What rebuilding?

[FringeNC]

Supposedly, the Chiefs are rebuilding, but where? We are no where near the youngest team in the league -- GB and Indy are.

So we have a young QB, a young WR...who else on offense?

On D, Allen is ready for a new contract, so can't really count him as young. We have young DTs -- may or may not turn out to be good. Young safeties -- same thing. Hali is young, but is he any good? I'd say we'd have to be the oldest team in the league at CB/LB.

Herm has had two drafts, yet we are still on old team and happen to be a bad team, also.

If you really want to blame our bad team on lack of talent rather than Herm's coaching, we're in for very rough years ahead because we have so many old players.

How are Indy and GB able to turnover their roster and compete for SBs, yet we can't turnover our roster nor play respectable football? The more I think about it, the more disastrous does Herm's tenure seem.

[Bowser]

Is it Herm, or is it Carl? Carl is the one who makes the personnel decisions, not Herm. I'm sure he has a word in it, but it boils down to Carl. Herm has been placed in a position of making horseradish out of horseshit with the players he has, particularly on offense.

And it hasn't been more evident of how far back Willie Roaf set this team by deciding to retire on the eve of last year's training camp. They had NO backup plan for Roaf's abscence, and it has cost us. That isn't on Herm, that's on Carl.

Basically, Carl is scared to death of admitting to rebuilding this team, a topic that has been talked to death around here.

[Demonpenz]

allen tamba page pollard DJ brack turk tank aren't young?

[FringeNC]

Is it Herm, or is it Carl? Carl is the one who makes the personnel decisions, not Herm. I'm sure he has a word in it, but it boils down to Carl. Herm has been placed in a position of making horseradish out of horseshit with the players he has, particularly on offense.

And it hasn't been more evident of how far back Willie Roaf set this team by deciding to retire on the eve of last year's training camp. They had NO backup plan for Roaf's abscence, and it has cost us. That isn't on Herm, that's on Carl.

Basically, Carl is scared to death of admitting to rebuilding this team, a topic that has been talked to death around here.

I agree with most of what you say, but there is this view that Herm is great at building a roster, but I don't see it. Perhaps he has little power to turnover the roster as much as he'd like, but it's hard to not look at these last two years as just a disaster -- we haven't been competitive nor have we turned over the roster.

The season is almost over, we have the worst offense in the league outside of the 49ers, and an old roster. We're so ****ed.

[Micjones]

Rudy Niswanger, Jeff Webb, Tank Tyler, Turk McBride, Tyron Brackenridge...

Three out of that bunch could be starters next season and are seeing increased playing time.

[DaKCMan AP]

How are Indy and GB able to turnover their roster and compete for SBs, yet we can't turnover our roster nor play respectable football? The more I think about it, the more disastrous does Herm's tenure seem.

Are you forgetting that GB went 4-12 and 8-8 prior to this season?

[Bowser]

I agree with most of what you say, but there is this view that Herm is great at building a roster, but I don't see it. Perhaps he has little power to turnover the roster as much as he'd like, but it's hard to not look at these last two years as just a disaster -- we haven't been competitive nor have we turned over the roster.

The season is almost over, we have the worst offense in the league outside of the 49ers, and an old roster. We're so ****ed.

It's almost like Carl is living in denial from our near misses in '03 and '05. It's depressing. And I've said it before - the Chiefs picked the wrong time to go into the tank with their players and direction, with this refurbishing of Arrowhead coming up. People will still show up, but it won't be like it could have been had we had a little foresight with our personnel decisions. Nobody is going to want to pay between 75 -100 bucks to watch a 4-12 team.

[FringeNC]

Are you forgetting that GB went 4-12 and 8-8 prior to this season?

Which is going to be just about our two records going into next year...

[ChiTown]

Is it Herm, or is it Carl? Carl is the one who makes the personnel decisions, not Herm. I'm sure he has a word in it, but it boils down to Carl. Herm has been placed in a position of making horseradish out of horseshit with the players he has, particularly on offense.

And it hasn't been more evident of how far back Willie Roaf set this team by deciding to retire on the eve of last year's training camp. They had NO backup plan for Roaf's abscence, and it has cost us. That isn't on Herm, that's on Carl.

Basically, Carl is scared to death of admitting to rebuilding this team, a topic that has been talked to death around here.

We're going to learn a lot about Clark Hunt in the next 18 months. It will be interesting to see whether Clark has the same blind love for Carl that his Father once had.

I say 18 months, because I doubt seriously that this organization could survive another year like we are having before the fans finally revolt and start filling the stadium with 60 K fans vs a full house. If it gets to that point, maybe CP will do the admirable thing and resign/retire (something he should have done long ago).

[ChiefsCountry]

Here are old starters:
Gonzalez
Kennison
McIntosh
Waters
Weigmann
Welbourn
Terry
Edwards
Boone
Edwards
Law
Surtain

Plus these guys:
Dunn
Wesley
Bell
Turley
Huard

Majority of these guys will be gone. Ones in bold are holdovers from Vermeil's days.

[HemiEd]

I have a lot of problems with what Herm is doing, a lot.

However, I think they took a shot at 2007 by adding Donnie Edwards and keeping Ty law.

I am guessing you won't see Ty Law , Jason Dunn, Kendrell Bell, Drummond, Huard, Eddie Kennison, Surtain, Chris Terry, Turley, Wiegmann and Welbourn back next year.
If that happens, we would be one of the youngest teams in the NFL, probably looking at 4 and 12 for 2008 and ready to make a strong run in Herm and Carls last year of 2009.
I wish I had more faith in Herm actually pulling it off without losing the team.

JMO

[DaKCMan AP]

Which is going to be just about our two records going into next year...

So you want to reload like the Packers without having to endure any of the pain (4-12, 8-8 seasons)??

[thehead]

I have a lot of problems with what Herm is doing, a lot.

However, I think they took a shot at 2007 by adding Donnie Edwards and keeping Ty law.

I am guessing you won't see Ty Law , Jason Dunn, Kendrell Bell, Drummond, Huard, Eddie Kennison, Surtain, Chris Terry, Turley, Wiegmann and Welbourn back next year.
If that happens, we would be one of the youngest teams in the NFL, probably looking at 4 and 12 for 2008 and ready to make a strong run in Herm and Carls last year of 2009.
I wish I had more faith in Herm actually pulling it off without losing the team.

JMO




Right on Damon backfired

[patteeu]

I agree with most of what you say, but there is this view that Herm is great at building a roster, but I don't see it. Perhaps he has little power to turnover the roster as much as he'd like, but it's hard to not look at these last two years as just a disaster -- we haven't been competitive nor have we turned over the roster.

The season is almost over, we have the worst offense in the league outside of the 49ers, and an old roster. We're so ****ed.

Hmmm. We made the playoffs last year, right? We were very much in the game with both Indy and Green Bay this year, right? There's still plenty of work to do, but to say we haven't even been competitive seems too strong to me.

[Katie]

Are you talking about overall youth on the team or youth that are so called "good" players? I don't think you can say a team with youth is automatically good, likewise, you don't grow young over night with all the older players we have.

[bowener]

I am guessing you won't see Ty Law , Jason Dunn, Kendrell Bell, Drummond, Huard, Eddie Kennison, Surtain, Chris Terry, Turley, Wiegmann and Welbourn back next year.


I think you are correct on most of these, however I think they keep one of the old CB's. I thought I saw on here somewhere that Law is going to be making quite a bit next year, so that either makes it easier or harder to cut him depending on how the contract was written. If we can cut him and take a small loss, then he is probably gone, but it could be the Kendrell Bell effect all over again (only Law can at least look servicable).

