Pastabelly: Teams on the decline

[BTAU]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2796894

Kansas City: One of the NFL's most stable franchises, the Chiefs still have front office direction from president Carl Peterson and on-field motivation from coach Herm Edwards. But the talent base has waned a bit in the last few years and, even with a tailback capable of gaining 2,000 yards, in Larry Johnson, the offense could be entering a transitional phase. There is a chance quarterback Trent Green, who has been asked to restructure his contract, won't be back, and that the Chiefs will count on journeyman Damon Huard as a potential bridge to youngster Brodie Croyle. A model of consistency under Peterson's stewardship, the Chiefs nonetheless have some catching up to do in the division.

[Mr. Laz]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2796894

Kansas City: One of the NFL's most average franchises

FYP

[Wile_E_Coyote]

We all know that the Chargers are the best team in football to never win anything. The rest of the division is all down hill from there

[BigChiefFan]

Len is a little early in his predictions, IMO. I think it's best to actually see the draft before presuming teams are done for. That said, we need to kick ass in the draft.

[shaneo69]

Going into a season with Damon Huard/Brodie Croyle as your QB?

I don't know how anyone could pick us to win more than six games.

[jidar]

KANSAS CITY CHIEFS RULE, SHUT UP BASTARDS.

[ck_IN]

It's just my hunch but I think Herm is trying to shift to a Gibbs style of offense. Actually that would be conducive to where our talent is; TE, H-Back (bigfoot) and RB with a drive blocking Oline. We don't have the oline yet but McIntosh fits the description. The Gibbs O doesn't require a great QB so we could do fine without a Manning or Brady. LJ is a problem at RB that will need to be resolved but I'm sure it will be one way or another.

On D the Tampa 2 is designed to bend and not break so you don't need top flight CBs or LBs. You need good pass rushers; Hali & Allen. You need run plugging DTs, LBs that are fast and safeties that are hitters. We may have the safeties in our two draft picks, we have the DEs, we may have the LBs in Harris and DJ. We don't have the DTs.

There's going to be some long Sundays but I can see where Herm is heading. Now can he get us there? *shrug*

[HMc]

Going into a season with Damon Huard/Brodie Croyle as your QB?

I don't know how anyone could pick us to win more than six games.

If the O Line performs i can see 9 or 10 wins. Anything more than that is gonna require some solid DTs

[Chiefs Pantalones]

Stable franchise?

[Messier]

Stable franchise?

Sure. How have they not been stable, say like the Raiders?

[Logical]

Going into a season with Damon Huard/Brodie Croyle as your QB?

I don't know how anyone could pick us to win more than six games.

Which is why the older free agents like Donnie Edwards make no sense.

[ck_IN]

<i>Which is why the older free agents like Donnie Edwards make no sense.</i>

Of course they do Jim. They're big name signings that keep the fan base motivated to renew their season tickets and fill the seats on Sunday.

You seem to be under the illusion that it's about winning not making money. Silly Jim. :)

[Brock]

<i>Which is why the older free agents like Donnie Edwards make no sense.</i>

Of course they do Jim. They're big name signings that keep the fan base motivated to renew their season tickets and fill the seats on Sunday.

You seem to be under the illusion that it's about winning not making money. Silly Jim. :)

Yeah, I'm sure signing Edwards is going to sway people one way or the other.

[ck_IN]

Obviosly it's having some impact Brock or there wouldn't be all these threads on here saying what a great signing it is.

[Brock]

Obviosly it's having some impact Brock or there wouldn't be all these threads on here saying what a great signing it is.

It's a signing that makes sense. Unless you think Kawika Mitchell is better just because he's younger.

[ck_IN]

It's a signing that makes sense if you're planning to use him to mentor a rookie or 2nd year LB. I don't think DJ fits that description. Perhaps they're planning on drafting a LB in which case it would make sense.

Otherwise signing a 34yr old LB to a team that desprerately needs to get younger is just a publicity signing.

[chop]

Which is why the older free agents like Donnie Edwards make no sense.

I disagree with this statement. You need some older guys to play an active role in developing young players. Whenever you rebuild you have to have some type of veteran leadership to teach the young guys. Donnie is a proven guy that will provide the type of leadership needed to produce a better team.

[Brock]

It's a signing that makes sense if you're planning to use him to mentor a rookie or 2nd year LB. I don't think DJ fits that description. Perhaps they're planning on drafting a LB in which case it would make sense.

Otherwise signing a 34yr old LB to a team that desprerately needs to get younger is just a publicity signing.

