After Nick Novak made just 6 of 10 field goals, the Kansas City Chiefs dropped their veteran kicker...

After Nick Novak made just 6 of 10 field goals, the Kansas City Chiefs dropped their veteran kicker and replaced him with rookie Connor Barth. Since then, the Wilmington native has nailed all six of his field goals including a 2-for-2 effort Sunday in the Chiefs’ 20-13 win over the Oakland Raiders.

Connor Barth Stays Perfect For Kansas City Chiefs | Cape Fear Sports Report

about 3 years ago Chris Thorman 19 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I love Barth but...

his longest attempt has been 48 yards. Not exactly a lot to test him yet. But he has been solid on manageable field goals which we really needed. And I’m a pretty big fan of his kickoffs as well.

by JayrodT on Nov 30, 2008 8:29 PM CST reply actions

True, he hasn't been tested by a huge pressure kick yet.

However, he’s a perfect 6/6 (I thought the two FGs today made him 8/8 though?) and he’s shown he can make the makeable kicks, unlike Medlock, Rayner or Novak.

by Seth_C on Nov 30, 2008 8:42 PM CST up reply actions

Agreed

I hate the feeling of not knowing whether the kicker will make a 30 yard kick. Even if he’s only 50% past 50 yards, it’s nice to have someone automatic up closer.

by Vince D on Nov 30, 2008 8:54 PM CST up reply actions

He's done everything he can so far

to try to convince us he’s a good kicker.

Arrowhead Pride

by Chris Thorman on Nov 30, 2008 8:59 PM CST up reply actions

8/8 With A 48 Yarder

Means there’s nothing to criticize in his performance. That’s more than we can say about any kicker since Nick Lowery pretty much.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Nov 30, 2008 9:00 PM CST up reply actions

He even kicked it into the endzone today on kickoffs

by Vince D on Nov 30, 2008 9:02 PM CST reply actions

+1

That was my only concern with him. If he can get his kickoffs in the endzone, we have ourselves a kicker for the foreseeable future.

by KCScuba on Nov 30, 2008 9:05 PM CST up reply actions

+11

Even if he can’t make 50+ers reliably, we could use some stability there.

by Bleedingredandgold on Nov 30, 2008 9:19 PM CST up reply actions

I think Barth & Leggett

are the real deal for this franchise and what we’re looking for. Good UFA acquistions. Now if we can get 2 of those a year + 2-3 solid performers from the draft how long will it take to build a team?

by KansasCityShuffle on Nov 30, 2008 11:05 PM CST reply actions

+1.

And don’t forget about Mike Cox.

by rockchalk on Dec 1, 2008 1:37 AM CST up reply actions

Another Mistake

Novak is just another example of how bad this staff is at evaluating talent. Anyone paying attention this spring knew that Barth won that job.

by bfos7215 on Dec 1, 2008 8:30 AM CST reply actions

not so sure

(Qualifier I didn’t follow the kickers that closely, so I’ll withdraw it if data proves me wrong)

Depends on if Herm thought there was more long-term upside to Novak, whether in “longer” leg, or more maturity.

I’d say it’s pretty clear that Herm is trying to build, and that’s how he’s been going about it: accepting short-term struggles, in hopes of getting above-average players, in the long run. When Novak failed to develop, Barth got another shot, just like players at another of other positions.

Hell, the practice squad’s been like a clown car this year. It’s been churning out bodies and leaving fans wondering “Where the hell did /he/ come from?!?”

by Bleedingredandgold on Dec 1, 2008 9:24 AM CST up reply actions

Barth Won The Job

He had a higher kicking percentage than Novak, he was more consistent than Novak, and (most importantly) he didn’t have a track record of failure in the NFL like Novak did (he hit the same FG percentage here that he did for the rest of his career).

The staff went with Novak because he was a “proven veteran” not because he was a good kicker. bfos is right about it calling into question the coaching staff’s ability to judge talent. We’re just lucky that nobody else grabbed Barth.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Dec 1, 2008 10:32 AM CST up reply actions

It is just a kicker

And teams find solid replacements all of the time. It could be argued that a “stud” kicker just doesn’t exist.

However, what the heck is the point of a competition for a job if performance isn’t a factor? I think the indictment to how this staff evaluates talent and builds a roster is more important to consider than the singular impact of rostering the wrong kicker for a few weeks.

by bfos7215 on Dec 1, 2008 11:04 AM CST up reply actions

Barth didn't "win" the job

in reality Novak and Barth were just about tied. The reason most people wanted Barth was that he was a rookie and people thought he had a much bigger upside than Novak. They thought that the tie should go to the rookie. But by no stretch did Barth flat out win it.

by JayrodT on Dec 1, 2008 11:57 AM CST reply actions

He far-and-away had the best percentage

in the so-called “contest” between Feely, Novak, and Barth…in fact I think he was perfect on the last day of that contest…that might be what UCrawford meant.

by PVChiefsfan on Dec 1, 2008 12:07 PM CST up reply actions