I am probably wrong, but I thought I saw somewhere if you include our practice squad we are one of the youngest teams, if not the youngest (when you include other teams PS's as well). Each draft we add about 3 starters it seems, hopefully this draft we add 4, LT/RG/C/CB, and/or pick up some great talent in the FA market. I do not mind losing if it means we can move ahead next season and then make a big push for a couple or more years after that.

[patteeu]

I think you are correct on most of these, however I think they keep one of the old CB's. I thought I saw on here somewhere that Law is going to be making quite a bit next year, so that either makes it easier or harder to cut him depending on how the contract was written. If we can cut him and take a small loss, then he is probably gone, but it could be the Kendrell Bell effect all over again (only Law can at least look servicable).

I am probably wrong, but I thought I saw somewhere if you include our practice squad we are one of the youngest teams, if not the youngest (when you include other teams PS's as well). Each draft we add about 3 starters it seems, hopefully this draft we add 4, LT/RG/C/CB, and/or pick up some great talent in the FA market. I do not mind losing if it means we can move ahead next season and then make a big push for a couple or more years after that.

I wouldn't think the practice squad would make much difference since almost every team's practice squad ought to be filled with guys who just got out of college in the last couple of years.

[CupidStunt]

The only way to really compare the Chiefs to a team like the Packers is wait until they suck this year and load up on top picks, do the same next year and then in 2010, if they blow chunks, moan.

It's my opinion that, in 2010, we'll be a stacked team NOT coached by Herm Edwards. That equals success.

[FringeNC]

So you want to reload like the Packers without having to endure any of the pain (4-12, 8-8 seasons)??

We have endured the pain...GB won 12 total games prior to this year...how many games will we win the previous two years going into next year? 13-14? No meaningful difference.

[el borracho]

How are Indy and GB able to turnover their roster and compete for SBs, yet we can't turnover our roster nor play respectable football?
Um, don't you think it might have something to do with their Hall of Fame quarterbacks? Herm has many faults, but I wouldn't say he could be fairly criticized for the age of the roster. We are getting younger with Herm.

[KCJohnny]

This year is rock bottom. We'll probably finish 6-10. Next year we will have new tackles, a real FB, a youth movement at CB and probably a new kick returner. With a retooled OL, this team wins 10 games. Easy.

[backburner]

This year is rock bottom. We'll probably finish 6-10. Next year we will have new tackles, a real FB, a youth movement at CB and probably a new kick returner. With a retooled OL, this team wins 10 games. Easy.

new staff?

[KCJohnny]

new staff?

Let's hope at least a new OC (Terry Shea?) or QBs coach. And some more moving pockets schemes for Brodie.

I think we win at least 10 games next year even with this staff.

[DaKCMan AP]

Why are some people so enamored with Terry Shea? What exactly has he done to make him so desirable?

[HemiEd]

I think you are correct on most of these, however I think they keep one of the old CB's. I thought I saw on here somewhere that Law is going to be making quite a bit next year, so that either makes it easier or harder to cut him depending on how the contract was written. If we can cut him and take a small loss, then he is probably gone, but it could be the Kendrell Bell effect all over again (only Law can at least look servicable).

I am probably wrong, but I thought I saw somewhere if you include our practice squad we are one of the youngest teams, if not the youngest (when you include other teams PS's as well). Each draft we add about 3 starters it seems, hopefully this draft we add 4, LT/RG/C/CB, and/or pick up some great talent in the FA market. I do not mind losing if it means we can move ahead next season and then make a big push for a couple or more years after that.

I am thinking since the one area Herm is actually an expert, DB, he is grooming the youngsters to take over next year. Much like he did with Pollard and Page this last year at the safety positions. Barksdale, Patterson, Brackenridge and Sapp will be sinking or swimming next year IMO during our 4-12 campaign.
We are and will be looking up at mediocrity.

[Wile_E_Coyote]

The young team vs old team is virtual horse poop. A story where there is none. Find the hard numbers & it will be like 24.7(young) vs 26.2 (old). Big whoop

[HemiEd]

Why are some people so enamored with Terry Shea? What exactly has he done to make him so desirable?

He was a key ingredient in a very successful offense and knew what he was doing. I contend we have nobody on the coaching staff that actually knows what they are doing on offense unless you move the OC back to coaching the line.
OJT!
To say Terry Shea was given a fair chance to succeed in Chicago is BS. He was the scape goat they used to appease the fans after one season.

[banyon]

This year is rock bottom. We'll probably finish 6-10. Next year we will have new tackles, a real FB, a youth movement at CB and probably a new kick returner. With a retooled OL, this team wins 10 games. Easy.

This is Looney Tunes right here. The Raiders, Broncos, and Chargers (after firing Norv) should all be improved. You're going to replace 4 O-Lineman and 2 CB's in one off-season? Yeah we'll just go thru McDonald's drive thru no snap. Maybe ask for them to supersize our order.

No way in Hades we win 10 next year. We'll be lucky if Waters and TG don't want out of town (thru trades and retirement) also.

[RustShack]

This is Looney Tunes right here. The Raiders, Broncos, and Chargers (after firing Norv) should all be improved. You're going to replace 4 O-Lineman and 2 CB's in one off-season? Yeah we'll just go thru McDonald's drive thru no snap. Maybe ask for them to supersize our order.

No way in Hades we win 10 next year. We'll be lucky if Waters and TG don't want out of town (thru trades and retirement) also.

We already play close in every game, we just need a few offensive improvements to put us over the top. Gonzalez and Waters arn't going anywhere.

[BigRedChief]

Rudy Niswanger, Jeff Webb, Tank Tyler, Turk McBride, Tyron Brackenridge...

Three out of that bunch could be starters next season and are seeing increased playing time.
But out of those who do we know will be any good? It's a crapshoot. They may be good. They may not be.

We arn't rebuilding successfully until they are producing.

[HemiEd]

This is Looney Tunes right here. The Raiders, Broncos, and Chargers (after firing Norv) should all be improved. You're going to replace 4 O-Lineman and 2 CB's in one off-season? Yeah we'll just go thru McDonald's drive thru no snap. Maybe ask for them to supersize our order.

No way in Hades we win 10 next year. We'll be lucky if Waters and TG don't want out of town (thru trades and retirement) also.

Quit bringing up reality! ;) We are and will be looking up at mediocrity for a while.

[BigRedChief]

Quit bringing up reality! ;) We are and will be looking up at mediocrity for a while.
AWWW 2000-2006 those great years.:banghead:

[Buzz]

Rebuilding is an overused excuse for failing... Are these not professional athletes and coaches? The answer must be NO! To all you that say it takes 3 to 4 years to put a quality Team on the field, give me a friggn break. Most coaches and even players aren’t with the same Team that long. The good ones are and they are the ones winning year in and year out.

[FAX]

The following is a public service announcement brought to you by FAX.

Many posters have expressed concern over the possible overuse of the term "mediocrity" on ChiefsPlanet. To address these concerns, here are some words you can use instead:

mundanity
averageness
kinda good but kinda bad tooness
Hermish
ordinariness
second-rateism
sucky
not outstanding
Carleth

Thank you for your time and attention.

FAX

[xbarretx]

Is it Herm, or is it Carl? Carl is the one who makes the personnel decisions, not Herm. I'm sure he has a word in it, but it boils down to Carl. Herm has been placed in a position of making horseradish out of horseshit with the players he has, particularly on offense.

And it hasn't been more evident of how far back Willie Roaf set this team by deciding to retire on the eve of last year's training camp. They had NO backup plan for Roaf's abscence, and it has cost us. That isn't on Herm, that's on Carl.

Basically, Carl is scared to death of admitting to rebuilding this team, a topic that has been talked to death around here.

