Another AFC west prediction link..

[Joe Seahawk]

This one is much different than any of the others that I've seen...

This dude is apparently not high on DV....Joe


http://www.fantasyinsights.com/articles/mullen/mullen8.html

[mcan]

This is bull. But here's the kicker. He thinks the Raiders "could finish as low as fourth this season" The Raiders COULD fall into the pacific ocean after a huge earthquake, or the COULD be abducted by aliens and come back all looking like Richard Nixon. But there is no way they will place 5th? I think Dick must have messed with this dude's daughter or something. He seems more than just critical, he seems offended that the Chiefs hired this guy.

[Abba-Dabba]

Could he be a St.Louis fan in disguise?

[mcan]

That's as good a guess as any.

[Gaz]

Except for the childish swipes at Vermiel, I find nothing in his assessment with which I can take issue.

We are totally unproven in the new systems. Brand new Offense, Defense and Special Teams. I can be as much of a Homer as the next guy, but it is ludicrous to expect all three phases to gel by the first game.

We are lacking in superstar talent. Sure, we have Gonzalez and Alexander, but as he says, that is a far cry from the Rams WR roster. We have Holmes and Richardson, but that falls short of Faulk. We could point out that our D is superior to that of the Rams [any number is greater than zero], but it stunk pretty badly last season and is unproven this season.

And we are in the very tough AFC West, along with some teams that can be very good [if everything falls the right way]. The AFC West will be a dogfight [which is music to my ears] and we will beat each other up.

We had better develop some calluses quickly, because we will be hearing a lot of this kind of talk. And it will only get worse if we falter out of the gate [the most probably scenario].

xoxo~
Gaz
Striving for Zen acceptance of a rebuilding year.

[ptlyon]

This guy is a douchebag.

Yes we are unproven, with low expectations and I like it that way.

[Mark M]

While I agree that this guy takes some cheap shots (for a while I thought it might be Packfan), I'm with Gaz on this one. Now, I don't think they'll finish last by any means, but the Chiefs have a whole heckuva lot to prove. It's going to be interesting to see which of the younger players becomes the next "star" (assuming one of the does). No one was calling Holt a "star" three years ago ...

MM
~~Preparing for a potentially painful season.

[Clint in Wichita]

I'd be willing to bet that the Chargers will finish below .500, and that the Raiders will finish higher than 4th place.

His comment about the Broncos being "the team that can challenge the Ravens in the AFC" shows his allegience. He apparently forgot all about the Titans, who would be MY preseason pick to return to the Super Bowl.

If I were to compete against this guy in a fantasy league, I'd kick his arse into oblivion!!

[Cannibal]

The Raiders and the Broncos are locks for first and second place in the division.

You can take the Chargers, Seahawks and KC, put them in a bag, shake it up and pick one for 3rd through 5th place. Those three teams all have a lack of talent and depth, as well as many question marks on both sides of the ball.

[ptlyon]

Maybe this team even has their own fans buffalloed. It will be fun to watch. But I'm expecting more than what I'm reading.

[alphacroon]

First let me say that our beloved Chiefs do have several questions to answer. New schemes accross the board, can we stop the run, can we stop the pass, etc....


My problem is with the analysis that some of the "experts" are providing. They seem to have hindsight vision and that is not very far reaching.

1) Before their Superbowl run, what type of talent was perceived to be on the Rams squad? Bruce was a good receiver who was injury prone and had not proven to be a great receiver, Holt was an unproven rookie with great potential, Faulk was a malcontent from the Colts who hadn't lived up to his potential, Green was an unproven starter, who was Az-hakim, who was Kurt Warner.

Alexander is a good receiver who has not proven to be great, Minnis is an unproven rookie with great potential, Gonzo is the best in the game, Holmes hasn't lived up to his potential, neither Holmes nor Richardson are Faulk - but could the combination of them be, Green is an unproven starter, Mayes has shown talent, Horne provides speed.... The potential is there.

2) Vermeil's greatest strength is leadership and he has already shown plenty of that. He will allow his coaches to coach as he provides general direction and player motivation. Why is it silly to bring a successful coach out of retirement. He obviously knows how build an organization.

