My picks are so awful, its time to pull the plug.
But ... Bills (pick) 16, at Chiefs 10.
Meanwhile, the "Voice of Reason" finally checked in this week for a lively back-and-forth debate about Sunday's debacle against the donkeys. Enjoy!
---------------------
* from Monday's Chiefs / donkeys recap:
Gregg, the ex-roommate, has yet to comment. I sent the "todd must go cut the cord" text that every other time gets a "you overreact / he's not that bad / give him time" response. No response this time. (Congratulations, Todd! You've managed to f*ck up so spectacularly that my voice of reason cannot disagree with what I am saying about you! You definitely get a Tommy Point for that one.)
---------------------
gg: Here's my reaction. Do I agree with that play call? No. But to say it's the worst play call in franchise is an overreaction. The play was about 2 inches away from working. The receiver was wide, WIDE open with plenty of running room. Had Croyle put a little more air under the ball, it would have been a huge play. The Chiefs did a pretty good job of faking that the play was going to the right, when it really was designed to go to the left. According to Brent, they Chiefs line also did a pretty good job of "hiding" Croyle and that Denver probably didn't know he was in the game or at least lined up as the punter. Keep in mind that Colquitt was in the game, but shifted to a wide out. Having the snapper be eligible was pretty genius actually which helped with the fake. My biggest problem was not the play call itself, but doing it while it was still an 8 point game. I would have been better with that call had it been a 2 possession game and we "needed" to make something happen.
I was far more upset about having first and goal at the 1 and not running it up the middle 4 straight times. Also, the second time we had first and goal (at the 5, I believe) we again lost 3 yards on first down. If we could just find a way to eliminate negative yardage plays in these situations, we'd be a lot better off.
I maintain that had Bobby Wade not dropped that TD pass on our first possession, it would have been a totally different game. Bobby Wade pi$$ed me off far more in this game than Todd Haley did. Haley was just trying to make something happen. Wade was causing stuff not to happen.
---------------------
sk: I could not agree with you more on the 1st and goal at the 1. Other than the short yardage stuff, I'm ok with Haley's play calling for the most part. The short yardage stuff is driving me insane, but the INTs in the third quarter, those weren't bad play calls. It was a combo of good defense (the 2nd INT) and a horrible throw (the 1st INT) after one of the worst throws I've ever seen in my life (the 15 yard overshoot of Chambers when he was wide open in the zone coverage. Seriously, even I could have thrown a better ball in that spot, and I've been accused of throwing like a girl from time to time). Cassel had nothing on Sunday. You can't blame Haley for that. He doesn't make the throws, and you can't exactly run the ball every down when you're down 20 and your RB can't hold onto the football.
I completely agree on Wade's drop. He effing QUIT on that play. He completely "Tito Beltran'd" it. I know I've torn into Haley for his "lack of professionalism on the sideline", but good for Todd for trying to tear Bobby "Beltran" Wade a new one. That was one time when his "lack of self control" was completely justified. (If that had been me, I might have gone Buddy Ryan on him and decked him).
The thing with the fake punt that so angered me is that it ignored every element of common sense. You can argue its stupid for one of four reasons:
a. too deep in your own territory to try something like that (28 yard line). If you fail, you're conceding 3 at the very least.
b. too far to gain (7 yards). If you're going to "go for it", you're better off putting Cassel in the gun, going 4 wide with Charles as the safety valve, and run a couple 8 yard out patterns and a fly route with Chambers, and try to make something happen, than you are to catch the donkeys special teams napping.
c. too much time left in the game. 28 minutes is an eternity to play, especially since
d. it was only a one score game. Too close at that point to try something like that.
And after reading an article in the Star on the play, I'd throw in a 5th reason why it was stupid:
e. Haley didn't suggest it. ST coach Steve Hoffman did.
I was angry when I thought Haley ordered the play (based on his postgame comments, I was led to believe he did). After hearing it was Hoffman's idea, I was even angrier. This is why you're a head coach, Todd. To consider ALL the ramifications of your decisions, not just to consider the effect to the offense. Your job is to coach the game for all 60 minutes, not the 60 seconds in front of you at that moment in time.
Did Todd consider the deflation of the crowd if you don't get it? Every damned person in that stadium knew after the try failed that we'd lost. Everyone knew it. It completely took the crowd out of the game. It also put the defense in an awful spot, set up to fail. It also basically told the offense "I don't think you're good enough to move the ball without gimicks and trickery and special teams assisstance". (On this point, to be fair ... Haley has a valid argument).
