Peter King: Common denominator among five bad NFL teams...
 

MMQB Mail: Common denominator among five bad NFL teams

Seems to me we have nine bad teams in football right now. For all of you in Buffalo, Chicago and Seattle who want me to include your team in this grouping, sorry. You've show too many signs of life to make the Bottom Nine.

The worst teams fall into three categories. Separating the badness:

The Blow It Up And Start Over Division: Tampa Bay (0-7), St. Louis (0-7), Cleveland (1-6), Kansas City (1-6), Detroit (1-5).

It All Starts With The Quarterback Division: Oakland (2-5), Washington (2-5), Carolina (2-4).

They Never Should Have Drafted Vince Young Division: Tennessee (0-6).

The last four teams have quarterback problems that will keep them down until solved. JaMarcus Russell is a disaster; we don't need to see any more of him to know his pocket presence and awareness are horrible and his accuracy just as bad. Jason Campbell far too often looks for the easy checkdown than for the open throw downfield, and watching the first half of the Monday nighter, I'm convinced his pocket awareness, too, is severely flawed. In Carolina, John Fox has to be wondering if Jake Delhomme is Steve Sax. I know I am. In Tennessee, Jeff Fisher has to see if Vince Young has a chance; there is no sense playing Kerry Collins now. But I have little faith that Young will work there, and the Titans must not either, based on Fisher's unwillingness to play him significant minutes.

But the five teams in the Blow It Up Division have three things in common. If I'm the owner of any of them, I think it's foolish to think anything but stay the course and let's evaluate everything after the season. The only place among the five that I think has even a small chance of getting blown up in-season is Cleveland. But that shouldn't be judged until January.

The common denominators among the Bucs, Rams, Browns, Chiefs and Lions:

1. (Mostly) New front offices trying to change the culture. All but St. Louis have new general managers, and with the Rams, new coach Steve Spagnuolo and COO Kevin Demoff have joined willing agent-of-change GM Bill Devaney in changing everything about the organization. The Bucs had the fifth-oldest team in football last year; now they're the third-youngest. Eric Mangini and George Kokinis would change everything about the Browns (I think including the nickname) if they could; that's how far gone they think they found this organization. Scott Pioli was given a free hand to reconstruct the Chiefs in his vision from the ground, and he's in the 10th month of probably a three-year building job doing that. In Detroit, Martin Mayhew (even though he's a Matt Millen leftover) has already shown his smarts by getting first-, third- and fifth-round picks for perennial underachiever Roy Willams, and he's found a willing partner for change in new-thinking Jim Schwartz. I think Mayhew deserves to be judged on his own.

2. Coaches trying to establish newness takes a while. Ask the Chiefs about the four-and-a-half-hour practice days (two sessions) in training camp of Todd Haley compared to the much-softer hand of Herman Edwards. Haley will now be tested by this Larry Johnson Twitter criticism. At Tampa, Raheem Morris probably got his job a year too soon, but the Bucs were worried about losing him to another team in 2010. In Detroit, Schwartz changed the weight room to almost all free weights to build strength for a team he thought got pushed around too much. Romeo Crennel was the benevolent uncle in Cleveland, Mangini the marine uncle. (Not saying he's better, just saying he's totally different.) Steve Spagnuolo got to know everyone in the building in St. Louis and promoted team to the point where he took down all individual current photos of players in the building.

3. The quarterbacks are all struggling and/or hurt. This week, 35 quarterbacks qualify for the NFL's quarterback stats, having played enough to justify inclusion. The five quarterbacks of these teams -- Matt Cassel, Marc Bulger, Matthew Stafford (though out currently with a knee injury), Josh Johnson and Derek Anderson -- are 25th, 27th, 29th, 33rd and 35th in passer rating, and also all in the bottom third in average per pass attempt, the more significant passing category.

Cassel and Stafford are their teams' quarterbacks of the future and are going through growing pains. Anderson and Bulger are almost certain to be replaced long-term with draftees or free-agents in 2010. Johnson is an interesting prospect, but Josh Freeman has the best shot to be the Bucs' long-term quarterback. When young quarterbacks struggle, rebuilding teams are almost always awful. It's a fact of NFL life.

