If Vermiel get's us to the AFC Championship or SB this year do you want him back?

[chiefsfan1963]

What's the buzz in KC about Vermiel? SB or bust? I'm still a big fan of what he has accomplished. I would like him back if we get to AFC Championship game. I'm expecting us to better though.

[Electric]

What's the buzz in KC about Vermiel? SB or bust? I'm still a big fan of what he has accomplished. I would like him back if we get to AFC Championship game. I'm expecting us to better though.

There are people here that don't want him now!!

[keg in kc]

If he wants to come back next year, I'm fine with it. I don't think he will unless we go some distance into the playoffs. He hasn't, however, accomplished all that much here, in my opinion. 2003 was nice, but 2001-2002 and 2004 weren't any better than Gun's years.

[ChiefFripp]

Everyone knows The Chiefs are going to have to start rebuilding after this next season. We may as well start with a new coach. I hope Saunders is interested in the position.

[keg in kc]

Everyone knows The Chiefs are going to have to start rebuilding after this next season. I don't believe that for a second.

[Chieficus]

What's the buzz in KC about Vermiel? SB or bust? I'm still a big fan of what he has accomplished. I would like him back if we get to AFC Championship game. I'm expecting us to better though.

I'm not going to be overly critical of Vermiel, but I'm also not going to procliam "I love having him here!" either.

From what history tells us, he certianly earned accolades for his work with the Eagles back in the day, but aside from the Rams SB season, I've not been impressed whatsoever by his coaching abilities with either the Rams or the Chiefs.

If we do win, I'm not going to say: "It's the brilliance of Saunders!" For obviously as we have seen with Martz, it's not true that for his SB win the OC was the brain and he was a mere talking head.

I will give him credit for some quality personell moves, but he's also made his fair share of dumb ones. I'm fairly confident about our chances this season, but part of me would be more comfortable and confident if someone else was in his shoes. If he wins us one, then, heck: "Thanks for the memories, but, see ya!"

[alanm]

If he wants to come back next year, I'm fine with it. I don't think he will unless we go some distance into the playoffs. He hasn't, however, accomplished all that much here, in my opinion. 2003 was nice, but 2001-2002 and 2004 weren't any better than Gun's years.
Oh Gawd... If Proctor could only see this now!! ROFL ROFL ROFL

[Logical]

I would be suprised if anyone says no, but someone probably will.

I think DV is the perfect person to maintain if players start to retire. You change coaches and you likely are not just changing personel but changing the system and then need even more players suited to that new system.

However, if we win the SB I would be suprised if DV stays.

[TEX]

I'd like D.V. back regardless. If not, then I hope A.S. gets the job the second Vermeil retires.

[DeepSouth]

I don't believe that for a second.
I agree with kik.

[keg in kc]

Oh Gawd... If Proctor could only see this now!! ROFL ROFL ROFLYeah, I'm sure he'd try to salvage some kind of a moral victory out of the idea that Vermeil's teams have played as poorly as Gun's did.

[beavis]

If he wants to come back next year, I'm fine with it. I don't think he will unless we go some distance into the playoffs. He hasn't, however, accomplished all that much here, in my opinion. 2003 was nice, but 2001-2002 and 2004 weren't any better than Gun's years.
Exactly. One 13 win season (in which we weren't nearly as close as some might like to think) and a first round playoff exit. We could have had that under Marty. I don't see what he's really accomplished, besides have polar opposites on both sides of the ball.

[Deberg_1990]

He hasn't, however, accomplished all that much here, in my opinion. 2003 was nice, but 2001-2002 and 2004 weren't any better than Gun's years.

Exactly..this is the dirty little secret nobody wants to admit.

[keg in kc]

Well, maybe I'm being a little harsh. He has given us one of the best offenses in the history of the league. That is worth some degree of note. It's just a shame the other side of the ball hasn't yet been up to par.

I have a feeling if it is this year, we'll be pretty forgiving. At least I will. I've said this a lot the last couple of years, I think with this crowd, even a simple playoff win would purge a lot of demons.

[chiefsfan1963]

I was 7 when we won the SB so I never saw the Chiefs when they were on top offensively. I've never seen a chiefs team better offensively than with DV at the helm. I like his game time philosophy to "play to win". I personally believe that Lamar is to blame for the 2004 fiasco. He would not loosen the purse strings in 2004. If he had done what we did this offseason personel wise on D we would have been a playoff team in 2004. DV had no control of this. CP and Lamar had it.

[keg in kc]

As much as I wish we'd have not made some of the moves in '04 that we did (resigning guys like Hicks and Woods), there weren't the kind of personnel available last offseason that we got this year. Kendrell Bell, Trotter and Ed Hartwell weren't on the market, so there wasn't a real pick of the litter at linebacker as I recall. There certainly weren't a number of top-shelf corners available. No Derrick Johnson. Etc.

I look at it more as the stars really aligned for us this offseason, in free agency and the draft, and we took advantage of it.

