Saunders-haters: Why NOT Al?
 

Why rebuild, when you can reload? Come on, hear me out on this....

I've read here and elsewhere, it's because CP doesn't "like" Saunders; or he has different politics than the rest of the FO. I've read that he's pissed off LJ; and that LJ is CP's boy. I've read Al gets too "cute" with his play calling. I've read he's already been a HC, and failed. While there may be some element of truth to each of those charges....as major reasons to not consider hiring Saunders, I just don't buy any of it.

This is football. While the team has suffered as a result of DV's neglect of the defense IMO, Al has done his job extremely well. Saunders has been a big part of some of the most consistently successful offenses in the history of the league. The Chief's offense the last five years has been a joy to watch--90% of the time. If Roaf comes back, filling Shields spot is the only significant task left to do on that side of the ball. Yes, developing a young tackle or two, finding a QBOTF, converting Wilson from TE to FB to replace TRich (or something like that-heh), and signing a quality back up for LJ, are all we would really need to do for the next two or three years on Offense. Very "doable" in my mind.

Now, having said that......something dramatic has to be done on the Defensive side of the ball. However, who's to say that with Saunders taking over, that he and CP won't be able to cherry-pick the coaches that are worth keeping, while at the same time hiring new coaches in key areas.....

:hmmm:

Along with a couple of key additions to the defensive personnel, in the draft and in FA (provided we can clear the cap room) and I think we will have just reloaded, instead of rebuilding.

Thoughts, comments, or reactions? :hmmm:

I really Struggle with this question.

I worry that nothing will change, can he bring the right attitude? I'm not sure. And then I wonder what will happen once Trent, Roaf and Shields hang em up?

I want a HC I can get excited about.

Because that type of reasoning requires the use of logic, something that few people seem to be able to do.

When is the last time you saw Al Saunders make good in game adjustments?

Not wanting Al for head coach ≠ hating Al

I don't want Al to be the next HC because I believe it would be a continuation of what we have now and I don't like what we have now.

Start fresh.

I just think we'd be "throwing the baby out with the bath water," as they say.... :shake:

I mean, the problem is the DEFENSE; let's find a way to FIX that. Leave well enough alone on the offensive side of the ball.

I'm REALLY gonna be hating life, if we hire one of these trendy Defensive Coordinators....only to see the offensive firepower disappear. I'm gonna be REALLY pissed if we become the Baltimore Ravens, the Buffalo Bills, or the Miami Dolphins.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

I know. I just figured "Saunders-haters" might draw more hits....

;)

Give must coaches a qality QB, a top notch offensive line, a future HOF TE, and another TE who is an excellent blocker, a FB who excells at blocking, an all-pro RB, a second RB that looks to have the potential to do who knows what, and a decent (though not-great) WR, and they'll look pretty good at their job...

Yes, the OC does play a role in the success of that group, but the group itself has just as much if not more to do with it (as we saw earlier this season with Roaf being out).

I don't think Saunder's problem is being too cute. I think he has the same problem the rest of the coaches seem to have: he can't adjust worth a squat. He's a one-trick pony. It's part of the reason why this O could only muster 3 points against a team like buffalo. If cute works, then hey, be cute all you want... but if what you're doing fails, then you have to adjust--figure out the opponant's weakness and attack.

We need a coach who will do that in-game. I don't know if Saunders just doesn't see it or is just that stubborn, but I want him as the HC as much as I want DV to return... and that's about the desire of having a plague of boils upon my butt.

Iowanian made the point very succinct, here's my long winded version, but I agree.

He has shown us this season that he is too stubborn to make the offensive adjustments necessary to win the games we need to (Let's just go ahead and use the S.D. game earlier in the year) games and then, and based upon this past performance, many are skeptical - including myself - on giving this guy full reign. This logic is also based upon his coaching heritage, the "coaching tree" he is decended from.

It has nothing to do with his prior "failure" as a head coach.

Whether you agree with it or not, I believe many probably feel the same, if not, that's cool; That's how I see it.

P.S. I am undecided on keeping him on staff, but definitely not as a HC

How do you know the water doesn't smell bad because the baby died three seasons ago and we're all to emotional to recognize it?

14 pts after halftime, both in Dallas and New York.

In games where we were tied or behind, we've scored at least 14 points in the second half MOST of those games.

Yes, the Philly and Buffalo games sucked eggs. And there have been instances when our offense has not responded in the second half; but they are the exception, not the rule.

