Chiefs’ Problems Start with Pioli and Haley
by Jon Yoon on Sep 29, 2009 8:42 AM CDT
135 comments
Let me start by saying I firmly believe Scott Pioli and Todd Haley deserve at least two or three years to make their mark on this franchise before we can truly evaluate how well they're doing. And I realize that Pioli was posed with the challenge of cleaning up other people's messes.
But that doesn't change the fact that they both made critical mistakes this offseason, and those mistakes are going to delay the development of this franchise. Matt Conner had a great piece earlier in the week about the same issues. I'm going to add some opinions of my own to that.
I haven't been shy in saying that I really like the acquisition of Matt Cassel. He has the potential to be a very good quarterback in the NFL and I commend Pioli for bringing him in and locking him in to a long-term deal, but the instant he made that move, he should have made building an offensive line his top priority. It's not like we're talking about veterans like Brett Favre or Jeff Garcia here. We're talking about a quarterback who is still learning the game and needs quality reps. We're talking about a quarterback who was brought in moreso for his upside than he was for what he can do right now.
I'm about to say something that is going to make a lot of you very uncomfortable: Scott Pioli and Todd Haley have unapologetically set Matt Cassel up for failure this season. I don't know if that was ego, as Whitlock will probably tell you. Either way, it's inexcusable.
You don't have to look very far to understand how to best develop a quarterback. You're seeing it right now in New York with Mark Sanchez at the helm for the Jets, and you saw it last year with Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan. You develop a quarterback by surrounding him with a terrific running game that runs hard and often, and by giving him quality passing reps. Granted, it helped that all three of those quarterbacks were drafted by teams that were a lot further along in the rebuild than the Chiefs were, but you get the point. In each of those situations, their head coaches decided to do a few things: 1) build the quarterback's confidence by not forcing him to win games all by himself that early; 2) allow opposing defenses to play in a run-first mode, thus making it much easier to move the ball in the passing game; 3) teach the quarterback good habits by giving him the time to think through and execute plays.
Cassel isn't a rookie and you don't need to coddle him nearly as much as the above three quarterbacks, but he's still a young quarterback who has a lot to prove and a lot to learn. Pioli's number one priority after drafting Matt Cassel should have been to surround him with as good of an offensive line as he could put together. I'm not talking about long-term solutions; I'm just talking about short-term stopgaps and upgrades. It's not like that's a tall task. How hard is it really to upgrade from Damion McIntosh, Adrian Jones, and Rudy Niswanger? If we truly believe that decisions start from up top, then Pioli was the man who looked at videotape of our offensive line and decided that it was acceptable. In his defense, nobody knew that Goff, Waters, and Albert were going to be this bad, but he certainly knew that Niswanger and McIntosh would be. At least, I hope he did.
Instead, he prioritized defense over offense in his push to quickly install a 3-4 defense. Strange, given that when Pioli first started to build "the Patriot Way," the majority of his first-day draft picks were offensive players. Strange, given that when Brady first started playing quarterback, he played mostly in a role where the Pats didn't ask too much of their young quarterback. Instead, in 2009, Pioli's first three draft picks were defensive players, including a cornerback this team didn't even really need. In free agency, he picked up two defensive free agents who are currently starting. It took a few weeks into the preseason and an injured starting quarterback for Pioli to realize that maybe the offensive line was a problem.
Really?
On Sunday, we got a bitter taste of why that decision was a lousy one and it wasn't because the Chiefs were outmatched-that was going to happen anyway. It wasn't because the Chiefs lost-they were expected to lose over 10 games this season anyway. It's because our supposed franchise quarterback has to run a watered-down version of an offense because his offensive line can't hold a block. The Chiefs' offensive line was a complete embarrassment against the Eagles. Cassel couldn't even complete his dropback most of the time. On many quick-hit, short screens, Cassel was still getting destroyed. It was easily the worst performance from a Chiefs' offensive line that I've ever seen.
I've heard several people complain that Haley gave up in the second half, but anyone who paid attention to what happened in the first half knows that the alternative wasn't any better. Cassel was getting clobbered on short, 5-yard routes, what makes people think he'd have any kind of time to throw the ball downfield? Haley's only options were to run the ball or take a sack.
I don't fault Haley for the playcalling. I do fault him for a lot of other things.
Haley doesn't have any problem feeding Cassel to the sharks. I can only imagine that Cassel, like any young player, had some jitters about playing in a new offense. In order to overcome those jitters, you have to practice. A lot. The problem is, Haley hasn't given Cassel that opportunity. He's been so busy setting examples for disobedient players that he hasn't stopped to think that maybe playing musical chairs with receivers makes it very difficult for Cassel to establish any kind of working relationship with his targets. He chose to bench Bowe in a preseason game where Cassel needed quality reps, and he chose to bench his second camp target, Mark Bradley, in favor of a receiver they just signed that week. Given that Bowe was blanketed by arguably the best cornerback in the league, it's pretty unsettling that Cassel's top target against the Raiders was a receiver he had thrown to for only a few days (and keep in mind, Cassel wasn't practicing at 100% that week).
You can only hope that what he's doing now out of necessity doesn't develop into long-term bad habits, such as taking off at the first sign of trouble or locking on to a first read. The good news is, at least Cassel is learning from some good coaches. Oops. That's right. Pioli and Haley decided that it was a good idea to let Haley coach quarterbacks, in addition to his coordinating and head coaching duties. It's not that Haley is a bad quarterbacks coach; it's just that I can't imagine where in the world he'll ever find time to focus on Cassel, let alone Croyle and Thigpen. Cassel shouldn't have a selectively available quarterbacks coach; he should have one who is available to him all times of the day and week.
This season shouldn't have been about winning or losing. It should have been about Matt Cassel. I can accept wins and losses, as long as I see Cassel get better week after week after week. Unfortunately, the Chiefs are not going to have much opportunity this season to do that. And what's worse, they're letting him take the fall for mistakes they made this offseason. Here's an idea: rather than half-heartedly support your starting quarterback and spark rumors of a quarterback controversy, how about we stop playing games and start working our tails off to give him the resources to learn to become a better quarterback.
I can handle an 0-16 season. What I can't handle is the Chiefs throwing Cassel onto a deserted island and forcing him to fend for himself.
3 recs |
135 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Outstanding Analysis, Jon
Well stated and I agree with you.
Moderator - Arrowhead Pride
Predictions for 2009
1. Todd Haley's going to struggle with managing his staff in his rookie year as head coach.
6. The Chiefs will go 7-9 in 2009, good for 2nd in the AFC West. Revision: We go 5-11 and finish behind Oakland.
7. Ryan Succop will not perform better in 2009 than Connor Barth did in 2008.
8. The Chiefs will have a bottom 10 defense this year.
9. RB will be a problem area this season on offense.
by UCrawford on Sep 29, 2009 8:55 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Except For The 0-16 Season Part
If the Chiefs go 0-16, there’s not a person in that front office or on that coaching staff who shouldn’t be terrified about losing their jobs.
Moderator - Arrowhead Pride
Predictions for 2009
1. Todd Haley's going to struggle with managing his staff in his rookie year as head coach.
6. The Chiefs will go 7-9 in 2009, good for 2nd in the AFC West. Revision: We go 5-11 and finish behind Oakland.
7. Ryan Succop will not perform better in 2009 than Connor Barth did in 2008.
8. The Chiefs will have a bottom 10 defense this year.
9. RB will be a problem area this season on offense.
by UCrawford on Sep 29, 2009 8:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed there.
I do think we are better than the Browns though.
We should at least have a shot at the Browns and Raiders.
D-Bowe, Mark Bradley, Bobby Engram and Turtle. Four Chiefs WRers. 4 Pro Bowlers.
by Patrick Allen on Sep 29, 2009 8:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For the love of god...
we are not going to go 0-16. As for this post: my eyeballs are going to pop out of my head. I think they knew the offensive line was going to be a work in progress, but they didn’t know it was going to be the worst in the league. Albert, Waters, and Goff are to blame for how inept the line is right now. They are suppose to be the proven guys that preform week in and week out. Niswanger had started for one year and he was definitively a player you could say had upside. I mean I would have loved to have Jason Brown, but the Rams overpaid for him. I bet you guys would have gave Brown a fucking 100M contract. And the only way to have fixed the RT position this year would of been with the #3 overall pick!!! There was no one in free agency with the exception of Stacey Andrews who to play with his brother in Philly. People need to stop blaming Pioli and look at the three aforementioned players: Albert, Waters, and Goff. Jesus, woulda coulda shoulda, except you can’t accept that there wasn’t even an alternative back in March or April. They did what they could without getting too desperate and using the #3 overall pick on a right tackle!
by I_Bleed_Red. on Sep 29, 2009 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I disagree with your premise
not about 0-16, who cares – but about Albert and Waters – right now they’re about the only two OL that can honestly be counted on week to week – ok, so Waters had an off day vs Eagles, get over it – he and Albert are light years ahead of where Goff might be in his dreams, much less Rudy N
I won’t question that there wasn’t much out there, in fact, I agree … but I’d far rather have seen KC use the #3 pick on an OL (or even trade down a few notches and get two 1st rounders) and spend the year getting the OL UNIT (that’s everyone) practicing and playing together, as a UNIT, day after day after day, even with Croyle as the QB, than to see it spent on a DL … OL is the one UNIT that takes the longest to develop, and it’s the one UNIT that NEEDS to be together, in practice and in game-time, as much as possible
instead, we have Haley playing “musical depth charts” with … well … just about every position on the team, leading to a complete lack of cohesion, and a lack of faith in the players by the coach
the bus is coming and Haley needs to realize it’s way bigger than he is
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too early to tell.
