Chiefs Haley versus McDaniels - Page 6

SenselessChiefsFan · 11-30-2011, 08:42 AM

For those that think I love Cassel, I don't. I just think that Haley isn't nearly the offensive coordinator that McDaniels is. I think the biggest reason that many on here think that Orton is better is because he had two years with McDaniels while the Chiefs had Haley, then Weis, and now Haley again.

Orton and Cassel have both struggled this year.

Haley had a great offense in Arizona with Kurt Warner. McDaniels had a great offense with Tom Brady, but he also has had good offenses with Kyle Orton and Matt Cassel....ahem.... Kyle Orton and Matt Cassel.

In 2007, Haley's first as a offensive coordinator, there is no comparison. McDaniels had a record setting offense at the top of the league. Haley had the 12th best offense. Winner: McDaniels. Haley might get some credit here since he was in his first year with the Cardinals. But, The Pats set the world on fire and set records and were just so much better, that you have to give the nod to McDaniels.

In 2008, Haley had the fourth rated offense. He had Kurt Warner, Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin, and Breaston. Granted, the running backs weren't great. Edgerin James wasn't quite what he once was and they had Tim Hightower.

In 2008, McDaniels had the fifth rated offense. He had Matt Cassel, Randy Moss and Wes Welker. And, believe it or not, the running backs in NE were even MORE underwhelming. Lamont Jordon, Maroney, Sammy Morris.

2008 edge: Despite Arizona ranking one spot higher, it would be foolish not to notice the distinct advantage in talent around Haley. so the edge goes to McDaniels.

2009- Daniels had the 15th best offense. He had Orton, Marshall and Royal. He didn't have much of a running threat.

In 2009, Haley had the 25th best offense. He had Matt Cassel, D-Bowe, and Charles. Yeah, he didn't give Charles a ton of time until the end of the season. Who's fault is that? Who is the coach that saw JC on the field every day and still decided to play LJ?

In 2010, Haley had Weis as offensive coordinator. The Chiefs were 12th in offense. The Broncos were 13th. The Chiefs had better offensive talent. Jones was still playing well last year, JC was out of this world. They had D-Bowe and Moeaki as well. Luckily, Haley had Weis to know how to use the talent. With Weis, they managed to be one spot higher than the Broncos.

McDaniels had Orton, B LLoyd, Eddie Royal. Yet, he managed to get to the 13th ranking.

2011. Finally, a year that Haley can probably claim as better than McDaniels. The Chiefs are 27th in offense. The Rams are 29th.

Now, lets look at talent. Matt Cassel versus Sam Bradford. Bradford is the obvious answer. However, a second year guy going into a new system, and an offseason with no training camp. Again, Bradford is the better guy, but overall situation? Haley might have the better overall situation. Cassel and even Palko had been with the Chiefs for a full year.

Both McDaniels and Haley have had to have two games played with their backup QB.

Jackson is clearly superior to anything that the Chiefs have in the backfield since JC went down.

However, look at the talent on the outside and you will see the Chiefs have Bowe, Breaston and Baldwin..... heck, even McCluster would probably be one of the Rams top two WR's. Not kidding. They have Brandon Lloyd and Brandon Gibson. That is their top two WR's.

So, even conceding that they have the best QB and RB in St. Louis, you look at the fact that McDaniels came to a brand new team without an offseason and is only 2 spots worse than the team that Haley has been building for three years.

McDaniels was a crappy personnel guy. I concede that fact every day of the week. But, when it comes down to x's and o's. He outshines Haley by a huge margin.

I think Haley may be the better overall head coach, but from a purely offensive creativity and coordination standpoint. Haley is far inferior to McDaniels.

And any comparison between Orton and Cassel has to be based in this reality.

And, please understand, I am not a huge Cassel fan. I want him gone. But, this idea that Orton is an upgrade is fools gold. They are both mediocre QB's that have looked good under McDaniels. And, in Cassel's case, at least decent under Weis.

WhiteWhale · 12-01-2011, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

I stand corrected. I remember the offense being better than the year before. Maybe that was more towards the end of the year when the Bucs were coming together more.

The point still stands that they had a great defense for a long time, and it wasn't until Gruden was hired as the head coach (offensive minded Coach) that they were able to get to the Super Bowl.

I have not doubt that the opponent in the Super Bowl had much to do with their actual winning of the Championship.

Their opponent in that game was a gift from god.

What Gruden did to make that team better wasn't about X's and O's. It was one of those intangible things. They were a different team. More motivated... more emotional.