To me, the problem isn't offense; it's defense. And to throw Al out, over something which he had little or no control....just makes no sense, IMO.


:shrug:

Sorry, but its not just the Defense. Sure its been the reason for the last 2 weeks, but the offense while still getting good stats has not produced close to the results it has in the past. I think some of that is due to Roaf, but a lot of it has to do with play calling.

You honestly think this Offense is dead.

20 of the teams in the League would LOVE to have this offense--even without Shields, and without Holmes.

Like the rest of the team, this offense lays down when it matters most. If we're blaming the D on Gun then the O is on Saunders.

1st and goal, 9 yard line, 4 point lead with 1:21 remaining on the clock before the half, Kansas City has successfully moved the ball on the ground and already scored two rushing touchdowns.

The play comes in, its a pass incomplete to Larry Johnson in the middle due to PRESSURE ON GREEN.

Time running out on the clock, oh wait... The Chiefs call a timeout????

1:16 left on the clock before the half, 4 point lead, 2nd and goal on the 9 yard line.

The play comes in... The fullback goes out?

Singleback formation, here comes the snap, its another pass?

Johnson misses the block on the outside linebacker blitz.......................

i'm good with giving AL a shot as long as we completely clean house on the defensive side of the ball.

top 3 offense the last 4-5 year

For someone with a complete inability to make changes and adjust, Saunder has done a great job scoring points and moving the ball. Especially when you consider all the dropped balls, penalties, injuries, etc.

It's funny to see people have to go back to the first SD game to critique the guy.

He would be a fine fit. Look at what he has done for the offense.

Clock management? I'd put more of that on Vermiel, than on Saunders. That has been pathetic, I agree.

As far as LJ missing a block...that sucks, yes. No doubt about it. Unfortunately, it happens. Hopefully it will happen less, as LJ becomes a better blocker.....what's that have to do with Saunders? Other than, maybe he had faith that LJ might be able to do it in that particular case...:shrug:

I think there were some miscalculations by the coaching staff, earlier in the season....with regard to limitations of some players due to injuries and agree they should have been able to figure it out, but didn't. Once again though, I'd put that more on Vermiel than Saunders.

The offense scored 17 pts in the second half of the SD game....

top 3 offense for almost his entire tenure and he did it without a stud receiver.


not bad in my book

Ain't gonna happen.

That's bullshit. The very game you mention (S.D.) he had a quarterback pass for more yards in one half then any other quarterback had up to that point in the year. He had a back rush for over 100 yards in a quarter. If plays weren't being made it's because his quarterback was throwing interceptions or taking sacks. Is an offense going to stagnate sometimes? Sure. Same thing happens on defense. The chicago bears defense has given up big plays and had games of 150 + yards rushing allowed this year. Nobody can be perfect in the NFL. But when a guy leads the league in a category 5 years in a row he should get some respect and Saunders has done that.

My problem with AS isn't that he is a terrible coach. My problem is that we can't get rid of ALL the players, but if you keep players and coaches but send a few coaches packing what have you really changed? The only way a current Chiefs coach can win the players back would be to take the job, unmercifully fire every other coach, then become a different person than they were when DV was here. I don't see AS doing that because of his loyalty to DV.

Why not?

I could see them dumping everyone but Gun, and maybe Karmelowicz..... :hmmm:

You did see LJ get stuffed three times in a row last week against the NYG. LJ should have been able to pick up the blitz. Poor execution, not poor playcalling.

yea ... well, that's a completely different question


if it takes dropping everyone to get new defensive coaches then buh-bye to Al.


but if these defensive coaches stay then it has nothing to do with AL and everything to do with Carl.

I say change a lot of the coaches and players. Keep the ones who've been successful is what I'm saying....

I'd say 10-12 players need cut; and an equal number of coaches....I think that would go along way toward "righting" the ship, if those cut are the ones deserving of being shown the door:

Bartee, Bell, Woods, Hicks, etc.....Guinta, Dean, Hairston, etc.....maybe Wesley and Sims, maybe Gun and Karmelowicz....

Why get cute? 9 yards to score and 1st and goal after moving the ball on the ground and previously scoring two rushing touchdowns (from 11 yards and 1 yard).

Johnson has problems with pass protection from lack of game experience in the NFL, everyone knows it. When Trent misses the previous pass because of pressure why the hell would you take your fullback out and run another pass play in that situation.

That's not Vermeil, thats Saunders.