Let’s see if O’Callaghan makes a difference, and if Ndukwe winds up at RG.
The thing about Waters is he wanted to practice in pads on Friday, but Haley went with the shells. Sounds like Waters maybe wants the o-line to do better, but if he gave a damn (or had any sense), he’d’ve shown up in OTAs and done some leading THEN. Wanting to practice in pads on Friday when it’s time to SAVE players for the marathon season, is too little too late.
I’ve seen too many GOOD O-Linemen come right in and perform (for various teams) to think this is a unit cohesion issue. I think that’s overblown by pundits. Especially with regard to the Chiefs O-Line, where the individual efforts, themselves, were so miserable. These weren’t teamwork errors. These were “Look at me! I’m gonna fuck this up for y’all!” errors.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have to expect...
a lot more out of Albert and Waters than we have seen in the first three games. Yeah, they are leaps and bounds above everyone else, but that doesn’t mean we should be satisfied with mediocre play. As for the depth chart scramble, Haley hasn’t done that on the offensive line until he made the O’Callaghan switch. And I applaud him for doing it in other areas. Making players earn their spots, never them get comfortable with “good enough”. You wanted to draft a lineman with the 2nd round pick instead of trade for Cassel, huh? Yeah I would definitely go with an interior offensive lineman of starting caliber QB like Cassel. Getting talent in the NFL is all about opportunity. You have to take it when it comes.
by I_Bleed_Red. on Sep 29, 2009 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
mediocrity would be a lot better than what the right side has produced thus far
point taken on talent acquisition, but then again, at what price? if the foundation of a house collapses, so will everything above it … now, since Cassel has no time to throw, we have basically given up a 2nd round pick for the “talent” to hand the ball off to the RB Du Jour to get stuffed before he gets to the line
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 6:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only other point I question is...
I’ve heard several people complain that Haley gave up in the second half, but anyone who paid attention to what happened in the first half knows that the alternative wasn’t any better. Cassel was getting clobbered on short, 5-yard routes, what makes people think he’d have any kind of time to throw the ball downfield? Haley’s only options were to run the ball or take a sack.
I don’t fault Haley for the playcalling. I do fault him for a lot of other things.
FIGURE IT OUT!!… You aren’t just a coordinator anymore. It’s your job as head coach to figure these things out at half time. That’s what great coaches do….adjust at half time. Great coaches do not quit and just say….whelp we can’t do nothing about it derherher. It’s not like the Eagle suprised us by blitzing, everyone knew that was going to be the case. As everyone knows when they are blitzing all the time, there is someone wide open all the time. FIGURE IT OUT HALEY….at least try to. I would have rather lost by 50 and tried, than lose by 20 and give up.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 29, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's My Thought On It Too
I never thought the Chiefs would be good this year. I can even handle it if they’re bad. What I won’t tolerate is when their head coach quits on games like he did against Philly…because when that happens this team’s never going anywhere. You can be incompetent in the NFL and survive…sometimes even succeed. But you can never be somebody who quits and expect to last.
Moderator - Arrowhead Pride
Predictions for 2009
1. Todd Haley's going to struggle with managing his staff in his rookie year as head coach.
6. The Chiefs will go 7-9 in 2009, good for 2nd in the AFC West. Revision: We go 5-11 and finish behind Oakland.
7. Ryan Succop will not perform better in 2009 than Connor Barth did in 2008.
8. The Chiefs will have a bottom 10 defense this year.
9. RB will be a problem area this season on offense.
by UCrawford on Sep 29, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not when the only effective halftime adjustment would be 5 brain transplants for their O-Linemen.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 4:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed.... figure it out
bring in 2 TE and 2 RB in pass protection
roll the QB out of the pocket on every play
run the arrowspread
whatever you have to do….
get enough blockers in there, and call plays that have a chance.
* "I doubt anyone will miss Connor Barth except UCrawford"
* the LB corps may become the biggest strength of the Chiefs in 2009
* The OL is NOT as bad as you think it is... give it time, and you'll see improvement this season
by stagdsp on Sep 29, 2009 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I went to my sons freshman game last night
they played a team that was bigger and faster on both sides of the ball in most positions.
Went into half time down by 14, the other team was pretty much running at will.
We came out in the 3rd and adjusted our D switched a few guys around,stuffed the run,slapped down all their passes.
We caught up with 3 minutes left in the 4th and won by 6 in OT,it was a very exciting game.
You’re probably thinking yea, so WHO cares? The point is if freshman kids can get fired up,pissed off,and adjust and figure out what the problem is, It should be no problem for a pro team making millions.
by Bestofthewest on Sep 29, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you mean
Cassel is being treated the same as Brodie and Tyler were, but now it’s not OK?
Hey, at least there running the ball in the fourth quarter when they are down by 20 points just to protect him
by choirboy on Sep 29, 2009 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice read
I do feel that Pioli did try to help the offensive line. Did he do enough? No. Obvously.
But he did bring in 3 new lineman. Goff was a bust. Hopefully putting the Irishman at RT will help but I doubt it.
Probably the best way to go is stick with the best line you have and hope they improve and learn to play together. It really sucks that the Chiefs had to open against a slew of great defensive teams.
I mean let’s face it. The Eagles and Ravens are obvious Super Bowl contenders with great defenses. Same with the Giants and Cowboys.
The next couple weeks will be ugly. We just have to hope they continue to improve amongst all the carnage.
D-Bowe, Mark Bradley, Bobby Engram and Turtle. Four Chiefs WRers. 4 Pro Bowlers.
by Patrick Allen on Sep 29, 2009 8:56 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed!
Enjoyed the read, but I couldn’t help thinking that they did try to address the offensive line in the off-season, draft and even through the preseason and first 3 games…
I personally remember reading that McIntosh showed up in the off-season in unbelievably great shape. I remember that he was working hard too. I remember reading that Goff looked good, Herbie & B-Rich were doing well and the O-line was gelling. Things just didn’t pan out as well as they planned — it happens…
Top it all off, as Paddy mentioned, we’re facing the elite of the league (with the exception of the Raiders) in the first half of the season. Its a perfect storm of problems for the HC & GM. Sheesh, I’m sure they had nightmares about this in the off-season and preseason.
I think like most fans, we were hopeful that the Chiefs would do well. The Ravens game raised our hopes even more. The Eagles & Raiders games have given us a dose of reality. Our team isn’t like last year’s Dolphins or Falcons yet, but its early in the season.
Its okay to criticize the HC & GM for failing to address the O-line, I guess, but there are still 27 or 28 of last year’s Chiefs that are still not on a payroll for any NFL team. That’s a huge turnover in personnel. I’ve also heard it mentioned here and other places, that if you want to build a dynasty — you start with the defense first. We addressed defense with this year’s draft first. Next year, I suspect we’ll be drafting for offense more than this year…
"Every day is an evaluation and if you’re not out there how can we depend on you? If you’re out there and you don’t know what to do, how can we depend on you?" Accountability -- Haley-style...
by Chief_Elmo on Sep 29, 2009 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Actually, McIntosh failed his conditioning test and wasn't sure if he could, when asked.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good article
Haley and Piloi are definitely under the light for me. I know its early, and we’re still early into the season so anything can happen, but so far I am not at all impressed.
In the NFL today, through trades, free agency, and the draft, there is no reason you cannot have a mediocre team in 1 year.
I know thats not what we want, we want a great team(IMO it will be a loooooooong time for that to happen) but there are enough options out there to be able to put a team together that at least looks professional, and it appears we are still a year or two away from that, just as we were a year or two ago.
I’ve been a Chiefs fan as long as Ive been into football, but were are I can say 100% the worst looking team in the league week in and week out. I’m tired of excuses, I’m tired of re-building, I’m tired of hearing how we’re seeing improvment.
We arent. If we’ve been improving as they say we have we would be a pretty good team by now.
We were beat by the Raiders. I do not see how we can beat even the Chargers, who as it looks now are playing decent football, at least better than us.
We really could go 0-16, but probably 2-14 again.
I do hope if we don’t win 2 games someone will address Haley with his quote from the offseason about 22 guys off the street, and ask his smug ass about it.
To Pioli-
Dorsey came into camp out of shape, he has sucked so far this preseason-
SHOP HIM AROUND!!!
LOOK FOR A GOOD YOUNG RT FOR DORSEY!!!
DO IT NOW!!!
by dbowechiefs09 on Sep 29, 2009 8:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
wooops
meant to say the Broncos
To Pioli-
Dorsey came into camp out of shape, he has sucked so far this preseason-
SHOP HIM AROUND!!!
LOOK FOR A GOOD YOUNG RT FOR DORSEY!!!
DO IT NOW!!!
by dbowechiefs09 on Sep 29, 2009 8:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great read Jon...I agreed on most points...
