PDA

View Full Version : Will KC fire Herm? (poll)



D.A.S.
12-18-2008, 06:28 PM
Now that Carl is gone do you think he gets the boot?

Chiefster
12-18-2008, 09:55 PM
I vote yes because it's what I sincerely hope that's what happens. :D

CHIEFS_FN_ROCK
12-18-2008, 11:07 PM
I also think that they should axe him! Then it will be a new start in arrowhead! Change is good!:yahoo:

Three7s
12-18-2008, 11:09 PM
I voted no but he should be. The more I hear, the more I think Herm is gonna stay for at least another season.

theaxeeffect4311
12-19-2008, 06:31 AM
I have to disagree. I think Clark Hunt does want to fire Herm, but he does not want it to show just yet. That's why he said that whoever becomes the next GM will have an influence on the decision, but ultimately, it's his choice on if Herm stays. Which makes me think that Herm will be gone. Hunt said he wants to bring in fresh eyes on the franchise. Does that sound like a guy who is satisfied with the team?

brish
12-19-2008, 07:10 AM
I think he is going to stay for 1 more season, unless there is a drastic, and i mean really drastic turnaround, then he gets the boot.

Unless ofc. Clark lands a high profile coach like Cowher..

Coach
12-19-2008, 03:13 PM
Cowher, Cohwer, Cohwer(chanting).

D.A.S.
12-19-2008, 04:04 PM
Anyone, Anyone, Anyone (but Herm).:mob:
As long as we don't hire Mr.Temper Tantrum, Dennis Green as the nest coach. The Chiefs should hire me as the coach. I can lose just as good as this coach (which is what they seem to want in the front office).
:character00197: This has nothing to do with the topic I just like the snowman.

texaschief
12-19-2008, 06:42 PM
Whoever the coach is next season, will be credited with a "drastic" turnaround as long as they don't change the systems too much. (That includes Herm) Although, I'm sure he won't get any credit on this board and it'll all go toward the new GM. If Herm doesn't get fired when the new GM steps in, my bet is that he'll be here for a good 3 or 4 years longer. This team will keep getting better every year and it'll be hard to justify firing a coach who's team keeps improving.

While I wouldn't agree with the firing of Edwards, I can certainly understand why people are upset and want him gone now. His win production has steadily declined from one year to the next. The ONLY way that I could see someone wanting Edwards gone, is if they think the Chiefs will do worse in 2009 than they did in 2008. I can't see that happening.

When you take into account the age and awful play of the 2007 team which was practically a bunch of hold overs from the previous coaching era and awful free agent signees, to the complete tear down and rebuild through youth and the massive amount of injuries that this team took this year, I just can't see them being worse next year. Most people refuse to acknowledge difference between the 2007 and 2008 teams. The 2007 team was bad because of old age, lack of talent and injuries. This team lost because of injuries and zero experience. The Chiefs are BY FAR the youngest team in the league and haven't had a steady QB. Once they got a consistent QB, they became super competitive and could just as easily have 7 or 8 wins this year as opposed to only 2.

Like i said, the only way I see Edwards losing his job is if Mr. Hunt believes this team will be worse next year than they were this year. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I just don't see that happening.

D.A.S.
12-19-2008, 07:00 PM
Whoever the coach is next season, will be credited with a "drastic" turnaround as long as they don't change the systems too much. (That includes Herm) Although, I'm sure he won't get any credit on this board and it'll all go toward the new GM. If Herm doesn't get fired when the new GM steps in, my bet is that he'll be here for a good 3 or 4 years longer. This team will keep getting better every year and it'll be hard to justify firing a coach who's team keeps improving.

While I wouldn't agree with the firing of Edwards, I can certainly understand why people are upset and want him gone now. His win production has steadily declined from one year to the next. The ONLY way that I could see someone wanting Edwards gone, is if they think the Chiefs will do worse in 2009 than they did in 2008. I can't see that happening.

