Chiefs Whitlock: Why should the Chiefs bring Haley back? - Page 30

**Tribal Warfare** · 12-20-2009, 11:17 PM

Why should the Chiefs bring Haley back?
By JASON WHITLOCK
The Kansas City Star

I’m not arguing that Todd Haley should be fired. I’m wondering what’s the justification for bringing him back.

Loyalty? Fairness?

You throw them overboard with the waiting list for season-ticket holders. Anyone arguing the Chiefs have made progress this season hasn’t heard about what happened inside Arrowhead Stadium on Sunday when the Cleveland Browns visited.

On a day when Cleveland quarterback Brady Quinn threw for 66 yards and two interceptions, the Browns rumbled for 351 yards on the ground and surpassed the 40-point barrier in a 41-34 victory over Haley’s Chiefs.

Keep in mind, the Browns are in the process of wooing Mike Holmgren to take over their organization and can embattled head coach Eric “Dead Man Coaching” Mangini. The Browns are bad. The Chiefs are worse.

It took a total team effort to give Cleveland a road victory.

“When you allow two returns for touchdowns, that’s generally not going to end up being a good thing,” Haley said, scolding the special-teams unit that allowed Josh Cribbs to find the end zone twice on kickoff returns.

“When you drop nine balls, and we had 39 to 40 by the NFL’s count going into this game — 50-plus by my count — it’s going to be very difficult,” Haley said, scolding his receivers for their inability to catch.

“When you allow a team to run the football the way they were able to run the football, you’re not going to have much of a chance to win,” Haley said, scolding a defensive unit that has surrendered 800-plus rushing yards in its last three games at Arrowhead Stadium.

That’s all three units, folks. Special teams. Offense. And defense.

It’s Christmas, and all three phases of Haley’s team are in disarray.

We’ve spent so much time focusing on the shortcomings within Kansas City’s roster, we’ve failed to mention that it’s likely Haley will overhaul his entire coaching staff, too.

You think Clancy Pendergast is coming back as defensive coordinator after some kid named Jerome Harrison gained 286 yards and finished 10 yards shy of the NFL’s all-time rushing record? We know Haley is a hothead. He booted his most qualified assistant (Chan Gailey) before the season. He’s already demoted a receivers coach. He benches receivers when his mood dictates.

Come on, you know Haley’s instincts will tell him to fire everyone except his wingman, Maurice Carthon. Haley can argue that he got this head-coaching position so late last offseason that he was unable to lure top-flight assistants.

Will top assistants want to come work for Haley this offseason? Let’s don’t even deal with the damage Haley has done to his reputation with his wild-man coaching routine and his handling of Gailey. Why would a top assistant come to KC when Haley is going to enter next season on the hot seat?

You know who would come? A coach with ties to Scott Pioli; a coach who thinks he could be the interim head coach if Haley gets fired six weeks into the season. Charlie Weis. Romeo Crennel.

Yes, more of the Patriots Way. A continuation of the flawed philosophy that you can export a winning culture from one city to another. Winning produces its own unique culture wherever it lands.

Let me get back on topic. I’m not saying Todd Haley should be fired. I’m wondering what’s the justification for bringing him back.

Mike Shanahan appears to be headed to Washington. Mike Holmgren apparently is going to take over Cleveland’s front office. Bill Cowher might rejoin the coaching ranks. The Chiefs are going to stand pat with Haley?

What has he shown us that gives us confidence he’ll hire a competent coaching staff? And if the Chiefs are going to be starting over with a new assistant-coaching staff, why not just start all the way over with a new head coach?

I did not say fire Todd Haley. I’m searching for reasons to bring him back. Right now, loyalty and fairness come to mind.

Scott Pioli stuck Haley with a craptastic roster. The stupidity of playing all season with special-team players masquerading as starting linebackers and safeties has caught up with the Chiefs the last month. And so has playing musical waiver wire at receiver.

Haley’s defenders can argue quite persuasively that he hasn’t been given a fair shot. Haley’s critics could argue that Haley has made a bad situation worse.

I’m not arguing anything. And I’m cool with Haley coming back ... as long as he realizes he has to make a boatload of fundamental changes to his coaching approach.

Brock · 12-22-2009, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

R u stalking me? I just got done sweeping the whole house.... Creep...

guess I need to throw more speculation out there? I have zero facts from Clark or Pioli or Haley to add to this matter... Otherwise I would just be spewing crap from my mouth about a subject that I have zero evidence to back it up....

