In defense of DV

[Cormac]

Change is good. It is what KC needs. A breath of fresh air. Herm comes in with his defensive emphasis, cuts Battle, and now he’s the next coming. I’m waiting before I fling myself onto his bandwagon. He is still a coach with a 41-44 (ish) lifetime HC record. And the Jets didn’t improve under his leadership, IMO. They were a decent team when he got there, and 4-12 when he was leaving. Not that I’m saying he is to blame…..just something to keep in mind.

When DV took over from Gunther, we were all excited about his honesty and the wealth of information in his press conferences, and his stated desire to play rookies, which were all improvements over Marty and/or Gun. Now many people are just as happy about those things with Herm. It may not make a bit of difference to our W-L record. Like I said, I’m going to wait until I see evidence for improvement on the field.

I am as frustrated as anybody that we weren’t more successful under DV. His loyalty to players and staff was his best and his worst attribute. And I admire him for acknowledging that every chance he got. But let’s not colour our judgement of him with selective memory of his moves. For every Julian Battle, there is a Dante Hall. And for every bust draft pick, there is a great FA pickup (Green, Roaf, Holmes, Kennison, Surtain).

People say that DV ignored the defense. That is being said more and more now. He was definitely biased towards offensive prowess, but we made a lot of moves on D while he was here. Holliday/Barber/McCleon was a very active offseason that resulted in 6 changes on the starting D, Robinson was fired the next offseason which was what we all wanted, Surtain/Bell/DJ/Knight were all brought in the next offseason, and now we have Law/Hali/Pollard this time. Most of our top draft picks have been on the D side for the last 5+ years, and even the year we picked up LJ in the first round, DV wanted Tyler Brayton (DE). Thank God that didn’t happen, but it’s sterling evidence that DV wasn’t forsaking the D side of the ball.

All I’m saying is that a lot of people in the media, Chiefs FO or on this board are pissing on DV’s head coaching grave. Whether that is overtly stated or not, it is heavily implied in many references to Herm’s philosophy for this team. Each to his own. I, OTOH, have very happy memories of the Chiefs under DV’s tenure. We had some serious shortcomings, but almost every team does. But watching them play football was really fun for 4 of the 5 years, and I always felt like we had a shot to win any game we were playing. We’re way overdue a playoff win, and hopefully Herm can bring that. I bet he can, but in the meantime I am grateful to DV for his efforts. He cleaned out a lot of overpaid trash when he came in, too (Grbac, Alexander, McGlockton (?) et al). Five years from now, it will be interesting to see what the prevailing opinion is of DV vs Herm. They’re both starting out in much the same way. Change is good.

[Brock]

Failure isn't worth defending.

[HemiEd]

Good Post Cormac, and lets not forget what a shamble the team was in when DV took over. I was, for the first time in my life almost embarrassed to say I was a Chiefs fan. Heck it was worse than the Marv Levy "Winged T" teams, and that sucked bad. DV built team unity, we had a bunch of Dan Williams types when he took over.

[Cormac]

Failure isn't worth defending.

What about a healthy dose of scepticism?

[jspchief]

DV was bizarro Marty.

Both built a great half team, but could never get enough of a complete team to have post season success.

[chiefsfan1963]

Great Post! Good Job! :clap:

[Idahored]

Cormac,
You just took the thoughts out of my head. I personally really like the Herm signing and change is good. It was time for Dick to leave and he knew that as well as everyone else. I enjoyed the Chief's under Dick and am looking forward to see if Herm can build on what he left and take the team to the SB.

[Idahored]

Failure isn't worth defending.


Then most of the head coaches currently and historically in the NFL should all be determined failures. Wow, that is some high standard there. I bet you don't hold yourself to the same standard.....

[Brock]

Then most of the head coaches currently and historically in the NFL should all be determined failures. Wow, that is some high standard there. I bet you don't hold yourself to the same standard.....

If I went 5 years at my job without achieving anything meaningful, I'd certainly be fired. So I'll take your bet.

Secondly, how many times is the ridiculous argument going to be made that just because most coaches don't make it to the playoffs, the one we had doesn't suck? It just means that most coaches in the NFL suck.

[chiefsfan1963]

Cormac,
You just took the thoughts out of my head. I personally really like the Herm signing and change is good. It was time for Dick to leave and he knew that as well as everyone else. I enjoyed the Chief's under Dick and am looking forward to see if Herm can build on what he left and take the team to the SB.