A publicity signing, right. It's not like the Chiefs NEED a middle linebacker or anything.

[Sully]

It's just my hunch but I think Herm is trying to shift to a Gibbs style of offense. Actually that would be conducive to where our talent is; TE, H-Back (bigfoot) and RB with a drive blocking Oline. We don't have the oline yet but McIntosh fits the description. The Gibbs O doesn't require a great QB so we could do fine without a Manning or Brady. LJ is a problem at RB that will need to be resolved but I'm sure it will be one way or another.

On D the Tampa 2 is designed to bend and not break so you don't need top flight CBs or LBs. You need good pass rushers; Hali & Allen. You need run plugging DTs, LBs that are fast and safeties that are hitters. We may have the safeties in our two draft picks, we have the DEs, we may have the LBs in Harris and DJ. We don't have the DTs.

There's going to be some long Sundays but I can see where Herm is heading. Now can he get us there? *shrug*

Is McIntosh quick enough to pull on the counter tre?

[ck_IN]

Pardon me Brock but isn't Harris slated to play MLB?

As for vet leadership, Harris has 5 (I think) years under his belt and he's 28. He's young, has experience, could provide leadership and is entering his prime. Edwards is 34 and past his prime. Simply a publicity signing.

[Brock]

Pardon me Brock but isn't Harris slated to play MLB?

As for vet leadership, Harris has 5 (I think) years under his belt and he's 28. He's young, has experience, could provide leadership and is entering his prime. Edwards is 34 and past his prime. Simply a publicity signing.

So what you are saying is that a one time alternate pro bowler is some kind of a big deal. Secondly, who would you rather have the Chiefs sign, knowing that you have LB spots to fill?

[Messier]

Pardon me Brock but isn't Harris slated to play MLB?

As for vet leadership, Harris has 5 (I think) years under his belt and he's 28. He's young, has experience, could provide leadership and is entering his prime. Edwards is 34 and past his prime. Simply a publicity signing.


For a publicity signing Edwards is still darn productive. He lead the Chargers in tackles, had three sacks a few picks. He's still very good.

[FAX]

We are so screwed.

FAX

[ck_IN]

<i>Secondly, who would you rather have the Chiefs sign, knowing that you have LB spots to fill?</i>

Ask and ye shall recieve. These are in no particular order but take your pick and feel free to add anyone not present:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/drafttracker/position/OLB

http://www.nfl.com/draft/drafttracker/position/ILB

We need to get younger so we sign a 34yr old LB. I've nothing against Edwards and if we were remotely close to being contenders I'd think him a great signing. But we're not and neither is he.

[Kerberos]

We are so screwed.

FAX


HOW Screwed ARE WE?

(Make it quick before Redrum gets here with MOM jokes)

[Brock]

<i>Secondly, who would you rather have the Chiefs sign, knowing that you have LB spots to fill?</i>

Ask and ye shall recieve. These are in no particular order but take your pick and feel free to add anyone not present:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/drafttracker/position/OLB

http://www.nfl.com/draft/drafttracker/position/ILB

We need to get younger so we sign a 34yr old LB. I've nothing against Edwards and if we were remotely close to being contenders I'd think him a great signing. But we're not and neither is he.

So you are in favor of being forced to draft linebackers, and having no flexibility in your draft plan.

[Direckshun]

Donnie had 140 tackles last year. You guys are idiots.

[ck_IN]

<i>So you are in favor of being forced to draft linebackers, and having no flexibility in your draft plan.</i>

Hmm, prior to this year the Pats had built their team almost entirely though the draft and they've won 3 SBs. The Steelers rely on the draft and they won in '05. The Colts won this year and rely almost entirely on the draft.

I see your point Brock. After all it's been so successful for us with Barber, Bell, Law, Surtain, Knight, Dalton, etc.

[Hammock Parties]

Bunch of crap. We're going to field the best defense we've had in years this season.

[Mecca]

Why do people think players mentor other players......I'm sure a player really wants to teach a guy who will take his job if he does.....

That's the caoches job.

[Coogs]

Donnie had 140 tackles last year. You guys are idiots.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/3404

His numbers are declining over the past 4 years. Team on the decline... player on the decline. Makes sense.

[Brock]

<i>So you are in favor of being forced to draft linebackers, and having no flexibility in your draft plan.</i>

Hmm, prior to this year the Pats had built their team almost entirely though the draft and they've won 3 SBs. The Steelers rely on the draft and they won in '05. The Colts won this year and rely almost entirely on the draft.

