Will Pioli's 3-4 Defense Be Better than the Herm Edwards 4-3 Defense it Replaced?
Jared Allen. How we miss thee. I don't know if I can bear to watch the Vikings' playoff game this Sunday, because it's a brutal reminder of some of the key mistakes the Chiefs' front office made under Carl Peterson. But it also got me to thinking about the 4-3 defense and how close the Chiefs might have been to fielding a very good defense in 2009.
For the record, I support Clark Hunt's decision to hire the man most believed was the top General Manager on the market. And I am fine with Scott Pioli's decision to build the defense he is familiar with. Hiring Romeo Crennel is definitely a big step in the right direction. Still, I think after reading this analysis, you'll agree that the Herm Edwards version of the Chiefs defense was actually not as far away as many might think.
Which begs the question: now that the Chiefs are firmly committed to the path of building a 3-4 defense, was that really the right path to take?
It would be remiss of me not to start with a plug for Herm Edwards and a jab at Carl Peterson's front office. Herm was an absolute lightning rod for criticism when he was in Kansas City and that's a shame. To blame the Chiefs' recent struggles on poor drafting and personnel moves under Herm Edwards' watch is incredibly short-sighted. The biggest contributors to the Chiefs' recent struggles were: 1) poor drafting during the Vermeil years that failed to bring in young replacements for the franchise; 2) lukewarm success in the free agency market before Herm came in; 3) the flawed assumption that older players could play until they were 50 years old. But it didn't stop there.
Carl Peterson was still steering the ship after it crashed. Instead of dismantling the team the minute Herm Edwards stepped into office, Peterson instead insisted on eeking out one last run, to hell with the consequences. Little by little, the Titanic started to tilt. Willie Roaf left. Trent Green, Tony Richardson, Will Shields and Priest Holmes fell out of the equation. Suddenly, the Titanic tilted completely upright. In the process, Peterson's moves also hamstrung the Chiefs in unforgivable ways. His notorious lowball tactics forced Jared Allen out of Kansas City---one of the biggest blunders in the team's long history. Meanwhile, he was perfectly content to sign Larry Johnson to a long-term deal, nevermind his checkered history on and off the field. He hired his head coach and two coordinators from within his network instead of looking to the outside. Nevermind that Solari ran a wide open offense and Gunther Cunningham wasn't a Tampa 2 guy. And oh, by the way, Solari is not coordinating offenses in the NFL anymore and Gunther Cunningham has laid a gigantic goose egg so far in Detroit.
Under Herm's watch, the Chiefs made a big, bold step in the right direction in 2008 when they took a sledgehammer to the decrepit ship and decided they were going to build a brand spanking new one from scratch. It really leaves me to wonder, if Carl Peterson didn't meddle and allowed Herm to rebuild sooner, allowed him to openly interview outside candidates for the Offensive and Defensive Coordinator position, and never got rid of Jared Allen, where would the team be today?
So on the one hand, the Chiefs took longer to rebuild because of mistakes made during the Carl Peterson era. But credit Herm Edwards for forcing this team into the right direction and getting the team moving in the right direction in 2008. It undoubtedly made the switch to a 3-4 much easier. The question is, should Scott Pioli have made that defensive switch at all? I remember arguing that the Chiefs' 4-3 defense was in such a state of disrepair that it didn't matter if the Chiefs switched over. In looking back, the Chiefs' defense actually could have been very good from the get-go. And I'm starting to question whether switching over to the 3-4 is just another example of Pioli trying too hard to mold the Chiefs into the Pats' image instead of building off their strengths or if it really is the approach that will ultimately yield the superior defense.
The 4-3 Defense That Could Have Been:
First, let's point out the obvious. If Peterson didn't stupidly push Allen out of Kansas City, the Chiefs would have lined Allen up next to Glenn Dorsey, with Brandon Flowers and Brandon Carr shutting down at the corners. Woof. But let's put Jared Allen aside for a moment.
Even without Jared Allen, the Chiefs were in position to draft a few more playmakers. With their first pick, they could have taken Aaron Curry or Brian Orakpo. They didn't, in large part because Curry and Orakpo weren't nearly as attractive options for a 3-4 defense. With the second pick, they could have taken Rey Maualuga or James Laurinaitis. The 4-3 defense would have looked something like this (in the most ideal situation. And yes, I realize that suggesting that the Chiefs draft Orakpo is a hindsight argument).
Defensive Line: Brian Orakpo - Glenn Dorsey - Tank Tyler - Tamba Hali
LBs: Demorrio Williams - James Laurinaitis - Derrick Johnson
Secondary: Brandon Flowers - Jarrad Page - Bernard Pollard - Brandon Carr
And that's completely disregarding potential free agent pick-ups. I would think that the Chiefs would have been much more aggressive in 2010, especially with Herm Edwards realizing his job was on the line. I don't know about you, but that looks like a pretty mean defense, especially if they had a different, better defensive coordinator calling the plays.
It's too soon to judge whether Pioli made the right decision to move to a 3-4. I do have some concern as to whether the Patriots' two-gap version of the defense might be slightly outdated. And I think what's going to put a lot of pressure on Pioli to build a great 3-4 defense is the consideration of what he sacrificed to move the team there. The team took a step backward to get to the 3-4---I'm okay with that point. The question is whether his version of the defense will fare better than the version he could have built with the pieces the Chiefs already had. I don't think that's nearly as easy a question to answer as people think, especially after you take a quick look at that 4-3 lineup that could have been.
Pioli will need to spend the next few years justifying that this was the right decision. And if that 3-4 defense is nothing short of spectacular by then, we can legitimately question whether Pioli destructed a perfectly good, working defense in exchange for an inferior defense he was more comfortable with.
2 recs |
180 comments
|
Comments
We were as bad or worse as last year...
The Chiefs’ defense had some of the worst games of any in the NFL this past season, twice sending opposing players into the record book with franchise-best performances.
Miles Austin, in an overtime victory over the Chiefs, set the Cowboys single-game record with 250 yards receiving. Then later in the season in what many Chiefs fans consider the low point of the entire year, Cleveland backup Jerome Harrison rushed for an astonishing 286 yards, wiping out Jim Brown’s team record with the third-highest single-game total in NFL history.
Crennel agrees to become defensive coordinator for Chiefs from Sports Illustrated
by NJ Chiefs Fan on Jan 13, 2010 2:31 PM CST up reply actions
Don't forget
Everette Brown (who the Panther’s gave up this years 1st rounder for) in the 2nd round or Michael Johnson in the 3rd round for RDE. There is no question in my mind Herm’s team (who was one draft away from being where he had invisioned it) would have been a better team than Haley’s this year. Instead he was pushed out the door before his plan came into full fruition. I’m not crying over spilled make, just stating the obvious. I’m over it though because as I’ve spoke with this about my Pops – what championships has Peterson & Edwards ever won? We use the analogy of building a house a lot between the two administrations but the reality is one (the former) never really built anything while the other has built structure’s which all builders & contractor’s seek to model. It was just painful as a Chief’s fan because the timing. Our house was soo close to be done and we weathered the storm for 3 years. We were about to put the finishing touches on it before Donald Trump became available to us and we said the hell with this, let’s go big!
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 2:14 PM CST reply actions
That's what she said?
I was thinking about this yesterday…even though the bet was over who would have the better career, and Sanchez lucked out by being drafted by a far superior team, you got me. You are the new owner of a shiny 100 bill and the debt will be paid in full when I catch up with you. The question is now will that be in Cali or Misery?
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 3:31 PM CST up reply actions
Weak
so had I won you would have reneged on the deal. I see how you are. 3 grams of our Bubba is roughly equivalent to what’s at stake, so we’ll call it good. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZI3Igtx3nHY&feature=related
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 4:05 PM CST up reply actions
by KansasCityShuffle
Mi Gi Dem .._com wit a witler ! Na , Na, Na !
by 65tosspowertrap on Jan 16, 2010 6:03 AM CST up reply actions
You forgot about Jimmy Wilkerson
Another good 4-3 DE that we let go. He had 6 sacks and 2 FF in 15 games for Tampa Bay this year.
At this point, Jared Allen’s best year was his last with the Chiefs…and that was playing next to Ron Edwards and James Reed. He’s now playing next to arguably the best DT tandem in the league, and producing fewer sacks. I’m okay with having traded him at what appears, so far, to be the pinnacle of his career.
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
Pioli's 3-4?
WTF?
It’s Haley’s. What the hell does Pioli have to do with this defense? When did he become the coach? Or, was Herm the GM and I missed that?
Funny how when it’s good news, it’s Pioli’s. When it’s bad, it’s Haley. Maybe people will eventually get over this issue. These guys came to coach with Todd Haley. They won’t interact with Pioli and Pioli didn’t make the hire. Strange.
