Chiefs Whitlock LOLs at the Patsification of the Chiefs - Page 34

Hammock Parties · 01-14-2010, 01:33 AM

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/col...y/1682402.html

Wake me when the Chiefs sign Tom Brady, the one with two healthy knees and fearless pocket demeanor.

Until then, I’ll take a wait-and-see approach with Scott Pioli’s New England Relocation Plan.

Right now, this smells like a Jackson Five reunion tour without Michael (Brady) or Janet (Bill Belichick).

Romeo “Tito” Crennel, the defensive coordinator, joins Pioli, Charlie Weis, Matt Cassel, Mike Vrabel and ex-Pats to be named later in what appears to be a lame attempt at recreating the New England Dynasty.

Let me apologize for being unimpressed with this lineup.

You’re tired of reading it, and I’m tired of writing it. Unfortunately, I’m paid to tell you what I really think. Romeo Crennel sounds great on paper. He won three Super Bowls while holding the title of “defensive coordinator” for Belichick’s Patriots.

Tito sold a bunch of records plucking a guitar and singing backup for Michael Jackson. Without The Gloved One, we never heard of Tito again until Michael passed.

Romeo flamed out in Cleveland as a head coach. Of all the Belichick assistants during the Super Bowl years, Crennel was the one with the least amount of responsibility on his plate. Belichick designed the defenses.

When Crennel got the Cleveland job, I asked a longtime Patriots defender what he thought of the hire, and the player told me flat out that he never envisioned Romeo as a head coach.

It’s just one player, one opinion. And not being head-coach material doesn’t disqualify someone from being a top-flight coordinator.

In fact, I touched base with the player again on Wednesday, and he assured me that Crennel installed the defensive game plan throughout the week without interference from Belichick and that Crennel called the game.

The player also assured me that Belichick had his fingerprints on everything that transpired with the team — special teams, offense, defense and front-office decisions.

I’m just not sold on Crennel. As a coordinator, Crennel has far more to prove than Charlie Weis. No one I’ve talked to doubts Weis’ ability to create innovative game plans. (Everyone I’ve talked to doubts Weis’ ability to control his ego.)

Crennel worked for Belichick, who specializes in defense. Bill Parcells never won a Super Bowl without Belichick working as his defensive coordinator.

Hey, maybe one day we will be saying the same thing about Belichick and Crennel.

Today, all I’m sure of is that Crennel’s hiring increases the likelihood that Todd Haley is in a make-or-break season in 2010.

If things go poorly next season, don’t look for Pioli, Weis and Crennel to take the blame. They have nine Super Bowl rings among them. In their mind, they know exactly what it takes to win at the highest level in the NFL.

Haley either has no political savvy, no interest in playing the kind of politics that enhances a coach’s longevity or zero leverage when putting together a coaching staff.

Given the previous working relationship of Pioli, Weis and Crennel — and Weis’ oversized ego — it would be a seamless transition for Pioli to install Weis as head coach midway through the 2010 season or at the start of 2011.

My gut says Haley’s ego and gambling nature make him unaware of the ramifications of his decisions. Firing Chan Gailey was a colossal error. With the offensive personnel provided to him by Pioli, Haley should’ve held on to Gailey for a season. There was no reason for the head coach to attach his reputation and credibility to a receiver-less offense.

Good coaches are paranoid. They perceive every move by ownership/management as a potential threat to their power. Paranoia is what drives a good coach to be great. Paranoia is what makes a coach sleep at his office and punt on fourth down.

Look at Belichick. He’s been spoiled by success. That’s why he went for it on fourth and 2 against the Colts. He’s losing his paranoia.

Haley’s background is extremely unusual for an NFL head coach. Golfers focus on a single obstacle, the course. A football coach worries about a million things, including what his assistants may or may not be plotting.

Mecca · 01-14-2010, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

my point is that some here are still ass hurt about not getting sanchez(no matter what they say) and it's time to give it up.

Actually what people are ass hurt over is we've seen this story play out before, all Chiefs fans should know how it ends.

Micjones · 01-14-2010, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

So many jokes, so little time.