Which team will turn it around in 2010? My guess is Detroit and Kansas City have the best chances because they have what appear to be strong GMs, strong coaches and quarterbacks who look like they have a chance. I don't expect Mangini to make it long-term, and I'm dubious about Morris because Tampa's going to lose for awhile longer -- maybe quite awhile. Spagnuolo should have a shot, unless whoever buys the Rams wants a big star as coach. Schwartz and Haley will have two or three years to prove themselves.

We're all just guessing on these teams, but the ones that turn around are usually the ones with strong coaches, consistent front offices and competent quarterbacks.

***

I like Shaun Hill as a leader and a player, but I'd have done the same thing Mike Singletary did Monday -- name Alex Smith the quarterback of his team for the foreseeable future. Simple reason: He gave the team a spark it hadn't shown in six quarters, and with the NFC West being taken over in the past couple of weeks by Arizona, time is running out to establish a toehold in the division.

The other reason: Smith hung around the 49ers' facility during the bye week and threw to Michael Crabtree. When they got together in the second half of Sunday's loss at Houston, they looked like they were very much on the same page. Crabtree, who played a surprisingly high 48 snaps in the game, will be force-fed the offense because Singletary thinks he's ready to be force-fed. He might be a bigger factor in this offense down the stretch than any of us predicted.

***

Mail time...

• NINER NATION WANTS MORE CRABTREE. From Armine Khansari of Houston: "Michael Crabtree: five catches for 56 yards, and a 20-plus-yarder brought back due to a penalty. He was on the field for almost every offensive snap and looks to be in great shape. I say he's legit Peter. What were your impressions?''

He's a little faster than I thought -- or at least played faster at Houston. And he'll be on the rug at Indy on Sunday, so that should help too. The couple of isolated replays I saw showed a receiver comfortable with the cuts and playing confidently; he wasn't intimidated by anything the Texans threw at him from what I saw. A good start.

• OVERSEAS FOOTBALL. From Jeff of Atlanta: "Good point on fans in Tampa never seeing Tom Brady, etc., because of the game overseas, but don't you HAVE to make that overseas game a cross-conference game? Otherwise, a conference game -- or even worse, a division game -- that might decide a playoff spot is lost, and the team that gave up that home date is REALLY penalized.''

I'm sure that's what teams will argue. But if I'm a fan, I tell my owner, "How can you rob me of my one chance to see Tom Brady EVER? I pay good money for these tickets. Take away the Jake Delhomme game, please. But not the Brady game.''

• THE REDSKINS SHOULD HAVE TOO. From Greg of Los Angeles: "Given their O-line problems this season, should the Packers have traded up or down to take one of the tackles in this year's draft? Michael Oher was available for a long time on draft day.''

Lots of teams are looking at Oher playing the left side for Baltimore and keeping Joe Flacco clear. Good point. I can't argue with you. I think Oher will be a vastly over-producing player compared to some of the men who went before him in the 2009 draft.

• POINT TAKEN. From Tom of Annapolis, Md.: "Once again Peter, I enjoyed your column, but I take issue with you and some others about Adrian Peterson's hit on William Gay. Gay got there on a bad angle and never had a chance to break down. Yes, he got wacked, but "ruined"? No. Peterson left the game after that, and his backup gave the game away. Gay never missed a play.''

Interesting point. But Chester Taylor is in the game a lot anyway, and you don't know if Peterson would have stayed in the game after that play or gone, depending on the play called and the formation used. I admire Gay for hanging in there, but that's a play that will haunt him for a while.

• PITTSBURGH. From Chris Palmer of St. Thomas, Ontario: "After Pittsburgh and Cincinnati beat two teams from the NFC North this weekend, who do you think stands a better chance to win the AFC North? Do you think the other team will be the wild card, or does Baltimore still have a shot?''

