Chiefs At the Quarter Mark: Better or Worse? - Page 11

chiefzilla1501 · 10-06-2009, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

Herm used rebuilding to buy himself another year excuse free...it blew up in his face, thankfully....

Herm only had a job because of Carl. Period. And if he wasn't under Carl's thumb and truly "bold" he would have rebuilt right away...and not stuck with Gunther.

Herm brought us Huard and Croyle and Thigpen. Whoppity ****ing doo.

fascinating to watch history being re-written in this thread....Herm the great talent evaluator! Herm the bold rebuilder! Herm the great motivator!

Bullshit revisionist history.

It's been well publicized that Herm wanted to rebuild a year earlier.

And it's been pretty much well publicized that Herm pushed for it and Carl Peterson refused, and that the relationship soured, and that Herm had to go all the way to Clark Hunt to finally get it done.

What the **** is the head coach supposed to do when your GM, the guy who signs off on all the decisions for the team, refuses to let you do what you think you need to do?

And yes, opening up a can of worms because I know milkman is going to react to this, but I still don't understand why people think Gunther and Solari was Herm's call. We know now that Gunther and Herm never saw eye-to-eye on the defense. We saw in year 2 that Herm hated Solari's offense so much that he forced Solari to scrap it in favor of a more conservative scheme. You can either choose to believe that Herm wanted to hire two coaches who ran schemes that he hated, or you can come to the logical conclusion that the only reason Solari and Gun were kept on Herm's coaching staff was because of Peterson's long history of being overly loyal to coaches within his network. After all, how do you think Herm was hired? It wasn't through an open interview process. Herm was hired because he was in Peterson's rolodex. Just like Gunther and Solari.

POND_OF_RED · 10-06-2009, 04:26 PM

I think one stat that increased is games against defending playoff teams. 1 last year. 3 this year. I think that evens out the numbers a little IMO.

**DaneMcCloud** · 10-06-2009, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED

I think one stat that increased is games against defending playoff teams. 1 last year. 3 this year. I think that evens out the numbers a little IMO.

Losses are losses.

Plain and simple.

Reerun_KC · 10-06-2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Losses are losses.

Plain and simple.

And Herm racked them up at an alarming rate...

Plain and simple....

**DaneMcCloud** · 10-06-2009, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

And Herm racked them up at an alarming rate...

Plain and simple....

So did Vermeil.

2001 & 2002: 14-18

2006 & 2007: 13-19

Are you bitching about a one game difference or are you bitching about Year 3, when he was finally allowed to blow shit the **** up?

Reerun_KC · 10-06-2009, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

So did Vermeil.

2001 & 2002: 14-18

2006 & 2007: 13-19

Are you bitching about a one game difference or are you bitching about Year 3, when he was finally allowed to blow shit the **** up?

And he blew this franchise the **** up!

Vermiel started planting the bombs, Herm pushed the button...

Chiefless · 10-06-2009, 04:53 PM

Sometimes in order to clean up a mess you have to make an even bigger mess. I just hope Haley/Pioli know what their doing, because this team has been completely taken apart...and the putting it back together part does not seem to be going according to plan. This off-season better see the shoring up of the o-line. Because that unit is unwatchable right now.

JD10367 · 10-06-2009, 05:38 PM

The "better or worse after four games" argument is a short-term view. You need to think long-term. As has been said before, Pioli could've easily made the Chiefs look really good. He could've kept Tony Gonzalez. He could've hired a "name" coach. He could've signed an old retread QB like Jeff Garcia. And the Chiefs might be 2-2 right now, and might bob along to a 7-9 or 8-8 record. But as a team they wouldn't be any better in the long-term, with no plan or solution. Thinking short-term is what got the Chiefs into the mess they're in. Sometimes you have to suffer a bit more on the front end to get the results on the back end.

