An addition to the Pioli resume
 

I was bored, thought I'd run some numbers - hadn't done any Chiefs-related homework in a while.

Anywho, discussion in another thread got me to thinking about the "talent level" on this team. People seem to be getting back in the habit of blaming specifically the QB and coaching, while claiming that this roster, and those before it are loaded with talent.

For a team that supposedly has talent, all they've done is beat up on the weak sisters of the poor over the last 4 years of the Pioli Nightmare.

23 wins in 4 years.

Those 23 wins came against teams with a collective 152-214 record and a .415 winning percentage. You can thank Green Bay dropping a metric ****ton of passes back in December of 2011 - take them out of the equation, and you're looking at a .375 winning percentage.

1 win in 4 years against a 10-win or better team.

3 wins in 4 years against a 9-win or better team.

20 wins against 8-8 teams or worse - 11 of those wins against teams with 6 wins or less.

So the "Executive of the Decade" was responsible for 5.75 wins per year, and we should consider ourselves lucky we "earned" that many.

In this era of parity in the NFL, a team with this much "talent" would be winning more than 5.75 games per year. Even without a QB. Even without a QB and HC.

Folks say that Mark Sanchez is a POS, and that we have more talent than the Jets. The same Jets that have won 34 games in the last 4 years. 11 more than the Chiefs.

Buffalo has shit for talent, plays in a brutal division, and has 2 fewer wins over the same time period.

Cleveland is hot garbage, and they've won 4 fewer games over the past 4 years. 1 game a year difference.

Jacksonville has 1 fewer win.

Miami has 4 MORE wins.

Oakland has 2 MORE wins.


The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that we have more "talent" than every one of the above teams.

The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that our QB play has been at least as good as the above teams, and in most cases, better.

The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that our coaching has been at least as good as the above teams, and in most cases, better.


The overwhelming majority of this board would be dead wrong on one of those three assessments. One of these things is not like the other.

Folks, it's time to wake up and realize that QB and HC are just part of the problem.

I see a lot of bad teams with bad QB's and bad HC's that have won as much or more than we have.

Sadly, the bottom line is that there isn't nearly as much "talent" on this roster that you think there is - and that we're a lot closer to the Cleveland's, Buffalo's and Jacksonville's of the NFL than you want to admit.

Coaching has been at least as bad as all those teams. Qb had been at least as bad too. Probably worse in both cases.

I'm in the camp that we are a very talented team that is in the same mindset as poor old lomas brown.

They hate their qbs and know every Sunday they don't have a very good chance of winning behind them.

Or coaching hasn't helped either.
Posted via Mobile Device

So you're saying we have a roster chock full of talented quitters.

Got it.

when Pioli goes, can he take his 'scouts' with him?

Well now we know why Hillis chose to sign here.

We're in much the same position now as in '09. There is a talented core of players. Unfortunately, the majority of this core is now four years older because Pioli was truly terrible at his job.

I would call them frustrated.


Or lacking in direction.


No QUALITY leadership from the top down.

How could any team win like that?


this organization is a total cluster **** and when it gets straightened out I think you will be surprised how everything changes
Posted via Mobile Device

Even if the QB was "as bad" as those other teams.

Even if the coaching was "as bad" as those other teams.

This insane amount of talent some of you claim we have would be winning games.

These other teams are winning as many games or MORE without the QB, HC or the talent.

There's no leadership with Buffalo, Jacksonville, Oakland etc. either.

Yet they've won as many games or more than we have in the past 4 years, and with way less talent, according to the majority of this board.

Straightened out = drafting talented players.

The bills have 21 wins the last 4 years
The Jaguars have 22
The Raiders have 25
The Chiefs have 23

Thats just sad.

yeah, but our tailgating rules; / ALL CAPS DEB

Oakland seems to have changed their whole philosophy between last year and this. We should probably not lump them in quote yet. small sample size.

Jax sucks yes.

Buffalo has Chan gailey the chicken salad out of chicken shit guy. They made a mistake at the qb position...

Ohhhhhh maybe THAT'S the defining factor in all the teams you mentioned.

A franchise qb.
Posted via Mobile Device

FYP

Oak. Cle. Buff. Jets. Chiefs.