How that plays out on the field, we'll have to see.

[ARROW2]

I love DV. He is one of the all time greats. Don't take him for granted....He can stay as long as he wants as far as I'm concerned....

[Logical]

I was 7 when we won the SB so I never saw the Chiefs when they were on top offensively. I've never seen a chiefs team better offensively than with DV at the helm. I like his game time philosophy to "play to win". I personally believe that Lamar is to blame for the 2004 fiasco. He would not loosen the purse strings in 2004. If he had done what we did this offseason personel wise on D we would have been a playoff team in 2004. DV had no control of this. CP and Lamar had it.I saw the Chiefs from 65 to the end of the Stram years and the offense though brilliant was never this good. On the other side no defense for the Chiefs has ever been this bad. As to Vermiel's game philosophy it seems to me it is completely lacking in consistency. I often get the feeling when we get to the end of the halves he does nothing but play the gut feeling of that instance. Worst Defense, kick to the opposing team. Inside the 10 yard line and it is 4th down with less than 30 seconds to go kick the field goal when a TD would seal the victory, yup time to kick the field goal. I could go on and on but what is the point. I do agree that 2004 was probably the fault of Lamar and Peterson but that is now water under the bridge.

[chiefsfan1963]

As much as I wish we'd have not made some of the moves in '04 that we did (resigning guys like Hicks and Woods), there weren't the kind of personnel available last offseason that we got this year. Kendrell Bell, Trotter and Ed Hartwell weren't on the market, so there wasn't a real pick of the litter at linebacker as I recall. There certainly weren't a number of top-shelf corners available. No Derrick Johnson. Etc.

I look at it more as the stars really aligned for us this offseason, in free agency and the draft, and we took advantage of it.

How that plays out on the field, we'll have to see.

good point keg. perhaps we couldn't have done anything substantial even if Lamar was willing in 2004. i didn't think of that.

[Rausch]

After he does this year, yeah...

But I don't think we'll see DV or Holmes on the field again if we win a super bowl...

[Logical]

As much as I wish we'd have not made some of the moves in '04 that we did (resigning guys like Hicks and Woods), there weren't the kind of personnel available last offseason that we got this year. Kendrell Bell, Trotter and Ed Hartwell weren't on the market, so there wasn't a real pick of the litter at linebacker as I recall. There certainly weren't a number of top-shelf corners available. No Derrick Johnson. Etc.

I look at it more as the stars really aligned for us this offseason, in free agency and the draft, and we took advantage of it.

How that plays out on the field, we'll have to see.Won't quite agree on CB at least when it comes to one or two for the most part you are correct. However, that is not the point, had we signed a couple of players that would have replaced say a Hicks and provided a decent starter among the LBs then we would have them to go with this years signings and being that much closer to fielding a potential top 10 defense. You do not rebuild in only one year, we completely wasted a year of defensive rebuilding in 2004 IMO.

[Sparhawk]

Maybe he's lost a little of that edge he used to have when he coached the Eagles? I wouldn't mind seeing him back, but on the other hand I don't think it'd hurt to have some new blood. I'm not sure who we'll get though because I've heard unsubstantiated rumors that Saunders and the King don't get along.

[chiefsfan1963]

I saw the Chiefs from 65 to the end of the Stram years and the offense though brilliant was never this good. On the other side no defense for the Chiefs has ever been this bad. As to Vermiel's game philosophy it seems to me it is completely lacking in consistency. I often get the feeling when we get to the end of the halves he does nothing but play the gut feeling of that instance. Worst Defense, kick to the opposing team. Inside the 10 yard line and it is 4th down with less than 30 seconds to go kick the field goal when a TD would seal the victory, yup time to kick the field goal. I could go on and on but what is the point. I do agree that 2004 was probably the fault of Lamar and Peterson but that is now water under the bridge.

i would agree in part, but perhaps the inconsistency was due to how awful we were on D. personally I couldn't figure why our D got so bad. although DV's past defenses with the eagles and rams weren't great they were no where near as bad as the Chief's D.

[keg in kc]

Won't quite agree on CB at least when it comes to one or two for the most part you are correct.This offseason was an aberration. I don't know if there've ever been this many starting corners available at one time in free agency. Rolle, Smoot, Lucas, Law. Baxter, Henry, and then Surtain in trade. We could not have acquired anyone last year close to the calibre of Surtain without trying to outbid the browncows for Bailey. That's the point I was making.

In short, what I'm saying is not that we shouldn't have made different moves, simply that we could not possibly have made the moves we made this year last year. It just wasn't possible. We could've swapped role players, and maybe been slightly better, but nothing close to the calibre of changes we made in '05. It simply was not possible to "do last year what we did this year".

And I think it remains to be seen whether or not we wasted a year of rebuilding or not. You can't judge that until this season is finished. If Wesley and Hicks return to their form of several years ago, then we didn't. Although I don't think I'll ever be satisfied with the Woods signing, not at his age.

