View Full Version : Vermiel lowering expectations...

09-16-2001, 10:11 PM
Vermeil alters expectations for offense, Green

By ADAM TEICHER - The Kansas City Star
Date: 09/16/01 22:15

The Chiefs return to practice today with altered expectations from their head coach.

Dick Vermeil, because of the unplanned break in weekend routine, had ample time to think about where the Chiefs' season is headed. He came to the realization that he can't expect the offense to be as strong as he initially hoped.

He also knows he can't expect quarterback Trent Green to be as spectacular as he was last season when Green was the NFL's second-rated passer for the St. Louis Rams.

The Chiefs' season resumes this Sunday against the New York Giants at Arrowhead Stadium. Last Sunday's scheduled game at Seattle was called off because of the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. The Chiefs had yet to hear whether it whether it will be made up at season's end.

"I don't know if we're ever going to be explosive on offense," Vermeil said. "I think we can be efficient. I think we can be explosive on defense. I feel pretty good about the defense. We gave up too many yards (against Oakland), no question. But overall I think we can be pretty good on defense, maybe better than pretty good."

The offense and Green struggled in the 27-24 season-opening loss to Oakland, the only regular game the Chiefs have played. The wide receivers contributed just one catch, and the running game produced just 35 yards.

Green completed just 16 of 37 passes and wasn't as sharp as in the preseason, when Vermeil said he thought Green would be as effective as last season.

Vermeil scaled back that hope after studying video of the Raiders game.

"Can he make the same contribution that Kurt Warner makes to the Rams? No, because he doesn't have the same people," Vermeil said. "I think it's realistic that he can be in the 90-plus area of quarterback efficiency rating. The better our receivers get, the better the chance he has of doing that. If he doesn't, it won't be because he doesn't have the ability to.

"Regardless of the receivers, he isn't what he will be because of his (injured) knee. If Trent Green were a linebacker and you put him in the league opener after coming off a knee surgery, how do you think he would play? It isn't going to be lights-out."

A passer rating of 90-plus would still put Green at season's end among the NFL leaders. It might be a stretch to think he can get there without more help.

At no position could Green and the Chiefs use more help than wide receiver. The Chiefs last week flirted with the idea of signing veteran Keith Poole, who opted instead for Denver.

The Chiefs have talked with Cleveland about trading for wide receiver Kevin Johnson, but discussions stalled when the Browns asked for a third-round pick and the Chiefs countered by offering a fifth.

"If I was convinced he could come in and make a winning contribution to us right off the bat, then Carl (Peterson) and I would discuss it and come up with the best decision," Vermeil said. "We've all been burned on trading for somebody else's player. Then you find out why they were up for trade after you get 'em.

"I'm not against giving a third-round pick if he plays like a third-round pick. When he was drafted, he had the talent to perform. He was the 32nd player drafted. He had the talent to perform at a higher level than he's playing at now. But he hasn't for one reason or another."

The need becomes more critical if Derrick Alexander doesn't play Sunday. Alexander has been in and out of practice because of a sore Achilles' tendon, and though he played against Oakland he was held without a catch for the first time in almost two years.

"We're going to try new shoes for him with the thinking that the shoe design of his old shoes was affecting his Achilles' tendon," Vermeil said. "When your Achilles' are not right, it's tough. The Achilles' tendons have been MRIed and everything else. There's no structural damage, so we're not really worried about him popping an Achilles' tendon."

With or without Alexander, improvement may have to come from within. Vermeil said it was unlikely the Chiefs would acquire a receiver unless something changes.

"I'm not big on replacing players that have been in the program once the season gets started," he said.

"There's a need for improvement. I think we can get that improvement from our current group."
Vermeil alters expectations for offense, Green (http://www.kcstar.com/item/pages/sports.pat,sports/3accfac3.916,.html)

09-16-2001, 10:59 PM
I don't know if we're ever going to be explosive on offense

These are the words of a master motivator? Sure wouldn't motivate me very well. Then again I usually do prefer some positive feedback or at least a little belief. Last year Gun was ready to resign after the first game. Now Dick is ready to bag the entire offense after one game. I don't get it.

The Bad Guy
09-16-2001, 11:05 PM
What is there not to get?

I don't recall a sentence in Teichers whole article that says Vermeil is ready to bag the offense. He is just clearly stating what everyone knows that this offense isn't explosive. Efficient yes, explosive it isn't.