I think Haley and Pioli were in agreement on the 3-4 Defense
I get the impression it was a joint decision and the Pioli and Haley are pretty tight on personnel and other moves with the team. That bizarre rumor that they never talked is one of the most off-the-wall comments I’ve ever heard.
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
Re: Pioli's 3-4
Pioli has a lot to do with this defense. He made the conscious decision to build the 3-4 defense in the image of the Patriots, not the 4-3 Under that Pendergast largely ran in Arizona. That is pretty evident by their drafting Tyson Jackson in the top 5.
This is Pioli’s defense. And I never said that was a good or a bad thing. But I think few would agree that this defense is largely the design of Haley.
Wrong Yoon
Pendergast ran a hybrid that he was evolving into the 3-4. This is Haley’s 3-4. Pioli hired Haley to install his offense and defense. i’m sure there was collaboration but let their be no doubt this is Haley’s 3-4.
Unless you have some concrete evidence instead of the here say you’re passing off as fact i suggest you show us Yoon because your word is nothing more than BS.
Hey now, there's no place for insults.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
insult?
passing off speculation as fact is the insult here and that’s exactly what Yoon was doing. Calling it Pioli’s 3-4 is like calling it Petersens 4-3 a couple years ago. how often did you hear that?
Like i said i’m sure they collaborated on this but calling it Pioli’s 3-4 is misrepresenting the situation. Haley is the coach and it’s his responsibility.
when Pioli takes the bad press for the 3-4 miscues we can call it his but you won’t see that anytime soon.
by riverhorse_2000 on Jan 13, 2010 6:34 PM CST up reply actions
Re: riverhorse
Thanks for reading. I’m sorry you disagree that this is Pioli’s 3-4.
It is speculation, sure. But given how many new additions to the roster were ex-Patriots, his hiring of two ex-Patriot coordinators, and the fact that the Chiefs are focusing on a 2-gap defense that is fairly unique to the Patriots, I think it’s more than fair to say that Pioli had a lot of say in this defense.
I’m not faulting him for building what he knows. But when the defense is built in the same exact mold as the defense the GM has been building for 10 years prior, it leads you to believe the GM was very instrumental in the decision.
Can you explain how something is "fairly unique"?
This car is “almost” one-of-a-kind! Buy Now!
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
Except for the 10 other teams that run it, of course...
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
Also
I thought most 3-4 defenses were 2-gap, and that Dallas (who often encourages the NT to shoot one of the A-gaps) was in the minority. Is this incorrect?
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
No, it's Haley's
Best just to admit the mistake. We all do it from time to time. Can’t compare Pioli to Herm. Apples to oranges.
by ChiefConcern on Jan 13, 2010 5:33 PM CST up reply actions
let it go...
It’s Romeo’s show now…re-freakin-joice!!!
I for one feel WAY better with how things are looking now.
the numbers were slightly better this year (but not much)
YPG – 393.2 down to 388.2
PPG – 27.5 down to 26.5
Sacks – 10 up to 22
INTs – 13 up to 15
Now you can argue that Herm’s team would of made a bigger improvement because they weren’t learning a new system, but to me the fact that we improved at all while learning a new system while our only major addition was Tyson Jackson (who struggled) shows that this system will be superior in the long run.
Also, don’t forget that Herm’s cover 2 was constantly picked apart, they put NO pressure on the QB, and players were lazy and sloppy under his command.
Feeling "The Love" and "Drinking the Kool AId"
by KCporkchop on Jan 13, 2010 2:23 PM CST reply actions 4 recs
and the run D was looking WAY better before Dorsey got dinged and Buff and Clv ate our lunch
Feeling "The Love" and "Drinking the Kool AId"
by KCporkchop on Jan 13, 2010 2:26 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Didn't read the last part
“we can legitimately question whether Pioli destructed a perfectly good, working defense in exchange for an inferior defense he was more comfortable with”. Ughhh…what? Our defense was god awful, not that this year’s was better, but we lacked technique, we lacked coaching, and we lacked more than a few pieces realistically. Our team got progressively more OUT of shape as this season’s went on under Herm. I don’t even know how that happens. There was a sense of entitlement and positive motivation from Herm that I’m not sure best served this team. While harsh, I like Haley’s approach of “do your fucking job or I will find someone who will” as opposed to Herm’s “don’t worry about it, just do better next time”. In the long run I think Clark made the right call, it’s just growing pains we’re going thru and y’all know I’m the first one to whimper when it hurts
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 2:23 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Re: Defense was god awful
The defense was god awful. But was that because of poor coaching? Was that because young guys like Dorsey and Flowers were rookies?
I’m not even saying you keep Herm and definitely not Gun. Let’s imagine Pioli hires a 4-3 mastermind like Gregg Williams to coordinate the defense, who would be an enormous upgrade over Gunther at Defensive Coordinator. Let’s assume you use the #3 pick on Brian Orakpo instead of Tyson Jackson. Let’s assume that you use the second round pick on one of the outstanding linebackers, like Rey Maualuga or James Laurinaitis.
And given that 2008 was the year Herm decided to wipe the slate clean, let’s assume that the Chiefs were aggressive in free agency for the first time in the Herm era.
A new Defensive Coordinator, two outstanding defensive rookies, 1-2 upgrades through free agency, in addition to improvement from young guys like Dorsey, Tank Tyler, and Flowers?
It’s a hypothetical. But when you actually look at the scenario, the defense could have been excellent in 2009.
A new Defensive Coordinator, two outstanding defensive rookies, 1-2 upgrades through free agency, in addition to improvement from young guys like Dorsey, Tank Tyler, and Flowers?
Aren’t we essentially looking at this same scenario now? We are a S, ILB, OLB and NT away from having a steady top 15 defense if, as you say, we see some improvement from Hali (which with his work ethic, you know we will), T-Jax and Dorsey. Add to that Dorsey and Hali playing on the same side, and you can imagine the weak-side playmaking ability we could have.
We’ve got the D.C., we’re on our way to drafting some outstanding rookies, and we’ve got a big name coordinator in place to further sway potential FA’s.
In light of that, I believe we are in a much better situation now than if we stuck with Herm and the 4-3
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius, in contrary to Glenn Dorsey lining up in the 2-tech
Re: ArrowSpread
Great comment. In my opinion, we took a large step backward in order to take what we think would be a step forward. We got rid of some valuable depth guys like Tank Tyler and Turk McBride. While I’m okay with the Tyson Jackson pick in the framework of what Pioli wanted to do, we would have gotten far better positional value for 4-3 players like Orakpo or Curry. I think we would have gotten more out of Dorsey as a 3-technique DT instead of the 5-technique he plays today. And I would also argue that if Pioli stuck with a 4-3, evaluations would have been easy and we could have dove into the free agency market in 2009 rather than wait for 2010.
We’ll see how it plays out. I have no firm opinion. But no doubt it set the rebuild back about 2-3 years (maybe more, if the CBA falls through and fewer free agents hit the market). And there’s no guarantee it will be better.
If all we added was Orakpo and a Defensive Coordinator who actually knew what he was doing, this defense would have been very good in 2009 and we could have spent the entire 2010 season focused on building the offense. Just trying to add a contrarian point of view.
if's and but's
if if’s and buts were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry xmas Yoon.
Who peed in your Cheerios?
Not that it matters, as the attitude you’re throwing around isn’t necessary either way.
Let’s assume that you use the second round pick on one of the outstanding linebackers, like Rey Maualuga or James Laurinaitis.
And we’d still be starting Thidpen. No thx.
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
by KCSatchmo on Jan 13, 2010 5:20 PM CST up reply actions
If Herm was here we would be starting Croyle not Thigpen.
Chiefs set an NFL record,most roster changes in 1 season.
by bringbacktheglory on Jan 13, 2010 5:43 PM CST up reply actions
Either way...
Pass
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
by KCSatchmo on Jan 13, 2010 5:47 PM CST up reply actions
First, let’s point out the obvious. If Peterson didn’t stupidly push Allen out of Kansas City, the Chiefs would have lined Allen up next to Glenn Dorsey, with Brandon Flowers and Brandon Carr shutting down at the corners. Woof.
No, because without the luxury of a second 1st round pick (the one we used on Albert), I’m fairly certain that #5 pick would have been a left tackle rather than Dorsey.
But let’s put Jared Allen aside for a moment.
Your second scenario is more likely, but I’m not sure a 4-3 line with Orakpo and Hali at the ends could stop the rushing offense of St. Mary’s High School =) – they’re both big OLB’s.
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
Doubt it
Dorsey by ALL accounts was BPA. Nobody even thought about him being available at #5 because surely he would have been off the board. When a player like him falls to you, you’ve really got no choice in the matter.
