ChiefsPlanet
Page 13 of 17 « First 39101112 13 14151617
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Is it conceivable for the Chiefs to dump Pioli & Haley and get Cowher for GM & HC? (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=217322)

SenselessChiefsFan 11-02-2009 11:04 AM
[QUOTE=DeezNutz;6227138][QUOTE=SensibleChiefsfan;6227101]

#1) Most see the willingness to bing in familiar players as a weakness. I see it as a strength. The Chiefs are a fragile team right now, and I think they have to make sure the guys they bring in, have the right attitude.

Quote:

Doesn't LJ undermine this argument, the thought that the "right 53" is more than empty rhetoric?

Oops. I ****ed up the quotation.
Remember, LJ said and did all the right things for all of offseason and the beginning of the regular season.

LJ worked hard, dropped weight and was a class citizen by all accounts.

Now, they are in a bad spot. If they cut him, they tell the team that if they want out, they just have to act up.

They are going to keep him on and make him live with the mess he made. No easy out.

Haley told everyone at the beginning that they were starting with a clean slate. He kept his word. That is how LJ was still here.

It would be different if they brought in guys that had problems like this. I think then, you could say my argument was invalid.

LJ was an prexisting condition that they are doing their best to work with.

SenselessChiefsFan 11-02-2009 11:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 6227141)
Bullshit.

If the Chiefs don't acquire a Jon Abraham/Joey Porter/James Harrison type of pass rushing machine, Tyson Jackson's selection is even worse.

The linebackers in the 3-4 are THE playmakers. If there are no playmakers behind Jackson, guess what happens?

Oh yeah, I think we already know because we see it each and every week.
Yeah, why don't you look at where the Steelers typically draft their outstanding pass rushing linebackers. Hmmm. And, why don't you look at how those same linebackers typically do when they leave there. Hmmm.

It is a team effort. And, I will give Jackson a little bit of slack for not being dominant seven games into his career.

Now, for the record, Jackson was not my favorite pick. But, to say regardless of how good he is... it is a wasted pick... is moronic.

BossChief 11-02-2009 11:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 6227008)
When surrounded by excellent talent, those three guys you mentioned played very well. But what I meant by "impact" is a guy who does something on their own - a game changer.

Tyson Jackson and the overwhelming majority of 3-4, 5-tech defensive ends are not the type of guys to put a team on their shoulders and lead them to victory.

IMO, the Chiefs needed the type of player at #3 overall that makes an impact on the game, not a guy who's primary job is to let other people make plays. Especially when the linebackers and safeties are not in place.

I've said this before and I'll say again: Tyson Jackson could turn out to be the greatest 5-tech player to ever play the game. But unless the Chiefs acquire outstanding linebackers and safeties, no one will even know or care.

And that for me makes it a wasted pick.
While I agree with this, dont you realize that you have to build the foundation first? Good teams do.

If TJ does his job, our rush defense will be much improved for years to come and the rushbacker we hand select to play behind him will excell.

The dline is every bit as important to the defense as the oline is to the offense. Without it the talent cant do its thing.

Its WAAAAAAY to early to be calling it a wasted pick.

Nobody we chose was gonna come in and turn this thing around single-handedly.

Fish 11-02-2009 11:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan (Post 6227101)
That is a very fair question.

#1) Most see the willingness to bing in familiar players as a weakness. I see it as a strength. The Chiefs are a fragile team right now, and I think they have to make sure the guys they bring in, have the right attitude.

#2) Patience. They didn't come in and make a ton of changes right away. Some think that this is a weakness. I don't. I think they were smart to get the talent on the field before they decided what guys could actually do.

#3) Cutting talented players that didn't fit the organization. They cut Pollard and Boone. They are both guys that have talent and could have fit this system. This is frustrating on the surface. But, I think they were looking at more than just talent. They were looking at chemistry and accountability.

#4) Lack of panic. Cassel has struggled. It would be easy for the Chiefs to start Brodie to try to get a 'spark'. Or for them to draw up more gimmick plays like the Chiefs did last year. It would be easy to cave in and give DJ his starting job back.

I just see a steady hand guiding the organization.

Now, I have been critical of Haley and if Haley loses the team, then he should be fire when that happens.

But, until then, I think he should be given three years to build the team.
I see what you're saying. Although I do see #1,2 as a weakness. I felt that this team desperately needed the chainsaw approach to team building. Most of these young players got game action last season thanks to the youth movement, so we knew what we had with most of them. The weaknesses on the team were obvious to most folks. I think those weaknesses needed bombed and rebuilt, and patience had no value there.

