Who likes the Bill Muir promotion and who dont?

[CrazyHorse]

Just thought it might be easier to keep track with a poll.

[booger]

Originally Posted by Brock

Which one of those things is Weis not?

I meant a post Weis hire. Like the pool of candidates would have been much larger and he could of hired an experience guy like Childress, Callahan, hell anyone just throwing out names, of those types that don't come from the same system. From the get go they didn't leave themselves much choice with the criteria of the perkins/ernhart or whatever you wanna call it offense.

Weis yep he sure fits the bill but there's that hole ego thing with both of them and more so on Haley with the number of OC's he's been through. I will give him somewhat of a pass on Gailey because of the system difference. Gailey said at his presser in Buffalo announcing him as HC that he made it clear to clark, pioli, and Haley that their philosophies didn't match and he wasn't sure it could work but he was under contract. And i don't blame managment/ownership that much because not many want a first time HC to call plays and be his own OC in his rookie year plus the fact Whisenhunt worked with Gailey and could have gave Todd plenty of insight.

I'm just talking going forward after Weis.

[Chiefnj2]

KC's offense makes a huge improvement in year 2, especially the rushing attack and # of sacks taken by Cassell. Yet everyone wants to blame Muir for the OL "regressing" across the board?

Maybe, just maybe, Albert isn't cut out to be a LT and Richardson isn't that good.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by siberian khatru

The upside, FWIW, is what I said from the beginning and others have said: That it's now clearly all on Haley. Everybody knows where the buck stops. He gets all the credit or the blame. And if it fails, he's the problem that needs to be fixed.

That's really a stupid ****ing way to run a football franchise, especially when the guy "leading" and taking all the responsibility has very little experience managing a team at any level.

This isn't Jimmy Johnson, who coached a national championship team at Miami after years in the college ranks that moves on to the NFL. This isn't Mike Shanahan, who won a Super Bowl in SF after years in Denver, only to return to Denver and win two more Super Bowls with a HOF QB.

This isn't even a seasoned, veteran coach like Pete Carroll or Marty Schottenheimer. This is a guy that rose slowly through the coaching ranks and after ONE season as an OC of a team with HOF players, was hired as a head coach that immediately took on too much responsibility, alienated players and basically coached like a amateur, high school football coach his first season.

It *may* work the second time around, but honestly, why would ANY owner turn the keys of the franchise over to a guy that's shown that he's incompetent at running the offense and act as head coach simultaneously?

I don't get it. It seems terribly reckless on the owner and GM's part and if they lose fans in stands in 2011, it'll make it all more the difficult to get them back in 2012 and beyond.

[T-post Tom]

First blush: hate it. Stupid call. Seems to be a thinly veiled attempt to install a foot shuffling porter with an a-hole big enough for haley to stick his arm up in it.

That said, I'm willing to suspend judgement until next season. I suspect that this will be the beginning of the end for Haley if it fails.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

I love it.

[siberian khatru]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

That's really a stupid ****ing way to run a football franchise, especially when the guy "leading" and taking all the responsibility has very little experience managing a team at any level.

This isn't Jimmy Johnson, who coached a national championship team at Miami after years in the college ranks that moves on to the NFL. This isn't Mike Shanahan, who won a Super Bowl in SF after years in Denver, only to return to Denver and win two more Super Bowls with a HOF QB.

This isn't even a seasoned, veteran coach like Pete Carroll or Marty Schottenheimer. This is a guy that rose slowly through the coaching ranks and after ONE season as an OC of a team with HOF players, was hired as a head coach that immediately took on too much responsibility, alienated players and basically coached like a amateur, high school football coach his first season.

It *may* work the second time around, but honestly, why would ANY owner turn the keys of the franchise over to a guy that's shown that he's incompetent at running the offense and act as head coach simultaneously?

I don't get it. It seems terribly reckless on the owner and GM's part and if they lose fans in stands in 2011, it'll make it all more the difficult to get them back in 2012 and beyond.

You're still arguing that an owner should get involved in the composition of the coaching staff. I believe it's reckless to have an owner telling football guys what asst. coaches should be hired or fired. Clark might as well fire Pioli, save money and act as GM himself, like Jerry Jones.

But really, do you trust Clark to make these kind of decisions? You and him may agree on this one, but what if he intervenes on another that you disagree with? Suddenly, I suspect he'd get lots of flak for being a know-nothing soccer boy who's way out of his league.

The owner should care only about the results. He hired the GM to produce results, and leaves the details to him. Clark hasn't turned the keys of the franchise over to Haley, he's turned them over to Pioli. Pioli has signed off on this move. It's Pioli's responsibility to hold Haley accountable for this, and Clark's job to hold Pioli accountable if he doesn't.

That was a big problem Lamar had: He never held Carl accountable long after it was clear that Carl's way wasn't working. It took Clark to get rid of Carl. I hope he's got Pioli on a much shorter leash than Daddy had Carl.

