ChiefsPlanet - View Single Post - Chiefs Why people are disappointed: Exhibit A

DaWolf · 12-14-2009, 02:15 PM

There are a few reasons I would give Pioli some more time:

1) Hunt didn't hire him to just come in and "fix" the existing team. He hired him to change the entire culture of the football side of the operations. Pioli said from the beginning that doing this would not happen overnight and that they may have to step back before moving forward. If Clark wanted to stay the course with the roster and culture in place, he should have promoted Kuharic and kept Herm around.

2) Pioli wasn't able to get his own personnel department and scouts set until after the draft, when contracts expired and new hires were available. Now this may not seem like a big deal or it may just be some excuse if you believe all personnel departments are created equally and it is just the top guy who makes all the calls, but I'll be curious to see if there is any difference this coming offseason.

3) Rookies usually can't be fully evaluated their first year. Some rooks look great and just fade after a few years, others bust out in the 2nd or 3rd year. I'm not going to sit here and say we had a great draft by any means, but I think you need to let the class mature a bit more before writing it off.

4) This is not new to Pioli, in New England they did a very similar thing in 2000, taking an 8-8 football team, getting rid of a bunch of guys and signing a bunch of scrubs, and going 5-11, and starting the next year off 1-3 before going on their run. Now they had a better core of veteran players in place to start with than we do, but I think the philosophy is to bring in guys who buy into the "system" and slowly start to build that roster. By year three, a lot of the guys starting or playing significant portions for us now should be valuable depth if the so called "process" works and better and better talent is brought in.

I agree that right now a lot of the moves look bad and we're not much better off than we were to start with. And if we don't have a significant talent influx this offseason, then something is amiss and you can go to the top there, because he's now had enough time not only to get his front office pieces in place, but he's had the time to get a firsthand look at the roster he has and who fits in and who doesn't.

Pioli may well be in over his head, and maybe he's not going to be able to get it done here. The biggest thing I have against him right now is not on the personnel front, but on the coaching hire front. Haley is bugging me more and more every week. I think the biggest reflection on a roster that isn't improving is the quality of the coaching. I don't care who you have playing, good coaches will always get their guys to improve as the year goes on. We're sinking. And we could arguably have three more wins with a better prepared football team. So if there are not some big changes on the staff this offseason, I don't think Pioli will have much of a chance even if he has an A+ draft this offseason...

12-14-2009, 02:15 PM	#45
DaWolf Cry havoc... Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10007725	There are a few reasons I would give Pioli some more time: 1) Hunt didn't hire him to just come in and "fix" the existing team. He hired him to change the entire culture of the football side of the operations. Pioli said from the beginning that doing this would not happen overnight and that they may have to step back before moving forward. If Clark wanted to stay the course with the roster and culture in place, he should have promoted Kuharic and kept Herm around. 2) Pioli wasn't able to get his own personnel department and scouts set until after the draft, when contracts expired and new hires were available. Now this may not seem like a big deal or it may just be some excuse if you believe all personnel departments are created equally and it is just the top guy who makes all the calls, but I'll be curious to see if there is any difference this coming offseason. 3) Rookies usually can't be fully evaluated their first year. Some rooks look great and just fade after a few years, others bust out in the 2nd or 3rd year. I'm not going to sit here and say we had a great draft by any means, but I think you need to let the class mature a bit more before writing it off. 4) This is not new to Pioli, in New England they did a very similar thing in 2000, taking an 8-8 football team, getting rid of a bunch of guys and signing a bunch of scrubs, and going 5-11, and starting the next year off 1-3 before going on their run. Now they had a better core of veteran players in place to start with than we do, but I think the philosophy is to bring in guys who buy into the "system" and slowly start to build that roster. By year three, a lot of the guys starting or playing significant portions for us now should be valuable depth if the so called "process" works and better and better talent is brought in. I agree that right now a lot of the moves look bad and we're not much better off than we were to start with. And if we don't have a significant talent influx this offseason, then something is amiss and you can go to the top there, because he's now had enough time not only to get his front office pieces in place, but he's had the time to get a firsthand look at the roster he has and who fits in and who doesn't. Pioli may well be in over his head, and maybe he's not going to be able to get it done here. The biggest thing I have against him right now is not on the personnel front, but on the coaching hire front. Haley is bugging me more and more every week. I think the biggest reflection on a roster that isn't improving is the quality of the coaching. I don't care who you have playing, good coaches will always get their guys to improve as the year goes on. We're sinking. And we could arguably have three more wins with a better prepared football team. So if there are not some big changes on the staff this offseason, I don't think Pioli will have much of a chance even if he has an A+ draft this offseason...
Posts: 6,798