QFT

[DaKCMan AP]

He was a key ingredient in a very successful offense and knew what he was doing. I contend we have nobody on the coaching staff that actually knows what they are doing on offense unless you move the OC back to coaching the line.
OJT!
To say Terry Shea was given a fair chance to succeed in Chicago is BS. He was the scape goat they used to appease the fans after one season.

How was he a key ingredient? ROFL

The fact is he failed in Chicago and he hasn't been the 'key ingredient' anywhere.

[patteeu]

Why are some people so enamored with Terry Shea? What exactly has he done to make him so desirable?

He turned the Bears into an offensive juggernaut or something.

[FringeNC]

This is Looney Tunes right here. The Raiders, Broncos, and Chargers (after firing Norv) should all be improved. You're going to replace 4 O-Lineman and 2 CB's in one off-season? Yeah we'll just go thru McDonald's drive thru no snap. Maybe ask for them to supersize our order.

No way in Hades we win 10 next year. We'll be lucky if Waters and TG don't want out of town (thru trades and retirement) also.

Yeah, I don't get it either. Other teams have off-seasons and draft picks to re-tool also. Homers only believe their teams get to make moves evidently.

[keg in kc]

The amount of roster turnover they've done in two years is amazing. If you don't believe me, pull out an '05 roster and compare it to the current one:

(Players in bold are no longer with the Chiefs)

DE Jared Allen, LB Shawn Barber, CB William Bartee, LB Kendrell Bell, G Jordan Black, T Chris Bober (IR), WR Marc Boerigter, RB Dee Brown, DT/DE John Browning, QB Todd Collins, P Dustin Colquitt, RB Ronnie Cruz, DT Lional Dalton, TE Jason Dunn, LB Keyaron Fox, C Kendall Gammon,
TE Tony Gonzalez, QB Trent Green, LB Kris Griffin, LB Boomer Grigsby, DE Carlos Hall, RB Dante Hall, DE Eric Hicks, RB Priest Holmes (IR/Retired), WR Chris Horn, C Johnathan Ingram, LB Derrick Johnson, RB Larry Johnson, WR Eddie Kennison, S Sammy Knight, DE Khari Long, CB Dexter McCleon, LB Kawika Mitchell, WR Samie Parker, TE Ed Perry, RB Tony Richardson, T Willie Roaf, T Kevin Sampson, CB Benny Sapp, LB Rich Scanlon, G Will Shields, DT Junior Siavii, NT/DT Ryan Sims, LB/DE Gary Stills, CB Patrick Surtain, T Will Svitek, K Lawrence Tynes, CB Eric Warfield, CB Dewayne Washington, C/G Brian Waters, T/G John Welbourn, S Greg Wesley, C Casey Wiegmann, DE Jimmy Wilkerson, TE Kris Wilson, CB/S Jerome Woods

56 names on that list, 33 of them are gone, nearly two-thirds.

And those are just the players who were active in '05, it doesn't list guys who never suited up, guys who were on the practice squad, and so forth.

That's rebuilding, no matter how you want to slice it.

If the roster's still old in some areas, you can thank Vermeil for that, for failing over the course of 5 years to draft or acquire young backups.

I don't know how Herm could do any more than he has, personnel-wise. I don't know that you can replace everyone overnight.

[BigRedChief]

The amount of roster turnover they've done in two years is amazing. If you don't believe me, pull out an '05 roster and compare it to the current one:

(Players in bold are no longer with the Chiefs)

DE Jared Allen, LB Shawn Barber, CB William Bartee, LB Kendrell Bell, G Jordan Black, T Chris Bober (IR), WR Marc Boerigter, RB Dee Brown, DT/DE John Browning, QB Todd Collins, P Dustin Colquitt, RB Ronnie Cruz, DT Lional Dalton, TE Jason Dunn, LB Keyaron Fox, C Kendall Gammon,
TE Tony Gonzalez, QB Trent Green, LB Kris Griffin, LB Boomer Grigsby, DE Carlos Hall, RB Dante Hall, DE Eric Hicks, RB Priest Holmes (IR/Retired), WR Chris Horn, C Johnathan Ingram, LB Derrick Johnson, RB Larry Johnson, WR Eddie Kennison, S Sammy Knight, DE Khari Long, CB Dexter McCleon, LB Kawika Mitchell, WR Samie Parker, TE Ed Perry, RB Tony Richardson, T Willie Roaf, T Kevin Sampson, CB Benny Sapp, LB Rich Scanlon, G Will Shields, DT Junior Siavii, NT/DT Ryan Sims, LB/DE Gary Stills, CB Patrick Surtain, T Will Svitekm K Lawrence Tynes, CB Eric Warfield, CB Dewayne Washington, C/G Brian Waters, T/G John Welbourn, S Greg Wesley, C Casey Wiegmann, DE Jimmy Wilkerson, TE Kris Wilson, CB/S Jerome Woods

53 names on that list, 33 of them are gone, nearly two-thirds.

And those are just the players who were active in '05, it doesn't list guys who never suited up, guys who were on the practice squad, and so forth.

That's rebuilding, no matter how you want to slice it.

If the roster's still old in some areas, you can thank Vermeil for that, for failing over the course of 5 years to draft or acquire young backups.

I don't know how Herm could do any more than he has, personnel-wise. I don't know that you can replace everyone overnight.
I bet you will find the same ratio on most NFL teams. It's the caliber of player remaining on the team that matters not the number of players remaining.

[HemiEd]

How was he a key ingredient? ROFL

The fact is he failed in Chicago and he hasn't been the 'key ingredient' anywhere.

You know a lot about the Chicago debacle do you? I am sure you do. ROFL
I live here and am inundated with it. He was brought here in Lovie Smith's first year to bring the KC offense to Chicago. They honestly believed that would do it. When it didn't and the Bears still sucked after hiring a whole new staff, he was sacrificed after only one season. Nobody could have turned around that offense in one year, nobody.

The Chiefs were glad to get him back, Trent was used to working with him and preferred working with him.

[FringeNC]

I bet you will find the same ratio on most NFL teams. It's the caliber of player remaining on the team that matters not the number of players remaining.

Beat me to the punch. I bet that is not unusual in the least.

[keg in kc]

I bet you will find the same ratio on most NFL teams. It's the caliber of player remaining on the team that matters not the number of players remaining.You could be right. I'm not going through any more rosters to find out.

My guess, however, is that you won't find many teams turning over 2/3 of their rosters every two years. Particularly not competitive teams. This is like flushing the '05 Chiefs down the toilet, for all intents and purposes, and I'd bet that another 8 or 10 players off that list are gone in '08.

As for the calibre of the players remaining, that'ss specifically why the roster is stil old in some areas, as I pointed out. We didn't acquire any kind of young talent from '01 to '05 (and actually, from about '94 to '05, but that's another story...). Many of the best players on the roster, such as it is, are all older vets. And there's only so many guys you can cut in one swath...

The real question is whether they're rebuilding the roster, or simply reshuffling it. Because if they replace all these mediocre players that Vermeil acquired with more mediocre players, they haven't actually rebuilt anything. You'll be changing the names on the back of the jerseys, but not really improving the team...

Time's the only thing that can answer that question, however.

[FringeNC]

You could be right. I'm not going through any more rosters to find out.

My guess, however, is that you won't find many teams turning over 2/3 of their rosters every two years. Particularly not competitive teams.

How is Indy the youngest team in the league? Isn't that a pretty good summary number of roster turnover?

[patteeu]

I bet you will find the same ratio on most NFL teams. It's the caliber of player remaining on the team that matters not the number of players remaining.

