-----------------------------------
Originally Posted by htismaqe
100% false. He's had ONE season where his defense finished top 10 in both yards and point allowed. ONE.

Year - Points Allowed - Yards Allowed
Chiefs
2005 - 16th - 25th
2004 - 29th - 31st

Chiefs
1998 - 22nd - 9th
1997 - 1st - 15th
1996 - 11th - 17th
1955 - 1st - 4th

Raiders
1994 - 17th - 12th
1993 - 21st - 10th
1992 - 11th - 8th
---------------------------------------------
So, it appears, since Stenerud missed the overtime field goals against Miami, The Chiefs defense has basically sucked - save for one year.

And even though 60% of the current players apparently suck, a new DC would provide a huge lift by leaving tooth marks on their arses.

Or: Gun and the players suck, but we want a DC that doesn't suck - until we are ranked 24th in defense next year, then he will suck too.

Man, I wish all these guys were women with all the suckin' goin' around ROFL ROFL ROFL
They'd probably suck at that too!! ROFL

From what I understand Herm Kept Gun based on the Players Request

That, I'm sure was part of it.

:thumb:


exactly.

look at their schedule

But you clearly have to be wrong, since numbers aren't arbitrary.

an intelligent fan knows to look at the name of the team next to the numbers

So an intelligent fan can use their dicretion to determine that the numbers aren't really indicative of a team's true performance?

yes, an intelligent fan can look at the statistics I displayed and see that the Chiefs played good defense at the end of the season against good offenses.

the same intelligent fan can look at the good numbers the colts showed on defense, but look at the defenses they played and discredit those numbers.

I hope not, that has been a miserable failure approach twice before.

intelligent is yiddish for "homer"...

So, by your own admission, thos numbers are arbitrary.

http://m-w.com/dictionary/arbitrary

ROFL :shrug: ROFL

















:BLVD: :bong:

First of all, why in the hell do we look at yards allowed? It doesnt mean shit. The only defense stat that matters is points allowed.

In regards to the "never improved two years in a row", I'm not convinced that's an accurate benchmark of Gun's ability to build a D. It's looking at stats in a vacuum, ignoring any details that may have accompanied the situation. What role did injuries and player turnover play?

As someone else mentioned, Several of the times Gun's D got "worse" it was following a year when they were first in the league. They had nowhere to go but down.

Also previously mentioned, Gun has never had to build a D up from rock bottom, so previous examples aren't comparable situations.

I'm not a Gun homer, and I'm not convinced he'll get this turned around. But so far most of the arguments against him being able to are pretty weak IMO.