Saunders-haters: Why NOT Al?

[Mr. Kotter]

Why rebuild, when you can reload? Come on, hear me out on this....

I've read here and elsewhere, it's because CP doesn't "like" Saunders; or he has different politics than the rest of the FO. I've read that he's pissed off LJ; and that LJ is CP's boy. I've read Al gets too "cute" with his play calling. I've read he's already been a HC, and failed. While there may be some element of truth to each of those charges....as major reasons to not consider hiring Saunders, I just don't buy any of it.

This is football. While the team has suffered as a result of DV's neglect of the defense IMO, Al has done his job extremely well. Saunders has been a big part of some of the most consistently successful offenses in the history of the league. The Chief's offense the last five years has been a joy to watch--90% of the time. If Roaf comes back, filling Shields spot is the only significant task left to do on that side of the ball. Yes, developing a young tackle or two, finding a QBOTF, converting Wilson from TE to FB to replace TRich (or something like that-heh), and signing a quality back up for LJ, are all we would really need to do for the next two or three years on Offense. Very "doable" in my mind.

Now, having said that......something dramatic has to be done on the Defensive side of the ball. However, who's to say that with Saunders taking over, that he and CP won't be able to cherry-pick the coaches that are worth keeping, while at the same time hiring new coaches in key areas.....



Along with a couple of key additions to the defensive personnel, in the draft and in FA (provided we can clear the cap room) and I think we will have just reloaded, instead of rebuilding.

Thoughts, comments, or reactions?

[Amnorix]

IMHo there's alot to be said for continuity for an offense that has consistently been among the best over the past few years, rather than restarting with someone else's scheme.

One side of the ball works. Keep that part. Fix the part that doesn't.

[chiefz]

Originally Posted by Mr. Kotter

I agree.

But what works in one game and situation, against one team....isn't necessarily going to work against another team, in a slightly different situation necessarily.

It's only obvious because it didn't work, that time. How many OTHER times, on other plays has LJ MADE that block? I honestly don't know the answer, but I suspect he's MADE the block more than a few times....

Being an OC is a tough, tough job. It involves a lot of preparation and study, no doubt. However, there is an element of educated-"guessing" that is always present. When they succeed they look like a genius; when they fail, they are a goat.

Al's been much more of a "genious" than a goat.

Has he had good and experienced players? Yup. But there have also been a lot of good players on teams who haven't achieved what our offense has achieved over the past five years.

I understand that but what I'm pointing out specifically are instances in the same game, when you get away from what works and end up shooting yourself in the foot.

[dtebbe]

Originally Posted by Mr. Kotter

That's a good response. That is a reasonable take, IMO. If we want a possible return to Martyball, then it makes sense.

I can buy that. Rep.

In defense of Marty, he never had a back like Larry Johnson in the backfield... Maybe Barry Word comes close to LJ's power/speed, but I think LJ is clearly a step above that. Just because you bring in a defensive minded coach, does not mean you have to go conservative on the other side of the ball. The bears are that way because they don't have a very good (proven) QB or RB.

DT

[Lurch]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

IMHo there's alot to be said for continuity for an offense that has consistently been among the best over the past few years, rather than restarting with someone else's scheme.

One side of the ball works. Keep that part. Fix the part that doesn't.

Unfortunately, given the how this FO operates, I'm not sure we can hire Saunders as HC, and dump most or all of the defensive guys. If we can, I think that should be option number one.

[dtebbe]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

IMHo there's alot to be said for continuity for an offense that has consistently been among the best over the past few years, rather than restarting with someone else's scheme.

One side of the ball works. Keep that part. Fix the part that doesn't.

That sounds simple enough, it just seems that offensive minded HCs never seem to be able to put a good defense on the field. I would point to our drafting of Kris Wilson (despite how bad our defense was/is) as a prime example. We need defense, and we draft a "toy" for Al Saunders. And thus far that "toy" has been played with about as much as a chia pet.