I seriously doubt that's the case. Here's just one quick spot check on the theory comparing the 2003 Chiefs with the 2005 roster that Keg posted:

K Morten Andersen
TE Billy Baber
P Jason Baker
LB Shawn Barber
CB William Bartee
CB Julian Battle
LB/DE Monty Beisel
RB Derrick Blaylock
WR Marc Boerigter
DT/DE John Browning
LB Quinton Caver
QB Todd Collins
DT Eric Downing
TE Jason Dunn
FB Omar Easy
S Clint Finley
DT Eddie Freeman
LB Scott Fujita
C Kendall Gammon
TE Tony Gonzalez
QB Trent Green
RB Dante Hall
CB Corey Harris
S Shaunard Harts
DE Eric Hicks
DE Vonnie Holliday
RB Priest Holmes
CB Darrius Johnson
RB Larry Johnson
LB Fred Jones
WR Eddie Kennison
LB Mike Maslowski
CB Dexter McCleon
LB Kawika Mitchell
WR Johnnie Morton
DT Allen Reese
RB Tony Richardson
T Willie Roaf
DT Montique Sharpe
G Will Shields
NT/DT Ryan Sims
G/T Marcus Spears
LB/DE Gary Stills
T John Tait
DE R-Kal Truluck
WR LaShaun Ward
CB Eric Warfield
C/G Brian Waters
S Greg Wesley
S Lyle West
C Casey Wiegmann
DE Jimmy Wilkerson
G Donald Willis
CB/S Jerome Woods

27 of the 54 players listed were still on the roster two years later. That compares to 20 of the 53 players from the 05 roster carrying over to 07.

[KCJohnny]

This is Looney Tunes right here. The Raiders, Broncos, and Chargers (after firing Norv) should all be improved. You're going to replace 4 O-Lineman and 2 CB's in one off-season? Yeah we'll just go thru McDonald's drive thru no snap. Maybe ask for them to supersize our order.

No way in Hades we win 10 next year. We'll be lucky if Waters and TG don't want out of town (thru trades and retirement) also.
Oh please.
We're a handful of missed FGs from being 7-4 this year.

I did not say replace 4 OLmen. I said with new tackles, one of them is already here (move McIntosh to ORT). We need a LT and a RG. Hardly impossible. I also did not say replace CBs - you said that. I said a "youth movement" at CB which includes developing guys we already have (Sapp, Brackenridge).

You people act like the sky is falling. You scream and cry and carry on for a total rebuild then as it happens you moan and groan about losing games. C'mon.

Gonzo's not going anywhere. Neither is Waters; they are team leaders. We'll have 2 solid RBs next year. This team is bottoming out now. Next season will be much improvement.

[FringeNC]

Oh please.
We're a handful of missed FGs from being 7-4 this year.

I did not say replace 4 OLmen. I said with new tackles, one of them is already here (move McIntosh to ORT). We need a LT and a RG. Hardly impossible. I also did not say replace CBs - you said that. I said a "youth movement" at CB which includes developing guys we already have (Sapp, Brackenridge).

You people act like the sky is falling. You scream and cry and carry on for a total rebuild then as it happens you moan and groan about losing games. C'mon.

Gonzo's not going anywhere. We'll have 2 solid RBs next year. This team is bottoming out now. Next season will be much improvement.

The reality is that we are a 4.6 YPP on offense, 5.1 YPP on defense team -- those are not the fundamentals of a good team. In fact, they are the fundamentals of one of the worst teams in the league.

[KCJohnny]

The reality is that we are a 4.6 YPP on offense, 5.1 YPP on defense team -- those are not the fundamentals of a good team. In fact, they are the fundamentals of one of the worst teams in the league.

No argument there. I made the same point about 4 games ago. We are 1 ypg above the NYJs for being the 2nd to worst O in the NFL.

The defense stat is a bit misleading - we do give up yds between the 20s in the Cover 2. But KC is the NFL's best RZ defense. That's something to build on. I still see the glass half full.

[DaneMcCloud]

You know a lot about the Chicago debacle do you? I am sure you do. ROFL
I live here and am inundated with it. He was brought here in Lovie Smith's first year to bring the KC offense to Chicago. They honestly believed that would do it. When it didn't and the Bears still sucked after hiring a whole new staff, he was sacrificed after only one season. Nobody could have turned around that offense in one year, nobody.

The Chiefs were glad to get him back, Trent was used to working with him and preferred working with him.

That sure worked out well with Trent and Shea in Miami, did it not?

And if Shea is SOOO good, can you please explain to me how Trent Green's best year statistically was in 2004, the year Shea was in Chicago?

[keg in kc]

How is Indy the youngest team in the league? Isn't that a pretty good summary number of roster turnover?28 of the players on Indy's roster right now were acquired in 2006-2007. 13 of them are draft picks. Indy does have 8 players on IR right now, which is going to put people on the roster who might not have been there otherwise.

That's still less of a turnover than KC. And the reason they're a better team than the Chiefs is obvious: they're not rebuilding, they're adding to an already solid roster. The Chiefs are not. KC doesn't have the kind of foundation that the Colts do. Because, as I've already pointed out, the staff and front office did not build a core here between '01 and '05. They start with Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne. We start with Damon Huard, Eddie Kennison and Samie Parker.

Building around that kind of talent, it's not real tough to tell which team's going to be better...

And that's because one team is rebuilding while the other team is restocking, just adding to what's already there.

My point, in the end, is that KC is turning over the roster as much as you possibly can. The Chiefs had an awful roster in '05, and reality is that you can't replace 100% of your players in two years. There's no possible way to do that.

The question is whether the players brought in will be better than the players they're replacing. If Herm's not developing a core of talent solid enough build a franchise around, then we'll be no better off than we were under Vermeil, or Marty's second half or Gunther, and we won't have "rebuilt" anything.

[HemiEd]

That sure worked out well with Trent and Shea in Miami, did it not?

And if Shea is SOOO good, can you please explain to me how Trent Green's best year statistically was in 2004, the year Shea was in Chicago?

Do you really think Trent Green was a complete football player at any time after the first game of the season last year? I don't, I think his stuff got messed up and it is too bad.

Once again, I don't think you can build a team in a year, Chicago, Miami or KC. 2004 was a horrible year for the Chiefs, a horrible year. The Offense kept it going after 2003 but the Defense hit rock bottom.

I think you could check with Newphin on how Trent feels about Terry Shea, all I have is stuff we all have from the media.

[Chief Faithful]

The amount of roster turnover they've done in two years is amazing. If you don't believe me, pull out an '05 roster and compare it to the current one:

(Players in bold are no longer with the Chiefs)

DE Jared Allen, LB Shawn Barber, CB William Bartee, LB Kendrell Bell, G Jordan Black, T Chris Bober (IR), WR Marc Boerigter, RB Dee Brown, DT/DE John Browning, QB Todd Collins, P Dustin Colquitt, RB Ronnie Cruz, DT Lional Dalton, TE Jason Dunn, LB Keyaron Fox, C Kendall Gammon,
TE Tony Gonzalez, QB Trent Green, LB Kris Griffin, LB Boomer Grigsby, DE Carlos Hall, RB Dante Hall, DE Eric Hicks, RB Priest Holmes (IR/Retired), WR Chris Horn, C Johnathan Ingram, LB Derrick Johnson, RB Larry Johnson, WR Eddie Kennison, S Sammy Knight, DE Khari Long, CB Dexter McCleon, LB Kawika Mitchell, WR Samie Parker, TE Ed Perry, RB Tony Richardson, T Willie Roaf, T Kevin Sampson, CB Benny Sapp, LB Rich Scanlon, G Will Shields, DT Junior Siavii, NT/DT Ryan Sims, LB/DE Gary Stills, CB Patrick Surtain, T Will Svitek, K Lawrence Tynes, CB Eric Warfield, CB Dewayne Washington, C/G Brian Waters, T/G John Welbourn, S Greg Wesley, C Casey Wiegmann, DE Jimmy Wilkerson, TE Kris Wilson, CB/S Jerome Woods

56 names on that list, 33 of them are gone, nearly two-thirds.

