Not impressed with new regime.

[Bike]

In the third year of the Pioli/Haley era, one would think KC would be maybe 3/4 of the way to building a championship team, and getting to the playoffs last year gave me a lot of hope. But now this team is going in the wrong direction.
Many on here will blame injuries. I disagree. Good teams overcome injuries. Good teams draft depth. Both our offensive and defensive lines are horrible. Just flat out bad. There is no excuse for this. None.
I posted 3 years ago that this team needed to build from inside out - build the lines first. I got shot down.
So who is accountable for this mess? Clark? Pioli? Haley?
With over 30 million in cap room, why couldn't we make some strides on getting our lines fixed?
WHY?
Why are we still trying to squeeze 4/3 players into a 3/4 defense?
WHY?
I'm not sure who is making the decisions on this team regarding player personnel, coaches, and philosophy, but whoever it is - is failing. Time to re-evaluate.

[texaschief]

Pioli should stay. Haley needs to go. In fact, outside of Crennel, the entire coaching staff should be overhauled. Pioli just needs to make sure the coaches he hires and the schemes they want to implement are conducive to the current player's ability. Pioli shouldn't be given the green light for another rebuild if they've decided the current rebuild attempt is a failure. A coaching turnover shouldn't require a rebuild.

[josh1971]

Pioli should stay. Haley needs to go. In fact, outside of Crennel, the entire coaching staff should be overhauled. Pioli just needs to make sure the coaches he hires and the schemes they want to implement are conducive to the current player's ability. Pioli shouldn't be given the green light for another rebuild if they've decided the current rebuild attempt is a failure. A coaching turnover shouldn't require a rebuild.

A coaching change wouldn't necessarily require a rebuild, but it does screw things up a bit at first, I would think, as a new head coach will bring his guys in for assistants, and start to implement his ideas for Offense/Defense.

Mind you, I'm not saying it's a bad idea to replace Haley, but he has one year left of his contract, and I don't see him going anywhere.

Haley's no Schottenheimer, but then... he's no Frank Ganz either.

[Bike]

Their offense revolves around the QB and the passing game. Losing an insignificant RB will hardly decimate the offense.

Our offense revolves around Jammal Charles, and our running game.

This may be true, but therein lies the problem. We could have easily selected Aaron Rodgers with the 15th pick - but we didn't. Why can't the Chiefs have the same forsight as the Packers? We knew that Green wasn't getting any younger - why not draft a franchise QB as Green Bay did? But Noooo, we waited until the third round to draft Croyle. With Huard backing him up. This team has a long history of these kinds of blunderous moves.
And although Green Bay has an excellent passing game, they also have a pretty damn good running game. They are a complete team. They did it with sound coaching and excellent draft time decision-making. When we started this new regime, this team could have done the same kinds of things. We just didn't.
Injuries to your starting players, especially as many as GB (and KC) has had, is devastating to any team, no matter the position or philosophy of the team. Having a one dimentional offense as the Chiefs have is a fault in itself. I blame this mess squarely on Pioli. And he needs to get it fixed, and pretty damn quick.

[chief31]

Pioli should stay. Haley needs to go. In fact, outside of Crennel, the entire coaching staff should be overhauled. Pioli just needs to make sure the coaches he hires and the schemes they want to implement are conducive to the current player's ability. Pioli shouldn't be given the green light for another rebuild if they've decided the current rebuild attempt is a failure. A coaching turnover shouldn't require a rebuild.

So you want a HC who has no say in anything? Have to run what we already have in place?

That eliminates anybody who would get another offer from another team.

This may be true, but therein lies the problem. We could have easily selected Aaron Rodgers with the 15th pick - but we didn't. Why can't the Chiefs have the same forsight as the Packers? We knew that Green wasn't getting any younger - why not draft a franchise QB as Green Bay did? But Noooo, we waited until the third round to draft Croyle. With Huard backing him up. This team has a long history of these kinds of blunderous moves.

Yeah. This is irrelevant to Haley and Pioli.

And there was nothing blunderous about passing on Rodgers, at that time.

In fact, The Packers were widely criticized for that pick.

The way it has worked out is, again, the extreme exception, not the norm.

And although Green Bay has an excellent passing game, they also have a pretty damn good running game. They are a complete team. They did it with sound coaching and excellent draft time decision-making.

They are currently ranked 25th in YPG (23rd in YPA), They ranked 24th in 2010 (25th in YPA), and were 14th (YPG and YPA) in 2009.

I would say they are a passing team, who is not good at running the ball. Which brings us right back to The irrelevance of a RB to that team.

When we started this new regime, this team could have done the same kinds of things. We just didn't.
Injuries to your starting players, especially as many as GB (and KC) has had, is devastating to any team, no matter the position or philosophy of the team. Having a one dimentional offense as the Chiefs have is a fault in itself. I blame this mess squarely on Pioli. And he needs to get it fixed, and pretty damn quick.

Like I said before, The Chiefs losing Jamaal Charles is a much bigger impact than The Packers losing Ryan Grant.

This offense was powered by Charles' unique abilities, as The Packers' offense is powered by Aaron Rodgers' unique abilities.