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 2:25 PM CST up reply actions
Well then we better have had a damn good defense
because Damion McIntosh would have still been our LT.
The only way we would have kept our QB’s alive would have been to run the wildcat 100% of the time :)
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
by PVChiefsfan on Jan 13, 2010 2:27 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I wonder if Suh falls to #5 are we going to "have" to pick him too
I really like your points today Shuffle
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 13, 2010 5:53 PM CST up reply actions
I think if Pioli 'n' Co evaluate Suh as best 3-4 DE in years, as others do (right or wrong),
then I think it very likely he WOULD take Suh. An embarrassment of riches in the trenches is easy to live down. But passing up a dominant player at such a key position is unforgivable. You can always trade off the lesser player, maybe struggle for a year, stuck with the best D-Line in the league, but you can’t ignore the other position groups entirely. Or can you?
The PIT model is pure lunchbucket on the front 3. But with more teams switching to 3-4, true widebodies who can and will play 2-gap unselfishly are going higher and higher in the draft, with GMs like Pioli leading the way. Used to be easier to find and retain their front 3 for peanuts. But the world she is a changin’.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
Hali is not an OLB
just because he’s an amazing athlete with similair work ethic doesn’t mean he’s an OLB, nor does it mean the same because the Redskins were “crazy” enough to put him in at LB in a 4-3 defense. By all accounts Hali is a traditional LDE (he’s proven he can’t man the right side) and Orakpo would have been a beast a RDE.
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 2:27 PM CST up reply actions
I just don't see either of them holding up at the point of attack on running plays like other DE's
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
Conversely
I just don’t see either one of those two dropping into pass coverage. I realize that’s more of the ILB’s job in a 3-4 defense, but reality is duty calls for it 10x more than being a DE in a 4-3. All scouts projected them to be best utilized at DE’s in a 4-3 and I still agree with that assessment.
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 2:31 PM CST up reply actions
I actually liked Hali better this year, playing a little lighter
than I did when he played LDE opposite Allen. I think his nonstop motor goes better with a 260 lb. guy than a 280 lb. guy.
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
Yup...it pays off at the end of games.
I have NOTHING bad to say about Hali. He’s my favorite player on the defense. There is NO quit in that guy.
Wonder how Studebaker will do as a pass rusher on the other side? (after Vrabel is gone of course)
by Chiefsfan1970 on Jan 13, 2010 3:30 PM CST up reply actions
If we do not get another OLB to replace Vrabel
by BAMFSpecialOps on Jan 13, 2010 3:42 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not really sure how Studebaker
will be as a pass rusher, kind of like Vrabel this year. Not a huge rush impact has to be taken account of before the snap due to running to his side/him dropping back.
by BAMFSpecialOps on Jan 13, 2010 5:34 PM CST up reply actions
It's an honor to add another layer of nesting to this thread.
It’s fun to listen to the grown-ups talkin’.
I think Hali’s playing at the right weight. That’s something the new regime seems to target, more than the weight they WANT a guy to be at. They want a guy who’s close to peak condition and in that condition, is appropriate weight for the position he plays.
Another guy just like Hali, to either start, or back up Studebaker at SOLB, and I can easily see Vrabel playing ILB. I think that’s where he played when NE won a championship or two.
I don’t want to see ANY LB of mine bein’ stuck 1-on-1 with RB or TE, as a matter of course, but I’m OK with any LB handling the correct drops as a matter of choice on his part, once fear of the havoc he wreaks in the O-backfield and against the run is established in the mind of the opposing offense.
A big key to that is to have a front 3 that swallow up 5 guys. That makes a Hali on either side problematical for offenses to protect against. When an offense has to deal with that, and you’re mostly beating up RBs and TEs at or before they reach the line of scrimmage, it’s very difficult for QBs to predict where he’ll be when he is in his zone drops, and the QB is primed to make a semi-blind pass to a spot where he thinks he can make the quick pass against the devastating rush he’s been facing.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
Note that Hali's playing weight
upon being drafted was 265. No matter at DE or OLB, I think that’s his ideal weight
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 3:32 PM CST up reply actions
I think so, too.
And they’re gettin’ good use of him in the role he’s in.
And I think that’s why they had to let McBride go. He’s a ‘tweener who’s ’tween either of the roles for which he might reasonably audition. Too small to be a 3-4 widebody, and just on the slow side to play 3-4 LB.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
And therein is a GM's reason for switch to 3-4.
I just don’t see either of them holding up at the point of attack on running plays like other DE’s.
You get that freak DE who can run down the QB and he gets run over. You get a widebody DE who can hold the point, and many of today’s mobile QBs will make him look foolish in space. You’ll have your big games against teams that haven’t taken care of business on the O-Line side of things, and you’ll keep yourself in that 6-10 to 10-6 window, but, unless you luck out a few times in a row in the draft, you’re stuck paying thru the nose for fewer than a handful of franchise FAs.
I ain’t sayin’ it’s EASY to build a dominant 3-4 D, but it’s easier than building a dominant 4-3, in today’s NFL. That’s why I lean towards this being Pioli’s 3-4, regardless of who’s being asked to run it. I think, as GM, Pioli’s saying that it’s easier to BUILD a solid D, and MAINTAIN it, with relatively (and only relatively) easier system picks. And his system, modeled to some degree on the PIT system(s) builds a D that has continuity and unit cohesion, year in and year out.
I’ve been watching the sand slip thru King Carl’s fingers for a couple decades, now, two new holes spouting seawater for every one he plugged. A big part of the problem, as I see it, has been staffing and retaining personnel to run the 4-3 the way it oughta be run. There are other parts to it, as well, mostly relating to mistaking upside for value, and Pioli’s all about value.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
I thought a lot of Chiefs fans blamed Carl more than Herm for what happened
It’s clear that Carl and Herm weren’t on the same page, which means it was a mistake for Carl to hire him. Carl definitely drained the team with a lot of pathetic drafts before and during Vermeil’s coaching stint. And he blew it big time with Allen (and you forgot to include John Tait as a Carl special screw up). But I think Herm was still a LONG way from having a decent team. Or even a decent defense.
I think the 3-4 is the direction to go. I found it interesting that Haley was big for the 3-4 because of he found it the most difficult to plan against. There are several teams that are moving to the 3-4, but I don’t know of any that are moving from it to the 4-3. It’s a tough change, especially with all the voids we had on defense anyway, but sticking with the 4-3 and Herm for longer would mean we could climb to being a mediocre team that makes the playoffs once in a while and never advances more than one round. At least the new regime holds out the possibility of being more.
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
they were on the same page
Carl and Herm were really good friends.
It just so happened that the page they were on read "igore all of the teams needs and draft crappy players and sign should be retired big name Free Agents "
KRRRAKATAWAA
I don't think they were.
I think they were good friends BEFORE Herm got here. But I think Herm correctly saw the team for what it was, an old team being held together with some FA Bondo but on the verge of falling apart. He tried to get Carl to go big on the draft and rebuild, but Carl was against it, so they went Carl’s way the first year. After the perfect storm and ANOTHER humiliating playoff loss, Herm went to Clark and convinced him the team needed to be rebuilt. Remember, there were a lot of storied that Clark was convinced that Herm was on the right path (no mention of Carl), and Carl took a step back in the organization. I don’t recall hearing Carl ever speak up for Herm after that. I think they became estranged – it reminded me a lot of Carl and Marty the last year of Marty’s tenure.
Carl never wanted to admit to rebuilding. I think Posnanski had a great article about that when he was here. Carl was more interested in being 10-6 every year, and losing in the first round of the playoffs, while keeping the seats filled and fans excited than in going after the fundamentals and building a championship.
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
It’s on both. Carl should have never hired Herm for many reasons, and certainly if he wasn’t on the same page as Herm, when it came to the direction the team wanted to go, if that’s TRULY the case. And Herm should have never taken the job without a FIRM, ROCK SOLID understanding of what Carl wanted to do. That’s why I don’t give Herm any kind of pass for not going to the youth movement immediately.
I hope we go with what the Cardinals are doing now. I love their amorphous blob defense. It baffles the best qb's.
Favre said he had no idea who was blitzing. They all kinda just stand around and then seemingly random people blitz. It’s really fun to watch. i didn’t get to watch the 2nd half of the GB game, but the Cardinals D was STELLAR the first half of that game.
They got eaten alive in the second half
That was a very strange game.
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
I know, that's why I said I have no idea what happened.
Maybe they just went into the prevent which is the worst defense ever. They played damn good that first half though.
You mean Rogers, not Favre.
