It's the coaches fault he missed all those tackles? Not to mention he would talk shit when the team was getting there ass kicked. He was a toilet bowl that needed to be flushed and it's a good thing this regime did it. Far from sucking in Texas isn't really true either. If you watched the game where Chris Johnson ran all over them he was nowhere to be found.

The thing is, the two statements I bolded (which I both believe to be true) contradict each other. Something just doesn't add up here.

But Dane, they'd rather have guys who are good citizens and don't talk back to coaches over talented players.

It took an injury to get Goff out of the lineup, and interestingly enough, ever since he's been out, Cassel's time to throw has almost ****ing tripled.

It took some gay slurs to get LJ out of the lineup, and what do you know, the running game is producing.

We're in an evaluation year, yet they won't give playing time to the players that need to be evaluated.

I'm starting to think Whitlock was right about the "ego" thing - can't wait to see the piece he puts together after the Denver game.

Another thing, When Pollard sucked here none of you were blaming the coaches.

Defending the asinine moves of incompetent personnel people is like curry to a pisshead for this fan base.

If only you knew the invectives that were hurled at Gunther and Herm for playing our personnel in a ****ing Tampa 2 when it should have been a man-pressure, blitzing scheme.

Reguardless it was a consesus that Pollard sucked.

Actually, some of us were, because he was being mis-used.

He was being used more in coverage and not enough in run support.

Yet, for all that, and the supposed issue of missing tackles, he still lead the team.

He's in Houston for one reason, and one reason only:

He mouthed off to Clancy Pendergast.

And after what we've seen this year, it probably was deserved.

I would like to see posts where people were saying "If only we had good coaches Pollard would be a good player." Because from what I remember everyone was glad that the new regime was bringing in competiton to take Pollards spot.


Since Mike Brown leads the team in tackles does that mean he's not a bad tackler?

I bitched and bitched about Pollard being misused. Finally, I figured that it couldn't be all on coaches, and claimed him a bust as a safety (although still a PB-caliber STer).

I was wrong. I should have just stuck to my initial belief.

Thank you. And yes he was good on special teams.

One thing about that character over talent I read on the first page.

We're not reading about Chiefs players getting DUI's, bitch slappin' chicks & so on all the way up here in the NW anymore.

Mike Brown actually tackles fine.

The problem is putting himself in position to MAKE a tackle, because he takes HORRIBLE angles.

Yes, that appears to be true.

I honestly believe that the lack of spending in free-agency was due to improperly evaluating the talent on the roster.

How else can you explain Niswanger starting at center to this day? Or the lack of a big back for short-yardage carries? Or completely ignoring the offensive line?

1. Clark Hunt spent $75 million out of pocket. I declared that free-agency would be next to non-existent at that point.
2. Scott Pioli was hired, gave Cassel a $60 million dollar contract and Tyson Jackson a huge contract (about $30 million upfront for both).
3. The Chiefs didn't sign any high or even mid-priced free agents.

So, either Hunt mandated that the Chiefs not spend much money in free agency (unlikely) or Pioli & Company improperly evaluated the existing talent and the end result was no "real" money spent in free agency because the Chiefs had enough talent (in his opinion) to compete in 2009.

I'm going with the latter.

I think me actually believing this is going to happen is the reason I still have hope for this regime.
If at least 4 out of six of those things don't happen, I'm joining the lynch mob.
Another is Krumrie must be gone. I can't handle another season of him on the payroll.

Pioli has been pretty lousy and he has to earn our trust. And he should certainly be taken to task for not knowing Cassel a little better before trading for him. But I think you and a lot of people have a completely skewed understanding of how talent evaluation works. Pioli is only as good as the scouting information fed to him. Pioli didn't have his guy or his scouts feeding him info going into the draft. And his guy didn't have nearly enough time to feed him the right info going into the free agency period.

These aren't excuses. They are reasons. I'm not saying he deserves a free pass. But I think he deserves at least the 2010 offseason before we can really judge what he's capable of. He can compete for the best coaches and assistants. He'll have had a full year of his own scouts and his own Director of College Scouting feeding him draft data. He'll have had a Pro Personnel Director who has had a full year to self-scout and also do an extensive analysis around the league. And he won't have to deal with a ton of administrative house-cleaning/transitional items he had to deal with in January (people forget that the draft was one of a million things he had to deal with in the early stages).

If he ****s up this draft and continues to make horrible decisions, including inbreeding the organization with former Pats players, then I'll agree with you. And I agree with you that his track record so far is really shitty. I just don't agree (yet) that these are signs that Pioli has no idea what he's doing. And by the way, I 100% agree with pestilence's checklist of things he needs to do. If he doesn't accomplish most of that list and then some, I'm more than happy to rip him a new asshole. Not literally, of course.