[Rausch]

Oh Gawd... If Proctor could only see this now!! ROFL ROFL ROFL

Because I decided to give the guy a chance (what choice did I have? He's here no matter how I feel about it) instead of using his hiring to forge a deep hatred for the man he's quickly starting to become one of my favorite coaches.

The guy convinces players they're better than they are, and before you know it, they play like it.

I'm still amazed he's taken two no-name RB's and made them the NFL's best at what they do (Holmes and Dante), a career journeyman at QB, an over the hill WR and a career underachiever in Morton and Kennison, an undersized center, and a rookie free agent fullback that he converted to gaurd and made the NFL's best offense over the last four years.

It's like he's discovered a Vaypoo-rize for NFL players...

[greg63]

Sure! He knows how to put together an effective offence. But, I think the point is moot, he's not coming back - last I heard.

[Wallcrawler]

Just as you do with any coach, you deal with the bad along with the good in regard to Dick Vermiel.


Recordwise, and playoff record, he hasnt done any better than Gun or Marty, this is true.

But he has made watching Chiefs football exciting with the offense that he has built. The Chiefs are a scoring machine that is all but unstoppable. Often times it is the Chiefs that end up stopping themselves offensively, not the opposing defense. In any game, the Chiefs have a chance to win with as many points as they put up. The Defense was on the decline before Vermiel ever got here, and Vermiel is an offensive minded coach, so everyone should have known not to expect a huge turnaround on defense.

Vermiel's development of Dante Hall into one of the most explosive return specialists the game has ever seen is another credit to him. Gun had all but given up on Dante Hall when he was head coach. Vermiel recognized the talent there, and made him what he is.


The negatives that I find in Vermiel are that he becomes too close to his players/staff, becomes their friend, and keeps them around even though they are not getting the job done. This can be said about Greg Robinson who couldnt coordinate a monkey shitfight in a zoo, Peter Giunta who can coach a pro bowl corner into the unemployment line, and Eric Hicks who hasnt done jack in 7 seasons. These guys, although ineffective at their job, are retained because of Dick's personal relationship with them. I can find no other explanation as to why such ineffectiveness is allowed to pass. On any other franchise, Eric Hicks would have been cut years ago.


On gameday, I think that Vermiel sometimes gets too in love with the passing game, and neglects his all world running back that he has in Priest Holmes. Best offensive line in football, best scoring back the league has seen in a single season, yet he chooses to throw the ball countless times on third and short, or a yard away from the endzone. I remember the game that the Chiefs lost to the Bengals to end their undefeated streak, Priest Holmes touched the ball 12 times all game long. That is completely inexcusable. Or the game against the Texans, Chiefs have the ball at the 1 yard line and instead of giving it to Holmes, they throw the ball and it gets picked off and returned for a game tying touchdown.

To me, thats like slapping your O-line/Runninback in the face and saying to them "We dont think you can get one yard, so we're throwing it." Holmes and the Chiefs had been destroying the Texans and dominating every statistical column in the game to that point. It seems that Dick just gets bored with handing the ball to Holmes and has to get creative. Maybe it was Saunders' idea, but DV has the final say on what type of play to call.


If Dick Vermiel will stay with the offense/special teams and let Gunther handle the defense the way he wants, I wouldnt mind seeing him come back. Dick doesnt know defense, never has, and never will. He should leave the defense to those who do it for a living, and stick with what he knows best, that being offense.

If he is going to undermine Gunther and demand that Hicks and other jagoffs get playing time because he doesnt want to hurt anyone's feelings, then he can go ahead and retire.

[htismaqe]

While the records may be similar, there's no comparing Vermeil to Gunther.

With Gunther, we weren't good at anything.

With Marty we had great defense and no offense. With Vermeil we have great offense and no defense.

With Gunther we had shit in one hand and no hope in the other.

[MichaelH]

While the records may be similar, there's no comparing Vermeil to Gunther.

With Gunther, we weren't good at anything.

With Marty we had great defense and no offense. With Vermeil we have great offense and no defense.

With Gunther we had shit in one hand and no hope in the other.


All good points. The team has lacked balance for many years. I really hope this is the year that both sides are fairly equal. I don't see DV coaching past this season.

[Phobia]

I don't want him back. Not only has he put our D in the worst hole in the history of the league (the 70's Buccaneers weren't that bad), but his game management skills blow. Punt, go for it, FG? I'm unsure if he's ever made that decision to our benefit. At least he doesn't run it 3 times up the gut and play for a FG.

[Deberg_1990]

While the records may be similar, there's no comparing Vermeil to Gunther.

With Gunther, we weren't good at anything.

With Marty we had great defense and no offense. With Vermeil we have great offense and no defense.

With Gunther we had shit in one hand and no hope in the other.

Actually, the 1999 team was decent. We almost made the playoffs. The 2000 team had a good offense and Grbac with a Hot Hand.

[Mecca]

I better not ever hear about Gunther talking about people "growing their beards out" again.