But yeah. I think both teams decided to spread things out. Looked to me like DB-WR mismatches eventually ruled the day. Once both teams’ very good passers proved they could beat the blitz, the entire landscape of the game changed.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
Kudos to you Jon
for the great discussion topic as it’s something I’ve thought a lot about this year. Plus, if I read one more report about Crennel, one more retarded mock draft, or one more FA fantasy wishlist I was going Todd Haley Brodie Croyle style
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 2:35 PM CST reply actions
I agree, Shuffle
that this is excellent foood for thought. Good post, Jon!
John
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!"
I just want to know ...
Do you think we’ll get Wilfork now?
What do you think about drafting a Left Tackle with our first pick and shifting Albert, Waters and NIswanger all over one spot? Would that immediately improve our O-Line? And, if so, who would you take with that pick?
And, just out of curiosity, who do you have us taking with our first pick in the second round?
Re: Left Tackle
Getting Wilfork will probably largely depend on the CBA. If there’s no CBA, New England can slap a franchise tag on two players, I believe, so there’s no way Wilfork hits the open market—they’ll want trade value and probably too high for KC to afford.
In the first, I am thoroughly opposed to getting a Left Tackle. 1) Albert showed promise at LT toward the end of the season; 2) you do not bump a promising LT to another position unless you are 100% sure you have the next Willie Roaf (not even close to a guarantee that Okung is better than Albert); 3) you do not draft a Guard or Center with your #3 pick. Yes, we’d be drafting a Left Tackle, but let’s be honest, if you draft a LT it’s because you want to improve at Center or Left Guard more than wanting to improve at Left Tackle.
Rather than do that, draft the best Center or Guard on the board in the 2nd-4th round.
I'd say there's a very good chance that we draft McClain
and yes, I know it’s “crazy” to use a top 5 pick on an ILB =)
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
Jonny boy
I think Jacin was making a sardonic response to me. Being as that those are everbody’s bright idea’s and FAQ’s
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 3:35 PM CST up reply actions
Yup.
And I was trying to get as much mock drafting and free agent wishlisting talk in there as I could.
Well played, sir
Well played.
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 6:21 PM CST up reply actions
I think the best value in the 2nd for OL is going to be RT.
And I think it reasonably certain that the 2a pick quickly surpasses a pretty good O’Callaghan, giving KC starting-quality swing tackle, and every warm body they’ve brought in, plus a 3rd &/or 4th round interior lineman to address C/G.
Now HERE’s a turd in the punchbowl:
McDaniels clearly wants to go E-P on O-L. And we all thought HALEY was going to go E-P on O-L. Is the long-term intention to be a Z-B team, or was Z-B a stop-gap try at respectability, with power-blocking still what Haley wants? Colin Brown sure scouted to me like a pick made by a team with E-P in its long-term plans.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
Im not sure a hypothetical on a defense that was mediocre at its best
Is something to hang your hat on. I agree, Herm started a trend with young players that needed to be started….but there is no telling (in fact, more things point to him failing as the leader) that he would have been able to coach this team to anything better than 2-14 with his own player. And he could have forced Gunther and Solari out if he thought there was something better. I agree, good food for though, but not a sound argument. It sounds like another post about how Herm just didnt have enough time to make things work.
KC could've added Orakpo and won more games, depending on Orakpo's health.
They had fair-to-middlin’ depth on the front 4, with Dorsey comin’ into his 2nd year, and a decent set of starters, with Hali and McBride fighting for the other DE spot.
But no guarantees Carl would’ve gone DE at all. Probably would’ve gone Eric Curry, or something ridiculous like that, and still been at least one DE short of a dominant front 4.
And we’d’ve forgiven the mgmt, and just moan about bein’ snake-bit, when Dorsey, Tyler, and Edwards, playing out-of-shape, struggled with injuries all season. Hali and McBride, both playing overweight, trying to stay bulked-up, ALSO struggling with nicks all season. Somehow, things just not gelling, with cries for a better LB in 2010, because Curry ALSO got hurt, because there was so much trash to fight through every play, with Lokey starting at DT for a 4-game stretch…
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
What-ifs are fun.
Proving a negative is always impossible.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
well thought out post
but, the answer is a pretty resounding YES it will be better, IMO
You're either growing or you're dying, there ain't no third direction
-Big Tom Callahan
Herm had a house of cards
When Herm took over. Vermeil administration did not do a good job in the draft for five years. His first year he lost Willie Roaf. The second year he lost will sheilds. The defense
sucked. He did not have wide receivers. The QB was a pocket passer who got hurt because the Oline could not protect. It was a house of cards when Herm took over.
Yes the defense will be better. Herm drafted some players to make this defense better.
Saying that I like a 3-4 defense over the 4-3
Let's be clear on this.
Vermeil DID get his way on Trent Green, Priest Holmes and Willie Roaf – key free agents that DID make the team better. But LJ never would’ve been drafted if it’d been Vermeil’s call. The scouting was done by Peterson cronies, and the picks were Carl’s. For the most part, DV had a good eye for what was needed, and who could fill that need. Just look at how St. Louis was STACKED when DV won a championship, and how it started deteriorating the minute he left, and Martz thought it was all about being clever with skill players, and blaming guys like Kurt Warner for the O-Line DV left behind and STL failed to maintain.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
And STL STILL sucks, and is STILL looking for a QB to play behind...
… a shitty line.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
If Lamar would have fired Carl and hired Herm Chiefs would have been better off
I’m sure Solari would not have been OC, we might still have Allen, and we would have a much younger team. Last year was impossible with all the injuries. I thought McBride was coming on for 2 injuries took him out. I would have liked to see him compete at DE. I was surprised to see them go to the 3-4 so early. I think Scott thought he could get OL help in free agency but no takers.And I don’t think money was the problem. I might do a post on that.
gordymule
He is on my wish list (Wilfork)
Off-Season Wish List:
Romeo Crennel - Completed
Charlie Weis - Completed
Resign DJ - pending
Draft Eric Berry - pending
Draft Golden Tate - pending
Draft Toby Gerhart - pending
Draft Jermaine Gresham - pending
Draft Jammie Kirlew - pending
Sign Marcus McNeill - pending
Sign Vince Wilfork - pending
Trade for Boldin - pending
Sign DeMeco Ryans - pending
Great another too long sig line, straight from the school of UC
Gerhart is going to be jack shit in the NFL.
by HIV 2 Elway on Jan 13, 2010 3:07 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
haha
and all three of our first picks on offense?
and yes I’m counting Gerhart as a second because some dumb ass GM will take him before the third round
KRRRAKATAWAA
Not fair at all
If we spent all our early picks on defense as you suggest our offense would suck ass.. We’d still have Damein Macintosh at LT, Larry Johnson at RB, and Brodie Croyle at QB
So back to the post.. the answer is yes. As of 2009 the 4-3 would have been better, but it wouldn’t matter because we’d have no foundation for our offense so we’d never win games anyway. But I’ll stretch the issue a bit and argue that the 4-3 is only better on paper..
There is only one coach in the entire NFL that runs the Tampa 2 successfully, that being Ron Meeks (Indy) who recently resigned. It was an awesome defense in the late 90’s- early millenium but it has pretty much died since considering O coordinators have found a way to dink and dunk down the field exploiting the "bend but don’t break philosophy.
The 3-4 on the other hand is a defense that has withstood the test of time. The 3-4 has been around the NFL since the mid 70’s (funny enough it was the Patriots who bought it to the NFL) and 11 of the 32 NFL teams run it today.. The Tampa 2 is near extinction with Buffalo in the middle of an overhaul and the resignation of Meeks, only Houston is left standing (Although you could argue the Bears as well, but that still only leaves two teams).
KRRRAKATAWAA
by 808NaNz808 on Jan 13, 2010 3:04 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Yup...Not looking all that spectacular right now
although, I do think he will be a great player in time. I’m sure Pete Carroll will bring in the right people to help them out.
by Chiefsfan1970 on Jan 13, 2010 3:24 PM CST up reply actions
+1 Kev
I think the whole dynamic in the NFC is about to change….And we play against them this coming season…..don’t be suprised if SF goes QB early on in the draft or gets a veteran QB FA/trade. Seattle may do the same. There’s gonna be a sizeable power vacuum in that division soon….and if a guy like Curry comes around, that would be seismic..
Good read Nanz Rec
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 13, 2010 6:08 PM CST up reply actions
What difference does it make???
The mistakes of the past have very little bearing on the future at this point. Most of the pieces are in place for us to complete the transition and I personally believe this defense improved…a little bit.
I’m tired of bashing the easy targets of Carl, Herm, and Gunther. It doesn’t matter now. This is a new team with an all star coaching staff. I’m pretty sure that by the time this next season starts, we will have all the parts in place and Romeo should be able to work wonders with this young D-line. We should see MAJOR improvements on this defense in the 2010 season and then, all will be forgotten because we will be winning games.
Yeah! Another poor Herm didn't get a chance post.