I wasnt one of the chosen ones on here to get the inside scoop on from Hunt or Pioli...

"I have no opinion of my own, but here's some irrelevant words about nothing".

'Hamas' Jenkins · 12-22-2009, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

we had one of the best dlines in 2006+2007 when our defense was definitely returning to respectability (ranked #16 and #13 overall yardage defense in 06+07) lead by the Dline...then CP traded away our top threat (Jared) and let our third best pass rusher (Jimmy Wilkerson) walk for nothing. Those two had over 20 sacks between them last year in roles VERY similar to the role they would have played here. Id also like to point out that you can go down the list and see that each player he has coached has progressively gotten better the longer they were coached by him.

IMHO he has played the hand given to him very well as our Dline coach. Too bad King Carl was dealin the ****ing cards back then....

What the hell are you talking about? Wilkerson did shit here. 1 sack in his entire Chiefs career. 11 in 2 years in Tampa. And he didn't have the benefit of Jared Allen in Tampa.

What about the hordes of DL he "improved" in Buffalo and Cincinnati. Umm...who, exactly? Tim "T-Rex" Anderson?

You know what that shows me? That Krumrie is the problem, not the solution.

BigCatDaddy · 12-22-2009, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

JFC.

The reasons listed to keep Haley--

1) Herm got three years
2) He's a raving lunatic on the sidelines
3) He's not Herm

Of course you want us to keep Haley, when we last played you ran a fake punt on 4th and 8 from his own ****ing 28 with our backup quarterback in a one score game.

A reason they will keep Haley would be the price tag to fire him. They would basically be paying for 2 HC's the next 3 years.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-22-2009, 10:22 AM

Yes, he's made some boneheaded in-game decisions, but to me, it comes back to talent evaluation.

It took LJ mouthing off for us to learn that Charles is capable of being the man.

It took injury to find our best 5 offensive linemen.

We're still starting Vrabel over Studebaker.

And then yesterday, I hear this beauty:

Cassel was speaking with a reporter about his past performances being sub-par, and Cassel told him that he was graded out as having ZERO ERRORS during the Buffalo game.

This is a game in which Cassel threw 4 INT's and had a 35.4 QB rating.

I have a hard time trusting the guys doing the grading after that.

Chiefnj2 · 12-22-2009, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

And then yesterday, I hear this beauty:

Cassel was speaking with a reporter about his past performances being sub-par, and Cassel told him that he was graded out as having ZERO ERRORS during the Buffalo game.

This is a game in which Cassel threw 4 INT's and had a 35.4 QB rating.

I have a hard time trusting the guys doing the grading after that.

Link??

'Hamas' Jenkins · 12-22-2009, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy

A reason they will keep Haley would be the price tag to fire him. They would basically be paying for 2 HC's the next 3 years.

And yet we gave Matt Cassel 60 million ****ing dollars before he took a snap for us.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 12-22-2009, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yes, he's made some boneheaded in-game decisions, but to me, it comes back to talent evaluation.

It took LJ mouthing off for us to learn that Charles is capable of being the man.

It took injury to find our best 5 offensive linemen.

We're still starting Vrabel over Studebaker.

And then yesterday, I hear this beauty:

Cassel was speaking with a reporter about his past performances being sub-par, and Cassel told him that he was graded out as having ZERO ERRORS during the Buffalo game.

This is a game in which Cassel threw 4 INT's and had a 35.4 QB rating.

I have a hard time trusting the guys doing the grading after that.

The fact that Cassel would even tell a reporter that with a straight face, even if his coaches gave him such a stupid evaluation, just further illustrates that he's part of the problem.

There isn't a ****ing quarterback alive who could take that evaluation with a straight face if they had any pride or belief in a team concept.

That just screams "cover your ass".

RedThat · 12-22-2009, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

It also shows how meddlesome, know-nothing owners can **** up a franchise.

I can count the number of good decisions Snyder and Davis have made this decade on both hands.

Don't act like firing those coaches one year in ruined everything.

I agree that a bad owner is the problem to a bad team.

However, all Im trying to say is, when you hire a new coach, chances are he is going to bring in his new staff, new scheme, new philosophy, etc.