The Chiefs’ offensive line was a complete embarrassment against the Eagles. Cassel couldn’t even complete his dropback most of the time. On many quick-hit, short screens, Cassel was still getting destroyed. It was easily the worst performance from a Chiefs’ offensive line that I’ve ever seen.
The o-line is an embarrassment. These guys suck. Ndukwe should never, ever, under any circumstances be a starting right tackle in this league. Ever. don’t know what he looks like at RG, which I hear is his natural position but I can’t imagine someone getting dominated at RT being any good one position to his left. If that’s what Pioli considers “addressing the o-line problems” we might be in trouble. To think we gave up a pick for that dude is bothersome.
I don’t think this was the worst performance Ive ever seen from the Chiefs o-line. I do think it’s on par for what ive seen the past 3 seasons. I agree Pioli set Cassel up for failure by not really adressing the o-line problems (other than giving up a pick for someone who might not make a UFL team)
All in all great read and great alalysis.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 29, 2009 8:59 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ndukwe is a highly rated G. RT is a totally different job.
It says a lot that he was pushed to start at RT. His feet are quicker than Sackintosh’s, but I still thought that just throwing a blocking TE to McIntosh’s right side would help a LOT. I just don’t see a TE on the roster that’s much good at that, and that’s disappointing. I’d’ve been FINE with the Tony G trade if there were a dominant blocking TE to replace him. I thought that would do more to get more consistent and balanced offense than keeping Tony G would’ve done.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i need a tissue!
a hug from KC Wolf wouldnt hurt either!
by GoShooterGo on Sep 29, 2009 9:03 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, amd I miss Chan Gailey
No reason for us to get rid of him. We should still be running the spread. It was the only way we were successful last year with this piss poor O Line. I bet we’d be 1-2 or 2-1 this year if Gailey was still calling plays and Thigpen was our QB.
A new GM, a new coach, a new year. A new sense of hope and pride.
by CBaller13 on Sep 29, 2009 9:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
doubtful
With no Tony Gonzalez? I doubt Ryan or Cottam would catcht any more than 10% of Thigpen’s desperation passes.
by paChiefsFan on Sep 29, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
without the great one thiggy is useless, and Haley is trying to do too much right now.
by GHOST OF DT on Sep 29, 2009 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tony G in the ArrowSpread would just be another year of
great TE stats in losing efforts.
Tony wasn’t a game-changer. A contributor, but not a game-changer. And his mediocre blocking compromised more basic things an offense should be able to do.
Great stats, not winning ball. If it were winning ball, he’d MAKE those game-deciding 1st downs. He would NOT commit the holding penalty that gets the completion called back. Blah blah blah. Sorry. That horse isn’t even a wet spot, any more. The blood dried months ago.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
You mentioned the
Jets w/Sanchez, Ravens w/Flacco, & Falcons w/Ryan stating that they all had a stong running game, yet even moreso they all have defenses that can keep them in the games & even win some games for them. None of those QB’s were asked to win games, only to manage them because their defenses were strong enough that their running games were usually enough to win.
We definitely need to do more with our O-line, I can’t argue with that; however, on film it was hard to tell just what we had because the Arrowspread hid a lot of the lines weaknesses & perhaps gave the illusion that they were more talented than what they actually were. Either way, they really needed to be evaluated 1st hand, and obviously they have been found wanting and the floodgates have been opened!
by ttownmikey on Sep 29, 2009 9:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I, and many others have said this numerous times
When Haley and Pioli came to KC, they realized that between our offensive and defensive lines, we had, MAYBE, 3 guys who should even be on an NFL team.
They had a tough decision to make – do we spend our high draft picks on offensive linemen, and hope we can still win a game while giving the opposing team an opportunity to run on us like the Titans or Panthers did last year? In a division with Moreno, McFadden, and Tomlinson?
Or, do we try to fix the run defense, so at least the other team can’t just rush for 250 yards, keep the ball for 40 minutes, and pound our asses into oblivion?
Yes, it sucks watching the Chiefs play when one of the lines is terrible – but it sucks more when both the lines are terrible (see 2007-2008)
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
by PVChiefsfan on Sep 29, 2009 9:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the writeup Jon
It’s a well written, well reasoned opinion. I do agree with Patrick Allen though that Pioli did appear to try addressing the OL, even if the guys he brought in aren’t world beaters. Also, as some others have mentioned in other threads, just because we didn’t sign the upper-tier FA linemen doesn’t mean we didn’t try to. I would imagine that most experienced veterans, given a choice, will go to the team they believe has the best shot at winning. I know that Pioli has said before something like “Just because we aren’t bringing guys in here doesn’t mean we’re not trying.”. I realize that it could be a smoke screen to deflect criticism, but I could see it being the case.
I’m also disappointed that he didn’t sign any of the good FA LBs that were available (there were a few, I think), but again some of that may be attributed to the team’s recent lack of success.
Please keep the articles coming, I always enjoy reading them!
by jmcgoblue on Sep 29, 2009 9:24 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: O-line upgrades
While Pioli addressed the o-line with several moves, you have to also realize the timing of those moves. Rather than take the cream of the crop in free agency, he waited until the end of the preseason to take other team’s cast-offs. Not that the market was impressive, but in rounds 3 and 4, there were plenty of Centers, Guards, and Right Tackles to look at. And there were certainly enough linemen in free agency that could have come in and played for a season or two, and they’d be better than anyone the Chiefs have right now.
by Jon Yoon on Sep 29, 2009 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
true
The guys he ended up bringing in were brought in late (other than Goff & that C from Cincy who got cut), but I still tend to believe that the better ones simply had no interest in playing for KC. He probably could have vastly overpaid to get them in here (certainly have the cap room), but there are pretty valid reasons not to do that as well. It’s hard, but I’m going to try to withhold judgment until next season. I’d expect that the early rounds of the ‘10 draft will be used on OL & LBs, and I’ll be pretty disappointed if that isn’t the case (though the safety Berry would be a great pick depending on where we draft in the first round).
I’m probably rationalizing here, but (maybe) the logic behind concentrating on the DL in this draft is that these players take the longest to develop, so they should be the first ones in if you want to build a solid team quickly. I DO completely agree with your argument that not addressing the OL better this year will slow down Cassel’s development, and that’s a major failure of the new GM.
by jmcgoblue on Sep 29, 2009 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If They Had No Interest In Playing For KC
Then that falls on Pioli too.
Part of a GM’s job is convincing players that KC is a place they want to come to. If he can’t do that, then what good is he? Heck, most of his success in New England the last three years was based off of free agent acquisitions (because his 2006-2008 drafts were terrible). So if all he can get is the scrubs, then he’s the wrong man for the job.
Moderator - Arrowhead Pride
Predictions for 2009
1. Todd Haley's going to struggle with managing his staff in his rookie year as head coach.
6. The Chiefs will go 7-9 in 2009, good for 2nd in the AFC West. Revision: We go 5-11 and finish behind Oakland.
7. Ryan Succop will not perform better in 2009 than Connor Barth did in 2008.
8. The Chiefs will have a bottom 10 defense this year.
9. RB will be a problem area this season on offense.
by UCrawford on Sep 29, 2009 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Convincing top tier FA's to come to NE during their dynasty run
Would be like trying to convince me to sleep with Meghan Fox.
Fiiiiiiiiiiine. Sigh, I guess I will.
RIP Bodhi - Not tragic to die doing what you love. You want the ultimate thrill, you gotta be willing to pay the ultimate price.
by craig in calgary on Sep 29, 2009 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Only If She Keeps Her Mouth Shut
That bi$%^ is stupid.
by Ryan in Nixa on Sep 29, 2009 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I have planned for her
Would require her mouth to be open.
Sorry if that was over the line.
RIP Bodhi - Not tragic to die doing what you love. You want the ultimate thrill, you gotta be willing to pay the ultimate price.
by craig in calgary on Sep 29, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wtg craig - take one for the team!
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's not what I mean
I’m not saying I think he can’t get guys to come in because they don’t like KC as a place to live/play, I mean they may not have any interest in spending the final years of their career playing for a team coming off 6 wins in two years. I think the guys who were FA pickups came in either because nobody else wanted them, or because they were scrubs to begin with & wanted a chance to become starters (obviously more likely to happen on an awful team). I certainly think this problem will disappear once the team starts winning again.
by jmcgoblue on Sep 29, 2009 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"this problem will disappear once the team starts winning again"
well yeah, but it’s sort of a chicken-egg thing … you have to get the FA’s to come in in order to win to begin with, and as Crawford has pointed out: that’s Pioli’s job
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
see 2009
Yes, it sucks watching the Chiefs play when one of the lines is terrible – but it sucks more when both the lines are terrible…
Jackson hasn’t done a damn thing. Sure it’ll take him a year or two,….but as of now the dude looks like shit. Same can be said about Drosey. They both get no push, no penitration….they just look week and slow out there IMO. Dorsey got into the backfield against the Eagles….when he wasn’t blocked….and he completely whiffed the sack…running right past Vick. Dorsey might be pretty damn good….if no one blocks him.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 29, 2009 9:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Jesus Christ
Name me one rookie that has thrived in his first season in the 3-4 Defense? If you recall even Richard Seymore wasn’t good as a rookie. Not only that but if 3-4 D-lineman are doing their job they wont be getting stats, the linebackers will. And the Linebackers suck too.
