shaneo69
10-11-2005, 11:37 AM
DAWES: SIMPLE TRUTHS
Oct 11, 2005, 5:28:16 AM by Rufus Dawes
The response to the Chiefs recent spate of losing is highly instructive. It shows, first, that people care about the team as much as they ever did. Second, it shows that emotion rules as much as reason and, third, that some people never learn, those people being certain members of the chattering class.
Like the drunk who looks for his keys under the streetlight because the light is better there, too many critics continue to cite the same old arguments for what’s wrong.
The defense
If anyone truly expected the defense to make some enormous leap they either know little about the sport or were driven to flights of fancy by a couple of off-season acquisitions. Improvement comes by way of a winding staircase. It’s incremental. The trip is littered with some promising outings and some not so promising, but it’s not like even at its peak the defense of the ‘90s was able to consistently stop the Broncos.
Nevertheless, those who continue to point to the defense as the key trouble spot have no eye for detail. Indianapolis started the season 3-0 but its usually potent offense was nowhere to be found. In truth, the Colts have succeeded because they have avoided mistakes on offense, giving up no sacks and only three turnovers in their first three wins. By Vermeil’s account, Kansas City gave the ball to the Eagles last week four times on its side of the 50-yard line. For a growing defense going against one of the more formidable offenses in the league, that’s too much to ask.
Meanwhile, the Colts defense has grown up, but remember it has taken head coach Tony Dungy four years to build it and it was done more with draft picks than free agents. He used the same template in Tampa Bay where his defense (not Jon Gruden’s offense) led the Bucs to the Super Bowl. Indy’s offense was not up to its usual standards this past weekend, however, giving up a sack and tossing a couple of INT’s, but the defense managed to take the ball away four times. The team now stands as the only undefeated team in the league and it’s as much because the offense hasn’t made any major blunders as it is because the defense has improved.
The offense
Omit the accusation that the team’s offensive problems are due to a lack of a dominant receiver and you omit something important about the mental atmosphere in which the current debate over the team’s start has been conducted. The Chiefs had two 1,000-yard receivers last year and could have had a 1,000 yard rusher to boot. They all returned so where exactly this dominant receiver could flourish escapes me.
Vermeil’s offense, by his own admission, has been dependent on the offensive line, a legacy that really dates back to before the head coach when the inside trio of Grunhard, Shields, and Szott teamed with John Alt and powered the team. The media, by and large, prefer to convey the loss of Roaf as a primary reason for the offense’s problems but it is more the continuity that he, Shields, Wiegmann, Waters (and Dunn, too) haven’t had since last year. With aging players come injuries and the remarkable run of the line’s nearly perfect slate of complete games in 2002 and 2003 is likely never to be replicated. Pray that this is not similar to 1998 when lineman Glenn Parker won the team’s MVP award largely because he filled in at three different positions along the offensive line.
The coaching
Accusations of coaching blunders have also made their way up the criticism chain. No surprise there. But what is somewhat of a surprise, the criticism has been leveled at the head coach, Dick Vermeil. The Chiefs don’t practice during their bye week and it’s accusations that the coach is too soft, or he lets the players get away with too much, witness the reported troubles off the field. This, of course, comes from some of the same people who accused Vermeil of working his players too hard.
Too hard? Too soft? Neither has anything to do with it. By any measurement, the Chiefs practices are harder than most and include a steady dose of padded outings, a concept totally foreign to many NFL coaches by this time of year.
The coordinators, for the most part, have been skipped over for some of the blame. But if you listen closely you can hear the voice of dissent and that they, too, must face some of the media’s music. Why doesn’t Tony Gonzalez get the ball more? (According to Vermeil, he has only two fewer catches compared to last year at this time.) Change the plan for the running backs. That’s the same plan they found so appealing two weeks ago. (Vermeil says Johnson needs to play and he needs some plan to do that, so there is no change planned right now.) What happened to the Gunther Cunningham euphoria? Oh, it’s still there but it’s likely linked as much to what people appreciate in a defensive coordinator more than any specific why he does this or that.
A month ago thoughts of a 2-2 record would have brought smiles to plenty of faces. Today it’s an ominous sign. But whether you strut or fret, at least stop resurrecting the same old arguments or blaming the same people. Maybe the Chiefs right now “are a poster child of today’s NFL,” as fellow columnist Jonathan Rand contends. (A Fitting final Test for Vermeil?) “They have enough weapons to be dangerous and enough weaknesses to be vulnerable.”