3) Vermeil got the QB he wanted. He would have "settled" for Grbac, but he wasn't his choice. He could have "settled" for other FA choices - Johnson, Buerline - but they weren't his choice. He got the guy he wanted and got Blaylock and Horne in the deal as well for Damiene Lewis (Rams #12 pick). Probably a good trade on our part. Time will tell.

Most experts were saying that a 1st and 3rd was not too much for the QB you want. We get him and 2 other players for just a 1st and now we are idiots. AMAZING.

[KCJohnny]

I'm surprised none of you guys accused me of writing the Chiefs section of the article.

You all think I'm hostile to DV (I'm not) and have dismissed this defense (almost) but this guy's opinion is not untypical.

The AFC West should be the toughest Division. I thought it was funny that he said whoever finished 4th in the AFC West could win the NFC East.

Of course, I'm picking Washington to win the NFC Least....

KCJ

[Cormac]

It's funny how nobody gives us credit for what we have achieved this offseason. Look at the cap money we shook off, and we did that by losing the overpaid underachievers. Anybody who thinks that DV is going to come in here and get us to the playoffs or beyond this season is expecting too much IMO. I think the strides that have been made this season by switching coaching staffs, getting our cap back in order, releasing Glock, Bennett etc., and bringing in the QB that was wanted all along are great steps towards building the future that DV wants. This guy makes it sound like all we were left with was Green. It's not as though we would have signed anybody else anyway. And I'd prefer to have Green on these terms than have overpaid for Brad Johnson or brought in 10-10-2-Flutie

This guy is right in that we won't do much this season. I agree, although I am beginning to think that Seattle will be the cellar-dwellers, and we'll be a close 4th. But how can somebody talk about our offseason without mentioning how we wriggled our way out of cap trouble, and canned the most inept coaching staff in recent league memory??? If anything else, we have set ourselves up for better years to come. Let the teething period begin!!!

FWIW, I thought he made an excellent case for a resurgent SD, and I happen to agree with that (although they'll hardly be better than 3rd).

[ptlyon]

You guys keep up the doom and gloom. I myself am going to be optimisitic. Hey... It's all I got!!!


_________
pt - awaiting another "rip your heart out and stomp on it" ending to the season like '95 and '97

[KCJohnny]

Cormac,
This is not aimed at you personnally,
but...

...How in heck do the most "inept coaching staff in recent league memory" finish .500 over their 2 years together which is better than SB 'genius' Mike Holmgren and better than SB 'genius' George Siefert???? Dick Vermiel in his first two seasons with StL finished 9-23, substantially below Gun/staff's 16-16.

Just wondering about the double standards, I'm not really asking for a reply (I know what they will be).

KCJ
Still can't figure out how everyone is rejoicing over the prospects of a 5-11 season with DV...:confused:

[Gaz]

This is a perfect example of why statistics are not to be trusted. You can build a statistical case that Gunther and the Stooges were serviceable coaches, better than Seifert, Holmgren or Vermeil. Is there anyone who truly believes that Gunther is a superior coach to any of these men?

If you do not see the obvious fallacy there, then you will not understand why statistics always provide a skewed slice of reality.

xoxo~
Gaz
Beating that same old dead horse again.

[KCJohnny]

While you are splashing around in dead horse blood, Gaz, please answer me this:
Since when is W/L a mere "stat"?
And where did I say that Gun was superior to those 3 coaches (although he beat two of them head-to-head)?

All I said was:

How in heck do the most "inept coaching staff in recent league memory" finish .500 over their 2 years together which is better than SB 'genius' Mike Holmgren and better than SB 'genius' George Siefert???? Dick Vermiel in his first two seasons with StL finished 9-23, substantially below Gun/staff's 16-16.

And why are you so ticked off at me?
I wonder if it was because of my religious views...(other thread)...

