YOUTH OR EXPERIENCE?

by chiefskingfromcali on Jun 22, 2009 11:15 PM CDT

I've always been a believer that a good NFL team need a good combination of both with youth being 60% and experience being 40%. Vermeil used experience( not enough youth or good youth), and Herm went young (a little to much of young in my opinion). It seems like the good teams have a pretty even mix. Whats your take and do you think this years Chief team has a good balance in regards to a youth and experience mix.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.

Tweet Comment 27 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Definitely a plus to have some veterans

Not only for immediate talent but also teaching the rookies the ropes, although I think that aspect is overstated a bit.

Last year’s Chiefs were irresponsibly young in some positions.

Arrowhead Pride

by Joel Thorman on Jun 22, 2009 11:29 PM CDT reply actions

Now that the season is over.

It’s kind of nice to have loads of young guys with a year under there belts.

That’s assuming Herm/Gun didn’t teach too many bad habbits.

"...Said he couldn't go on the American way"

by Jux on Jun 26, 2009 5:10 PM CDT up reply actions

Good point......

About the bad habit’s, but i really get the feeling that this Football team is heading for greatness. With this team of young players we could do what the Pats did for the last decade. I think this team next year is going to kick some a$$ and could even get to the playoffs this year with alittle luck.

by CPT.Caveman on Jun 26, 2009 11:20 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

I still got your back Cavey :)

Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying

by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 27, 2009 12:32 AM CDT up reply actions

+100

by Zodeman on Jun 27, 2009 7:18 AM CDT up reply actions

I agree

You knew when Herm was asked about the San Diego job and he said “he was coaching a college team” that we were way to young. I believe in rebuilding, but WOW. What was he thinking. He made it alot of work for the this new staff. He did a pretty crappy job on the draft as well. Can you believe just because of his famous quote with the Jets that he landed a pretty cush job. Is he still getting 5 million because of his contract?

by chiefskingfromcali on Jun 22, 2009 11:44 PM CDT reply actions

I like the Colts/Steelers blueprint for assembling their rosters

Both teams keep their best players around as long as possible. They don’t go out and get big-money free agents: they work their magic through the draft and just reload. I think that’s what Herm was trying to do last season: just building through the draft. However there were too many young guys and not enough veteran leadership to help out. Indy and Pitt have always done well enough to find the right balance.

I don't have a girlfriend. I just know a lady who would be really mad if she heard me say that. -Mitch Hedberg

by mistamic on Jun 22, 2009 11:51 PM CDT reply actions

Yeah

In the Colts 2006 Super Bowl win they had like five players on the roster that they hadn’t drafted. That’s how crazy it is.

Arrowhead Pride

by Joel Thorman on Jun 23, 2009 12:07 AM CDT up reply actions

I remember that

That was crazy.. I like that the Colts and Steelers hold on to their players as long as possible it shows a lot of respect for their contributions over the years. But what I also like is that their not afraid to cut old guys if they’re getting in the way of developing youth. (Farrior) There’s an unstoppable train running in Pittsburgh and I hope we can get to that point

Time is a great teacher... unfortunately it kills all it's pupils.

by 808NaNz808 on Jun 23, 2009 3:24 AM CDT up reply actions

+1

Great teams don’t rebuild they reload. keeping players till they outgrow their need or ability.Very rarely overpaying but knowing when to let someone go is very underrated in my opinion. Both organizations are great at knowing when a player is overvalued.

by rockymtnchief on Jun 23, 2009 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions

Its ........

Hard to keep great players anymore, they all want more $$$ and they dont have that team loyality anymore.Man what i’d give for the days when football players just worried about making there team better and winning the Super-Bowl……….not how much money they could make playing for some other team, it sucks period.

by CPT.Caveman on Jun 24, 2009 11:22 PM CDT up reply actions

I agree

But I think the general attitude of the players is a direct result of the free agent market that teams have adopted. When you look at teams like pittburgh, that’s exactly how their players operate. They want to win and they all act like they are part of a collective.

Can we really blame players for playing the game of making money when that’s what all the teams are doing anyway? Hopefully the chiefs stay away from that type of drama. I don’t want my grabbers playing for the chiefs.

"...Said he couldn't go on the American way"

by Jux on Jun 26, 2009 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions

The youth movement failed

We had to suffer through the last two years because of it. Just like colts and Steelers you play your vets till a rookie beats them out of the job, you don’t just give the starting jobs to rookies, thats why we only won 6 games in 2 years. Well and having a head coach with the name of Herm also makes you loose games.

Herm is gone things are better with that one move!!

by bringbacktheglory on Jun 23, 2009 11:31 AM CDT reply actions

It should be easier to recover from a failed Youth movement than vice-versa

Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying

by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 23, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions

I disagree

The youth movement hasn’t “failed” unless the team doesn’t start winning this year or next.

What the movement did succeed in doing is bringing a VERY young, very talented core of players that SHOULD make this team great in the future.

yes, it failed to deliver wins in the first 2 years of a youth movement, but that’s not uncommon.
But, it wasn’t about winning immediately, it was about building a long term winner… and you can’t call that a failure after year #2

by stagdsp on Jun 23, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions

Ok Herms youth movement failed

he let go of good vets to give the jobs to rookies. as I said bringing in rookies is good but if you have vets that are better play the vets and let the rookies learn from them. Why do you think Clark cleaned house Peterson and Herm talked Clark into the youth movement and after two years of 6 wins he had enough.

Herm is gone things are better with that one move!!

by bringbacktheglory on Jun 23, 2009 11:01 PM CDT up reply actions

I can't say........