When you take into account the age and awful play of the 2007 team which was practically a bunch of hold overs from the previous coaching era and awful free agent signees, to the complete tear down and rebuild through youth and the massive amount of injuries that this team took this year, I just can't see them being worse next year. Most people refuse to acknowledge difference between the 2007 and 2008 teams. The 2007 team was bad because of old age, lack of talent and injuries. This team lost because of injuries and zero experience. The Chiefs are BY FAR the youngest team in the league and haven't had a steady QB. Once they got a consistent QB, they became super competitive and could just as easily have 7 or 8 wins this year as opposed to only 2.

Like i said, the only way I see Edwards losing his job is if Mr. Hunt believes this team will be worse next year than they were this year. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I just don't see that happening.

Of course the team will be better. When you hit bottom there is no where to go but up. The question is not can the team improve but can it be good. I'm against Edwards because, professional speaking, since I don't about him personally, he's stupid. The plan was asinine. Young players don't become a good team. With his philosophy you would fire every good player because he's to old to make way for the future of the team. Well, what about now? If you focus to much on the future you'll never succeed. You need veterans to win the superbowl and when they get old and retire then the young guys come in.

Three7s
12-19-2008, 08:22 PM
Texas, I know you're one of the biggest Herm supporters on this forum, and I understand why. You respect the fact that Herm is taking a bullet and trying to rebuild this team.

However, one thing I'd like to know. One of your key points, last season, for why Herm should stay is because of what he was brought in here to improve, which is the defense. After some improvement, it has gone down to the worst in the league, easily. So, why should he be the coach now? Because you don't wanna see another coach credited with his work?

I've already said it, I think Herm is good in 2/3 areas that make a good coach, but the third area kills him, which is ingame management. I could question his ability to find talent after this horrible drop in defense, but I could blame that on the youngsters. Anyways, I would gladly bring in another coach that actually knows how to coach in a game, even if it means using "Herm's players".

texaschief
12-19-2008, 08:34 PM
Texas, I know you're one of the biggest Herm supporters on this forum, and I understand why. You respect the fact that Herm is taking a bullet and trying to rebuild this team.

However, one thing I'd like to know. One of your key points, last season, for why Herm should stay is because of what he was brought in here to improve, which is the defense. After some improvement, it has gone down to the worst in the league, easily. So, why should he be the coach now? Because you don't wanna see another coach credited with his work?

I've already said it, I think Herm is good in 2/3 areas that make a good coach, but the third area kills him, which is ingame management. I could question his ability to find talent after this horrible drop in defense, but I could blame that on the youngsters. Anyways, I would gladly bring in another coach that actually knows how to coach in a game, even if it means using "Herm's players".

Well, we all know how much pressure it puts on the secondary (especially one that is made entirely out of first and 3rd year players) when you can't get pressure on the QB. You can't expect too much improvement on the defensive side of the ball when you trade away your best pass rusher for what turned out to be essentially 3 offensive players.

He's building the team the way everyone on this board agrees with... inside out. He has 3 EXTREMELY young players on the defensive line. He drafted an OT in the first round instead of a pass rushing DE. That's probably his biggest problem on defense. He has 2 or 3 very solid CB prospects, one good LB and 2 potentially great DTs and one decent DE. With all that inexperience and then the injuries, it's not hard to see why the defense was so bad.

theaxeeffect4311
12-19-2008, 08:38 PM
I see the only reason why the Chiefs are not winning more games is because of Herm and his ingame coaching ability. I'm surprised at what happens. When the Chiefs have the lead, he doesn't know what to do. In the second half of the Chargers game, we abandoned the spread to try to run out the clock. Smart? Maybe. But once it doesn't work the first two times, why keep doing it. And I agree that it is surprising people call Herm a defensive minded coach. The Chiefs rank last and you can't blame all that on inexperience.

texaschief
12-19-2008, 08:49 PM
I see the only reason why the Chiefs are not winning more games is because of Herm and his ingame coaching ability. I'm surprised at what happens. When the Chiefs have the lead, he doesn't know what to do. In the second half of the Chargers game, we abandoned the spread to try to run out the clock. Smart? Maybe. But once it doesn't work the first two times, why keep doing it. And I agree that it is surprising people call Herm a defensive minded coach. The Chiefs rank last and you can't blame all that on inexperience.