And those are just the players who were active in '05, it doesn't list guys who never suited up, guys who were on the practice squad, and so forth.

That's rebuilding, no matter how you want to slice it.

If the roster's still old in some areas, you can thank Vermeil for that, for failing over the course of 5 years to draft or acquire young backups.

I don't know how Herm could do any more than he has, personnel-wise. I don't know that you can replace everyone overnight.

One factor is DV unwilling to replace veterans with 1st and 2nd year players. When DV turn-over 27 players over two years (2003-2005) most of those were free agent veterans. Most of the 33 (2006-2007)Herm has replaced in two years have been young drafted players or un-drafted free agents. This is why the team is getting younger. Under DV the team got older.

I still see critical needs at WR (Kennison is aging), RT, RG, and CB. I prefer to see either WR or RT in the first round.

[Zouk]

My point, in the end, is that KC is turning over the roster as much as you possibly can. The Chiefs had an awful roster in '05, and reality is that you can't replace 100% of your players in two years. There's no possible way to do that.



Just wait until next year. I put the range of Vermeil players who will remain in the 10-12 range. And some of those guys (possibly Huard, Boomer, Svitek, Wilkerson) will be backups. That's incredible turnover in 3 years.

[Ugly Duck]

We are no where near the youngest team in the league -- GB and Indy are.

Where do we find that data?

[KCJohnny]

One factor is DV unwilling to replace veterans with 1st and 2nd year players. When DV turn-over 27 players over two years (2003-2005) most of those were free agent veterans. Most of the 33 (2006-2007)Herm has replaced in two years have been young drafted players or un-drafted free agents. This is why the team is getting younger. Under DV the team got older.

I still see critical needs at WR (Kennison is aging), RT, RG, and CB. I prefer to see either WR or RT in the first round.

Nah. Go for a house at OLT (Jake Long, Ryan Clady) and move McIntosh to ORT. I agree we do need a RG. Also a replacement for EK. Might get a younger FA as a possession receiver.

[Rasputin]

I havn't bought into the "rebuilding" this year when Hermy said this was a rebuilding year with Huard still as our QB. That was stupid for him to say, after a loss all of a sudden we were "rebuilding"

I want this team to BUILD for a championship not rebuild. We have not had a Championship team in 37 years so there is nothing to "rebuild".

Now with two pretty good drafts under Herm and 10 draft picks in 08, I think we will be fine but it is going to be a long rough couple more seasons before we see any results. At the same time we are loseing our patience with Herm in his "Coaching" decisions. I can't say he is a good coach, I don't think he is that bad, but I still want to like Herm if he can get this team to play better.

I am POed that Brodie didn't start sooner and I am POed that we are just now seeing Kolby Smith. WTF!!! Sure they would have been making mistakes from the get go but they would have NFL games under their belt to learn from. Now they get 5-6 games to get better and that is short and not enough (imo) to show that much progress.

This coaching staff sux rocks. Dick Curl, Solari, Phifer, they aren't any good. We need a complete coaching staff change. We need to fire Carl Peterson and then we can start building a Championship team.

[Chris Meck]

It's easy to get frustrated, but we need to remember that we're not on the practice field every day. we don't know who is ready to play and who isn't.

Brodie's playing now. I'd have liked to see it sooner, but he might be in pieces right now if he had been.

Kolby's playing now. Who knows if he even knew the offense well enough earlier?

We're clearly getting younger. You can't do it all at once, but we're doing it pretty quickly.

You have to depend on your young players developing. To say that they won't just because in the past they haven't under vermeil is to totally negate what a rebuilding period is. I have faith in Herm's ability to scout talent, if not to manage the game. Bowe, Brodie, Brackenridge, Hali, Page, Pollard, Kolby Smith, etc. Pretty good couple of drafts and we haven't even seen much yet of Turk and Tank.

[DaneMcCloud]

Do you really think Trent Green was a complete football player at any time after the first game of the season last year? I don't, I think his stuff got messed up and it is too bad.

Once again, I don't think you can build a team in a year, Chicago, Miami or KC. 2004 was a horrible year for the Chiefs, a horrible year. The Offense kept it going after 2003 but the Defense hit rock bottom.

I think you could check with Newphin on how Trent feels about Terry Shea, all I have is stuff we all have from the media.

You are totally contradicting yourself.

First, you're an advocate for Shea. He was a failure in Chicago. Lovie fired him because he saw the offense was going nowhere. And that's sad considering how impotent Chicago's offense has been, yet they still were in the Super Bowl just two seasons after Shea was fired.

Then, you state that 2004 was a horrible year. But in actuality, it was Trent Green's best year from a statistical standpoint. As I may remind you, Jason Verduzco was the QB coach that year, which totally obliterates the idea that it was Shea behind Trent Green's success. If it really had been Shea, then Trent Green's numbers would have suffered, right? But the fact is that they were the best of his career.

Please explain, because the facts prove contrary to your claims.

[Coach]

But out of those who do we know will be any good? It's a crapshoot. They may be good. They may not be.

We arn't rebuilding successfully until they are producing.

Sure, but how can they produce if they aren't given the chance to play?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

And if Shea is SOOO good, can you please explain to me how Trent Green's best year statistically was in 2004, the year Shea was in Chicago?

Because Priest was hurt, our defense was at it's absolute worst, and we had to throw non-stop in the second half of every game to play catch up.

Does anyone here remember the '04 Chiefs?

[Chief Faithful]

I havn't bought into the "rebuilding" this year when Hermy said this was a rebuilding year with Huard still as our QB. That was stupid for him to say, after a loss all of a sudden we were "rebuilding"



Herm has used the phrase, "team in transition" and said they need to get younger, but I have never heard the term rebuild. I don't think the Chiefs feel they are rebuilding and they wouldn't admit it even if they were rebuilding. It makes perfect sense to use the veteran QB if the young gun is not ready if it is a team in transition.

[Dr. Van Halen]

Hmmm. We made the playoffs last year, right? We were very much in the game with both Indy and Green Bay this year, right? There's still plenty of work to do, but to say we haven't even been competitive seems too strong to me.


Well said. I think the hyperbole monkey is eating too many bananas again. Another year like this and these people will start calling the Chiefs the worst team in the history of sports.

[TEX]

That sure worked out well with Trent and Shea in Miami, did it not?

And if Shea is SOOO good, can you please explain to me how Trent Green's best year statistically was in 2004, the year Shea was in Chicago?

Simple. He threw more passes. Or, played easier defenses. Shoot, it could be a number of things. Stats don't tell the whole story - you know that. Besides, I think '03 was his best year as far as being a complete QB goes. But stat -wise you're right.

Hey, how come you quote stats now, when it suits your argument, and you totally discard them when discussing DV's accomplishments? :hmmm:

[TEX]

Well said. I think the hyperbole monkey is eating too many bananas again. Another year like this and these people will start calling the Chiefs the worst team in the history of sports.

No, that would be the Raiders. The same Raiders who outplayed us at ARROWHEAD last Sunday. The same Raiders whose coaching staff outcoached ours as well. It doesn't matter what the monkey is eating because those are the facts of the matter.

[Dr. Van Halen]

No, that would be the Raiders. The same Raiders who outplayed us at ARROWHEAD last Sunday. The same Raiders whose coaching staff outcoached ours as well. It doesn't matter what the monkey is eating because those are the facts of the matter.