That Herm’s youth movement cost us anything. We werent going to the Super-Bowl with what we had, and now we have a young team with lots of talent, a great GM, a coach that works well with WR’s and doesnt take any shit from his player’s, and a QB of the future……….maybe. IMO we now have a team that could kick some ass for year to come.

by CPT.Caveman on Jun 24, 2009 11:30 PM CDT up reply actions

I wouldn't call it a failure

Given, letting go of guys like Casey Weigmann was probably a bad idea because we didn’t have any rookie or youngster to fill his place. What this youth movement lacked is veteran players to fill holes and play leadership roles. Our youth movement last year will result of the franchising of this program.. That’s if Todd Haley can get us t a super bowl and Scott Pioli is the guru people say he is

Time is a great teacher... unfortunately it kills all it's pupils.

by 808NaNz808 on Jun 23, 2009 2:06 PM CDT up reply actions

I’m sure I’m alone in thinking this, but I thought the re-build was the right way to go—and by that I mean the blow-up, all-out youth movement they did. My only problems with it were that Herm Edwards was still the coach, and Carl Peterson and his doofus scouts and doofus staff were still running the team.

by burntorangehorn on Jun 23, 2009 7:05 PM CDT reply actions

+1

Herm should have been Head Scout with Pioli and Haley to Actually coach em.

Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying

by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 23, 2009 7:17 PM CDT up reply actions

I thought they should have done it in Herm's first year

they were getting old and needed a serious facelift then. Peterson screwed Herm out of his best chance to make something here.

by Zodeman on Jun 23, 2009 8:35 PM CDT up reply actions

so how many teams

does Herm have to run in the ground before you realize he is a bad coach. Not trying to be mean but he couldn’t manage games,motivate players and to many more things to name.

Herm is gone things are better with that one move!!

by bringbacktheglory on Jun 23, 2009 11:08 PM CDT up reply actions

Herm had 'em playin' hard.

I know that doesn’t sound like much, but, other than some name FAs that Vermeil brought in, we saw years of players who played like the game was bigger than they were. We saw more fear of failure than eagerness for success in 90% of the players drafted and trained by the organization, dating back to Marty, imo. There’s a spark in the young players that wasn’t there before Herm, again, imo. I think that’s part of why we’re so excited this offseason. I think there are some men who will step up and play with fire this year – players whom Pioli and Haley inherited.

Herm’s a 9-7 coach, if you give him a decent team. Never going to finesse the finer points to win many of the close ones. But while I’ll remain alone with my reservations about the secondary until I see ’em play under Pendergast (and maybe join the majority), I do think the Chiefs hit on quite a few draft picks while Herm was there. And Herm WAS handed a team that had stretched itself thin to win a Championship in 5 years under DV. Still no excuse for winning fewer than 6 games a season, though.

by hmills110 on Jun 24, 2009 2:20 AM CDT up reply actions

Don't get me wrong

I’m not a big Herm Edwards fan. I just look at it objectively. He had the Jets in the playoffs 3 out of 5 years. His last year they were bad, but I think from what I’ve seen now that it was probably due to the conditioning and number of injuries sustained. When he came here, he screwed up and got us into the playoffs and Peterson put off the rebuilding. He was also saddled with a DC not of his choosing and I believe they never got along, which put additional poison in the system. I think Herm in reality had a good eye for talent. In reality he did not know how to coach it, manage a game, or be very creative in game plan. Had they made the youth movement in his first year as they should have, I don’t think things would have sunk to the levels they did. Do I think Herm was a good coach and would have taken us to the playoffs? HELL NO!!!!! But I also don’t think he was given a fair chance to succeed either.

by Zodeman on Jun 24, 2009 8:25 AM CDT up reply actions

Heh. burntorangehorn, you crack me up.

6 wins in 2 seasons is a clear failure of mgmt AND coaching. Nobody hates you. I think if Vermeil had stayed and called ALL the shots, the team was prob’ly due for a sub-.500 season in there, and a 2- or 3-year plan to get back into contention, but maybe 4 or 5 more years before making another serious play for the Lombardi. Too bad DV didn’t want to go through all that (and making do with what Carl brought him).

I don’t know that the youth movement was so much smart as it was the only option. Chiefs spent too much reaching for players that didn’t pan out, and losing their GOOD depth players and/or failing to make GOOD picks in the draft. And I personally thought there’s been too much tied up in the TE position, when the team was weak in more critical areas, and a good-enough TE can be found for much less than Tony’s franchise-plus plan.

But let’s give ‘em some credit. They’ve gotten some quality minutes out of a fair number of their recent draft picks, which says Pioli prob’ly has some pretty good pieces already on the board.

I’m not exactly sure how important the presence of some arbitrary number of experienced players is. Seems to me it’d depend on the quality of the training you’re giving to guys who (most of ‘em) have been playin’ organized football for over 10 years. I think if you had your shit together, you probably could win with the right set of young players.

by hmills110 on Jun 24, 2009 1:59 AM CDT up reply actions

Vermiel and Edwards can both be blamed for the situation the Chiefs are in...

Vermiel let the team get too old and was unable to draft effective defensive players. He also had no clue about building for the future. He was strictly focused on winning now but at what price?
Herm released some very good veteran players (T-Richardson, Wiegman, JA, etc.)and went too young and didn’t know anything about running an NFL offense. I still believe that if he had let Gunther run the defense the way he wanted to, our defense would not have been as bad as we have seen in the last year.

by Chiefsfan1970 on Jun 24, 2009 10:47 AM CDT reply actions