I do agree with most of your comments other than I would have liked DV to stay and get another Super Bowl with the Chiefs. My hope is that Herm can finally get our Defense to the Top 15 best and not sacrifice the Offense too much in accomplishing this. I also hope we can still be exciting to watch. Perhaps our D can add to the excitment making up for a less exciting offense compared to years past.

Finally I'm a little scared that Herm will be too conservative come playoff time and only allow our players to play not to lose rather than play to win.

[htismaqe]

I do agree with most of your comments other than I would have liked DV to stay and get another Super Bowl with the Chiefs. My hope is that Herm can finally get our Defense to the Top 15 best and not sacrifice the Offense too much in accomplishing this. I also hope we can still be exciting to watch. Perhaps our D can add to the excitment making up for a less exciting offense compared to years past.

Finally I'm a little scared that Herm will be too conservative come playoff time and only allow our players to play not to lose rather than play to win.

DV wasn't gonna win a Super Bowl here.

[Cormac]

In a way I think Herm has inherited a bit of a white elephant. Everybody expects our O to keep humming along with LJ, but in reality, they're old and there is precious little youth in place to take over, IMO. Also, with his defensive emphasis, most of us expect our D to take huge strides. I expect us to be in the top 10, personally. It will just be interesting to see what he can deliver. It won't surprise me in the least if he "fails" too.

[Baby Lee]

DV was bizarro Marty.

Both built a great half team, but could never get enough of a complete team to have post season success.
DV was the bizarro caricature of Marty.
Marty's D wasn't league leading like DV's O, just very good, and very very exilarating on occasion.
And Marty's O was never as soul suckingly abysmal, certainly not soul suckingly abysmal week in, week out, year in, year out, as DV's D, just middle of the road.

[Baby Lee]

I would have liked DV to stay and get another Super Bowl with the Chiefs.
And I would have liked 'Emily's Reasons Why Not' to stay on TV and become the best show in all of television. ;)

[StcChief]

In a way I think Herm has inherited a bit of a white elephant. Everybody expects our O to keep humming along with LJ, but in reality, they're old and there is precious little youth in place to take over, IMO. Also, with his defensive emphasis, most of us expect our D to take huge strides. I expect us to be in the top 10, personally. It will just be interesting to see what he can deliver. It won't surprise me in the least if he "fails" too.

Getting Old at WR (Kennison)
OL - Thankfully the youth draftees Sampson, Black, Svitek,.... hopefully will be able to fill big shoes in the next year or so

Green - 1-2 years. So printer/croyle better be stepping up.

TG - 2-3 years Kris Wilson? mature enough huge shoes to fill AllPro TE.

[Frazod]

F#ck him.

At least Marty won a couple of playoff games.

[HemiEd]

F#ck him.

At least Marty won a couple of playoff games.


Shut up Peckerwood! :D

[htismaqe]

DV was the bizarro caricature of Marty.
Marty's D wasn't league leading like DV's O, just very good, and very very exilarating on occasion.
And Marty's O was never as soul suckingly abysmal, certainly not soul suckingly abysmal week in, week out, year in, year out, as DV's D, just middle of the road.

Very, very true.

Marty's teams were much more balanced mediocrity. Whereas, DV's offense and defense were balanced by cancelling each other out...

[Cormac]

Shut up Peckerwood! :D

Yeah, fraz. What he said.





:p

[bsp4444]

DV was the bizarro caricature of Marty.
Marty's D wasn't league leading like DV's O, just very good, and very very exilarating on occasion.
And Marty's O was never as soul suckingly abysmal, certainly not soul suckingly abysmal week in, week out, year in, year out, as DV's D, just middle of the road.

Marty's defense WAS league leading, in 1995 they led the AFC for fewest yards, and they were near the top for a while. And I would have to say the offense was well short of middle of the road. It was definitely time for DV to go. He is the one that kept Robinson as the Def. Coord. for toooo long.

[Chief Faithful]

I'm never going to speak poorly of DV. He did a lot of good things such as improve team character, build the NFL's best offense, helped the team get out of cap hell, and generally put a team on the field week in and out that was fun to watch.

Now I'm glad Edwards is the coach because even after all the success under DV the defense still stunk. DV did not fix the defense after 4 years so now it is time for a new coach. Ultimately the success or failure of a team lands with the coach.

I'm ready to see a real Chiefs defense return to Arrowhead.

[ck_IN]

DV's tenure was an exercise in ego stroking. His whole mission here was to prove to the world that he and not Martz was the mind behind St. Lou's 'Greatest show on turf'. DV accomplished his goal.