FAX · 12-01-2011, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

Part of being a coach and an offensive coordinator is using the talent to the best of their abilities.

JC riding the bench is on Haley. To think that you would use this as an excuse FOR Haley is astounding.

If you recall, Jamaal was putting the ball on the ground a heck of a lot back in those dark days. People who attended camp were talking about it. He was fumbling every second touch.

FAX

SenselessChiefsFan · 12-01-2011, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

Again, you think the NFL is all about coaching. I'm still sticking with talent. KC would have won no more than 6 games without Charles last season and Weis AND Cassel would have been terrible.

How many times do you see a team do a quick turnaround when a new coach is brought in?

Look at the 49ers this year. I still see the same shitty QB that they have had for years starting there.

See, good coaches are able to identify talent. Then, they are able to use that talent to the best of the players ability.

Do you think that JC rides the bench for the first half of McDaniels first season in KC?

WhiteWhale · 12-01-2011, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

Part of being a coach and an offensive coordinator is using the talent to the best of their abilities.

JC riding the bench is on Haley. To think that you would use this as an excuse FOR Haley is astounding.

I'm not excusing Haley's personnel decisions at all. You're just trying to change the target.

You were talking about his offensive system and ability as a coordinator. I'm pointing out that our offensive success has been more tied to the playing time of Jamaal Charles than who our OC is.

Haley has all kinds of problems, but unless we address the TALENT issue we're just treading water.

WhiteWhale · 12-01-2011, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

How many times do you see a team do a quick turnaround when a new coach is brought in?

Look at the 49ers this year. I still see the same shitty QB that they have had for years starting there.

See, good coaches are able to identify talent. Then, they are able to use that talent to the best of the players ability.

Do you think that JC rides the bench for the first half of McDaniels first season in KC?

Yes. That's a hypothetical that cannot be proven, but LJ was entrenched in the starting RB spot. Over at another chiefs site I started driving the 'start Charles' bandwagon in 2008 and it was lonely. A lot of Chief fans in the 2009 preseason said he was outplayed by Battle and Savage and should have been cut (we kept 4 RB's).

The issue I'm debating isn't if coaches can have an impact. The issue I'm debating is whether coaching ALONE improves our current roster as of today into a good team. I do not believe it does. You, apparently, do. We're just probably not going to agree here.

listopencil · 12-01-2011, 10:59 AM

Well that was a complete success.

SenselessChiefsFan · 12-01-2011, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

Yes. That's a hypothetical that cannot be proven, but LJ was entrenched in the starting RB spot. Over at another chiefs site I started driving the 'start Charles' bandwagon in 2008 and it was lonely. A lot of Chief fans in the 2009 preseason said he was outplayed by Battle and Savage and should have been cut (we kept 4 RB's).

The issue I'm debating isn't if coaches can have an impact. The issue I'm debating is whether coaching ALONE improves our current roster as of today into a good team. I do not believe it does. You, apparently, do. We're just probably not going to agree here.

I think coaching can have a bigger impact than any one player.

I understand that talent matters in the NFL. But, frankly, if one of the most talented backs in the league is sitting on the bench for half the season, I will not use it to excuse the HC/OC's lack of offense.

It is up to the coach to use the talent that is here to the best of their ability.

WhiteWhale · 12-01-2011, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

I think coaching can have a bigger impact than any one player.

I understand that talent matters in the NFL. But, frankly, if one of the most talented backs in the league is sitting on the bench for half the season, I will not use it to excuse the HC/OC's lack of offense.

It is up to the coach to use the talent that is here to the best of their ability.

It's not an excuse for anything. It's an observation of cause and effect. I'm not defending anyone, I'm making a case for talent>scheme.

As for coaching having an impact more than any one player... no.

Give the Colts 100 coaches with what they have now, and they'll fail. Give them Manning with any of those 100 coaches and they'll succeed.

Put Brady and Belichick each on a bad team next year, and I'm pretty confident that Brady's team would be much much better than Bill's. Coaching matters, but not as much as talent.

SenselessChiefsFan · 12-01-2011, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

McCluster is not good. You guys need to just accept that he's a slow 5-7 RB who can't break or elude tackles. It's not coaching. He's just not that good. He's a shitty version of Dante Hall. A smaller, slower, less elusive version of Hall. A gadget player without the talent to fill that role. He's not an impact player. He's proven that over the course of 2 seasons. We get him in space over and over and he does NOTHING.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news...or-nfl-scouts/

McCluster is not as fast as Hall. But, he has run a 4.4. He isn't slow.