DT

[Fat Elvis]

Stupid cute plays on offense will appear on defense (not that it would hurt our d that much). But can you imagine Saunders pulling something out of his ass like having all the defensive line drop back in coverage, the linebackers rushing to the sidelines and having the secondary crash the middle?

yeah, that's why not

[dtebbe]

Originally Posted by Fat Elvis

Stupid cute plays on offense will appear on defense (not that it would hurt our d that much). But can you imagine Saunders pulling something out of his ass like having all the defensive line drop back in coverage, the linebackers rushing to the sidelines and having the secondary crash the middle?

yeah, that's why not

OMFG!



YES!

The sad thing is that the play would probably work, but 5 missed tackles later the opponent would score anyway.....

DT

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by dtebbe

In defense of Marty, he never had a back like Larry Johnson in the backfield... Maybe Barry Word comes close to LJ's power/speed, but I think LJ is clearly a step above that. Just because you bring in a defensive minded coach, does not mean you have to go conservative on the other side of the ball. The bears are that way because they don't have a very good (proven) QB or RB.

DT

Marty had several good backs, but he'd never commit the ball to them. Even after Okoye's league-leading 1989 campaign, he just HAD to bring in Word to share carries.

Marty was his won worst enemy, and still is.

We CAN get a defensive-minded HC without having to go through Martyball again...

[ck_IN]

I don't want him because I view him as a mini DV. Perhaps that's incorrect but I want the DV stain removed from this team.

[chiefz]

Originally Posted by Fat Elvis

But can you imagine Saunders pulling something out of his ass like having all the defensive line drop back in coverage

You mean like Greg Robinson did against the Colts in the playoffs?

[Lurch]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

...

We CAN get a defensive-minded HC without having to go through Martyball again...

So, what does your short list of such candiates look like?

[Wile_E_Coyote]

at one time the Chiefs had the largest & most expensive coaching staff in the NFL. If they can dump that bloat & keep Saunders fine.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Lurch

So, what does your short list of such candiates look like?

Mike Trgovac and Kirk Ferentz (for selfish reasons) would be my top 2 choices.

[Frankie]

Originally Posted by Mr. Kotter

Why rebuild, when you can reload? Come on, hear me out on this....

I've read here and elsewhere, it's because CP doesn't "like" Saunders; or he has different politics than the rest of the FO. I've read that he's pissed off LJ; and that LJ is CP's boy. I've read Al gets too "cute" with his play calling. I've read he's already been a HC, and failed. While there may be some element of truth to each of those charges....as major reasons to not consider hiring Saunders, I just don't buy any of it.

This is football. While the team has suffered as a result of DV's neglect of the defense IMO, Al has done his job extremely well. Saunders has been a big part of some of the most consistently successful offenses in the history of the league. The Chief's offense the last five years has been a joy to watch--90% of the time. If Roaf comes back, filling Shields spot is the only significant task left to do on that side of the ball. Yes, developing a young tackle or two, finding a QBOTF, converting Wilson from TE to FB to replace TRich (or something like that-heh), and signing a quality back up for LJ, are all we would really need to do for the next two or three years on Offense. Very "doable" in my mind.

Now, having said that......something dramatic has to be done on the Defensive side of the ball. However, who's to say that with Saunders taking over, that he and CP won't be able to cherry-pick the coaches that are worth keeping, while at the same time hiring new coaches in key areas.....



Along with a couple of key additions to the defensive personnel, in the draft and in FA (provided we can clear the cap room) and I think we will have just reloaded, instead of rebuilding.

Thoughts, comments, or reactions?

Like I've been saying. That is the intelligent way to go with this team. Rep.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Frankie

Like I've been saying. That is the intelligent way to go with this team. Rep.

Except that you refuse to accept the very real possibility that we retain Saunders but the offense still changes.

It happened with the defense when Gunther became HC, it can happen again.

Saunders is NOT a guarantee, only a hope. And I'd rather pin my hope on someone who hasn't already been part of five years of Chiefs futility.