The #1 reason CP should say YES to Al Saunders - (And the main reason he won't)

[B_Ambuehl]

Forget about the fact that he's coordinated the top offense in the nfl the last 4 years. Forget the fact that he's obviously the best candidate available and already on the staff. Forget the fact that whether he stays or goes could decide whether hall of famers on the offensive line stay or go.

The real reason Saunders should be named head coach is right here. The real reason Saunders WON'T be named head coach is also right here as well.

This was from last summer and I bookmarked it for future reference.

Some of you may recall a guy from the coalition by the name of "former db" from training camp last year. He's a media guy and former football player from Pittsburgh who is also a die hard chiefs fan. He covered the Chiefs training camp last year and provided some really good interviews and info. Anyway, he had this to say about a conversation with Frank Ganz last summer:

http://www.chiefscoalition.com/Forum...=29295&hl=ganz

Some of you already know I'm up here in Pittsburgh. Frank Gantz Sr. lives here too and we're very familiar with each other because he is, of course the former coach and he knows me from my job as a television reporter.

Now that thats out of the way, I spotted Gantz and his wife in a grocery store, Whole Foods (bunch of healthy stuff).
He was wearing Chiefs shorts, t-shirt and cap, he made me laugh.

Anyway here are some of the things he shared with me based on the conversations he has with Vermeil about three times a week.

NEW COACH:
Gantz believes Herman Edwards will get strong consideration as the next Chiefs head coach, for a couple of reasons. First, he says head coaches wear out their welcome very fast, even if they're winners. Most importantly, he says the Chiefs front office is enamored with Edwards. Al Saunders will be considered too HOWEVER... HOWEVER, Saunders and Carl Peterson are the two primary parities in regards to the political in-fighting within the organziation. Gantz says the Saunders doesn't back down to Peterson, gets in his face and will tell him his ideas are wrong. They don't share the same philosophy in regards to player evaluations either. I got the strong impression, and Gantz feels this too, that Saunders would be the person to knock Peterson's ego sideways. So Gantz wouldn't be surpirsed if Saunders is passed over as Vermeil's successor.

LARRY JOHNSON:
He says the Chiefs are very sorry Derrick Blaylock is gone. They say that Larry Johnson can't do nearly as many things as Blaylock. They must reconfigure a lot of packages minimize Johnson's short-comings. Gantz says Johson can run, but there's a lot more to the game than just running the rock.

BOOMER GRIGSBY:
May be a starter. Gantz and I had fun talking about the MLB position, as does everyone else. Vermeil told him that Boomer is awesome and that Vermeil isn't letting on to how well this guy REALLY is to the media. Apparently, Boomer is ALWAYS, ALWAYS in position to make the tackle and his technique is flawless. Here's the funny part of our conversation, Gantz asked me why did Grigsby last until the 5th round. I'm like, DUHHHHH!!! He laughed like hell. Gantz and I both think the battle at MLB is between Boomer and Scanlon. He really likes Kawitka Mitchell but it doesn't seem like he's the answer. Everybody is caught up with Boomer's mentality and core toughness to play the position. I informed Gantz of Boomer's gymnastics background and he was even further impressed with the kid.

KENDRELL BELL:
He's NOT healthy from what Vermeil shared with Gantz. Now I thought Bell came back to practice after straining his groin. Perhaps Vermeil is keeping his health undercover but Gantz' voice was noticably grim when talking about Bell's health.
I just hope he is 100 percent by training camp.

GANTZ:
We plan on bumping into each other at training camp because Vermeil asked him to address the team and Gantz is excited to do so. He and I both believe the Chiefs were brilliant in drafting the punter in the third round. Now, while we talked for about 20 minutes, his wife was smoothly filling the cart. She's a wonderful lady, very understanding of two football nuts talking Chiefs football at the deli counter.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic

I thought his name was Ganz, not Gantz.

Yeah, it was discussed last summer, when this guy's talk with Ganz was posted here the first time.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by jspchief

Wrong. The reason our scoring is off is because our red zone performance has dropped off a cliff. It has nothing to do with turnovers and everything to do with settling for FGs where we used to get TDs.

There are a lot of reasons for our red zone performance dropping off IMO. The biggest is the loss of Priest Holmes. Say whatever you want about LJ being the better back, but no one had an eye for the endzone like Holmes. Another reason is Tony Gonzalez. He just isn't the guy he used to be. His hands aren't as good and he isn't as fast. He's no longer a threat inside the 20 like he once was.

This offense is on the decline. It might be masked by a stud young RB, but it's happening. The age of these guys is catching up. One of these days it's going be the the Gannon led Raiders where the drop-off becomes dramatic. Then we'll be stuck with Al Saunders trying to make Todd Collins do what Green did, Kris Wilson do what Gonzo did, and Jordan Black do what Roaf did. And when it fails the team will be stuck with a bunch of guys Saunders brought in to try and keep the flame burning a few years longer.

I'm not on the Al Saunders bandwagon.

But if Al were hired, I'm not overly concerned with the scenario you've described playing out.