KCJ
Blind, deceived Stat Homer

[Lzen]

KCJ,
I know you said you didn't want a reply but, you should know you'll get plenty of them when you make comments like that.
First, I don't know what the heck happened with Holmgren last year. Maybe wearing 2 hats got to him. After all, he was just the coach in GB, not the GM & coach like he is now. Same thing with Seifert, can't explain it. Maybe injuries caught up with his team. Maybe the game has passed him by. Hard to say. Still, you know as well as anybody knows that the situation in Stl. was much different than it is here. They were a terrible team for several years before DV got there. I mean hey, Rome wasn't built in a day. This Chiefs team had the talent to go 10-6 or 11-5 last year. Poor coaching was the main reason why the 2000 Chiefs finished 7-9. So, even with the departures of several players(mostly overpaid underacheivers), this team is well ahead of where Stl. was when DV took over. I believe the biggest change will be in the attitude and leadership on this team. It won't be long before this team is challenging for the championship. I'm not expecting a whole lot this season. However, I believe that the 2001 Chiefs could surprise a lot of the so-called "experts".

[Clint in Wichita]

Gunther made no improvements to the Chiefs during his 2 years. If anything, the team got worse.

The same can't be said for Vermeil. His teams rapidly improved after his arrival.

[Clint in Wichita]

Not to mention the fact that when DV took over those teams, they couldn't have been much worse.

[KCTitus]

I think it's the 5-11 dig at the end of your post that you KNOW will get someone to respond, John. Congrats, you know the formula.

I fail to understand where you pull a 5-11 for this future season when you have yet to see any evidence either way. Could it be that you 'hope' this to be the case since your boy Gun is gone?

While Gun was here you were the consummate optimist filled with good news even while facing a miserable season which ended at 7-9 and at least 3 losses attributable directly to coaching decisions. Even with all that evidence staring you in the face you still remained positive about the team.

Now, without a scintilla of evidence in either direction, you rejoice in the imminent failure of this team. Where is the optimism?

Im just curious about the double standards, Im not really asking for a reply (I know what they will be).

[Gaz]

Chaplain-

Of course “Win/Loss” is a statistic. The misuse comes by putting [2] years of Gunther’s statistics up against proven coaches. [2] years is an absurdly small sample from which to extrapolate a relative ability between coaches. It is a violation of the basic principles of statistical analysis.

Someone, and please forgive my memory that I do not remember who it was, made an equally valid extrapolation of [2] rushing plays by Alexander to a full season of carries, proving that he is the best RB in the NFL, based on YPC.

BTW, I am not “ticked off” at you. I make this point every time someone misuses statistics. This BB is littered with my debunking of flawed statistical analysis. I assure you that it is not personal. Everyone who abuses statistics gets the same treatment.

xoxo~
Gaz
A loveable kinda guy.

[KCJohnny]

Two years is a fair sampling if that's all you have. And 32 games is not comparable to that hyperbolic sneer about DA's rushing average. I'm right on this one.

I am NOT rejoicing in the fact that YOU PEOPLE (read: not me!) are rejoicing in the prospects of going (pick your record) 4-12/9-7) as long as its with anybody but Gunther. I am convinced that Gun needed to go. All I am asking is to use a level hand when dealing out insults like "worst coaching staff" etc... when that is plainly not true (sorry, have to use the old W/L 'stat' to back up my point).

And save your breath with all those "Rams were much worse" excuses. DV inherited a bad team and they went 9-23 his first 2 years. Then thay had the softest schedule in the NFL the year they won it all and lucked into Warner, hired Martz against Vermiel's wishes, etc...

I am predicting a 10-6 season, which is well below my predictions from '98-00, but better than most of you.


Did Gunther inherit a "GREAT" team? Oh really? I thought KC was 7-9 in '98, had a QB controversy, had a moral/spiritual meltdown, a weak rushing attack, a thug problem, etc... At least Gun made the Chiefs the NFL's 3rd best rushing team, dumped the thugs, and came within a FG of winning the AFC West.

KCJ

[KCTitus]

You may not be rejoicing, but you are reveling in your doom and gloom predictions of failure with NO evidence to support that claim.

There is not a single post by any member of this bb that you could point to that would be in any way considered 'rejoicing' about this team. Most are cautiously optimistic.

For the 1000th time, there's a reason why I, among others, use the 'worst staff in the NFL' to describe the coaching staff. Because of their direct impact on 3 losses last year and the game against oakland on Jan 2. That game KC was not a FG away, they were already in the lead--Gun willingly and admited out of his own mouth that he WANTED to give the ball back to Oakland, who then scored twice on KC then put us in the hole that we had to rely on our kicker to bail us out. ~bad decision that cost KC the game. There's your evidence.

