermeil more each week...


I don't know which is worse.

16 weeks of hope and struggle...and then dash those dreams on the rocks
of the playoff sea AT HOME!(twice..by the same friggin' team)

Or,a 16 game practice for 2009?

At least with the latter,we might get a decent draft pick in the end.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 05:03 AM
We went 7-9 that year. Thanks for the reminder.7-9 is looking pretty ****ing good right now.

Yup...we didn't win a playoff game under Vermeil, y'all are quite correct. But if you're going to lose, would you rather watch a cluster**** like last Sunday or a 49-42 loss? At least the shootout is fun to see.

And let's stop blaming it all on Vermeil, OK? Guess who else was here...****ing Carl Peterson. Who didn't exactly give the Chiefs D much to work with.

I didn't like the lack of playoff wins under Vermeil either. But at least half the team (offense) looked like they knew what the **** they were doing. Now both sides of the ball look like a bunch of retards.

King_Chief_Fan
09-16-2008, 06:55 AM
7-9 is looking pretty ****ing good right now.

Yup...we didn't win a playoff game under Vermeil, y'all are quite correct. But if you're going to lose, would you rather watch a cluster**** like last Sunday or a 49-42 loss? At least the shootout is fun to see.

And let's stop blaming it all on Vermeil, OK? Guess who else was here...****ing Carl Peterson. Who didn't exactly give the Chiefs D much to work with.

I didn't like the lack of playoff wins under Vermeil either. But at least half the team (offense) looked like they knew what the **** they were doing. Now both sides of the ball look like a bunch of retards.

not to mention that they were the #1 or 2 offense for several years running. We have a very middle of the pack if not lower D based on the last two games and the worst ranked offense in the NFL. Herm has made quite a difference.

Baby Lee
09-16-2008, 07:06 AM
Hey everybody, remember when it was FUN to suck!!!!

oldandslow
09-16-2008, 07:40 AM
Bumping.

Again.

At least we could smell the playoffs.

We aren't winning anything in the current administration...

Dickie V's teams were more fun to watch and they won more often...therefore

Vermeil > than Herm et al.

CupidStunt
09-16-2008, 07:46 AM
There's a happy medium here. 63, like 88, is a complete cock-guzzler, but his point has some merit.

I actually don't want to watch the Chiefs at this point, and I never once said that under Vermeil. I'm equally as pissed off with the end game (no success and no real hope), but the Chiefs WERE relevant and they WERE entertaining. That is, after all, a huge part of the reason we all follow the f'ing team.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 08:50 AM
You know, I was just telling the wife how much I miss losing 41-35 instead of 17-10...

:rolleyes:

Redrum_69
09-16-2008, 08:56 AM
SIX words define all that is HERM...

"WE PLAY TO WIN THE GAME"


thats all you need to ever know.

Demonpenz
09-16-2008, 09:01 AM
We sucked but it was sure fun to watch. That is what the nfl is... entertainment.

luv
09-16-2008, 09:04 AM
We watched the 1994 (?) MNF Chiefs/Broncs game at Joe's this weekend.

morphius
09-16-2008, 09:05 AM
I remember when we were asking for a balanced team, but this isn't what we had in mind.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 09:09 AM
You know, I was just telling the wife how much I miss losing 41-35 instead of 17-10...

:rolleyes:Yes, a loss is a loss. But if you've got to watch one or the other, which is more enjoyable.

Yeah...that's what I thought.

Bowser
09-16-2008, 09:10 AM
You're a borderline retard.

And I say that with all due respect to the other retards that post on Chiefsplanet.

I are apreciating these.

Bowser
09-16-2008, 09:11 AM
Somebody make sure Milkman is still alive after reading this. If he is and hasn't seen it yet, block him from seeing this thread, else his head might pop like a zit.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 09:13 AM
Let's look at a Chiefs game like it's a boxing match. Would you rather watch two fighters circle each other for 12 rounds and land a total of 4 punches, or would you rather watch the same two fighters land punch after punch for 12 full rounds?

Yes, someone's going to lose the fight. But the entertainment value is quite a bit different.

FAX
09-16-2008, 09:15 AM
... But I didnt hate Vermeil more each week...

And that, my friends, is the measure of a good head coach.

It troubles me greatly that you guys are overreacting so much. Everything's going to be okay once our coaching staff gets a handle on our team's true identity. In fact, when that happens, we'll see some true creativity on offense. I foresee a day very soon when Herm and Gailey launch an entirely new era in professional football and establish their reputations alongside the great innovators of the game like Sid Gillman and George Halas and Bill Walsh by combining "The Slash" and "The Option" into a completely new and utterly dominant offensive scheme; "The Sloption". The league will be scrambling to catch up for decades.

All is well.

FAX

Fish
09-16-2008, 09:17 AM
Yes, a loss is a loss. But if you've got to watch one or the other, which is more enjoyable.

Yeah...that's what I thought.

LMAO

Whoooooo doggy I sure miss getting my hopes crushed in a more entertaining fashion.

8-8 is Grrrrrrrrreaat!

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 09:18 AM
Yes, a loss is a loss. But if you've got to watch one or the other, which is more enjoyable.

Yeah...that's what I thought.

Honestly?

The DV days made me absolutely ****ing miserable. All that team needed was a goddamn defense and they could have done some great things. A great opportunity was WASTED.

Never once did I say to myself after a loss, "well, that was FUN."

Now, I have no expectations, I can just watch a game and not get so upset about it. I expect them to lose. My friends and I have enjoyed Sundays more now than ever. But then again, we like NFL football, and watch as many games as we can, not just the Chiefs.

Baby Lee
09-16-2008, 09:21 AM
Let's look at a Chiefs game like it's a boxing match. Would you rather watch two fighters circle each other for 12 rounds and land a total of 4 punches, or would you rather watch the same two fighters land punch after punch for 12 full rounds?

Yes, someone's going to lose the fight. But the entertainment value is quite a bit different.

Problem is, you're defining throwing punches in terms of avoiding punches.
All offense and no defense exists, it's called basketball.
Football is where people hit each other and exert their will to STOP progress.
This team would be a lot more exciting if the defense was stout, even if the offense sucked, not that I WANT it to suck, just that I want the D to not suck much more.

And last night was an exciting game because both Ds were good, but the Os were even better. Not a lot of Tiki Barber bumping off eleventy billion hapless losers going on.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 09:31 AM
LMAO I sure miss getting my hopes crushed in a more entertaining fashion. 8-8 is Grrrrrrrrreaat! Part of being a fan is being entertained by your team. So yes, if I'm going to see my team lose I'd much prefer it be in an entertaining fashion. And yeah...8-8 is quite a bit better than 3-13 and what looks to be the strong possibility of 0-16.

Vermeil was 44-36 over 5 years...a .550 winning percentage. Career .524.

Edwards is 13-21 so far...a .382(!!!) winning percentage. Career .456.

And just to dispel the complete BS about this...Vermeil's career post-season winning percentage is .545, Herm's is .333.

So no, we are not headed in the right direction and we are not currently employing anyone in the front office/coaching staff that's going to take us in that direction. Ever.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 09:34 AM
Problem is, you're defining throwing punches in terms of avoiding punches.
All offense and no defense exists, it's called basketball.
Football is where people hit each other and exert their will to STOP progress.
This team would be a lot more exciting if the defense was stout, even if the offense sucked, not that I WANT it to suck, just that I want the D to not suck much more.

And last night was an exciting game because both Ds were good, but the Os were even better. Not a lot of Tiki Barber bumping off eleventy billion hapless losers going on. I completely understand and agree with the need for defense. Just one problem...where is ours now? Results-wise our D is no better now than it was under Vermeil. We just got lit up for 300 on the ground by a team who's QB couldn't find a receiver. Vermeil was at least able to get one side of the ball going, which made for a significantly more entertaining fan experience even if the end result was the same.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 09:34 AM
Did we win a playoff game under DV?

No, but in his third year we were 13-3. Do you think that is going to happen here?

Hermcuff will never win 13 games in a season unless they expand the league to 8 months long and 50 games a year.

Did Hermcuff ever win a Super Bowl?

How many playoff wins does Hermcuff have as a HC?

How about DV?

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 09:42 AM
Let's also talk about the fact that under Vermeil the players at least looked like they knew what the **** they were doing. I'm sorry, but at 13-3 I put not advancing in the playoffs on the players themselves. The coaching staff prepared you well enough that you were 13-3.

On Herm's watch we've regressed to a point where no one on the field in a KC uniform (other than the ****ing punter) seems to know what the hell they're supposed to do.

Given parity (and the following is JMO and arbitrary) I figure a coaching staff is responsible for getting the team to roughly 8-8. Better than that and it's the players that are standing out. Worse than that and it's indicating failure on the part of the front office and coaches.

CoMoChief
09-16-2008, 09:43 AM
Hell, two games came to mind for me...

Buffalo slaughter
Monday Night Meltdown

That was Sun night IIRC.

Simply Red
09-16-2008, 09:44 AM
Rebuilding, get over it.

KCJohnny
09-16-2008, 09:44 AM
13-3.
Well this team has 13 rookies.
Perspective.
Vision.
Balance.
Long term advantage.




13 is an important number.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 09:47 AM
Rebuilding, get over it.We're not "rebuilding". "Rebuilding" indicates some kind of forward progress being made. If we were "rebuilding" I'd expect the players to show at least a little bit that they understand what direction we're going in and execute with that end in mind.

None of this is happening.

FAX
09-16-2008, 09:50 AM
You guys are still not seeing the big picture here. With The Sloption, our TOP will increase dramatically because the other team's center won't want to touch the football.

FAX

Fish
09-16-2008, 10:01 AM
Part of being a fan is being entertained by your team. So yes, if I'm going to see my team lose I'd much prefer it be in an entertaining fashion. And yeah...8-8 is quite a bit better than 3-13 and what looks to be the strong possibility of 0-16.

Vermeil was 44-36 over 5 years...a .550 winning percentage. Career .524.

Edwards is 13-21 so far...a .382(!!!) winning percentage. Career .456.

And just to dispel the complete BS about this...Vermeil's career post-season winning percentage is .545, Herm's is .333.

So no, we are not headed in the right direction and we are not currently employing anyone in the front office/coaching staff that's going to take us in that direction. Ever.

You can throw up whatever stats you would like. But the fact remains that Vermeil crippled this franchise for the sake of those wins. His ego and stubborn nature provided zero long term stability. And now we're paying for that. But obviously he did it in a way that kept the less knowledgeable ADHD fans content from week to week with a flashy high scoring loss and an "awwww shucks, at least it was a close loss" attitude.

No thanks. I'd rather take the lumps and be patient and do it right.

Deberg_1990
09-16-2008, 10:31 AM
Bumping.

Again.

Wake me when Herm wins 13 games in a year.

Tiger's Fan
09-16-2008, 10:54 AM
Herm couldn't carry DVs fart stained boxers. And BTW, a retard is anyone that thinks he could.

CoMoChief
09-16-2008, 11:02 AM
There is one clear fact about this argument.

With DV, we always knew we could hang with anyone and had a chance to win no matter what.

With Herm, there's pretty much a good chance we are gonna get our asses kicked, and now its to the point where I don't think there's a single team in the NFL that we could beat. Maaaaaybe Detroit or ATL, but that's being very generous.

Bowser
09-16-2008, 11:05 AM
There is one clear fact about this argument.

With DV, we always knew we could hang with anyone and had a chance to win no matter what.

With Herm, there's pretty much a good chance we are gonna get our asses kicked, and now its to the point where I don't think there's a single team in the NFL that we could beat. Maaaaaybe Detroit or ATL, but that's being very generous.

Absolutely. Even if deep down I knew our defense couldn't stop anyone, it was entertaining as hell to watch that offense. At least that was something.

CoMoChief
09-16-2008, 11:05 AM
You can throw up whatever stats you would like. But the fact remains that Vermeil crippled this franchise for the sake of those wins. His ego and stubborn nature provided zero long term stability. And now we're paying for that. But obviously he did it in a way that kept the less knowledgeable ADHD fans content from week to week with a flashy high scoring loss and an "awwww shucks, at least it was a close loss" attitude.

No thanks. I'd rather take the lumps and be patient and do it right.

Part of that reason is we brought an old coach out of retirement to have one last "Go" at the big one. Thus really enhancing the philosophy of "Win Now".

Not really DV's fault more so than it is the way Carl wanted to go with this franchise at the time. Maybe he was on the hot seat after firing Gunther and we didn't know it. Then DV/AS came in and the offense sold tickets and Carl kept his job and signed another long term deal to stay GM of the Chiefs.

Deberg_1990
09-16-2008, 11:08 AM
That 2003 Chiefs defense was bad. Bordering on terrible at times.

But one thing that helped them win so many games was their turnover ratio. They had a knack for coming up with a big INT or turnover at just the right time.

Dont get me wrong, they were still bad and definately cardiac kids, but this new defense cant even seem to come up with turnovers to give the offense some help.

Bowser
09-16-2008, 11:10 AM
That 2003 Chiefs defense was bad. Bordering on terrible at times.

But one thing that helped them win so many games was their turnover ratio. They had a knack for coming up with a big INT or turnover at just the right time.

Dont get me wrong, they were still bad and definately cardiac kids, but this new defense cant even seem to come up with turnovers to give the offense some help.

The funniest part about that 2003 defense was that we were actually respectable until Mike Maslowski went out with his leg injury, then it all fell apart for real. Never would have thought that Mike Maslowski was the potential lynchpin to taht team having success in the playoffs.

Fish
09-16-2008, 11:10 AM
There is one clear fact about this argument.

With DV, we always knew we could hang with anyone and had a chance to win no matter what.

With Herm, there's pretty much a good chance we are gonna get our asses kicked, and now its to the point where I don't think there's a single team in the NFL that we could beat. Maaaaaybe Detroit or ATL, but that's being very generous.

Bullshit.

With DV, we knew that if the defense couldn't manage to make 1 or 2 stops or a critical turnover, we weren't going to score enough points to win. Which happened a helluva lot. That's what I remember.

With Herm, It's becoming obvious that if we don't have 2 or 3 good clock-eating drives on offense, our defense isn't going to have the energy to stop anyone in the second half.

Deberg_1990
09-16-2008, 11:15 AM
The funniest part about that 2003 defense was that we were actually respectable until Mike Maslowski went out with his leg injury, then it all fell apart for real. Never would have thought that Mike Maslowski was the potential lynchpin to taht team having success in the playoffs.

Yea, i cant remember when he got injured exactly that year, but they were fairly respectable the first half of that year. Nothing great, but respectable in relation to the type of team DV had built.


It all sort of went downhill after that Cinci game. I think we lost 2 games out of the final 4?

Bowser
09-16-2008, 11:19 AM
Yea, i cant remember when he got injured exactly that year, but they were fairly respectable the first half of that year. Nothing great, but respectable in relation to the type of team DV had built.


It all sort of went downhill after that Cinci game. I think we lost 2 games out of the final 4?

Sounds right - I think Maz got hurt during that Cinci game, but that was only week 10, or something. We did stagger across the finish line of the regular season, iirc.

Who came in as Maz's replacement? Glen Cadrez? That may explain a few things.

HemiEd
09-16-2008, 11:23 AM
DV was our HC and it was in 2004 against the Titans. One of the all time highest combined scores on Monday Nite!

Until Herm his entire coaching staff and CP and his entire FO are gone we will never be able to witness the kind of game we witness tonight!

Hopefully it won't be in 2010 before we have that chance.


:banghead::banghead::banghead:

I was thinking similar thoughts watching the Dallas/Eagle game. So this is what it looks like to watch real football? I had almost forgotten! That was entertaining!

How about that Baltimore Chiefs game a few years ago, when Ray Lewis was exsposed as a whiny bitch?

I haven't seen an entertaining Chiefs game since Herm ****ing Edwards was hired.

Bowser
09-16-2008, 11:24 AM
How about that Baltimore Chiefs game a few years ago, when Ray Lewis was exsposed as a whiny bitch?

"They've got TWO GUYS on me ALL THE TIME!!"

LMAO

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 11:29 AM
But obviously he did it in a way that kept the less knowledgeable ADHD fans content from week to week with a flashy high scoring loss and an "awwww shucks, at least it was a close loss" attitude.

No thanks. I'd rather take the lumps and be patient and do it right.You've got to be ****ing kidding me. Do it right? Who the hell do you think is "doing it right" mother****er? Because it isn't Carl Peterson and Herm Edwards. Did you actually watch the game last week or are you just here venting bullshit that sounds good to you?

HemiEd
09-16-2008, 11:30 AM
"They've got TWO GUYS on me ALL THE TIME!!"

LMAO

Yeah, he was seeing double! :deevee: One play it was T Rich running over his ass, then Willie Roaf or Brian Waters the next. ROFL

Bowser
09-16-2008, 11:32 AM
Yeah, he was seeing double! :deevee: One play it was T Rich running over his ass, then Willie Roaf or Brian Waters the next. ROFL

Will Shields OWNED Ray-Ray that game. I think he broke his nose at one point.

And yeah, if that wasn't bad enough, he got rolled by Roaf and T-Rich, too. Great game!

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 11:36 AM
You've got to be ****ing kidding me. Do it right? Who the hell do you think is "doing it right" mother****er? Because it isn't Carl Peterson and Herm Edwards. Did you actually watch the game last week or are you just here venting bullshit that sounds good to you?

You're combining things that don't deserve to be combined.

The actual process of rebuilding IS being done right.

The game planning, and in-game decision making is absymal.

They are two separate entities, and that will become obvious when a new coach is brought in this offseason.

blueballs
09-16-2008, 11:40 AM
a new form of sexual buzzard
hover over a freshly dead carcass
and spit the semen of your demigod on it

DeezNutz
09-16-2008, 11:44 AM
You're combining things that don't deserve to be combined.

The actual process of rebuilding IS being done right.

The game planning, and in-game decision making is absymal.

They are two separate entities, and that will become obvious when a new coach is brought in this offseason.

You really think this will happen? Should it? Absolutely. But there are so many reports of Herm being "Clark's guy," that I think Carl and Gun will be fired, and Herm will get one more year, thus wasting even more time.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 11:46 AM
You really think this will happen? Should it? Absolutely. But there are so many reports of Herm being "Clark's guy," that I think Carl and Gun will be fired, and Herm will get one more year, thus wasting even more time.

Carl is the domino that puts the rest of the pieces in motion.

If Clark fires Carl, the new GM is going to hire his own staff - not hang on to Herm and his staff.

All Clark has to do is fire Carl, and he effectively fires them all.

FAX
09-16-2008, 11:49 AM
I was thinking similar thoughts watching the Dallas/Eagle game. So this is what it looks like to watch real football? I had almost forgotten! That was entertaining!

How about that Baltimore Chiefs game a few years ago, when Ray Lewis was exsposed as a whiny bitch?

I haven't seen an entertaining Chiefs game since Herm ****ing Edwards was hired.

It's all very mystifying, Mr. HemiEd. On the one hand, Hermoine says we're rebuilding which, ostensibly, means he's ready to let the players play, make their mistakes, take their lumps, discover their comparative strengths and weaknesses, and work each week on improvement. Everybody knows that, when you're rebuilding, wins and losses are significantly less important than learning and growing in the short term.

On the other hand, he dials back the fabulous, new, simplified offense to the point that we're practically handing a copy of our gameplan to the enemy on Saturday, not allowing our QBs to air it out so we can find out how well they play the vertical game, inserting Downfield (our resident pre-retiree) into the huddle, and introducing concepts like "The Slash" and "The Option" (offensive tactics that we all know are last-ditch efforts to win now and have little to do with any long term objectives).

It seems very dysfunctional, to me. If we're truly rebuilding, let 'er rip and let's find out what we have. If we're not, why go to the trouble of telling people that we are? It's confusing, to be honest.

FAX

Bowser
09-16-2008, 11:49 AM
Carl is the domino that puts the rest of the pieces in motion.

If Clark fires Carl, the new GM is going to hire his own staff - not hang on to Herm and his staff.

All Clark has to do is fire Carl, and he effectively fires them all.

My gut feeling is that Carl is around AT LEAST until Arrowhead is completely rennovated, if not longer (especially in some other capacity).

My other gut feeling is that we will flounder until he is purged from this team. Bottom line - the Chiefs will not compete in the playoffs for another 5 years, minimum.

CupidStunt
09-16-2008, 11:50 AM
The 2008 Chiefs offense will be far worse than the 2003 Chiefs defense. Far worse. If those two units faced each other in a mythical matchup, the '03 defense would pitch a shutout and force seven takeaways.

Fish
09-16-2008, 11:53 AM
You've got to be ****ing kidding me. Do it right? Who the hell do you think is "doing it right" mother****er? Because it isn't Carl Peterson and Herm Edwards. Did you actually watch the game last week or are you just here venting bullshit that sounds good to you?

Yes the rebuilding strategy is being done right. The coaching is not being done correctly at all, but the strategy in place this year to rebuild this team is being done right.

And yes, I did watch the game. I've rewatched too. Focusing on key positions. I'm not venting at all. And from your post, it appears that you are the one needing a release of angry emotion. That's not healthy for you.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 11:57 AM
My gut feeling is that Carl is around AT LEAST until Arrowhead is completely rennovated, if not longer (especially in some other capacity).

I used to think that, but I'm leaning the other way.

It's just a hunch, but I think that Clark and Carl had a "coming to Jesus" meeting in the offseason, where Carl was pretty much told to keep his hand out of the cookie jar and quit fighting Herm on the rebuild. Couple of reasons I feel this may have happened:

We traded one of Carl's best draft picks for more picks.

The roster has been purged of veterans with piss-poor attitudes. (for the most part)

Rookies and young guys are actually PLAYING.

Other than the shot he took at Whitlock in NE, Carl's been surprisingly quiet.

These all go against Carl's M.O.




Like I said, it's just a hunch, but I think Carl knows he's on the hot seat...I almost think that privately, Clark has TOLD him he's on the hot seat...

Fish
09-16-2008, 11:58 AM
Carl is the domino that puts the rest of the pieces in motion.

If Clark fires Carl, the new GM is going to hire his own staff - not hang on to Herm and his staff.

All Clark has to do is fire Carl, and he effectively fires them all.

Yup. And the bright side of that, is that we will have a good young team with some experience and plenty of cap money for the next coach to work with. As frustrating as this situation is right now, we'll very likely be better off because of it. As long as the young guys don't get too demoralized in the mean time.

FAX
09-16-2008, 12:01 PM
Will Shields OWNED Ray-Ray that game. I think he broke his nose at one point.

And yeah, if that wasn't bad enough, he got rolled by Roaf and T-Rich, too. Great game!

One of the best, Mr. Bowser. The really cool thing about that deal was that, before the game, the TV guys (both the guys in the booth and the guys in the studio) didn't give the Chiefs much of a chance at all. Prior to kickoff, the entire focus was on talking up the Ravens' fearsome, dreaded, shut-down defense and Ray Ray's status as one of the greatest LBs to ever play the game, blah, blah, blah. For some reason, all that hype made the total destruction of their D and Ray Ray's schnozzola all the sweeter.

FAX

Bowser
09-16-2008, 12:01 PM
I used to think that, but I'm leaning the other way.

It's just a hunch, but I think that Clark and Carl had a "coming to Jesus" meeting in the offseason, where Carl was pretty much told to keep his hand out of the cookie jar and quit fighting Herm on the rebuild. Couple of reasons I feel this may have happened:

We traded one of Carl's best draft picks for more picks.

The roster has been purged of veterans with piss-poor attitudes. (for the most part)

Rookies and young guys are actually PLAYING.

Other than the shot he took at Whitlock in NE, Carl's been surprisingly quiet.



Like I said, it's just a hunch, but I think Carl knows he's on the hot seat...I almost think that privately, Clark has TOLD him he's on the hot seat...

Man, I hope you're right. Carl has gotten complacent over the years, imo, with Lamar letting him be owner de facto, in essence. And as I asked earlier - how the hell does a team rebuild, when the main culprit for the mess that we're in is still calling the shots? Carl NEEDS to feel his football mortality for the sake of this team and its fans.

FAX
09-16-2008, 12:13 PM
Yes the rebuilding strategy is being done right. The coaching is not being done correctly at all, but the strategy in place this year to rebuild this team is being done right. ...

I wholeheartedly agree with that statement, Mr. KC Fish. One can definitely draw a distinction between the strategy of the rebuild and the tactics we're using to get it going. And, we should. I don't fault "The Plan". Not at all. I fault "The Execution".

Which is why I posed the question some time back about how one should be able to tell the difference between a "rebuild" and a team that's just playing young guys. The answer is getting clearer - especially after watching Herm deploy the option and put an unknown WR under center so we can get down with some Slashball. I don't see how anyone can look at this deal and not realize that Herm's heart is in the right place - get young players through the draft, scheme to their strengths, and develop a new generation of fundamentally sound Chiefs. It's his head that's the problem.

FAX

KCCHIEFS27
09-16-2008, 12:16 PM
Holy crap..I'm so tired of these "remember how great DV was" threads..the guy sucked plain and simple. All offense, no defense..no PLAYOFF WINS!

ChiefsCountry
09-16-2008, 12:22 PM
2009 will be the end of Peterson and Edwards era IMO. They got one more year. There is no way that Hunt will let them run things in the new stadium. He has to have that sucker filled and it wont happen with them. I think this year is a free past unless the players revolt and next year they better show improvement. Just IMO but I think that is what is going to happen.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 01:07 PM
Bullshit.

With DV, we knew that if the defense couldn't manage to make 1 or 2 stops or a critical turnover, we weren't going to score enough points to win. Which happened a helluva lot. That's what I remember.

With Herm, It's becoming obvious that if we don't have 2 or 3 good clock-eating drives on offense, our defense isn't going to have the energy to stop anyone in the second half.

Right, that's why we went 13-3 in 2003.

<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"></st1:City></ST1:p<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
Care to explain which of the games that were cause of concern for not stopping the team one time during the game?<O:p</O:p

Baby Lee
09-16-2008, 01:19 PM
Holy crap..I'm so tired of these "remember how great DV was" threads..the guy sucked plain and simple. All offense, no defense..no PLAYOFF WINS!

The choices are shitty indie flick or Dude Where's my Car, you MUST chose one as the funnest movie to watch ever. They're the only two movies ever made, and one of them is, by design, the best movie ever made.

Baby Lee
09-16-2008, 01:21 PM
Right, that's why we went 13-3 in 2003.

<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"></st1:City></ST1:p<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
Care to explain which of the games that were cause of concern for not stopping the team one time during the game?<O:p</O:p

Oh, I don't know, the one where the Vikes but eleventy billion on us, or the one where Broncos RBs were putting twelvety billion yards on us [while wearing outrageous 'waist bling' in the process]

Rooster
09-16-2008, 01:28 PM
[QUOTE=Programmer;5025420]Right, that's why we went 13-3 in 2003.


The special teams play had more to do with the 13-3 record in 2003 than the defense did. The special teams (D. Hall) had a season for the ages.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 01:30 PM
Oh, I don't know, the one where the Vikes but eleventy billion on us, or the one where Broncos RBs were putting twelvety billion yards on us [while wearing outrageous 'waist bling' in the process]

The special teams play had more to do with the 13-3 record in 2003 than the defense did. The special teams (D. Hall) had a season for the ages.

Good points guys.

I count 7 games that were won or lost by one possession.

So yeah, there's a cause for concern when the game is within 1 possession and the defense hasn't proved they can make a stop.

Fish
09-16-2008, 01:32 PM
Right, that's why we went 13-3 in 2003.

<o>:p</o>:p
<o>:p</o>:p
<st1:city w:st="on"></st1:city>:p<o>:p</o>:p
<o>:p</o>:p
Care to explain which of the games that were cause of concern for not stopping the team one time during the game?<o>:p</o>:p

Take your pick...

How about the Cinci game where nobody could tackle Peter Warrick? He had a 70 yd punt return where nobody could tackle him. And a 77 yd catch where defenders tried to arm tackle him as he matriculated down the field. Cinci had 200 yds rushing. We managed no turnovers. Meaning a loss. Had we been able to tackle or turn the ball over, we might have won.

How about the Bronco game that year where we gave up 270 rushing yards and 5 rushing TDs? Think a stop would have made a difference there? We allowed over 500 total yards to the Donkeys. Think a stop on one of those would have made a difference? Zero turnovers there too.... see a pattern?

Again, the Vikings loss... we gave up another 225 yds rushing and 3 rushing TDs. All Ontario Smith. We couldn't stop him. They had 470 total yards.

And then we have the biggest glaring example possible.... the playoff loss against the Colts. Where we couldn't make them punt one ****ing time. Not once. Do you think maybe....just maybe if we could have stopped them once we might have won? But nope. We couldn't. We allowed them to convert on 8 of 11 3rd downs.

Does any of this make sense to you?

Programmer
09-16-2008, 01:46 PM
Take your pick...

How about the Cinci game where nobody could tackle Peter Warrick? He had a 70 yd punt return where nobody could tackle him. And a 77 yd catch where defenders tried to arm tackle him as he matriculated down the field. Cinci had 200 yds rushing. We managed no turnovers. Meaning a loss. Had we been able to tackle or turn the ball over, we might have won.

How about the Bronco game that year where we gave up 270 rushing yards and 5 rushing TDs? Think a stop would have made a difference there? We allowed over 500 total yards to the Donkeys. Think a stop on one of those would have made a difference? Zero turnovers there too.... see a pattern?

Again, the Vikings loss... we gave up another 225 yds rushing and 3 rushing TDs. All Ontario Smith. We couldn't stop him. They had 470 total yards.

And then we have the biggest glaring example possible.... the playoff loss against the Colts. Where we couldn't make them punt one ****ing time. Not once. Do you think maybe....just maybe if we could have stopped them once we might have won? But nope. We couldn't. We allowed them to convert on 8 of 11 3rd downs.

Does any of this make sense to you?

Sure it does, but tell me one thing here Einstein. Do you even see the possibility of Hermcuff getting to a point that you can bitch about winning a game by one score? I don't.

The basis is that we knew we didn't have a defense but we did have an offense that could keep us in games. We had special teams that helped us stay in games. Today, we have NO DEFENSE, NO OFFENSE AND NO SPECIAL TEAMS.

Does any of this make sense to you?

And did you not enjoy watching the Chiefs when there was a chance they were going to score 40+ points a game? How excited are you now? Remember the 13-3 season with DV was his 3rd season.

Hermcuff was brought in to rebuild the defense, he has failed and failed miserably. DV was brought in to make us competitive, he did. Gunther was brought up to keep us going, he failed and was fired after 2 years. Why is Hermcuff still here?

DaneMcCloud
09-16-2008, 01:53 PM
It doesn't matter if the Chiefs had gone 16-0 in the regular season.

They lost in their only game in the playoffs to the Colts.

And couldn't even make them punt once.

Vermeil credited the schedule as much as anything for their "success" that season. The Chiefs faced 4 other playoff teams in 17 games and went 3-2. The second loss being the most important.

At home against Indy.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 01:55 PM
It's amazing the lengths people will go to defend a man who's team made the playoffs once in five years, only to lose by not forcing a punt.

FAX
09-16-2008, 02:12 PM
You guys could make Cherry Pie sound bad.

DV's Chiefs were fun as hell to watch. I dare anyone who fancies themself a fan of the red and gold to say otherwise. There's no point in debating where all that firepower ultimately got us in the end because it ultimately got us in the end. But, I loved watching TRich lead Priest around the edge as our big Willie, Waters, and Weigman pancaked guys like it was IHOP day at Arrowhead. It was perfection. Precision. Poetry.

I loved it.

FAX

Fish
09-16-2008, 02:16 PM
Sure it does, but tell me one thing here Einstein. Do you even see the possibility of Hermcuff getting to a point that you can bitch about winning a game by one score? I don't.

The basis is that we knew we didn't have a defense but we did have an offense that could keep us in games. We had special teams that helped us stay in games. Today, we have NO DEFENSE, NO OFFENSE AND NO SPECIAL TEAMS.

Does any of this make sense to you?

And did you not enjoy watching the Chiefs when there was a chance they were going to score 40+ points a game? How excited are you now? Remember the 13-3 season with DV was his 3rd season.

Hermcuff was brought in to rebuild the defense, he has failed and failed miserably. DV was brought in to make us competitive, he did. Gunther was brought up to keep us going, he failed and was fired after 2 years. Why is Hermcuff still here?

OK, I'll play this....

In 01, our average deficit in losses was 8.3 pts.
In 02, our average deficit in losses was 7 pts.
In 03, our average deficit in losses was 13.5 pts(including playoff game).
In 04, our average deficit in losses was 6.4 pts.
In 05, our average deficit in losses was 9.6 pts.
In 06, our average deficit in losses was 13.7 pts(including playoff game).
In 07, our average deficit in losses was 11.2 pts.
In 08, our average deficit in losses so far is 11 pts.

So no, the difference isn't as great as you would like for your argument. DV only had one season where the loss deficit was less than a TD, and that was 04 when we went 7-9. And what is particularly interesting is the years that each coach got us to the playoffs, the difference in scoring in games we lost was equal.

Does that make sense to you? Do you see the absurdity in saying DV was light years ahead? For Herm's NO DEFENSE, NO OFFENSE AND NO SPECIAL TEAMS, the difference isn't that great now is it?

And I could care less if we score 40+ points or not. I want a win, that's all that matters.

DaneMcCloud
09-16-2008, 02:22 PM
You guys could make Cherry Pie sound bad.

DV's Chiefs were fun as hell to watch. I dare anyone who fancies themself a fan of the red and gold to say otherwise. There's no point in debating where all that firepower ultimately got us in the end because it ultimately got us in the end. But, I loved watching TRich lead Priest around the edge as our big Willie, Waters, and Weigman pancaked guys like it was IHOP day at Arrowhead. It was perfection. Precision. Poetry.

I loved it.

FAX

Too bad that only lasted one year.

I guess if Vermeil had actually drafted properly, the Chiefs would probably be putting up big points.

Alas, 5 years and 35 draft choices later (90% of whom are out of the NFL), IMO, wasn't worth one year of "fun". If they had won the Super Bowl (or even a ****ing playoff game), I might feel differently.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 02:41 PM
It's amazing the lengths people will go to defend a man who's team made the playoffs once in five years, only to lose by not forcing a punt.

Which part of 0-2 compared to 13-3 bothers you?

It's not that we didnt' have a defense then, we were all pretty much aware of that.

We brought Hermcuff in to help the defense, by now I expected some action. 0-2 in your 3rd year speaks volumns. We may go 0-16 this year and I will guarantee you that we will not see a playoff game. I guarantee that you will not see a playoff game from now until after Hermcuff is gone.

DV had offense and special teams, no defense.

Hermcuff has no defense, no offense, and no special teams. I see a very large problem with that, if you would rather have this format over DV's I don't know what to tell you. Watching games that Hermcuff coaches is worse than watching mud dry.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 02:44 PM
OK, I'll play this....

In 01, our average deficit in losses was 8.3 pts.
In 02, our average deficit in losses was 7 pts.
In 03, our average deficit in losses was 13.5 pts(including playoff game).
In 04, our average deficit in losses was 6.4 pts.
In 05, our average deficit in losses was 9.6 pts.
In 06, our average deficit in losses was 13.7 pts(including playoff game).
In 07, our average deficit in losses was 11.2 pts.
In 08, our average deficit in losses so far is 11 pts.

So no, the difference isn't as great as you would like for your argument. DV only had one season where the loss deficit was less than a TD, and that was 04 when we went 7-9. And what is particularly interesting is the years that each coach got us to the playoffs, the difference in scoring in games we lost was equal.

Does that make sense to you? Do you see the absurdity in saying DV was light years ahead? For Herm's NO DEFENSE, NO OFFENSE AND NO SPECIAL TEAMS, the difference isn't that great now is it?

And I could care less if we score 40+ points or not. I want a win, that's all that matters.

The deficit in our losses now is much greater at 11 points average and the 11.2 points average from last year. We have no offense to offset scoring of the other teams.

Does that make sense to you? We could score with DV, we can't score with Hermcuff. If it hadn't been for the prevent defense we would not have scored a single point against the raiders Sunday.

What is going to happen when we go up against a good team?

How are you going to get a win if you have no offense?

Programmer
09-16-2008, 02:46 PM
Too bad that only lasted one year.

I guess if Vermeil had actually drafted properly, the Chiefs would probably be putting up big points.

Alas, 5 years and 35 draft choices later (90% of whom are out of the NFL), IMO, wasn't worth one year of "fun". If they had won the Super Bowl (or even a ****ing playoff game), I might feel differently.

I'm sure we all wanted that, but I have to say that if Vermeil had of stayed around there is a possibility, rather than a probability, that we would have found some new offensive hogs for the OL. Just my opinion, but DV was not good for the team, but he was good for the fans. Hermcuff is neither good for the team nor for the fans.

HemiEd
09-16-2008, 02:46 PM
It's all very mystifying, Mr. HemiEd. On the one hand, Hermoine says we're rebuilding which, ostensibly, means he's ready to let the players play, make their mistakes, take their lumps, discover their comparative strengths and weaknesses, and work each week on improvement. Everybody knows that, when you're rebuilding, wins and losses are significantly less important than learning and growing in the short term.

On the other hand, he dials back the fabulous, new, simplified offense to the point that we're practically handing a copy of our gameplan to the enemy on Saturday, not allowing our QBs to air it out so we can find out how well they play the vertical game, inserting Downfield (our resident pre-retiree) into the huddle, and introducing concepts like "The Slash" and "The Option" (offensive tactics that we all know are last-ditch efforts to win now and have little to do with any long term objectives).

It seems very dysfunctional, to me. If we're truly rebuilding, let 'er rip and let's find out what we have. If we're not, why go to the trouble of telling people that we are? It's confusing, to be honest.

FAX
Exactly, he is a ****ing contradiction. He contradicts his own plan on a regular basis! If he is going to play kids, play them!

Our wonderful kick returner last year was another great example. They could have kept a promising youngster, Phinesee, but no, they kept Drummond.

Thigpen should have played the whole game, why bother with Downfield? Well I degress, Herm is just ****ing Herm.

One of my business associates the other day (Packer fan) saw an interview with Herm. He asked me if the guy had an ego problem? Of course I errupted.

HemiEd
09-16-2008, 02:47 PM
The 2008 Chiefs offense will be far worse than the 2003 Chiefs defense. Far worse. If those two units faced each other in a mythical matchup, the '03 defense would pitch a shutout and force seven takeaways.

That is so ****ing brutal it is true. That really hurts to look at it that way.

HemiEd
09-16-2008, 02:50 PM
One of the best, Mr. Bowser. The really cool thing about that deal was that, before the game, the TV guys (both the guys in the booth and the guys in the studio) didn't give the Chiefs much of a chance at all. Prior to kickoff, the entire focus was on talking up the Ravens' fearsome, dreaded, shut-down defense and Ray Ray's status as one of the greatest LBs to ever play the game, blah, blah, blah. For some reason, all that hype made the total destruction of their D and Ray Ray's schnozzola all the sweeter.

FAX

Yeah, remember Ray Lewis's introduction? Like something out of wrestling, XFL. Hilarious.

HemiEd
09-16-2008, 02:53 PM
It's amazing the lengths people will go to defend a man who's team made the playoffs once in five years, only to lose by not forcing a punt.

The Chiefs did not punt either.

DaneMcCloud
09-16-2008, 02:55 PM
I'm sure we all wanted that, but I have to say that if Vermeil had of stayed around there is a possibility, rather than a probability, that we would have found some new offensive hogs for the OL. Just my opinion, but DV was not good for the team, but he was good for the fans. Hermcuff is neither good for the team nor for the fans.

I think the jury's still out on whether or not Herm's good for the team but it's very clear that he's not good for the fans.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:12 PM
I think the jury's still out on whether or not Herm's good for the team but it's very clear that he's not good for the fans.

Consider this: Typically you see players step up and assume leadership roles on a team. Tony G used to be one of these guys. Donnie Edwards was one as well, both here and in San Diego.

What I see is a load of players that have been intimidated or micromanaged to the point that they don't dare take a stand. When Trent Green was a Chief he was that leader. Even when he was out due to injury he was on the sidelines proving his leadership with the team. I do not see anyone stepping up.

The offense needs someone to be a take charge type, but they have been beat down with the antiquated offensive strategy of Hermcuff that they just don't take the initiative.

Fish
09-16-2008, 03:13 PM
The deficit in our losses now is much greater at 11 points average and the 11.2 points average from last year. We have no offense to offset scoring of the other teams.

Does that make sense to you? We could score with DV, we can't score with Hermcuff. If it hadn't been for the prevent defense we would not have scored a single point against the raiders Sunday.

What is going to happen when we go up against a good team?

How are you going to get a win if you have no offense?

ROFL

Nice deflection.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 03:14 PM
Which part of 0-2 compared to 13-3 bothers you?

It's not that we didnt' have a defense then, we were all pretty much aware of that.

We brought Hermcuff in to help the defense, by now I expected some action. 0-2 in your 3rd year speaks volumns. We may go 0-16 this year and I will guarantee you that we will not see a playoff game. I guarantee that you will not see a playoff game from now until after Hermcuff is gone.

DV had offense and special teams, no defense.

Hermcuff has no defense, no offense, and no special teams. I see a very large problem with that, if you would rather have this format over DV's I don't know what to tell you. Watching games that Hermcuff coaches is worse than watching mud dry.

You've missed the point ENTIRELY.

This isn't DV vs. Herm.

NEITHER of them did what they came here to do.

PERIOD.

If you're the type that enjoys losses just because we scored 30 points, then by all means, continue to genuflect at Vermeil's alter.

I don't care if Vince Lombardi is the coach, or if Rich Kotite is the coach - if we lose by 10 scoring 30 or lose by 10 scoring 10.

In the end, it's still a big-ass "L" in the loss column.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 03:15 PM
Consider this: Typically you see players step up and assume leadership roles on a team. Tony G used to be one of these guys. Donnie Edwards was one as well, both here and in San Diego.

What I see is a load of players that have been intimidated or micromanaged to the point that they don't dare take a stand. When Trent Green was a Chief he was that leader. Even when he was out due to injury he was on the sidelines proving his leadership with the team. I do not see anyone stepping up.

The offense needs someone to be a take charge type, but they have been beat down with the antiquated offensive strategy of Hermcuff that they just don't take the initiative.

You've figured this out through your TV screen?

Holy shit, Freud. I'd get your resume sent out, there are a TON of sports franchises that could use your expertise...

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 03:18 PM
The Chiefs did not punt either.

And what happened the following week?

Indianapolis lost.

Bottom line is that we weren't going very far that year without a defense. You can get away with it in the regular season, but you can't in the playoffs.

Fish
09-16-2008, 03:27 PM
The deficit in our losses now is much greater at 11 points average and the 11.2 points average from last year. We have no offense to offset scoring of the other teams.

Does that make sense to you? We could score with DV, we can't score with Hermcuff. If it hadn't been for the prevent defense we would not have scored a single point against the raiders Sunday.

What is going to happen when we go up against a good team?

How are you going to get a win if you have no offense?

Do you have an answer for why DV, with his much better offense consisting of Green, Priest, Roaf, Shields, etc. could only manage a deficit 3 or 4 points better than what Herm has been managing? If DV is that much better, and Herm has NO DEFENSE, NO OFFENSE AND NO SPECIAL TEAMS, then why did DV only keep it 3 or 4 points closer? If we could score so much better and give us a chance to win each game with DV, then why is the deficit only 3 or 4 points?

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:30 PM
ROFL

Nice deflection.

Speaking of deflection, or denial in your case.

This team sucks and all the years that you want to give Hermcuff will not change that. He could have every draft pick in the first two rounds and not produce a winning team, he just does not have the ability.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:32 PM
You've figured this out through your TV screen?

Holy shit, Freud. I'd get your resume sent out, there are a TON of sports franchises that could use your expertise...

Watch the players on the field Bevis. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see a totally micromanaged team. Listen to YOUR head coach in his press conferences. He is just as full of shit as a Christmas goose.

Fish
09-16-2008, 03:35 PM
Speaking of deflection, or denial in your case.

This team sucks and all the years that you want to give Hermcuff will not change that. He could have every draft pick in the first two rounds and not produce a winning team, he just does not have the ability.

My preceding posts are not defense for Herm. They are criticisms for DV. We shouldn't be happy with the results of either coach.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 03:37 PM
Watch the players on the field Bevis. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see a totally micromanaged team. Listen to YOUR head coach in his press conferences. He is just as full of shit as a Christmas goose.

Wow.

Armchair psychiatrist.

Are you in the locker room?

At practice?

In position meetings?

You can tell all of this just by watching the team on Sunday and listening to press conferences?

Holy shit, dude. The phone must be ringing off the hook...

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:38 PM
Do you have an answer for why DV, with his much better offense consisting of Green, Priest, Roaf, Shields, etc. could only manage a deficit 3 or 4 points better than what Herm has been managing? If DV is that much better, and Herm has NO DEFENSE, NO OFFENSE AND NO SPECIAL TEAMS, then why did DV only keep it 3 or 4 points closer? If we could score so much better and give us a chance to win each game with DV, then why is the deficit only 3 or 4 points?


Which part of "DV sucked at defense" did you miss?

Watch the rest of this year and tell me that you'd still rather have a head coach (for lack of an appropriate term) that 1) does not allow the offense to play the game. 2) doesn't put a defense on the field that can effectively put us in a position to win, and 3) does not have special teams that can do their job.

Hermcuff claims that defense wins championships. He is wrong, a balanced team wins championships. Hermcuff claims that you have to run the ball to win the game, yet he does not use plays to open up the running game. Week 1 and week 2 we had 8-9 players in the box all day long until the raiders went to prevent defense. Had they kept the 8 or 9 in the box we would not have scored.

The modern game of the NFL is to score points with your offens and stop the scoring of the other guys with the defense. He can get neither trait displayed with this team.

If he truly was going to "play to win" he would open up the offense. Since his arrival the play book has gone from 150 pass plays to 30. We've seen about 7 of them.

There is talent on this team, but the HC does not have the ability to teach, or to get the most out of the players.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:40 PM
Wow.

Armchair psychiatrist.

Are you in the locker room?

At practice?

In position meetings?

You can tell all of this just by watching the team on Sunday and listening to press conferences?

Holy shit, dude. The phone must be ringing off the hook...

Sounds like you have all the answers.

Tell us why a professional team can go down the tubes as the Chiefs have. What is the reason for the dismal performances? What do you see that makes you think they are a great team. How many times have you seen this particular team shine? How many great plays have you seen turned in, single plays not sustained high level performance?

This team has been beat down by a HC that just has lost contact with reality as it seems you have.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 03:41 PM
I continue to be amazed by the individuals that can't distinguish between losing a game 49-42 in a shootout vs. losing one 23-8 via complete ineptitude. Yes, a loss is a loss...but not being able to differentiate between those two situations just shows that you don't actually appreciate the game of football, only the final outcome.

One is a celebration of the game...two teams slugging it out every way possible. The other is watching two retards fight over a ball. There is supposed to be beauty and spectacle to this game. Vermeil's teams got that...Herm's teams do not.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 03:42 PM
If he truly was going to "play to win" he would open up the offense. Since his arrival the play book has gone from 150 pass plays to 30. We've seen about 7 of them.

You've talked out of your ass long enough.

Please show me ANY documentation you have that shows we have gone from 150 pass plays to 30, or that we've seen 7 of them.

ChiefsCountry
09-16-2008, 03:42 PM
Watch the players on the field Bevis. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see a totally micromanaged team. Listen to YOUR head coach in his press conferences. He is just as full of shit as a Christmas goose.

Vermeil was probally the most micromanged coach out there.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 03:43 PM
Sounds like you have all the answers. Think signal-to-noise ratio man. The guy has 12,000+ posts in three years. Clearly he's just throwing shit out there to see what sticks.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 03:45 PM
I continue to be amazed by the individuals that can't distinguish between losing a game 49-42 in a shootout vs. losing one 23-8 via complete ineptitude. Yes, a loss is a loss...but not being able to differentiate between those two situations just shows that you don't actually appreciate the game of football, only the final outcome.

One is a celebration of the game...two teams slugging it out every way possible. The other is watching two retards fight over a ball. There is supposed to be beauty and spectacle to this game. Vermeil's teams got that...Herm's teams do not.

Jesus tapdancing Christ.

A celebration of the game?

Excuse me while I laugh my ass off...

Take Herm and DV out of the equation for a second - I know, it'll be impossible to do, you keep coming back to it.

Would you rather win a SB ugly, or lose one in a shootout?

**** beauty and spectacle and celebrations of the game.

WINNING IS ALL THAT MATTERS, NO MATTER HOW IT IS ACCOMPLISHED.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 03:45 PM
Vermeil was probally the most micromanged coach out there.

Shhh....

ChiefsCountry
09-16-2008, 03:46 PM
What the hell is with all these people pissing on OTW? He is honsetly one of the best posters here and most of his posts are spot on.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:46 PM
You've talked out of your ass long enough.

Please show me ANY documentation you have that shows we have gone from 150 pass plays to 30, or that we've seen 7 of them.

Read Whitlock dumbass.

Fish
09-16-2008, 03:47 PM
I continue to be amazed by the individuals that can't distinguish between losing a game 49-42 in a shootout vs. losing one 23-8 via complete ineptitude. Yes, a loss is a loss...but not being able to differentiate between those two situations just shows that you don't actually appreciate the game of football, only the final outcome.

One is a celebration of the game...two teams slugging it out every way possible. The other is watching two retards fight over a ball. There is supposed to be beauty and spectacle to this game. Vermeil's teams got that...Herm's teams do not.

You don't appreciate football unless you prefer a 49-42 game?

High scoring is a celebration of the game, but low scoring is fighting retards?

I'm speechless.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:47 PM
Vermeil was probally the most micromanged coach out there.

By whom?

Simply Red
09-16-2008, 03:48 PM
Priest Holmes, :cuss:

ChiefsCountry
09-16-2008, 03:48 PM
By whom?

You really dont know alot about football do you. Go check out the Eagles Super Bowl appreance. Go find who had the longest and hardest practices in the NFL. Grandpa Dick wasnt his appreance all the time.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:51 PM
One is a celebration of the game...two teams slugging it out every way possible. The other is watching two retards fight over a ball. There is supposed to be beauty and spectacle to this game. Vermeil's teams got that...Herm's teams do not.


A good team can win low scoring games consistantly, that means two things. They can manage the clock (hermcuff cannot), they can put up a good defense (hermcuff cannot) and they are exciting to watch if you have some hope that they are not pissing in a fan (as hermcuff does).

Games in the "golden age" of football had some smashmouth type of football, they were good to great teams. Hermcuff does not have the ability to coach that type of football IMO. In this case when there is a low scoring game only one side is retarded and that position is held by hermcuff.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 03:52 PM
Jesus tapdancing Christ.

A celebration of the game?

Excuse me while I laugh my ass off...

Take Herm and DV out of the equation for a second - I know, it'll be impossible to do, you keep coming back to it.

Would you rather win a SB ugly, or lose one in a shootout?

**** beauty and spectacle and celebrations of the game.

WINNING IS ALL THAT MATTERS, NO MATTER HOW IT IS ACCOMPLISHED. Winning does matter (though I'm old and wise enough now to understand it's not all that matters when you're watching rather than playing). But we're talking about two (Vermeil and Herm) losing situations. Everyone keeps talking about how DV never won a playoff game here. Neither has Herm. So what we're left with is W/L record overall...which Vermeil has a substantial lead in. We're also left to consider, if the end result (no playoff wins) is equal, which teams were more enjoyable to watch...since that's all we as fans can do. There is no ****ing way you can tell me Herm's teams are equal or more fun to watch than Vermeil's teams. Unless you're a liar or a moron.

Simply Red
09-16-2008, 03:52 PM
You really dont know alot about football do you. Go check out the Eagles Super Bowl appreance. Go find who had the longest and hardest practices in the NFL. Grandpa Dick wasnt his appreance all the time.

No he just always likes to argue.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:54 PM
You really dont know alot about football do you. Go check out the Eagles Super Bowl appreance. Go find who had the longest and hardest practices in the NFL. Grandpa Dick wasnt his appreance all the time.

Be more specific here. You have zipped right under the radar. What the hell did you say?

How is appreance defined the first time you used it, and how is it defined the second time you used it.

appearance?

apprentice?

Programmer
09-16-2008, 03:55 PM
No he just always likes to argue.

Which part of the "argument" do you not get?

Tell us all how great hermcuff is and what great advances he has made in Kansas City.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 03:56 PM
You don't appreciate football unless you prefer a 49-42 game?

High scoring is a celebration of the game, but low scoring is fighting retards?

I'm speechless.
So, you're today's reading comprehension problem, huh? Go back and re-read what I wrote...losing 23-8 via complete ineptitude. That's how the Chiefs lose games now.

Sure, I can appreciate a defensive ballgame (though I'd rather watch a high scoring game), but that's not what we've seen so far this year or last season. We're not watching competent defense...we're watching a neutered offense and a poorly coached, completely unprepared defense week in and week out.

When our defense suddenly becomes '85 Bears let me know...I'll be happy to watch them stuff other teams. But as long as the Three (11?) Stooges defense remains I'll continue to be of the opinion that it sucks.

ChiefsCountry
09-16-2008, 03:57 PM
Be more specific here. You have zipped right under the radar. What the hell did you say?

How is appreance defined the first time you used it, and how is it defined the second time you used it.

appearance?

apprentice?

You said Herm micromanged his players more than Vermeil, which is total BS. The week of the Super Bowl, Vermeil ran the Eagles like the military. He told them when to eat, when to practice, when to go to bed, etc. Vermeil ran his team hard. Rams players wanted to revolt over their training camps. Chiefs veterans complained about the practices. Herm is one of the more player friendly coaches in the league and this is fact.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 03:58 PM
Sounds like you have all the answers.

Nope. Not at all. I just prefer to not get riled up over shit I have no control over. People can hold their breath and stomp their feet and have their childish temper-tantrums, but nothing changes. Herm will be the coach Sunday, Carl will be the GM. And that's not likely to change until January, 2009. I'm not happy about it, but I've accepted it.

Tell us why a professional team can go down the tubes as the Chiefs have. What is the reason for the dismal performances?

If you knew jack-shit about football, you'd know the answer to that question. I could write for DAYS about why this franchise is in the shape it's in, but I'm not going to. Here are some highlights:

- Poor drafting during the Vermiel era
- Unwillingness to try to build through the draft
- Wasting of draft picks om coaches and players
- The team was allowed to get old without suitable replacements during DV era.
- Carl Peterson demanding Herm make one last run in 2006 instead of starting the rebuild right away.
- Carl Peterson demanding we start older players in 2007 instead of giving young guys valuable experience.
- Clark not being more proactive after Lamar's death



What do you see that makes you think they are a great team. How many times have you seen this particular team shine? How many great plays have you seen turned in, single plays not sustained high level performance?

This team has been beat down by a HC that just has lost contact with reality as it seems you have.

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit. Go back and find a post of mine where I claim the team is great. Do us all a favor and don't come back until you do...

Christ, I was one of the very few people who predicted losing in this fashion. I said we'd lose 27-10 and we'd get run all over.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4996509&postcount=20

27-10 Raiders.

We gave up 5 yards per carry to Maroney and Morris, running behind a beat up Patriots OL.

McFadden and Fargas should have no problem getting at LEAST as much.

Probably a LOT more.


You're WAY out of your league here. You should probably crawl back under your rock in DC...

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 03:58 PM
A good team can win low scoring games consistantly, that means two things. They can manage the clock (hermcuff cannot), they can put up a good defense (hermcuff cannot) and they are exciting to watch if you have some hope that they are not pissing in a fan (as hermcuff does).

Games in the "golden age" of football had some smashmouth type of football, they were good to great teams. Hermcuff does not have the ability to coach that type of football IMO. In this case when there is a low scoring game only one side is retarded and that position is held by hermcuff.Again, I'm totally fine with "smashmouth" teams...Marty had some good ones. I enjoyed the Okoye/Thomas-Smith Chiefs teams. My problem isn't with a low scoring game if it's two teams executing well on defense. My problem is with low scoring games that are low scoring because the teams involved can't find their ass with both hands and a map.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 03:59 PM
Read Whitlock dumbass.

They gave Whitlock access to the playbook?

Right.

You made the comment, I'm not digging up your defense for you.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 04:00 PM
You said Herm micromanged his players more than Vermeil, which is total BS. The week of the Super Bowl, Vermeil ran the Eagles like the military. He told them when to eat, when to practice, when to go to bed, etc. Vermeil ran his team hard. Rams players wanted to revolt over their training camps. Chiefs veterans complained about the practices. Herm is one of the more player friendly coaches in the league and this is fact.

And what has that profited the team? Losing consistantly.

When in a leadership position lead. If you don't you get stuff like we have now.

ChiefsCountry
09-16-2008, 04:02 PM
If you don't you get stuff like we have now.

You get what you are seeing now because we lack talent. Plain and simple. If Herm tried something different we would be looking even worse. And I dont even like Herm so I dont want to hear I'm some Herm lover.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 04:05 PM
Winning does matter (though I'm old and wise enough now to understand it's not all that matters when you're watching rather than playing). But we're talking about two (Vermeil and Herm) losing situations. Everyone keeps talking about how DV never won a playoff game here. Neither has Herm. So what we're left with is W/L record overall...which Vermeil has a substantial lead in. We're also left to consider, if the end result (no playoff wins) is equal, which teams were more enjoyable to watch...since that's all we as fans can do. There is no ****ing way you can tell me Herm's teams are equal or more fun to watch than Vermeil's teams. Unless you're a liar or a moron.

When is it going to dawn on you that this isn't DV vs. Edwards?

No one is defending Edwards, but for some reason, you and "DC Dumbass" feel the need to defend Vermeil.

They were both inept coaches in their own respective ways.

And if you watch for pure entertainment, great.

I don't. I've never walked away from a Chiefs game saying, "well, we lost, but damn, that was entertaining."

Not ONCE.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 04:10 PM
And if you watch for pure entertainment, great.

I don't. I've never walked away from a Chiefs game saying, "well, we lost, but damn, that was entertaining."

Not ONCE.May I ask what you're watching for if it's not for entertainment? You're not playing. You're not studying what's going on in hopes of making the team next year. You're not scouting them for another team. You're not making your living by watching them. That basically means you're there for entertainment.

And if you (a non-player) can't walk away from a game and be well-adjusted enough to say to yourself "yeah, we lost...but what a game" then you should probably have a chat with a mental health professional.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 04:15 PM
May I ask what you're watching for if it's not for entertainment? You're not playing. You're not studying what's going on in hopes of making the team next year. You're not scouting them for another team. You're not making your living by watching them. That basically means you're there for entertainment.

And if you (a non-player) can't walk away from a game and be well-adjusted enough to say to yourself "yeah, we lost...but what a game" then you should probably have a chat with a mental health professional.

Now we have 2 armchair psychiatrists in the thread.

Being accused of not being well-adjusted.

That's rich.

I guess all the people with their asses on fire starting eleventy-billion FIRE EVERYONE NOW threads, in WEEK ****ING TWO are the people I should aspire to be...

Wow.

Reerun_KC
09-16-2008, 04:15 PM
You get what you are seeing now because we lack talent. Plain and simple. If Herm tried something different we would be looking even worse. And I dont even like Herm so I dont want to hear I'm some Herm lover.
Isnt most of this talent drafted or brought in by Herm and Co? So Herm really doesnt have an eye for talent? IS that what you are saying?

:)

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 04:18 PM
Isnt most of this talent drafted or brought in by Herm and Co? So Herm really doesnt have an eye for talent? IS that what you are saying?

:)

Dude, c'mon. You've been really cool as of late.

Don't encourage the ****tards. You know exactly what he meant, and why your post is retarded...

Reerun_KC
09-16-2008, 04:19 PM
Dude, c'mon. You've been really cool as of late.

Don't encourage the ****tards. You know exactly what he meant, and why your post is retarded...
K I will STFU

Programmer
09-16-2008, 04:21 PM
Nope. Not at all. I just prefer to not get riled up over shit I have no control over. People can hold their breath and stomp their feet and have their childish temper-tantrums, but nothing changes. Herm will be the coach Sunday, Carl will be the GM. And that's not likely to change until January, 2009. I'm not happy about it, but I've accepted it.

Riled up? I'm not riled up, but as a fan I expect more for my money. I would hope that if hermcuff is still the coach after the next loss, which will be Sunday the Chiefs will definitely get the first round draft pick.

If you knew jack-shit about football, you'd know the answer to that question. I could write for DAYS about why this franchise is in the shape it's in, but I'm not going to. Here are some highlights:

- Poor drafting during the Vermiel era
Vermeil has been gone 3 years. That dog won't hunt.

- Unwillingness to try to build through the draft
When did we not draft by the positions we needed at the time of the draft?

- Wasting of draft picks om coaches and players
Old news.

- The team was allowed to get old without suitable replacements during DV era.
Again, old news. The current status of the team is all Hermcuff. He has been making the decisions on what position players we need for three years now.

- Carl Peterson demanding Herm make one last run in 2006 instead of starting the rebuild right away.
I need to see your proof of that. I get the Star and haven't seen that in print.

- Carl Peterson demanding we start older players in 2007 instead of giving young guys valuable experience.
Again, when and where was that said?

- Clark not being more proactive after Lamar's death
Who else are you going to blame? First DV, again DV, again DV, Carl, again Carl and now Clark. Put the blame where it lies, Carl for recommending Hermcuff and Hermcuff for being such a shitty HC.


Reading comprehension is not your strong suit. Go back and find a post of mine where I claim the team is great. Do us all a favor and don't come back until you do...

Perceived from your comments. You don't believe we are as bad as we are, but you attack those that see way too much room for improvement. That has to mean that you feel we are doing just fine.

Christ, I was one of the very few people who predicted losing in this fashion. I said we'd lose 27-10 and we'd get run all over.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4996509&postcount=20

So effing what? Everyone knew that team sucked, we hoped the rivalry would get the team up for the game. It didn't. Does that give you a clue as to how badly they were prepared for the game?

You're WAY out of your league here. You should probably crawl back under your rock in DC...

I've been a Chiefs fan since they moved to KC. I am not the most knowledgable person when it comes to football, but in this case I'd claim to have more savvy than you could ever claim. You need to get off your high horse and figure out that the team currently sucks and the head coach is not the person to fix the problem. Stop blaming everyone but those responsible.

As for my interpretation of what I see with this team. I've been a coach before, I've been in leadership positions before. I have an ability to judge performance and have been successful in doing so. I have also been in a positoin to train individuals to succeed and they have.

I'm not the most adept at fixing the problem here, but it seems like the only fix you see is "let it ride". IMO that is not a good answer. Action is needed now. Firing Hermcuff will scramble the team a bit, but it will also give us an opportunity to cut our losses and move forward.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 04:22 PM
K I will STFU

Don't shut up. You've been a pleasant surprise lately.

Just don't encourage the retards. Reading comprehension is not their strong suit.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 04:23 PM
You get what you are seeing now because we lack talent. Plain and simple. If Herm tried something different we would be looking even worse. And I dont even like Herm so I dont want to hear I'm some Herm lover.

I dont agree, we have talent on the team, we do not have a coach that can exploit that talent. He is too old school to succeed.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 04:24 PM
Ah, another reading comprehension problem. I didn't suggest that you aspire to be more like me. I suggested that you might want to look into the fact that (according to you) you can't walk away from a loss...in a game that has no bearing on any real portion of your life...with the idea that it was a great game. Sad really.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 04:33 PM
...in WEEK ****ING TWO are the people I should aspire to be... Might want to check your math as well genius. It's week 35+ of the Herm Edwards experience...not week 2. And at week 35+ we are 13-22. That's a big .371 winning percentage.

So yeah...I think we're firmly into "fire the stupid ****s" territory.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 04:42 PM
Riled up? I'm not riled up, but as a fan I expect more for my money. I would hope that if hermcuff is still the coach after the next loss, which will be Sunday the Chiefs will definitely get the first round draft pick.

Vermeil has been gone 3 years. That dog won't hunt.

Oh. My. God.

I'm baffled. That might be one of the most retarded comments EVER made on this board.

Take every player in the league drafted before 2006 off of every roster in the league, then tell me that past drafting ability doesn't matter.

Wow.

Here's a quote from Clark himself, all but throwing Vermeil under the bus:

If you look at our shortcomings this year they can really be traced back to the early part of this decade, where we had a head coach, Dick Vermeil, who believed that you build teams through free agency with veteran players. He did a great job of that both here and in St. Louis, but unfortunately at the same time we weren’t drafting well enough. The players we did draft, there wasn’t a focus on developing them.

Fast forward to 2007, those same players who would have been in the prime of their careers, weren’t here. Instead we had a bunch of aging veterans, many of whom had been wonderful players for us...

http://kan.scout.com/2/720910.html


When did we not draft by the positions we needed at the time of the draft?

That part of the problem. You don't draft for need, you draft the best player available. Though that would have been a sham as well, since Vermeil couldn't evaluate talent worth a shit.


Old news.


Again, old news. The current status of the team is all Hermcuff. He has been making the decisions on what position players we need for three years now.

See above. Dear God, I feel sorry for you.


I need to see your proof of that. I get the Star and haven't seen that in print.


Again, when and where was that said?

It has to be reported in the Star for it to have taken place? Sorry
I don't bookmark every page I read on the internet, just to debate you. It's common knowledge, and the 2006 playoff run comment was made by Carl himself.


Who else are you going to blame? First DV, again DV, again DV, Carl, again Carl and now Clark. Put the blame where it lies, Carl for recommending Hermcuff and Hermcuff for being such a shitty HC.

I've blamed everyone from Clark on down. LEARN TO READ.

Perceived from your comments. You don't believe we are as bad as we are, but you attack those that see way too much room for improvement. That has to mean that you feel we are doing just fine.

Your perception over what I've personally written.

Interesting.


So effing what? Everyone knew that team sucked, we hoped the rivalry would get the team up for the game. It didn't. Does that give you a clue as to how badly they were prepared for the game?

Rivalries are for fans. Get over it.



I've been a Chiefs fan since they moved to KC. I am not the most knowledgable person when it comes to football

No, Really?

but in this case I'd claim to have more savvy than you could ever claim. You need to get off your high horse and figure out that the team currently sucks and the head coach is not the person to fix the problem. Stop blaming everyone but those responsible.

I've blamed EVERYONE responsible. Again, learn to read.

If you bothered to read ANYTHING I've posted over the past two weeks, you'd see I have no thoughts that Herm is the person to fix this. However, I'm smart enough to know that we're stuck with him until the offseason, and no amount of losses is going to change that.

Even IF Clark fired Herm in the middle of a season, what makes you think Gailey or Gunther would do any better?

Clark needs to do a TOTAL housecleaning come January. I've made that perfectly clear.

As for my interpretation of what I see with this team. I've been a coach before, I've been in leadership positions before. I have an ability to judge performance and have been successful in doing so. I have also been in a positoin to train individuals to succeed and they have.

I'm not the most adept at fixing the problem here, but it seems like the only fix you see is "let it ride". IMO that is not a good answer. Action is needed now. Firing Hermcuff will scramble the team a bit, but it will also give us an opportunity to cut our losses and move forward.

I feel for anyone you've coached, in any capacity.

Action now solves nothing. It's a band-aid over a sucking chest wound.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 04:45 PM
Ah, another reading comprehension problem. I didn't suggest that you aspire to be more like me. I suggested that you might want to look into the fact that (according to you) you can't walk away from a loss...in a game that has no bearing on any real portion of your life...with the idea that it was a great game. Sad really.

Can't walk away from a loss?

I guess you missed this post:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=5024818&postcount=60

There's a huge difference in being able to "walk away from a loss" and accepting losses just because we were competitive.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 04:47 PM
I dont agree, we have talent on the team, we do not have a coach that can exploit that talent. He is too old school to succeed.

Please show me the ESTABLISHED TALENT we have on this team.

53 guys on the active roster.

Please, enlighten us.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 04:50 PM
Please show me the ESTABLISHED TALENT we have on this team.

53 guys on the active roster.

Please, enlighten us.Colquitt :banghead:ROFLLMAO

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 04:53 PM
Colquitt :banghead:ROFLLMAO

You think it's funny, but there's not much more...

Tom wants to talk about how bad we really are, yet suggests that this team is just overflowing with talent.

CoMoChief
09-16-2008, 04:59 PM
Bullshit.

With DV, we knew that if the defense couldn't manage to make 1 or 2 stops or a critical turnover, we weren't going to score enough points to win. Which happened a helluva lot. That's what I remember.

With Herm, It's becoming obvious that if we don't have 2 or 3 good clock-eating drives on offense, our defense isn't going to have the energy to stop anyone in the second half.

You're such a ****ing moron.

Im not arguing the fact that our defense was pathetic.....

What I'm saying is that while our defense gave up 30 points per game, our offense had the ablility to score 31+, and that did happen a lot.

Going into the game we could knew we could hang with anyone, the players knew that, they took pride in the fact that they could almost score at will.........can you really honestly say that now?!?!?! If we are down by 2 scores the game is ****ed. We're done.

DaneMcCloud
09-16-2008, 05:01 PM
You're such a ****ing moron.

Im not arguing the fact that our defense was pathetic.....

What I'm saying is that while our defense gave up 30 points per game, our offense had the ablility to score 31+, and that did happen a lot.