Not a franchise qb on any of them.


Thanks for the research in proving how valuable the qb is otwp
Posted via Mobile Device

Jason, you're missing the point.

All these teams have bad QB play.

All of these teams suffer from poor coaching/leadership.

But posters here seem to think we have a ton of talent that these other teams don't have - yet they've all won as many games (or more) than we have in the past 4 years.

and the difference between a couple wins?

Luck.

All those teams are going to suck until they find a qb.
Posted via Mobile Device

again sometimes that's just the way the ball bounces. Luck.


We are all in the same boat.

We are a talented team. They all gave talented players
Posted via Mobile Device

Have talented players.
Posted via Mobile Device

So, we are a talented team, just like Jax, Oakland, and Buffalo?

I agree that there is in general a sentiment that we are a talented team, but if we are now agreeing that all the teams in the NFL are "talented" than I guess that doesn't leave us very well off.

Talent level on this team, outside the Herm players, is about average.

That's not nearly good enough when your QB is utter shit.

And the talent level on teams such as Buffalo, Oakland, Jacksonville, etc is well below average, their QB play is utter shit, yet they've won as many games as we have over the past 4 years.

Sadly, I think guys like Fitzpatrick and Henne are better than Cassel. Palmer certainly is.

We're splitting hairs, though. This isn't, and never was, one of the best rosters in the NFL. It's near league average, give or take.

A league average team with a franchise QB can compete for a title. A league average team with Matt Cassel and Brady Quinn coached by Romeo Crennel can compete for a #1 pick.

We're talking over 4 years though. Palmer covers a year and a half.

Henne covers something like 6 games. Christ, Jacksonville pulled a guy off a ****ing tractor a few years back.

So again...

KC's QB play is at least as good, if not better than these teams from 2009-2012.

KC's coaching is at least as good, of not better.

KC's so-called talent level is supposedly leaps and bounds ahead of Buffalo, Oakland, Cleveland, Miami and Jacksonville - yet it hasn't translated into more wins.

Why?

Hint: It's because this roster isn't as talented as people think it is.

Chock full of losers. Absolutely.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/XhI0OVs_zj0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

So the Colts QB fluctuation over the past 3 years hasn't shown you just how important the QB is?

Or now that Manning is in Denver? Or Russell Wilson? A QB fixes a LOT of bad things. How many wins can an elite QB account for?

Don't forget the QB's on his team have thrown 4 pick 6's, there has been a fumble "return" TD, and special teams has given up 2 TD's. That's 7 TD's there. Take them away, and the Chiefs are right in the middle of the package for total points given up.

THAT only accounts for a very small handful of the QB's 30 turnovers this season. Doesn't even consider how many times the offense turned the ball over inside of our own 50, 30, 20, or closer...

So sure, we could use upgrades over Lewis, Siler, TJ/Dorsey, and across from Flowers, and I hope we get them. They aren't necessary though, at least not all of them RIGHT NOW.

On offense, we need a QB, a deep threat, and upgrades/depth at TE, FB, RB and a line spot or two.

That doesn't mean that this team is devoid of talent. It has some really pieces though, which is a lot of talent for one team. Flowers, Berry, Houston, Hali, DJ, I like what I saw from a rookie Poe. Charles, Bowe, Albert. All players any team would love to have.

That isn't even including good to adequate players. The entire Oline, depth included is either good or adequate. Winston being one of my least favorite. Same goes for TE, and Breaston, DiMarco, Draughn, Gray. Also plenty of players on defense.

This team can make the playoffs next year EASY, if they pick the right QB and head coach, diagnose which positions that could be upgraded would payoff the most.

Deep threat WR, starting CB, DE's, would go a long way on this team.

Draft Geno, trader our 2nd and one of our 3rd's(comp pick) if that's what it takes to move back in order first and grab best deep threat WR(T. Williams if available in 20's). Best CB and 3-4 DEFENSE available in 3rd & 4th rounds.

I would agree on only one of the original points. The Chiefs do have more talent than those other teams. The only thing that Pioli has done well is retain most of the talent he inherited. The players in general have not been coached up by our coaches. DJ is an exception. Houston is an exception.