Explosive offenses has dynamic wideouts. Our wideouts can't even put the IC in dynamic. We have efficient players though that can run it.

I don't know why Vermeil would lie and say we have the ability to be explosive, he is just stating the truth, but never does he say he is ready to bag it.

09-16-2001, 11:18 PM
Uh oh, this is starting to sound eerily similar to martyball. Explosive defense, efficient offense. Of course with Marty, the offense was rarely even efficient. Deficient is much more like it.

09-16-2001, 11:39 PM
The thing about this weeks game being postponed is it would have been a confidence booster because the Chiefs would have easily defeated Seattle.

09-16-2001, 11:45 PM
Somehow I think we will be drafting all offense the next couple years unless we get lucky. I'm not convinced our troubles at DT are over, but I certainly hope so.

Wouldn't bu suprised to see us take WR's in the first and second next year.

- Mark

09-17-2001, 07:13 AM
When I read this article this morning, it just really kind of deflated me. It didn't really say anything I didn't already know, but somehow hearing Vermeil say it really drove the point home. The quote in particular that got me was "We've all been burned on trading for somebody else's player. Then you find out why they were up for trade after you get 'em."

I know this quote was in the context of trading for a receiver, but I found myself wondering if somewhere deep down he didn't wonder a little bit about the Green trade too. The whole article just had a weird feel to it, IMHO.

09-17-2001, 07:14 AM
This is good to hear. The preseason expectations for this team were wildly out of touch with reality. It's good to see DV attempting to ground things.

We are a 6-10 team gang. We might luck out and go 7-9 or 8-8 but the 11-5 posts we saw prior to 9 Sept were completely out of touch.

We need DA and Morris to get healthy. We need Green to look at more than one receiver and stop holding the ball so long. We need a RB. Perhaps a spread set with TRich as the single back would help there. Holmes is not the answer. Stickboy needs to stay in the slot. I wouldn't mind seeing Mayes brought back.

As for the draft and offseason, in no particular order we need a shutdown CB, run stuffing DT, speed WR and RB.

This will be a character building season and I'm pleased to see DV acknowledging the obvious. Although the garbage about Green's knee bugs me. We heard nothing but 'his knee is fine. His knee is 100%' now DV is trotting it out as an excuse. Green is a good to average QB that was oversold. Lets not make excuses for his good to average play. Lets acknowledge his strengths and find people to acceuntate them.

09-17-2001, 07:23 AM
Im not suprised at this. I was suprised at the apparent lack of ability to get the ball to the WR's.

09-17-2001, 07:34 AM
I see this collumn in a totally different light than most of you. Dick Vermiel is trying to give the offense a little kick in the *ss with this article. He's trying to tell Green and Co, hey your not explosive, and the only way to prove that otherwise, is to do it on Sunday's. This is just a little kick on the butt to get things into gear. He is a motivator. We played pretty well against Oakland, being it our first game under Vermiel, Green, new offense, etc.....We will play better agianst the Giants, and expect a little more firepower from the offense this coming Sunday....A 6-10 team? NOPE.

09-17-2001, 08:20 AM
I was really irritated that on the short ball, none of the WR could get open, and on the long ball, Green kept throwing WAAAAY off target. Maybe it was because he was pressured, but he looked worse than Grbac to me... and that hurts to say.

09-17-2001, 08:20 AM
Sorry double post

09-17-2001, 08:27 AM
The inability to get the ball to the WR's shouldn't be surprising at all. DA is hurt and was going against Woodsen, one of the best in the business. Minnis was getting schooled by Allen and facing his first NFL physical man on man coverage. Minnis was in <b>way</b> over his head and his talent level.

What concerned me most was the decisions that Green made. He should have had at least two more interceptions with his throws into traffic. And he looked completely confused in the pocket at times. Not to mention how he locked onto receivers.

DA will get healthy and get his catches. Minnis is a lost cause as long as he's facing physical CB's. Put him in the slot and he'll contribute. Green is the key. He needs to improve drasticly and quickly.

09-17-2001, 08:33 AM
This puts me in a quandary.
While I want this O to succeed, I saw this coming all along. We needed to get back to aggressive running the football and utilizing the talent we DO have (Richardson, Gonzales, Ricks) and not the talent the Rams have (WRs, Faulk).

This O looks worse than the Raye O IMO. At least the Raye O was good for 22-24 ppg and 400+ yds of total offense. And Raye's O had more TOP than this one.