[keg in kc]

The 2000 team had a good offense and Grbac with a Hot Hand.I wouldn't call it a "good offense". The '00 Chiefs scored a total of 355 points. We scored about 130 more than that each of the last two years. Which is about a TD and 2 pt conversion better per game. That's a good offense.

[DaWolf]

If Dick Vermeil wins he can coach however long he wants. But we've gotta start seeing results. I respect and like Vermeil a lot, but it is time for this franchise to win a Super Bowl, and if it takes an A-hole coach to do it, then fine. I just want to Lamar hoisting up that Lombardi...

[King_Chief_Fan]

I like what DV has done......but, his inability to separate personal and business has taken it toll on this team........He keeps coaches and players that should be sent packing

[Mecca]

I like what DV has done......but, his inability to separate personal and business has taken it toll on this team........He keeps coaches and players that should be sent packing

Now that is a comment I fully agree with. Wouldn't Peter Giunta be the most glaring example of this? Or hell any of the Robinson coaches that are still here. They should have let Gunther replace any of the coaches he wanted too.

[tiptap]

I think of Vermiel as a Special Teams Coach not a defensive or offensive coach. Historically he has not been the best coach in playoffs. I do not find the tweaking of the teams play in the playoffs that the successful teams perform to gain some advantage. This is in part to the homerun mentality of the offense. And the offensive show from the Chiefs has been spectacular and the games TOO close and exciting. As an entertainment package it is hard to beat. I wish and hope we find with the personnel at least less heart ties and more objective evaluations to performance on the field.

[DaWolf]

Now that is a comment I fully agree with. Wouldn't Peter Giunta be the most glaring example of this? Or hell any of the Robinson coaches that are still here. They should have let Gunther replace any of the coaches he wanted too.

I've heard this a lot but frankly how do we know that Gunther actually wanted any other coaches? He might have liked these guys. I just don't see the logic in A) Gun having the option to take 3 jobs (Jets, Falcons, us) and chooses the one where his hands are tied in terms of hiring coaches, and B) Carl giving Gunther all this money to come back but then telling him he can't make any staff changes, essentially nullyfying anything gun wants to do.

My theory is that Gun felt comfortable with the existing staff and wanted them here because they were familiar with the players and the Chiefs are in a win now mode, so that familiarity would help him out. Obviously it didn't. Now he's keeping them here this year because they all understand his scheme better and if you bring in someone new you have to re-teach them again.

I dunno. There are many possibilities...

[Electric]

Exactly..this is the dirty little secret nobody wants to admit.

This response is answering the comment that DV hasn't really done anything here?

Nothing can be said to justify the lack of defense, the HC because of his position is as responsible as anyone else.

I do think that the Chiefs offense under DV/AS has proven to be unstoppable at times. There have been precious few games that the Chiefs were not competitive. Last year they only lost a couple of games by more than 7 points. Sure the defense was not what we needed, but the offense, that offense, has proven to be the best in the league over the last three years.

Face it, with a 7-9 record the Chiefs led the league in offense. From an outsider's view, the goal was to outscore the opponent so as to overwhelm their offensive capability to catch up. As stated, the problem was that the defense was much worse, at times, than even DV anticipated.

Do not look for the same defense this year. Do look for more of the same offense this year. If DV comes back, I'm behind him. If he doesn't the new guy had better have his act together and realize that the concept is fine, the details need to be worked out.

[Manila-Chief]

I saw the Chiefs from 65 to the end of the Stram years and the offense though brilliant was never this good. On the other side no defense for the Chiefs has ever been this bad. As to Vermiel's game philosophy it seems to me it is completely lacking in consistency. I often get the feeling when we get to the end of the halves he does nothing but play the gut feeling of that instance. Worst Defense, kick to the opposing team. Inside the 10 yard line and it is 4th down with less than 30 seconds to go kick the field goal when a TD would seal the victory, yup time to kick the field goal. I could go on and on but what is the point. I do agree that 2004 was probably the fault of Lamar and Peterson but that is now water under the bridge.

I saw them from 66 onward. Don't forget the D of the Stram years. The D helped us win the SB as much or more so than the O.

But, yeah, I think this O is better.

If we win I'm all for keeping him. If we get close and most of the players return because of him then keep him. If we go one and out or don't make the play-offs ... then see ya!!! Coz he will be no better than Marty or Gun. But, I'm expecting good things from the Chiefs this year ... because of the new D players, Gun, and Al. Yep, DV will help but it will be the team.

[keg in kc]

I've heard this a lot but frankly how do we know that Gunther actually wanted any other coaches? He might have liked these guys. I just don't see the logic in A) Gun having the option to take 3 jobs (Jets, Falcons, us) and chooses the one where his hands are tied in terms of hiring coaches, and B) Carl giving Gunther all this money to come back but then telling him he can't make any staff changes, essentially nullyfying anything gun wants to do.