Yeah, the Colts, Steelers, and Patriots NEVER sign free agents. Are you high?

[ck_IN]

Thank you Coogs and Meca at least I know there's somebody out there not guzzling the kool aid.

<i>Yeah, the Colts, Steelers, and Patriots NEVER sign free agents. Are you high?</I>

Brock exactly what part of <i>almost entirely</i> and <i>rely on the draft</i> did you not understand?

It's a rare day when the Colts sign a FA that isn't their own. Offhand I can think of three in the last four years and one of those blew up on them. I'm not a Pats fan but until this year they were a rare player in the FA market as were the Steelers. They may sign one now and then but it's an exception. Every year the Chiefs sign several high dollar FAs.

The Pats have three rings and the Colts and Steelers have one each in the last two years. Get a friend to help you with the math.

[Chiefnj]

DE would have been a good signing last year when Herm was willing to make one more run with DV's players. Adding him this year is questionable. Unless someone steps up at QB and the OL is addressed the team won't be in a position to make a serious run and Edwards will be another year older and really on the decline.

KC still needs to draft LB's since there is nobody behind Harris on the depth chart, Fox is the o#2 backup for both OLB spots and Herm didn't seem to like Griffin as much as DV.

[Brock]

DE would have been a good signing last year when Herm was willing to make one more run with DV's players. Adding him this year is questionable. Unless someone steps up at QB and the OL is addressed the team won't be in a position to make a serious run and Edwards will be another year older and really on the decline.

Edwards is here to fill a position, which he does quite nicely. An upgrade, in fact. I don't doubt the Chiefs will draft a linebacker, but with Edwards they don't have to right now.

[Brock]

Every year the Chiefs sign several high dollar FAs.

No, they don't. The fact that you would say that is pretty indicative you probably ought to stick to talking about your team, because you clearly aren't paying attention to anything over here.

[Chiefnj]

Edwards is here to fill a position, which he does quite nicely. An upgrade, in fact. I don't doubt the Chiefs will draft a linebacker, but with Edwards they don't have to right now.

Herm has been preaching about getting younger and developing your own talent through the draft and how you want ascending players and not descending players. DE is old and on the downside. Although he does fill a need and he is better than Bell, he is the opposite of what Herm said he was looking for.

My only problem with the signing is the timing. I don't believe KC is a real contender this year and by the time Herm has put his stamp on the team and has his players and scheme fully implimented, DE will be on his last legs.

[Messier]

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/3404

His numbers are declining over the past 4 years. Team on the decline... player on the decline. Makes sense.

Ten fewer tackles is a decline? Alright. And in the years before that he hovers around 150 tackles. Where is the decline?

[DMAC]

Jeez, complain that we never sign free agents...and then complain they we sign free agents.

Some of you confuse the hell out of me.

Don't you remember always getting pissed at Carl because he never made any big moves in the offseason?

[ck_IN]

*sigh*
Brock please read Chiefnj's post. He very clearly states the case why Edwards is not a good signing. Perhaps you'll understand his wording since you apparently have reading comprehension problems regarding my posts.

[Brock]

*sigh*
Brock please read Chiefnj's post. He very clearly states the case why Edwards is not a good signing. Perhaps you'll understand his wording since you apparently have reading comprehension problems regarding my posts.

yeah, I'd run away from that statement about the Chiefs signing big name free agents every year too. It was pretty stupid.

[Dr. Van Halen]

Ten fewer tackles is a decline? Alright. And in the years before that he hovers around 150 tackles. Where is the decline?

Ten fewer tackles! This is a disaster! Horrible signing! Peterson is just trying to sell tickets!!! How dare they upgrade! Let's talk Royals!!! Baseball is awesome!!!

Sincerely,
810's afternoon show

[ck_IN]

Brock you are amusing. Not to mention consistent.

Here's a short list: Barber, Bell, Law, Surtain, Knight, Dalton, etc.

For this year you can add Edwards and Harris. I'm not going to go on because it's a waste of my time. My point is made even if like a blind man you refuse to see it. Drink the kool aid Brock. Drink it up like a true fan. Whatever that is. CP loves you.

[Dr. Van Halen]

*sigh*
Brock please read Chiefnj's post. He very clearly states the case why Edwards is not a good signing. Perhaps you'll understand his wording since you apparently have reading comprehension problems regarding my posts.

*sigh*

(insert random insult about your intelligence here)

Chiefnj makes a good point about Edwards only getting older after next year...however, I don't think anyone is saying that DE is the long-term solution at LB. He's a veteran still playing at a fairly high level who is going to be an upgrade over what we had. He's the short-term solution, and, yes, every team in the NFL has players starting who are short-term solutions. (Even the Colts, who, by the way, have an O-line made up almost entirely of free agents.)

Donnie Edwards isn't going to Cadrez up our defense, don't worry.

[Brock]

hey genius, what year was it the Chiefs picked up Surtain in free agency? Oh, and nice touch in adding Barber and Dalton to the "Superstar free agent" ranks. LOL Just plain stupid.

[Coogs]

Ten fewer tackles is a decline? Alright. And in the years before that he hovers around 150 tackles. Where is the decline?

160>150>140

Numbers are declining. Still good numbers, but declining none the less. At some point, those numbers are going to tumble big time. And my guess is San Diego thought the same thing, as they are SB ready talent wise, and chose to let their leading tackler walk.

[Brock]

160>150>140

Numbers are declining. Still good numbers, but declining none the less. At some point, those numbers are going to tumble big time. And my guess is San Diego thought the same thing, as they are SB ready talent wise, and chose to let their leading tackler walk.

They also replaced Marty S. with Norv T., so I'd be careful about looking at their decisions as anything to put any weight on.

[Chiefnj]

*sigh*

(insert random insult about your intelligence here)

Chiefnj makes a good point about Edwards only getting older after next year...however, I don't think anyone is saying that DE is the long-term solution at LB. He's a veteran still playing at a fairly high level who is going to be an upgrade over what we had. He's the short-term solution, and, yes, every team in the NFL has players starting who are short-term solutions. (Even the Colts, who, by the way, have an O-line made up almost entirely of free agents.)

Donnie Edwards isn't going to Cadrez up our defense, don't worry.

CKIN is merely exhibiting his frustration with an organization that continually tries the stopgap/short-term solution. They haven't had success with it over the last 12 years. There was finally talk from the head coach that he was going to approach things differently, but apparently that may not be the case.

[Direckshun]

The Chiefs are on this list every year.

Peter King predicted we'd go 6-10 last year.

People are always expecting us to implode or decline but we rarely do.

[DMAC]

The Chiefs are on this list every year.

Peter King predicted we'd go 6-10 last year.

People are always expecting us to implode or decline but we rarely do.Yep, we just stay mediocre!

[Messier]

Football is not baseball. I say this because it seems several people here treat it as though it were. You don't "rebuild" in football. Every year you take the best shot you have at winning. You don't scrap a year. You don't start young players just to start young players. If they win a spot by beating out a vet there you go, but unless every other option is worse you go with experience over potential. That's why Edwards will start over Fox. He's better.

[Coogs]

They also replaced Marty S. with Norv T., so I'd be careful about looking at their decisions as anything to put any weight on.


I wasn't putting any weight on anything. Just agreeing with the group that thinks this goes against what Herm said we were going to do, and I also think Edwards has seen his better days. On paper in early March, DE would appear to be an upgrade over what we had. Not that that would take much.

[Messier]

160>150>140

Numbers are declining. Still good numbers, but declining none the less. At some point, those numbers are going to tumble big time. And my guess is San Diego thought the same thing, as they are SB ready talent wise, and chose to let their leading tackler walk.

Well here are the last four years 161, 150, 152, 141.
It's not a decline. Here's a decline: 152 to 72. Oh, and the year before that 161 season he had 128. Wow, good thing we didn't have him that year.

[Coogs]

Football is not baseball. I say this because it seems several people here treat it as though it were. You don't "rebuild" in football. Every year you take the best shot you have at winning. You don't scrap a year. You don't start young players just to start young players. If they win a spot by beating out a vet there you go, but unless every other option is worse you go with experience over potential. That's why Edwards will start over Fox. He's better.

The 49ers had to do it a few years back. They are seemingly looking pretty good for thier rebuilding effort. Tennessee had to do it too. They seem to have hit the jackpot in Vince Young as well. Sometimes you have to go backwards to go forwards. You can't just stay in the same place all the time. Unless you are the Chiefs.

[Chiefnj]

Football is not baseball. I say this because it seems several people here treat it as though it were. You don't "rebuild" in football. Every year you take the best shot you have at winning. You don't scrap a year. You don't start young players just to start young players. If they win a spot by beating out a vet there you go, but unless every other option is worse you go with experience over potential. That's why Edwards will start over Fox. He's better.

Why do you equate a youth movement with scrapping a year?