I love how everyone talks about all the bad decisions Carl made but then defend Herm. Guess what? Herm was just another bad decision of Carl. 4th round pick for a coach that lost more games than he won as a HC.
I’ll take the resumes of the people in charge we have now any day. Carl and Herm are gone people, let those dark years go.
Chiefs set an NFL record,most roster changes in 1 season.
by bringbacktheglory on Jan 13, 2010 3:19 PM CST reply actions
Agreed
BTW: Back when the whole Croyle vs Thiggy debate was going strong, who would have thought that BBTG and I would be agreeing on anything?
And yes Nanz, that’s a great point about Washington. I was about to say the same thing myself.
by Chiefsfan1970 on Jan 13, 2010 3:22 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
+1
Good to be on the same side with you. Haven’t seen you around here as much, I hope everything has been OK?
Chiefs set an NFL record,most roster changes in 1 season.
by bringbacktheglory on Jan 13, 2010 3:29 PM CST up reply actions
Oh...
And if Herm was still here, so too would be Krumrie and the glaring 2008/2009 DLine sack totals he left behind.
Pass.
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius, in contrary to Glenn Dorsey lining up in the 2-tech
Excellent post Jon!
But I have to disagree on one thing. If Allen stayed, then Dorsey wouldn’t be here. We would have been more likely to draft Ryan Clady.
I’ve also considered this. If Allen would have stayed, then the landscape would be far, far, far, far different. Who knows? Maybe we would have won 3 or 4 more games in 2008 with him, and Herm and Carl kept their jobs. Maybe They get fired anyway and Pioli comes in and leaves the 4-3 intact, since a NFL worst sack record would have never happened in 2008 with Allen here. Plus a stud super star pass rusher would probably cause Pioli to leave well enough alone and continue building around Allen and the 4-3.
But it’s all in hind sight. The 3-4 is here, and I get the impression that a beast NT and a good LB or two will vault us into a top 15 defense. Only time will tell.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 3:24 PM CST reply actions
Biggest myth out there
The whole “Carl wouldn’t let poor Herm rebuild” nonsense. Shame to see this crap pop up again.
1) Herm denies this
2) Carl denies it
3) no proof (kent babb just started saying it)
4) and most importantly, how exactly would they of rebuilt more than they did in 2006/2007? Since when does cutting veterans create more draft picks? Oh yeah, it doesn’t. What else could we have done, trade Allen earlier when he had less value, even though you say trading Allen was a mistake?
5) Herm’s the one who brought in the likes of Law, Turley, etc, etc.
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 3:25 PM CST reply actions
Edwards' and/or Peterson's denials are meaningless
Presumably, both of these guys want back in the NFL. They won’t help their case by publicly revealing conflict that took place between them while they were with the Chiefs.
And I remind you that on at 12:00 noon on January 6, Todd Haley stood in front of the Kansas City media and emphatically denied that he had spoken with Charlie Weis about becoming the Chiefs OC. Within 12 hours, media reports made it clear Weis had the job, and it was publicly announced in less than 48.
So I just don’t think that any public statements made by either Edwards or Peterson on this matter ought to used as evidence to support your claim that this is a myth. We’ll simply never know if it happened… or if it didn’t.
The fact is… Edwards did rebuild more in 2008 than he did in 2006 and 2007. The average age of his starters – not the entire roster – dropped 2.9 years between 2007 and 2008. In both 2006 and 2007, it dropped just 0.3 years from the year before. We’ll never know exactly why that happened when it did, but there’s no question that it did happen.
John
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!"
Dying to hear...
how Herm wanted to rebuild more in 2006-07 but couldn’t. What would he have done? Filled the team with undrafted free agents? Traded Tony G? Draft picks just don’t appear, which is the main reason it’s a complete and utter myth!
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 8:43 PM CST up reply actions
The answer, sir,
is exactly what I said – that the average age of the starters dropped dramatically in 2008. Go ahead… show me another NFL team that had such a dramatic change (2.9 years, to be precise) in the age of the starting lineup in one year. And good luck with that.
You also misunderstand my position. I am not trying to say that the conflict between Edwards and Peterson took place – only that there was a substantial change in what happened on the field in 2008. I don’t know what happened between Edwards and Peterson, and won’t pretend that I do. But I do know that there was a dramatic change in who got on the field to play… starting after week 14 of Edwards’ second season, when Chris Terry (who had started against Denver) was unceremoniously cut.
John
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!"
still waiting HOW
HOW HOW HOW
It’s the one thing the myth believers can never answer. How would he have rebuilt more in 2006-07? Where do these magical draft picks come from?!?!?!?
Of course we got younger in 2008, we had, what, 12 draft picks, 6 in the first 3 rounds!?!?!? You miss the premise that I’m not talking about 2008.
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 14, 2010 2:52 PM CST up reply actions
OK... how about
starting Croyle from the beginning of 2007 – which, to anyone who watched Hard Knocks will attest, Edwards wanted to do, and Peterson did not want to do? Or Pollard, who was available in 2006, but didn’t really get used until 2007? Or McBride and Tyler, who could have gotten on the field a year earlier, in place of Edwards or Boone? What about Stallings or Taylor? The way things played out, neither of those guys got a real chance to show what they could do, which is what Edwards said he wanted almost from the first moment he set foot in Arrowhead: to put the young guys on the field, and let them develop. Who’s to say that with this additional experince, at least some of these players could have shown they had what it took?
Intstead… all these guys – except for Croyle – are gone. It may turn out that Pioli and Haley were right to cut every one of them – that for whatever reason, they didn’t fit in with their plans. But the franchise gave up early picks for a lot of them. If it turns out P&H are right… fine. But if not, then the franchise treaded even more water.
John
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!"
Don't even mention Turley...
That was terrible. That was the worst O-line I have ever seen…Makes the 2009 squad look like the 2003 squad.
When will people get over Jared Allen?
Check his stats this year. Over half his sacks came early in the season against one team, the Packers, when their offensive line was killed by injuries.
Against the rest of the league, he only managed 7 sacks in 14 games. His final year in KC, he had twice that many sacks in 14 games. People can talk about “double teams” and such all day long, but it’s not like Allen was never being double-teamed before this season.
As another poster already mentioned, Allen has yet to play as well for the Vikings as he did his final year here, and that’s with a far better cast around him up north.
And if you dive even further into the numbers, of those 7 sacks against everyone but Green Bay, only a couple of them were actually meaningful. Most of them came in garbage time when the Vikings were already well ahead.
If the Packers’ line hadn’t struggled so bad early in the season, there would be a lot of talk about Allen’s declining production since the Vikings traded for him.
And, of course...
…without the Allen trade, we don’t draft Jamaal Charles.
by SlipperyPete on Jan 13, 2010 3:45 PM CST up reply actions
Why not?
How can you be sure that the Chiefs don’t draft Charles even without the extra pick?
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 3:53 PM CST up reply actions
Please
Because of the Allen trade, the Chiefs ended up with 3 extra picks in the first 3 rounds. That gave them a ton of flexibility to simply stay true to their board and draft the best possible players.
Running back was not a position of need. They had LJ and Kolby Smith had just been drafted the year before.
Do you seriously think that if the Chiefs only had 1 pick in the third round, they would have used it on a running back they didn’t need?
by SlipperyPete on Jan 13, 2010 4:10 PM CST up reply actions
RB may not have been a position of need,
but neither was safety.
Besides, if Allen would have been retained, then Larry Johnson might have been traded. Surely we could have gotten at least an extra third for LJ… which would have made drafting a RB a necessity. My point is that you couldn’t possibly know how the draft would have panned out under different circumstances. We might have gotten Charles regardless of whether or not Allen was traded.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 4:26 PM CST up reply actions
interesting
I hadn’t thought of that SP. Even more interesting with the information you provided in mind – he was still top 5 in DPY voting.
Sure he was
How many people do you think actually pay attention to the kind of thing I just posted? They’ll look at the stats, say “gee, Allen had a lot of sacks”, and give him a vote.
Of course, he only actually got 2 votes.
by SlipperyPete on Jan 13, 2010 4:24 PM CST up reply actions
-1.
Yes, because we would all HATE to have a pass rusher that averaged about 15 sacks a year for the last 3 years. And it would really suck to have a pass rusher that harasses a big time divisional rival. How shitty would it be if Tamba had 15 sacks and 7 of those came against San Diego? That would be awful.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 3:51 PM CST up reply actions
LOL
Way to ignore that Allen was harrassing third stringers to get those sacks.
by SlipperyPete on Jan 13, 2010 4:20 PM CST up reply actions
Really?
Green Bay had third stringers protecting Rodgers? LMAO.