You are absolutely, without a ****ing doubt, full of SHIT.

Please, leave this discussion.

Your intent is to make excuses for a man earning $5 million dollars a year whose past 11 months have been a complete and utter failure.

Please, go back to the Coalition or wherever the **** you came.

It's becoming regoddamndickulous.

FACT: Pioli conducted the draft with Carl Peterson's scouts and Personnel Directors
FACT: Pioli hired Ray Farmer, Director of Pro Personnel (the most important guy in the organization when it comes to scouting players from other teams) on June 7th
FACT: Pioli hired Phil Emery, Director of College Scouting (the most important person in terms of college scouting and easily the second most important person outside of Pioli as it relates to draft decisions) AFTER the draft was conducted

That's not being full of shit. Those are facts and they are indisputable. He drafted with someone else' lame duck scouts. He drafted with Peterson's Director of College Scouting. He conducted combine evaluations with Carl Peterson's scouting network. He opened the free agency period with Carl Peterson's Director of Pro Personnel. Feel free to tell me where I'm wrong on any of this.

Like I said, if he ****s up in 2010, then we're in really big trouble. And I've said repeatedly that I hate the decisions Pioli has made so far. But give me a ****ing break. I'm not going to overreact and say that despite the million major front offices changes made in the past year that Pioli should have had everything figure out by now.

Again, you're full of shit.

If you think that the Executive of the Millennium didn't trust his scouts and made not one, not two, not three but SEVEN poor draft choices based on their opinions and their opinions alone, you're a ****ing MORON.

Go the **** away.

And STAY away.

Does anybody remember the contract the Rams gave Jason Brown? They gave him 37.5 million with 20 in guarantees. People here would have gone apeshit if we threw 40 million at a ****ing center.

With that said, I agree with most of the anti-Pioli/Haley stuff.

AMEN

Who used the roll out quite a bit?...............

One guess, he used to be the OC here.

I find it hard to believe that a new GM would hinge the beginning of his career on a bunch of talent scouts that were on a team full of failure.

If he did, then it speaks volumes on Pioli's decision making ability.

Maybe you could explain how he was going to replace a full scouting staff before a draft, since most scouts contracts don't run out until after the draft. So he couldn't go out and hire people from other teams, and you can't hire people off the street because how many people off the street spend the year flying around to all the different teams and watching tape on players.

Pioli didn't hire Ray Farmer he was already here and kept his same position. Just want to clarify that.

Yeah. Everybody that doesn't agree should LEAVE. This is not a place for discussion.

You know there's really only room for about 6 people on this board.

I'm joining htismaqe.
This place is nothing but a hate farm.

Pioli didn't know what he had or didn't have on the roster and who could play and not play the schemes he and Haley were installing.

He used this past year to pretty much see how many of the existing players they could keep. He probably reasoned why spend big money on free agents when someone on the roster can do the job. I'd imagine Clark felt that way too.

I was young, so I have a hard time remembering exactly, but I believe that the hated CP did a much better job of turning this franchise around from year one. I know that Marty came in and won immediately, so why couldn't Scott and Todd? I must say that I am very disappointed in the progress so far. Not as disappointed as my Dad, who has wanted Haley fired since game 3, but nonetheless, I believe that we should expect more than what we got from this team this year.

see: http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...29#post6345429

So again, that precludes him from acquiring talented players?

It might. They spent big money on Dorsey. Don't you think the owner wanted to try him out in the new system rather than immediately bringing in someone else? In some cases (Hali and Dorsey) it may have worked, in others (McBride, Tyler) it didn't.

Who were we going to "try out" on the OL?

At WR?

And this isn't an excuse for getting one impact player - a ****ing kicker - in the draft.

I can't explain it or say if it's true or not. It just blows my mind.

Thanks for clarifying. I thought he was hired in 2009.

No, it is standard practice for almost any organization. You can't afford to fire all your scouts and Personnel guys right in the heart of draft season. Everybody knew that Kuharich, Chuck Cook, and the entire scouting organization was pretty much conducting their last draft ever for the Chiefs. And to nobody's surprise, almost all of them were fired very soon after the draft.

We'll see. I really like the drafts Phil Emery put together in Atlanta and I'd at least like to see what he's capable of. This upcoming draft is going to be a shitload more reflective of what we can expect the next 5 years rather than 2009.

If you knew much about the business of football...which your post proves you don't...NFL scouts and most other player personnel contracts run from draft to draft usually an April 30/ May 1 date.

