Seriously, Herm has to go

[OnTheWarpath15]

There are more reasons than I can count for wanting Herm to get fired, but I have to say, the premise of this argument has to be one of the stupidest basis ever.

There's not a coach in this league that would go for it at home, with an 11 point lead, on 4th and 1, from inside your own 40, with less than 12 minutes left in the game, after your OL has just been smoked on the same down/distance the play before.

Not ONE.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

There are more reasons than I can count for wanting Herm to get fired, but I have to say, the premise of this argument has to be one of the stupidest basis ever.

There's not a coach in this league that would go for it at home, with an 11 point lead, on 4th and 1, from inside your own 40, with less than 12 minutes left in the game, after your OL has just been smoked on the same down/distance the play before.

Not ONE.

The 4th-and-1 argument was introduced to this thread by a Herm supporter. The real argument is that the entire 2nd half was played from a play-not-to-lose perspective.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by cdcox

The 4th-and-1 argument was introduced to this thread by a Herm supporter. The real argument is that the entire 2nd half was played from a play-not-to-lose perspective.

Amazing, isn't it?

[Boris The Great]

Originally Posted by cdcox

The real argument is that the entire 2nd half was played from a play-not-to-lose perspective.

Hows that, exactly? Did they just run the ball up the centers butt the entire second half? I must have missed it.

Gaileys playcalling was suspect all game long. Was that on Herm? Was Herm pulling the strings when on 3rd and 1, the offense tried a 30 yard fade rout that the announcers practically laughed at for making no sense at all? Or when they ran a hook-and-ladder route that should have gone 5 yards deeper? Or was Gailey just making some dumb calls today?

The offense didnt execute well in the second half. Among other things, how many times did Thigpen throw to a receiver, usually Gonzalez, who was being blanketed by a defender that just swatted the pass away? How many times did they run screen passes that went nowhere because nobody blocked anybody?

Are we to believe that Herm instructed them to do these things? He told Gailey to make dumb calls? He told the offense not to execute?

You want to act like the offense not moving is some kind of directive from Herm. They didnt move the ball, so Herm must have told them not to. It wasnt because of anything the Chargers players did, or the KC players werent doing. No, its because Herm wanted it that way.

The supposed real argument you speak of is a phony argument. You know why we were talking about the punt on 4th and one? Because that is actually a decision Herm made that you can point to and talk about. Not this phantom crap that he told the offense to stop working.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Originally Posted by Boris The Great

Hows that, exactly? Did they just run the ball up the centers butt the entire second half? I must have missed it.

Gaileys playcalling was suspect all game long. Was that on Herm? Was Herm pulling the strings when on 3rd and 1, the offense tried a 30 yard fade rout that the announcers practically laughed at for making no sense at all? Or when they ran a hook-and-ladder route that should have gone 5 yards deeper? Or was Gailey just making some dumb calls today?

The offense didnt execute well in the second half. Among other things, how many times did Thigpen throw to a receiver, usually Gonzalez, who was being blanketed by a defender that just swatted the pass away? How many times did they run screen passes that went nowhere because nobody blocked anybody?

Are we to believe that Herm instructed them to do these things? He told Gailey to make dumb calls? He told the offense not to execute?

You want to act like the offense not moving is some kind of directive from Herm. They didnt move the ball, so Herm must have told them not to. It wasnt because of anything the Chargers players did, or the KC players werent doing. No, its because Herm wanted it that way.

The supposed real argument you speak of is a phony argument. You know why we were talking about the punt on 4th and one? Because that is actually a decision Herm made that you can point to and talk about. Not this phantom crap that he told the offense to stop working.

At this point? YES. I will merrily, happily, and absolutely believe ALL OF THE ABOVE!
And I will blame Bigfoot and UFO's too! Herm is a ball-sucking, ball-licker to the 100th power! Grrrrrrr.....

[BigRock]

Originally Posted by cdcox

The 4th-and-1 argument was introduced to this thread by a Herm supporter.

It was introduced because I actually thought there might be a point to Fringe blabbering his "risk management" crap. Silly me for thinking he meant some specific decision Herm made during the game, and not the completely vague "playing not to lose" BS that keeps getting thrown out like some catchy buzzword that no one can seem to explain.

Originally Posted by cdcox

The real argument is that the entire 2nd half was played from a play-not-to-lose perspective.

I see this question has already been asked and ignored, but please, do explain in what way.

On the Chiefs' opening drive of the game, they marched 96 yards for a touchdown. What revolutionary offensive strategy did they break out to accomplish that feat? They ran it some, Thigpen scrambled here and there, and they threw some short passes. I don't think Thigpen threw a ball farther than 10 yards the entire way. A couple receptions went for 10+ yards, but it was yards after catch.

Tell me what drastic, fundamental change took place in the way they ran the offense in the second half. Give me tangible evidence of Herm forcing some kind of change on the way they were operating.

You can't because there isn't any. They were still throwing those passes. They were still running the ball. Thigpen still scrambled. It didn't work as well. Throws were off, catches weren't made, runs didn't go for as many yards.

A case can certainly be made for Gailey not adjusting well, but that's an entirely different discussion. The topic at hand boils down to little more than "Mommy, the offense isn't moving the ball anymore! WHY DID HERM TELL THEM TO STOP GETTING YARDS?"

That is literally the dumbest interpretation possible, and it's being made by a guy who's all over this thread talking about what other people don't know or don't understand.

IRONY~!

[whoman69]

The problem with Herm, and Marty in the playoffs, is they say they're playing to win, but they're afraid of losing. In this league you have to consider no league safe. Where is all this talk about playing for 60 minutes like Marty always used to spout. This team went on cruise control for the second half and it got away from them in two minutes. You could blame Gailey, but under Herm I believe that every coach is thinking 'what would Herm want me to do in this situation?'. Ask Mike Solari what its like to try to get off the beaten path with Herm.

You can't take your foot off the pedal in this league.

[suds79]

Given the fact that we always get owned in the 3rd quarter doesn't speak well to the coache's hafttime adjustments.

I'd be okay if we went in another direction.

Rebuilding or not, we had to business losing that game today. That was one of the all time biggest choke jobs I've seen from the Chiefs.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by whoman69

The problem with Herm, and Marty in the playoffs, is they say they're playing to win, but they're afraid of losing. In this league you have to consider no league safe. Where is all this talk about playing for 60 minutes like Marty always used to spout. This team went on cruise control for the second half and it got away from them in two minutes. You could blame Gailey, but under Herm I believe that every coach is thinking 'what would Herm want me to do in this situation?'. Ask Mike Solari what its like to try to get off the beaten path with Herm.

You can't take your foot off the pedal in this league.

You know what the coaches are thinking?