As for his honesty, his first act as a HC, dumping Grbac for Green, was based on lies. It was time for Grbac to go and Green is better but DV's whole 'I intended to play Grbac and he up and left me in the lurch, I'm such a victim' was such a total croc it was laughable.

Willingness to play rookies? Are you delusional? Because DV had a win now and to hell with later mindset he stocked the team with aging vets and Ram castoffs. He didn't play a rookie unless he absolutely had to.

Many of the team improvements were done in spite of DV. Don't forget that we'd STILL have Robinson if it was up to DV.

In short DV left us an aging shell of a team that realisticlly has a 2 year window before it ages out. But he stroked his ego and that's all he seemed to care about. Maybe Herm can capitalize on that window but if he does it'll be because of Herms talent, not DV's.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

If I went 5 years at my job without achieving anything meaningful, I'd certainly be fired. So I'll take your bet.

Secondly, how many times is the ridiculous argument going to be made that just because most coaches don't make it to the playoffs, the one we had doesn't suck? It just means that most coaches in the NFL suck.



Well it depends on what you consider to be meaningful. If the only meaningful accomplishment in the NFL is winning the super bowl than that is true. That would also mean that within 5 years at your job you are running the place. It would be comparable. If on the other hand, having the top offense in the league for a few years, starting your team off to it's best record in history, or going 13-3 and winning your division would be considered meaningful accomplishments as well then that may be a good bet.

[keg in kc]

DV's tenure was an exercise in ego stroking. His whole mission here was to prove to the world that he and not Martz was the mind behind St. Lou's 'Greatest show on turf'. DV accomplished his goal.I think that the same is true of Saunders. I think he was entirely focused on stats and records, and that's why the offense *may* improve in certain areas this year, while probably sacrificing overall scoring. But it certainly filtered down from the top, too.Willingness to play rookies? Are you delusional? Because DV had a win now and to hell with later mindset he stocked the team with aging vets and Ram castoffs. He didn't play a rookie unless he absolutely had to. No doubt there. That may be the single-best change that Herm brings, the competition on the roster.Many of the team improvements were done in spite of DV. Don't forget that we'd STILL have Robinson if it was up to DV.Not so sure there. I've heard DV on more than one occasion since he left say that it was a mistake to keep Robinson as long as he did, that he should have been fired a year sooner. Maybe that's lip service, but he's said it. That doesn't, however, excuse him from apparently retaining the rest of the defensive staff against Gunther's request (although I'm not sure I still buy that - maybe that's true, maybe that's Gun excusing himself - he didn't have to take the job, either, if that was a condition...).In short DV left us an aging shell of a team that realisticlly has a 2 year window before it ages out. But he stroked his ego and that's all he seemed to care about. Maybe Herm can capitalize on that window but if he does it'll be because of Herms talent, not DV's.Now that I agree with totally, which is kind of a surprise. I think if this team wins, it's because of Herm and not the team DV built, which is usually the way I see new coaches succeed (on the foundation of what came before).

Not that Vermeil didn't leave a hell of a foundation, but the fact remains that this was NOT a winning team and it did not have a winning attitude. It was soft. If we win now it's because Edwards brought in a new staff and a new, tougher attitude. He'll have changed the entire environment and the entire concept the team is built on.

We'll see if it happens. It may not...

[htismaqe]

I think that the same is true of Saunders. I think he was entirely focused on stats and records, and that's why the offense *may* improve in certain areas this year, while probably sacrificing overall scoring. But it certainly filtered down from the top, too.No doubt there. That may be the single-best change that Herm brings, the competition on the roster.Not so sure there. I've heard DV on more than one occasion since he left say that it was a mistake to keep Robinson as long as he did, that he should have been fired a year sooner. Maybe that's lip service, but he's said it. That doesn't, however, excuse him from apparently retaining the rest of the defensive staff against Gunther's request (although I'm not sure I still buy that - maybe that's true, maybe that's Gun excusing himself - he didn't have to take the job, either, if that was a condition...).Now that I agree with totally, which is kind of a surprise. I think if this team wins, it's because of Herm and not the team DV built, which is usually the way I see new coaches succeed (on the foundation of what came before).

Not that Vermeil didn't leave a hell of a foundation, but the fact remains that this was NOT a winning team and it did not have a winning attitude. It was soft. If we win now it's because Edwards brought in a new staff and a new, tougher attitude. He'll have changed the entire environment and the entire concept the team is built on.

We'll see if it happens. It may not...

Good post.