**DaneMcCloud** · 10-06-2009, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD10367

The "better or worse after four games" argument is a short-term view. You need to think long-term. As has been said before, Pioli could've easily made the Chiefs look really good. He could've kept Tony Gonzalez. He could've hired a "name" coach. He could've signed an old retread QB like Jeff Garcia. And the Chiefs might be 2-2 right now, and might bob along to a 7-9 or 8-8 record. But as a team they wouldn't be any better in the long-term, with no plan or solution. Thinking short-term is what got the Chiefs into the mess they're in. Sometimes you have to suffer a bit more on the front end to get the results on the back end.

You're missing the whole point of this discussion:

Pioli didn't ANYTHING this year long-term for the Chiefs.

Do you think Goff will be with the Chiefs next year? Vrabel? Waters? LJ? Bradley? Mays? Belcher? Hell, even DJ? Ron Edwards?

Where's the "foundation" of the future? Where's the game-changers? Where's the improvement, period?

Oh that's right: There is none.

Reerun_KC · 10-06-2009, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You're missing the whole point of this discussion:

Pioli didn't ANYTHING this year long-term for the Chiefs.

Do you think Goff will be with the Chiefs next year? Vrabel? Waters? LJ? Bradley? Mays? Belcher? Hell, even DJ? Ron Edwards?

Where's the "foundation" of the future? Where's the game-changers? Where's the improvement, period?

Oh that's right: There is none.

I guess they should just quit and dissolve the franchise?

**DaneMcCloud** · 10-06-2009, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

I guess they should just quit and dissolve the franchise?

Are you kidding?

It's already been completely dismantled.

As I've said since November 2008: This is an expansion franchise in terms of talent.

**SAUTO** · 10-06-2009, 05:40 PM

the quote function must be ****ed up today

Mecca · 10-06-2009, 06:21 PM

I really didn't like about half those picks....

**SAUTO** · 10-06-2009, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I really didn't like about half those picks....

but are they average players that would form the nucleus of a good/great team?

Chiefless · 10-06-2009, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

but are they average players that would form the nucleus of a good/great team?

I think the chiefs need to look at it this way: The nucleus of this team is everything but the O-Line. Nobody's job in that unit should be safe. If you get an upgrade at any of those positions I think you take it (even if it means moving players like Albert or Waters to another position or off the team). There is a severe lack of talent on that line. It's so bad in my opinion that there's really no way to properly evaluate the rest of the entire team. If they get the o-line in order I think we'll find that most of the other units are at least NFL-average.

10-06-2009, 04:26 PM	#2
POND_OF_RED The talking stonehead Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Blue Springs, MO Casino cash: $-1976854	I think one stat that increased is games against defending playoff teams. 1 last year. 3 this year. I think that evens out the numbers a little IMO.
Posts: 6,019

10-06-2009, 04:53 PM	#7
Chiefless Veteran Join Date: Jul 2001 Casino cash: $10007500	Sometimes in order to clean up a mess you have to make an even bigger mess. I just hope Haley/Pioli know what their doing, because this team has been completely taken apart...and the putting it back together part does not seem to be going according to plan. This off-season better see the shoring up of the o-line. Because that unit is unwatchable right now.
Posts: 1,326

10-06-2009, 05:38 PM	#8
JD10367 Cheaterlover* Join Date: May 2009 Location: RI Casino cash: $10010716	The "better or worse after four games" argument is a short-term view. You need to think long-term. As has been said before, Pioli could've easily made the Chiefs look really good. He could've kept Tony Gonzalez. He could've hired a "name" coach. He could've signed an old retread QB like Jeff Garcia. And the Chiefs might be 2-2 right now, and might bob along to a 7-9 or 8-8 record. But as a team they wouldn't be any better in the long-term, with no plan or solution. Thinking short-term is what got the Chiefs into the mess they're in. Sometimes you have to suffer a bit more on the front end to get the results on the back end.
Posts: 12,916

10-06-2009, 05:40 PM	#12
SAUTO Shit Join Date: Jun 2008 Casino cash: $10039067	the quote function must be ****ed up today
Posts: 55,715

10-06-2009, 06:21 PM	#13
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-782950	I really didn't like about half those picks....
Posts: 115,406