How could anyone believe that Herm Edwards can deliver a Superbowl to KC?

[Zouk]

The case is not that difficult to make. His resume is similar to Belichick's before he got Brady, and to Tony Dungy's before he got Peyton Manning. Look it up. Both of those coaches showed they were very good in Tampa and Cleveland (considering the talent they had), but people were too stupid to notice it.

And no one was making the case for either of those 2 to make a Super Bowl either. In fact, many many many people said that they could not win a Super Bowl because of their approach on offense (Dungy) or their lack of ability to motivate players (Belichick).

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by Zouk

The case is not that difficult to make. His resume is similar to Belichick's before he got Brady, and to Tony Dungy's before he got Peyton Manning.

I'm not even going to address the Belichick comparison, because it's quite obviously ludicrous. Not that any of Belichick's teams were this god awful, anyway.

But Tony Dungy has never had two losing seasons in a row. Unless there's a miraculous turnaround, Herm is about to be a losing head coach three out of the last four years.

The Herm Edwards era in Kansas City is an utter failure. I'm looking forward to see your reaction when he's fired.

[Zouk]

Originally Posted by Claythan

I'm not even going to address the Belichick comparison, because it's quite obviously ludicrous. Not that any of Belichick's teams were this god awful, anyway.

But Tony Dungy has never had two losing seasons in a row. Unless there's a miraculous turnaround, Herm is about to be a losing head coach three out of the last four years.

What matters is how often you go to the playoffs and what you do when you get there. On those accounts, the resumes are similar. And Belichick has been blown out multiple times in his career. Including with the Pats.

If the Chiefs are an uncompetitive 3 or 4 win team by December, he'll be fired and deservedly so. If they look better and get 6 wins - he'll stay and we'll see what he can do next year.

I'm consistent with what I say - I don't flip back and forth and overreact like you.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by Zouk

And Belichick has been blown out multiple times in his career.

I'm not talking about individual games. I'm talking about fielding a team so embarrassingly bad that it's bottom of the barrel on both offense AND defense. Neither Belichick nor Dungy came CLOSE to fielding that kind of team.

If the Chiefs are an uncompetitive 3 or 4 win team by December, he'll be fired and deservedly so. If they look better and get 6 wins - he'll stay and we'll see what he can do next year.

We have no reason to believe anything will get better. The schedule only gets tougher from here on out.

I'm consistent with what I say - I don't flip back and forth and overreact like you.

Who's overreacting? I've been extremely patient and defended Herm for a long time. We're showing no progress in any facet of the game, except perhaps special teams. At some point enough is enough. I wonder when that point will come for you. When we're 1-8?

[Zouk]

Originally Posted by Claythan

Who's overreacting? I've been extremely patient and defended Herm for a long time. We're showing no progress in any facet of the game, except perhaps special teams. At some point enough is enough. I wonder when that point will come for you. When we're 1-8?

No - not at 1-8. At the end of the year. If we're 1-8, and finish 6-10 I think that's success.

4 wins or less is failure and he'll be fired. 6 wins or more is success and he stays. 5 wins is amiguous. But I want to see the whole movie.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by Zouk

No - not at 1-8. At the end of the year. If we're 1-8, and finish 6-10 I think that's success.

Not to Clark Hunt. He wanted to compete for the playoffs.

4 wins or less is failure and he'll be fired. 6 wins or more is success and he stays. 5 wins is amiguous. But I want to see the whole movie.

That's pretty fair of you. I just don't see a reason why anything is going to get better.

[The Bad Guy]

Originally Posted by Zouk

No - not at 1-8. At the end of the year. If we're 1-8, and finish 6-10 I think that's success.

4 wins or less is failure and he'll be fired. 6 wins or more is success and he stays. 5 wins is amiguous. But I want to see the whole movie.

6 wins would be the absolute worst team ever for this team.

6 wins would ensure that Herm comes back.

6 wins would ensure that we have no chance at getting guy like Stafford.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by Zouk

What matters is how often you go to the playoffs and what you do when you get there. On those accounts, the resumes are similar. And Belichick has been blown out multiple times in his career. Including with the Pats.

If the Chiefs are an uncompetitive 3 or 4 win team by December, he'll be fired and deservedly so. If they look better and get 6 wins - he'll stay and we'll see what he can do next year.

I'm consistent with what I say - I don't flip back and forth and overreact like you.

The thought of that is absolutely disgusting. All of the evidence shows, if we get better, it'll be despite Herm. And what if we get better? He's going to start playing to win? Fire him now.

Originally Posted by Claythan

Who's overreacting? I've been extremely patient and defended Herm for a long time. We're showing no progress in any facet of the game, except perhaps special teams. At some point enough is enough. I wonder when that point will come for you. When we're 1-8?

Well, it's not like you've just jumped the fence... you loved the hire, 'soured on him', 'saw the light', and you were even defending him after the Panthers game a little before jumping back over this week. I wonder when you'll jump back.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

I wonder when you'll jump back.

Maybe we can go 6-10.

[triple]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

The thought of that is absolutely disgusting. All of the evidence shows, if we get better, it'll be despite Herm. And what if we get better? He's going to start playing to win? Fire him now.

I am thinking Herm is a player's coach like Vermeil was, and like Vermeil during his time here, is better at being liked by his employees than accomplishing things.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by Zouk

The case is not that difficult to make. His resume is similar to Belichick's before he got Brady, and to Tony Dungy's before he got Peyton Manning. Look it up. Both of those coaches showed they were very good in Tampa and Cleveland (considering the talent they had), but people were too stupid to notice it.

And no one was making the case for either of those 2 to make a Super Bowl either. In fact, many many many people said that they could not win a Super Bowl because of their approach on offense (Dungy) or their lack of ability to motivate players (Belichick).

I don't know a lot about Belichick in Cleveland, and I heard he made some bad decisions, but the Browns weren't ever all that good... he also served under Parcells for 4 years before getting the head coaching position in New England, so it's not all that similar to Herm. He went to a SB with Parcells in NE and then to the AFC Championship game a couple of years later. It's not like some moron saw his resume and thought he was good enough to go straight into another head coaching position.

And like FenceJumper said, Dungy had some really good teams in Tampa...

[Fairplay]

Originally Posted by Zouk

The case is not that difficult to make. His resume is similar to Belichick's before he got Brady, and to Tony Dungy's before he got Peyton Manning. Look it up. Both of those coaches showed they were very good in Tampa and Cleveland (considering the talent they had), but people were too stupid to notice it.

And no one was making the case for either of those 2 to make a Super Bowl either. In fact, many many many people said that they could not win a Super Bowl because of their approach on offense (Dungy) or their lack of ability to motivate players (Belichick).

That's it Zouk we are going to send in Army Group North with the 1ST Panzer Division in after your ass.