Odds are Herm still employed after today...
 

Seeing as Jack Hary says it was Shanahan, Mort said Herm would be gone by today, Collinsworth said it was Haley and Schefter said we had not spoke with Shanahan, Ari's realtor said it was Cowher and the latest Gailey story, I'd say....

Herm will still be here after today, contrary to all of the above. Hopefully Pioli will make me eat my words but all I have seen is all the "experts" don't have a ****ing clue.

I just dont see how Pioli could keep Herm?

He would immediatly ruin all the goodwill and credibility he has built up amongst the fanbase the past few weeks.

Hes a smart guy. I just cant believe he would do that.

:)I have felt that impending feeling of doom before...maybe it is just taking some time to sharpen the axe!

is this all dependent on the college game this weekend?
I'm sure all employeed/unemployeed coaches will be watching. evaluating.

The combines are still to come..... I still think we have time to get a coach.

Don't assume Herm is still here for 2009.

The only thing I can think is that if Piloi can't get who he wants, he will keep Herm. That or he was banking on Spagnuolo and that hosed up his plans when he went to STL. Either way it looks bad when the Senior Bowl is underway and we do not have a head coach there. Though Piloi is known for playing things close to the vest, this is getting rather rediculous and makes me wonder about the off-season ahead for the team?

You have forgot that Clayathon, and Nick I suppose, were both saying he is as good as gone .... so to me that was like the kiss of death for him leaving.

I don't think Pioli worries about the good will and credibility he has with the fans. Winning or losing will dictate that. I'm sure he has a plan and he knows exactly what he wants. If Herm stays that means he didn't see a guy he thought would be good enough to give a contract to.
In any case, I really hope he doesn't give a flying rats ass what anyone here or any other message board think.

Like they would have a clue. But you are onto something there....:hmmm:

Hopefully this isn't a save some bucks move to honor the last year of Herm's contract.....:)

Pack your shit ....you have been banned from the always sunny and 70 Olathe!!!:D

Have to help pay for the additional $70mil in stadium renovations

I don't see how they can keep Herm.

1) You can't keep him on a 1-year contract as a lame duck.

2) You take a huge risk giving him a contract extension. He's coming off a 6-26 stretch, which means he's on incredibly thin ice. If he starts out 09 1-5 or whatever, Arrowhead will be a ghost town and there will be tremendous pressure to fire him. Suppose he goes 6-10 -- are the Chiefs really gonna sell that as progress, especially considering what Atlanta and Miami did this year? So you have to fire Herm -- and owe him for the remainder of his contract (say, 2 years). AND you have to hire a new coach and pay him, perhaps very well if you go after a big name. Will Clark want to fork over all that money?

3) However, if you bring in a new coach, even if he goes 6-10 there's a bit more of a grace period. Because he's not Herm, the team and the fans can say, well, he was given a daunting task not of his making, let's give him another year to really turn it around, etc.

The new guy gets a clean slate. Herm doesn't. Herm comes with all this baggage and bad feelings. It just seems to me a huge gamble to bring him back. I don't see what it accomplishes. Plus, he's hardly an indispensable man. It's not like he's got a Super Bowl or two to fall back on as proof he's THE guy, like a Cowher, Shanahan or Parcells type. You would think Pioli is confident enough to have identified other coaches who can do better.

The ONLY thing that could make Herm stay, I guess, is if Clark simply puts his foot down and says he believes with all his heart, every fiber in his body, that Herm is the one guy in all of football who can lead this team. But if he really believed that, I would think they already would have announced Herm is staying.

Perhaps if they had actually fired Herm, the rest of the NFL (Spagnuolo) would have realized that the Chiefs actually had an opening for HC. That may have helped the process.

What he said.

:clap::clap:

Where are the professional journalists to say this it makes the most sense.

If nothing happens today, I don't think anything will happen until after the Super Bowl. Which means this living hell extends until February!

FYP.:D

The real question is what seniors are we looking at. :hmmm: Normally you'd think that if our top draft choice was playing our coaching staff would be down there observing him themselves. But maybe our top draft choice isn't a Senior, a junior QB maybe. :Pinky:

I certainly don't see any increase in ticket sales or attendance at games if Herm is still employed by the Chiefs.

Maybe Pioli is getting Herm's input on potential draftees before he cans him? heh

If Herm, for some strange reason, is still around next year, one of my main requests is that he not be allowed to give another press conference.

I'm tired of hearing him talk.

I was listening to the local radio here in Omaha, (which is terrible btw) but they were saying it was just a matter of time and that Pioli was keeping Herm on staff as an emergency backup in case he doesn't get who he wants this year.

Not that I want Herm around or have any sympathy towards the guy but seriously, in all fairness, either let the guy go so he can get a new job or announce that he will be the h.c. next year. It's not right to string him along.

What for? Herm is shit at obtaining talent...

Well since Gailey is still here. His input from O side will be taken. Gunther gone, but I would imagine Pioli had a full debriefing on team needs and issues. Potential target seniors...

All is not lost (sky is still up there Chicken-littles) because the HC hasn't been named.

His conferences will be smugg I told you so conferences....

You think they suck now.... Dear God, they will be untolerable if he is given an extension..

It wasn't my Realtor... it was a friend of mine, who is friends with a former Chief/Steeler who knows Cowher.

Get it right, fuqtard!!! ROFL

You're exactly right.

In Herm's mind, it would be a reaffirmation of the fact that he can do no wrong.

Here are my reasons why Herm hasnt been fired YET. But will not be the coach for next season.

I know everyone wanted Pioli to come in and tell all the coaches to pack their shit and hit the bricks the next day. But if he is supposed to evaluate the players that the chiefs have here I think the best way to do that is interrogate the coaches as he watches film. "what was the play call, what were his responsibilities, what was his gap assignments...." Its easy to watch our team and be like well that guy sucks balls look how out of position he is. Is that because the player sucks or because the coach is crap and schemed or put him into a position to fail. Which is why I think the coaches that have already jumped ship knew that they werent being fired until Pioli had all the information from them he wanted, then when they were no longer of value to him they would have been canned.

If Herm was going to be the head coach next year it would have already been announced so that Herm could fill his coaching staff. And I hate the stupid arguement that "oh he will keep Herm a year then hire his man next year when someone is available".

Other than Cowher who the hell is everyone talking about, he is the only person allegedly not available. Everyone knows how much money talks, if Pioli and Clark went to Cowher and said your our guy this is what we are offering. If he would consider the chiefs for 2010 I bet he sure as hell would consider doing it in 2009. I swear the greatest thing to happen to the chiefs in quite some time in hiring Pioli and a couple weeks later chiefs fans are pissing their pants because the head coaching position is in limbo. "but but its almost February its too late to hire a head coach now" Last I checked there was still one game left to be played and I bet there are some damn good coaches on both those teams ready to go to the next level.

This....

I would futher drive the fans away from the stadium on sundays.... I cant see Clark giving up millions just to appease and not hurt his cock holster*...

*Herms mouth

So? You're still wrong, douche...so STFU

Yea, that is pretty shitty. If you aren't going to keep Herm cause you want Herm then fire him and let him go find some work elsewhere.

Let's look at some facts. I know facts don't play well on the board, but let's just try it for fun.

1. The Chiefs owe Herm 4 Million in '09.
2. A new HC will run you 2 to 4 Million in '09.
3. Everyone seems to think that Scott knows what he is doing as a GM.
4. Scott has Herm and his assistant coaches under contract.
5. Scott will not make a change JUST to make a change. HE will hire a guy he wants.
6. Why would Scott spend 6 to 8 million (Herm's money + the new guy's money) on the HC position next season for a guy he really didn't want? You will also have to figure in the expense of two coaching staffs (guy's under contract + new staff).

Conclusion: Don't fire the guy you have to pay anyway until you are sure (with signed contract) you have the guy you want. That is the way all good business are run.

You will lose more money in revenue if Herm is here, or pay both staffs and having a full stadium and parking lot...


Herm will cost the team more than just a salary next year...

Its not rocket science...

Then he needs to come out and say Herm is the man. It is that simple.

Hey, I'm not saying keep Herm. I'm just saying get the guy you want first...then fire Herm. Otherwise you are the Raiders. Fire a guy a then hire whoever is still available and is willing to coach your team.

Why? Why is coaching the last year of your contract with no extension in place yet considered to be "lame duck"? Who made that up?

Why is everyone so convinced that a coach won't play out the last year of his contract? That makes very little sense to me. This idea has been thrown around for a bit now, and it seems like everyone is taking this idea as accepted truth. But I don't see it that way. I don't see that it's so crazy for a coach to continue in the last year of his contract without everyone around him running for the hills. That's silly. It's not a requirement that you have to have an extension in place before you coach the last year of your current contract. Especially if you're a coach that has only won 6 games in the last 2 seasons.

Everyone has seemed to accept that he'll either be fired or get an extension. Either or. But I don't think that's the only possible outcome at all...

If Herm stays on board as the HC is anyone on here going to buy the address of:

www.firescottpioli.com

???????????????

Seems that is the feeling from some on here.

I never said Herm is the guy or that Scott wants Herm to be the guy, but Herm is the guy until you are assured you have the guy you want.

Good leaders do it on their terms not someone else's.

And what happens in the locker room when the team gets off to a slow start, 0-4? Do you think that a coach in the last year of his contract will be able to demand the respect of players who are inked long term?

Everyone will know the coach is going to get fired and things will quickly become a circus. Essentially, '09 would become (yet another) lost season.

Yea, we get that. Doesn't mean it isn't bullshit and doesn't mean it won't send a message to the team that Herm really doesn't have Piloi's confidence, now does it?

this

I didn't know you could do that!!

Has Pioli packed his bags for his Aruba vacation yet? Or will that come during the first week of free agency like Carl used to do?

What would you rather have Scott do? (A).Say "Herm is my guy" then fire him two weeks later or (B). Fire Herm then sign another second rate coach because you couldn't get the guy you wanted.

Keeping all employees on their toes and not showing your hand is the way all large companies work when upper management changes.

I think Herm and a lot of guys will be gone today. Scouts and personnel guys should be back from Mobile and hand in their reports, etc.

after he signs Shanahan, the two of them are going together to work on their tan

Maybe even further reductions in attendance.

I have been to two games since Herm has been the coach, both were his first season.

I won't be attending any more as long as he is HC, and I would bet there are plenty of others that feel this way.

BS. If the players give up after an 0-4 start because they're scared of the possibility of a new coach the season after, then I don't want a single one of them on the team. You really believe they play with that attitude? You really think their egos are so brittle that they can't handle losing unless the head coach is guaranteed to be there the next season? That seems absurd. If they hire a new coach and still go 0-4, will it be that different simply knowing the coach's job is safe?

The idea that a team can't or won't play hard or play together unless the coaching situation is guaranteed long term is just stupid.

That's not my point.

It's not about playing hard. It's about listening to the coach and buying into what he's telling them to do.

If players think Herm is full of crap, and there's a faction of players on every team that thinks this about their coach, and they also think they're going to be with KC longer than he is, what do you think the situation will be like?

This has nothing to do with effort or being scared and everything to do with buying into the "plan" that any coach has to sell to his team.

When players start saying, "**** you. I'm doing it my own way.", there's trouble.

That's different altogether. If players won't listen to the coach, then you get rid of those players. You don't set up coaching extensions to appease the players. If the players think Herm is full of crap, then they're going to think he's full of crap regardless of when his contract is up. They're not going to change their mind about him being full of crap just because he has a contract extension. Buying into the "plan" has no relevance to contract extensions beyond the current season. The locker room isn't going to fall apart because of possible uncertainty after the season is over. They play one game at a time, one season at a time. If players can't stay focused because they're worrying about next season after 4 games, then that's the player's problem.

But where we're apparently disagreeing is that I think there would be A LOT of players no longer listening to the coach. Too many to simply get rid of.

The players aren't stupid. It's about accountability. If the writing is on the wall that Herm's going to get fired because things aren't going well (at whatever point that is, 0-4 was just a random number), players realize they aren't going to be accountable to him anymore. What he says and thinks won't matter.

IMO, what would happen next is that players would tune him out and start going about things their own way. The result would be a complete cluster****.

It's really a matter of getting quality assistant coaches. A good coach isn't going to want to uproot his family to move to KC for a year. You are going to get people desperate for a job because they have failed before or have no experience, etc.

And again, if that were to happen, that would happen regardless of the coach's contract. And the coach isn't going to get a contract extension simply to prevent the possibility of that happening. Which is the point of the whole "lame duck" discussion. If there are a lot of players no longer listening to the coach, then it should make Pioli's decision much easier. If there is, or will be, civil unrest in the locker room, then it's Pioli's job to see that and address that. We have to trust him to do so. But don't think that he's going to grant an extension out of fear that the players will rebel unless the coach gets an extension.

Bingo

nah, they're gonna pay Herm $4M to be the janitor. Those better be some #$%@#$% spotless floors!

We'll have to agree to disagree, then. I think the contract is very important in indicating to the players that this is someone you have to pay attention to because he's going to be around, suggesting that you can't outlast him.

It also is a sign of faith from the organization.

As a sometimes columnist for kcchiefs.com, I want to stress that this doesn't come from any inside information. It's just a hunch. From what I've seen in New England and Clark Hunt's handling of the g.m. search, major Chiefs business is going to be conducted very much behind the scenes. It's going to drive the local media batshit. But that's how it will be.

I'm guessing this guy has a major ace up his sleeve. But first he has to fire Herm, and then he has to interview a minority candidate a la the Rooney Rule. Then he can produce the coach I'm guessing he already has in the bag.

And my guess is this coach will be a blockbuster.

Just like Pioli was a blockbuster. And we won't learn about the Chiefs blockbusters until they are damned good and ready for us to know.

like Seattle...

OK then. I just don't think that contract length is indication of anything these days. Most contracts these days never ever make it full term, so I don't see how you can put any importance in that whatsoever. And under contract or not, if you're not doing an acceptable job, you're still going to get fired. It's the same for coaches as it is for players. And the players can see that.

And speaking of "sign of faith from the organization", you're also ignoring the fact that by firing Edwards before his contract expires sends the message that "Yeah we gave you a 4 year contract, but we're firing you anyway after the 3rd year." In essence, we gave you a "sign of faith from the organization" in your 4 year contract, but now that you suck we're going back on that sign of faith. Does that still sound like the message you'd want to send?

Yeah we're giving the new coach a 5 year deal, and we feel that contract length is a good indicator of faith and commitment. Never mind that we just ignored that and fired the last guy....

The Pioli factor points to Parcells and the Gailey factor points to Cowher. Yeah, I'd say those are blockbusters.

Accountability. You live up to your end, and we'll do the same. And this is generally the case with coaches' contracts.

Rooting out incompetence when it's identified isn't a negative message. Does this mean that coaches aren't unfairly treated in certain instances? Of course not. Look at Oakland.

Player contracts, however, are different story and are often a joke.

I think you're understating the importance of the business aspect of pro sports. It's common to see the guy with the big contract throw his weight around b/c he understands the organization's financial commitment in him and the sway that this holds.

Overlooking all this back and forth arguing is the reality of the situation: How many NFL coaches are allowed to coach in the last year of their contracts?

As Adam Schefter wrote last January: "Teams typically do not like coaches to head into a season as a lame duck; last season, the New York Giants handed a modest one-year extension to Tom Coughlin."