Please get your predictions straight, you say 10-6 but three posts ago, you said 5-11. That's a squiggle of denisian proportions. Please make up your mind.

[Gaz]

I'm right on this one.

'nuff said.

xoxo~
Gaz
Leaving bliss alone.

[MrBlond]

I will accept that there have existed worse coaching staffs than Gunthers. However...Seifert, Holmgren, Shanahan, and Vermiels staffs are not among them. Regardless of the records head to head, or the last 2 seasons, the afformentioned coaches have one thing in common. SUPERBOWL RINGS! If you want to argue that Gunther was better than Frank Ganz, Wade Phillips, etc. OK. But please leave men who have lead a team or teams to the FRIGGIN SUPERBOWL!!! out of comparisons to a guy who can't figure out when to go for a 2 point conversion.

[Cormac]

KCJ,

Sorry, the BB was down (for me). That was some (possibly ill-advised) hyperbole to say that Gun and co. comprised the "most inept.....". I realise that you respect and like Gun. Probably we all should. But I am glad he's gone. This is nothing personal against you. I respect that you fly the flag for Gun despite constant criticism. But I am nothing short of elated the more I think about it that he and the stooges were canned. There are many reasons why, some of them are fact, some are opinion, and they have all been mentioned before. But here is a sample of why I am glad we have had a change at the top
no more cloak and daggers, saying one thing and doing another
no more RB by situation.....mis-using Bennett as short-yardage back when a waterboy could average <1ypc
no more confusion as to who will start at RB, and how many carries they will get.
"you'll be a great player in this league" - Gun to Cloud. Huh??? Then he should have treated him like one. Did he carry the ball at all last season after his 10 yd sweep for a TD?
how long is the play-clock anyway?
no more shoeless, sleeveless, insomniacs hired because they're tough and they love the cold.
I assume DV knows when to go for 2, not to mention when to kick a FG as opposed to "confusing" the defense with a run up the middle on 4th and goal.
no more opening up games with 6 straight runs
no more blaming individual players for mistakes (Parker's fumble)
the $64m question - how did the defense get so bad when Gun had such a good defensive mind in his own right???
Above all, I believe Gun lost the team. Maybe due to his threat of retirement, maybe his inconsistencies, but any team that throws in the towel in several games like our Chiefs did last year, are not playing with the necessary passion. If he was still at the helm this team would be one of the worst in the league in 2001 IMO. Why was Maz so fired up trying to get his team-mates in the game last year on Monday night football? Nobody cared, same as for the Atlanta game, the SF game, the SD game. Then the team got "up" for the Denver game and showed how they were capable of playing. In a nutshell it is the coaching staff's responsibility to ensure that they play that way every game.

That's what I expect from DV et al. If DV lets me down by being guilty of any of the above "strategies", then I'll call for his removal too. This is not personal against Gun, let alone you, and I think we are in for a good ride. I just hope you can enjoy it as much as the rest of us. Gun is where he belongs. With one of his friends (Fisher), at a good squad, where he can do an excellent job, in a subordinates role.

[ptlyon]

the $64m question - how did the defense get so bad when Gun had such a good defensive mind in his own right???

(said with utter disgust) Curt Schottenheimer

How the hell can someone go from a special teams coach to defense? I'm glad he's with his brother, that's where he belongs, tagging on his shirt tail.

[ChiTown]

Cormac, in the words of my former boss to me, "Great analysis son, now you don't mind if I rewrite this in my own words and present it to the Board do you"?

Nothing to change here, Cormac. I couldn't have said it any better myself;)

Chi
~Happy as kittens in silly string to be Stoogeless

[Cormac]

Thanks Chitown ;). As much as I wanted to like Gun, I could no longer want him to be HC.

ptlyon,

You're right there. It's just a shame Gun was too overwhelmed as HC to help out.

OK, I'll shut up now :)

[Clint in Wichita]

Has KCJ ever been right?

If he's predicting a gloomy season, we should all be happy. They'll almost certainly do well.

[Rausch]

First of all, Spurt did do a good job bringing along our DB's in the system gun ran before Marty left. Of course, Marty and Gun(both excellent defensive minds) were there to babysit him. If Marty is there to babysit, I think Kurt will do fine as a coordinator parroting his older brother.