My theory is that Gun felt comfortable with the existing staff and wanted them here because they were familiar with the players and the Chiefs are in a win now mode, so that familiarity would help him out. Obviously it didn't. Now he's keeping them here this year because they all understand his scheme better and if you bring in someone new you have to re-teach them again.

I dunno. There are many possibilities...I think your theories on coaches could extend to personnel, too. Every guy we re-signed was one of "his" guys from his earlier stint in KC. So, really, how far fetched is the possibility that those moves were all made at Cunningham's behest?

[Electric]

I saw them from 66 onward. Don't forget the D of the Stram years. The D helped us win the SB as much or more so than the O.

But, yeah, I think this O is better.

If we win I'm all for keeping him. If we get close and most of the players return because of him then keep him. If we go one and out or don't make the play-offs ... then see ya!!! Coz he will be no better than Marty or Gun. But, I'm expecting good things from the Chiefs this year ... because of the new D players, Gun, and Al. Yep, DV will help but it will be the team.

I cannot class DV and Marty in the same category as Gun. I think he is great as a DC, but I also think he was in far above his head when it came to HC. His 9-7 season was mostly because he inherited the leftovers from the previous year he showed improvement from 7-9 but I dont think it was because of his abilities. If he was that good it would have been a better record his second year. He was basically promoted beyond his capability, that was a management error in judgement.

[Brock]

Actually, the 1999 team was decent. We almost made the playoffs. The 2000 team had a good offense and Grbac with a Hot Hand.

Ha ha.

Better than bad does not equal good.

[StcChief]

If DV wins SB. Ride off into the sunset, HOF record as 3 Teams SB.

Deep in playoffs AFC Championship game. HE may come back.

IF not look to AS to take over.

I agree bring in a new outside Coach with a new scheme with the players we have and its F'ed up for 2-3 years.

[Baby Lee]

Exactly. One 13 win season (in which we weren't nearly as close as some might like to think) and a first round playoff exit. We could have had that under Marty. I don't see what he's really accomplished, besides have polar opposites on both sides of the ball.
Nothing can quite beat the metaphysical knowledge at 9-1 that the season is doomed.

[Brock]

It's time for Vermeil to go.

[Baby Lee]

I better not ever hear about Gunther talking about people "growing their beards out" again.
I still say, at that point, Gun was so pissed off at the media he was spouting crazy shit just to f@ck with them.
"These guys microscrutinize and twist every word out of my mouth to ridiculous ends anyways. I'll just tell them that Grbac's beard has magical powers."

[Gaz]

I would be thrilled with Vermeil as HC as long as he is willing to stay.

xoxo~
Gaz
DV fan.

[Baby Lee]

Last year they only lost a couple of games by more than 7 points. Sure the defense was not what we needed, but the offense, that offense, has proven to be the best in the league over the last three years.
And how many of those close losses ended with the ball in the offense's hands and Trent going to the turf?
Or Trent throwing a 175 yard interception to a triple covered TE while we were holding a close lead?

[Mr. Kotter]

Everyone knows The Chiefs are going to have to start rebuilding after this next season. We may as well start with a new coach. I hope Saunders is interested in the position.

Before this off-season, I'd have agreed with you....however, with the acquisitions we've made (Bell, Surtain, Knight, Hall, DJ, Holcombe, Colquitt, Hodge, and....who knows, even FredEx), and a couple of the younger players beginning to emerge (Parker, Black, Sampson, and hopefully Sims and Saivii)...there really are only three or four potentially serious "holes" in the team for next year.

Heck, if CP is half as agressive in FA next year, we'll should be able to fill those (QBOTF, O-Line, WR....DE?). :thumb:

[Electric]

And how many of those close losses ended with the ball in the offense's hands and Trent going to the turf?
Or Trent throwing a 175 yard interception to a triple covered TE while we were holding a close lead?

For some strange reason I didn't research that aspect. How about enlightening us?

[Electric]

Before this off-season, I'd have agreed with you....however, with the acquisitions we've made (Bell, Surtain, Knight, Hall, DJ, Holcombe, Colquitt, Hodge, and....who knows, even FredEx), and a couple of the younger players beginning to emerge (Parker, Black, Sampson, and hopefully Sims and Saivii)...there really are only three or four potentially serious "holes" in the team for next year.

Heck, if CP is half as agressive in FA next year, we'll should be able to fill those (QBOTF, O-Line, WR....DE?). :thumb:

Don't be too optimistic, the naysayers will be on you like stink on ****!!

[Brock]

And how many of those close losses ended with the ball in the offense's hands and Trent going to the turf?
Or Trent throwing a 175 yard interception to a triple covered TE while we were holding a close lead?

I don't know about the interceptions, but there were too many times when a 3 man rush got to Green.

[Mr. Kotter]

Don't be too optimistic, the naysayers will be on you like stink on ****!!