The Raiders are the worst team in the history of sports? You know they existed prior to a few years ago, don't you?

I see your point, but this is the NFL. Any team, etc. Someone just might lose to Miami at some point. Don't you remember all those games in the '80s when we were horrible, but we'd play up for the Raiders and win? Those were always really fun games.

I guess I'm just saying that some people are exaggerating the state of things.

[DaneMcCloud]

Hey, how come you quote stats now, when it suits your argument, and you totally discard them when discussing DV's accomplishments? :hmmm:

Give me an example. I provided contrary stats to almost everything that everyone's said about DV in the other thread.

But the bottom line is that he only had one playoff appearance in 5 years, despite several HOF'ers on the offense. And two winning seasons out of five is nothing to write home about.

At least in my opinion.

[1ChiefsDan]

The Raiders are the worst team in the history of sports? You know they existed prior to a few years ago, don't you?

I see your point, but this is the NFL. Any team, etc. Someone just might lose to Miami at some point. Don't you remember all those games in the '80s when we were horrible, but we'd play up for the Raiders and win? Those were always really fun games.

I guess I'm just saying that some people are exaggerating the state of things.Judging from a lot of the posts I would suspect that many of the people on the Planet have no idea that the faiders were actually a successful franchise at one time or that the Chiefs really sucked in the 80's. Unless they checked a stats web page;)

Does this season suck? Sure - but it is no where near as bad as some I have witnessed.

[TEX]

The Raiders are the worst team in the history of sports? You know they existed prior to a few years ago, don't you?

I see your point, but this is the NFL. Any team, etc. Someone just might lose to Miami at some point. Don't you remember all those games in the '80s when we were horrible, but we'd play up for the Raiders and win? Those were always really fun games.

I guess I'm just saying that some people are exaggerating the state of things.

Sure I do, it was an exageration to make a point that currently they're pretty bad from top to bottom. We really didn't beat them much in the '80's at all that I can remember.

Friend, it is pretty bad in KC right now and that's no exaggeration.

[TEX]

Give me an example. I provided contrary stats to almost everything that everyone's said about DV in the other thread.

But the bottom line is that he only had one playoff appearance in 5 years, despite several HOF'ers on the offense. And two winning seasons out of five is nothing to write home about.

At least in my opinion.

That's one bottom line - sure. It was pretty much even in that he had 2 losing seasons - 2 wining seasons - and one .500 season. His last year he won as many games as Herm Edwards has ever won as a coach and that team had a better record than the '06 team, but didn't qualify for the playoffs. But, some of us enjoyed DV' s brand of football and it brought us years of enjoyment. To us - that's our bottom line - the thrill factor if you will and his accomplishments do mean something to us.

Here's another bottom line - Herm quit on the Jets before the '05 season ended. If that's the guy you want for a coach - that's your perogative. In my book that's the lowest form of loser.

[DaneMcCloud]

That's one bottom line - sure. It was pretty much even in that he had 2 losing seasons - 2 wining seasons - and one .500 season. His last year he won as many games as Herm Edwards has ever won as a coach and that team had a better record than the '06 team, but didn't qualify for the playoffs. But, some of us enjoyed DV' s brand of football and it brought us years of enjoyment. To us - that's our bottom line - the thrill factor if you will and his accomplishments do mean something to us.

See my thread regarding disgruntled fans. Apparently, losing is okay for many fans, as long as there are gaudy stats along the way.

Here's another bottom line - Herm quit on the Jets before the '05 season ended. If that's the guy you want for a coach - that's your perogative. In my book that's the lowest form of loser.

How did Herm "quit on the Jets" during the 2005 season? And are you implying that he is "quiting" on the Chiefs?

Where and when did I EVER state that *I* wanted Herm Edwards as the Chiefs head coach? Personally, I wanted Al Saunders so that the Chiefs would at least have continuity in the offense and I had several posts debating Parker about Saunders as head coach.

Regardless, the Chiefs roster was sorely lacking talented, youthful football players when Herm arrived. I think it's safe to say that the roster has improved since his hiring and I think it's also safe to say that the 2008 draft will be the most important draft in the history of the Chiefs franchise.

I think the Chiefs are in good hands with Herm regarding personnel.

[BigRock]

Here's another bottom line - Herm quit on the Jets before the '05 season ended.

The Jets won 4 games in 2005. Two of those 4 were won in the final month of the season. One came in the final game.

But by all means, keep saying "Herm quit on his team" in as many threads as possible. Maybe one day it'll magically become the truth.

[Fish]

No, that would be the Raiders. The same Raiders who outplayed us at ARROWHEAD last Sunday. The same Raiders whose coaching staff outcoached ours as well. It doesn't matter what the monkey is eating because those are the facts of the matter.

Vermeil lost his first 3 out of 4 against the Raiders when he took over coaching the Chiefs.

Edwards won his first 3 out of 4 against the Raiders when he took over coaching the Chiefs.

:BLVD:

[headsnap]

Vermeil lost his first 3 out of 4 against the Raiders when he took over coaching the Chiefs.

Edwards won his first 3 out of 4 against the Raiders when he took over coaching the Chiefs.

:BLVD:

looks like Vermeil trended in a better direction... ;)

[ChiefsCountry]

But, some of us enjoyed DV' s brand of football and it brought us years of enjoyment. To us - that's our bottom line - the thrill factor if you will and his accomplishments do mean something to us.

Basically that is why people love DV just bc of the circus type offense. Doesnt matter that he didnt win crap here and nobody will give Herm a fair shot bc he doesnt apply that type of offense.

[headsnap]

Basically that is why people love DV just bc of the circus type offense. Doesnt matter that he didnt win crap here and nobody will give Herm a fair shot bc he doesnt apply that type of offense.
DV's Chiefs were at least exciting to watch. The same can't be said for Herm's team.

[DaneMcCloud]

DV's Chiefs were at least exciting to watch. The same can't be said for Herm's team.

And there's the rub

[headsnap]

And there's the rub
now I can use Sundays to catch up on my sleep...

[keg in kc]

If by 'exciting' you mean "kept you on the edge of your seat wondering how the defense would collapse this week" then yes, they were exciting.

[headsnap]

If by 'exciting' you mean "kept you on the edge of your seat wondering how the defense would collapse this week" then yes, they were exciting.
that was definitely a part of it!

[Discuss Thrower]

Herm's style of trying to let the defense win games for you won't work in this era of Manning-enabling pass happy offenses. Remember the whole emphasis on calling defensive holding more often from a few years back?

[TEX]

If by 'exciting' you mean "kept you on the edge of your seat wondering how the defense would collapse this week" then yes, they were exciting.

No, I was talking about scoring points. That was exciting. Certainly you remember when we did that better then anyone. Anything was more exciting than what we have now IMO.

[TEX]

Basically that is why people love DV just bc of the circus type offense. Doesnt matter that he didnt win crap here and nobody will give Herm a fair shot bc he doesnt apply that type of offense.

Some might. Some might also see it that with DV, we had a coach who won the Super Bowl and took another team to one. Someone who actually had accomplished the goal that every team and coach, including Herm, aims for. Herm Edwards is nothing special - he's just some guy who has been promoted beyond his competence.

[HemiEd]

You are totally contradicting yourself.

First, you're an advocate for Shea. He was a failure in Chicago. Lovie fired him because he saw the offense was going nowhere. And that's sad considering how impotent Chicago's offense has been, yet they still were in the Super Bowl just two seasons after Shea was fired.