I think I made my point.
It won't take 4 years for them to assemble a talented core of offensive skillplayers. They have two already.
Unless they just fail miserably at evaluating talent.

stevieray · 01-14-2010, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

If his deficiencies are just masked, welcome to a game or two either side of .500 ball and a possible one-and-done in the playoffs.

Manning
Rivers
Palmer
Brady
Flacco
Sanchez

Brees
Favre
Romo
Warner
Rodgers
McNabb

interesting, two FQB's on this list have won SB's, and two on this list have come out of nowhere...

**DeezNutz** · 01-14-2010, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

my point is that some here are still ass hurt about not getting sanchez(no matter what they say) and it's time to give it up.

I agree that people need to "move on" or whatever. But it's wishful thinking to believe that there won't always be talk about the '09 draft if Cassel disappoints and Sanchez lives up to the billing.

Same way that '83 gets brought up from time to time. People aren't pissed, really, just not forgetful.

stevieray · 01-14-2010, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Again...

Teams are built around a franchise QB.

The Colts, for example, were built around Manning. Over time, they went out and got the players that would benefit him and the offense most.

That takes TIME.

When you're Peyton Manning, and you start as a 22 year old rookie, it's a perfect scenario. Pieces are added while you grow as a QB.

By the time all the pieces are in place, you're 26-27 years old and in your prime.

Now put Cassel's name in place of Manning's, and add 5 years.

Unless you think that every QB in the league can defy age like Favre and Warner have, Cassel's going to be on the decline at that point.

That explains the general rule of thumb regarding QB's:

Most teams looking to build a dynasty draft and develop a QB, and build around him.

The teams that already have the talent in place, usually go for the veteran because their overall window is closing.

We're attempting the process in reverse.

so, they get the benefit of the doubt?

keg in kc · 01-14-2010, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

So what?

We still need to, and that's my point.

Hopefully they will at some point.

Unfortunately the real ugly reality is that the Chiefs are at the unenviable position where pretty much any position they draft is going to fit, logically speaking, because they frikkin' need players everywhere. Which is why I'm not completely upset that the new rebuild didn't start with a drafted QB. I actually think that's a move they should make later, when more pieces are in place.

Beyond that, I don't think 2009 was the right time to draft a QB, because I didn't and don't think that Sanchez was the right choice at 3. If a Matt Ryan had been sitting there as was the case at 3 in 2008 (I really, really wanted him to fall to 5...) it would have been a different story, but he wasn't. I don't think 2010 is the right year for it, either; there's just something I can't put my finger on with Clausen that makes me want to stay away. Maybe 2011 will be, depending on their record and how the draft falls.

They need to do it at some point, though, but I don't think it has to be a desperate save the franchise pick in the top 5. I'm more of a draft one in the teens or twenties and let him groom on the bench for a year or more kind of guy myself, unless he blows you away in camp, guys like Flacco or Rodgers or Roethlisberger.

That would be my blueprint, particularly with Cassel on the roster. He starts in 2010, focus on building the team around him, and then the rookie's drafted in 2011. See how it goes in camp, may the best QB win.

Mecca · 01-14-2010, 06:27 PM

The problem with waiting to take a QB, is then you're a 7-9 team without a QB that isn't bad enough to get one but isn't good enough to win anything.

**DeezNutz** · 01-14-2010, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Hopefully they will at some point.

Unfortunately the real ugly reality is that the Chiefs are at the unenviable position where pretty much any position they draft is going to fit, logically speaking, because they frikkin' need players everywhere. Which is why I'm not completely upset that the new rebuild didn't start with a drafted QB. I actually think that's a move they should make later, when more pieces are in place.

Beyond that, I don't think 2009 was the right time to draft a QB, because I didn't and don't think that Sanchez was the right choice at 3. If a Matt Ryan had been sitting there as was the case at 3 in 2008 (I really, really wanted him to fall to 5...) it would have been a different story, but he wasn't. I don't think 2010 is the right year for it, either; there's just something I can't put my finger on with Clausen that makes me want to stay away. Maybe 2011 will be, depending on their record and how the draft falls.