McCluster is about the same height as Hall, but a little less stout.

However, McCluster is much faster than Wes Welker. I just think that McDaniels would be able to put him in similar situations to Welker. Situations that could help him be more effective.

Look at Wes Welker's career before he got to New England. He had played in the NFL for four years prior to getting traded to New England.

Hey, it is always a combination of talent and coaches. I just think you can look around the NFL and see a ton of quick turnarounds by good coaches being added to teams.

As I said earlier, the 9ers are probably the easiest and best example of this in the current season.

SenselessChiefsFan · 12-01-2011, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

It's not an excuse for anything. It's an observation of cause and effect. I'm not defending anyone, I'm making a case for talent>scheme.

As for coaching having an impact more than any one player... no.

Give the Colts 100 coaches with what they have now, and they'll fail. Give them Manning with any of those 100 coaches and they'll succeed.

Put Brady and Belichick each on a bad team next year, and I'm pretty confident that Brady's team would be much much better than Bill's. Coaching matters, but not as much as talent.

And, you talke Brady and put him on a different team as a rookie and he could be selling insurance right now because a coach didn't see the talent that was there.

Manning probably gets at least a fair shot no matter where he goes due to where he was picked. But, lets say he goes to Cleveland. Do you really think he is the same Peyton Manning?

Yeah, NOW, after years of teaching and coaching, these guys could go anywhere and be successful.... but that is dependent on the coaching and teaching of these guys early in their careers.

How many times do you see a bust on one team go on to be successful on another?

There are so many moving pieces in all of these discusions. Heck, you give Haley the right pieces, an I know he can be successful. I saw it when he had Warner, Fitzgerald and Boldin. However, great coaches can get the most out of what they have.

SenselessChiefsFan · 12-01-2011, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

It's not an excuse for anything. It's an observation of cause and effect. I'm not defending anyone, I'm making a case for talent>scheme.

As for coaching having an impact more than any one player... no.

Give the Colts 100 coaches with what they have now, and they'll fail. Give them Manning with any of those 100 coaches and they'll succeed.

Put Brady and Belichick each on a bad team next year, and I'm pretty confident that Brady's team would be much much better than Bill's. Coaching matters, but not as much as talent.

I have to run, but I wanted to say that I think you are quality poster. I enjoyed the debate. I don't agree, but I appreciate that for the most part, you were respectful and more concerned with proving your point than anything else.

Thanks for the help wasting four hours of my day.

WhiteWhale · 12-01-2011, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news...or-nfl-scouts/

McCluster is not as fast as Hall. But, he has run a 4.4. He isn't slow.

McCluster is about the same height as Hall, but a little less stout.

However, McCluster is much faster than Wes Welker. I just think that McDaniels would be able to put him in similar situations to Welker. Situations that could help him be more effective.

Look at Wes Welker's career before he got to New England. He had played in the NFL for four years prior to getting traded to New England.

Hey, it is always a combination of talent and coaches. I just think you can look around the NFL and see a ton of quick turnarounds by good coaches being added to teams.

As I said earlier, the 9ers are probably the easiest and best example of this in the current season.

40 yard dash time is not the same as on field speed.

You know who was REALLY fast but never once got behind a defense or outran anyone? Sammie Parker. Yanno why? Not everyone carries that equipment the same. I haven't seen McCluster outrun anyone since opening day of 2010 when it was raining. He may run a 4.4 on track in shorts and no shirt... but the NFL is different and he's not a blazer on the field. I think assuming he can be Wes Welkerish is a bit much. I mean it was optimism when he was drafted to think that, but now? C'mon man.

You can also see team turn arounds by home-run draft picks that often accompany that new coach. Cowher was just Marty Jr. until they drafted Ben. We can debate this all day, but it's just a circular argument at this stage and we should probably stop.

FAX · 12-01-2011, 11:29 AM

Bro hugs for everybody!!

FAX

WhiteWhale · 12-01-2011, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FAX

Bro hugs for everybody!!

FAX

I do prefer all my discussions end that way. Hostility on the internet is like having phone sex... what's the ****ing point?

FAX · 12-01-2011, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

I do prefer all my discussions end that way. Hostility on the internet is like having phone sex... what's the ****ing point?

Never fear, for I am 100% simpatico with you on this deal.

For many a year (or even longer sometimes), I, myself, have stood tall and fully erect for goodness and niceness and right and virtue and kindnessness and proportionate tittahs and Triscuits with pepper cheese, Mr. WhiteWhale.