I wear my rose colored glasses, and homerism proudly.... :)

[Baby Lee]

For some strange reason I didn't research that aspect. How about enlightening us?
Texans - that fuggin INT
Jax
TB
Saints
Chargers

In each instance the O had the ball and were within a TD [TD w/2pt in the instance of Jax] at the end. And at least three ended with a sack on a 3 man rush. And I think one of them ended with CONSECUTIVE sacks on 3 man rush.

[philfree]

I'd like to keep this coaching staff intact for another year regardless of this seasons out come. I believe in DV and his coaching methods as well as Saunders' and Cunningham's ability to lead their side of the ball.
DV is a proven winner. Both unit's have their boys at this point so I see no reason to be in a hurry to start over.

PhilFree:arrow:

[htismaqe]

Nothing can quite beat the metaphysical knowledge at 9-1 that the season is doomed.

ROFL

I guess I'm not the only one that caught the significance of 1973 being back.

[Logical]

Nothing can quite beat the metaphysical knowledge at 9-1 that the season is doomed.

Not sure whether you were being sarcastic or serious with this post. I do remember that there were indeed quite a few people on this BB that started correctly prediciting what would happen in the playoffs after we lost to Cincinnati. I think it personally took the second loss for me to see it coming but I have to give credit to those who saw the shortcomings and were not afraid to speak up in the face of all those who were still riding the wave of enthusiasm from the 9 game winning streak.

[Electric]

Texans - that fuggin INT
Jax
TB
Saints
Chargers

In each instance the O had the ball and were within a TD [TD w/2pt in the instance of Jax] at the end. And at least three ended with a sack on a 3 man rush. And I think one of them ended with CONSECUTIVE sacks on 3 man rush.

Now that you've done the research and came up with the data, what could the defense have done in this case? If we had of pulled off each of the end of game drives and won would there be all of this discussion? Would the Chiefs have placed such a high priority on the Defense in the off season?

It may be that those situations led to having an all around better team this year.

In each of those instances we were playing with our Aces, the best offense in the League plus having the best O line that didn't get the job done. Three man rushes should never get to the QB, but I'm sure that if the tables were turned we would have done our best to do the same.

I totally understand what you say, maybe it just wasn't our time. I feel like now is our time.

[Rausch]

It's time for Vermeil to go.

Who would your first (reasonable) choice be?

Most of the best coaches in the game are locked up or don't look to be leaving. You advocating a promotion for AS or looking steal a coordinator from somewhere?...

[Rausch]

I don't know about the interceptions, but there were too many times when a 3 man rush got to Green.

I still don't understand how that was even possible. Sure, Green held on to the ball for too long in some cases but with our line there isn't a team that we shouldn't be able to hold for 7 seconds with only a 3 man rush...

[Baby Lee]

Not sure whether you were being sarcastic or serious with this post. I do remember that there were indeed quite a few people on this BB that started correctly prediciting what would happen in the playoffs after we lost to Cincinnati. I think it personally took the second loss for me to see it coming but I have to give credit to those who saw the shortcomings and were not afraid to speak up in the face of all those who were still riding the wave of enthusiasm from the 9 game winning streak.
If you could go back to my posts from then, you'd know I was serious. Weirdly sanity-preserving to have such a long lead-in time to prepare me for what the Colts inevitably did to us in the playoffs.

[Brock]

Who would your first (reasonable) choice be?

Most of the best coaches in the game are locked up or don't look to be leaving. You advocating a promotion for AS or looking steal a coordinator from somewhere?...

I'd be okay with Al Saunders. It is just ridiculous that this team wasted the best offense in the NFL for 3 or 4 years, and I'm tired of Vermeil making excuses for it.

[Baby Lee]

Now that you've done the research and came up with the data, what could the defense have done in this case? If we had of pulled off each of the end of game drives and won would there be all of this discussion? Would the Chiefs have placed such a high priority on the Defense in the off season?

It may be that those situations led to having an all around better team this year.

In each of those instances we were playing with our Aces, the best offense in the League plus having the best O line that didn't get the job done. Three man rushes should never get to the QB, but I'm sure that if the tables were turned we would have done our best to do the same.

I totally understand what you say, maybe it just wasn't our time. I feel like now is our time.
There's an old haiku by Sir H. Edwards that guides my thinking in matters of this nature

You play
To Win
The Game.

When the greatest O on earth fizzles out repeatedly in the crunch like that, I don't take solace in 'hey, maybe we can call do-overs and try to win next year."

[Mr. Laz]

I love DV

why?

[Lzen]

I think of Vermiel as a Special Teams Coach not a defensive or offensive coach. Historically he has not been the best coach in playoffs. I do not find the tweaking of the teams play in the playoffs that the successful teams perform to gain some advantage. This is in part to the homerun mentality of the offense. And the offensive show from the Chiefs has been spectacular and the games TOO close and exciting. As an entertainment package it is hard to beat. I wish and hope we find with the personnel at least less heart ties and more objective evaluations to performance on the field.


Uhhh.......what? Are you talking about Marty? Tweaking the offense for playoff time? :shake:

And as far as his playoff record, I think .500 or better in the playoffs makes you a good coach. DV is 6-5 in the playoffs.