If Pioli was what they say he is...he knew what he had. If he didn't then he had three months at One Arrowhead Drive to figure it out prior to the draft and during free agency.

Pioli's sole job at the Pats was to evaluate talent. He knew who the free agents were going to be...he knew who was in the draft long before he came to KC. Did he just get stupid? He changed over half the roster and continues to make changes. Best bet he is in way over his head.

Occam's razor.

And there was proof of his inept talent evaluation AT NEW ENGLAND, too.

Nobody is as disappointed as Chris Berman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hid-n...eature=related

Yeah, but people here act like when Pioli came into Kansas City, he was 100% devoted to the draft. They forget that he's also the Head of Operations walking into a new team that he knows close to nothing about. Not just w/Chiefs players, but also the operational and coaching staff. You also have to be the face of the organization and do a lot of administrative bullshit. You also have to talk to a lot of people, figure out who's in who's out, build a culture that fits what you want to do, develop a strategy, and then get everyone to buy in and act on your strategic vision. Difficult to bring in players if you're not sure what your 5-year vision for the team is.

I've done a lot of work in change management from organizations changing radically different cultures. It is difficult, difficult stuff. And most of that difficulty comes from old employees who refuse to buy in to what you're selling. Especially true when your former boss worked there for 20+ years.

Most of that change is probably over. Like I said, in 2010 there is no excuse. And you can't give a free pass for 2009. I just think it's a really, really tough expectation to expect a GM to turn around a 20-year culture in just a few months.

Alright Warpath,

I have to tell you to give it a rest. I do believe that EVERYONE knew that the approach for this season was to really sit back and evaluate. They inherited a team that was bad. Everyone knew that

We knew they wouldn't be active in free agency, and they weren't. Not until they got to OTA's and training camp and had a chance to evaluate players with their own eyes. Tape can say one thing, but who's to say the player isn't failing b/c he's doing exactly as he's told. You are better off seeing how they fair in your drills. By the time they realized who was out, the pickin's were slip. The guys they brought in, at least in my eyes, weren't "their guys", they were what was left, but they were still an unknown potential compared to the know crap we had.

With Todd Haley as coach, recent culture of loosing, Clark Hunt on the budget and the uncapped rules.... It will be a bleak offseason in KC.

The only way this team is going to get better is:

Coach the players you have better.
Draft like a genious.
Continue to bring in other teams 54th best player.

I don't agree with what's in bold, at all. In fact, if it's true, everyone who is in charge at 1 Arrowhead should be fired immediately.

The goal is always to make progress toward a championship. Period. Not to sit back and evaluate.

You evaluate and then make the necessary moves to get better, and Pioli had sufficient time to do this before a single meaningful snap happened. Arguing otherwise is revisionist history.

As fans, we have to face the distinct possibility that Pioli is dumb as ****. So far, the evidence says he *might* be.

Meanwhile, I'm hoping like hell that he puts together an off-season this coming year that presents an equally convincing counter-argument.

BULLSHIT excuse.

BULLSHIT excuse. Are you telling me that we can't adequately judge Michael Oher, Percy Harvin, Knowshon Moreno, Michael Crabtree or Vontae Davis?

Tyson Jackson is just a GUY. He hasn't "flashed". Magee? Same thing. Washington? A Joke. O'Connell? ROFL

More nonsense.

This isn't New England. There is no TOM BRADY on the roster. Todd Haley isn't Bill Belichick.

If Scott Pioli came to town thinking he could just follow the Patriots blueprint, without any improvisation or changes, he's a bigger ****ing idiot than I previously thought. I don't hold him in high regard, whatsoever at this point.

I knew what was wrong with this team. In MY mock draft, I had Sanchez, Unger, Urbick, Louis Murphy, Louis Vasquez and more. How come I knew what the Chiefs needed but the Executive Of the Millennium didn't?

Oh, and there were several others around here that had pretty damn good mock drafts that seem to know more about the Chiefs than ****ing Scott Pioli.

You're making too many excuses for a job that to date, has been poorly executed from top to bottom.

New sig.

More bullshit.

Pioli turned over 65% of the roster.

If you think that HE expected the Chiefs to win less than 4 games this season, you're delusional.

Looks like everything that I would have said in response to this post has already been said.

People want to fight the obvious, and it's a completely understandable reaction. It sucks to know that this team is no where close to being competitive.

Much easier to make excuses and hope and wish that Pioli is really going to start trying this off-season. Because about the only thing worse than realizing that this team will suck ass for another year or two is the thought that maybe the guy in charge isn't capable of fixing it.