Injuries? Trading Allen? One linebacker?

theaxeeffect4311
12-19-2008, 09:00 PM
Injuries? Trading Allen? One linebacker?

Injuries are going to happen. Look at Tom Brady. But this is the team Herm wanted. Are you saying that Herm did not agree to the Jared Allen trade or the players drafted and the FA acquasitions?

Three7s
12-19-2008, 09:29 PM
Injuries are going to happen. Look at Tom Brady. But this is the team Herm wanted. Are you saying that Herm did not agree to the Jared Allen trade or the players drafted and the FA acquasitions?
Actually, I don't think he agreed at all about the Jared Allen trade. It's one of those things that's kept in-house. Also, we really didn't run it all that much in the 2nd half, we didn't even have the ball very much.

arrowheadGoon305
12-19-2008, 09:32 PM
i think that herm WONT get fired. But if the chiefs dont do good next season he will be

chief31
12-19-2008, 09:41 PM
Injuries? Trading Allen? One linebacker?

Mr. talent evaluator can most definitely take some blame for piss-poor personnel decisions.

If Herm had realized how important a pass-rushing DE is to his defense, then he would have made some noise in an effort to make sure he didn't lose such a talented one.

Do you think that he had no say in what players that are on the field?

Three7s
12-19-2008, 10:00 PM
Mr. talent evaluator can most definitely take some blame for piss-poor personnel decisions.

If Herm had realized how important a pass-rushing DE is to his defense, then he would have made some noise in an effort to make sure he didn't lose such a talented one.

Do you think that he had no say in what players that are on the field?
I really don't. CP seemed completely convinced that Jared Allen was a player at risk, and wasn't gonna risk any little bit of his money on him.

theaxeeffect4311
12-19-2008, 10:22 PM
I really don't. CP seemed completely convinced that Jared Allen was a player at risk, and wasn't gonna risk any little bit of his money on him.

If he doesn't have say in the matter that gives me more reason to want to fire Herm because that means he is a pushover.

texaschief
12-20-2008, 01:09 AM
I agreed with the decision to trade Allen. Although he most definitely would have been part of a strong foundation, something HAD to be done on the offensive and defensive lines. We desperately needed a LT. Everyone on this board was SCREAMING about the O-line. At pick 5, there were no OTs to be had. Everyone knew Long wouldn't fall to KC. The Chiefs HAD to get back in the first round to get a good OT. You're not going to do that without trading a valuable piece. It's just too bad they weren't able to do that with LJ before his value dropped out. If we had, we'd probably still have Allen right now.

Also, you're absolutely right. Injuries DO happen. But right now, the Chiefs are only 1 deep in most areas and aren't capable right now to absorb as many injuries as the Chiefs had this year. Depth killed them this season. For ANY team, it doesn't matter what level, if you don't have depth, you don't have a winning team. It's hard to find depth when you're trying to establish who's going to be in that first line.

chief31
12-20-2008, 03:22 AM
I agreed with the decision to trade Allen. Although he most definitely would have been part of a strong foundation, something HAD to be done on the offensive and defensive lines. We desperately needed a LT. Everyone on this board was SCREAMING about the O-line. At pick 5, there were no OTs to be had. Everyone knew Long wouldn't fall to KC. The Chiefs HAD to get back in the first round to get a good OT. You're not going to do that without trading a valuable piece. It's just too bad they weren't able to do that with LJ before his value dropped out. If we had, we'd probably still have Allen right now.

Also, you're absolutely right. Injuries DO happen. But right now, the Chiefs are only 1 deep in most areas and aren't capable right now to absorb as many injuries as the Chiefs had this year. Depth killed them this season. For ANY team, it doesn't matter what level, if you don't have depth, you don't have a winning team. It's hard to find depth when you're trying to establish who's going to be in that first line.


And that lack of depth is entirely out of Herms hands. He didn't stop playing Napoleon Harris. (Oops. Yeah, he did.)