[htismaqe]

Not sure whether you were being sarcastic or serious with this post. I do remember that there were indeed quite a few people on this BB that started correctly prediciting what would happen in the playoffs after we lost to Cincinnati. I think it personally took the second loss for me to see it coming but I have to give credit to those who saw the shortcomings and were not afraid to speak up in the face of all those who were still riding the wave of enthusiasm from the 9 game winning streak.

I have to give credit to those who ridiculed those who were not afraid to speak up. They told us how we weren't true fans, how we needed to have faith in Vermeil and the team.

And then when the team got pasted by Indy, those same people said they'd never watch another game. Ain't that right 1973?

:D

[htismaqe]

I'd be okay with Al Saunders. It is just ridiculous that this team wasted the best offense in the NFL for 3 or 4 years, and I'm tired of Vermeil making excuses for it.

Why?

Saunders is to Vermeil as Gunther is to Marty.

:Lin:

[Brock]

Why?

Saunders is to Vermeil as Gunther is to Marty.

:Lin:

Remains to be seen.

[Rausch]

Why?

Saunders is to Vermeil as Gunther is to Marty.

:Lin:

I attribute our 90's playoff failure to both Marty and Carl.

Same now, both Carl and DV never had the same balls or willingness with the defense they did with the offense the last 5 years. The exact opposite with Marty.

There's no excuse for our GM not seeing the obvious lack of talent the last 3 years on defense.

[whoman69]

Actually, the 1999 team was decent. We almost made the playoffs. The 2000 team had a good offense and Grbac with a Hot Hand.
Got to disagree. The offense was inbalanced as the whole team was during the DV era. In '99 they couldn't pass, in '00 they couldn't run. We couldn't control the ball either year. Don't forget who we had for OC and DC back then. Gun didn't exactly have a genious staff behind him.

[chiefsfan1963]

I'd be okay with Al Saunders. It is just ridiculous that this team wasted the best offense in the NFL for 3 or 4 years, and I'm tired of Vermeil making excuses for it.

Remember Brock DV is just the head coach. He doesn't hold the purse strings. CP and Lamar decide how much grease they are going to release. I do not blame DV for 2004 fiasco. He was just towing the company line when he said that we could win with just Gun as our new coordinator and no more additions to our D. Lamar and CP did not want spend any money period. Lamar is tight when it comes to the other owners out there. He makes a lot of money each year with the Chiefs, and it's too bad that he values it more than winning another ring! It amazes me that he wouldn't pull all the stops given that he is not long for this world. Why the Farther of the AFL would not want to go out on the winning side is beyond me. YOU CAN"T TAKE IT WITH YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[chiefsfan1963]

I have to give credit to those who ridiculed those who were not afraid to speak up. They told us how we weren't true fans, how we needed to have faith in Vermeil and the team.

And then when the team got pasted by Indy, those same people said they'd never watch another game. Ain't that right 1973?

:D

H- you know i was completely beside myself last year watching my beloved Chief's implode! I was so mad that Lamar and CP did not lift a finger to make our D better team at the begining of the year. DV and Gun were left to improve the team from last year with no additional quality players on D. Like good employees they towed the company line that it could be done. Please give me pass on this one. I was not guilty due to insanity!!!!!!!!! :cuss:

[Chiefnj]

Remember Brock DV is just the head coach. He doesn't hold the purse strings. CP and Lamar decide how much grease they are going to release. I do not blame DV for 2004 fiasco. He was just towing the company line when he said that we could win with just Gun as our new coordinator and no more additions to our D. Lamar and CP did not want spend any money period. Lamar is tight when it comes to the other owners out there. He makes a lot of money each year with the Chiefs, and it's too bad that he values it more than winning another ring! It amazes me that he wouldn't pull all the stops given that he is not long for this world. Why the Farther of the AFL would not want to go out on the winning side is beyond me. YOU CAN"T TAKE IT WITH YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lamar really isn't tight with his money. Lots and lots of money went to sign free agents who didn't pan out and went to pay offensive players. Having the best OL and TE, a top 3 HB and a top 5 QB costs lots and lots of money.

[chiefsfan1963]

Lamar really isn't tight with his money. Lots and lots of money went to sign free agents who didn't pan out and went to pay offensive players. Having the best OL and TE, a top 3 HB and a top 5 QB costs lots and lots of money.

he still could of done better than doing nothing.

[Chiefnj]

he still could of done better than doing nothing.

What year did he do "nothing."

[chiefsfan1963]

What year did he do "nothing."

2004 offseason additions to our D.

[tiptap]

Uhhh.......what? Are you talking about Marty? Tweaking the offense for playoff time? :shake:

And as far as his playoff record, I think .500 or better in the playoffs makes you a good coach. DV is 6-5 in the playoffs.

