PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs If the Chiefs hire a first time head coach


Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 03:29 PM
...and they have to replace him in a year or two. Is the program set back?

88TG88
01-26-2009, 03:31 PM
Not if we draft/bring in good players.

RustShack
01-26-2009, 03:33 PM
You don't replace a new coach in a year or two dumbass.

RustShack
01-26-2009, 03:34 PM
If you want to know what happens to organization that replace the coach after a year or two see the Raiders.

Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 03:34 PM
Saban, Petrino & Cameron, ect

Cheater5
01-26-2009, 03:37 PM
IF we go 1-15 two years in a row, I would guess that the HC would be removed. And yes, this would be a set back.

Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 03:38 PM
IF we go 1-15 two years in a row, I would guess that the HC would be removed. And yes, this would be a set back.

What if they pick up a Cowher, Holmgren or Shanahan? They would be picking up high round draft picks under Pioli

DJ's left nut
01-26-2009, 03:40 PM
How could it not be?

If in 2 years we have to can our coach, it's because the club didn't progress. Now we'll be tossing everyone out and starting from scratch with a new system and many new players. It's absolutely moving backwards.

This isn't an old team that could need a 'transition' coach. This is a young team that needs to be progressing, improving its talent base and moving up in the standings. We've hit rock-bottom, if we have to fire a coach in 2 years, that's right where we'd be again.

Cheater5
01-26-2009, 03:44 PM
What if they pick up a Cowher, Holmgren or Shanahan? They would be picking up high round draft picks under Pioli

So, for the sake of argument let's look at it this way

2007: 4-12
2008: 2-14
2009: 1-15
2010: 1-15

But...we got Holmgren/Shanahan/Cowher/Lombardi's Ghost, plus two first round picks, and this is not seen as a step backward?

My contention is it doesnt matter; it isnt working.

DaKCMan AP
01-26-2009, 03:51 PM
Saban, Petrino & Cameron, ect

Terrible examples for a couple of reasons.

1. Saban and Petrino chose to leave.

2. Cameron was replaced because a new front office was hired.

3. Neither Miami nor Atlanta were set back with the departure of Petrino and dismissal of Cameron.

Fish
01-26-2009, 03:53 PM
Not if we draft/bring in good players.

Yup.

Everyone is putting so much emphasis on having the perfect coach. But without quality players it doesn't matter....

DaneMcCloud
01-26-2009, 03:57 PM
If you want to know what happens to organization that replace the coach after a year or two see the Raiders.

QFT.

Furthermore, I can't see Pioli and Clark Hunt hiring a guy that would need replacing in one year.

That would be a colossal mistake and I just can't envision that happening.

Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 04:08 PM
So, for the sake of argument let's look at it this way

2007: 4-12
2008: 2-14
2009: 1-15
2010: 1-15

But...we got Holmgren/Shanahan/Cowher/Lombardi's Ghost, plus two first round picks, and this is not seen as a step backward?

My contention is it doesnt matter; it isnt working.

Going 5-11 & 8-8 could be reason to be replaced. Yet you are still building a good core of players, scheme or not

Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 04:09 PM
Terrible examples for a couple of reasons.

1. Saban and Petrino chose to leave.

2. Cameron was replaced because a new front office was hired.

3. Neither Miami nor Atlanta were set back with the departure of Petrino and dismissal of Cameron.

They were still replaced

Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 04:10 PM
Not if we draft/bring in good players.

This is how I feel.

Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 04:11 PM
Yup.

Everyone is putting so much emphasis on having the perfect coach. But without quality players it doesn't matter....

Yes, exactly. The lines are more important at this stage & QB development

ChiefsCountry
01-26-2009, 04:13 PM
Going 5-11 & 8-8 could be reason to be replaced.

Looks like the team is headed in the right direction with those records.

Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 04:15 PM
Looks like the team is headed in the right direction with those records.

And if management thought better coaching would get better results, you are still ahead. Not losing much ground & gaining maturity

Mr. Arrowhead
01-26-2009, 04:16 PM
Why are people so scared of bringing in a good young coach like Haley

Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 04:19 PM
Why are people so scared of bringing in a good young coach like Haley

The Chiefs have a first time GM and more than likely a first time QB. I would think now would be the time to give a young guy a shot at head coach. The vets would be more apt to dismiss him

Mr. Laz
01-26-2009, 04:24 PM
it's gonna have to be a first time coach if Pioli is gonna dictate the type of system the HC is gonna have to run the way some people around here insist he will.

i mean if pioli has already decided what type of players he's gonna draft then the new HC is gonna be handcuffed.