Pretty much EVERYTHING is new! So the players have to adjust accordingly. It's a whole new transition process and learning curve for the players in general because they have to be intellegent enough to blend into the "new" coaches, philosophy and schemes, it really comes down to the players capabilities of adapting to their new environment. Look what happened with Dorsey? He wasn't drafted to be a 3-4DE or is suitable enough to play the nose? New scheme, new coach, and voila he is no longer a 4-3 DT but a 3-4 DE. Thank goodness he is playing pretty well at that position. Sometimes its not easy to adapt to a new environment. Some guys can do it, others not so well. This is why when teams hire a new head coach, chances are there will be a lot of turnover on your roster because its all about them finding the right players that are capable of adapting to the scheme and philosophy. thats just as important as talent level.

when you hire new coaches all the time, then you're pretty much constantly experimenting. The coaches are trying get a "feel" for their players to see what they're capable of doing. players are trying to always adapt. sometimes its best to be patient, let the players learn things over time. I don't know about you, but Id rather see a player master at something rather then have to learn new schemes all the time and start from square 1 again and again. The Steelers are an example of sticking with their plan, and are rewarded for it.

BigCatDaddy · 12-22-2009, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

And yet we gave Matt Cassel 60 million ****ing dollars before he took a snap for us.

Sign me up for Cowher, Shanny, or Gruden. It's just not like the Hunts to pay for something like that. I remember people being surprised the bought out Herm and Carl with only 1 year remaining.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-22-2009, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Link??

Was mentioned in Haley's presser yesterday.

Not sure if the text copy has been released yet, and if so, I'll bet anything they cut it out.

KCDC · 12-22-2009, 10:37 AM

Though disappointed in Pioli's performance, it is hard to argue that Clark signing him was a mistake. He was the consensus best guy available. Getting anyone to come take on the Chiefs was challenge enough, but getting someone with those credentials, who said no to other better teams, was something of a coup for Clark. The move was applauded by most every commenter. Just because he has yet to prove to be the genious that we hoped is not a reason to be anything more than disappointed, hoping he will learn from his mistakes.

In his last radio interview, Pioli admitted making mistakes. I think he learned a valuable lesson that won't be repeated. As a football executive in NE, he left coaching to the coaches. Having BB meant that you never second-guessed him. Second, any first time senior executive wants to believe that you should delegate responsibility to the supervisor beneath him ... to let him blossom. After you learn that he is incapable of that, you step in. That is what is happening here. Pioli's mistake was letting Haley have complete control of coaching. It was a rookie mistake to trust a rookie. I don't think that happens agains.

Haley has made mistakes. He thought he was smarter than everyone else. That is not uncommon. Heck, there are a lot of posters here on CP that have that same mental failing. *laughs* He thought he was a better OC, based on what he did with a good QB and two great receivers in Arizona. And, to be fair, the Chiefs played like crap in the preseason, so Haley blamed Gailey, thinking he could do no worse. Heck, many of us fans felt the same, at times.

This season has been a humbling experience for Haley. We will benefit from that in year #2. Pioli will now be more hands on in coaching decisions in year two. We will benefit from that. Haley will get some help (more ways than one), and we will benefit from that. Haley will begin to realize that theory does not always work in reality. In theory, the fake punt should have caught Denver completely unaware and worked like a dream. In reality, you cannot expect good execution from mediocre players. It was reckless to try it, but it could have been a great play, in theory. Year 2, Haley dispenses with novel theory. We benefit.

In contrast, Denver will not benefit. Their 6-0 start merely cemented in Josh McDaniel's mind that he *is* a genius. It was the players that failed him, not the other way round. He has not had the same humbling that a new HC needs in order to realize that it is a team effort of coaches, just as it is a team effort on the field.

If Haley was a moron, like Herm, I would despair because a lesson in humility to a moron is not as likely to yield positive results (unless it causes them to hire good people and stand back). Some of Haley's calls may seem moronic, at times, but the man seems to be a student of the game, and one that will learn well. Yes, it would have been nice to have a professor of the game, rather than a student, but that has its own drawbacks too.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-22-2009, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

The fact that Cassel would even tell a reporter that with a straight face, even if his coaches gave him such a stupid evaluation, just further illustrates that he's part of the problem.

There isn't a ****ing quarterback alive who could take that evaluation with a straight face if they had any pride or belief in a team concept.

That just screams "cover your ass".

That leads to Part 2 of the question that was asked:

Apparently, Gretz had spoken with Cassel after the Buffalo game and said something like, "How important is it to bounce back after having 2 really bad games" and Cassel got really defensive and said, "Interesting you say I've had 2 bad games."

So in the presser yesterday, both of those were used as lead-in's to a question asking Haley if Cassel is capable of seeing when he isn't performing - and being able to learn from it.

