Explain to me why we need to give Herm more time

[Dave Lane]

After seeing my worst fears come true in Herm with the Jetsification of the Chiefs (a top 5 draft pick) and the destruction of a team. I wonder in this microwave world of instant gratification how is it we cling to the notion 2 years doesn't set a trend especially giving his previous body of work. So I thought well surely 2 years must be handed out like candy in the past to any head coach and then it occurred to me to check the Chiefs history to confirm this.

Chiefs Head Coaches with shortest tenures:

Tom Bettis - 1977
Frank Gansz - 1987-1988
Gunther Cunningham - 1999-2000
Paul Wiggin - 1975-1977
John Mackovic - 1983-1986

Thats half of the Chiefs Head Coaches in the history of this team. 3 of them are 2 years or less. So in the present world why not cut ties with Herm. Actually excluding Herm 33% of Chiefs coaches have had a tenure of 2 years or less. And yes I know Bettis is a bad choice. Still 2 years of Herm like performance has cost coaches their jobs in the past.

Dave

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by HemiEd

Ok, not trying to have it both ways. Who assembled that group coming out of camp?

To what do you attribute the Defensive decline? Did the talent go to shit all of a sudden?

You know I've lost faith in Herm. But according to Nick, management convinced Herm that playing the status quo with this offensive line was acceptable before training camp. Herm went along with it. Maybe he was foolish for doing that.

I don't know why the defense has suddenly gone under. Probably because half of the players are quitting. That is a coaching problem, for sure. Again, you know I've lost faith in Herm and wish Gunther was shown the door.

But to say these linemen are talented...well, it's just flat out dumb.

[FAX]

Originally Posted by GOATSE

You know I've lost faith in Herm. But according to Nick, management convinced Herm that playing the status quo with this offensive line was acceptable before training camp. Herm went along with it. Maybe he was foolish for doing that.

I don't know why the defense has suddenly gone under. Probably because half of the players are quitting. That is a coaching problem, for sure. Again, you know I've lost faith in Herm and wish Gunther was shown the door.

But to say these linemen are talented...well, it's just flat out dumb.

In journalism, that's what you call one of those "understatement" things, isn't it?

FAX

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by GOATSE

You know I've lost faith in Herm. But according to Nick, management convinced Herm that playing the status quo with this offensive line was acceptable before training camp. Herm went along with it. Maybe he was foolish for doing that.

I don't know why the defense has suddenly gone under. Probably because half of the players are quitting. That is a coaching problem, for sure. Again, you know I've lost faith in Herm and wish Gunther was shown the door.

But to say these linemen are talented...well, it's just flat out dumb.

Good explanation.
Who brought in Chris Terry? Herm had Turley last year and he sucked. Why would he bring him back? He must have thought they were good enough. He either made bad choices, or could not provide proper coaching IMO.

I think the players have lost faith in the guy and have quit. They are not good enough to make up for all the shortcomings under the Herm administration. I think a better HC would have a lot more success with the same guys.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by HemiEd

I think a better HC would have a lot more success with the same guys.

Yeah, maybe we could have gone 7-9 instead of 4-12.

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by GOATSE

Yeah, maybe we could have gone 7-9 instead of 4-12.

That would be an improvement. So if that same coaching staff, that got 7-9 out of this group, was given more talent, what would they accomplish?
I just can't visualize Herm coaching the Chiefs to any success.

h

[L.A. Chieffan]

nice

[Fish]

Have you guys met Anette Dawn?

She's nice, but she can't stay long........

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You are officially, an idiot.

Turley, Terry, Welbourn, McIntosh nor Weigmann would not be starting for ANY other NFL team. Period. There is absolutely NO WAY that all of them should have been playing at all, albeit, together!

But I'm sure they're all just Pro-Bowlers with a different coach, right?

Except McIntosh was a starter with the Dolphins and Weigman was playing at a high level two years ago. Turley, Terry and Welbourn wouldn't be playing anywhere else except for the dumb ass coach and GM that gave them a starting spot in KC. Fielding a group of JV players isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of the head coaches prowess for finding talent.

[dallaschiefsfan]

Originally Posted by GOATSE

Yeah, maybe we could have gone 7-9 instead of 4-12.

Yeah...and under what form of reality is that NOT better? If another coach could get this exact team to 7-9, then Herm isn't getting the most out of this team...which means he's a problem.

[dallaschiefsfan]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I think three years is more the standard, but it also depends on the state of the personnel.

While you could be partially right about three years, the thinking is flawed in regard to Herm. I can't think of an example of a successful coach that was given three years...AND finally turned it around in year three WITHOUT finishing strong and improving dramatically at the end of season 2.

[FAX]

Originally Posted by dallaschiefsfan

Yeah...and under what form of reality is that NOT better? If another coach could get this exact team to 7-9, then Herm isn't getting the most out of this team...which means he's a problem.

I wonder if you guys have noticed the funny direction Herm's been spinning this over the last couple of weeks. Basically, he's saying that, as far back as camp, the coaches thought this disaster could potentially happen. He's said that, if "things" had turned out one way they had predicted, we would have been a playoff team again. But, if "things" turned out the other way they had forecast, we would suck (you know, like we do and all).

This is amazing spin to me. I think that what Herm's trying to get across is the idea that he is so smart that he figured this butt hump was a possibility from the beginning which makes him the ultimate football genius and mind melder supreme. Still, no one in the KC media is asking him, if he knew this was a possibility, why didn't he do something to prevent it?

FAX

[Mecca]

There wasn't really a whole lot you could do.....

The team wasn't that talented last year and more or less got lucky. You only have so many players, coaching is a problem but this team lacks talent....

Even if they had awesome drafts the last 2 years this team would still suck...unless you wanted to sign 30 FA's and spend huge money and then be in this spot again in 3 years.

[FAX]

I can think of no enterprise of any kind run by any person with any sense whatsoever that would tolerate a prediction of potential full meltdown and take no action to prevent it.

FAX

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by FAX

I can think of no enterprise of any kind run by any person with any sense whatsoever that would tolerate a prediction of potential full meltdown and take no action to prevent it.

FAX

Ok what do you want to be done? Even if the best coach and personnel guy in the world had taken this job...the team was and still is old as hell, you can only do so much...

I still think some fans lack this understanding, when you get in this spot you will have a couple really bad years. No one competes while rebuilding.

I think Herms idea in theory is right, I just don't think he's the right guy to do it. You can have the right idea all you want still doesn't mean you'll get it right.