Desperately hoping for Desperate Measures
by averagegatsby on Sep 29, 2009 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
*Name me one rooke lineman that has thrived in the 3-4 defense that is.
Desperately hoping for Desperate Measures
by averagegatsby on Sep 29, 2009 9:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not getting stats is one thing....
Getting completly donimated at the line is anothe….Oher, another rookie, made him look like complete dog shit….so I buy the whole rookie are always going to suck argument.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 29, 2009 9:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
***dont' buy
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 29, 2009 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay...
name me one rookie D-lineman who excelled in the 3-4 defense his first year
Desperately hoping for Desperate Measures
by averagegatsby on Sep 29, 2009 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure I can off the top of my head...
However I have to believe there have been rookie 3-4 DE that haven’t been dominated on every play like Jackson has.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 29, 2009 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Richard Seymore got dominiated his rookie year
And he is the prototypical 3-4 DE. The learning curve for DE is pretty high to begin with, Im sure Houston is just fine having Mario Williams who struggled mightily his rookie year.
Desperately hoping for Desperate Measures
by averagegatsby on Sep 29, 2009 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure it's sucky LBs.
They’re just not sendin’ ‘em very often. This 3-4 looks a lot like vanilla 4-3, once you get past the fact that Hali’s upright at the snap and a BIT more likely to drop in coverage or pursue across the formation.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still think more time is needed before judging these guys too harshley
I’d say if they aren’t consistently productive by year 3 then you can say they are relative busts. HOWEVER, the run defense has looked MUCH better this year than it did last year. I don’t know if that’s due to the new players or due to the scheme switch…but I’ve always heard that the 3-4 is supposedly more vulnerable to the run, not less. I think you need to judge the unit as a whole, not point out individual players. I’ve seen a lot more runs stuffed at the line of scrimmage this year than I recall at any time in the past decade.
by jmcgoblue on Sep 29, 2009 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: judging guys too harshly
I’m not too upset about the D-line play and early growing pains are expected. They’ll be fine. And I’m not upset about the Tyson Jackson pick.
I’m still scratching my head at why the Chiefs stacked the defense with veterans and used a third and fourth round pick on defensive backups who almost never see the field, instead of looking at some offensive linemen. A veteran would be starting today, and a rookie draft pick most likely would have too. You probably wouldn’t have the cream of the crop in either instance, but they’d be better what we have today and in 3 years, they’d at least be quality depth.
by Jon Yoon on Sep 29, 2009 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep.
That’s the biggest problem for me is that 3-4 years you’re talking about. No matter what we do this offseason, it will take a long time to get any quality play from the line, even if we stack the line with our 1st rounder plus both seconds. Even if we do that (which I highly doubt) it would take 1-2 more seasons before they start to perform at a high level and by that time Waters will be ready to retire.
This is NOT going to be a short term problem. We are in for a long haul.
by Chiefsfan1970 on Sep 29, 2009 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
:(
But I want to win now!
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 29, 2009 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure about that
That’s the biggest problem for me is that 3-4 years you’re talking about. No matter what we do this offseason, it will take a long time to get any quality play from the line, even if we stack the line with our 1st rounder plus both seconds.
If we spent our first three picks next year on o-linemen, we’d have Albert in his third year at LT, Waters, the best center in the draft (2nd rounder), the best RG in the draft (other 2nd rounder), and the best Right Tackle in the draft (1st rounder).
I think that line would IMMEDIATELY be much better than our current line – they may take some time to gel, but we would get “quality play” from that line in week one.
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
by PVChiefsfan on Sep 29, 2009 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The biggest problems were on D.
A lot of weaknesses that they were overcoached to mask, rather than just gettin’ after it. They’re only JUST starting to play football like it’s THEIR decisions that affect the outcome of the play and the game. Cunningham had ‘em playin’ by the numbers. Didn’t look like very many players had control of their destinies the last few years, and the players they had weren’t such (or trained to be such) as to seize the opportunity.
That’s something I’ll say for Clancy. He’ll give you enough rope to hang yourself, and where the chips fall, there let them lie.
A lot fewer AP members are sanguine about the CB situation, and maybe are starting to appreciate how the schemes of the last few years (pretty much Cunningham’s entire tenure, except for the last days of Hasty-Carter) have been designed to do damage control for subpar DBs who couldn’t be relied upon to make any plays (except for TD-preventing tackles inside the 20 after yet another defense-gouging play).
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
KC D took Baltimore right OUT of their run game.
If KC had corners or a coverage scheme that could actually COVER, they’d’ve been respectable against the 2 teams with QBs they’ve faced.
What makes this D better at stopping the run is that it’s not a traditional 3-4. Both ends are cheating toward the middle. Clancy never used the phrase “5-tech” in reference to either Dorsey or Jackson. He talked only about 3- and 4-technique.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 4:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree about Dorsey
I think he’s shown real improvement this year. Much more active and doing a better job of shedding blockers. I’m not going to hold whiffing on Vick against him; how many d-lineman has Vick embarrassed in the past?
I haven’t had a chance to review tapes, but I’d be interested to see if Jackson’s eating up blockers. That’s his primary job. He’s not going to pile up big tackle numbers or sacks, but if he’s freeing things up for the others, I’ll consider that to be a successful rookie year.
by paChiefsFan on Sep 29, 2009 9:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
See a LOT of Dorsey, Tyler and Jackson being doubleteamed,
without an extra defender to take advantage. That LB is back in a futile attempt to defend the pass that the QB had 6 seconds to uncork against the 3- or 4-man pass rush.
The weak spot on D-Line is WOLB Hali. He can be more effective, but they need the extra blitzer to take some of the attention away from him. Jason Peters just stood like a rock while Hali tried every move in the book, spinning like a top – he looked like Rick Moranis in SpaceBalls swinging at air while his opponent simply rested his palm on his forehead, holding him off.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd
rather have Curry at this point since our middle is like the grand canyon. T-jack at 3 was a reach.
by GHOST OF DT on Sep 29, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same can be said about Drosey. They both get no push, no penitration
That is simply not true – in the three games this season, nearly my entire focus has been on our defensive line, and we are doing some very cool things with Jackson, Dorsey, and Tyler.
Dorsey has made several tackles on running plays headed towards the strong side (away from Dorsey) because they have him shooting the B gap, then when he realizes the play is headed away, he does a good job of sliding down the line (behind all the o-linemen) and making the tackle. It happened once or twice in Baltimore, 3 times I can think of against Oakland, and twice against the Eagles.
That is only possible because he is getting penetration.
Also, against Oakland, our leaders in tackles were Tyler and Dorsey – defensive linemen usually only lead in tackles when they are getting penetration.
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
by PVChiefsfan on Sep 29, 2009 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And because the strong side defenders are stacking things up...
That is only possible because he is getting penetration.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love how people keep thinking great offensive lineman grow on trees...
We all know the offensive line is terrible, but you can’t just make it better. Teams aren’t going to just give up good lineman without being blown away with a trade offer. Rarely do good offensive lineman hit the free agency pool. And with such a mediocre roster to begin with the only way we would be able to trade for better linemen is by trading draft picks. And anyone who thinks Pioli would pull a Snyder and trade off all of his draft picks really hasn’t been paying attention.
Fact of the matter is its ridiculous to expect this team to get turned around in one year (yes it has happened).
Desperately hoping for Desperate Measures
by averagegatsby on Sep 29, 2009 9:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yep your right....it's impossible to get a good O-line if you dont already have one....
What the hell are you talking about? There are great o-linemen that hit the FA market every offseson…and every draft there are several Pro bowl caliber o-lineman….this is the NFL it shouldn’t be that hard to pick up more than a couple scabs from the Dolphins.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 29, 2009 9:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Name one "great" free agent offensive lineman that hit free agency?
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/fa?sort=grade&positionId=46
according to that there weren’t any “great tackles”
and according to this there were virtually no guards available
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/fa?positionId=47
The few “good” players available were old with histories of injuries
Desperately hoping for Desperate Measures
by averagegatsby on Sep 29, 2009 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree, My Lions ended up with the same O Line from last year.
We added Loper from the Titans for depth, but were not able to get anyone else worth starting. I think Jason Brown was the only highly thought of OL FA and he is a Guard who can also play Center. Tackles were pretty much non existant.
There are no quick fixes here, a good O line takes time to develop. You guys used to have the most dominant line in the league because they stayed together so long. Unfortunately they all left at pretty much the same time.
One last question, I thought Branden Albert was very good last year, what happened?
by NorthLeft12 on Sep 29, 2009 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont think he was very good...
I think his short comings may have been covered up by playing in the Pistol. I think he may get better, but at this point Im wondering if a college Guard is being overwhelmed at the most physically demanding position in the NFL.
Desperately hoping for Desperate Measures
by averagegatsby on Sep 29, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wrecked, gatsby.