I know this will get me in trouble but Vermiel's wins in the Ram SB run are a credit more to that team and the offense that was Matz' concern. The Titans were 2 feet from changing the winner in the SB. They were the better COACHED team. The Rams were the better team. I think Vermiel is great in running the system as are his OC for his teams. But I think he is deficit in analyzing other teams and coming up with the plan that gives his team a better chance to win then just the abilities shown week by week during the season. He is not the sideline tactician or at half time. It is more like we just have to be performing like we have been rather than finding those situations and conditions that attack the other teams weaknesses. Vermiel doesn't add to this; his Coordinators maybe, but not Vermiel himself.

[Chiefnj]

2004 offseason additions to our D.

It wasn't nothing.

They resigned (and thus spent Lamar's money) on Woods, Wesley, Bartee, Hicks. It may not have been the correct signings, but money was spent on keeping Gunther's old school players.

[CoMoChief]

I would like to have him here, simply to keep A.S. strictly as the OC. But having that said there is also a part of me that wants him gone simply because of his stubborn buddy buddy system he has with coaches, especially on defense. I think Gun needs to bring some of his own people that know him and what the hell hes trying to accomplish on the defensive side of the ball.

So overall I really dont know what to think. I would like for him to stay only if he's up to it. As soon as he gets the feeling of being too tired to do his job, then he should quit. If we got a new head coach, it better be.....

JIM MORA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "Playoffs?!?!.....Playoffs?!?!?"

[chiefsfan1963]

It wasn't nothing.

They resigned (and thus spent Lamar's money) on Woods, Wesley, Bartee, Hicks. It may not have been the correct signings, but money was spent on keeping Gunther's old school players.

your right! sorry for the poor communication. i mean signing new players like we did this year.

[Lzen]

I know this will get me in trouble but Vermiel's wins in the Ram SB run are a credit more to that team and the offense that was Matz' concern. The Titans were 2 feet from changing the winner in the SB. They were the better COACHED team. The Rams were the better team. I think Vermiel is great in running the system as are his OC for his teams. But I think he is deficit in analyzing other teams and coming up with the plan that gives his team a better chance to win then just the abilities shown week by week during the season. He is not the sideline tactician or at half time. It is more like we just have to be performing like we have been rather than finding those situations and conditions that attack the other teams weaknesses. Vermiel doesn't add to this; his Coordinators maybe, but not Vermiel himself.

Who do you think built that team? Not to mention the all important team chemistry that every SB winner has. It was Vermeil. What has bonehead Martz done since DV retired?

[chiefsfan1963]

I know this will get me in trouble but Vermiel's wins in the Ram SB run are a credit more to that team and the offense that was Matz' concern. The Titans were 2 feet from changing the winner in the SB. They were the better COACHED team. The Rams were the better team. I think Vermiel is great in running the system as are his OC for his teams. But I think he is deficit in analyzing other teams and coming up with the plan that gives his team a better chance to win then just the abilities shown week by week during the season. He is not the sideline tactician or at half time. It is more like we just have to be performing like we have been rather than finding those situations and conditions that attack the other teams weaknesses. Vermiel doesn't add to this; his Coordinators maybe, but not Vermiel himself.

you are right! DV should get no credit for putting together his coaching staff. in fact I can't believe no one has figured out that he has no talent as a coach, that he has been completely lucky getting to the play offs with 3 team different teams, and getting to the SB with 2 of them and winning one. If he manages to go to the SB again with the Chiefs then give all the credit to Gun, AS and the rest of his assistants. Thanks for setting me straight. :shake:

[whoman69]

Once again chiefsfan1963 has just managed to argue both side of the case poorly.

[HemiEd]

Who do you think built that team? Not to mention the all important team chemistry that every SB winner has. It was Vermeil. What has bonehead Martz done since DV retired?


Exactly! :clap:

[Nightfyre]

Personally, I would love to see Herman Edwards or Bill Cowher (much more unlikely) back in KC. They have a history here, they've had success in the past elsewhere, and they understand the need for balance in a team, with maybe a slight defensive bias. They understand that occaisionally, it is important to run the ball. They run strong running oriented offenses. Additionally, you would be gifting them with a young, competitive team.

QB: Green
HB: Johnson
FB: Holcombe
LT: Roaf
LG: Waters
C: Wiegmann
RG: Welbourn
RT: Black
WR: Parker
WR: Smith/Thorpe
TE: Gonzalez and/or Wilson

CB: Surtain
CB: Warfield
FS: Wesley
SS: Knight
LB: Bell
LB: Johnson
LB: Fujita/Fox
LB: Mitchell/Grigsby
DE: Hall
DE: Allen
DT: Sims
DT: Siavii

There would only be a few positions to shore up, and those players give us a 3-4 year window, imo. I mean, Roaf and maybe Green will retire in that time frame. Not to mention, they could develop our LBs quite strongly. AS can stay or go. Let him prove himself as a coach, then come back.

[chiefsfan1963]

Once again chiefsfan1963 has just managed to argue both side of the case poorly.


huh? :shrug:

[Nightfyre]

Do I win yet?