Carl will hire Gunther to be HC before Al, so it's all moot anyway.

and what about the other bazillion drives that did work?


what about the fact that we've had arguably the best offense in the league since Saunders 2nd season here?



the problem with this team is defense and overall coaching


Saunders and the offense is the single bright spot.

WTF would lead you to think that? It took them 2 years too long to get rid of Robinson, and they didn't even fire him.

Now you are talking about "mixing it up"---the perpetual dilemma faced by all Offensive Coordinators.

If Offensive Coordinators become too predictable, that's the death of an offense. When mixing it and and getting cute works, OCs are a genius; when it doesn't work, they aren't "making adjustments" or should have gone with "what was working." It's a Catch 22 for them....

Do you go with "what works" and get stopped, as in the LJ four straight times at the goal line.....? Or do you "get cute" and score on 4th and goal at the goal-line--with no time-outs and 3 seconds on the clock.....no one really expected that

Just for the record, I don't hate Saunders and I think he's a good offensive coordinator even though I do think he makes some bad decisions from time to time in situations where he expects perfect execution when its not likely.

I just don't really want to have another, perhaps even more offensive minded coach and continue on this greatest show on grass path with no defense to back it up.

We've spent so much money on offense over the years that we rarely had money to spend on defensive talent and for whatever reason most of it that we brought in stunk.

I'm also not real sure how well the current offense will work without extremely talented and atheletic linemen like Shields and Roaf who will eventually retire.

I would just rather have Saunders as a coordinator with a head coach that was geared towards fixing the defense while keeping the running game in tact.

I would really hate to go through what the Rams went through post Vermeil with an over anxious offensive coordinator that thought he could outwit everyone.

Since when is taking a simple 5 step drop to pass the ball "getting cute"?
The Chiefs had been moving the ball in the air and on the ground.
LJ was asked to block or chip Scott F'n Fujita - not Merriman, not Freeney, not Jason Taylor, not Michael Strahan. If they can't rely on him to block an at best average linebacker they better grab a HB in the first round of the draft this year.

Four words for you:

Dick Vermiel is gone. :D

Nice work.

I think the current stench is contagious. Anyone who has been here for the whole thing and has been one of DV's guys is infected and needs to go. If not then the stench may be knocked down a notch but it will continue to breed and reappear at the worst possible time.

I don't think anyone could argue that since Saunders AND Vermeil have been here the offense has been one of the best in the league, primarily due to an extremely athletic offensive line and a very good running game. Our bread an butter has been running off left tackle, running to the edges and screen passes throughout most of that time.

We've also had one of the worst defenses in the league throughout that time, a big reason for it is the highlight on the offense and the big money spent there.

Uh-huh. and before that, it was Gunther who had Kurt Schottenheimer and Jimmy Raye forced on him.

Like I said, why do you think the chiefs are going to suddenly change the way they've always done business?

i doubt that's gonna happen

we aren't going to keep saunders has OC and go out and hire a Head coach.


we either promote Al or he's gone imo ... been too many teams snooping around about giving him a HC chance.

Well lets see, thus far we moved the ball on the ground effectively in the endzone, we needed to take time off the clock and were in a perfect position to score.

Don't you at least attempt a run on first and goal on the 9 yard line?

I believe that what happened in NY has a lot to do with offense as well as the defense. Al ran LJ on the left side or up the middle constantly but more to the left behind Roaf on the weak side. When they ran on the right side (the side that Welbourn was manhandling Strahan), the strong side, LJ had space to work with and made some great gains but that was to far and few between. The obsession that Al gets with a specific package is exhausting and at best futile. It tends to narrow the opportunities to succeed for our offense. It showed in the Buffalo game, the conservativeness of the paralell package inserted in the 2nd half of the Philly game, and it killed us in NY Saturday. His lack of trust in what hasn't yet been proven has been the Chiefs demise. The defense on the other hand, each individual in each position has to be trusted to do their part and the culmination of both failures Saturday spelled disaster for us. I do not want Saunders as a HC for the Chiefs for that reason. I want DV to retire and we need to clean house of the assistant defensive coaches and allow Gunther to hire his own. I like Gunther, his aggresiveness, his fire and passion. We need an offensive minded head coach that allows Trent to also call his own audibles and make changes on the line. We need a deep threat receiver to draw the attention from our TE's and make LBs drop back to allow space for LJ to cut and run. And quite possibly a QB that has the deep ball threat that Trent doesn't have.