Once the die was cast with Jackson and Magee, the sorry fact is that the late August/early September moves Pioli made for Ndukwe, Alleman, and O’Callaghan were likely the best that he could’ve managed. And it’s still a bit early to tell how good these acquisitions were.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jeeze dude…..you need to step outside a minute. I know I am on the optimistic side of things, and that everyone has a right to complain as they see fit, but I respectfully ask for the sake of this site that you take a look at the tone of your comments on this article. Bearing criticism is one thing, but being downright deconstructively negative about everything and anyone who has a positive opinion of anything is uncalled for IMO. Asking others “What the hell are you talking about” when they bring up a valid point is just over the top.
Please, and as respectfully as I can put it……lets keep it civil, and a discussion, and try to recognize points others make and discuss them. We all know you are upset……..
by Zimmy on Sep 29, 2009 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Great Point! Thanks!
Amen Brother! +1
"Every day is an evaluation and if you’re not out there how can we depend on you? If you’re out there and you don’t know what to do, how can we depend on you?" Accountability -- Haley-style...
by Chief_Elmo on Sep 29, 2009 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Three games in?
Really? Pioli named Sporting News “Executive of the Decade” and he’s an idiot?
This is well-written, but I must say I would have enjoyed it much more a year from today. The Chiefs have so many needs and they NOW have standards for the type of player they bring in—— someone who “gets it.” Someone who has football has his clear #1 priority. They don’t bring in misfits. So, you take what is given to you.
This will take time. Even if there was no learning curve for an entirely new coaching staff and the GM, this critique is premature.
Please, if the Chiefs make steady progress over the next few years, remember the condemnations made here. Changing the culture of a toilet organization is very, very hard. And it takes time. If you have never been in such a situation, it is impossible to describe.
Are Pioli and Haley the perfect tandem to turn around the Chiefs? NO ONE KNOWS. IT"S TOO EARLY TO TELL. Ask Jimmy Johnson. Check out his first year with the Cowboys. Belichick was a terrible head coach until he hooked up with New England and Pioli. Who knew?
by ChiefConcern on Sep 29, 2009 9:31 AM CDT reply actions 3 recs
can't wait to see
the next approval pols for pioli and haley….
"stuck in Dallas"
by johnnyo_99 on Sep 29, 2009 9:41 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I realise that I'm the only one with this opinion but, whatever.
I ABSOLUTELY do not fault Pioli and Haley for the offensive line play? Why? Well there are several reasons for this.
Our offensive line was just as bad if not worse this time last season. In fact, I’d say it was worse simply because we had multiple quarterbacks go down in a single game and there was absolutely no running game. The fact that Herm didn’t at least try and get creative with it also says a lot. However, by the end of the season, due to the scheme change and the simple fact that the unit had more time to play as a whole, drastically started showing signs of life. We were able to run the ball better and our QBs weren’t getting killed. We can argue that it was the spread that did the trick but that’s not my point.
Obviously when Pioli came in, I’m sure he saw the line as a huge problem. The thing is, there were about 15 other positions that were an even bigger problem. It’s not like Pioli completely ignored the line this offseason. We did bring in FAs and drafted Collin so they weren’t simply ignoring it. I think it just had a lot to do with the fact that we weren’t in a position to completely rebuild our line like teams do when that’s there only glaring hole. We only had one pick on the first day of the draft and that’s where all of the quality linemen were. Orlando Pace is the only decent FA I can think of (sure, there were probably more) but even he’s just a temporary solution and he’s not really lighting it up in Chicago right now.
I don’t doubt that the line will eventually be addressed but we have so many other problems still that need to be fixed as well and you have to take that into consideration.
by jonnyu on Sep 29, 2009 9:41 AM CDT reply actions 3 recs
exactly
there’s only so much you can do to fix a broken system. I believe Haley/Pioli chose defense as the priority at the beginning of the season. In the end which is harder to impliment and see progress, a good 3-4 defense or a o-line? From my perspective changing an entire defensive scheme is a huge transition thats over-looked now that the o-line is so bad. next year the offense will get its turn to be reorganized.
"stuck in Dallas"
by johnnyo_99 on Sep 29, 2009 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd also like to add
that Haley and Pioli need at least a full season to evaluate these players themselves. Just because they had access to all the film doesn’t mean that had a good grasp on the situation. The more I think about it, our entire team was horrible last year from top to bottom. Think of players like Flowers, DJ and Bowe who are performing great right now. They were all definitely underachieving last year with maybe the exception of Flowers who was a rookie. Even our good players (with the exception of Tony) sucked last year. At least the new regime is getting everything they can out of what they have.
by jonnyu on Sep 29, 2009 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: not Pioli's fault?
Umm… Pioli had a full year of tape on McIntosh and Niswanger. It’s not his fault that he didn’t see any kind of problem with either of these guys to even try to find a replacement? He took a backup corner and a backup defensive tackle in the third and fourth rounds instead of taking some of the top interior linemen on the board.
As for the spread offense, that’s not the right way to go. It may win you more games, but believe it or not, you don’t always play to win the game. Running the spread offense forces Cassel into a lot of bad habits. He needs to learn to take snaps from under center and he needs to learn to make the right reads. I’d rather develop Cassel the right way than force him to run a gimmick offense that has no long-term value and does nothing to improve his development.
by Jon Yoon on Sep 29, 2009 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
All of your "top interior linemen on the board"
are currently backups on their current teams. Most haven’t even been active on game day. Why do think they would be any better then the guys we have now?
by ICTChief on Sep 29, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
just one
Vasquez in SD.
* "I doubt anyone will miss Connor Barth except UCrawford"
* the LB corps may become the biggest strength of the Chiefs in 2009
* The OL is NOT as bad as you think it is... give it time, and you'll see improvement this season
by stagdsp on Sep 29, 2009 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Started the first game against the Raiders and
has been on the bench since.
by ICTChief on Sep 29, 2009 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was injured in that game.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 5:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the point is...
… that Pioli went out and got an expensive QB who still needs development, but didn’t give him the parts to facilitate that development. So KC spends $10mil+ per year on a QB, then focuses solely on the defense. It would be like spending $100,000 on a new Porsche, then parking it on the street and building a patio instead of a garage to protect the car.
by paChiefsFan on Sep 29, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Over/ Under on going to a spread offense?
The Bye week?
by NJ Chiefs Fan on Sep 29, 2009 9:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
What? the Chiefs need an OL??? no way. come on ... really?
ok look, no arguing the obvious – yup, they do – and it should have been the first order of business for Pioli – and a lot of us (myself included) have been saying the same thing for a long time, so in terms of this particular fanpost, really nothing “new” – nothing to disagree with
good post – rather reminds me, pointwise and stylewise, of a Jason column (but with references to [Egoili] cleaned up to protect the guilty
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 9:45 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Even if they started rebuilding the O-Line this year
it wouldn’t have made any difference and we’d probably be worse than we are right now because of the other positions it would have failed to address. Remember, our defense last year simply kept us out of games. You could have put Drew Brees and his offense with that defense and I guarantee we’d probably still have 2 wins. I mean, our defense is still bad, but they were simply f*cked last year.
by jonnyu on Sep 29, 2009 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
pretty much any football "insider" will tell you - it all starts on the line
OL or DL doesn’t matter, point is that when you build or rebuild a team you focus on the line and go from there – granted we had and still have lots of holes to fill, and granted “you can’t always get what you want” (props to M Jagger for that astute observation), and granted the schedule is nothing short of brutal early on – but I still believe you start with the basics, line first, and then worry about “skill positions” because you can have all the skill in the world at QB/RB/WR and still get hammered if you don’t have a quality line
jonny, we’re thinking along the same lines, more or less – I still think Pioli has made some unwise choices (again, not that Cassel is a BAD choice, I simply think the time, energy and money spent would have been better invested elsewhere on the team)
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not so fast my friend...
… I disagee with this post on a lot of levels, but the main one, (and it has been pointed out ad nauseum above) is – what were Pioli’s choices? Fix the:
a. Offensive line?
b. Defensive line?
c. Wide recieving corps?
d. Linebackers?
e. Kicking game?
I don’t think he’s done such a bad job and I, for one, am CONFIDENT this team will get better as the year progresses. True, Cassel is getting a “baptism by fire” but that is going to pay huge dividends for us down the road. Look at the donco’s, they have a great record, (so far) but have played NOBODY. Let’s see how the Chiefs look after the bye week. That’s when we’ll really start to see this team emerge..
…what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent speech were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone is now dumber for having heard it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
by Chef Jim on Sep 29, 2009 9:52 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
kicking game is all that's better at the moment.
I also disagree that only one thing at a time can be addressed.
by NJ Chiefs Fan on Sep 29, 2009 10:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
?
OL is slightly better, but not yet good enough
DL is DEFINATELY better
WR is DEFINATELY better
LB are BETTER, but not yet good enough
Kicking game is BETTER
they have addressed a LOT of needs, OL included. Yes, they could have done more, but they did make some major changes on the right side… they just haven’t panned out yet… doesn’t mean they won’t…
* "I doubt anyone will miss Connor Barth except UCrawford"
* the LB corps may become the biggest strength of the Chiefs in 2009
* The OL is NOT as bad as you think it is... give it time, and you'll see improvement this season
by stagdsp on Sep 29, 2009 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I see improvements across the board from last year…
Unfortunately, its not as evident because we’ve played two very good teams. Part of it was evident in the Raiders game, but we lost that for other reasons.