I think this O will get on track once we pound some weak team and discover our own "groove." That 42-10 waxing of SD after being down 7-0 really surprised us all last season. Maybe something like that will happen this year and we'll see TR gain 150 yds or who knows what.

Note: it was NOT me that mentioned our former head coaches in the posts below!

Ducking to avoid getting hit by flying eggs and tomatoes

09-17-2001, 08:44 AM

I won't toss any groceries at you, but I knew it would only be a matter of minutes before you posted on this topic in a "I told you so fashion".

You are becoming verrrrrrrrrrrry predictable.

Baby Lee
09-17-2001, 08:50 AM
"Can he make the same contribution that Kurt Warner makes to the Rams? No, because he doesn't have the same people,"

Too bad Green can't throw it and catch it too.

Joe Seahawk
09-17-2001, 08:52 AM
This article looks like it was written by the "Bob Dole Star Enquirer"

But it wasn't....:)

Baby Lee
09-17-2001, 08:55 AM
[KCJ-] You are becoming verrrrrrrrrrrry predictable.

The other day, I drove past a policeman at 100 mph. He pulled me other. Very Predicable.

If things turned out as you predict, especially if you went through the razzing KC did, you'd point it out too.

Listen, DV is bagging the O wholesale

"I don't know if we're ever going to be explosive on offense."
"he isn't what he will be because of his (injured) knee."
"We've all been burned on trading for somebody else's player. Then you find out why they were up for trade after you get 'em."

09-17-2001, 08:55 AM
"Too bad Green can't throw it and catch it too."

But he can, didn't you see the completion he threw to himself in week 1?


09-17-2001, 09:00 AM
Everytime Green would almost throw an interception I would just close my eyes and think...

30-year-old back up first round draft pick...

30-year-old back up first round draft pick...

30-year-old back up first round draft pick...

And I'd feel all better.

Baby Lee
09-17-2001, 09:05 AM
I think it's realistic that he can be in the 90-plus area of quarterback efficiency rating. The better our receivers get, the better the chance he has of doing that. If he doesn't, it won't be because he doesn't have the ability to.

Dude!! I got so worked up over the intro quote that I skimmed the exit quote in the paragraph. Does anyone else read this to say "No matter what, Green is a good QB. If the receivers do their jobs, it'll show up on the field."

09-17-2001, 09:14 AM
Hey Chuck, can't you go one day without bashing Minnis? A "lost cause?"...

Hello, he's the only guy that even got open...

09-17-2001, 09:23 AM
This article really just makes a already deflated JL80 feel even worse...Chiefs blow the Raiders game. Ragheads kill 10K of our friends and family and now when I am trying to heal DV pour salt in the wounds by pretty much letting us know that P.Holmes was wasted money and that we should have kept our damn 1st round pick and drafted D.McCallister or M.Bennett...

Maybe I will wake up soon and find out all of this is just a bad dream...

At least we got a steal in the 3rd round with the inactive Eric Dowing...:D

Bob Dole
09-17-2001, 09:30 AM
Green had a bad home opener in front of a new home crowd. Big deal. We'll be fine.

Bob Dole is going to be seriously pissed if the boo birds start coming out already.

09-17-2001, 09:33 AM
Sen. Dole,

I would imagine that it will take a 0-3 start before the boo birds start flying...Hopefully we won't see that.

09-17-2001, 09:52 AM
I wasn't bashing Minnis, although upon rereading I can see how you'd take it that way. I'm merely setting the bar at a more appropraite level for his talent.

Minnis can contribute although I will continue to say he was a reach and we could've gotten <b>much</b> better talent. He'll have to contribute from the slot and against nickle CB's or zone schemes. Those that were saying Minnis was better than Morris were overestimating Minnis' ability. The Oakland game proved that he's a slot receiver and has a learning curve even there. He's a rookie so that's fine.

Yes he did get open once. He did make a great catch. Kudos to him for that. He also dropped an easy catch and was stymied by a physical Allen all day long simply proving what I've been saying about him.

09-17-2001, 09:55 AM

I don't recall the last time we lost our 1st 2 home games to start off the year. It's probably been since the 80's. I can tell you that the boo birds will start to rear their ugly head if that happens. Before the last couple of years, it was unprecedented to lose more than 2 games at home. To lose your first 2 at home and still have to play Pittsburgh, Indy, Philly and Denver at Arrowhead - it could get ugly.