I obviously believe Todd Haley should be fired. But -- but -- if Pioli sits him down, points out the obvious mistakes Todd's made, and gets him a competent quality control / assistant head coach to inject some common sense into him when he's faced with moments like the fake punt, I can probably hold my nose and live through year two. Even the best coaches need a voice of reason on the sideline or in the booth to talk them off the cliff from time to time. Haley needs one 24/7/365 apparently.
---------------------
gg: I guess my main reason for not being overly upset about the fake punt is
that is was close....VERY close to working. Literally 2 inches close to
working. Had that play hit, it would have completely changed the momentum
of the game the other way. It was a gamble that obviously didn't pay off,
but it was very close. I firmly believe that it did have denver fooled and
had Croyle put just a tad more air under the ball it would have hit big.
I also believe the Chiefs lack of quality coaching has to do with getting a
late start on the coach hiring season last February. By the time they hired
Haley, all of the quality assistants had found new homes, so they were left
with Arizona scraps and people who couldn't find a job elsewhere in the
league. I think we have both a new OC and DC next year....and with any
luck, their names will be Romeo Crennel and Charlie Weis.
---------------------
sk: I'll agree that we were "late to the party" on coaches. It definitely screwed us this season. I think firing Gailey when we did was a mistake, but a justifiable one. If the HC and OC don't see eye to eye, its best to pull the plug and move on ASAFP. Having said that, after seeing Gailey make the proverbial chicken salad out of chicken sh*t last year, I think Gailey would have been worth two more wins at this point -- I believe we beat oakland here, and we beat Dallas here, with Gailey calling things. On the other hand, I think Haley's playcalling stole us at least one game we wouldn't have won (Pittsburgh) with Gailey at the helm, and it kept us in another one (Baltimore) that Gailey would have lost 37-14. So its basically a wash, not much difference between 3-9 and 4-8, except three spots in the draft.
On defense, I'm ok with the overall scheme, and clearly Pendergast has at least brought back somewhat of an attack mentality to the front seven (especially with Hali), but there's still too many lapses of fundamentals. Quite honestly, I agree with your pegging Crennel, and my question at this point is, why are we not bringing him in in the Sherm Lewis "consultant" role at this point for the final four games? He's not doing anything other than collecting his severance. I know he had knee surgery and that's why he didn't want to do the job in March, but why not now? You mean you can't stick him up in the box and let him oversee things and add some insight?
(I'd say the same thing regarding Weis ... only I don't think Weis is coming here. Gut feeling. But if Weis is who you want, again, why not "invite him in for a look"? That's what Lamar did with some former GM known as Carl Peterson 22 years ago, that seemed to go well ...)
Special teams, there's not much you can b*tch about. Steve Hoffman is definitely the MVP of this coaching staff. Coverage has gone from atrocious to respectable, especially on kickoffs. Charles has done a good job returning kicks. Succup is automatic. Dusty C is probably the third best punter in the division ... and the conference. No shame in being behind lechler and Scifres. No need to change anything there.
This team is better in many ways than it was last year at this time. The defense as a whole is better, but certain positions (S, ILB) are worse. The offense is stagnant -- its better at QB, its far worse at RB (can't hope for a LJ recovery anymore and Charles is NOT the answer), and about the same on OL. The special teams are vastly improved. Its a rebuild. I get that. The key now is to draft well, get some quality assistants to coach these guys up, and let an easier schedule (trading the NFC East for NFC West, drawing two last place teams in the non-set opponents) hopefully guide you to the fringes of wildcard contention (aka 5-7, 6-6 entering December).
The frustrating thing is, that's where we'd be had we held on against oakland and Dallas, 5-7, 2 games out, with at least a faint flicker of hope considering we'd be facing two winnable home games up next.
---------------------
gg: Well, it sounds like you are coming down from the ledge....at least a little
bit. As the great Wayne Allyn Root used to say, you are never as bad as you
think you are and never as good as you think you are. Overall, things are
better than they were 12 months ago. Pioli has now had 75% of a season to
view all of the players and coaches. It's time to continue to make changes
in the off season and get this team where it needs to be by 2011.
No comments:
Post a Comment