I like the Steelers. I think they're better on defense. If the Steelers can run it even a little bit, they should beat Cincinnati in the rematch and win the division. I like the Bengals to be a wild card, and I wouldn't count out Baltimore yet. I think they've played better than their three-game losing streak indicates.

• SHOUTOUT TO ASHWAUBENON HIGH. From Chad of Green Bay: "I happen to coach at Ashwaubenon High and take exception to your taking a shot at our receiving corps. Sure Al Harris and Charles Woodson could hold down our receivers for a while, but comparing us to the Browns? Ouch!''

They play some fine football in the Green Bay area. I've been to two Friday night games there over the years.

• COMES WITH THE TURF. From Ashley of Cincinnati: "Man, those crossword comments were harsh. It's like they think you won the Nobel Peace Prize prematurely.''

I know the Sunday crossword people, and believe me, they're not big Monday Morning QB fans.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...#ixzz0VFDDXrLJ

ROFL

i am guessing the steve sax reference is because sax had to move to first base because he couldn't throw accurately anymore? Damn that is a shitty reference if I demonpenz lord of the dumb knowledge in sports has to figure that one out.

Peter King is a moron. No one should ever post his work. Hes too busy bitching about coffee, melted Kit-Kats, Westin Hotels, and the terrors of travel (which is all expensed) to even know whats going on outside of Brett Favres panties.

Which team will turn it around in 2010? My guess is Detroit and Kansas City have the best chances because they have what appear to be strong GMs, strong coaches and quarterbacks who look like they have a chance.

Here comes Mecca, Dane, OTWP and Deez Nutz to tell us this is all BS and the organization is a total bust at this point. Blah,blah,blah.

Any negative opinion article is quoted as fact and anything resembling a positive is regarded as BS.

The exact things being bitched about around here as the biggest mistakes are the 3 reasons PK thinks we have a chance to turn it around next year. Interesting.

What he said about the Chiefs is true though. To many people on here just bish and moan about what is currently is going on and don't look to the future. We aren't going to be anything this year, next year, or possibly even two years from now. We have a lot of work to do and we have the money and hopefully the picks to correct the mishaps of the last half decade.

no, its because sax and steve howe used to do blow off of hookers asses in the 80's, so naturally he thinks delhomme is doing it too

If this team has a chance to "turn it around" next year...we should start seeing progress soon. I don't know about anyone else, I'm not seeing that progress YET.

Peter King lost all crediblility with me when he thought Larry Johnson was a smart guy. The duud kant evin spill korreckly

ROFL

That depends... on just how many guys on this team will even be here next year.

I think this is the key thing in there. Pioli didn't take this job to fit in the "six to eight" players that Herm thought we were away from competing for the playoffs, he took over this team to rip it apart and build an entirely new team from ground up, I'm guessing because he has a philosophy he believes in, he saw an owner who was going to have the patience and give him the support to do it, and he saw a team that he felt was fundamentally flawed and would never be in a position to compete for Super Bowls in the direction they were going.

Now we gotta pray that Pioli knows what he's doing, because he's basically going about this like the Chiefs are an expansion team (and, at 4-12 and 2-14, they essentially were)...

It's all speculations. We've all said that Denver is going to get whooped but see where they are now. I hope he's right and we turn it around next year.

Yeah, that is true, but it sure sucks right now.

As Clark pointed out last week... the Donkey's were 8-8 last year, we were 2-14. No matter how big of a mess they had this off-season and the perceived lack of a Super Bowl team, they still had a fair amount more talent than we did. They plugged in some players, changed up their scheme and it worked. Apparently they weren't that far off as we all thought?

You mean there is hope?

But, but, but...
The Four Horsemen told me all was lost... What gives?

Sure, there's hope. There's been hope since 1960.

I disagree.

I thought the chiefs were headed in the right direction, they simply needed a new director.

I still believe that Tank and Turk could have been legitimate contibrutors ina 43 with Dorsey as the anchor.

I also believe that had the right "director" been hired, we would have addressed the O-Line, QB and WR in free agency and the draft.