[jynni]

As for his honesty, his first act as a HC, dumping Grbac for Green, was based on lies. It was time for Grbac to go and Green is better but DV's whole 'I intended to play Grbac and he up and left me in the lurch, I'm such a victim' was such a total croc it was laughable.
Wasn't Grbac gone before Green was even considered an option? IRRC (and my memory is pretty sketchy about that offseason) Grbac was pretty unhappy in KC before DV was even hired. Baltimore offered him a pretty fat contract too.

[htismaqe]

Grbac was due a $10M roster bonus in March of that year...

[ck_IN]

<i>Wasn't Grbac gone before Green</i>

By the time we acquired Green, yes Grbac was gone. And as htismaqe says a 10 mill bonus was do so in pratical terms his time here was done.

What I'm referring to is how DV pimped Green from the moment he got here and made it totally clear that he was going to get Green. Grbac isn't bright but he could see the writing on the wall so he left. Then DV cries about how he's a victim and that mean Grbac ruined all his plans now he'll just have to go and get Green.

DV wanted Green and that was fine. If he or CP had simply held a press conference stating that the team has decided to go a different direction and they wish Grbac the best in his future endeavors then fine. No harm, no foul. Instead DV cooks up this absurd lie and sticks with it. I lost what little respect I had for DV at that moment.

[Cormac]

DV's tenure was an exercise in ego stroking. His whole mission here was to prove to the world that he and not Martz was the mind behind St. Lou's 'Greatest show on turf'. DV accomplished his goal.
We'll just have to disagree on that one. I think DV firmly believed that scoring points is the best way to win games, rather than putting all your eggs into the defense basket. Less to do with ego, than doing what he did best, IMO. I don't believe he is anywhere near so insecure as to feel that he had to "one-up" Martz.

As for his honesty, his first act as a HC, dumping Grbac for Green, was based on lies. It was time for Grbac to go and Green is better but DV's whole 'I intended to play Grbac and he up and left me in the lurch, I'm such a victim' was such a total croc it was laughable.
I don't remember the details of that, but if he stiffed Grbac, so be it! I don't remember Grbac ever doing anything to altruistic or unselfish for this organisation. Wasn't there an issue with a huge roster bonus or something then?

Willingness to play rookies? Are you delusional? Because DV had a win now and to hell with later mindset he stocked the team with aging vets and Ram castoffs. He didn't play a rookie unless he absolutely had to.
My point about playing rookies is that DV said he'd do so when he got here. I remember welcoming that idea. In the end, he didn't play rookies much. But it's just a word of caution to those who enjoy Herm saying the same thing. I'll wait for evidence before I get too excited about the chance. Also, the signing Ram castoffs thing was way overblown. If Trent Green is a Ram castoff, I'll take 53 of him. Also, Kennison has worked out very well. There was lots of talk of him signing former Rams like D'Marco Farr that never materialised. Lots of coaches do the same thing when going from one place to another.

Many of the team improvements were done in spite of DV. Don't forget that we'd STILL have Robinson if it was up to DV.
This is one thing I don't get. It's not fair to attribute all the crap decisions to one person and all the good ones to another. All you can do is look at the team improvements that occurred while DV was here en masse, and then decide. I think the results speak for themselves.

In short DV left us an aging shell of a team that realisticlly has a 2 year window before it ages out. But he stroked his ego and that's all he seemed to care about. Maybe Herm can capitalize on that window but if he does it'll be because of Herms talent, not DV's.
I agree that DV didn't leave us much. I think the team started aging out last year, with Roaf's and Shields' injuries, Gonzo's 2 TDs etc., and losing Roaf, Holmes, Richardson, Welbourn etc. this offseason means we have already lost a lot of what made the O great. We have a bare skeleton of youth to build a new offense with: Svitek, Black, Sampson, LJ, Cruz, Wilson, Parker on O. Lots of ?s there. The irony is that DV probably left us a brighter defensive picture with Allen, DJ, Mitchell, Fox.

The whole point to this thread is that DV did a hell of a lot for this team,IMO, despite failing to get over the top. I hope Herm can help us over, and bringing in a fresh approach is a good move at this point. But up to know, Herm is nothing but a 'whiz-kid' in KC.

[Mecca]

DV hated rookies so much that in almost all of our drafts with him he (to me) looked like he purposely took a bunch of project players so he'd have an excuse not to play them.

[HemiEd]

DV hated rookies so much that in almost all of our drafts with him he (to me) looked like he purposely took a bunch of project players so he'd have an excuse not to play them.