They need to do it at some point, though, but I don't think it has to be a desperate save the franchise pick in the top 5. I'm more of a draft one in the teens or twenties and let him groom on the bench for a year or more kind of guy myself, unless he blows you away in camp, guys like Flacco or Rodgers or Roethlisberger.

That would be my blueprint, particularly with Cassel on the roster. He starts in 2010, focus on building the team around him, and then the rookie's drafted in 2011. See how it goes in camp, may the best QB win.

There are going to be some very talented QBs in next year's draft who will be in the 10-20 range, most likely, just because of numbers, so I could see that scenario being a distinct possibility.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 01-14-2010, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones

I think I made my point.
It won't take 4 years for them to assemble a talented core of offensive skillplayers. They have two already.
Unless they just fail miserably at evaluating talent.

No, it won't take them 4 years to PICK those players.

But it might be 3-4 years before those players develop.

keg in kc · 01-14-2010, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

The problem with waiting to take a QB, is then you're a 7-9 team without a QB that isn't bad enough to get one but isn't good enough to win anything.

That's only a problem when you have a weak QB class like the last couple. Sanchez, for example, would have been exactly the kind of player I was referring to in any year with some competition at the position, a guy you take a flyer on in the 20's, instead of a guy you take at 5. He's like most of the rest of the top 10 from last year's draft in that regard.

Mecca · 01-14-2010, 06:33 PM

What QB's taken mid to late first round here in the last about 6 years have done well?

Roethlisberger and Cutler went like 11th you still have to be pretty shitty to pick 11th.

**DeezNutz** · 01-14-2010, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

What QB's taken mid to late first round here in the last about 6 years have done well?

Roethlisberger and Cutler went like 11th you still have to be pretty shitty to pick 11th.

Denver wasn't.

You have to be pro-active and demonstrate foresight.

Flacco, obviously.

Micjones · 01-14-2010, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

The problem with waiting to take a QB, is then you're a 7-9 team without a QB that isn't bad enough to get one but isn't good enough to win anything.

There's always Free Agency.

It's worked for the Saints, Cardinals, Panthers and Vikings.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 01-14-2010, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

The problem with waiting to take a QB, is then you're a 7-9 team without a QB that isn't bad enough to get one but isn't good enough to win anything.

Or you hope and pray for the once in a decade, planets aligning Hail Mary when the entire league goes brain-dead for four hours and a guy like Aaron Rodgers drops.

**doomy3** · 01-14-2010, 06:36 PM

I think next year is the year to pick the QB.

See, in a vacuum, this is about Cassel vs. Sanchez.

However, this could very well end up being a few years of Cassel and a career of Gabbert/Locker/Barkley/etc. vs. Sanchez.

In that scenario, I think we're better off in the long run, as I don't ever see Sanchez as more than a game manager.

I still think this came down to one thing: Pioli didn't like Sanchez enough to use the #3 overall pick on him. The trade for Cassel for a second rounder was still a good move, IMO. Perhaps you hit on someone who can be a viable QB for you for only a second rounder. If not, you get to pick from a much better crop of QBs in a couple years.

Just my opinion.