#3 I understand, but I just think they've done a piss poor job of it.

#4 is a good point.

beach tribe 11-02-2009 11:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 6227180)
While I agree with this, dont you realize that you have to build the foundation first? Good teams do.

If TJ does his job, our rush defense will be much improved for years to come and the rushbacker we hand select to play behind him will excell.

The dline is every bit as important to the defense as the oline is to the offense. Without it the talent cant do its thing.

Its WAAAAAAY to early to be calling it a wasted pick.

Nobody we chose was gonna come in and turn this thing around single-handedly.
Correct. If we had chosen a playmaking pass rusher he probably would be getting double teamed every play because we didn't have any 5 tech DEs worth a shit.

BossChief 11-02-2009 11:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 6227211)
Correct. If we had chosen a playmaking pass rusher he probably would be getting double teamed every play because we didn't have any 5 tech DEs worth a shit.
exactly

and I also think it is pretty foolish to say its a wasted pick to select a guy that can neutralize two olinemen....that is like having 12 men on defense!

Guys like Tyson can do that and let average pass rushers look great.


Im DEFINATLY saying I dont agree fully with the move to the 3-4 in the first place, but change of massive proportions were needed to get the taste of 6 wins out of 32 games out of our mouth.

DaneMcCloud 11-02-2009 11:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 6227180)
While I agree with this, dont you realize that you have to build the foundation first? Good teams do.

If TJ does his job, our rush defense will be much improved for years to come and the rushbacker we hand select to play behind him will excell.

The dline is every bit as important to the defense as the oline is to the offense. Without it the talent cant do its thing.

Its WAAAAAAY to early to be calling it a wasted pick.

Nobody we chose was gonna come in and turn this thing around single-handedly.
:shake:

No, I DO BELIEVE that it's necessary to build a "foundation". If that's the case, why did Pioli virtually IGNORE the worst offensive line in the league?

The Chiefs had a bevy of 4-3 defensive lineman that were entering the second and third years. They were MUCH closer with a 4-3 defense than a 3-4. PIOLI chose to dump those players in favor a 3-4, not to just "build" a foundation.

The "foundation" was already there! They should have stayed with the 4-3, added Rey Maualuga, drafted a pass rushing DE late and focused on the offense.

The move for Jackson had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with building a mythical "foundation" and EVERYTHING to do with his stubborness to continue with a 4-3.

And furthermore, if the Chiefs DON'T acquire at least two pass rushing OLB AND a nose tackle, this scheme is ****ed.

DaneMcCloud 11-02-2009 11:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 6227211)
Correct. If we had chosen a playmaking pass rusher he probably would be getting double teamed every play because we didn't have any 5 tech DEs worth a shit.
Really? So, those guys weren't available in free agency? You're telling us that is was ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to take Tyson Jackson at #3 overall?

JFC.

:shake:

DaneMcCloud 11-02-2009 11:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan (Post 6227175)
Yeah, why don't you look at where the Steelers typically draft their outstanding pass rushing linebackers. Hmmm. And, why don't you look at how those same linebackers typically do when they leave there. Hmmm.

It is a team effort. And, I will give Jackson a little bit of slack for not being dominant seven games into his career.

Now, for the record, Jackson was not my favorite pick. But, to say regardless of how good he is... it is a wasted pick... is moronic.
No, it's not.

And what the **** are you talking about when referring to the Steelers linebackers? That they majority were drafted in the second round? Duh.

The Steelers drafted a 5 tech this year. At number 32 overall. THAT'S where you draft a 5-tech.

Not at #3.

BigChiefFan 11-02-2009 11:47 AM
All 32 teams improve every year and also win the Super Bowl, didn't you get the memo?

Pioli's been here less than a year and some act like, all he needed was to wave his magic wand and the team would instantly be upgraded. For the umpteenth time, Pioli DID NOT IGNORE the O-LINE! He added Goff, Ndukwe, Alleman, O'Callaghan, and the kid from Mizzou. THAT'S FIVE new o-line players on the roster. That argument is officially debunked and no longer acceptable in my book.

ct 11-02-2009 11:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 6227240)
:shake:

No, I DO BELIEVE that it's necessary to build a "foundation". If that's the case, why did Pioli virtually IGNORE the worst offensive line in the league?

The Chiefs had a bevy of 4-3 defensive lineman that were entering the second and third years. They were MUCH closer with a 4-3 defense than a 3-4. PIOLI chose to dump those players in favor a 3-4, not to just "build" a foundation.