Should we be so dependant upon a RB? No. RB is an injury-prone position, with a short average career length.

But that is what happens when you have such a unique talent. His absence leaves a hole that is extremely difficult to fill.

[Bike]

So you want a HC who has no say in anything? Have to run what we already have in place?

That eliminates anybody who would get another offer from another team.



Yeah. This is irrelevant to Haley and Pioli.

And there was nothing blunderous about passing on Rodgers, at that time.

In fact, The Packers were widely criticized for that pick.

The way it has worked out is, again, the extreme exception, not the norm.



They are currently ranked 25th in YPG (23rd in YPA), They ranked 24th in 2010 (25th in YPA), and were 14th (YPG and YPA) in 2009.

I would say they are a passing team, who is not good at running the ball. Which brings us right back to The irrelevance of a RB to that team.



Like I said before, The Chiefs losing Jamaal Charles is a much bigger impact than The Packers losing Ryan Grant.

This offense was powered by Charles' unique abilities, as The Packers' offense is powered by Aaron Rodgers' unique abilities.

Should we be so dependant upon a RB? No. RB is an injury-prone position, with a short average career length.

But that is what happens when you have such a unique talent. His absence leaves a hole that is extremely difficult to fill.

Well, I digress. Building solid offensive and defensive lines is hurting this team much more than losing a RB or a safety. We could have done it, we should have done it, and we didn't do it. This was a blunderous mistake. Almost as blunderous as bringing in a primadonna HC who has absolutely no idea on how to rebuild a NFL franchise. NONE.

[hardcorechiefsfan]

Well, I digress. Building solid offensive and defensive lines is hurting this team much more than losing a RB or a safety. We could have done it, we should have done it, and we didn't do it. This was a blunderous mistake. Almost as blunderous as bringing in a primadonna HC who has absolutely no idea on how to rebuild a NFL franchise. NONE.

There is alot that the chiefs shoulda, coulda done. And you are on Haley's case? Why do people always think its the Coach's fault when the team is having a sucky season or seasons. If we had 53 guys that knew how to play as a team you would love Haley but instead we have a team of guys who didn't care how bad the team plays just as long as they get their paycheck. Ok, there are a few that I think are great(Bowe is not one of them), but not that many. Understand?

[Bike]

There is alot that the chiefs shoulda, coulda done. And you are on Haley's case? Why do people always think its the Coach's fault when the team is having a sucky season or seasons. If we had 53 guys that knew how to play as a team you would love Haley but instead we have a team of guys who didn't care how bad the team plays just as long as they get their paycheck. Ok, there are a few that I think are great(Bowe is not one of them), but not that many. Understand?

Nope. Doesn't the HC run the team? Doesn't the HC game plan every week? Doesn't the HC make decisions on player personnel and assistant coaches? What exactly am I missing here?
Maybe I just don't understand.

[hardcorechiefsfan]

Nope. Doesn't the HC run the team? Doesn't the HC game plan every week? Doesn't the HC make decisions on player personnel and assistant coaches? What exactly am I missing here?
Maybe I just don't understand.

The chiefs have hired people that can perform miracles with other teams(example: Vermiel)
Vermiel took what teams to the superbowl..? It didn't happen with the chiefs. Why...??? The team didn't have the mindset to be superbowl winners. Vermiel had to get out before the chiefs totally distroyed his win-loss record.
Of course he got too chummy with the players to be effective and maybe the superbowl experience clouded his judgement with the players, etc.
You say that the HC does the game plan, deals with assistant coaches, etc. Yes he does. But quite honestly, I doubt there is a HC out there that can change the chiefs into a winning team. The players themselves have to want to change. and become the winning team they can be if they take on the mindset of some of the most consistent NFL teams. If they want to.

[Hayvern]

I cant however make an excuse for the fact that they arent just losing, but they are getting blown out!! 41-7, 48-3, 31-3 ( Scores of Buf, Det and Mia) Sh!tty teams are killing us. Someone up front needs to get their sh!t together and make something happen or get out of the way for someone who can!!

This exactly the problem, in previous years we have lost a lot of games but we were in those games, meaning a touchdown or two in most cases. This year, we are getting our asses handed to us.

[TopekaRoy]

And although Green Bay has an excellent passing game, they also have a pretty damn good running game. They are a complete team.

The Packers do not have a pretty good running game (as has already been pointed out). The only reason they have any running game at all is because their passing game is so good that teams are forced to focus on that which softens them up somewhat against the run. Their best running backs, Starks and Grant, are ranked 22nd and 45th in yards per game and they wouldn't even be that good if they were frequently facing teams defenses that focused on stopping the run.

And the Packers are not a complete team. Their defense gives up a lot of yards but they overcome that somewhat by forcing a lot of turnovers. They simply outscore opponents with their passing game.

.

And there was nothing blunderous about passing on Rodgers, at that time.

In fact, The Packers were widely criticized for that pick.

And we passed on Tom Brady, too! If only the Chiefs had a crystal ball that could tell them how good college QBs will be 3 or 4 years after they are drafted. They'd be unstoppable!