He'll be missed.

You...

http://www.theboxset.com/images/revi...ombstone03.jpg

Cry me a river.

JFC.

:shake:

Someone should give him a list of people to take with him.

If Pioli had no chance of drafting capably because he didn't have "his" guys in place, the same should be said of EVERY new GM? Why do some new GM's draft ok the first year? Luck? Madan Cloe? Why do some teams do well the first year under a new GM? Some actually improve. Magic 8 ball?

And what was more important to Pioli when he got here than the draft? Couldn't he do the administrative stuff later? Change the office around and fire the security guard after the draft? I would have though that he would have spent a LOT of time on the draft when he first got here. Yeah, hire a coach, but leave the rest of the stuff till later. Then again, maybe I'm wrong. I do know that everytime I've been asked to take over a business, I'm expected to make progress quickly. Gone are the days of getting worse before it gets better.

It's a process. Trust it.

Im going to try that next time my boss asks why we aren't getting results. I'll let you know how that goes. Just in case, got any job openings where you work?

Sorry. You sound like you like results.

My work is about the right 234, not the best 234.

Next question for Dees, Dane, OTW and Goat (or anyone else that is arguing against Pioli)

In this situation, what should Clark do? Give him another year? Can him now? If Pioli is the problem, what is the solution?

I don't have a solution and I wouldn't fire him now. That would be stupid.

My only commentary on the situation at hand is that Pioli has failed this year and making excuses for him is lame. I'm completely willing to be patient but if we have a repeat of what happened this year it's gonna be obvious we're going to be in for a lonnnng five years.

From the inside information provided by BigRed, Pioli signed a five year guaranteed contract. I don't think that Clark Hunt will fire Pioli and throw away $20 million dollars.

I think that if we haven't seen a significant change in the Chiefs record by the end of year three, Pioli's job could be in jeopardy.

But not after year one.

And personally, I don't expect Clark Hunt to do or say anything.

Short of some type of gross indiscretion that demands an immediate firing, there's nothing much to do right now.

Once Pioli was hired, he gets a minimum of 3 years, IMO. It's my hope, however, that Hunt would seriously evaluate his performance after year 3 and be willing, just willing, to make a move if necessary.

If Haley gets the axe and Pioli continues to sign the Bobby Engrams of the world bringing in a head coach and giving him more of the power would be a solution I guess, making him more of a figurehead, etc. That would require some major meddling by Clark, though. Don't know if he's the type to do that or if he would even want to step on Pioli's toes.

This is all only in the event Pioli continues to show he can't properly upgrade the roster. He deserves at LEAST one more season to do it "his way."

If Haley gets fired, we're going to see the exact opposite brought in to be the HC.

A proven, vet winner. I'd expect The Chin.

Even the Executive of Yore cannot risk missing, again, this quickly.

Do you give him 3 years no matter what? If the Chiefs have another 2-14, 3-13, 4-12 season and they don't seem to be building a core, do you pull the trigger then? I would think you have to show SOME kind of progress. Don't ya?

I mean a more powerful head coach, essentially cutting Pioli's nuts off and making HIM the figuredhead. But again, any such move would have to come from Hunt.

Yes.

Because as bad as it is, and it is terrible, one can take a myopic view and argue that there has been substantial progress. After all, we've won 3 games. More than last year, right? Progress. Hell, we might double the win total. HUGE progress.

Of course, the more nuanced analysis shows the hilarity of that argument.

Now, if we go tits up next year, 0-16, then anything is possible. Anything else, and the dude gets the automatic 3.

Hell, I firmly believe Pioli would survive 0-16. The fumes from Brady are that powerful.

I think any vet guy, like The Chin, would fit that bill.

Those guys aren't going to a place where they have to ask permission.

That really makes me wonder if Pioli would want to work with such a head coach.

If he does, Whitlock will be furiously revising his "EGO" angle.

It's going to be the, "I seriously ****ed up and need to save my legacy as the Executive of a Lifetime" angle.

Making who the figurehead? Haley's been the public face of the team since the day he was hired. Pioli's barely visible.

I'm talking about real power, not public perception.

Pioli has all the power at Arrowhead these days.

The Browns sort of did this this year when they hired Mangini before their GM. Mangini has all the power there, not the GM.

If you looked very, very closely, you could see Pioli's arm extending up to Haley's ass after the Bills game as he worked the mechanisms to make Haley say, "First, I'd like to thank the fans..."

Then maybe you should use a word other than figurehead...

(you know a figurehead is a person who appears to be in charge and isn't, right? Which is what you're saying Haley is...)