We simply needed to tweak the philosophy on both sides of the ball and continue ot add talent.

We didn't need to blow the whole thing up.

And it really depends on the outlook you take on it. There are many different ways to build an organization. You can say that Denver plugged in some holes and off they went, but if they lose in the first round again, did anything of significance really change? If we stayed the course with Herm and Carl and brought in those six to eight players that Herm thought they were away from getting back to the playoffs, only to lose in the first round again, would it really have been better?

I'm thinking (hoping) that Pioli has this philosophy on what it will take to build a Super Bowl champion, not just some team that is making the playoffs at 9-7 or 10-6, occasionally going 13-3 thanks to lucky bounces in the regular season, and losing in the first or second round, and he wants to try and build it from the ground up. Again, the jury is out, but I think that's why you see him getting rid of anyone and everyone that doesn't fit what he's looking for...

Well, it looks like I did the right thing with Sunday ticket for a second year.

Except people forget this isn't the 1st year of the rebuild. Herm had already blown up the building 2 years ago and, based on whats happened on the field, this team has regressed even further. Some people are just sick and tired of seeing the same old bullshit over and over and being fed the same bill of goods. This regime is doing the same thing Herm did when he came in. Guys like DJ and Page are to Halioli what guys like Wiegmann and Dante Hall were to Herm. Some people are smart enough to realize the reasoning it's all just a bunch of hot air.

The Cardinals were a 9-7 team that was one play away from a SB champion. To win one takes a lot of things happening just right along the way, some of it is luck. The best team doesn't always win. You need to get the team to a highly competitive level first, but there really isn't one true blueprint to win a SB....there are many blueprints.

While I agree that this isn't the first year of the rebuild, it is Pioli's first year.

I don't care who was the HC or GM, when you change those positions you basically have to start over. I'm glad that the Chiefs it this way.

I hate the fact that we suck ass, I really do. However, I do see a light far off in the distance. We all thought Herm, or at least I did, was a good talent guy. I think we were wrong. How many players did we draft or sign that nobody has wanted after being cut.

The best thing the Chiefs could do is cut Larry Johnson's ass and anyone else who is a cancer to this team. Now is the time to do it.

What gives me hope is that we have a QB who I think can be the guy, a WR, and some defensive talent. We have a long way to go, but a core of players is starting to emerge.

Turk and Tank like the rest of Carls draft picks sucked dude.

Very well said.

Rebuilding was essentially restarted when they decided to go 3-4 or bust. Up until that point, most of the rebuilding efforts on D had gone into the DLine. Pioli and Haley set the rebuilding back themselves when they decided they had to switch to a 3-4.

And the youth movement was really put on a back burner too. I hate to see that. All the old guys they brought it haven't served much purpose IMO.

Rainbows and Pegasus?

Machismo.

I personally like the Steve Miller Band Pegasus a little more.

Actually Gretz posted a piece a while back that showed this team was younger than they were last year (Tony G out, Donnie Edwards out, McIntosh out, etc)...

Great response. The insight and analysis are unbelievable. You have once again posted irrefutable proof to back your opinion of the situation.

Did you, Mecca, Dane, and OTWP sit around and color this with crayons? Did your moms make milk and cookies for you and set you down for a nap around 2:00pm?

This is fact.

LMAO. Keep the personal attacks coming, especially since I often direct them at you. Embarrassing.

"Irrefutable proof"? You must find just about every subject outside of mathematics pretty unconvincing. Absolutes, after all, are the hallmarks of effective argumentation.

IMHO Where Clark Screwed up is he let Herm and Peterson start the rebuild. They should have gutted everything at the same time and started from scratch. Instead they let Herm and Peterson screw up the start and now Pioli and Haley are digging out of their piss poor talent hole.

Sounds like presidential politics doesn't it?

This.
Posted via Mobile Device

No personal attacks, if you are going to insinuate we all live in a fairly tale land of imagined reality then you get a response.

We all have opinions. Some of us don't act like our opinion is the only reality.

