At the Quarter Mark: Better or Worse?

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Exactly.

If Herm had been allowed to begin the rebuilding process in 2006 or 2007, do I think he'd be the head coach today?

No.

But, for the first time in nearly 40 years, someone inside this organization had it right.

Build your team through the draft.

Period.

FINALLY.

I have taken so much shit with this same exact position. A LOT of shit.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

FINALLY.

I have taken so much shit with this same exact position. A LOT of shit.

No, you took shit because of your position that he should have been retained beyond last season because he had just started the rebuild.

Hell, I agree that he finally did what needed to be done, but he's a terrible ****ing coach, and there's no way in hell that I wanted him here from the start, much less another year or two.

Let's rebuild with a coach who actually has a chance to grow with the team.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by milkman

No, you took shit because of your position that he should have been retained beyond last season because he had just started the rebuild.

Hell, I agree that he finally did what needed to be done, but he's a terrible ****ing coach, and there's no way in hell that I wanted him here from the start, much less another year or two.

Let's rebuild with a coach who actually has a chance to grow with the team.

I'm not afraid to still stand by that position. But you're oversimplifying it. I said that Herm should have been kept on board because I expected Carl Peterson to be on the last year of his contract, and that if Herm didn't put up results in 2009, he should have been fired alongside Peterson. The minute Peterson was fired, I said that Herm was probably going to be fired and it was a shitty, but correct decision to make.

As much as people hate Herm, he got a really shitty deal. He was basically promised that he could blow up the franchise, and the front office would be patient enough to let him go through a rough 2008 season because it was something that had to be done. It was the right business decision, but it's pretty shitty when a coach is the victim of a broken promise.

[Chiefless]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I'm not afraid to still stand by that position. But you're oversimplifying it. I said that Herm should have been kept on board because I expected Carl Peterson to be on the last year of his contract, and that if Herm didn't put up results in 2009, he should have been fired alongside Peterson. The minute Peterson was fired, I said that Herm was probably going to be fired and it was a shitty, but correct decision to make.

As much as people hate Herm, he got a really shitty deal. He was basically promised that he could blow up the franchise, and the front office would be patient enough to let him go through a rough 2008 season because it was something that had to be done. It was the right business decision, but it's pretty shitty when a coach is the victim of a broken promise.

That makes me hate herm less. But he did preside over the collapsing of the Chiefs. I'm not real sure Edwards feels real bad tho. Trying to fix the mess you made under the eye of a new management is hard enough but I bet Pioli is a MAJOR hard ass to work for. In a way I think Pioli did Edwards a favor by letting him go.