No, I think I used the right word.

If Clark Hunt was disappointed with Pioli and wanted to hire a head coach and give the new head coach all the power, Pioli would become the figurehead.

Right now Haley is a figurehead. He doesn't have all the power no matter how the Chiefs present it.

This is a pretty terrific post. It's not always an apples to apples comparison. I would argue that the Chiefs had a lot more dysfunction in the front office (20 years under the same regime) and whereas some GMs inherit teams with decent foundations, playmakers, and something to build upon, the Chiefs really didn't. They had to start mostly from scratch. The best apples to apples comparison, to me, was the Rams. And even they weren't nearly as dysfunctional in the front office as the Chiefs were.

Sometimes when you start from scratch, it's better to take your time. Better to move slowly in no direction than to move quickly in the wrong direction. Cassel was the only major whiff so far. Most of the other guys brought in seem to have been brought in moreso for cultural reasons and to serve as stopgaps. I'm sure nobody in the front office really cared if Engram was a bust, nor did they expect him to be some kind of savior. Remember that the Pats stayed pretty quiet for several years, and then all of a sudden went on a spending binge to get Welker, Moss, etc....

I hope like hell that this is the case and I'm willing to give him at leasts the offseason to prove it. But be prepared to also maybe find out that Pioli isn't very good at this.

Except for the fact that he, like you, easily discount the fact that every player acquired by Pioli, whether it be through the draft or free agency, have not been IMPACT players.

They've been marginal at best.

If that does not improve, it doesn't matter WHO is in place in the front office.

Personnel is of utmost importance.

Well, Pioli may have whiffed on Cassel. But apart from that, it's not like he signed many other free agents who were expected to be anything more than a stopgap. I don't know why he chose to do that. But I also recall that he did this in New England and then out of nowhere exploded by bringing in Moss, Welker, etc.... Maybe he wants to crawl before he walks and runs. I hope that's the case. Then again, he might just be an idiot.

As for the draft, you can chalk it up as excuses. I know the 2009 draft was shitty. But I also really like the guy he brought in as Director of College Scouting. And it sounds like the Chiefs are aggressively attacking scouting than they ever have before. I don't currently trust him, but I'm willing to wait and see what Emery puts together.

I know it sounds like I'm being a homer for Pioli. I'm not. I hate most of the moves he's made. I just happen to think that this offseason is the true test of what he really wants to do with this team.

Pioli "whiffed" on 35 players he brought in.

35 players. 65% of the roster.

That is inexcusable.

It is inexcusable. But it's not like he brought these 35 players in thinking that the majority of them were going to be long-term contributors to this team. Almost all of them were brought in to be stopgaps or diamonds in the rough. And most of them replaced players who haven't contributed elsewhere either. The fact that almost all of them had easy-to-cut contracts indicates that even Pioli knew most of these guys wouldn't pan out. I don't know why he wasn't more aggressive in the offseason. But it seems pretty clear that that was intentional.

He mentioned in a presser earlier in the year that he wants to be aggressive in the offseason. I want to see how he fares when he aims for the cream of the crop instead of the bottom of the barrel (hopefully, he gets that chance with the CBA still in doubt). And the scouting network is usually responsible for 3rd to 7th round draft choices. Let's see if Emery's role will help bring in much better talent between those rounds and through undrafted rookies.

Like I said. He had a shitty 2009. And yes, it is unacceptable. I'm just saying that I don't think bargain hunting is going to be representative of his strategy beyond 2009. And I hope to god that Emery and the new scouts will make him better in the war room. We'll have to see.

On the contrary. I am disputing the excuse that "Pioli whiffed because he didn't have his own guys in place". He started in the exact same place as every new GM. None have their own guys in place because of the way scouts contracts go, etc. So "Exec of All Time" should have done as well if not better than every other new GM. That doesn't seem to be the case.

And I completely agree that personnel is priority #1, which is why I can't understand the argument that he didn't have time to focus on the draft because of all the chaos in the office and all the administrative stuff he had to do. Could he not have worried about that stuff later and spent the first 3 months totally focused on the draft (and hiring a HC)?

Getting talented, impact players is the base of a great team. I agree with the philosophy of the "Right 53" (isn't that a Parcellism?). But it's not 53 players with the right attitude, its 53 TALENTED players with the right attitude.

I think everyone would feel better if he had turned over 65% of the roster by cutting or trading old, expensive veterans for young guys with an upside. Or if they signed some high priced, highly talented guys. It doesn't seem like he did either of those.

The Patriot way is to bring in middle of the road talent and coach it up. You may remember the Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since bringing in Moss or Welker.