Way to ignore that Allen IS STILL one of the best pass rushers in the league over the last 3 years. He’s by far better than ANYTHING we have now. Please man. Just stop. You’re trying to belittle the accomplishments of one of the league’s best defenders…. because most of this year’s sacks came against a division rival…. that made it to the playoffs. Never mind that offensive coordinators still have to game plan against him, and that even when he doesn’t sack a QB, he is still putting pressure on them a lot of the time. Just stop.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 4:34 PM CST up reply actions
Your argument has merit, but you’re ignoring valid counterpoints.
There’s some evidence that Kansas City traded him and got surplus value for him during a time in which they knew his services could not lead to a SuperBowl. That’s a brilliant strategy and one I will support every time, even if its Count Chocula and his bumbling Coors-Light commercial sidekick.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
No.
I’m not ignoring valid counterpoints. He doesn’t have any. Saying that Allen isn’t “all he’s cracked up to be because 7 of his 14.5 sacks came against one opponent (a divisional one at that)” is completely asinine and shows that he had no idea what Allen and the Vikings accomplished this year. And he goes on to say the majority of his plays came in garbage time, which is out right wrong.
In week 4, on GB’s opening possession, Allen sacked and stripped Rodgers and MIN recovered the ball. MIN scored on their next possession. In the 4th quarter, with 7:25 to go, Allen again sacked and stripped Rodgers, this time in the end zone. The fumble was reversed, but the play still resulted in a safety. GB lost that game 30-23. Seven points…. and Allen sacked him again on their final drive in under 2 minutes. It could be argued that the Vikings won that game because of Jared Allen. It’s impossible to argue that his plays came in “garbage time”.
In week 8, Allen sacked Rodgers in the 2nd quarter, the 3rd quarter, and in the 4th quarter with 6:26 to go and MIN only up 31-26. Again, that’s not garbage time.
None of the sacks that Allen got against GB came when the game was in the bag for MIN. To say otherwise is ABSOLUTELY WRONG. Allen played until the final whistle (like all NFL studs are supposed to), and that’s pretty much what it came down to both times.
And I’m sorry Justin, but trading Allen was the worst move the Chiefs have made in the last 10 years. We’re still looking for his replacement. There’s no reason we couldn’t have kept Allen and still drafted Albert (or most likely Clady), Flowers and Charles. I’d have to argue that Allen and Hali with Flowers behind them would have been a great combo. Cottam and Morgan haven’t done jack shit. Dorsey was supposed to be Allen’s replacement.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 5:39 PM CST up reply actions
That was against a third string OT, RNGB.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
Well I guess GB should have double teamed more often.
That’s not a valid argument. Put a RB or a TE over there…. especially if Allen opens the game with a sack strip on you. He still completely dominated in those two games.
Tell me, would you be complaining if Tamba had a season like Jared Allen just had? Would you be looking for ways to take away Tamba’s accomplishments? What would you think if SD or DEN came to KC and got harassed by Hali, who accumulates 4 sacks, a FF and a safety all in one game? Would you say, “oh, that’s no big deal. That was their third string LT”? No, you wouldn’t. You’re just grasping at straws to try and find some reason to make the Allen trade hurt less.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 6:27 PM CST up reply actions
And you're still not getting the most telling point:
He’s averaged about 15 sacks per year for 3 straight years. No other pass rusher in the league has done that. In fact, if you look at the top 5 pass rushers for each year, only Allen has made the list for 3 consecutive years. No one aside from DeMarcus Ware has made it more than once in that span either, and he’s only made it twice.
What do you think the Vegas Odds would be for him to make the top 5 a 4th consecutive year in a row? I’d put money on him doing it again. Point being, he’s the best pass rusher in the league. You can’t take that away from him.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 6:57 PM CST up reply actions
And my point is
the best pass rusher in the league, at his cost, with his flaws (though few), isn’t worth a first and two thirds.
The trade, regardless of which players were eventually picked, was based on smart analysis. Could he have gotten more? Pioli might have been able to, or waited a year longer, or structured one of the picks to be incentive based.
That’s also the reason why both the Tony Gonzales and Cassel/Vrabel trades were good. They were based on sound reasoning and projected to acquire more value than what was given up. As a GM you make that trade every single time, UNLESS:
1. You’re a GM with an owner that would rather have a consistent fanbase at the cost of a win range between 7-10.
2. You’re a GM that honestly believes he has a one-or-two year window to make a serious run at the SuperBowl (2008 Jets).
Ask yourself this. If Hershel Walker was traded to Dallas for the same compensation as reality, but Emmit Smith busts, Alvin Harper busts, and the trade using those picks for Russel Maryland fell through, and as a result Dallas never has its dynasty in the late 90s…was it a bad trade?
Of course not. The trade was brilliant for Dallas and extremely lopsided. The Jared Allen trade was smart but not lopsided. They got a great player and we got great value at a time we needed it.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
I don't agree with Justin a lot.
But I’m with him on this one. And I say that as a huge Jared Allen fan.
And BTW,
We’ll probably get over it when we get a premiere pass rusher that is ranked in the top 5 for sacks for at least 3 years. Until then we have every right to bitch and moan about trading Jared Allen.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not sure how effective Allen would be at OLB
He’d probably need to lose some weight, and if I remember correctly, before he bulked up, just about any RB could tear right through him (his rookie season everyone ran at Allen)
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
Try again after watching more Vikings games
I’ve averaged about 14 Vikings games in the past two year. Allen is a disruptive force, regardless of stats (which are impressive). He’s one of the best, if not the best, at what he does. I know you want to believe that trading him was ok, but the fact is it was a baaaaad move, predicated on fear that Allen would get drunk more.
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 4:41 PM CST up reply actions
1. First Round Draft Pick
2. Third Round Draft Pick
3. Third Round Draft Pick
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
But:
Dorsey filled in for Allen. Not trading Allen means that we didn’t have to draft Dorsey, so Ryan Clady probably gets drafted in the first.
And our thirds turned into Cottam, Charles and Morgan. I only see one that is showing any real promise…. and wouldn’t you know it: even without the Allen trade we still would have had one draft pick in the third.
No matter how you look at it, trading Allen was a bad move. Especially if your name is Carl Peterson and you’re supposed to turn those acquired picks into something that makes the Allen trade look smart.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 5:45 PM CST up reply actions
“No matter how you look at it” is fundamentally flawed analysis. You have to look at the total picture from the moment the trade was made.
Those three picks are worth more than Jared Allen was then, and they’re probably worth more now.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
No, you don't, and no they're not.
How can you argue this?
Our replacement for Allen was Dorsey. Has he produced ANYWHERE near the level that Allen did? No, he hasn’t. That’s at least 2 years of defensive production lost.
We got 2 extra thirds. Put Cottam and Morgan into those slots, and Dorsey/Cottam/Morgan traded for Jared Allen looks like a shitty trade move. Put Dorsey/Charles/Cottam in there and the return looks to be a little better… but still nothing to gloat about.
Besides, as I pointed out above, Charles could have still been drafted, regardless of the trade. In the long run, all that trading Allen did was increase the chance that some of Peterson’s picks would develop into players that would be equal to Jared’s level of play. Two years later I’d argue that we lost a definite superstar and gained a probable superstar…. that we probably could have gotten anyway. The trade was a failure.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Jan 13, 2010 6:42 PM CST up reply actions
I would say we can agree to disagree, but we’re talking about two different things. I’m talking about whether or not the trade was smart and based on sound judgment, you’re talking about whether or not it paid dividends.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
So, we got one right out of three.
Without those two extra picks, we’ve got a 2/3rds chance of getting a ‘bust’ in the third round. What would our team look like if we’d missed on that 33% chance of getting it right and taking Charles when we weren’t even really looking for a RB?
Again with this?
who cares? We will never ever know if Herm’s D would have become good. All we will ever know is that it sucked.
And again with the Herm youth movement BS? Why does CP get all the blame for the bad drafts and Herm gets all the credit for teh good ones? CP never gave up control of personnel decisions.
Sigh. Live in the past if you must…
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
by KCSatchmo on Jan 13, 2010 3:49 PM CST reply actions
You can't deny
Peterson’s draft record got miraculously better with Herm Edwards as HC.
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 4:16 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The had 1 good draft and
2 that were average at best. Makes no difference. People want to believe that all successes belong to Herm and all failures belong to CP. No need letting the truth get in the way of a good story.
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
by KCSatchmo on Jan 13, 2010 4:37 PM CST up reply actions
But that's a HUGE improvement over what CP did when Vermeil was HC
And we KNOW that Vermeil didn’t have much say in the draft, based solely on the 2.7 pick. I think it’s one reason he decided to retire when he did. I think Herm demanded more say in the draft as part of his coming here.
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
Don't forget that 2008 draft is equal in picks to 2003-2005 combined!