Then, you state that 2004 was a horrible year. But in actuality, it was Trent Green's best year from a statistical standpoint. As I may remind you, Jason Verduzco was the QB coach that year, which totally obliterates the idea that it was Shea behind Trent Green's success. If it really had been Shea, then Trent Green's numbers would have suffered, right? But the fact is that they were the best of his career.

Please explain, because the facts prove contrary to your claims.
Are you just reading a stats page somewhere? Hamas answered your question before I came across it. I also answered it earlier, but you seem to ignor things for your convenience.

Because Priest was hurt, our defense was at it's absolute worst, and we had to throw non-stop in the second half of every game to play catch up.

Does anyone here remember the '04 Chiefs?

[DaneMcCloud]

Are you just reading a stats page somewhere? Hamas answered your question before I came across it. I also answered it earlier, but you seem to ignor things for your convenience.

I'm able to look up stats. Are you? And where have I avoided to address your posts? You've certainly avoided to address mine, specifically the post stating that "Vermeil builds teams and Herm tears them down". No response from you as of yet.

To address you and Hamas on this topic, I believe that it's inconsequential as to how Trent Green had his best season statistically in 2004. The bottom line is that he did have the best statistical season of his career, whether it be in San Diego, Washington under Turner & Martz, Martz in St. Louis or Shea in Kansas City.

The simple fact is that Trent Green had his best season EVER under Jason Verduzco.

Not Terry Shea.

[TEX]

Are you just reading a stats page somewhere? Hamas answered your question before I came across it. I also answered it earlier, but you seem to ignor things for your convenience.

You're wasting your time. I basically said the same thing to him as well earlier in this thread. He's just a stats guy... :shake:

I also answered his "Chicago firing Shay" broken record take a few days ago. With a simple explanation that it's hard to run a system with players NOT drafted to fit said system. It's pretty simple, but stats can't explain it so he doesn't understand - and we're left to hear the same old broken record over and over again... :rolleyes:

[DaneMcCloud]

You're wasting your time. I basically said the same thing to him as well earlier in this thread. He's just a stats guy... :shake:

I also answered his "Chicago firing Shay" broken record take a few days ago. With a simple explanation that it's hard to run a system with players NOT drafted to fit said system. It's pretty simple, but stats can't explain it so he doesn't understand - and we're left to hear the same old broken record over and over again... :rolleyes:

No, you didn't.

Explain this to me: If Terry SHEA (not Shay) was such a valuable coach in the NFL, why WASN'T he offered the position of Offensive Coordinator ANYWHERE but Chicago?

Additionally, why is he still a Quarterback coach at his age?

[DaneMcCloud]

See my thread regarding disgruntled fans. Apparently, losing is okay for many fans, as long as there are gaudy stats along the way.



How did Herm "quit on the Jets" during the 2005 season? And are you implying that he is "quiting" on the Chiefs?

Where and when did I EVER state that *I* wanted Herm Edwards as the Chiefs head coach? Personally, I wanted Al Saunders so that the Chiefs would at least have continuity in the offense and I had several posts debating Parker about Saunders as head coach.

Regardless, the Chiefs roster was sorely lacking talented, youthful football players when Herm arrived. I think it's safe to say that the roster has improved since his hiring and I think it's also safe to say that the 2008 draft will be the most important draft in the history of the Chiefs franchise.

I think the Chiefs are in good hands with Herm regarding personnel.

Tex, where is your response to this post?

[DaneMcCloud]

You are totally contradicting yourself.

First, you're an advocate for Shea. He was a failure in Chicago. Lovie fired him because he saw the offense was going nowhere. And that's sad considering how impotent Chicago's offense has been, yet they still were in the Super Bowl just two seasons after Shea was fired.

Then, you state that 2004 was a horrible year. But in actuality, it was Trent Green's best year from a statistical standpoint. As I may remind you, Jason Verduzco was the QB coach that year, which totally obliterates the idea that it was Shea behind Trent Green's success. If it really had been Shea, then Trent Green's numbers would have suffered, right? But the fact is that they were the best of his career.

Please explain, because the facts prove contrary to your claims.

Ed, where's your response to this post?

[TEX]

I'm able to look up stats. Are you? And where have I avoided to address your posts? You've certainly avoided to address mine, specifically the post stating that "Vermeil builds teams and Herm tears them down". No response from you as of yet.

To address you and Hamas on this topic, I believe that it's inconsequential as to how Trent Green had his best season statistically in 2004. The bottom line is that he did have the best statistical season of his career, whether it be in San Diego, Washington under Turner & Martz, Martz in St. Louis or Shea in Kansas City.

The simple fact is that Trent Green had his best season EVER under Jason Verduzco.

Not Terry Shea.

Okay follow along - I say you're dead wrong that '04 was Green's best season ever because I'm only interested in his TD to INT ratio which was clearly better in '03 than '04... see the problem with stats? ..:rolleyes:

A crude example, but the bottom line is I am correct based on my criteria.

[DaneMcCloud]

Okay follow along - I say you're dead wrong that '04 was Green's best season ever because I'm only interested in his TD to INT ratio which was clearly better in '03 than '04... see the problem with stats? ..:rolleyes:

A crude example, but the bottom line is I am correct based on my criteria.

Well then your criteria is inconsequential.

Trent Green's numbers - yardage, touchdowns and TD to INT ratio was the finest of his career.

It wasn't because Priest Holmes got hurt: Larry Johnson picked up the slack and when combined with Priest's numbers, those numbers were equal to Priest's numbers in 2002.

Call it what you will but to deny the fact that Trent Green put up his best numbers while Terry Shea was in Chicago is ludicrous.

2003: QB rating of 92.6
2004: QB rating of 95.2

[HemiEd]

To address you and Hamas on this topic, I believe that it's inconsequential as to how Trent Green had his best season statistically in 2004.

That is absolutely absurd, this is like talking to a brick wall.

Let me see if I can help. The team was forced to throw the ball, Trent Green was doing the throwing, So Trent Greens stats went up. Follow?

I can talk slower if it will help.

[HemiEd]

Ed, where's your response to this post?

Are you drunk?

[DaneMcCloud]

That is absolutely absurd, this is like talking to a brick wall.

Let me see if I can help. The team was forced to throw the ball, Trent Green was doing the throwing, So Trent Greens stats went up. Follow?

I can talk slower if it will help.

The only person you're talking to is yourself.

Trent Green had 33 more pass attempts in 2004 than in 2003. 33.

That's does NOT explain why he had his best statistical year in 2004 without Terry Shea.

[Chiefs_5627]

Okay follow along - I say you're dead wrong that '04 was Green's best season ever because I'm only interested in his TD to INT ratio which was clearly better in '03 than '04... see the problem with stats? ..:rolleyes:

A crude example, but the bottom line is I am correct based on my criteria.


Not to get in the middle of the "squabble" but how can you pick and choose what stats you want to acknowledge, then tell someone theyre wrong knowing you only used half the facts? Thats like reading the first 3 chapters of a 10 chapter book and saying its the greatest book ever.

In '04 he posted his highest comp % n QB rating along with TDs n Yds/ave. Hard to argue against '04.

[DaneMcCloud]

Are you drunk?

No.

You called me out earlier, saying that I only responded to certain posts. That it totally untrue.

So in my defense, I dug up posts that directly contradicted your claims, yet you did not respond.

[HemiEd]

You're wasting your time. I basically said the same thing to him as well earlier in this thread. He's just a stats guy... :shake:

I also answered his "Chicago firing Shay" broken record take a few days ago. With a simple explanation that it's hard to run a system with players NOT drafted to fit said system. It's pretty simple, but stats can't explain it so he doesn't understand - and we're left to hear the same old broken record over and over again... :rolleyes:

There are a lot of things you won't find on a stat sheet about the Chicago thing.

