Peterson interview on Metro Sports
Baldinger asked him about Al Saunders possibly being the next HC, Peterson said he knows Saunders well and he knows his strenghts but also knows his weaknesses (and Peterson put some emphasis w/ his voice on the weaknesses part). He then said there are several viable candidates out there to look at.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm |
We've known for a long time that Carl wouldn't offer Saunders the position.
He wants a defensive coach. |
If Carl is still going to be around (Which he is), I think it would be stupid to go with an offensive HC. Last year we spent a lot on that defense, and while the stats didn't show much improvement, it was a lot better. I think Carl wants to continue to build on D which is music to my ears. And as long as we have LJ we will have an offense.
|
People will be beside themselves next year watching the decline of our O if AS is no longer a Chief.
Just as our D has turned a corner and getting better we pull the plug on the direction of our O. Thanks Carl! :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: |
Quote:
The biggest reason this offense would decline is named Roaf, not Saunders. |
The Chiefs need to move fast to get their guy or we will be stuck with some schmuck of a coach
|
Quote:
|
I'm not saying that AS will be our next head coach, but remember this....
Carl has negotiated through the media before. CP could intention for AS to coach the Chiefs is 2006, but he's not above trying to drive down the price. Just my $0.02....... |
Quote:
I wouldn't worry about him leaving a whole lot..... |
Would people shut the **** up about Saunders already?
When Roaf went down Saunders offense looked average most of the time. We're not going to scrap this offense in the offseason. All of the key components are returning. LJ and Samie Parker are only going to get better. Hell, Trent Green could probably call all the plays himself. |
Quote:
There is a different between having a top 5-10 offense, which is great, to one that is capable of setting NFL records. Al Saunders is special. That said, all of our players know the system inside and out, especially Trent, so as long as we change nothing next year, we should be fine with our current players. Al Saunders (and Dick) did a fantastic job teaching the players this system, and he will pay dividends even after he has left. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Al Saunders IS special. Without a doubt. But suggesting that our offense will fall apart without him? THAT is "going overboard". |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
[QUOTE=tomahawk kid]I've got it on pretty good authority that Willie wants to play 1-2 more seasons.
QUOTE] Yea, Like from the interview he did this past week that all of us read also. :rolleyes: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I hope you don't get that chance to see our O decline next year b/c AS becomes our next HC. I will say DV is special and like Martz, AS will find out pretty quickly how big those shoes are that he has to fill!!!!!!!!!! |
The main thing I was is Solari (sp?) to stay here.
The offense is all about Oline play IMO |
Quote:
:) |
Quote:
|
[QUOTE=DTLB58]
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
It doesn't matter at all that the offense isn't going to just collapse without Vermeil or Saunders, because you'll find some other reason to bombard us with your idiotic shit. |
Quote:
|
bittersweet
If you don't want to see a drop off in offensive production next year, and a loss of several more key veterans i.e. Roaf and/or Shields, the best choice for the new HC IS Saunders. Gun can take care of the defense. If we see anyone else come in, prepare for a rebuilding season or two.
|
Quote:
:rolleyes: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
We averaged 20.8 offensive points a game without Roaf. That would rank about 16th. Take out the Texans game where we scored 38 offensive points and it gets even worse. The average drops to 17.4 points per game, about 23rd or 24th. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
:rolleyes: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Roafless games: Oakland...............23-17 Denver................10-30 Philadelphia..........31-37 Oakland...............27-23 Buffalo................03-14 Houston..............45-17 thats 139 points, or an ave. of 23.1 per game. Now, I suppose you took out Dante's TD return and the defensive TD vs. Houston, but to make your analysis stand up, you would have to take away all the non offensive TDs for the entire league to get a valid ranking. Now, I can just as easily say "take away the Buffalo game" as "take away the Houston game" b/c its an anomolously odd performance. Then we would have a 24.4 average even throwing out the non offense TDs |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The Houston game is an aberration. Not a true indicator. You think our defense is as good as it showed in Buffalo, for example? |
What we need is our defensive version of Gruden, a guy who can come in and keep the offense near the same level but get our D to a point where we can dominate. This team is close, it just needs to take that final step. Just like Gruden got the Bucs to do in Tampa his first year there.
Al Saunders is not the end all/be all for this offense. Frankly we should be a lot better and a lot more consistent than we are during games. We don't HAVE to score quickly, as Al likes to do. We don't have the tools for that all the time. What we CAN do is dominate the LOS, the TOP, pound them with LJ, move the chains with Gonzo, and beat the other team up. We need to add another wideout to the mix, a guy who defenses take seriously. There was no excuse for the way Gonzo was totally misused this year, especially in the first half of the season. Brian Waters has already pointed out that we lost the Buffalo game because there was "disorganization" on the part of offensive coaches going into that game about what kind of offensive team we wanted to be after Priest went down. Considering that Al Saunders is basically the head coach on offense, you really want that taking over your entire franchise? I sure as hell don't... |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:21 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.