"Every day is an evaluation and if you’re not out there how can we depend on you? If you’re out there and you don’t know what to do, how can we depend on you?" Accountability -- Haley-style...
by Chief_Elmo on Sep 29, 2009 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Let’s see how the Chiefs look after the bye week"
you mean like last year?
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry
but the Donks played and embarrassed the Raiders, something we couldn’t do at home. I don’t disagree with you though, I think we will come into our own in the 2nd half of the schedule.
Put this in your pipe and smoke it:
1. Chiefs will be at least 8-8 and vie for division champs
2. DJ will break out and finally have his year
3. LJ returns to form
4. DBowe drops will reduce
by kcchiefsfan72 on Sep 29, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Notice how you have O-line at the top of your list.
They should have been addressed in that order too.
by GHOST OF DT on Sep 29, 2009 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Priorities
You can’t build Rome in a day. I’m not saying that. But you do have to prioritize.
The Chiefs’ placed their top priority on the QB the minute they signed Cassel to a long-term deal. Once they made that decision and locked him down to a $60M contract, the #1 priority needed to be to protect him. It’s like buying a $200,000 car and parking it in a bad neighborhood with no security system.
Here’s the deal: if the Chiefs’ d-line stinks, it’s going to be painful for fans to watch, but you know what? Nobody suffers. Without an o-line, let’s point to the obvious that you are risking putting your $60M QB at an injury risk every time he snaps the ball. But you’re also not giving him the development opportunities he needs. Cassel isn’t going to pay dividends for us if he’s on a stretcher. He isn’t going to learn a thing if he’s forced into an offense that only gives him time to look at one receiver on a short route. His best chance at success would have been to give him an o-line, give him time to make decisions and go through his progressions, and then correct mistakes when needed.
I can handle the defense not doing well. I can handle limited talent at the receiver corps. What I can’t handle is watching a QB develop without a QBs coach and learning to get into the habit of running before settling into a pocket and locking onto his first receiver option, not because he wants to, but because the offensive line forces him to.
by Jon Yoon on Sep 29, 2009 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Rec Jon.
I’ve made tha point alot. A shitty defensive line is frustrating for fans, but it doesn’t get anyone hurt.
RIP Bodhi - Not tragic to die doing what you love. You want the ultimate thrill, you gotta be willing to pay the ultimate price.
by craig in calgary on Sep 29, 2009 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same Here
A terrible d-line can be fixed relatively quickly. Losing your franchise QB can take a decade to recover from.
Moderator - Arrowhead Pride
Predictions for 2009
1. Todd Haley's going to struggle with managing his staff in his rookie year as head coach.
6. The Chiefs will go 7-9 in 2009, good for 2nd in the AFC West. Revision: We go 5-11 and finish behind Oakland.
7. Ryan Succop will not perform better in 2009 than Connor Barth did in 2008.
8. The Chiefs will have a bottom 10 defense this year.
9. RB will be a problem area this season on offense.
by UCrawford on Sep 29, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is the one argument that I think can be made for building the O-line first. But does anyone know, besides “assuming” that there were these players out there in the draft that would have come in and significantly fixed our offensive line this year? (because nobody can prove or disprove that we tried to bring in the big name free agents).
I want to see some names, and how they are being productive in systems in the NFL. Linement in the 3rd and 4th rounds, cuz we did get one in the 5th, and our first round wouldn’t have been an OL this year anyways most likely, would have been curry if not Jackson.
by Zimmy on Sep 29, 2009 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's about priorities AND opportunities
Pioli had the opportunity to get Cassel, he took it , even if he did know that he couldnt protect his QB like he would have liked too. There were so many holes, that he decided to put the priority on DL and switch to 3-4 and he knew it would take time…that’s what he means when he says “the day we will begin to win” it’s not there yet.
But he couldnt let go the opportunity to get Cassel, one or two years later he’d be gone to an other team. By the way, even good teams can lose there QB facing a bad pass-rush team (Tom Brady last year:::)
by swichief on Sep 30, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Has it crossed anyone's mind
that this tough first half schedule may battle harden this team and lead to a very respectable record in the 2nd half of the season, when everyone is really evaluated in a rebuilding year?
No, that would be too obvious. If it were my team, I’d rather that be the case than be a fan of the Broncos, who face the opposite scenario.
by jcru on Sep 29, 2009 9:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Exactly!
Once we get out of the NFC East part of our schedule, we’re going to have a better football team because of it. Whether or not that equates to a good record this year, I don’t know, but we’re going to be better because we faced the best of the best with the exception of the Redskins. It’s like Pittsburgs season before last. They were beaten down with a tough schedule and grueling practices and they were in no position to compete for a title that year. But they came back the next year and emerged as the toughest team in football by far. Not that we’re the next Pittsburg, but you can see my point.
by jonnyu on Sep 29, 2009 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember Parcells first year as coach of the Patriots
Take a good look:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_New_England_Patriots_season
Look familiar. A lot of doubters. A lot of angry people. Even with Parcells as coach. About as many people then, as you see now on these boards, said we were no better off than with the previous coach.
Now look at the end of the schedule. After that, all the pundits the next off season said we were on the right track.
by jcru on Sep 29, 2009 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We even had our own Whitlock
A guy by the name of Jim Donaldson, who Parcells’s second season, was forced to eat crow in print in the Providence Journal. But, he dogged even Parcells, in print, after every game, with that same kind of rabble rouser sarcasm. He didn’t care that Parcells won 2 Superbowls before that.
What I am saying is, it’s easy for me I guess, because I’ve seen it before. This is hardly over after 3 weeks.
by jcru on Sep 29, 2009 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
Remember, NO ONE expected KC to win vs Baltimore or Philly.
the only game they SHOULD have won was the Raiders game, and they played well enough to win, just didn’t finish.
This team is probably about where they are expected to be at this point. Still trying to find out who can step up, still getting used to a new system, not putting all the pieces together as a team… YET.
IF they are still playing poorly and winless in week 9, well, then we may have cause for concern. Until then, give it time!!!!!
* "I doubt anyone will miss Connor Barth except UCrawford"
* the LB corps may become the biggest strength of the Chiefs in 2009
* The OL is NOT as bad as you think it is... give it time, and you'll see improvement this season
by stagdsp on Sep 29, 2009 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Slight disagreement
You saw it last year with Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan. You develop a quarterback by surrounding him with a terrific running game that runs hard and often, and by giving him quality passing reps. Granted, it helped that all three of those quarterbacks were drafted by teams that were a lot further along in the rebuild than the Chiefs were, but you get the point
Were they? The year Flacco and Ryan came out the Chiefs were 4-12, the Ravens were 5-11 and the Falcons were 4-12. I’d argue that the Falcons were way behind the Chiefs at that point. It was the year after Vick f***ed up and Petrino did the midnight run. But where you are right is, they built around their young QB, whereas Pioli did not.
RIP Bodhi - Not tragic to die doing what you love. You want the ultimate thrill, you gotta be willing to pay the ultimate price.
by craig in calgary on Sep 29, 2009 10:00 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
the falcons had more talent
and were probably better than 4-12 but with the vick situation leaving them without a qb and bobby petrino quitting late in the year, it’s no surprise that they only won 4 games. it’s also no surprise with a good, young qb and a good rb plus some stability at head coach, they turned out to be pretty good. I also believe the ravens had enough talent to win more than 5 games the previous year based solely on their defense.
Never kick a fresh turd on a hot day.
Harry S. Truman
by kcguy on Sep 29, 2009 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I totally agree
with you when you say that was the worst performance by an O-line in KC. Well since I have been watching! Brandon Albert was a good pick if he stays at RG. Moving him to tackle was a mistake. Sure he is doing ok but he would be a much better player at RG. Move B. Waters to C. I was screamin for us to take Clady that draft.
But I just wanna see us compete geez is that too much to ask?
I want K.C. Wolfs' job!
by Jonezin4KC on Sep 29, 2009 10:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
no, it's not too much to ask ... but for now it's too much to "expect"
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
maybe it was LG
Either way he is better there then as a tackle….
I want K.C. Wolfs' job!
by Jonezin4KC on Sep 29, 2009 10:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Raiders game set us back big time
So much of the criticism here would go away if we had been able to stop the goddamn Raiders one more time. But these players are still too stupid to be able to win a game. They found a way to lose that game through foolish plays and horrible mental mistakes.
If we had just won that game, sitting 1-2 with both losses on the road to very good teams would look and feel vastly better to all of us. We could’ve actually seen some progress being made, and enjoyed a victory over the hated Raiders, and everyone would just be able to be more positive about everything. There’d be far less chance of the players possibly tuning out the coaches, and we’d even still be not out of the division race just yet.
But we have none of that, because we blew that one game. And we lost that game because of stupid plays and mental errors. Those are the things that is killing this team, and those are the things that I am most disappointed in with the new management. I expected us to be less talented, but I also expected us to play smarter and not kill ourselves with repeated stupid plays. We brought in all these veterans to set examples and influence the other players to not make those kinds of mistakes, but it hasn’t worked yet. It had better start to work, and soon.