Not only that, but I am also pretty much against evil in all its forms. Especially reposts.

FAX

11-30-2011, 08:42 AM
SenselessChiefsFan MVP Join Date: Nov 2008 Casino cash: $10005450	Haley versus McDaniels For those that think I love Cassel, I don't. I just think that Haley isn't nearly the offensive coordinator that McDaniels is. I think the biggest reason that many on here think that Orton is better is because he had two years with McDaniels while the Chiefs had Haley, then Weis, and now Haley again. Orton and Cassel have both struggled this year. Haley had a great offense in Arizona with Kurt Warner. McDaniels had a great offense with Tom Brady, but he also has had good offenses with Kyle Orton and Matt Cassel....ahem.... Kyle Orton and Matt Cassel. In 2007, Haley's first as a offensive coordinator, there is no comparison. McDaniels had a record setting offense at the top of the league. Haley had the 12th best offense. Winner: McDaniels. Haley might get some credit here since he was in his first year with the Cardinals. But, The Pats set the world on fire and set records and were just so much better, that you have to give the nod to McDaniels. In 2008, Haley had the fourth rated offense. He had Kurt Warner, Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin, and Breaston. Granted, the running backs weren't great. Edgerin James wasn't quite what he once was and they had Tim Hightower. In 2008, McDaniels had the fifth rated offense. He had Matt Cassel, Randy Moss and Wes Welker. And, believe it or not, the running backs in NE were even MORE underwhelming. Lamont Jordon, Maroney, Sammy Morris. 2008 edge: Despite Arizona ranking one spot higher, it would be foolish not to notice the distinct advantage in talent around Haley. so the edge goes to McDaniels. 2009- Daniels had the 15th best offense. He had Orton, Marshall and Royal. He didn't have much of a running threat. In 2009, Haley had the 25th best offense. He had Matt Cassel, D-Bowe, and Charles. Yeah, he didn't give Charles a ton of time until the end of the season. Who's fault is that? Who is the coach that saw JC on the field every day and still decided to play LJ? In 2010, Haley had Weis as offensive coordinator. The Chiefs were 12th in offense. The Broncos were 13th. The Chiefs had better offensive talent. Jones was still playing well last year, JC was out of this world. They had D-Bowe and Moeaki as well. Luckily, Haley had Weis to know how to use the talent. With Weis, they managed to be one spot higher than the Broncos. McDaniels had Orton, B LLoyd, Eddie Royal. Yet, he managed to get to the 13th ranking. 2011. Finally, a year that Haley can probably claim as better than McDaniels. The Chiefs are 27th in offense. The Rams are 29th. Now, lets look at talent. Matt Cassel versus Sam Bradford. Bradford is the obvious answer. However, a second year guy going into a new system, and an offseason with no training camp. Again, Bradford is the better guy, but overall situation? Haley might have the better overall situation. Cassel and even Palko had been with the Chiefs for a full year. Both McDaniels and Haley have had to have two games played with their backup QB. Jackson is clearly superior to anything that the Chiefs have in the backfield since JC went down. However, look at the talent on the outside and you will see the Chiefs have Bowe, Breaston and Baldwin..... heck, even McCluster would probably be one of the Rams top two WR's. Not kidding. They have Brandon Lloyd and Brandon Gibson. That is their top two WR's. So, even conceding that they have the best QB and RB in St. Louis, you look at the fact that McDaniels came to a brand new team without an offseason and is only 2 spots worse than the team that Haley has been building for three years. McDaniels was a crappy personnel guy. I concede that fact every day of the week. But, when it comes down to x's and o's. He outshines Haley by a huge margin. I think Haley may be the better overall head coach, but from a purely offensive creativity and coordination standpoint. Haley is far inferior to McDaniels. And any comparison between Orton and Cassel has to be based in this reality. And, please understand, I am not a huge Cassel fan. I want him gone. But, this idea that Orton is an upgrade is fools gold. They are both mediocre QB's that have looked good under McDaniels. And, in Cassel's case, at least decent under Weis.
Posts: 5,540

12-01-2011, 10:59 AM	#81
listopencil Immanentize The Eschaton Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: In Partibus Infidelium Casino cash: $-1044120	Well that was a complete success. __________________ *While you live, shine. Have no grief at all. Life exists only for a short while and time demands its toll.*
Posts: 56,879

12-01-2011, 11:29 AM	#88
FAX testing ... 1, 2, 3 Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Tennessee Casino cash: $6753759	Bro hugs for everybody!! FAX
Posts: 44,492