Pioli has brought in only 2 impact players through the draft. Pioli is also responsible for bringing in the coaches, setting a dictatorial atmosphere and an inability to see that having Cassel as the only option was a huge mistake.

So we have more talent, similar QB play and similar coaching - yet haven't won more games.

Makes sense.

Do you agree or disagree with my assessment of the following players:

Albert (if healthy) is a solid LT.
Bowe is a fringe #1 WR (true #1 WR are rare, just like true #1 pitchers are rare in MLB--not all teams have them.)
Hali is a solid OLB.
Houston is a solid OLB.
DJ is a solid ILB.
Flowers is a solid corner.
Charles is a ****ing beast.

That's a pretty talented core, IMO, and those positions are pretty tough to fill. A competent GM could supplement this talent pretty quickly, IMO, but it all hinges on first getting the QB.

How many points have been scored off of turnovers this season? I wouldn't know where to find a state like that.

If you're talking to me...

Yes. I would agree with that assessment.

EDIT: This is the same core (minus Houston) we all thought would be easy to build around in 2009.

Yet four years later, we've won 23 games in four years.

Because we don't have much talent outside the core.

Don't enjoy being lumped in with OAK, BUFF and CLE. Shitholes. Guess that makes the Chiefs shitty by association. Sad.

With Peyton Manning on this team, it wins 10.

Or Rodgers, Brady, etc.

Add a solid coaching staff and it wins 12 or 13.

This years debacle is a direct result of 30 turnovers from 2 shitty QBs.

Let's just take OAK. The only position I'd trade with them would be their DTs. Different scheme, of course, but they're stout along the line.

Cleveland is interesting. Better OT play, overall. Pretty close in terms of WR and RB play.

They also have a #1 CB.

In terms of age, they might be better situated than KC, but it's damn close.

Yep. My first post in this thread:

And terribly soft, anti-aggressive defensive scheming

That's the point.

People would rather make excuses for, or flat-out overvalue the talent level on this roster than admit that we really are as bad as tire fire organizations like Jacksonville, Oakland and Cleveland over the past four years.

Quit insulting tire fires.

So it's going to take one of the greatest QB's in the history of professional football to win 10 games with this roster in the weakest division in the NFL.

Case closed, Your Honor.

With average QB play and fewer turnovers, there is 5 or 6 more wins this season.

well thank God that didn't happen

I'll call this season a total success once Pioli/Crennel get canned, Cassel gets cut, and we draft Geno. Best season in a long, long, long, long, long time

And if my aunt had a cock and balls, she'd be my uncle.

Pioli's best move?

Letting Orton walk and bringing in "competition" named Brady Quinn for Matt Cassel!

Thanks, Scott!!

Yep. We might look back on all of this and decide that Pioli was the biggest blessing in disguise if Geno lives up to his potential.

:rolleyes:

Denver will finish with 5 more wins than last season.

If it had not been for all fluke plays last year, they are probably a 4-12 team.

Agreed.

It's too bad this season didnt happen last year.

Such is life as a Chiefs fan.

Denver is also infinitely more talented than we are - people just refuse to admit it.

I'd trade every position group we have for theirs other than RB.

So with the narrative of "Pioli hasn't brought in any great players" I wanna ask, with who we have on board as our core, did he really need too?


Charles
Bowe
Albert
DJ
Hali
Houston
Flowers
Berry
Winston
Poe (who I'm higher on probably than most)
Moeaki
Breaston


Thats your core, with all pro type guys there. Exactly how many do you need?

I think we tend to downplay just how much the QB position and coaching have affected this team.

Lets go group by group

OL: Winston and Albert are bookends. They are great tackles and young. Hudson played alright as a new C early until he was hurt. Allen and Asamoah have flashed but also struggled.

This group is directly affected by QB play.

Peyton clearly inflates the talent on that team.

Look no further than the Colts in 2010. 10-6 with him. 2-14 without.

I don't need to go group by group.

Denver has more talent than we do. Mainly because they've drafted way better than we have, and have done better in FA.

What position group of ours would you rather have than Denvers?

Running back.

I'll wait for the rest, though there really shouldn't be any if you're being honest.

I agree about Denver.

What about my comments about OAK and CLE?