Opinions are like assholes, sometimes they stink.

I agree with the 3-4 piece, but am not so sure about the old guys. They were never anything more than stopgaps. Fortunately they are paid like it.

Hopefully they are providing some leadership and work ethic that other ineffective placeholders would not have. Before the homer flaming begins, I acknowledge that there is no way to tell, as all we have is the old ****ers.

I do wish they would have brought in SOME talent.
Posted via Mobile Device

I think it's hilarious that 99% of the time, Peter King is looked at a ****ing reerun around here yet if he writes something that people agree with, he's a genius.

Typical 'Planet.

LMAO

I hope you don't get a neck strain from constantly looking over your shoulder there, Sport.

Are you joking?

Denver has one the youngest teams in the league. They have a very but excellent offensive line, one premiere receiver and one very good receiver returner, an excellent rookie running back and a young, smart QB. They're set for years to come AND have more draft choices from the Chicago trade next year.

Not to mention that their defense is Top Five and you've got the makings of a very, very good Broncos teams for the foreseeable future.

So?

It won't matter a lick if they're young but untalented.

So far, none of the draft choices brought in by Pioli have made any type of impact, unlike last year where Flowers, Carr, Albert and Charles all made an immediate impact.

ROFL

I'll admit that I'm giving Pioli the benefit of the doubt like others, but this King article and his "Cassel growing pains, and great QB" is a definite stroking of the patriots cock with a golden wash rang.

I disagree.

Tank was showing flashes last year, and lined up next to Dorsey, who is making strides this year, in a 43, would have given us a solid interior, with a servicable Hali at LDE.

We needed a good RDE to line up with them, with Turk, who showed flashes even while playing in the wrong position, playing a pivitol role as depth.

Here's an absolute.

Marcellus is a useless dick.

Just depends on what you perspective is... I am sure the Pioli and Haley haters would jump all over his knob if he wrote something Mecca and co liked....

Yeah typical planet....

Exactly what I said, only said differently.

No. No, no, no, no, no.

Peter King is ****ing hated amongst Chiefs fans. Every single ****ing time anyone links one of his articles, the 'Planet hates on it.

Use the search and look it up.

I, on the other hand, like Peter King and read MMQB religiously and have for more than a decade. I've been an SI subscriber for much longer than that.

So what is your take on the article, you still haven't stated that.

Why is Scott Pioli under any obligation to continue any of the "rebuilding" that Peterson and Edwards started? If he disagrees with anything they did, he'll blow that up as he should. Again I will repeat, look at any successful rebuilding jobs over the years. They usually got worse before they got better as the team was blown up. Gibbs started 0-5, Noll, Walsh, Jimmy Johnson, and I saw it with both Parcells and Belichick in NE. Relax people.
Posted via Mobile Device

I read Peter King each and every week so his take is not surprising to me. He's always liked Cassel and Pioli and has said he thinks Haley will probably succeed. He mentioned that it appears that the QB is in place and it appears that Haley is a strong coach that will be given 3 years.

I can tell you that it appeared to me that Haley was the right hire before the season started and it appeared that Matt Cassel was going to perform okay based on his two preseason performances. But at this point, you could make the argument either way.

In my opinion, I haven't seen anything that's convince me that Cassel is the long term solution at QB nor have I seen anything to convince me that Haley is the long-term solution at head coach.

But, we're only seven games in. There's plenty of time for that opinion to change.

Peter King is an idiot.

I still like reading MMQB and the Tuesday Edition each week.

:D

I don't read King except when he's linked here.

But I do hear constantly smacking his gums in interviews on ESPN Radio and on SNF pregame.

Every time he offers up an opinion I just wish I could tell him to shut the **** up.

I remember going into the draft last year, he talked for about 5 minutes about Brian Brohm on the Dan Patrick, basically calling NFL scouts idiots, because Brohm was in his opinion, "Far and away the best QB in the draft".

He offers up opinions like that in every interview.

Yeah, I know.