Haley and his staff have to put a stop to it, as soon as possible. That’s why I’m fine with Haley benching players for mental mistakes and getting in their faces. It hasn’t worked yet, but it has to be done. The message has to get through, as soon as possible. The sooner it does, the better off this organization will be, and the better we’ll all feel.
The longer it takes for that to happen, the uglier it’s going to be around here, and when we watch the games, and the longer it’s going to take to get this franchise turned around.
by Offense of the 70s on Sep 29, 2009 10:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
you're "fine with Haley benching players for mental mistakes and getting in their faces"
but I’m not, certainly not the way Haley’s done it thru fear and intimidation, thru constant “demotions” on the depth chart that disallows any hope of continuity
Marty – remember Marty? use to be HC for Chiefs in the 90’s – always made the point to his players that you focus on one play, forget the LAST play and focus on the one coming up – that’s coaching, that’s what Haley needs to TEACH and not the constant “in your face” thing, especially on the sidelines of a game (that’s the time and place to keep your cool)
I’m not saying the message doesn’t need to get across, I’m not saying the players SHOULDN’T learn and know that mental mistakes are bad – but I am saying that Haley’s not doing a very good job of teaching
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
On That Tangent
It’s tough for Haley to impart legitimate teaching points to his players when he’s also got to run the offense. spot-check the defense, and coach the QBs.
He’s spread himself too thin, and until he hires an OC or (at the very least) a QB coach that’s not going to change. Too little time for too many jobs.
Moderator - Arrowhead Pride
Predictions for 2009
1. Todd Haley's going to struggle with managing his staff in his rookie year as head coach.
6. The Chiefs will go 7-9 in 2009, good for 2nd in the AFC West. Revision: We go 5-11 and finish behind Oakland.
7. Ryan Succop will not perform better in 2009 than Connor Barth did in 2008.
8. The Chiefs will have a bottom 10 defense this year.
9. RB will be a problem area this season on offense.
by UCrawford on Sep 29, 2009 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Completely agree
Haley’s trying to be Shanahan without nearly the track record or experience. And he’s trying to be a Parcells-type intimidator on top of that. Way too much to handle.
by paChiefsFan on Sep 29, 2009 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not quite
I’m saying that I’m fine with him doing whatever it takes to get the message through.
Whatever works. It hasn’t worked yet, but it’s early still. And with the players who’ve been here under Edwards, they’re used to making stupid mistakes and keeping their jobs and not getting yelled at. Going from a player’s coach to another player’s coach is unlikely to get them to change their ways. Maybe a hardass will. The softer approach has been tried with a lot of these young guys already, and it failed. So we’ll try the hardass route for a while.
The new style hasn’t worked yet, but there’s a LOT of stupid going on, it’s going to take some time. And it’s still early.
It’s very frustrating that we were still too damn dumb to win that Raiders game. Being dumber than the Raiders is as bad as it gets. But that shows just how far we have to go. You can’t go from being the stupidest team in football to decently smart overnight.
Maybe it’s going to take some guys losing playing time for a couple of weeks before it sinks in that they better start doing what the coaches say and they better start approaching football more like Vrabel and Engram, or whoever is getting playing time.
Haley eventually will be judged by whether or not the stupidity stops, and that’s the bottom line, not the style he tries to use. But it’s way too early to judge him yet.
by Offense of the 70s on Sep 29, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This season shouldn’t have been about winning or losing. It should have been about Matt Cassel. I can accept wins and losses, as long as I see Cassel get better week after week after week. Unfortunately, the Chiefs are not going to have much opportunity this season to do that.
i’m sorry is going from 61% ,1 TD, and 2 INT to 77%, 2 TD, 0 INT not improving. i guess i’m just delusional.
by Leaf on Sep 29, 2009 10:50 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
when he had a chance... he performed well.
passing yardage isnt’ everything
* "I doubt anyone will miss Connor Barth except UCrawford"
* the LB corps may become the biggest strength of the Chiefs in 2009
* The OL is NOT as bad as you think it is... give it time, and you'll see improvement this season
by stagdsp on Sep 29, 2009 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pioli and Haley - Peter Principle at work?
just a thought here: maybe Pioli is a fantastic GM for a team that doesn’t need total reconstruction like the Chiefs, but not the best when it comes to “new housing” … it’s easy to remodel a house, it’s hard to build one from the ground up … maybe Pioli is great at remods but not so great at new construction
and Haley might be a fabulous OC but not a very good HC, the way Herm would be a great Secondary Coach but a pretty bad HC (I will grant that Haley’s “learning on the job” – he just better learn quickly)
those are my points
class: discuss!!!
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 11:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
More Like The Remora Principle
Too many coaches have gotten themselves plum jobs by feeding off the scraps of credit in Belichick’s wake without actually being that good at their jobs.
Moderator - Arrowhead Pride
Predictions for 2009
1. Todd Haley's going to struggle with managing his staff in his rookie year as head coach.
6. The Chiefs will go 7-9 in 2009, good for 2nd in the AFC West. Revision: We go 5-11 and finish behind Oakland.
7. Ryan Succop will not perform better in 2009 than Connor Barth did in 2008.
8. The Chiefs will have a bottom 10 defense this year.
9. RB will be a problem area this season on offense.
by UCrawford on Sep 29, 2009 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tough job for Pioli and Haley
We can continue to look for blame for the litany of problems with the Chiefs and I have no problem with that. We all know Haley and Pioli took over a bad team that made too many personnel mistakes in the past to overcome in one season. Trading Allen and keeping McIntosh is one glaring example. The approach both men took was to attempt to build a stronger defense and hopefully correct the offensive line with next years draft and free agency. Don’t be surprised if they still spend a number of picks in next years draft on impact defensive players. Building a good defense and having an adequate offense has been a successful formula for many past NFL teams. I believe, or maybe hope the offense will get better as the season progresses.
by chief66 on Sep 29, 2009 11:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think they didnt realize what was facing them this past offseason...
they took there time, doing this and doing that….probibly looking at houses for the families….typical IF your project isnt a disaster… But really we needed immediate changes to be made….Next season i think we’ll see a more aggresive offseason.
by Sea of RED on Sep 29, 2009 12:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
LOL been saying this all off season and everytime people slapped my wrist for being critical
This is why I don’t respect a lot of people on this site. Seems like most Chiefs fans on this site have this stupid idea that being loyal and loving everything management does makes them more of a Chiefs fan. They must be republicans. Bush/more patriotic american if you follow everything I say. Stupid stupid people. The biggest fault of the midwest
I don't want no Yo-Yos
by AK_47 on Sep 29, 2009 1:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hold out your hand *reaching for yardstick*
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Peanut Gallery is out in full force today...
You’re really going to argue that Pioli made mistakes or did this wrong?
For one it’s completely baseless because we’re at game three of sixteen so to judge anything at this point is pretty ludicrous. For two, he changed 31 players so that should tell you how horrible the talent on this team was an how much he has to address and even within those 31 players not all of them are long term solutions because thats just impossible to do.
Go back and look at how the Pats were built and try again. I’ll give you a headstart. First three years was defense heavy in the draft and in year 2 and 3 got lucky with some OL picks. Also no overly significant free agents were added, especially “around the QB”, except Vrabel, Phifer and maybe Andruzzi. During that period of three years their QBs were sacked 118 times and their running game averaged about 1500 yards/season which is nothing to write home about.
There’s an emphasis on defense first and thats the way to go. Thats exactly the reason why Sanchez and Flacco have had success because they’re defensive teams that run the ball and theres very little pressure on them to be the game breaker. This team is three games into a season with a new coaching staff, 60% new players, a new defensive scheme and a five week old offensive scheme. It’s a little too early to be saying whos doing what wrong.
"Success is never ending, failure is never final."
by GenericBrand on Sep 29, 2009 2:38 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Pretty much. Wrecked.
They didn’t think they were done working-over the roster for a SB run when, because they played smarter than everybody they faced, the championship fell to them.
It’s too early to tell a LOT of things about the talent and the coaching.
But a lot of people, myself included, were deeply disappointed by poor game management (2 minute drills), and simply awful play by an offensive line that was NEVER in that game. Looked to me like a team with a bad coach and that the big men on O weren’t buying in or worse, were out to torpedo the whole team effort.
That being said, it’s still WAY too early to say where things are going long-term or even this season. Shit happens to good people, same as bad. I’m stickin’ with my .500-ball-with-a-shot-at-the-division prediction, for now. (ducks)
Waters’ desire to practice in pads on Friday, while I think it was too little too late, does suggest he’s taking some pride in the showing by the O-Line. But until the O-Line turns the practices they do have into a respectable showing, it’s just as rational to say that these guys are clowns who don’t give a shit, and maybe even want to tear Haley down, because of Waters’ big ego last winter.
No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.
by hmills110 on Sep 29, 2009 5:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Theres
Almost 150 comments and I dont have time to read them all. Maybe this point was brought up, and if so, I apologize.
I’m sick and tired of this same BS. All of us were concerned that the OL wasnt upgraded much this offseason. But now that we’re 0-3 and the line has played like garbage, everyone wants to come out and say Pioli and Haley are stupid for putting Cassel back there like that.