01-14-2010, 01:33 AM
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $970478	Whitlock LOLs at the Patsification of the Chiefs http://www.kansascity.com/sports/col...y/1682402.html Wake me when the Chiefs sign Tom Brady, the one with two healthy knees and fearless pocket demeanor. Until then, I’ll take a wait-and-see approach with Scott Pioli’s New England Relocation Plan. Right now, this smells like a Jackson Five reunion tour without Michael (Brady) or Janet (Bill Belichick). Romeo “Tito” Crennel, the defensive coordinator, joins Pioli, Charlie Weis, Matt Cassel, Mike Vrabel and ex-Pats to be named later in what appears to be a lame attempt at recreating the New England Dynasty. Let me apologize for being unimpressed with this lineup. You’re tired of reading it, and I’m tired of writing it. Unfortunately, I’m paid to tell you what I really think. Romeo Crennel sounds great on paper. He won three Super Bowls while holding the title of “defensive coordinator” for Belichick’s Patriots. Tito sold a bunch of records plucking a guitar and singing backup for Michael Jackson. Without The Gloved One, we never heard of Tito again until Michael passed. Romeo flamed out in Cleveland as a head coach. Of all the Belichick assistants during the Super Bowl years, Crennel was the one with the least amount of responsibility on his plate. Belichick designed the defenses. When Crennel got the Cleveland job, I asked a longtime Patriots defender what he thought of the hire, and the player told me flat out that he never envisioned Romeo as a head coach. It’s just one player, one opinion. And not being head-coach material doesn’t disqualify someone from being a top-flight coordinator. In fact, I touched base with the player again on Wednesday, and he assured me that Crennel installed the defensive game plan throughout the week without interference from Belichick and that Crennel called the game. The player also assured me that Belichick had his fingerprints on everything that transpired with the team — special teams, offense, defense and front-office decisions. I’m just not sold on Crennel. As a coordinator, Crennel has far more to prove than Charlie Weis. No one I’ve talked to doubts Weis’ ability to create innovative game plans. (Everyone I’ve talked to doubts Weis’ ability to control his ego.) Crennel worked for Belichick, who specializes in defense. Bill Parcells never won a Super Bowl without Belichick working as his defensive coordinator. Hey, maybe one day we will be saying the same thing about Belichick and Crennel. Today, all I’m sure of is that Crennel’s hiring increases the likelihood that Todd Haley is in a make-or-break season in 2010. If things go poorly next season, don’t look for Pioli, Weis and Crennel to take the blame. They have nine Super Bowl rings among them. In their mind, they know exactly what it takes to win at the highest level in the NFL. Haley either has no political savvy, no interest in playing the kind of politics that enhances a coach’s longevity or zero leverage when putting together a coaching staff. Given the previous working relationship of Pioli, Weis and Crennel — and Weis’ oversized ego — it would be a seamless transition for Pioli to install Weis as head coach midway through the 2010 season or at the start of 2011. My gut says Haley’s ego and gambling nature make him unaware of the ramifications of his decisions. Firing Chan Gailey was a colossal error. With the offensive personnel provided to him by Pioli, Haley should’ve held on to Gailey for a season. There was no reason for the head coach to attach his reputation and credibility to a receiver-less offense. Good coaches are paranoid. They perceive every move by ownership/management as a potential threat to their power. Paranoia is what drives a good coach to be great. Paranoia is what makes a coach sleep at his office and punt on fourth down. Look at Belichick. He’s been spoiled by success. That’s why he went for it on fourth and 2 against the Colts. He’s losing his paranoia. Haley’s background is extremely unusual for an NFL head coach. Golfers focus on a single obstacle, the course. A football coach worries about a million things, including what his assistants may or may not be plotting.
Posts: 296,860

01-14-2010, 06:27 PM	#502
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-552950	The problem with waiting to take a QB, is then you're a 7-9 team without a QB that isn't bad enough to get one but isn't good enough to win anything.
Posts: 115,275

01-14-2010, 06:33 PM	#506
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-552950	What QB's taken mid to late first round here in the last about 6 years have done well? Roethlisberger and Cutler went like 11th you still have to be pretty shitty to pick 11th.
Posts: 115,275

01-14-2010, 06:36 PM	#510
doomy3 Supporter Join Date: Aug 2005 Casino cash: $3293539	I think next year is the year to pick the QB. See, in a vacuum, this is about Cassel vs. Sanchez. However, this could very well end up being a few years of Cassel and a career of Gabbert/Locker/Barkley/etc. vs. Sanchez. In that scenario, I think we're better off in the long run, as I don't ever see Sanchez as more than a game manager. I still think this came down to one thing: Pioli didn't like Sanchez enough to use the #3 overall pick on him. The trade for Cassel for a second rounder was still a good move, IMO. Perhaps you hit on someone who can be a viable QB for you for only a second rounder. If not, you get to pick from a much better crop of QBs in a couple years. Just my opinion.
Posts: 12,878