We had so much draft value in 2008, and traded away picks in 2003-2005, you really need to be sure to compare apples to apples. With roughly the same amount of draft value in 2003-2005, the top players were:
Allen
LJ
DJ
Colquitt
K. Mitchell
Fox
Wilkerson
In 2008, we have
Dorsey
Albert
Flowers
Charles
Cottam
Carr
??
Which is better? Hard to say. We are biased to the new players, and biased against people like LJ who have now gone downhill (but posted 2+ amazing seasons, more than Charles can say, yet).
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 8:40 PM CST up reply actions
I deny. What was so good about Herm's drafts?
2008 is still tough to call. 2006-2007 were average at best. Plus his Jets drafts were below average.
2nd Biggest myth i can’t believe people still push: Herm was a great drafter
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 4:43 PM CST up reply actions
I never said Herm drafted well
I’m a Chiefs fan and only realize the improvement in Carl’s work after Herm got here. Could care less about what he did in NY, though I do know he flamed out (who drafts McGraw in the 2nd round, seriously). 2006 I would say was pretty solid with Hali, Pollard, and Croyle. 2007 I would say was also pretty solid yet unfortunately we’ll never be able to accurately judge that class due to scheme change. You take a look back our first 3 picks from 2006 was better a class than anything we had from the previous decade.
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 4:53 PM CST up reply actions
Really?
Hali/Pollard/Croyle are clearly better than the drafts where we took:
DJ/Colquitt (2005) Fun fact we didn’t have a 2nd rounder (Surtain trade)
Jared Allen/Keyaron Fox/Kris Wilson (2004)
LJ/Kawika Mitchell (2003)
Looks like much of the same to me. If any of these deserve to be called the best it’s 2004…pre-Herm.
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
by KCSatchmo on Jan 13, 2010 5:03 PM CST up reply actions
Don't forget, one of the big reasons that Carl gave for taking Jared
was because he could long snap. Getting Jared was almost pure luck on Carl’s part, and a good job by the coaches in recognizing what they had in that 4th rounder.
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
Myth #3 appears!!!
Wow, the top 3 anti-Vermei, pro-Herm myths have popped up. Go read Bob Gretz article completely debunking that “long snapper” myth.
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 8:35 PM CST up reply actions
Give me a link
but I am positive that I hear Carl make that statement (or at least read it in a quote) so it had better be one hell of an article.
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
Oh, and I am by NO means "pro-Herm"
I never cared for Herm as coach, particularly not when we had to give up picks to get him. But I was ready for Carl to go after he fired Gunther.
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
fair enough
but in general people overvalue Herm’s drafts because it’s recent history and it has somehow become a myth that he is a great talent evaluator. People also forget that those “horrible” vermeil era drafts actually missed a lot of high picks because of high-return trades (Green, Roaf, Surtain, Vermeil, etc) and still produced some pro bowl quality players (LJ, Allen, Colquitt). Herm’s first two drafts haven’t produced a whole lot of high level talent, and some of the “starters” that probably only started out of need.
For 2006, i’d say Pollard shouldn’t be starting in the NFL (worst coverage by a safety in the NFL and some poor tackling fundamentals, i.e. big hits over wrapping up), Croyle has no value right now (try trading him, see what you get), and Hali is an average LDE/OLB (averages 8 sacks/year). Page might have some value, but only as a role player.
For 2007, i’d say its starting to look like a huge bust. The only guy with much value right now is Bowe (1st rounders should have value), and his value is currently dropping.
2008 is hard to tell, i firmly believe how good a draft is doesn’t really become apparent until after ~3 years.
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 5:04 PM CST up reply actions
2008 appears to be a very good draft
of course we had to trade away an all-pro to get the picks to make it happen.
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
by KCSatchmo on Jan 13, 2010 5:06 PM CST up reply actions
yes, but i reserve judgement
until after year 3. Also, we had a lot more bullets in 2008, so you’ll inevitably get more hits (and more misses)
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 5:08 PM CST up reply actions
Exactly
People want to talk about a great draft…1996 was a great draft. Woods/Tongue/Browning/Edwards/Horn. And we didn’t even have to trade away our best player for extra picks.
Where was Herm for that one? The idea the Herm suddenly made CP better is ridiculous. Herm just happened to be around the 2nd time CP had a great draft.
This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.
by KCSatchmo on Jan 13, 2010 5:11 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Get out of here
Tell Texan fans Pollard shouldn’t be starting in the NFL and see what type of response you get. His addition to the teams secondary made a world of difference.
Croyle has no value? Let him hit the open market and see how many suitors line up for his services. The kid probably wants to be unsigned because realistically he’d probably be one of the best FA options at QB. I mean – who else is there? You want Grossman or Leftwich? Nobody would pony up picks for Brodie because they know he’s on the bubble. It’s not because he’s not talented enough, it’s because we gave a $60 million to another backup QB. You think Page has more value than Croyle? Boy, stop.
2007 we can’t evenly judge. We drafted players for a different sytem in which we’re running now. McBride probably wasn’t worth the pick but at the time I certainly don’t think Bowe nor Tyler were poor choices.
2008 was epic by Chiefs standards. That’s already evident in year two of your three year evaluation.
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 5:27 PM CST up reply actions
you mean how pollard
lead his team in coverage burns? Or maybe how he probably was a leader on his team in missed tackles? Which one do you think the texans fans would miss more?
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 5:44 PM CST up reply actions
Yup. KC specializes in drafting safeties who start immediately and play mediocre.
Sorry, but I’ll put Woods and Tongue in there, too. Reggie Tongue couldn’t cover. Woods was a journeyman, at best, imo.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
You mean how Pollard
Was still better in almost every statistical category than Mike Brown (who we replaced him with)?
Let's Compare:
Tackles:
Pollard – 102 (82 Solo)
Brown – 100 (76 Solo)
Sacks:
Pollard – 2
Brown – 2
Forced Fumbles:
Pollard – 1
Brown – 0
Interceptions:
Pollard – 2
Brown – 3
Passes Defensed:
Pollard – 7
Brown – 3
Given the numbers, I’d still rather have new hotness over old busted.
It’s hard to defend getting rid of Pollard, unless one considers the importance of team unity, acceptance of team message, discipline, and the fragility of a young head coach’s leadership. They certainly didn’t cut him because of his talent, JacinB.
If one looks closer, Pioli/Haley took every one of our team leaders and cut him off at the knees. Waters was supposedly told to get in line, Tony was traded, Thigpen was given away, and LJ was muted by the pre-season “special master” ruling (if only for a time).
I’m going to make a large assumption that the reports about Pollard mouthing off to Pendergast and running to Daddy Haley to complain lost him his job and gave Haley the opportunity to make him an example.
The loss of talent is regrettable, but I understand why they did it (based on the other moves and cuts they made).
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
so your point being brown sucked?
no argument there. but it fails to address my point at all
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 14, 2010 2:54 PM CST up reply actions
The problem with alternative history
is that the farther one goes back and the more things one changes, the less one will be able to guess at what might have resulted.
Excuses
Sure, it’s an interesting thought excercise to wonder if Herm’s defense would have been better than the one fielded this year under Haley’s authorship. But not very useful or intellectually honest.
The truth is that the defense was close to inept under Vermeil, overburdened by that glorious offense. The truth is that the defense was STILL inept under Herm Edwards, and he was supposedly a defensive coach. The truth is that the NFL found an answer to the Cover 2 and Herm didn’t recognize that, and if he did he didn’t show it. The truth is that Herm had THREE YEARS to put together his defense of choice and failed utterly.
One can look in hindsight at the Jared Allen trade and bemoan the reasoning (and mentioning LJ as a corollary), but the truth is the trade itself was brilliant. Just because the resulting picks have not yet panned out, and may never, does not mean the trade wasn’t sound on its face. I like Jared Allen and love his pinpoint rushing of the quarterback, but he wasn’t worth two first round draft picks. He’s a great RDE, but the flaw in his game is obviously run coverage and only in a system like MIN’s can it be masked. Whether or not LJ was kept is irrelevant, especially when mentioning LJ’s off the field issues and conveniently ignorning Allen’s at the time. Please also recall the cost of Jared Allen to Minnesota, which might have had young, first-round quarterback waiting to replace Favre when he remembers he’s 60 years old.
So, to refute Mr. Yoon’s commentary in total:
1. Alternative History is best left to fiction writers. Pretending/hoping/guessing at what other events might have taken place does not remove us from our current reality.
2. Herm’s defense was not good and wasn’t going to get better. Blame it on Cunningham, blame it on the departure of Jared Allen, blame it on Carl, blame whoever you want. Herm had three years to install a proper defense and couldn’t get it done.