Oct 11, 2005, 5:28:16 AM by Rufus Dawes
The response to the Chiefs recent spate of losing is highly instructive. It shows, first, that people care about the team as much as they ever did. Second, it shows that emotion rules as much as reason and, third, that some people never learn, those people being certain members of the chattering class.
Like the drunk who looks for his keys under the streetlight because the light is better there, too many critics continue to cite the same old arguments for what’s wrong.
The defense
If anyone truly expected the defense to make some enormous leap they either know little about the sport or were driven to flights of fancy by a couple of off-season acquisitions. Improvement comes by way of a winding staircase. It’s incremental. The trip is littered with some promising outings and some not so promising, but it’s not like even at its peak the defense of the ‘90s was able to consistently stop the Broncos.
Nevertheless, those who continue to point to the defense as the key trouble spot have no eye for detail. Indianapolis started the season 3-0 but its usually potent offense was nowhere to be found. In truth, the Colts have succeeded because they have avoided mistakes on offense, giving up no sacks and only three turnovers in their first three wins. By Vermeil’s account, Kansas City gave the ball to the Eagles last week four times on its side of the 50-yard line. For a growing defense going against one of the more formidable offenses in the league, that’s too much to ask.
Meanwhile, the Colts defense has grown up, but remember it has taken head coach Tony Dungy four years to build it and it was done more with draft picks than free agents. He used the same template in Tampa Bay where his defense (not Jon Gruden’s offense) led the Bucs to the Super Bowl. Indy’s offense was not up to its usual standards this past weekend, however, giving up a sack and tossing a couple of INT’s, but the defense managed to take the ball away four times. The team now stands as the only undefeated team in the league and it’s as much because the offense hasn’t made any major blunders as it is because the defense has improved.
The offense
Omit the accusation that the team’s offensive problems are due to a lack of a dominant receiver and you omit something important about the mental atmosphere in which the current debate over the team’s start has been conducted. The Chiefs had two 1,000-yard receivers last year and could have had a 1,000 yard rusher to boot. They all returned so where exactly this dominant receiver could flourish escapes me.
Vermeil’s offense, by his own admission, has been dependent on the offensive line, a legacy that really dates back to before the head coach when the inside trio of Grunhard, Shields, and Szott teamed with John Alt and powered the team. The media, by and large, prefer to convey the loss of Roaf as a primary reason for the offense’s problems but it is more the continuity that he, Shields, Wiegmann, Waters (and Dunn, too) haven’t had since last year. With aging players come injuries and the remarkable run of the line’s nearly perfect slate of complete games in 2002 and 2003 is likely never to be replicated. Pray that this is not similar to 1998 when lineman Glenn Parker won the team’s MVP award largely because he filled in at three different positions along the offensive line.
The coaching
Accusations of coaching blunders have also made their way up the criticism chain. No surprise there. But what is somewhat of a surprise, the criticism has been leveled at the head coach, Dick Vermeil. The Chiefs don’t practice during their bye week and it’s accusations that the coach is too soft, or he lets the players get away with too much, witness the reported troubles off the field. This, of course, comes from some of the same people who accused Vermeil of working his players too hard.
Too hard? Too soft? Neither has anything to do with it. By any measurement, the Chiefs practices are harder than most and include a steady dose of padded outings, a concept totally foreign to many NFL coaches by this time of year.
The coordinators, for the most part, have been skipped over for some of the blame. But if you listen closely you can hear the voice of dissent and that they, too, must face some of the media’s music. Why doesn’t Tony Gonzalez get the ball more? (According to Vermeil, he has only two fewer catches compared to last year at this time.) Change the plan for the running backs. That’s the same plan they found so appealing two weeks ago. (Vermeil says Johnson needs to play and he needs some plan to do that, so there is no change planned right now.) What happened to the Gunther Cunningham euphoria? Oh, it’s still there but it’s likely linked as much to what people appreciate in a defensive coordinator more than any specific why he does this or that.
A month ago thoughts of a 2-2 record would have brought smiles to plenty of faces. Today it’s an ominous sign. But whether you strut or fret, at least stop resurrecting the same old arguments or blaming the same people. Maybe the Chiefs right now “are a poster child of today’s NFL,” as fellow columnist Jonathan Rand contends. (A Fitting final Test for Vermeil?) “They have enough weapons to be dangerous and enough weaknesses to be vulnerable.”