Going into the game we could knew we could hang with anyone, the players knew that, they took pride in the fact that they could almost score at will.........can you really honestly say that now?!?!?! If we are down by 2 scores the game is ****ed. We're done.

Big ****ing deal. What did that accomplish?

3 average or below average seasons.

2 winning seasons.

1 playoff appearance.

1 playoff loss.

Oh yeah. And a roster completely devoid of talent and depth when he left.

****ing great.

TN_Chief
09-16-2008, 05:01 PM
You think it's funny, but there's not much more...

Tom wants to talk about how bad we really are, yet suggests that this team is just overflowing with talent.There is some talent, though not a ton. What's most alarming to me is that even with the relatively inexperienced team we've got there doens't appear to be any coherent plan to get from A to B. It's 22+ players (and coaches) all going in different directions.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 05:05 PM
There is some talent, though not a ton. What's most alarming to me is that even with the relatively inexperienced team we've got there doens't appear to be any coherent plan to get from A to B. It's 22+ players (and coaches) all going in different directions.

Can't argue that.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 05:06 PM
Big ****ing deal. What did that accomplish?

3 average or below average seasons.

2 winning seasons.

1 playoff appearance.

1 playoff loss.

Oh yeah. And a roster completely devoid of talent and depth when he left.

****ing great.

But, but....we could score!

MahiMike
09-16-2008, 05:07 PM
Hang on while I get a tissue...(

Programmer
09-16-2008, 05:10 PM
Please show me the ESTABLISHED TALENT we have on this team.

53 guys on the active roster.

Please, enlighten us.

Show me where I said we have "ESTABLISHED TALENT" on this team.

You are trying your best to swing the comments to what they are not.

I'll wait for your link to the requested post.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 05:12 PM
Show me where I said we have "ESTABLISHED TALENT" on this team.

You are trying your best to swing the comments to what they are not.

I'll wait for your link to the requested post.

I'm not "swinging" anything.

If you want me to rip your post to shreds, feel free to post who YOU think has talent on this team.

And please, what post are you speaking of? I'm having trouble finding the "request" in the steaming piles of shit that are your posts...

Programmer
09-16-2008, 05:25 PM
That part of the problem. You don't draft for need, you draft the best player available. Though that would have been a sham as well, since Vermeil couldn't evaluate talent worth a shit.

My my my, you are quite draft master. WTF do you think has been done over the years? Vermeil didn't evaluate the talent in the draft, the scouts did and CP staff evaluated the information and selected to fill the request of the HC, it's been that way for a very long time.


See above. Dear God, I feel sorry for you.

Your response just shows what kind of asshole you are. If anyone here needs sympathy it's you. You are blind and arrogant, two qualities that are not going to lead you to success.

I've blamed everyone from Clark on down. LEARN TO READ.

So why are you arguing? If you had any brains you'd see that there are levels to the blame, currently everything is in hermcuff's court.

Your perception over what I've personally written.

Ya, you should read what you write.

Rivalries are for fans. Get over it.

You obviously have not played competitive sports, but that's a given.

If you bothered to read ANYTHING I've posted over the past two weeks, you'd see I have no thoughts that Herm is the person to fix this. However, I'm smart enough to know that we're stuck with him until the offseason, and no amount of losses is going to change that.

Why would I waste my time seaching for your posts? From what I've read here you are right next to brain dead.

Even IF Clark fired Herm in the middle of a season, what makes you think Gailey or Gunther would do any better?

Who says that theyould do any better? It's time to stop the bleeding and you don't do that with the knife in the back.

I feel for anyone you've coached, in any capacity.

Right, those kids will probably want to give their trophies back.

Action now solves nothing. It's a band-aid over a sucking chest wound.

So you would rather leave a sucking chest wound as is so everyone is in intense pain? That is one assinine comment. Hermcuff needs to be far from KC an he needs to be gone now.

We could replace him with most any poster on this board and it would be an improvement. Your concept that those left over couldn't improve on the team shows you don't know them or what drives them.

Programmer
09-16-2008, 05:31 PM
I'm not "swinging" anything.

If you want me to rip your post to shreds, feel free to post who YOU think has talent on this team.

And please, what post are you speaking of? I'm having trouble finding the "request" in the steaming piles of shit that are your posts...

You added established to my comment, that's not what I put, but..

Tony Gonzales
Larry Johnson
Donnie Edwards
Tamba Hali

To name a few that might be considered established.

There are some rookies we drafted that have talent.

Duane Bowe has talent. Croyle has talent, we just don't know if he will be sturdy enough to last in the league.

The post I was talking of is the one that you claimed I said we had established talent.

The rest of your response was nothing more than a childish response. If you are indeed an adult you need to learn that nothing here is personal. If you take it as such you need to step away from the keyboard.

OnTheWarpath58
09-16-2008, 05:57 PM
My my my, you are quite draft master. WTF do you think has been done over the years? Vermeil didn't evaluate the talent in the draft, the scouts did and CP staff evaluated the information and selected to fill the request of the HC, it's been that way for a very long time.




Your response just shows what kind of asshole you are. If anyone here needs sympathy it's you. You are blind and arrogant, two qualities that are not going to lead you to success.



So why are you arguing? If you had any brains you'd see that there are levels to the blame, currently everything is in hermcuff's court.



Ya, you should read what you write.



You obviously have not played competitive sports, but that's a given.



Why would I waste my time seaching for your posts? From what I've read here you are right next to brain dead.



Who says that theyould do any better? It's time to stop the bleeding and you don't do that with the knife in the back.



Right, those kids will probably want to give their trophies back.



So you would rather leave a sucking chest wound as is so everyone is in intense pain? That is one assinine comment. Hermcuff needs to be far from KC an he needs to be gone now.

We could replace him with most any poster on this board and it would be an improvement. Your concept that those left over couldn't improve on the team shows you don't know them or what drives them.



Quite the rebuttal.

Personal attacks, no facts.

Please, Tom, don't even try to suggest you know a damn thing about me.

I don't hide behind a screen name, or in your case, multiple screen names.

Many people on this board have met me in person. Shared their homes with me and my wife.

Most people on this board despise you. And this thread is just a microcosm of why.

You've admitted you don't know jack shit about football. Do us all a favor, and go back over to DC and continue to drive that forum into the ground. But please, leave the football talk to the adults, especially if you're not even going to bother to read their arguments.

blackhawk
09-16-2008, 07:15 PM
what ever happen to mike maslowski?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/4938/

Fish
09-16-2008, 08:28 PM
I am not the most knowledgable person when it comes to football, but in this case I'd claim to have more savvy than you could ever claim.

That's pretty much all you needed to say right there....

Programmer
09-16-2008, 08:31 PM
That's pretty much all you needed to say right there....

Now if you just had the balls to say the same thing we would be on even ground. As it is I have the high ground.

Oh Snap
09-16-2008, 08:32 PM
Bumping this question.

christ, who cares! Atleast it was fun to watch the chiefs!

Fish
09-16-2008, 08:38 PM
Now if you just had the balls to say the same thing we would be on even ground. As it is I have the high ground.

You have the high ground? OK then....

Do you always resort to military strategies when you're losing an argument Mr. Bronze medal?

Are you going to tell me I need to analyze my life too?

Programmer
09-16-2008, 08:42 PM
You have the high ground? OK then....

Do you always resort to military strategies when you're losing an argument Mr. Bronze medal?

Are you going to tell me I need to analyze my life too?

Can you really be that stupid? Answer: Yes you can.

I don't feel any amount of analyzing will help you. Your are AR and have problems understanding what is said.

Fish
09-16-2008, 08:47 PM
Can you really be that stupid? Answer: Yes you can.

(I don't feel any amount of analyzing will help you.) = (Your are AR and have problems understanding what is said.)

Thanks. I knew I could count on you.......

Sure-Oz
09-16-2008, 08:48 PM
what ever happen to mike maslowski?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/4938/

Maslowski joined the Hamburg Sea Devils of NFL Europe in 2006 and is currently the linebacker coach for the team.

According to his WIKI

DaneMcCloud
09-16-2008, 09:04 PM
Maslowski joined the Hamburg Sea Devils of NFL Europe in 2006 and is currently the linebacker coach for the team.

According to his WIKI

NFL Europe doesn't exist anymore

Programmer
09-16-2008, 10:05 PM
Thanks. I knew I could count on you.......

Thanks for accepting the fact that you are stupid.

ChiefsCountry
09-16-2008, 10:07 PM
Thanks for accepting the fact that you are stupid.

Pot talking to the kettle.

chiefsfan1963
09-17-2008, 01:28 AM
You can throw up whatever stats you would like. But the fact remains that Vermeil crippled this franchise for the sake of those wins. His ego and stubborn nature provided zero long term stability. And now we're paying for that. But obviously he did it in a way that kept the less knowledgeable ADHD fans content from week to week with a flashy high scoring loss and an "awwww shucks, at least it was a close loss" attitude.

No thanks. I'd rather take the lumps and be patient and do it right.

You are taking your lumps all for naught b/c we're not doing the right thing.

chiefsfan1963
09-17-2008, 01:34 AM
You're combining things that don't deserve to be combined.

The actual process of rebuilding IS being done right.

The game planning, and in-game decision making is absymal.

They are two separate entities, and that will become obvious when a new coach is brought in this offseason.

absolutely wrong that the rebuilding is being done right! Until we have a real coaching staff that knows what the ****** they're doing and complete top to bottom new Front Office. Rebuilding will not be done right here.

Guru
09-17-2008, 03:06 AM
I remember when we were asking for a balanced team, but this isn't what we had in mind.
Damn!!! That is about the most accurate statement in the thread there.:shake::doh!::(

Programmer
09-17-2008, 05:25 AM
Pot talking to the kettle.

Well Buckwheat. How about chiming in with in with some of your great football knowledge.

What is the problem with the Chiefs. Are you one of the "It's all Carl Petersons faut?" types. Do you blame Clark for not being the type of owner we need? The players all suck, we don't have any with the right amount of experience?

I've never claimed to be the most informed about the situation, but I do know what I see and what I see is that our Head Coach is totally inept in the frame of how to win games in the NFL.