He had nothing to do with the decision to get rid of Kawika Mitchell. (Well, a hasty youth movement may have played a small part in that.)

Scott Fujita, Ryan Simms, Ty Law, Greg Wesley, Jimmy Wilkerson....

And, just for good measure, let's include Jared Allen. That's eight defensive players that provide a ton of depth.

With the arguable exception of Law, each of those players has performed as well as a current Chiefs starter at their respective positions.

I wonder why this team doesn't have any depth.:lol:

texaschief
12-20-2008, 04:04 AM
Ryan Simms: 15 tkls I'd much rather have Boone and Edwards
Ty Law: played 5 games this season. I'd rather have Leggitt personally.
Kawika Mitchell has gotten worse every year since he left here. He's playing on defenses that hide him a lot better than the Chiefs' defense did. He's barely average. You really need to get off this guy's nuts. He only has 72tkls this season. 42 of them solo. In seven starts, Rocky Boiman has 57 tkls with 44 solo. Add that to Thomas' 44 and 33 and we've received more production than what Mitchell has been able to accomplish in 14 games. We'd be worse off with Mitchell.
Wilkerson and his 19 tkls can stay in Tampa. Again, I'd much rather have Boone and Edwards.
Greg Wesley wasn't even picked up this season. You can't be serious.
Scott Fujita left on his own as a FA. Would he be better than our other OLB, yeah. But it's not like he was cut.

These are the players you want playing for the Chiefs? wow.

theaxeeffect4311
12-20-2008, 04:18 AM
Ryan Simms: 15 tkls I'd much rather have Boone and Edwards
Ty Law: played 5 games this season. I'd rather have Leggitt personally.
Kawika Mitchell has gotten worse every year since he left here. He's playing on defenses that hide him a lot better than the Chiefs' defense did. He's barely average. You really need to get off this guy's nuts. He only has 72tkls this season. 42 of them solo. In seven starts, Rocky Boiman has 57 tkls with 44 solo. Add that to Thomas' 44 and 33 and we've received more production than what Mitchell has been able to accomplish in 14 games. We'd be worse off with Mitchell.
Wilkerson and his 19 tkls can stay in Tampa. Again, I'd much rather have Boone and Edwards.
Greg Wesley wasn't even picked up this season. You can't be serious.
Scott Fujita left on his own as a FA. Would he be better than our other OLB, yeah. But it's not like he was cut.

These are the players you want playing for the Chiefs? wow.

You cannot compare tackles as far as how a player is doing. Not to mention the numbers can be skewed since the Chiefs defense is on the field a lot more than the Bills defense.

I believe the comment about veteran players on the team has to do with depth on a team. Those players do not have to be starters, but they could provide a level of play comparable to the young players starting.

texaschief
12-20-2008, 04:28 AM
You cannot compare tackles as far as how a player is doing. Not to mention the numbers can be skewed since the Chiefs defense is on the field a lot more than the Bills defense.

I believe the comment about veteran players on the team has to do with depth on a team. Those players do not have to be starters, but they could provide a level of play comparable to the young players starting.

Like Boone, Edwards, Babin, McGraw, McIntosh, Gonzo, Waters, Niswanger, Jones, Harris, Edwards, Surtain?

theaxeeffect4311
12-20-2008, 04:43 AM
Like Boone, Edwards, Babin, McGraw, McIntosh, Gonzo, Waters, Niswanger, Jones, Harris, Edwards, Surtain?

Then how can you say that the Chiefs are only 1 deep at each position? If these players are comparable to the starters then injuries should not be a factor.

Also, you may be able to shed light on this one as well. The excuse for Herm this season is that the youth movement, inexperience, injuries, (1 linebacker), and trading Jared Allen. So what is his excuse for last season when the Chiefs went 4-12?

Let me guess...Larry Johnson's injury?

texaschief
12-20-2008, 05:12 AM
Then how can you say that the Chiefs are only 1 deep at each position? If these players are comparable to the starters then injuries should not be a factor.

Also, you may be able to shed light on this one as well. The excuse for Herm this season is that the youth movement, inexperience, injuries, (1 linebacker), and trading Jared Allen. So what is his excuse for last season when the Chiefs went 4-12?