Haley hemmed and hawed around, and dodged the question.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-22-2009, 10:42 AM

Sure as shit, they dropped the lead-in's to those questions:

Quote:

Q: Is Matt Cassel able to criticize himself? Is he maybe not as self-aware as you’d like a quarterback to be?

HALEY: “Are you referring how he acts with me or with you? I don’t hear how he interacts with you unless you to tell me, or how he works with other people.”

Q: Not how he talks to you, but can he accept he plays poorly when he plays poorly?

HALEY: “Maybe that’s an important question to you but it’s not an important question to me. I know what a quarterback has to do to be a winning quarterback in the league and that’s what I’m concerned with. I care about how he reads coverages, how his [pass] drops are, that he handles the ball well and is not careless with it, that he’s got the arm and accuracy to make the throws that are necessary to win. Coming off that game I believe there are some encouraging signs.”

Nothing like censoring press conferences...

**DaneMcCloud** · 12-22-2009, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beach tribe

Anybody with a brain knows these guys weren't leaving their organizations for the Chiefs. Especially Polian.

Unfortunately Dane is too ****ing arrogant, and hard headed to look in any other direction through his "**** all but mine" binoculars.

**** you, you don't know jackshit.

**DaneMcCloud** · 12-22-2009, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beach tribe

Pollard was a ****ing liability. I think it was CLEAR that we HAD to go after another Safety, or two, so why keep around a guy who demeans the authority of the coaching staff? I don't mind Pollard being gone at at all.

More idiocy from the guy who thinks Tyson Jackson is, and I quote a "bad ass".

12-20-2009, 11:17 PM
Tribal Warfare Man of Culture Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Far Beyond Comprehension Casino cash: $-2997187	Whitlock: Why should the Chiefs bring Haley back? Why should the Chiefs bring Haley back? By JASON WHITLOCK The Kansas City Star I’m not arguing that Todd Haley should be fired. I’m wondering what’s the justification for bringing him back. Loyalty? Fairness? You throw them overboard with the waiting list for season-ticket holders. Anyone arguing the Chiefs have made progress this season hasn’t heard about what happened inside Arrowhead Stadium on Sunday when the Cleveland Browns visited. On a day when Cleveland quarterback Brady Quinn threw for 66 yards and two interceptions, the Browns rumbled for 351 yards on the ground and surpassed the 40-point barrier in a 41-34 victory over Haley’s Chiefs. Keep in mind, the Browns are in the process of wooing Mike Holmgren to take over their organization and can embattled head coach Eric “Dead Man Coaching” Mangini. The Browns are bad. The Chiefs are worse. It took a total team effort to give Cleveland a road victory. “When you allow two returns for touchdowns, that’s generally not going to end up being a good thing,” Haley said, scolding the special-teams unit that allowed Josh Cribbs to find the end zone twice on kickoff returns. “When you drop nine balls, and we had 39 to 40 by the NFL’s count going into this game — 50-plus by my count — it’s going to be very difficult,” Haley said, scolding his receivers for their inability to catch. “When you allow a team to run the football the way they were able to run the football, you’re not going to have much of a chance to win,” Haley said, scolding a defensive unit that has surrendered 800-plus rushing yards in its last three games at Arrowhead Stadium. That’s all three units, folks. Special teams. Offense. And defense. It’s Christmas, and all three phases of Haley’s team are in disarray. We’ve spent so much time focusing on the shortcomings within Kansas City’s roster, we’ve failed to mention that it’s likely Haley will overhaul his entire coaching staff, too. You think Clancy Pendergast is coming back as defensive coordinator after some kid named Jerome Harrison gained 286 yards and finished 10 yards shy of the NFL’s all-time rushing record? We know Haley is a hothead. He booted his most qualified assistant (Chan Gailey) before the season. He’s already demoted a receivers coach. He benches receivers when his mood dictates. Come on, you know Haley’s instincts will tell him to fire everyone except his wingman, Maurice Carthon. Haley can argue that he got this head-coaching position so late last offseason that he was unable to lure top-flight assistants. Will top assistants want to come work for Haley this offseason? Let’s don’t even deal with the damage Haley has done to his reputation with his wild-man coaching routine and his handling of Gailey. Why would a top assistant come to KC when Haley is going to enter next season on the hot seat? You know who would come? A coach with ties to Scott Pioli; a coach who thinks he could be the interim head coach if Haley gets fired six weeks into the season. Charlie Weis. Romeo Crennel. Yes, more of the Patriots Way. A continuation of the flawed philosophy that you can export a winning culture from one city to another. Winning produces its own unique culture wherever it lands. Let me get back on topic. I’m not saying Todd Haley should be fired. I’m wondering what’s the justification for bringing him back. Mike Shanahan appears to be headed to Washington. Mike Holmgren apparently is going to take over Cleveland’s front office. Bill Cowher might rejoin the coaching ranks. The Chiefs are going to stand pat with Haley? What has he shown us that gives us confidence he’ll hire a competent coaching staff? And if the Chiefs are going to be starting over with a new assistant-coaching staff, why not just start all the way over with a new head coach? I did not say fire Todd Haley. I’m searching for reasons to bring him back. Right now, loyalty and fairness come to mind. Scott Pioli stuck Haley with a craptastic roster. The stupidity of playing all season with special-team players masquerading as starting linebackers and safeties has caught up with the Chiefs the last month. And so has playing musical waiver wire at receiver. Haley’s defenders can argue quite persuasively that he hasn’t been given a fair shot. Haley’s critics could argue that Haley has made a bad situation worse. I’m not arguing anything. And I’m cool with Haley coming back ... as long as he realizes he has to make a boatload of fundamental changes to his coaching approach.
Posts: 43,454

12-22-2009, 10:22 AM	#439
OnTheWarpath15 MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $2051115	Yes, he's made some boneheaded in-game decisions, but to me, it comes back to talent evaluation. It took LJ mouthing off for us to learn that Charles is capable of being the man. It took injury to find our best 5 offensive linemen. We're still starting Vrabel over Studebaker. And then yesterday, I hear this beauty: Cassel was speaking with a reporter about his past performances being sub-par, and Cassel told him that he was graded out as having ZERO ERRORS during the Buffalo game. This is a game in which Cassel threw 4 INT's and had a 35.4 QB rating. I have a hard time trusting the guys doing the grading after that.
Posts: 60,758

12-22-2009, 10:37 AM	#446
KCDC Starter Join Date: Mar 2009 Casino cash: $9616110	Though disappointed in Pioli's performance, it is hard to argue that Clark signing him was a mistake. He was the consensus best guy available. Getting anyone to come take on the Chiefs was challenge enough, but getting someone with those credentials, who said no to other better teams, was something of a coup for Clark. The move was applauded by most every commenter. Just because he has yet to prove to be the genious that we hoped is not a reason to be anything more than disappointed, hoping he will learn from his mistakes. In his last radio interview, Pioli admitted making mistakes. I think he learned a valuable lesson that won't be repeated. As a football executive in NE, he left coaching to the coaches. Having BB meant that you never second-guessed him. Second, any first time senior executive wants to believe that you should delegate responsibility to the supervisor beneath him ... to let him blossom. After you learn that he is incapable of that, you step in. That is what is happening here. Pioli's mistake was letting Haley have complete control of coaching. It was a rookie mistake to trust a rookie. I don't think that happens agains. Haley has made mistakes. He thought he was smarter than everyone else. That is not uncommon. Heck, there are a lot of posters here on CP that have that same mental failing. laughs He thought he was a better OC, based on what he did with a good QB and two great receivers in Arizona. And, to be fair, the Chiefs played like crap in the preseason, so Haley blamed Gailey, thinking he could do no worse. Heck, many of us fans felt the same, at times. This season has been a humbling experience for Haley. We will benefit from that in year #2. Pioli will now be more hands on in coaching decisions in year two. We will benefit from that. Haley will get some help (more ways than one), and we will benefit from that. Haley will begin to realize that theory does not always work in reality. In theory, the fake punt should have caught Denver completely unaware and worked like a dream. In reality, you cannot expect good execution from mediocre players. It was reckless to try it, but it could have been a great play, in theory. Year 2, Haley dispenses with novel theory. We benefit. In contrast, Denver will not benefit. Their 6-0 start merely cemented in Josh McDaniel's mind that he is a genius. It was the players that failed him, not the other way round. He has not had the same humbling that a new HC needs in order to realize that it is a team effort of coaches, just as it is a team effort on the field. If Haley was a moron, like Herm, I would despair because a lesson in humility to a moron is not as likely to yield positive results (unless it causes them to hire good people and stand back). Some of Haley's calls may seem moronic, at times, but the man seems to be a student of the game, and one that will learn well. Yes, it would have been nice to have a professor of the game, rather than a student, but that has its own drawbacks too.
Posts: 886