There was an article about Al that was posted to the planet about 3-4 months ago, and one thing he made fairly clear is that he learned the mistake of trying to extend the life of an aging team, and trying to continue doing the things that had been working before with less talented players.

I, of course, am paraphrasing.

He said that was his biggest mistake in his first opportunity as a HC.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by tk13

I don't think that's true at all. You're just being emotional again. You think Al would call the last 5 years a total success? You really think so? And you think Al would just carry on dong the same things DV did? I don't think so at all. Al's coached under Coryell, Marty, and DV... that's about as wide a range as you can get. I consider Al a unique individual, independent of all of those different coaches. And he's been successful with all of them.

With any team, Chiefs or otherwise, hiring Al means Al was a success, and he was. That's like saying you don't wanna hire Ron Rivera because his team's offense sucked and kept them from being successful.

I wouldn't mind Ron Rivera at all. He's never coached for the Chiefs, which is prerequisite #1 on my list.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I wouldn't mind Ron Rivera at all. He's never coached for the Chiefs, which is prerequisite #1 on my list.

I know. Thank God you aren't making that decision. That's one of the most illogical things I've ever heard.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by SideWinder

I'm not on the Al Saunders bandwagon.

But if Al were hired, I'm not overly concerned with the scenario you've described playing out.

There was an article about Al that was posted to the planet about 3-4 months ago, and one thing he made fairly clear is that he learned the mistake of trying to extend the life of an aging team, and trying to continue doing the things that had been working before with less talented players.

I, of course, am paraphrasing.

He said that was his biggest mistake in his first opportunity as a HC.

Which further reinforces my previous point. There's just as good a chance that Al keeps this offense going as there is that he starts fresh...

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by tk13

I know. Thank God you aren't making that decision.

Yeah, lord knows that we should prepare for the next 5 years of futility by hiring someone that's well-versed in being mediocre...

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by SideWinder

I'm not on the Al Saunders bandwagon.

But if Al were hired, I'm not overly concerned with the scenario you've described playing out.

There was an article about Al that was posted to the planet about 3-4 months ago, and one thing he made fairly clear is that he learned the mistake of trying to extend the life of an aging team, and trying to continue doing the things that had been working before with less talented players.

I, of course, am paraphrasing.

He said that was his biggest mistake in his first opportunity as a HC.

That would seem to blow a hole in the reason many people want to keep him around.

Maybe he knows better than to try and cling to an aging team, but I have a hard time believing he'd be capable of saying good-bye to some of these guys when the time comes. I don't want to be clinging to an ineffective Trent Green for nostalgia's sake.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Yeah, lord knows that we should prepare for the next 5 years of futility by hiring someone that's well-versed in being mediocre...

You don't know if Al is going to be mediocre though. You have absolutely no clue. You are just making an assumption. You could sit here and talk until your head fell off of your shoulders, and it would not make your point any more logical.

I wouldn't call Al's job here the last 5 years mediocre either really.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by jspchief

That would seem to blow a hole in the reason many people want to keep him around.

Maybe he knows better than to try and cling to an aging team, but I have a hard time believing he'd be capable of saying good-bye to some of these guys when the time comes. I don't want to be clinging to an ineffective Trent Green for nostalgia's sake.

I think the reason that most Al Bandwagoners are on that bandwagon is because he won't start to rebuild next season, and possibly two.

[FringeNC]

Originally Posted by gochiefs

Then how do you account for last year?

We had a better offense last year. More red zone opportunities + higher conversion rate....

Here's a stat for you. Through 14 games, Cinci had 11 more red zone opportunities than we did, despite virtually identical total offenses. Why? Look at the ridiculous number of turnovers Cincy has gotten...like we did in 2003.

2004 was the high mark for this offense. We averaged quite a bit more yards per game, and did have better red zone performance.

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by tk13

You don't know if Al is going to be mediocre though. You have absolutely no clue.

Neither do you.

We are all expressing opinions based on nothing but our own guesses and assumptions.

I guess the biggest difference to me is that some people believe that Al can fix this team, while I believe he can't.

I don't expect some new coach to come in and fix our current team. I expect him to build his own team.

Look at the teams that are in the play-offs this year. How many of them are built from a young nucleus, and how many of them are extensions of a crumbling empire?

Joe New Coach won't win us the Superbowl next year. But in 2008, we might have something that resembles the '06 Bengals, rather than something that resembles the '06 Rams.

[tk13]

We also had better special teams coverage/blocking in 2003.

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by SideWinder

I think the reason that most Al Bandwagoners are on that bandwagon is because he won't start to rebuild next season, and possibly two.

I agree.

And that's why I'm against Saunders. I think the rebuilding process needs to be started sooner. We have a decent young nucleus on defense IMO, and I don't think we can wait until they want their big money contracts to start replacing our aging offense.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by jspchief

I agree.

And that's why I'm against Saunders. I think the rebuilding process needs to be started sooner. We have a decent young nucleus on defense IMO, and I don't think we can wait until they want their big money contracts to start replacing our aging offense.

I agree with you, which is the primary reason I'm not on the Al Bandagon.

[FringeNC]

Originally Posted by tk13

We also had better special teams coverage/blocking in 2003.

And Dante Hall hasn't returned many this year.