Let's hope the fans show some patience and class, as this is obviously a retooling year for the Chiefs. My opinion still has not changed since pre-season. IMO, the wins and losses will be between the 7's and 9's.

Ugly Duck
09-17-2001, 10:00 AM
You guys should wait til you you see the performance in next week's game before you evaluate. Both Oakland and KC were wobbling a bit on their new offensive legs last week. Both teams were sighting in their new weapons. Oakland got it together quicker because they have much less new stuff to get used to. Remember, you guys, Oakland is a Superbowl favorite - a tough course for your shakedown cruise. The Raider D was #5 against the run last season, and they may be getting better the longer they play together. Guess what I'm saying is....Oakland is a top tier team that had a head start on you guys due to continuity of personnel. This first game may not be an accurate barometer for judging your team's talent. Stuff has had time to gel now, and this next game will give you guys a clearer picture of what you have.

09-17-2001, 10:01 AM
No problem Chuck...

I guess I just choked on the comments about Minnis...especially considering how pissed I am about the TOTAL DISAPPEARANCE of Derrick Alexander...

09-17-2001, 10:02 AM

Good points...I'm actually quite impressed with our defense after the game...I had figured it would have been much worse...

09-17-2001, 10:09 AM
Personally, I think only people like KC Johnny were expecting us to recreate the Rams offense, at least from posts that I recall. Most of us were expecting something much different.

In the SD offense, which is what <b>I</b> expected to see, they relied on strong running, good use of the TE and a controlled, precise passing game. Also, SD has always had decent defenses, even years that they stunk.

In other words, a well rounded, precise, <b>efficient</b> offense, and an explosive defense. Just like DV mentioned in the article.

I think DV is simply trying to explain to people that if you were expecting to see Rams West, you're going to be very disappointed.

I'm not completely displeased with the Oakland game. Mostly, yes, but I saw some good things and I think once we get the offense settled down and clicking, the defense will benefit from not being on the field quite so long and look more like the first half all game.

Oakland was a great bellweather. They're a tough team and they know us pretty well after all this time. I have a lot of confidence that over the next few games, the Chiefs will show a lot of improvement.

My preseason pick was 10-6 for the Chiefs and I haven't seen anything to change that yet.


Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan (the anti CK :D )

09-17-2001, 10:57 AM
The Chiefs should have brought in help the SECOND Sly went down. They waited so they are very thin at WR now. This offense will struggle too if Priest Holmes catches the ball the way he did against the Raiders. This is NOT a good sign in that our Defense will NOT be playing with huge leads the way EVERYONE thought. Robinson has had great success playing defense with big leads. His defenses have struggled when they have to play it close to the vest. Throw in the fact that the Chiefs are very inconsistent on Special Teams, and that could spell DISASTER. We saw this against the Raiders. As poorly as the offense played that game, had Todd Peterson just made his CHIP SHOT and the coverage team not given up that long return at the worst time possible, the Chiefs win that game. Still sticking with my preseason prediction of 6-10 and 4th place in the West. :confused:

09-17-2001, 12:34 PM
Yeah, yeah, yeah, blame it all on KCJohnny. Make your self feel good;)

The Chiefs traded in their #5 ranked pass attack for this 'balanced' attack? (16-37 222 yds)
The Chiefs jettisoned their famous drive blocking schemes for this 'Faulkish' attack (35 yds vs Oakland)?
I KNOW you hate to hear this but the Chiefs AVERAGED 443 ypg vs OAK last year with the WORST COACHING STAFF IN NFL HISTORY (you know who you are who said it).

This is DV sharing his emotions IMO that have been severly impacted by recent events, including the altering of the '01 NFL schedule.

You turkeys go ahead and throw in the towel; I'm only changing my prediction from 11-5 to 10-5 since we lost a game.

Blind, deceived homer who is collecting....)you know who you are)

09-17-2001, 12:48 PM
All of those stats mean dick. They mean nothing. They are out of context and keep fooling yourself with that nonsense, Proctor, because that's all it is. How many wins against Oakland did those stats produce? ZERO. KC was closer to winning week 1 than Gunther and his merry band of idiots ever were against Oakland last year.

the only stat that matters is 7-9 and the coaching staff last year DIRECTLY lost 3 games last year. Only thing that matters.

And just for the record, I said coaching staff was the worst in the league last year.

Lastly, how did the worst coaching staff in the league last year fare in week 1? I would suggest you look it up.

09-17-2001, 12:54 PM
After all that's happened I just want these guys and their fans to enjoy themselves and come home safely....