It does not matter because that group isn't winning shit without an elite QB.

So, no. I do not care to trade if I don't have Peyton Manning or some other elite QB.

What's the difference between a talented core of players and a group of talented players?

Just curious.

Is there a number?

Just trying to get everyone's interpretation of the two.

When I say "core" I mean talent at key positions, ones that, while not as important as QB, are essential to fielding a championship team.

Not being a smartass.

I honestly didn't know the difference between the two, or how to interpret either.

:spock:

Oakland is clearly better.

Mostly because Janikowski is better than Succop.

Field goals.

**** yeah!

I'd say pretty spot on.

This Denver conversation is just more proof about the mindset of our fanbase.

Denver won 8 games with Tim ****ing Tebow as QB.

While we've been drafting guys like Tyson Jackson, Poe, Arenas, McCluster, Moeaki and signing guys like Breaston and Hillis...

...Denver has been drafting guys like Von Miller, Demaryius Thomas, Erik Decker, Dumervil, Franklin, Beadles and Wolfe and signing guys like Tracy Porter, Dan Koppen, Justin Bannan, Chris Harris, etc.

They've made good moves, while we've made poor moves. It shouldn't be a surprise that they are more talented than we are.

Manning is just icing on the cake.

How many teams have an elite running game, number 1 reciever, 2 high end pass rushers, a number one corner, and an emerging super star safety?

This team beats playoff contending teams Pitt, Balt, Den, and Indy with even mediocre QB play.

The QB play really has been that bad the last 4 years that it just cannot be overcome. This is still a talented, young roster.

And they aren't winning shit without Manning.

Bannon? What has he done? He doesn't even have a sack. Jackson has better numbers LMAO

The QB play hasn't been worse than in Cleveland or Jacksonville, yet they have as many wins in 4 years as we do.

Please continue your donkey show in Knowmo's thread.

I'm not saying that we are more talented than Denver, but stick Cassel and Quinn on the Broncos instead of Manning and their "core" gets a lot smaller.

No set of QBs have turned the ball over 30 times.

No doubt.

But they'd surely have more than 2 wins.

Again, they won the division AND A PLAYOFF GAME with Tim Tebow at QB.

Tim.

Tebow.

And that's before signing extra pieces like Koppen, Porter, etc.

You're cherry picking one year out of 4.

Feel free to bury your head in the sand and expect a QB to solve all our problems in another thread?

Weeden has played better than Quinn and Cassel.

Get us a qb and we will see who is right here
Posted via Mobile Device

Preferably a chocolate flavored one sporting the number 12.

This also has to be looked at from the other direction as well. Lets take it away from Denver to GB, NE, NO. Where are those teams with Cassel and the roller coaster of HC and OC staff that has been run through KC in the last 4 years?

I would imagine that Cassel 27/7 year messes the averages up as well. Not to mention all the garbage stats that he has gotten when we are being blown out.

While this overall roster may not be as talented as some people think a potential franchise quarterback (who lives up to the #1 overall pick) improves the overall roster drastically.

Also curious if of the probowl numbers for those teams. Are any of those teams sending 5 to the pro bowl?

No joke.

Look what RG3 and Luck have done for their teams.

those aren't antlers either.

Feel free to take Dave's version of Manning.

10 wins.

Whoop-dee-****ing-doo.

It's going to take a HOF QB to get this roster 10 wins?


Of course we need a QB. That's not the debate here.

We also need a lot of good players around that core of 6-7 guys. We have to draft well and sign FA's well.

Christ, someone in another thread mentioned how good 400 some-odd yards is for McCluster, considering who is throwing him the ball.

Nevermind that guys like Rod Streater have more receiving yards.

That Rob Housler - a TE with Kolb, Skelton and Lindley throwing to him - has more yardage than Dexter.

That's just ONE example of how people rationalize the lack of talent on this roster.

It's not all the QB's fault that guys like Dexter, Moeaki, Arenas, Jackson, Hillis, Breaston, Winston, Lewis, Routt, etc aren't that good.

Yet we continue to prop them up and ignore it, because no one wants to admit this team has a few superstars pushing 30 and not much behind them.

Hmmm. I seem to recall the last SB winner won 9...