Did y'all catch Squirmin Herman's spot on ESPN about Shady?

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I didn't say Herm did the better thing. I said that when Dorsey took over, there was an urgency to win now When Herm took over, there was an urgency to tear apart and rebuild. An Alex Smith like trade probably didn't make sense during the Herm years in way it did when Dorsey took over.

So Herm was horrible. Got it. And finding a QB when you don't have one always makes sense.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Did Herm do an amazing job? No. But wreck is an absurd word. Wreck implies that he left Pioli with a mess. He inherited a mess and left a really good situation for Pioli.

WTF? Really good position? I think there were 42 new guys on the 53 man roster in Pioli's first year. Yay. He had some cap money to work with BUT THERE WAS NO TALENT. That is a ****ing wreck.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Most GMs can hide blemishes on the roster by making a few big FA moves over 3 years, but also sprinkling in a ton of small moves. While adding Howard, Parker, etc... is brilliant, we also spent a shitload on Vance Walker, Fasano, etc.... So overall, we spent a lot of money on these stopgap small moves in total. I agree that we didn't do great from the FA haul. But it's also unfair to compare him to, say, Pioli who inherited $57M in cap space. $57M allows you a lot of wiggle room to **** up on guys like Winston and Boss and Breaston.

So because Herm had no cap room to work with by 2008, how many of these small moves did we hold off on making that could have hidden a few of our blemishes? Given Carl Peterson's history of trying to put lipstick on a pig (arguably, probably the only reason we signed Huard to that ridiculous contract), I think we're really undermining how radical a direction it was for Herm to say enough with this band-aid bullshit, let's do a true rebuild. Over the many years in Kansas City, it is one of the only times we made the bold move to commit to a rebuild of this size.

I'm not going to go through and find guys they should have signed. But if he were a good personnel man he would have found someone that could play. That's the bottom line. They find guys that can play.

Your problem is you drank the Herm Koolaid about rebuilds. Good teams don't need to suck awful shit to turnover their roster. Even with tremendous cap restrictions, that the Chiefs faced this season, Dorsey still managed to make this team better than last years team.

Teams that go all in and get early picks aren't rebuilding they just blow nutsack. Teams are built through the depth and bottom half of the roster not a couple elite guys. It goes back to finding production for value of the cap. By 2008 Herm had enough cap to go find some dudes that can play. And again, they don't have to be expensive ones. Good talent evaluators find guys that outplay their contract.

He did ****ing none of that. He found a small number of guys that could play and huge number of guys that couldn't. He wrecked the ****ing franchise. He took over a contender and transformed it into a 2 win ****ing team. So what he got a few guys that could play. The team was total ****ing trash. Because he wrecked it.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

WTF? Really good position? I think there were 42 new guys on the 53 man roster in Pioli's first year. Yay. He had some cap money to work with BUT THERE WAS NO TALENT. That is a ****ing wreck.

I'll repeat, this is the team Pioli could have rolled with in 2009:

QB - Sanchez (draft at #3)
RB - Charles / Battle / Cox
OL - Albert / Waters / Wade Smith / De la Puenta / Barry Richardson
WR - Bowe / nobody
TE - Gonzalez

DL - Hali / Dorsey / Edwards / Turk
LB - DJ / Pat Thomas / Demorrio Williams
CB - Carr / Flowers
S - Page / Pollard

K - Barth
P - Colquitt

Imaging bring in Haynesworth or Peppers. Vilma and/or Dansby. We had $57M to spend. Are you telling me this isn't the nucleus for a potentially pretty good team, even behind an average QB? That roster above is not a terrible one to inherit. Throw in the #3 pick in every round.

He took over a contender and transformed it into a 2 win ****ing team. So what he got a few guys that could play. The team was total ****ing trash. Because he wrecked it.