Keep in mind the media in Chicago is somewhat magnified.

The fans had just been through the Dick Jauron era and were unhappy. Lovie was brought in and was under pressure to fix the offense. Everyone knew he was a defensive guy so they weren't worried about that. He made a statement about copying the KC OFFENSE and people expected it to happen. Hell every team wanted the KC Offense.
They had musical chairs of reject QBs on the team, it didn't work in one year and he was fired, pretty simple. The fans saw action.

[HemiEd]

No.

You called me out earlier, saying that I only responded to certain posts. That it totally untrue.

So in my defense, I dug up posts that directly contradicted your claims, yet you did not respond.

I have been doing more than reading this board tonight. When you take several hours to respond, I usually move on. Which ones are you talking about? The one you cited, I had already responded to and so had you. LMAO

Are you stoned?

[DaneMcCloud]

I have been doing more than reading this board tonight. When you take several hours to respond, I usually move on. Which ones are you talking about? The one you cited, I had already responded to and so had you. LMAO

Are you stoned?

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?p=4409171#post4409171

[BigRock]

That is absolutely absurd, this is like talking to a brick wall.

Let me see if I can help. The team was forced to throw the ball, Trent Green was doing the throwing, So Trent Greens stats went up. Follow?

I can talk slower if it will help.
Trent had numerous career-best stats in 2004 -- things like passer rating, yards per completion, completion percentage -- that were based on his performance. These aren't stats based on the fact that he threw the ball more often, like total passing yardage or something.

[HemiEd]

Trent had numerous career-best stats in 2004 -- things like passer rating, yards per completion, completion percentage -- that were based on his performance. These aren't stats based on the fact that he threw the ball more often, like total passing yardage or something.

So what do you attribute that to? QB Coach? Time with the team?

[DaneMcCloud]

So what do you attribute that to? QB Coach? Time with the team?

If you're going to place emphasis on Terry Shea's coaching, shouldn't you also place emphasis on Jason Verduzco's coaching, since under JV, Trent Green put up his career best numbers?

[HemiEd]

If you're going to place emphasis on Terry Shea's coaching, shouldn't you also place emphasis on Jason Verduzco's coaching, since under JV, Trent Green put up his career best numbers?

My point in bringing up Terry Shea, about 200 posts ago, was that he had some knowledge of offense. Something nobody on the staff currently has. They prove it every week.

[DaneMcCloud]

My point in bringing up Terry Shea, about 200 posts ago, was that he had some knowledge of offense. Something nobody on the staff currently has. They prove it every week.

See, I wouldn't go that far but apparently, you have a dislike for this coaching staff that can't be overcome with facts or stats.

For the last time, the offense line in 2007 is not the same as in 2003. At the beginning of the season, only one offensive starter was under the age of 30.

If you expected the same results in 2007 as in 2003, you were only fooling yourself.

The blame does not lie with the coaching staff. The blame for the offensive woes this year lie at the feet of Carl Peterson and the front office for not adequately providing future offensive starters that would provide the same level of play as in 2003.

[TEX]

Not to get in the middle of the "squabble" but how can you pick and choose what stats you want to acknowledge, then tell someone theyre wrong knowing you only used half the facts? Thats like reading the first 3 chapters of a 10 chapter book and saying its the greatest book ever.

In '04 he posted his highest comp % n QB rating along with TDs n Yds/ave. Hard to argue against '04.

Let me explain - Because I only chose a certain criteria to prove a point. In the criteria I chose he was/is wrong. The bottom line is stats can often be manipulated to prove a point. That's all I'm saying.

To use your analogy - it's more like reading the first 3 chapters of a 10 chapter book and saying those 3 chapters are the greatest part of the book.

[TEX]

The only person you're talking to is yourself.

Trent Green had 33 more pass attempts in 2004 than in 2003. 33.

That's does NOT explain why he had his best statistical year in 2004 without Terry Shea.

And all your takes do NOT explain why he did. We have given you examples of many possibilites of how and why it happened. We don't know for sure why or how. What is certain is you don't either. Get it now? This is so pointless because you're not open to any possibilities. Let's move on and just have different opinions of how and why it happned.

[TEX]

There are a lot of things you won't find on a stat sheet about the Chicago thing.

Keep in mind the media in Chicago is somewhat magnified.

The fans had just been through the Dick Jauron era and were unhappy. Lovie was brought in and was under pressure to fix the offense. Everyone knew he was a defensive guy so they weren't worried about that. He made a statement about copying the KC OFFENSE and people expected it to happen. Hell every team wanted the KC Offense.
They had musical chairs of reject QBs on the team, it didn't work in one year and he was fired, pretty simple. The fans saw action.

Yep. The only reason why he doesn't understand is because he doesn't want to acknowledge factors other than stats. He asked for reasons Terry failed as an OC (not QB Coach)in Chicago only after 1 season, and was given many legit reasons why it might have happened. Time to move on.

[TEX]

Well then your criteria is inconsequential.

Trent Green's numbers - yardage, touchdowns and TD to INT ratio was the finest of his career.

It wasn't because Priest Holmes got hurt: Larry Johnson picked up the slack and when combined with Priest's numbers, those numbers were equal to Priest's numbers in 2002.

Call it what you will but to deny the fact that Trent Green put up his best numbers while Terry Shea was in Chicago is ludicrous.

2003: QB rating of 92.6
2004: QB rating of 95.2

Um - go back and read your stats again because you're dead wrong. His TD to Int. ratio was better in '03 ( 24 to 12) than in "04 (27-17). My example was a way to hopefully show you that stats can be manipulated to prove a point. I did just that only you're not willing to acknowledge that. My numbers are not inconsequential as they support the criteria I stated - they are facts - do the math yourself. :shake:

Can we be done with this now - Please?

[TEX]

No, you didn't.

Explain this to me: If Terry SHEA (not Shay) was such a valuable coach in the NFL, why WASN'T he offered the position of Offensive Coordinator ANYWHERE but Chicago?

Additionally, why is he still a Quarterback coach at his age?


Okay - I'll try...

One explination could be that he's a QB coach and we was snatched up very quickly after his gig with the Chiefs. He's also very active with NFL QB camps. Last year he worked with Brady Quinn before Cleveland drafted him. Many teams value his opinions on QB's.

If you don't understand that - I'll try it your way....If Herm was such a good coach, why was he going to get fired by the Jets? Why weren't there other teams trying to out bid us for his services? Or, Priest must not be that good because he was an undrafted free agent which meant that all nfl teams passed on drafting him. See how your logic is flawed ? Man this is just dumb.

Now to address your last question - He's a QB coach at his age because he's a darn good one. Maybe the OC position is beyond his level of competency much the same way as HC is above Herm's?

[TEX]

Vermeil lost his first 3 out of 4 against the Raiders when he took over coaching the Chiefs.

Edwards won his first 3 out of 4 against the Raiders when he took over coaching the Chiefs.

:BLVD:

Um - that was when the Raiders won the West 3 years in a row and went to the Super Bowl. Now they're candidates for the Toilet Bowl.

[HemiEd]

Rudy Niswanger, Jeff Webb, Tank Tyler, Turk McBride, Tyron Brackenridge...

Three out of that bunch could be starters next season and are seeing increased playing time.

Two of them are.

[FringeNC]

This year is rock bottom. We'll probably finish 6-10. Next year we will have new tackles, a real FB, a youth movement at CB and probably a new kick returner. With a retooled OL, this team wins 10 games. Easy.

That was said in 2007. ROFL

[Deberg_1990]

That was said in 2007. ROFL

Yea, but it was KCJohnny....and he doesnt count. :)