[Coogs]

Well here are the last four years 161, 150, 152, 141.
It's not a decline. Here's a decline: 152 to 72. Oh, and the year before that 161 season he had 128. Wow, good thing we didn't have him that year.

It's a decline. Thing is, he is at the age where he could go from 141 to 70 something real easy.

[Dr. Van Halen]

The 49ers had to do it a few years back. They are seemingly looking pretty good for thier rebuilding effort. Tennessee had to do it too. They seem to have hit the jackpot in Vince Young as well. Sometimes you have to go backwards to go forwards. You can't just stay in the same place all the time. Unless you are the Chiefs.

The 49ers didn't choose to rebuild. Believe me, if given the choice, they would have rather not had their cap problems. Same goes for the Titans.

Messier said it right. This is football. The best players play.

[Chiefnj]

The 49ers didn't choose to rebuild. Believe me, if given the choice, they would have rather not had their cap problems. Same goes for the Titans.

Messier said it right. This is football. The best players play.

In college maybe. In the NFL pay scale and draft ranking gets you playing time.

[Messier]

It's a decline. Thing is, he is at the age where he could go from 141 to 70 something real easy.


It's fewer tackles, not a decline.

[Dr. Van Halen]

In college maybe. In the NFL pay scale and draft ranking gets you playing time.

There's some truth to that. Barring a high draft pick or top dollar FA, the best players play.

[Messier]

The 49ers had to do it a few years back. They are seemingly looking pretty good for thier rebuilding effort. Tennessee had to do it too. They seem to have hit the jackpot in Vince Young as well. Sometimes you have to go backwards to go forwards. You can't just stay in the same place all the time. Unless you are the Chiefs.


The 49ers are still pretty bad. The Titans are getting better, but as you said they hit the jackpot. They could have missed. I'll bet if you asked the coaches and GM's of those "rebuilding" teams if they could have won 4 or 5 more games in exchange for the higher pick, they'd take the games every time.

[Archie Bunker]

Getting young doesn't happen overnight and it is done by drafting well. It will take 2 or 3 more drafts to build a young team like Herm wants so why not sign guys like Donnie and try to win in the meantime.

Overall this team is getting younger at most positions just not all at once.

[beer bacon]

Getting young doesn't happen overnight and it is done by drafting well. It will take 2 or 3 more drafts to build a young team like Herm wants so why not sign guys like Donnie and try to win in the meantime.

Overall this team is getting younger at most positions just not all at once.

If we don't get to sucking right away, and mean really, really sucking, we won't ever get those blue chip draft picks. Being extremely horrible is the fast track to winning a Super Bowl now and days. If we really want to win, what we need to do is spend two or three seasons giving rookies 60 million dollar contracts.

[DaWolf]

I actually like this team. If we have another productive draft like last year's and add a couple of more pieces, and this defense does actually improve from last year, I think we could be a better team.

I mean honestly, do you think the offense is going to get any worse than last year's? The OL at the very least should be more stable and the OC has a year under his belt. Either Croyle can play or Huard will be the QB and asked to continue to play the Steve DeBergish role he's supposed to play...

[DaWolf]

If we don't get to sucking right away, and mean really, really sucking, we won't ever get those blue chip draft picks. Being extremely horrible is the fast track to winning a Super Bowl now and days. If we really want to win, what we need to do is spend two or three seasons giving rookies 60 million dollar contracts.

Unless Matt Millen is running your draft...

[Thig Lyfe]

Donnie had 140 tackles last year. You guys are idiots.

Well said.

[Mecca]

hey genius, what year was it the Chiefs picked up Surtain in free agency? Oh, and nice touch in adding Barber and Dalton to the "Superstar free agent" ranks. LOL Just plain stupid.

Shawn Barber is about the only one that really qualifies.......he got almost the same contract that Takeo Spikes did that offseason so when you get paid like that.....

[DaWolf]

Shawn Barber is about the only one that really qualifies.......he got almost the same contract that Takeo Spikes did that offseason so when you get paid like that.....
Yeah, we were expecting big, game changing plays from him after his time in Philly. Then two things happened. A) He got coached by GRob. B) He blew out his knee.

Ironically, he was our attempt to replace Edwards the year after GRob decided we didn't need Edwards. Thanks Grob. Along with the spinner defense, what would Kansas City have done without you (other than, ohhh, maybe making the Colts punt at least once?).

The only good news that came out of that entire scenario was that Barber was unable to convince Hugh Douglas to come to KC...