He didn't coach the contender to a playoff win in 2006. As I've said before, he wasn't a good game day coach. But that is total garbage to say he turned a contender into a 2-win team. That contender needed to be blown up. And make no mistake. It needed to be blown up. Not band-aided. Not fixed. It had to be blown up, and it took a bold decision to do it. And it should have saved us 3-5 years of painful rebuilding disguised as mediocrity but Pioli completely fumbled on it

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I'll repeat, this is the team Pioli could have rolled with in 2009:

QB - Sanchez (draft at #3)
RB - Charles / Battle / Cox
OL - Albert / Waters / Wade Smith / De la Puenta / Barry Richardson
WR - Bowe / nobody
TE - Gonzalez

DL - Hali / Dorsey / Edwards / Turk
LB - DJ / Pat Thomas / Demorrio Williams
CB - Carr / Flowers
S - Page / Pollard

K - Barth
P - Colquitt

Imaging bring in Haynesworth or Peppers. Vilma and/or Dansby. We had $57M to spend. Are you telling me this isn't the nucleus for a potentially pretty good team, even behind an average QB? That roster above is not a terrible one to inherit. Throw in the #3 pick in every round.


He didn't coach the contender to a playoff win in 2006. As I've said before, he wasn't a good game day coach. But that is total garbage to say he turned a contender into a 2-win team. That contender needed to be blown up. And make no mistake. It needed to be blown up. Not band-aided. Not fixed. It had to be blown up, and it took a bold decision to do it. And it should have saved us 3-5 years of painful rebuilding disguised as mediocrity but Pioli completely fumbled on it

Yeah. You don't just win with average starters. The rest of the team was a fire fire. Throwing a couple big name players at it doesn't change the fact that 10 or so guys that play significant snaps on offense defense and ST can't play. Go get some FA with your 57 M and you'll still have a team with no depth because Herm was a shit talent evaluator. For every Pollard you have to account for all the no name mother****ers he whiffed on. Just as you are bringing up about Dorsey. It takes more than 25 guys to make a team that's worth a ****. Especially if you're hangin your hat on players of Barry Rochardson caliber as the good guys.

Bottom line is this. If he were a good talent evaluator 3 years is enough time to get enough decent players in there to not stink it up to the tune of 14 losses.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

Yeah. You don't just win with average starters. The rest of the team was a fire fire. Throwing a couple big name players at it doesn't change the fact that 10 or so guys that play significant snaps on offense defense and ST can't play. Go get some FA with your 57 M and you'll still have a team with no depth because Herm was a shit talent evaluator. For every Pollard you have to account for all the no name mother****ers he whiffed on. Just as you are bringing up about Dorsey. It takes more than 25 guys to make a team that's worth a ****. Especially if you're hangin your hat on players of Barry Rochardson caliber as the good guys.

Bottom line is this. If he were a good talent evaluator 3 years is enough time to get enough decent players in there to not stink it up to the tune of 14 losses.

So we all acknowledge that the Chiefs brought in about 9 guys who could start: Albert, Charles, Flowers, Carr, Bowe, Hali, Dorsey, Pollard, Barth, Page. 9 guys and 1 kicker in 3 years, with the majority of them being very good players at really difficult positions? That's a decent young haul for 3 years, especially considering we picked from #23 and #20 the first 2 years.

So we drafted well. We didn't bring in many good FAs because we weren't actively looking because of our cap situation. So from a personnel standpoint, the big knock is that he didn't pull in a lot of talent from the scrap heap. Fair point. But it's also not necessarily something that gets pinned on your coach very often.

Again, with a fair cap situation, we would have had more ability to bring in cheap free agents to fill in gaps. Had we gone after the FA market, we could have easily brought in maybe 4 or 5 starters in those 3 years. But we didn't do pursue those markets. So while I agree the free agent haul wasn't great, you can't compare that to a regime like Pioli's or Dorsey's that was actively looking to bring in free agents and spend money. Actually, an even bigger knock on Pioli is that for whatever dumb reason, he decided to sit on a bunch of money in 2009.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

So we all acknowledge that the Chiefs brought in about 9 guys who could start: Albert, Charles, Flowers, Carr, Bowe, Hali, Dorsey, Pollard, Barth, Page. 9 guys and 1 kicker in 3 years, with the majority of them being very good players at really difficult positions? That's a decent young haul for 3 years, especially considering we picked from #23 and #20 the first 2 years.