Wile_E_Coyote
01-26-2009, 04:27 PM
This could be why it appears Gailey is being kept from interviewing. The first timer would have some experience to lean on

Christofire
01-26-2009, 04:31 PM
Thinking about it, I don't know that replacing a first-timer in the next two years will really be a setback. Here's my theory: Let's say for the sake of argument Pioli and the first coach he hires together decide that our talent is best suited for a 4-3 defense. So for the next two years, he's bringing guys in to support it. If the team is failed by a coach who can't properly organize/motivate/scheme/work well with Pioli/whatever, well, that's unfortuante. But if he's already assembled the talent for a dominant 4-3 defense in the future, I've got to think he'd just target another guy who buys into the 4-3, and would just improve on the coaching flaws of the previous guy.

The same would apply if Pioli deems our talent is best suited for a 4-3, 5-2, 6-1, 11-0 or whatever. Disappointing if the first-time coach gets fired? Absolutely. But a setback? Not necessarily.

Simplex3
01-26-2009, 04:31 PM
How much further back can the Chiefs really go?

lazepoo
01-26-2009, 04:35 PM
Guys, anytime you change coaches, it's a setback. Even if you have guys preaching similar philosophies, it takes time for everyone to adjust and to bring in exactly the kind of players that a coach is looking for. Coaching changes set back player development which is why it's a much more important hire than any player and one that Pioli and Clark absolutely need to nail.

Mecca
01-26-2009, 04:38 PM
The Chiefs have a first time GM and more than likely a first time QB. I would think now would be the time to give a young guy a shot at head coach. The vets would be more apt to dismiss him

Because this team has a bunch of good vets, oh wait..

The couple of vets on this team acted like Herm was god ask Brian Waters.

Cheater5
01-26-2009, 09:43 PM
Thinking about it, I don't know that replacing a first-timer in the next two years will really be a setback. Here's my theory: Let's say for the sake of argument Pioli and the first coach he hires together decide that our talent is best suited for a 4-3 defense. So for the next two years, he's bringing guys in to support it. If the team is failed by a coach who can't properly organize/motivate/scheme/work well with Pioli/whatever, well, that's unfortuante. But if he's already assembled the talent for a dominant 4-3 defense in the future, I've got to think he'd just target another guy who buys into the 4-3, and would just improve on the coaching flaws of the previous guy.

The same would apply if Pioli deems our talent is best suited for a 4-3, 5-2, 6-1, 11-0 or whatever. Disappointing if the first-time coach gets fired? Absolutely. But a setback? Not necessarily.


Chicken or the egg, I suppose. But look at the Redskins and how much money Snyder has spent on high quality free agents, and/or trading for top guys and stockpiling his team with talent. Not that it means much, but look at how many Redskins players are going to the Pro Bowl, yet they weren't in the playoffs. Norv Turner, Schottenheimer, Gibbs, and now Jim Zorn cannot seem to get them over the hump much less an NFC East championship.

Same can be said for Dallas; loads of talent, but when was the last time they won a playoff game? Jones and Snyder have the patience of a 9 year old girl.

Coaching (Leadership) cannot be underestimated, and even though it is the most intangible aspect of the game, it is perhaps the most important.

KCChiefsMan
01-26-2009, 10:13 PM
well if you want to take a page out of the raiders coaching guide for dummies

Wile_E_Coyote
01-27-2009, 03:55 PM
Bump for larger sample size, if possible

JuicesFlowing
01-27-2009, 03:57 PM
If a coach has his own "system" or style, then bringing in a new coach to replace him seems like a setback unless the new coach has the same "coaching philosophy." You can't have an old school coach coaching a spread offense. Oh wait ...

Over-Head
01-27-2009, 06:57 PM
With no Gaz option this post is flawed:shake:

StcChief
01-27-2009, 07:19 PM
considering our Cap situation.....
alot of new young players that wanna win....
some good vets that wanna go out as Chiefs ... Gonzo, Waters, (maybe Donnie Edwards)
having Pioli to help bring in a good coach/players......

the chance of another 1-4 win season seem low

The solid hire will be given alot of latitude (much to the win now CP approach)

Still think the min win is 5 even considering our horrid schedule in 2009

Craqhead
01-27-2009, 07:41 PM
If it happens, then yes it would set the program back. Should that happen? NO it shouldnt. Yet in the real world anything is possible. I truely hope this doenst happen.

Personally I think we hire a first time HC. If for some reason he's gone in two years, then sumthing about Piolo smells like crapolo.