Do you think that was the initial plan? Are the people who say this so ignorant to the fact that MAYBE Pioli DID try to upgrade the offensive line? Dont you think that MAYBE there were some free agents who simply didnt want to come to KC? What, do you all think that OL are just readily available all the time? No. Theyre not.
FACT: DL is the toughest position to transition (2-3 seasons, sometimes more) to coming into the NFL (except MAYBE QB).
FACT: We had NO defensive linemen, whether it be the 3-4 or 4-3, other than Dorsey who had a decent season for his position in his rookie year.
FACT: Last season, we had a 1st round pick on a LT, and a pro bowl LG. We thought we upgraded RG with Goff and didnt. Unfortunate, but if anything, Goff is better than Wade Smith or Adrian Jones. I can understand the line of thinking. Its much easier to have a struggling RT next to a good RG who can assist him. Its also easier to have a struggling C in between 2 experienced, good G’s (even though Goff hasnt turned out good, we didnt know that). Albert relied on advice from Waters, but didnt rely on Waters to help him on the field. Albert handled himself well without needs Waters to help him double team guys all the time.
I think Pioli/Haley did the right thing. Check this out. Cassel had a problem getting rid of the ball last season. This year, it seems that on the rare occasion that hes given enough time, he still holds the ball too long. MAYBE, having a piss poor offensive line will teach him to get rid of the ball quicker. Sure, its a risk, maybe he gets hurt, but hell, why not build the defense since its going to take a couple of seasons for them to really come together, while at the same time, Cassel works on arguably the worst part of his game. By the time we get better OL players and really become cohesive, our Defense should be coming together and we’re set with a young, solid team.
After this season, I can damn near GUARANTEE that Pioli will look to upgrade the OL. 1st rounder..depending on how high it is, will be spent on the OL. I COULD see them going with a LB depending on the situation but OL is definately the likely possibility. Then, next season, when Cassel actually has time to throw, he gets the ball out quick, and since he doesnt have to elude the entire defensive line, probably make more accurate passes.
Idk how many picks we have now, or what rounds they are in. But I would GUESS, that 1st round goes OL, 2nd round goes OL/LB and the 2nd roudner we get for trading Tony will be spent on whichever isnt picked earlier in the round. I also think that a WR is a possibility in the 2nd round, 3rd at the latest.
Look. None of us know who Pioli tried to bring to KC and failed. We cant blame him for players not wanting to come to KC. So why bash him and basically say hes stupid for not upgrading the OL when we dont know who or how many players he tried to bring in?
To me, I think these posts about Pioli and the OL are a direct result of being upset because of the way the season has turned out thus far, and the way the OL has played. I 100% completely whole heartedly disagree that this season should have been about Matt Cassel. NO season should EVER be about one player. This is a team game. What is Haley supposed to do? Bench Cassel to keep from getting hurt? Make him hand the ball off the the RB every play? How can you say Haley has no problem “feeding him to the sharks”? Sometimes, you dont have a choice. Matt Cassel can handle himself. And IMO, if Cassel were as good as we want him to be, he’d be able to kick the ball out quick if the blitz is coming. Thats what good QB’s do. I know he doesnt have much time, which is why he SHOULD operate out of the shotgun more, but he should be able to pick up these blitzes and know where the open man should be.
by Petey14 on Sep 29, 2009 6:06 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
let me see if I have this straight, Petey ... you're defending Pioli (and Haley)
while claiming that Cassel holds the ball too long … meaning maybe he isn’t actually worth a 2nd round pick and maybe Pioli made a less than totally awesomelisciously wise choice by making Cassel his NUMBER ONE PRIORITY … is THAT what you’re saying? that’s your DEFENSE?
sorry, Petey, you have lost your appeal and your client is (still) guilty of some poor decision making – I stated above a bit ago that I’d far rather have seen Pioli trade DOWN from #3 and get some extra picks for the sole purpose of rebuilding the OL (1) and DL (2A) or LB (2B) … right now we have a QB whose skill set is primarily spent on handing off to a RB just before said RB is stuffed for a loss … that’s on the OL, and it’s the GM’s job to get those players first
just as you build a foundation before you put up the rest of the house, you build the line(s) before you worry about the skill positions, because no amount of skill can overcome 6 defenders in your face before you have time to blink
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Sep 29, 2009 6:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How in the world
did you come to that conclusion?
First off, no, Cassel holding the ball too long has nothing to do with me defending Pioli. I’m simply saying that Cassel, when he actually DOES have time to throw, holds the ball too long. I like Cassel. I think he has the tools to be successful in this league. But hes gotta learn to get rid of the ball. Maybe having 6 defenders in his face will motivate him to get rid of the damn ball. Maybe it results in some turnovers, BUT on the flipside, when we DO have an offensive line, he’ll look to get rid of the ball quick, but he’ll have time to make smart, accurate passes. Sure, its unorthodox and I dont think that is the intention, but if the result is quicker, smart, accurate passers, than I’m all for it.
Cassel shouldnt be a #1 priority. The TEAM should be the #1 priority. Cassel, IMO, WAS worth a 2nd rounder.
My defense of Pioli is that YOU DONT KNOW WHO HE TRIED TO BRING TO KC!! What is so hard to understand about that? HOW do YOU know if Pioli didnt try to bring other OL in? Do you know somebody in the front office? Did Pioli call you and say “hey..im not going to upgrade this OL because I think its going to be pretty good”? Didnt think so. NONE OF US KNOW what happens in Pioli’s office. None of us know what players he attempted to bring to KC! I find it extremely hard to believe that someone who has had the success that Pioli has had..completely ignored the OL on purpose. It just doesnt make sense.
Pioli wanted to trade down. He had no takers. He said that and made it clear that he was looking to trade down. Do you really think he WANTED to take Tyson Jackson at #3 when Jackson wasnt even projected as a top 10 pick? Again, do you think someone with as much success as Pioli has had is that stupid? I’m pretty sure that if we, as fans, can draw the conclusion that he could have traded down, gotten more picks, and still taken Jackson, I’m pretty sure Pioli can get to that conclusion too.
Yes, you have to build a foundation. But would you of rather seen us NOT get Cassel this season? He probably would have went to Denver. Do you think we should have built the OL and drafted a QB next year? I dont. We got our QB NOW, and we can still BUILD after this season. Normally, I would say yes, build the OL first and draft a QB. But drafted QB’s DO bust and getting Cassel was a safer choice. Hes young (25 i think?), hes experienced, and we know what to expect from him.
You cant completely rebuild an offensive and defensive line in 1 offseason. So we built the one that would take the shortest amount of time. Its about balance. DL’s take longer to develop. By drafting the DL’s now, and letting offense suffer for another season isnt THAT bad of an idea considering the fact that by the time we get an OL, our defense will be coming together.
All we need is an offensive line. We have playmakers on offense ( a #2 WR still hasnt clearly stepped up, but Mark Bradley did have a nice TD grab.) We just need an OL to get the together. Dorsey, Tank, Jackson on the DL are going to take atleast this season and maybe even next season before they start to shine. While those guys are developing, we’re looking for OL. If we could make a trade for an OL right now, I’m sure we’d make it. But trades just dont happen during the season that often, especially when a GOOD player is involved.
Think about it this way, if we would have fixed the OL, our defense would be even worse than it is now, and we probably wouldnt be able to stop anybody. So the offense is better, but then NEXT year we need DL who are going to take 1-3 years to develop and during that time, our defense continues to cost us games. Why not let the Defense get their 1-3 years of experience now, let the offense suffer for 1 season (as opposed to the defense suffering for 1-3 years) fix the OL during the offseason, THEN we will have a BALANCED team.
With the high round talent on D, I think its just a matter of time before they become top 15. With the talent on O, I think its just a matter of getting an OL before they become atleast top 15.
by Petey14 on Sep 29, 2009 6:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: You don't know who Pioli tried to bring into KC
Actually, we do. The two areas where he could have clearly looked at offensive linemen were the draft and through the undrafted rookie pool. In both cases, it was very clear that Pioli favored the defense over the offense. Unless you’re drafting Michael Crabtree, anyone you draft or bring in as a UDFA has no choice to go to KC if his number is called.
by Jon Yoon on Oct 1, 2009 5:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh
and No. We dont know who Pioli tried to bring to KC.
You dont know how many agents of the FA’s available that Pioli contacted. The only ones you know are the ones that Pioli was actually able to get for a workout.
You dont know which players agents that Pioli contacted and the agent told them that his client wasnt interested in KC.
So saying that you do know who Pioli tried to bring to KC is a little arrogant.
by Petey14 on Oct 5, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lol.
The O and the D were both terrible coming into this season. If he woulda fixed the O, every1 would be pissed because the defense would be far worse than it is now.
UDFA…do you realize how hard it is to find OL’s in UDFA? There was an article about this last year on the Chiefs website..ill see if i can find it..but it was showing the top offensive lines in the game and how a large percentage of them were in the first 3 rounds of the draft. Its pretty rare (of course there are exceptions..like Brian Waters) that you find a UDFA OL who finds success. I dont want to throw out any percentages because honestly I dont remember what it is but I do remember it being a high percentage. If I can find it..ill come back and post it up.
by Petey14 on Oct 5, 2009 4:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