Getting cute is a singleback formation with 4 wide on 2nd and goal from the 9 yard line with a minute on the clock after the previous pass play failed primarily due to pressure on the QB.

I'm sorry but 1st and 10 on the 20, sure, 1st and goal on the 9, timeout, 2nd and goal on the 9, you pull your fullback when the protection previsouly broke down while he was in and pass again. Thats just silly.

LJ was able to block Ware one-on-one in a similar situation earlier in that game. You saw this week that three straight runs doesn't necessarily cut it either.

Okay on that specific play or what was supposed to be a play, I agree with you. But that was one bad call. I have nothing but good things to say about Al Saunders, he has knowledge of the game and typically brings it to the table.

Pretty much how I feel.

Alas, if Carl Peterson stays the entire tumor has not been excised and it will just grow back.

When? The only other times we got close to the rezone we ran the ball and scored.

Perhaps when they were able to spread the field but not tight in the redzone. The entire point I was trying to make was it was taking an unnecessary risk in that situation. There was absolutely no reason to believe what had been working well already wouldn't work again, as well as we knew we had the lead and the clock was running out. They needed to control the clock, not throw incompletions to stop it.

They could have ran 3 run plays for 9 yards and if we didn't punch it in at least we could have kicked a field goal and went into the half with a 7 point lead and the momentum on our side.

Well I won't continue to argue about it, if you don't think that specific play calling was terrible then it certainly wouldn't do any good. Saunders did call the plays right two times previously in the redzone, both times we ran the ball and both times we scored.

A faint hope that the Chiefs, CP, and the Hunts have finally learned their lessons from past mistakes, and realize that their opportunity to get a ring, in the foreseeable future, is slippin' away... :shrug:

I agree, for the most part Saunders does well but in almost every game he tries to get cute in a bad situation a couple of times. Sometimes it works and everybody hails him a genius and sometimes it doesn't and we get what we have there.

I just don't agree with taking unnecessary risks in situations when you have the game under control by doing what you do well. Thats generally when you lose control.

I'd like to know in DV's tenure here how many red-zone turnovers we've had, and how many came on passing plays (INT or sack/fumble).

And I'd like to know how many were in 2001 and how many since.

I pretty much agree with that; but CP, apparently, is going NO WHERE.

How do we make the best of a bad situation then? Keep Saunders as HC, and gut the entire defensive coaching staff.....adding a few key players in the draft and FA.

In today's NFL, that might be enough... :hmmm:

What are you going to do about the OL? The WR? The FB? Backup RB? Backup QB? It's bad all over.

How many times have we been in that situation and scored on a similar call in the past five years? Quite a few, I suspect.

I understand your point, but it's all just a guessing game.

If you think Al has had problems with "playcalling" need I remind you of the names: Jimmy Raye and Paul Hackett? :spock:

Seriously, every OC in the league is second guessed to death, when they fail; and lauded when they succeed. It's the nature of the beast. I just think we need to look at the big picture....the history: that's what separates Saunders from Raye, Hackett, and other wanna-be OCs.

Because defense wins championships, and a tough defense starts with the HC. The last thing we need is some OC that enjoys calling cute plays in charge of our already aweful D.

I think the Bears should be our blueprint. Bring in a guy with a simple defense that smashes people in the mouth. No 2" playbook, no 500 blitzes, no cute pre-snap motion. Put the guys in position and play your game. If the guys you have can't do it, get new guys. Look at the Bears roster, it's not like they are filled with big-time names on the defensive side of the ball. (outside Urlacher) They run and they TACKLE (what a concept)

DT

Well, in that time we had Priest Holmes in the backfield blocking, not a 2000 yard college rushing back that rarely pass blocked in his career and hasn't been on the NFL field long enough to fully understand the technique, hence why most of the time they will pull LJ on obvious passing downs.

Guessing games are one thing but I've always been under the impression that you go with what you know works until its been proven that it doesn't, specifically in a very obvious situation.

If Roaf retires, LT is the only "big" problem I forsee....and, yes, that's big. Either we draft to fill it, or it becomes FA priority number one. WR? I think Parker, and maybe Thorpe can fill in adequately assuming Kennison is back. Adding a FA would be nice though. TRich's successor may already be on the roster: anyone remember TRich's "stock" when Kimble Anders was the man? Maybe Cruz; maybe a FA, or Wilson converted? Backup RBs will be availble in FA. QBOTF is a draft gamble regardless; may be available in FA.