So Dick was doing the drafting? He was intentionally sabotaging our draft? OMG! ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL
Actually I blame Marty! He knew that we wanted Igor Olshansky so he took him ahead of us. He knew that we wanted Nate Kaeding so he took him ahead of us. It is all Marty's fault I tell ya!

[Mecca]

So Dick was doing the drafting? He was intentionally sabotaging our draft? OMG!
Actually I blame Marty! He knew that we wanted Igor Olshansky so he took him ahead of us. He knew that we wanted Nate Kaeding so he took him ahead of us. It is all Marty's fault I tell ya!

.....The one time DV didn't get the player he wanted, Larry Johnson year. He flipped out to the media about how he didn't want Larry Johnson, then he made up bullshit things to tell the media about him not knowing how to take a handoff.

DV had his comfort level with his veterans he was more comfortable with them even if they were bad players. I don't think he ever viewed the draft as "hey these guys can help us now". Not to mention his love for playing favorites.......I seem to recall Keyaron Fox and Monty Beisel getting in a fight and since DV loved Beisel, Fox didn't get on the field that entire season.

[HemiEd]

.....The one time DV didn't get the player he wanted, Larry Johnson year. He flipped out to the media about how he didn't want Larry Johnson, then he made up bullshit things to tell the media about him not knowing how to take a handoff.. I think this needs to be put in my perspective. DV was being bombarded with questions why the Chiefs took a RB, offensive player when the Defense sucked so bad. I remember a lot of the questions being centered around Priest making it back and whether drafting Johnson was a sign that he would not make it back. Sound familiar? So Dick weakens and said drafting him was not his idea. It gets blown clear out when the diaper incident happens.
.....
DV had his comfort level with his veterans he was more comfortable with them even if they were bad players. .
I disagree that Dick ever played a player that he thought was bad. He was willing to give effort a chance. Like Dante Hall.
.....I don't think he ever viewed the draft as "hey these guys can help us now". Not to mention his love for playing favorites........However, where did the majority of the draft choices go during his tenure? Offense or Defense? Do you believe that he was picking the Defensive draft choices? I do not.
.....I seem to recall Keyaron Fox and Monty Beisel getting in a fight and since DV loved Beisel, Fox didn't get on the field that entire season.
I can not argue with this, he had a problem playing rookies, no question. When he took over, the team had a bunch of players that were not making a very good effort, Vets or Rookies. They were a bunch of individuals. How do you fix this? Reward effort and leadership. I think it was the right strategy at the right time. I hope we do not regret scrapping the profile by bringing in players like Smoker.

[Mecca]

I think this needs to be put in my perspective. DV was being bombarded with questions why the Chiefs took a RB, offensive player when the Defense sucked so bad. I remember a lot of the questions being centered around Priest making it back and whether drafting Johnson was a sign that he would not make it back. Sound familiar? So Dick weakens and said drafting him was not his idea. It gets blown clear out when the diaper incident happens.

I disagree that Dick ever played a player that he thought was bad. He was willing to give effort a chance. Like Dante Hall.
...However, where did the majority of the draft choices go during his tenure? Offense or Defense? Do you believe that he was picking the Defensive draft choices? I do not.

I can not argue with this, he had a problem playing rookies, no question. When he took over, the team had a bunch of players that were not making a very good effort, Vets or Rookies. They were a bunch of individuals. How do you fix this? Reward effort and leadership. I think it was the right strategy at the right time. I hope we do not regret scrapping the profile by bringing in players like Smoker.

Because Jeff Smoker had a problem 4 years ago doesn't mean he has one now........if that was the case there'd be no reason to ever get better if people just assumed things right away.

If DV didn't play favorites I don't see how Dexter McCleon was still on the team last year......

[HemiEd]

Because Jeff Smoker had a problem 4 years ago doesn't mean he has one now........if that was the case there'd be no reason to ever get better if people just assumed things right away.

If DV didn't play favorites I don't see how Dexter McCleon was still on the team last year......

Of the thousands of decisions that DV made, I am not going to touch the Dexter McCleon one. I could not stand him, Mighty Mouse II.
Back on topic though:
How about Samie Parker, did he play as a Rookie? Kawika Mitchell? Ryan Sims? Harts? Fujita? Colquitt? Derrick Johnson? Jared Allen? Many others played on Special Teams, such as Boomer and Scanlon. I think he gave them all a chance to earn a spot, maybe some a few more chances than others.

[Mile High Mania]

Vermeil was a decent head coach... 15 years with 3 teams. 6 seasons with 10+ victories and 7 with less than .500 wins.

DV was lucky that the stars aligned for him with the Rams that season...

Good guy, nice leader... but, that's about it.