Let me guess...Larry Johnson's injury?

All I was saying was that those guys were better than the guys 31 mentioned. half the guys I mentioned are starters... if you look closely. That means they aren't providing depth. The Chiefs went 4-12 last year because of old age, injuries, no QB, no RB, no O-line, no CBs, 1LB and a poor OC.

This year, we got rid of most of the older players who didn't contribute and gained a bunch of talented rookies. We might have found a QB. Johnson is healthy. The O-line played much better this year. We got an OC who could adjust the system to compliment his player's talents. We have 3 rookie CBs who have played MUCH better than Surtain and Law. But, we still have 1LB and now we don't have a pass rushing DE.

Besides a couple more upgrades on the O-line, a couple new LBs and now a pass rushing DE, this team is in a MUCH better position than they were last year.

theaxeeffect4311
12-20-2008, 05:37 AM
All I was saying was that those guys were better than the guys 31 mentioned. half the guys I mentioned are starters... if you look closely. That means they aren't providing depth. The Chiefs went 4-12 last year because of old age, injuries, no QB, no RB, no O-line, no CBs, 1LB and a poor OC.

This year, we got rid of most of the older players who didn't contribute and gained a bunch of talented rookies. We might have found a QB. Johnson is healthy. The O-line played much better this year. We got an OC who could adjust the system to compliment his player's talents. We have 3 rookie CBs who have played MUCH better than Surtain and Law. But, we still have 1LB and now we don't have a pass rushing DE.

Besides a couple more upgrades on the O-line, a couple new LBs and now a pass rushing DE, this team is in a MUCH better position than they were last year.

But the numbers don't lie. When Herm took over in 2006, the Chiefs were a 10-6 team. His first year the Chiefs went 9-7. That is reasonable considering the Chiefs still made it to the playoffs. Then 4-12. Now 2-12. So we can talk about how much better the players are this season than the last. But if those players do not produce wins, then what is the point?

texaschief
12-20-2008, 05:57 AM
But the numbers don't lie. When Herm took over in 2006, the Chiefs were a 10-6 team. His first year the Chiefs went 9-7. That is reasonable considering the Chiefs still made it to the playoffs. Then 4-12. Now 2-12. So we can talk about how much better the players are this season than the last. But if those players do not produce wins, then what is the point?

Why do you think Vermeil quit this team? This team was about to fall off the face of the planet. They did. Now, "the point" is rebuilding and player development. It doesn't happen over night.

Seek
12-20-2008, 03:39 PM
Why do you think Vermeil quit this team? This team was about to fall off the face of the planet. They did. Now, "the point" is rebuilding and player development. It doesn't happen over night.

The Chiefs current defense was built by Herm. Specifically the D-line. The defense is horrible. They are about to become the worste team in NFL history with the fewest sacks.

The only reason the Chiefs are competitive the last 8 weeks is Tyler Thigpen and his consistency. He is only playing because Herm didn't do enough to upgrade the offensive line and two QB's got killed.

theaxeeffect4311
12-20-2008, 03:45 PM
Why do you think Vermeil quit this team? This team was about to fall off the face of the planet. They did. Now, "the point" is rebuilding and player development. It doesn't happen over night.

I guess the better question is what are the good qualities of Herm AS the Head Coach. Everyone. Let's get serious and really study the Pros and Cons of Herm as Head Coach.

Pros?

1. Optimistic. Helps keep a young team upbeat after each loss. Players seem to like him and share in his optimism on development. They have made drastic strides over the season. It goes to show that Herm is mentally preparing the players for years to come.

CHIEFS_FN_ROCK
12-20-2008, 08:23 PM
The only reason the Chiefs are competitive the last 8 weeks is Tyler Thigpen and his consistency. He is only playing because Herm didn't do enough to upgrade the offensive line and two QB's got killed.
The 2 best things this year is CP is ASTA LA BYE BYE!!! AND THIGPEN!!! I think they should let him stay and play he has potental! He has done his part to win games for sure!