3. The Jared Allen trade was a good trade, even if it didn’t result in what we wanted.
4. Asking the question in the headline and then answering it in your closing with, “it’s too soon to tell” is a complete cop-out. We have the data. We have the facts. This defense is ALREADY better than the one it replaced. It is young, it is stocked with 1-2-3 round draft picks that are and will soon be playing out of their minds.
5. The idea that Pioli is “trying too hard” to make KC into another New England is silly on its face. Just like we can’t go to war with a tactic (terrorism) but we can with people (jihadists), no GM is actually trying to make their team into Patriot Dynasty the Second, but replicating the strategy upon which it was built. In this case, we actually have the architect of said strategy directing our team. Suggesting that Pioli told Haley that we’re going to run the 3-4 because the “Patriots did it!” is just ridiculous. He did it because its a sound strategy that works in this time of quick outs, quick slants, and the newer wildcat packages we’ve seen lately.
“Analysis”
I’m actually shocked at this article man. Come ON. To provide better analysis we must assess the current situation and collect the facts we have, asking what we know and what we want to know. Instead, this analysis takes a position of defending a former head coach, placing blame on the GM with which he worked, and then ignoring the very question that the supposed analysis was supposed to answer.
Well I’ll do your work for you. Pioli’s Haley’s (Crennel’s) 3-4 will be much better than Herm’s 4-3.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
by Justin Bopp on Jan 13, 2010 3:52 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Funny coming from my mouth
but have some taste. It’s a good discussion topic and while you make entirely valid points (irrefutable even), you don’t have criticize the actual posting of this article. It got you two type out the two page essay, didn’t it? I don’t know about you but I’d like to be distracted from work with a topic I actually deem interesting as opposed to the same old regurgitated crap. If you feel differently you’re more than welcome to return to the countless armchair GM’s fanposts you seemingly love so. You provide good content – don’t ruin it by hopping on a high horse
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Jan 13, 2010 4:15 PM CST up reply actions
True. I am a little high-horsey and could be a little more...diplomatic in my criticism.
Truthfully, I like Jon a lot. He puts out a lot of great stuff and if we don’t keep him honest, we’ll see more duds like this one. I do hope I didn’t hurt his feelings.
However, I expect the same professional courtesy when I write (god knowing I need to improve my own stuff), so I literally am treating him the exact way I want to be as well. Your point about this actually making me think and work long enough to refute isn’t lost, btw. Just understand when I hear countless radio callers repeating arguments like the ones this article makes, it gets me all riled up. I want to blame the analysis, not the audience.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
With all due respect, Justin
you can’t say that “alternative history is best left to fiction writers” and then in the next sentence say that “Herm’s defense was not good and wasn’t going to get better.” You don’t know that any better than Jon knows that his theory would have come to pass.
John
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!"
That's alternative future, not alternative history.
Jon was changing facts in the past to make a flawed assertion, I am making a fully-supported assertion with known facts at the time. Suggesting that Herm’s defense wasn’t going to get better is based on what we know, not what might have been.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
Again, with all due respect, Justin
we simply don’t know how Edwards’ defense might have performed in 2009. To say otherwise is – as you put it – “intellectually dishonest.”
John
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!"
one thing we do know
is that the defense got progressively worse for 3 years under Herm despite significant investment of draft picks and no uncontrolled loss of talent (e.g. aging).
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 7:14 PM CST up reply actions
Actually...
Progressively worse? Yes. It went from being ranked 11th in 2006 to to 14th in 2007 to 29th in 2008. But it’s not true that there was “no uncontrolled loss of talent.” See my post above about the average age of Edwards’ starters in 2008 compared to 2007.
John
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!"
actually
what inherited talent did he lose out of his control on defense? I can’t think of one player. Adding then subtracting Law (and replacing him with a rookie) is his own doing. Average age does not address my point at all.
Oh, well he had Surtain age on him. That’s the only significant inherited talent that got worse for him.
Point remains the same, defense got worse under his watch, with no uncontrolled outside forces really at work.
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 8:32 PM CST up reply actions
I see what you're saying, but....
saying “if x, y, z didn’t happen, a, b, and C would have happened”
is a far cry from
“x, y, z, therefore = conclusion.”
Basically, Jon was saying “if Carl hadn’t traded Jared Allen we might have drafted differently, and if we didn’t have Gunther but had a different DC, and if Herm was allowed to rebuild from the beginning, et al, ..would the result have been better than what we have now?”
I’m saying, “that’s a whole lot of caveats to ask an easily answered question.”
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
Re: Justin
Not offended at all. Love a good discussion.
I don’t believe I dodged the question. We know a lot about what the Chiefs would have had in a 4-3. We’ve yet to see what we’ll have in a 3-4. It is my opinion that we could have had a really good defense if Peterson had the guts to get rid of Cunningham, if they would have drafted either Orakpo or Curry, and maybe a Laurinaitis or Maualuga. And if they spent money on free agents, which I would think was well within Herm’s plan given that he put his job on the line by slashing his roster to save cap costs. Many people may not share this opinion. But the 4-3 lineup I presented in my post + a new Defensive Coordinator + 1 or 2 major free agents had potential to be very good, and that wouldn’t have been hard to do. Again, that’s my opinion.
Thanks for reading. We may disagree, but I think the 4-3 with a few small tweaks had potential to be a real force as soon as 2009.
Thanks for the considerate response, Jon.
The majority of this post highlights my criticism of this analysis. You spend a good portion of it speculating “what if” and then use that fantasy world to assert that the result would have been better than the current defense.
That’s not analysis OR opinion. That’s loosely-based fantasy used to assert an inarguable point. Anybody can say “if I change a bunch of things in the past that are completely separate from reality and then look at the result, would that have been better than what we have now?” Of course the team would have been better if you change a bunch of the circumstances to suit the point you want made.
The problem isn’t that this isn’t fun to sit around and discuss with a bunch of like-minded football friends, because I’ve had more fun discussing this than a lot of things Chiefs-related over the past couple years. The problem is the platform (and as a credit to you, the author) gives this pass-the-bong sofa talk some legitimacy. I can’t wait to hear some caller on the radio repeating what you wrote, but missing the major point that this is all based on fantasy. I would have much rather had you start at “Herm doesn’t get fired. Here’s who he picks and this is why that defense would have been better.”
That would have been a fantastic read.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
I get where you're coming from
After all, we kept a majority of the 4-3 starters we had last year and brought nobody in that had significant 3-4 experience to coach the players. No wonder we had trouble. Regardless, I think a head coach has to run the system he’s comfortable with rather than let the coaches and players dictate the system. The 3-4 was a very poor fit last year but a few people did make the transition successfully. And this year, we certainly have a head start in completing that transition.
Pioli+Crennel=Seymore?
Think its safe to say Pioli likes the Patriot way. I also think its safe to say we don’t have a chance at Wilfork. The Pats cleared space in their cap for him just in case a new CBA is worked out. What are the chances the Chiefs (Pioli) go after Richard Seymore? With Romeo here it makes sense.
Eric Berry 4 prez
Ive said it before
I do not believe there is the “patriots way” it is “Pioli’s way” and I believe in a couple of years it will become obvious who the real “genius” of NE was
Shouldn't this all be called the "Parcells Way"
Thats where most of these connections are originally from, including Haley.
by VermeilLikesToCry on Jan 13, 2010 7:03 PM CST up reply actions
Justin, good article
You’ve got a lot of interesting conversation going here. I still don’t agree with your idea, but it’s made for a great comment thread!
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
DOH! Jon, not Justin!!!
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then give up. There's no use in being a damn fool about it." ---W.C. Fields
Hank Stram 1966 defense Baiting the trap for defenders
I was reading an old article in the Jan 14th 1967 sporting news. about the 1966 AFL
Championship It wrote:
Defensively, the Chiefs use nine alignments. The pet, and a Stram original, is the stack.
It features mobility, utilizing four linebackers. Its attack the offense at the starting point
by placing Buck Buchanan ( all 287 Pounds) head up on the center. And it creates confusion for blockers by placing a linebacker directly behind any of three, and sometimes all three front man. This open the door for a number of stunting possibilities.
The stack thus can revolve into anything from a 3 man to a 7 man line.
The Chiefs don’t blitz often, about 20 per cent of the time. but they fake blitz as much as 80 pecent of the time.
Toying with football formations is a Stram trademark. Those who sat near him in class
at Purdue — and he was an excellent student – remember his notebook was filled not with notes,but football diagrams. When he eats out, its a good bet the table cloth
will be marked. He keeps a pad and pencil in his bedroom. His wife no longer is startled
when he bolts out of bed in the middle of the night and feverishly makes notations.
Just a little History for you.
by rlkc8085 on Jan 13, 2010 10:42 PM CST reply actions 1 recs

by 




























