The Million Dollar Question: *****/Haley/ and the KC Roster.

[Raised On Riots]

Observing and taking part in the several threads that have sprung up due to Whitlock, I have finally crystallized the boiled-down essence of what this team and season is all about.



The Million Dollar Question is:



Can you evaluate and establish culture with this roster and win games simultaneously?


Without your best players on the field, I don't think you can. And it will be interesting to see as the season unfolds which of these two aspects is going to take precedence.

What do you think?

[htismaqe]

Who are these "best players" that aren't on the field?

People were concerned about Dorsey - he's on the field.
People were upset about Jackson - he's on the field.
Bowe's on the field despite the demotion.

There's more.

So who are these "best players"?

[Simply Red]

rebuilding get over it.

[KCtotheSB]

Depends on if the players continue playing hard for Haley.

Haley's behavior has been brought up time and time again that there might be a point where the yelling/screaming/temper tantrums aren't as effective as before. I agree with Haley on the fact that conditioning and being able to play late in ballgames will be Kansas City's best chance at winning with a roster devoid of a lot of talent. That conditioning and ability to win or at least, stay in games, goes hand in hand with Haley's behavior and whether the players still buy in. Still, no matter what the players attitude becomes, I think ***** and Haley have an effective "backup plan" in "if you don't do your shit right, we'll find someone off the waiver wire who will". The amount of players on this roster that are "untouchable" are few and far between which helps solidify that backup plan. The culture and leadership will have to come from those few that are "untouchable" and a select few who buy in to Haley's methods and excel on the field.

As for winning games? Yeah, it can and will happen this season, regardless of what some might think. We won't be playoff contenders by any means, but aside from fellow bottomdwellers, I think the Chiefs will clip a few teams that overlook them.

[ChiefsCountry]

I think two million dollar questions are:

1a) Can Cassel be a franchise guy?
1b) Can we build a top 5 defense?

Those two are what we need to happen to accomplish what we want.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by KCtotheSB

Haley's behavior has been brought up time and time again that there might be a point where the yelling/screaming/temper tantrums aren't as effective as before.

What hasn't been brought up, at least not NEARLY enough, is how FAIR Haley has been.

He yelled at Croyle about the time out. And he was right there to pat the kid on the back and praise him when he threw the TD.

It's as if the guy doesn't do anything BUT scream, and that couldn't be further from the truth.

[OnTheWarpath58]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

What hasn't been brought up, at least not NEARLY enough, is how FAIR Haley has been.

He yelled at Croyle about the time out. And he was right there to pat the kid on the back and praise him when he threw the TD.

It's as if the guy doesn't do anything BUT scream, and that couldn't be further from the truth.

That's just because Croyle is "his QB."



Couldn't help it.

[Raised On Riots]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Who are these "best players" that aren't on the field?

People were concerned about Dorsey - he's on the field.
People were upset about Jackson - he's on the field.
Bowe's on the field despite the demotion.

There's more.

So who are these "best players"?

The best answer I can give you is another question. And that question is; at what point do you allow a concrete, starting roster the opportunity to gel as a unit and begin to trust and depend on each other instead playing "musical chairs" with the available positions?

When do you attempt to establish consistency with the squad and give them the best opportunity to win?

Are we playing football, or are we more concerned with sending messages and creating mindsets?

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Raised On Riots

The best answer I can give you is another question. And that question is; at what point do you allow a concrete, starting roster the opportunity to gel as a unit and begin to trust and depend on each other instead playing "musical chairs" with the available positions?

When you think you actually HAVE a starting-caliber roster.

Originally Posted by Raised On Riots

When do you attempt to establish consistency with the squad and give them the best opportunity to win?

When you think you have the talent to win consistently.

Originally Posted by Raised On Riots

Are we playing football, or are we more concerned with sending messages and creating mindsets?

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

That's just because Croyle is "his QB."



Couldn't help it.

Touche!

[donkhater]

The list is short:

Cassel
Bowe
Albert
Waters
Jackson (only because he is a rookie DL)
Flowers
Carr
Colquitt
Succop

That's it IMO. Maybe Dorsey given that I tend to give defensive linemen more time ot learn a position. But really, if everyone else was replaced, could anyone really gripe?

[Fruit Ninja]

hehe, Isnt Croyle Herm's QB?

[Raised On Riots]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Aye, there's the rub; if the new regime had inherited a better roster like Ryan did, you can implement your new culture w/o compromise and still win games.

With these guys? Not so much.

So, once again; which route are we taking?

[Fritz88]

With the talent we currently have. We are not doing too bad.

[DaWolf]

Originally Posted by Raised On Riots

Observing and taking part in the several threads that have sprung up due to Whitlock, I have finally crystallized the boiled-down essence of what this team and season is all about.



The Million Dollar Question is:



Can you evaluate and establish culture with this roster and win games simultaneously?


Without your best players on the field, I don't think you can. And it will be interesting to see as the season unfolds which of these two aspects is going to take precedence.

What do you think?

The key is "this roster".

I think people want to see us turn into Miami or Atlanta this year, but there are a few issues:
1) The roster situation inherited here is different.
2) The schedule we play this year is far harder than the one either of those teams played last year.

However, I think it is paramount that this team does start to win games, because the reality is that part of the culture they are trying to establish is winning games, and expecting to win games, not being close in games.

I don't expect this team to be any better than 5-11, which would match *****'s initial New England team, however these guys have got to learn to win some games, and have some momentum going into next year. This gives credibility to the entire program and process. So winning is relative. I don't think they need to be a winning team *this* year, but they do need to show a lot of improvement over last year, especially in the W column...