Bad all over? One starter to replace. Three starters need an understudy to groom. We still have a lot of the pieces in place, IMO.

I agree.

But what works in one game and situation, against one team....isn't necessarily going to work against another team, in a slightly different situation necessarily.

It's only obvious because it didn't work, that time. How many OTHER times, on other plays has LJ MADE that block? I honestly don't know the answer, but I suspect he's MADE the block more than a few times....

Being an OC is a tough, tough job. It involves a lot of preparation and study, no doubt. However, there is an element of educated-"guessing" that is always present. When they succeed they look like a genius; when they fail, they are a goat.

Al's been much more of a "genious" than a goat.

Has he had good and experienced players? Yup. But there have also been a lot of good players on teams who haven't achieved what our offense has achieved over the past five years.

That's a good response. That is a reasonable take, IMO. If we want a possible return to Martyball, then it makes sense.

I can buy that. Rep.

IMHo there's alot to be said for continuity for an offense that has consistently been among the best over the past few years, rather than restarting with someone else's scheme.

One side of the ball works. Keep that part. Fix the part that doesn't.

I understand that but what I'm pointing out specifically are instances in the same game, when you get away from what works and end up shooting yourself in the foot.

In defense of Marty, he never had a back like Larry Johnson in the backfield... Maybe Barry Word comes close to LJ's power/speed, but I think LJ is clearly a step above that. Just because you bring in a defensive minded coach, does not mean you have to go conservative on the other side of the ball. The bears are that way because they don't have a very good (proven) QB or RB.

DT

Unfortunately, given the how this FO operates, I'm not sure we can hire Saunders as HC, and dump most or all of the defensive guys. If we can, I think that should be option number one.

That sounds simple enough, it just seems that offensive minded HCs never seem to be able to put a good defense on the field. I would point to our drafting of Kris Wilson (despite how bad our defense was/is) as a prime example. We need defense, and we draft a "toy" for Al Saunders. And thus far that "toy" has been played with about as much as a chia pet.

DT

Stupid cute plays on offense will appear on defense (not that it would hurt our d that much). But can you imagine Saunders pulling something out of his ass like having all the defensive line drop back in coverage, the linebackers rushing to the sidelines and having the secondary crash the middle?

yeah, that's why not

OMFG!

ROFL ROFL

YES!

The sad thing is that the play would probably work, but 5 missed tackles later the opponent would score anyway.....

DT

Marty had several good backs, but he'd never commit the ball to them. Even after Okoye's league-leading 1989 campaign, he just HAD to bring in Word to share carries.

Marty was his won worst enemy, and still is.

We CAN get a defensive-minded HC without having to go through Martyball again...

I don't want him because I view him as a mini DV. Perhaps that's incorrect but I want the DV stain removed from this team.

You mean like Greg Robinson did against the Colts in the playoffs?

So, what does your short list of such candiates look like?

at one time the Chiefs had the largest & most expensive coaching staff in the NFL. If they can dump that bloat & keep Saunders fine.

Mike Trgovac and Kirk Ferentz (for selfish reasons) would be my top 2 choices.

Like I've been saying. :thumb: That is the intelligent way to go with this team. Rep.

Except that you refuse to accept the very real possibility that we retain Saunders but the offense still changes.

It happened with the defense when Gunther became HC, it can happen again.

Saunders is NOT a guarantee, only a hope. And I'd rather pin my hope on someone who hasn't already been part of five years of Chiefs futility.

I could live with either of those two, from what I've read.

What makes you think there's ANY "guarantee" of a good system on either side of the ball from ANY other candidate out there? Saunders has learned from Coryel and Vermeil. I feel reasonable assurance that his 'O' will be similar to theirs. I also consider DV as close to the optimum neglector of defense. I bet Saunders won't be as much. When I listen to his interviews he always strikes me as intelligent and logical. The logical part means he'll be less given to emotional stuff like unnecessary loyalties that have been DV's Achiles heal. Who knows? Billick's defenses haven't been too shabby.

I never said there was a guarantee with a new coach.

It's all assumption. And if I'm being forced to guess, I'm going to go with the guy that hasn't been here and been part of 5 years of failure.

This team SERIOUSLY needs an enema.

I'm amazed that no one has brought up the concept that quite possibly, there isn't a single person on this earth that is more sick of our defense screwing up his masterpiece more than Al Saunders....

Very true.

He might just be waiting for the first chance to coach somewhere else...