So we drafted well. We didn't bring in many good FAs because we weren't actively looking because of our cap situation. So from a personnel standpoint, the big knock is that he didn't pull in a lot of talent from the scrap heap. Fair point. But it's also not necessarily something that gets pinned on your coach very often.

Again, with a fair cap situation, we would have had more ability to bring in cheap free agents to fill in gaps. Had we gone after the FA market, we could have easily brought in maybe 4 or 5 starters in those 3 years. But we didn't do pursue those markets. So while I agree the free agent haul wasn't great, you can't compare that to a regime like Pioli's or Dorsey's that was actively looking to bring in free agents and spend money. Actually, an even bigger knock on Pioli is that for whatever dumb reason, he decided to sit on a bunch of money in 2009.

Eh I don't know if I'd call 9 guys and a kicker that was horrible the one year we are talking about but went on to be decent a job well done. You are still buying the impact player crap. It takes a team to win. You can have 2 great corners and 2 great safeties but if your nickel guy can't cover my grandma, you haven't got shit. I'd call 9 guys and a kicker coupled with a truckload of rat shit a shitterrible offseason.

And Herm definitely could have found some cheap FA. Look at Spencer Ware. His cap hit is $360,000. Chris Conley's cap hit is $712,434. Link So whatever preconceived notion that you have that FA have to be expensive is incorrect. Again, the important thing is getting guys that outplay their salary.

Herm didn't not get FAs because they were too expensive. He didn't get FAs because he was bad at talent evaluation, which again, you have admitted was his ONLY redeeming quality.

Herm was horrible.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

Eh I don't know if I'd call 9 guys and a kicker that was horrible the one year we are talking about but went on to be decent a job well done. You are still buying the impact player crap. It takes a team to win. You can have 2 great corners and 2 great safeties but if your nickel guy can't cover my grandma, you haven't got shit. I'd call 9 guys and a kicker coupled with a truckload of rat shit a shitterrible offseason.

And Herm definitely could have found some cheap FA. Look at Spencer Ware. His cap hit is $360,000. Chris Conley's cap hit is $712,434. Link So whatever preconceived notion that you have that FA have to be expensive is incorrect. Again, the important thing is getting guys that outplay their salary.

Herm didn't not get FAs because they were too expensive. He didn't get FAs because he was bad at talent evaluation, which again, you have admitted was his ONLY redeeming quality.

Herm was horrible.

I don't have a preconceived notion that all free agency is expensive. But you can't rule out that if the Chiefs spent on long-term free agents, they could have easily added to those 17 - 25 contributors. It also allows you to buy lots of small contributors. Fasano, Schwartz, Vickerson, Branch, etc.... these guys were cheap, but they're not that cheap for a team trying to clean their cap up.

I don't think Herm was great at talent evaluation. Much credit goes to Kuharich and the scouts. But (LJ aside) he generally put the right guys over the field, insisted on a youth movement (right thing to do), and yes the decision to blow up the roster was absolutely correct and it was extremely ballsy.

My point all along is and always has been: there are a lot worse coaches than Herm, but I never wanted his 9-7 ceiling. But he made bold moves during the rebuild most coaches wouldn't, and they put the team in a good situation in 2009. You may not agree with the talent that was on there. But it was smart to show massive restrain in free agency vs. band-aiding. It was smart to clean the roster up from lots of bad contracts. It was smart to get your young guys out there early to sink or swim. Any reasonable GM should have taken that 2009 roster and immediately turned them into at least an 8-8 team. I truly believe that.

[FloridaMan88]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I'll repeat, this is the team Pioli could have rolled with in 2009: QB - Sanchez (draft at #3)

Herm was already wed to his QBOTF Broken Croyle.

You remember Broken Croyle, the QB that talent evaluator extraordinaire Herm handpicked to be the Chiefs QBOTF.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88

Herm was already wed to his QBOTF Broken Croyle.

You remember Broken Croyle, the QB that talent evaluator extraordinaire Herm handpicked to be the Chiefs QBOTF.

That won 0 NFL games. Ever.