Assuming Herm is the Yes/No man in the draft...

[irishjayhawk]

Are you still down on him, for those that were?

[LiL stumppy]

Meh. this is one hell of a draft though.

[Chiefs Pantalones]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

Are you still down on him, for those that were?

No one is down on his eye of talent, they are down on his shitty coaching. Although when you have talent that makes coaching a lot easier. He's still a shitty coach. I would love to have him be our GM though.

[cdcox]

Making this picks was like falling off a log.

[el borracho]

This looks to be a great draft so far- but he should still be fired from the head coaching position.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by Vanilla Thunder

No one is down on his eye of talent, they are down on his shitty coaching. Although when you have talent that makes coaching a lot easier. He's still a shitty coach. I would love to have him be our GM though.

I asked that question way earlier about Herm being a GM and everyone said that he shouldn't be because of his picks: Pollard, Turk, Tank and Hali.

[Chiefs Pantalones]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

I asked that question way earlier about Herm being a GM and everyone said that he shouldn't be because of his picks: Pollard, Turk, Tank and Hali.

A draft can't be judged until 3 to 4 years down the road.

For example...the 2004 draft...complete failure. We have no one on this roster from that draft.

[BigVE]

If we did not have such a sucky season last year (thanks Herm) we would not have had the 5th pick OR a chance at Dorsey. All depends on how you want to look at it I guess.

[KcMizzou]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Making this picks was like falling off a log.

By that measure, we weren't good enough to fall off a log before....

[DaWolf]

Herm knows talent. Problem is he doesn't surround himself with great assistants. So on gameday, he looks like a worse coach than he is.

He's one of those guys though that if you give him a talented team, and surround him with great assistants, he can win with it. I think he's like Dungy in that way. Dungy looked like crap in Tampa too, but give him Manning and a great OC and he's a SB coach...

[el borracho]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

I asked that question way earlier about Herm being a GM and everyone said that he shouldn't be because of his picks: Pollard, Turk, Tank and Hali.

It's too early to give a comprehensive critique but none of those guys have looked fantastic to this point. Hali has looked like a solid player (which you would expect from a late 1st rounder); Pollard, Tank and Turk haven't really excelled, considering their draft status. Of course, if Herm were smart enough to play them more last year we would know that much more about them.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by DaWolf

Herm knows talent. Problem is he doesn't surround himself with great assistants. So on gameday, he looks like a worse coach than he is.

He's one of those guys though that if you give him a talented team, and surround him with great assistants, he can win with it. I think he's like Dungy in that way. Dungy looked like crap in Tampa too, but give him Manning and a great OC and he's a SB coach...

That's pretty much the way I look at it.

Great coaching tends to go hand-in-hand with great talent. The question is which one is the chicken and which the egg.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by Vanilla Thunder

A draft can't be judged until 3 to 4 years down the road.

For example...the 2004 draft...complete failure. We have no one on this roster from that draft.

You have to consider Albert and our two thirds as part of the 2004 draft.

[Old Dog]

Hell, even Carl is getting a pass from me today

[whoman69]

Originally Posted by Vanilla Thunder

A draft can't be judged until 3 to 4 years down the road.

For example...the 2004 draft...complete failure. We have no one on this roster from that draft.

I always hear that, and its not entirely true. The way to grade a draft from the bat is by judging the talent they have based upon where they were picked. Take a pick like Kawika Mitchell. The conventional wisdom was that the Chiefs had reached to take him in the 2nd when he could have been available in the 5th. Too much in recent years have we been drafting based upon potential instead of what the player has shown on the field. Its shown in the lack of talent we have received. It doesn't make sense to pick a player in the 2nd or 3rd when they're going to still be in play 2 rounds later. The Chiefs have done a poor job of prioritizing talent in the draft.