Let me be clear, lest you misunderstand: I DO NOT support this move, for the reasons you cited above and more. But I do not think the owner should be meddling in this. At best, he should be aware of what's going on, he can tell Pioli he's skeptical of it and remind him that it better work out or else.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by siberian khatru

You're still arguing that an owner should get involved in the composition of the coaching staff. I believe it's reckless to have an owner telling football guys what asst. coaches should be hired or fired. Clark might as well fire Pioli, save money and act as GM himself, like Jerry Jones.

The Hunt Family has been notoriously hands off an owners. What has that provided the fans over the course of the past 40 years?

1. A 15 year void in playoff appearance (they finally made the playoffs in 1986, only to fire their coach immediately after the season).
2. 18 years and going since the last playoff game.
3. 10 years too late in firing Carl Peterson.
4. Allowing Haley to hire Pendergast and go without an OC in 2009, only to repeat that mistake in 2011.

I'm not stating that Clark Hunt should suddenly become Jerry Jones or Daniel Snyder, which are extreme situations.

But, the Kraft Family is closely involved in ALL decisions regarding the Patriots, the Rooney family has ALWAYS been involved in ALL decisions regarding their franchise, Woody Johnson is extremely involved in the Jets day-to-day business, as is Arthur Blank of the Falcons and so on.

Very, very few teams succeed in ANY sport with little-to-no interaction from ownership and IMO, the Chiefs NEED more input from their owner if they're going to be a long term, winning franchise.

It doesn't just "happen" on its own.

[ChiTown]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Very, very few teams succeed in ANY sport with little-to-no interaction from ownership and IMO, the Chiefs NEED more input from their owner if they're going to be a long term, winning franchise.

It doesn't just "happen" on its own.

See: Glass, David

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

They're going to get/unleash EXACTLY what they ****ing deserve. Thought you could unload Ass Hattle on this team and not pay for it?

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Okay.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The Hunt Family has been notoriously hands off an owners. What has that provided the fans over the course of the past 40 years?

1. A 15 year void in playoff appearance (they finally made the playoffs in 1986, only to fire their coach immediately after the season).
2. 18 years and going since the last playoff game.
3. 10 years too late in firing Carl Peterson.
4. Allowing Haley to hire Pendergast and go without an OC in 2009, only to repeat that mistake in 2011.

I'm not stating that Clark Hunt should suddenly become Jerry Jones or Daniel Snyder, which are extreme situations.

But, the Kraft Family is closely involved in ALL decisions regarding the Patriots, the Rooney family has ALWAYS been involved in ALL decisions regarding their franchise, Woody Johnson is extremely involved in the Jets day-to-day business, as is Arthur Blank of the Falcons and so on.

Very, very few teams succeed in ANY sport with little-to-no interaction from ownership and IMO, the Chiefs NEED more input from their owner if they're going to be a long term, winning franchise.

It doesn't just "happen" on its own.

How about the ownership in Green Bay?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by milkman

How about the ownership in Green Bay?

The city? Well, they've hired and fired CEO's over the years (Bob Harlan, Kevin's father being the last ousted CEO) and they've demanded championships from their team.

Which is something that neither the Hunts or the fans that live in Kansas City have ever demanded. Making the playoffs is "good enough", hence all the love for the "Marty Years".

[Extra Point]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Anxiously looking for the True Fan lever...

I pulled it: Choice 1. I like Muir's history, and his involvement with how the line improved over last year.

Pound the rock, pass with high percentage. Know what it takes to get first downs and into the endzone when we have the ball.

I would kind of like to know who will coach the O-Line, but it don't matter to me.

[ChiTown]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Which is something that neither the Hunts or the fans that live in Kansas City have ever demanded. Making the playoffs is "good enough", hence all the love for the "Marty Years".

Playoffs? You want to talk about Playoffs? Playoffs?

[milkman]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The city? Well, they've hired and fired CEO's over the years (Bob Harlan, Kevin's father being the last ousted CEO) and they've demanded championships from their team.

Which is something that neither the Hunts or the fans that live in Kansas City have ever demanded. Making the playoffs is "good enough", hence all the love for the "Marty Years".

My next question is this.

Does it not appear that Clark Hunt is more involved than his father was?

Robert Kraft is involved in New England, but when it's all said and done, Bill Bellichick is still the final decision maker when it comes to bringing in talent and hiring staff.

Clark Hunt's involvement, from a distance, appears to mirror Kraft's in New England.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Extra Point

I pulled it: Choice 1. I like Muir's history, and his involvement with how the line improved over last year.

Pound the rock, pass with high percentage. Know what it takes to get first downs and into the endzone when we have the ball.

I would kind of like to know who will coach the O-Line, but it don't matter to me.

Our OCINO himself, according to kcchiefs.com.