Secondly, I think Gun COULD have ben one helluva coach if not for three things

A) HE ran a run oriented game plan with a terrible collection of half backs.

B) He had the stooges on his side, or against him, depending on how you look at it.

and C) The guy outright refused to sleep or take 10 minutes away from football. It's no secret that sleep deprivation takes your brain out of your head and places you in a state of confusion. Often I had to go to class after working overnights and forgot mundane details of History. When my instructor asked me about WWII and my opinions i started with: "Well, Carter was against the idea of the bomb at first...."

Laughter erupted. Imagine that. I'm a HUGE history buff and I threw Carter 30 years in the past.....DUH! Gun was running a team, and if he ran on half a tank all year, you probably got half a Gun. Vermeil did this with the Eagles, got burned out, and left. I do hope Gun finds success, but i think he burned himself similar to Vermeil's perils in Eagle-land....

[Rausch]

First of all, Spurt did do a good job bringing along our DB's in the system gun ran before Marty left. Of course, Marty and Gun(both excellent defensive minds) were there to babysit him. If Marty is there to babysit, I think Kurt will do fine as a coordinator parroting his older brother.


Secondly, I think Gun COULD have ben one helluva coach if not for three things

A) HE ran a run oriented game plan with a terrible collection of half backs.

B) He had the stooges on his side, or against him, depending on how you look at it.

and C) The guy outright refused to sleep or take 10 minutes away from football. It's no secret that sleep deprivation takes your brain out of your head and places you in a state of confusion. Often I had to go to class after working overnights and forgot mundane details of History. When my instructor asked me about WWII and my opinions i started with: "Well, Carter was against the idea of the bomb at first...."

Laughter erupted. Imagine that. I'm a HUGE history buff and I threw Carter 30 years in the past.....DUH! Gun was running a team, and if he ran on half a tank all year, you probably got half a Gun. Vermeil did this with the Eagles, got burned out, and left. I do hope Gun finds success, but i think he burned himself similar to Vermeil's perils in Eagle-land....:rolleyes:

[KCJohnny]

AS usual, I agree with Brad (wierd, huh?) and there was nothing that I said in my posts on this thread that can be interpreted as Pro-Gun except my questioning that he inherited a 'great team.' I agree, like ALL coaches, there were some bad decisions. I am not contesting that; I am merely saying that if Gun was anywhere near the turkey some of you make him out to be, he couldn't have gone 6-2 against the SB coaches you all regale and he couldn't have taken KC to a 16-16 mark in the league's toughest division. That's my story and I am sticking to it.

Yeah, yeah, Holmy is great, Siefert a genius, Vermiel a wizard (yawn) but in their first two years with their current teams (Vermiel = Rams) Gun had a better W/L record than them all. And that is not to say that Gun was a better coach than they were (it WAS his first opportunity as a HC at ANY level) but if .500 = 'worst coach, stooge, dumbther, etc...) then apply the same standards evenly to Vermiel, Holmy, Siefert, ect...

Titus: If you ACTUALLY read my posts, I said that YOU guys were the ones predicting a poor season record (and providing cover for DV should the team finish .500 or worse) while I was the one predicting a winning season (with a weak defense).

I also said that YOU were the ones rejoicing that Vermiel was the new HC even if he put a loser on the field. I will NOT rejoice over a losing season, but will always praise legitimate achievement, regardless of what that is or how it can/can not be statistically measured.

KCJ

[KCJohnny]

Brad's point 'C' is one that I really believe. I was in the forefront of those few of you who criticized Gun for his unhealthy obsession with football machinery. Football is a great hobby but a lousy religion.

KCJ
Sleep addict

[milkman]

Johnny,
I won't shy away from it.
As far as I'm concerned Goonther and the Stooges were among the worst coaching staffs that I have ever seen.

Stats notwithstanding (16-16), he had this team headed in the wrong direction.
Had he remained for another season, the Chiefs would be well on their way to a glorious 4 wins, maybe 5.

Hell, we shoulda' kept him.
We coulda had the chance to achieve the (in)glorious record of 0-16 by '02.

[TEX]

The guy makes sense. I picked the division the same way in another thread. :confused: