The Chiefs Defense: An Absolutely Terrifying Set of Statistics

[Arrowhead Pride]

I'm not one to self promote on here but one of our readers did an excellent post on the Chiefs defensive draft picks over the last 7 years. Thought you all might be interested.

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2008/1...-an-absolutely

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Do you think that Miami is set up to win consistently for the next 5-8 years, like the Colts?

I don't.

It's their first year with a new coach and new GM. They couldn't possibly be in the same situation as a team that has had the benefit of having the same coach and GM for many years.

Nobody looks 8 years down the road. Most teams and coaches probably have a 3-4 year plan. Coaches don't have the job security to build something that looks so far into the future.

[FringeNC]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

IMO, rebuilding has nothing to do with the record.

It's the process of making your team younger, and hopefully better for the long term in the process.

In theory, if you bring in/draft the right players during a rebuilding process, your team should be good for a significant amount of time. We're talking 5-8 years. A team of 22 year old players should grow and mature as players along the same timeframe, putting them all in their prime at the same time. Almost by definition, you can't call a rebuild a success or failure for several years. See Green Bay, Tennessee. In our case, incompetent coaching will probably slow that process down considerably.

What Miami has done is not rebuilding. You could call it reloading, I guess. They'll be decent this year, maybe next.

But unless they draft extremely well over the next 3-5 years to replace all the aging veterans they signed in FA this offseason, (at what happen to be very important positions) then they'll be right back in the shithouse with a 4-12 record.

The Jets are the same way. When players like Favre, Faneca and Jenkins retire, or are become ineffective to to age, they'll be in a world of hurt unless they draft extremely well and have replacements on hand for those vets.

So by the Jets signing aging veterans, how does this preclude them from winning in the future -- in order words, what young players did they cut from the roster who will be good in the future?

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by FringeNC

So by the Jets signing aging veterans, how does this preclude them from winning in the future -- in order words, what young players did they cut from the roster who will be good in the future?

Who said anything about cutting young players?

I said they've put themselves in a position that they have to draft exceptionally to win in the future. (3-5 years down the road, and beyond)

As players age, their productivity declines.

They went out an spent a ton of money to win NOW, future be damned.

Unless they strike gold in the draft over the next 2 years and find replacements for these aging players (which all happen to be at key positions) then they're screwed.

The average age of the offense is 30 years old. Every impact player they have is over 30. (Favre, Jones, Coles, Woody, Faneca, etc)

They have youth at two positions, center and left tackle.

They are in better shape on the defensive side of the ball averaging 27 years old. All of their age is in the front 7, all of those guys are in that 30 YO range - which is the beginning of the slide, in a lot of cases.

Where they are really strong/young is in the backfield.

IMO, the Jets are going to end up right where Vermeil's Chiefs did - they'll all "get old" and have their skills diminish around the same time. If they draft like we did, they'll fall of the face of the map - just like we did.

[Chief Faithful]

Originally Posted by FringeNC

Thank you. You only call it "rebuilding" when you have a bad record.

Obviously you do not agree with the approach they decided to take at the end of last season, but it is a proven approach. The most recent examples are Tennessee and Packers and nobody can forget how Jimmy Johnson did it in Dallas.

On the other extreme you have the George Allen approach of sell the future for now. The Jets are the most recent example of that approach.

Parcells and Cowher have been very successful treading the middle, which few can do. Most end up like Shannanrat with mediocrity year in and year out.

The Chiefs were so completely bankrupt of talent at the end of DV's tenure I don't think they had a choice. They tried to get younger and more talented without rebuilding, but the whole thing just fell apart last year.

[FringeNC]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Who said anything about cutting young players?

I said they've put themselves in a position that they have to draft exceptionally to win in the future. (3-5 years down the road, and beyond)

As players age, their productivity declines.

They went out an spent a ton of money to win NOW, future be damned.

Unless they strike gold in the draft over the next 2 years and find replacements for these aging players (which all happen to be at key positions) then they're screwed.

The average age of the offense is 30 years old. Every impact player they have is over 30. (Favre, Jones, Coles, Woody, Faneca, etc)

They have youth at two positions, center and left tackle.

They are in better shape on the defensive side of the ball averaging 27 years old. All of their age is in the front 7, all of those guys are in that 30 YO range - which is the beginning of the slide, in a lot of cases.

Where they are really strong/young is in the backfield.

IMO, the Jets are going to end up right where Vermeil's Chiefs did - they'll all "get old" and have their skills diminish around the same time. If they draft like we did, they'll fall of the face of the map - just like we did.

You're missing my point -- sure, if they are trading away all their draft picks, or cutting promising but young guys (like Minn. with Thigpen), then yeah, they may be mortgaging the future. If you sign good veteran players instead of playing crappy young players with no future, how are you mortgaging the future. My point is simply you either draft well, in which case you'll be good in the future, or you don't, and signing old good players doesn't matter.

[FringeNC]

Originally Posted by Chief Faithful

Obviously you do not agree with the approach they decided to take at the end of last season, but it is a proven approach. The most recent examples are Tennessee and Packers and nobody can forget how Jimmy Johnson did it in Dallas.

On the other extreme you have the George Allen approach of sell the future for now. The Jets are the most recent example of that approach.

Parcells and Cowher have been very successful treading the middle, which few can do. Most end up like Shannanrat with mediocrity year in and year out.

The Chiefs were so completely bankrupt of talent at the end of DV's tenure I don't think they had a choice. They tried to get younger and more talented without rebuilding, but the whole thing just fell apart last year.

This argument would be correct if a lot of the players Shanny drafted were cut and had success elsewhere because he refused to wait for the to develop. I don't know the answer to this question, but my guess would be there were very few who developed elsewhere.