Charles Robinson of Yahoo Sports, Dec. 25: "Mangini has one year left on his contract, making the team’s latest flop even more perplexing. If they go by the NFL textbook, they are in a “fold or raise” scenario. They don’t want a scenario where he’s in a lame-duck season, especially when the players are hearing the New York media and fan base calling for his head. Either they fire Mangini now and begin with a rebuild, or they extend his deal and hope he can repair the damage from a late-season slide."

Off the top of my head, I can't think of many, if any, coaches in recent years who entered the season in the last year of their contract (other than someone retiring, such as Holmgren). Maybe someone can come up with a few names that did, and I'll concede the point.

Sure, nothing prevents the Chiefs from keeping Herm on next year in his final year, or giving him a Coughlin-like one-year extension. But given the situation -- new GM, 6-26, massive rebuilding -- it just seems a perfect opportunity to cut your losses and start fresh, rather than keep around all the lingering questions and doubts.

Yes. I agree completely about accountability.

But we've gotten away from the original argument though, which was the idea that they can't let Herm coach his last year because it would be "lame duck". I have absolutely no problem at all with firing Herm because of accountability. He deserves that. But it's not a situation where he's either fired or his contract is extended because of the "lame duck" last year of the contract. That was the point I was trying to make. And now I feel like I'm just being argumentative, so I'm going to stop here...

The Bills have done it twice recently. Jauron started 2008 in the last year of his contract and then was extended mid-season after they started 4-0 and Gregg Williams did it a couple of years ago. He was actually never fired as head coach - his contract just expired.

It is very rare though.

Thanks.

Nah. Just good back-and-forth exchange.

:thumb:

Pioli down at the Sr bowl scouting kids is much better than Herm doing it anyways.

Remember how Herm can only watch 10min of video......then the bitch falls asleep.

I think the Bills extending Jauron like they did was a dumb move, by the way.

Those are possibilities, as are Shanahan and Haley. We can come up with explanations for why don't have a new coach yet. It's much harder to come up with explanations for why Herm hasn't been fired yet.

EXACTLY! The Pats made all kinds of unpopular moves and didn't care what the fans thought. Heck, even hiring Bill Belichick was unpopular at the time. That worked out okay.

It is funny to see how many people actually think the Chiefs care about what we think.

So few people remember this. Belichick was at near-Herm levels of derision when he left the Browns. It softened somewhat after he had success with the Jets - but still the opinion of most fans and media was "great coordinator, terrible head coach". It was repeated ad nauseum as so much NFL conventional wisdom is.

When you read about Belichick the thing you find is that he didn't really change much from Cleveland to New York - it's just that the personnel got better.

According to Gretz (take it for what it is worth) Pioli didn't go to the Sr. Bowl this week. To be honest I never saw any video or press pictures of Scott there this week. I've seen images of other teams coaches/front office staff. Parcells wasn't and still isn't a Sr. Bowl guy. He prefers game tape and individual workouts. I wonder if Pioli will be the same way?

You can make unpopular moves if you have a winning team. If you have a new/refurbished stadium that you want to fill up then public perception and reaction may be a factor they want to take into account.

They didn't have a winning team... just because you have one now doesn't mean you always have been one...

Didn't most people on this board bitch and bitch about Carl only making decisions in order to fill the stadium? It seems that posters are wanting Pioli to act more like Carl everyday.

The Patriots way is to do it your way on your schedule and everyone else, including the NFL office/fans/other teams, be damned. If you do your job right then everything else takes care of itself.

The Patriots weren't a winning team when they hired BB were they?

Some of the Patriots moves, like cutting popular players, occurred after they started winning.

Plus, the Pats weren't a bad team when Belichick took over. They were in the playoffs 3/4 years prior to Belichick and the year before he took over they were .500.

Odds - 1 to 1.

Is Pioli at the Senior Bowl yet? I take it there have been no sightings of either Herm or Pioli down there?

This officially sucks ass. What the hell is going on over at Arrowhead?