The "foundation" was already there! They should have stayed with the 4-3, added Rey Maualuga, drafted a pass rushing DE late and focused on the offense.

The move for Jackson had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with building a mythical "foundation" and EVERYTHING to do with his stubborness to continue with a 4-3.

And furthermore, if the Chiefs DON'T acquire at least two pass rushing OLB AND a nose tackle, this scheme is ****ed.
What sense does it make to hire a man then expect him to continue with a program that is not his? and furthermore a program that was very clearly not working?

Just because YOU have no belief in starting over when YOU felt we were close, means zilch to the man in charge.

Fish 11-02-2009 11:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigChiefFan (Post 6227287)
All 32 teams improve every year and also win the Super Bowl, didn't you get the memo?

Pioli's been here less than a year and some act like, all he needed was to wave his magic wand and the team would instantly be upgraded. For the umpteenth time, Pioli DID NOT IGNORE the O-LINE! He added Goff, Ndukwe, Alleman, O'Callaghan, and the kid from Mizzou. THAT'S FIVE new o-line players on the roster. That argument is officially debunked and no longer acceptable in my book.
:shake:

That's equivalent to Firemen bring a squirt gun to a burning building and saying "See! We tried, but it burned down. Ahh shucks, we'll get the next one."

That's not acceptable to me. None of those 5 you listed would likely start for any other team in the league. That's not improvement.

BossChief 11-02-2009 12:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 6227240)
:shake:

No, I DO BELIEVE that it's necessary to build a "foundation". If that's the case, why did Pioli virtually IGNORE the worst offensive line in the league?

The Chiefs had a bevy of 4-3 defensive lineman that were entering the second and third years. They were MUCH closer with a 4-3 defense than a 3-4. PIOLI chose to dump those players in favor a 3-4, not to just "build" a foundation.

The "foundation" was already there! They should have stayed with the 4-3, added Rey Maualuga, drafted a pass rushing DE late and focused on the offense.

The move for Jackson had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with building a mythical "foundation" and EVERYTHING to do with his stubborness to continue with a 4-3.

And furthermore, if the Chiefs DON'T acquire at least two pass rushing OLB AND a nose tackle, this scheme is ****ed.
I agree 100% with the bolded part, it was very very puzzling. I wont even try to justify it because I would be 100% wrong. You'd have to ask the guy who played a huge part in building the roster of a team with three superbowl trophies and four appearances in ten years along with the executive of the year award, Im sure he made mistakes along the way.

I also believe we were closer than perception of getting to the point of fielding a decent 4-3, but we were horrible at it for 10 years and drastic change was needed. Do I agree with jettisoning the talent we had in place to change schemes, no.

Hali is as good a pass rusher as most of the olbs NE had playing behind Ty and Dick. That leaves one, and if we decide to draft a good one, he will have a chance at excelling now BECAUSE WE HAVE A GOOD 5TEC!

There is no doubt we need a dominant NT for this thing to work, the writing is on the wall and has been since the day we decided to make the switch.

DaneMcCloud 11-02-2009 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigChiefFan (Post 6227287)
All 32 teams improve every year and also win the Super Bowl, didn't you get the memo?

Pioli's been here less than a year and some act like, all he needed was to wave his magic wand and the team would instantly be upgraded. For the umpteenth time, Pioli DID NOT IGNORE the O-LINE! He added Goff, Ndukwe, Alleman, O'Callaghan, and the kid from Mizzou. THAT'S FIVE new o-line players on the roster. That argument is officially debunked and no longer acceptable in my book.
This HAS to be a joke.

A 33 year old guard who can't play any more.

Two players that Miami were going to cut for their FIRST cutdowns, not their second. An offensive tackle who didn't even have a profile on NFL.com! He sucked at tackle and was moved to guard.

And O'C was acquired on waivers AFTER the start of the season.

You're telling us that he adequately address the WORST offensive line in the league? The SAME line that put two QB's on IR the previous year?

Huh?

DaneMcCloud 11-02-2009 12:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ct (Post 6227294)
What sense does it make to hire a man then expect him to continue with a program that is not his? and furthermore a program that was very clearly not working?
So, it wasn't working, eh?

You mean after two years, Tank & Turk & Dorsey (after one) were supposed to be Pro Bowlers?

Yet all I hear from Piolisuckers is that you have to "give it time"?

What a load of horseshit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ct (Post 6227294)
Just because YOU have no belief in starting over when YOU felt we were close, means zilch to the man in charge.
Then go **** yourself and find another football forum to suck "the man in charge's" cock.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:20 PM.
Page 13 of 17 « First 39101112 13 14151617
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.