Yes, my standards have been lowered too...

Anyone else afraid of what's going to happen against the Gmen this week after the attack? You don't think these guys want to win to give NY something to feel good about? If they weren't playing our boys I'd cheer for 'em too....

But the jets still have a chance at making NY smile, so I'll cheer for them and the CHiefs on sunday....:D

09-17-2001, 12:54 PM
Titus, you're brilliant:

KC was closer to winning week 1 than Gunther and his merry band of idiots ever were against Oakland last year.

Oak at KC, 2000: Oak 20, KC 17
Oak at KC 2001: Oak 27, KC 24

Total offensive points scored in '00: 17
Total offensive points scored in '01: 17

Notices name-calling surfaces when facts complicate things

09-17-2001, 01:02 PM
I didnt call you anything but Proctor, John.

You mean to tell me that the #5 ranked Pass Offense that averaged 443 ypg couldnt put up more than 17 pts? That makes my case even more. Thanks, John!

BTW, tell me how the stooges did in Week 1? How about you compare that game to ours?

09-17-2001, 01:26 PM
The Skins allowed only 250 yds of total offense, compared to 439 for KC.
I know the Skins O stunk.
You did name call:

Gunther and his merry band of idiots ever were against Oakland last year.

Remembers that Morris fumbled in the red zone vs Oak at Arrowhead in '00; how was that Jimmy Raye's fault?

09-17-2001, 01:29 PM

Raye should have been telling his players, especially the rookies, that once you get into field goal range DON'T DO ANYTHING STUPID...like fighting for a meaningless extra yard...

09-17-2001, 01:37 PM
Were you a member of the coaching staff last year? Sorry, dont think so. I can call them whatever I please.

dont give me the yards allowed...you know whats more important is the point production. How many points did Raye's O get? How many points did Kurts D give up? Marty and Kurt masters of Defense gave up how many points to a team that went 1-15 last year? You've got to be kidding me.

Here's another irrelevent stat:

KC held the lead in week 1's game for 48 minutes. last year KC only held the lead of the of the Oak/KC game for 23 minutes.

09-17-2001, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by KCTitus
dont give me the yards allowed...you know whats more important is the point production. How many points did Raye's O get? How many points did Kurts D give up? Marty and Kurt masters of Defense gave up how many points to a team that went 1-15 last year? You've got to be kidding me.

While I agree with you on the ineptitude of Raye and K. Schott., I do feel the need to point out the flaw in this statement. Washington fumbled the ball 7 times and lost 2 of them. They continually put the defense in bad field position. That, and the fact that their special teams gave up a td, is why they gave up 30 points and lost the game. Their defense actually did play okay. K. Schott. over the last 2 seasons with the Chiefs had days where he looked like a genious. The problem was that they were few and far between. Far too often, the other days he looked like someone who didn't belong in the position of "D" coordinator.
Now, as far as Raye is concerned, his "O" looked like dookey. IMO, he's a coordinator who can call a decent passing game but, his playcalling has no balance and\or rhythm. Not to mention that it doesn't have much creativity.
Now, as for the Chiefs game this past Sunday, I can't say it was much different. I will, however, say that it is far too early to make judgements on this team. From what we all saw in the preseason, this team should be pretty good and make the playoffs as a wild card team (who knows how that's gonna pan out now). The team we saw against the Raiders didn't look like the team we saw in preseason. Not much creativity in the offensive playcalling, not much consistency, not much accuracy from the qb, etc. The defense did look good for a while. I will credit their 4th qtr collapse to fatigue and excellent adjustments by Gruden and company.

Still thinks it's way too early to play chicken little.

09-17-2001, 02:36 PM
Lzen: True. Here's a summary of the offensive series of the Redskins:

1st Quarter:
3 and out, the punt is returned for a TD
Int on 3rd and long

2nd Quarter:
3 and out
Int on 3rd and long, got a single first down
3 and out

3rd Quarter:
Fumble on 3rd down
3 and out
3 and out
Started at the SD 32, ran 5 plays to the SD 1 after 3 successive attempts up the middle, Stephen Davis fumbles

4th Quarter:
3 and out
last drive of the game came with 4:16 left in the game down 30-3, the Redskins managed to get 4 1st downs (for a game total of 5) and the drive stalled on the SD 3.

Yeah, I sure do miss these coaches

Thig Lyfe
09-26-2004, 03:14 PM
Lowered expectations. Sounds familiar.