Why not start now? Demand Herm's resignation....

[stlchief]

Why wait? The only reason we made the play-offs last year is there was a trace of the previous offense left. By the time we got to Indy, it was dead and gone, only a memory.

The Indy loss and the first game of the season: decent defense, sucky offense.

I will be the first to say it officially:

Unless the Chiefs come up with something other than line-of-scrimmage plays next week, then I say it is time for Herm to resign.

I bet Solari would open it up immediately and least we wouldn't be predicatible...

[DrunkHillbilly]

You are baiting me, aren't you? Lol. Why is it a problem to have a great tight end?

It is not a problem at all!!! I love it! However, when everyone knows that we are going to throw to him more than we will to our receivers, it's a problem!! We can go through this again but all I'm saying is that we need receivers to take people out of the box and to give TG a break once in a while!

***** between catching balls and helping the O line block on 75% of the plays, that dude has got to be beat!!!

[DrunkHillbilly]

No argument about the current reciever needs. But when Vermiel was here, ( Seein' as how the statement was that we have been needing a reciever for years,) a reciever was far from the top of the teams "needs" list. When you have the top offense in the league and the worst defense, reciever is not the position that needs addressed.

I only brought it up because hillbilly and I have had this argument before.

This is where we will just have to agree to disagree because I think it was a glaring problem back in the Dicky days! Just because we were a good team and got to the playoffs a time or two doesn't mean we didn't need to address the position. If we would have had another viable receiver or two, we would have really been good!!

[chief31]

It is not a problem at all!!! I love it! However, when everyone knows that we are going to throw to him more than we will to our receivers, it's a problem!! We can go through this again but all I'm saying is that we need receivers to take people out of the box and to give TG a break once in a while!

***** between catching balls and helping the O line block on 75% of the plays, that dude has got to be beat!!!

I don't get how it is a problem having a tight end who gets thrown to more than the recievers? Is it also a problem if you have one reciever who is going to be thrown to more than the rest of the team? If you can pass the ball successfully, what difference does it make what the name of the position the reciever plays is?

Again, let me make clear that I believe that this and last seasons there is a much bigger need for a top-flight WR. But that before that, there wasn't.

[chief31]

This is where we will just have to agree to disagree because I think it was a glaring problem back in the Dicky days! Just because we were a good team and got to the playoffs a time or two doesn't mean we didn't need to address the position. If we would have had another viable receiver or two, we would have really been good!!

We were really good...on offense. We needed defense, not more offense.

[DrunkHillbilly]

I don't get how it is a problem having a tight end who gets thrown to more than the recievers? Is it also a problem if you have one reciever who is going to be thrown to more than the rest of the team? If you can pass the ball successfully, what difference does it make what the name of the position the reciever plays is?

Again, let me make clear that I believe that this and last seasons there is a much bigger need for a top-flight WR. But that before that, there wasn't.

It is only a problem when you only have 1 receiver that is worth a damn. The more options you have to make the D cover, the better. When they know that you won't throw to certain players, it makes it easier for them to double the guy they know you will throw the ball to.

I agree that other positions needed to be addressed but they haven't had a top teir receiver maybe in the history of the team!! Teams that win have at least one top teir receiver and one or two avg receivers. Or....they have two or three better than avg receivers. We on the other hand haven't had either of those two.

[chief31]

It is only a problem when you only have 1 receiver that is worth a damn. The more options you have to make the D cover, the better. When they know that you won't throw to certain players, it makes it easier for them to double the guy they know you will throw the ball to.

I agree that other positions needed to be addressed but they haven't had a top teir receiver maybe in the history of the team!! Teams that win have at least one top teir receiver and one or two avg receivers. Or....they have two or three better than avg receivers. We on the other hand haven't had either of those two.

This is absurd. Who were the Patriots recievers a year ago? The Chargers? The Bears? The Steelers from '06? Some teams manage to win with a great recievers group, others do it without. Having a top-flight tight end equals one top-flight WR.

If the Vermiel Chiefs hadn't thrown the ball to Gonzales so often, then Kennison and Morton/Parker would have had much better statistics and we wouldn't have been hearing anyhting about their WR "need".

[DrunkHillbilly]

This is absurd. Who were the Patriots recievers a year ago? The Chargers? The Bears? The Steelers from '06? Some teams manage to win with a great recievers group, others do it without. Having a top-flight tight end equals one top-flight WR.

If the Vermiel Chiefs hadn't thrown the ball to Gonzales so often, then Kennison and Morton/Parker would have had much better statistics and we wouldn't have been hearing anyhting about their WR "need".

Colts??????

Yes there are exceptions but those teams also have things we don't have. Like the best D, arguably the best QB, best player in the game. I just think if you are close to having the best offense in football, why not go out and get that one missing piece?? Not saying ignor the other needs of the team. It is possible to do both!!!!! Especially with all the cap room we have. Your right, having a great TE does equal a good receiver but it takes away another aspect of the game for your offense. They guard him all the time and not the receivers!

BTW, Hines Ward was better than any WR we have had in years.

[chief31]

Colts??????

Right...

Some teams manage to win with a great recievers group, others do it without.

In oppositon of your statement...

Teams that win have at least one top teir receiver and one or two avg receivers. Or....they have two or three better than avg receivers. We on the other hand haven't had either of those two.

[chief31]

Colts??????...Cardinals?????


BTW, Hines Ward was better than any WR we have had in years.

Who were the above average recievers that go with him (Ward)? Randle El? The kick returner? AKA Dante Hall?

[DrunkHillbilly]

Who were the above average recievers that go with him (Ward)? Randle El? The kick returner? AKA Dante Hall?

Your so black and white dude!!!!! I said we needed to address other issues!

Santonio Holmes...8 or 900 yds, 3 or 4 TD's
Nate Washington...7 or 800 yds, 5 or 6 TD's

Chiefs receivers
Kennison..8 or 900 yds, 4 or 5 TD's
Parker...4 or 500 yds, any TD's???
Hall...200 yds, maybe 1 TD

Cardinals

Rookie QB
Worst offensive line in football