But there are so very few NFL writers these days that'll I'll pretty much take whatever coverage I can get.

I really liked Dr. Z. I know people hate him too but I really like his knowledge of offensive line play.

And I like people with an opinion, whether I agree with it or not.

Dr. Z has always been one of my favorites.

Dr Z is pretty good. He came right out and immediately predicted the Giants would get heat on Brady up the middle and upset the Patriots in the Super Bowl.
Posted via Mobile Device

This.

King didn't exactly go out on a limb.

He said this:

When he would have said this, had he actually believed it:

FYP

Eh well technically Succop has. Your right though Piolis first draft was suck.

Well, it really depends what you mean by "immediate impact". If immediate impact is starting and putting up stats, then yeah sure. My measure of immediate impact is do they make your team any better. So if you're making an immediate impact on a 2-14 team, and this year you're making an immediate impact on a 1-6 team, how much of a real impact are you making?

That makes entirely too much sense.

Not to mention the positions we drafted were mainly D-line (3-4 DE) which take some time to develop. Not like a corner who can come in and be as noticeable immediately.

Donald Washington was a known project as well. Just like Morgan was supposed to be 2 years ago.

You can be an impact player on an awful team, Calvin Johnson is.

Dwayne Bowe used to be.

Now he gets 5 targets a game.

Dwayne Bowe gets the same targets as Lance Long, I don't understand it.

It also helps if he can stay on the field and not fight through nagging injuries.

I think this team just needs a couple ugly years to build talent.

I don't think there's any mystery to it.

Well if we use those years drafting types like Tyson Jackson it's going to take more than a couple.

Louis Murphy has been targeted more than Bowe.

Louis.

Murphy.

And that's with Oakland having 30 fewer pass attempts.

So either our coach doesn't call plays for him or our QB frankly doesn't like him...I wonder which one it is.

ok, heres some peter king knowledge:

"Now, the Cowboys might be completely back and they might not— but what I like is that Romo is playing like you have to play sports."

Holy shit. Thats the most inane ****ery i have ever read. Peter King might be a writer...and he might not...but what I like is that he writes like he has to write.

Christ hes useless.

Excuse me?

This is like "that depends on the definition of is".

Tyson Jackson is not an impact player, period, nor has he made an immediate impact. The defense has not improved over last year.

Alex Magee has made no impact. Say what you will but Charles and to some extent Cottam impacted the Chiefs positively last year.

If the Chiefs had taken Knowshon Moreno, Percy Harvin, Jeremy Maclin, Michael Crabtree or even Michael Oher, the Chiefs would have seen immediate impact.

Tyson Jackson's position is as such that it'll never make an impact. The other guys in Magee, Washington, Brown, Lawrence, Williams and O'Connell haven't had any impact, either.

For a team that was 2-14 last year with an extremely young roster, I fully expected Pioli to choose players that could make a difference and make an immediately impact.

So far, that has not been the case.

I can only speak to the game I went to, but Bowe was rarely if ever Cassel's first read - he was usually on the other side of the field.

Once we were in the 2-minute drill, however, he began getting the first look.

Odd.

How do you know that? What if Jackson turns out to be a top lineman?
Posted via Mobile Device

He's a guy I had in my mock with our 4th round pick.

He would have been a nice complementary receiver to Bowe IMO.

It'll sicken me to know end if he ends up with better numbers than Bowe while playing with the worst QB in the league, bar none.

All that 3-4 defensive ends are expected to do is swallow up blockers so that the linebackers can rush the QB and make plays.

He'll have to be the second coming Richard Seymour to make an impact.

How do you know he won't?
Posted via Mobile Device

Huh?

Are you telling me that it's going to take a "few years" for a guy that was taken #3 overall time to "develop"?

#3 overall? If that's the case, he's the wrong ****ing guy.


Morgan was drafted in the 2008 draft. By my count (and I could be wrong), that was last year.

After 7 games Richard Seymour wasn't making much of an impact while Patriot fans were still wishing they drafted David Terrell.
Posted via Mobile Device