The Pioli Watch Thread

[cardken]

I'm hijacking the thread starter to use for an "updates" area. Sorry cardken. Here are a few recent updates:

Last updated 1/13/09 2:30pm CDT (final update)

Originally Posted by Basileus777

New England Patriots vice president of player personnel Scott Pioli has agreed to become head of football operations for the Kansas City Chiefs, two NFL sources confirmed to ESPN's Michael Smith.
The vice president for player personnel at New England, Pioli, 43, is close to Patriots coach Bill Belichick and has been with the Patriots for nine years. Pioli would find a warm welcome in Kansas City. At the last Chiefs' home game, shortly after the embattled Carl Peterson resigned after 20 years as president, general manager and CEO, several signs were spotted in the crowd proclaiming, "We want Pioli." Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3830515

[JimNasium]

Originally Posted by Ultra Peanut

Maybe if you've got prosopagnosia.

I'll admit it, I had to look it up.

[FringeNC]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

There's your reason. We're one of those.

This roster has a serious lack of talent.

I have a feeling some of those players with think aren't very good will turn out to be pretty darn good if Pioli is all he's cracked up to be.

[Ultra Peanut]

Originally Posted by HemiEd

Mikey23456789 is convinced you are another GoChiefs alias, and your timing was kind of conspicuous.

Mikey23456789 is also ****ing insane, so

[penguinz]

Originally Posted by Micjones

I don't think it has to be a rookie either, but a Matthew Stafford would be nice.

Sanchez would be better.

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by penguinz

Sanchez would be better.

I'm not convinced.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by FringeNC

I have a feeling some of those players with think aren't very good will turn out to be pretty darn good if Pioli is all he's cracked up to be.

If Pioli hires a head coach who is all he is cracked up to be...maybe...

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

This roster has a serious lack of talent.

That's where the disagreement will lie. I think the problem is only at a few positions, and I believe most of it can be addressed in one offseason. I also think the Chiefs were a 7- or 8-win team coached to 2-win results, primarily on defense. Which is why Herm should be gone, although I'm still not convinced he is. Either way, I'm thinking (or maybe just hoping) people will see more than they expect out of several players in 2009, specifically because so much of the roster is so young. I see growing or developing talent where other people see a lack.

Find a starting MLB, find a weak-side pass rusher, and I think the defense goes up 20 spots, particularly if Gunther is out the door. There's talent at the skill positions on offense, and while they need to settle the starting QB question, I think the most important thing is to get back to as dominant an offensive line as they can, regardless of what kind of system they end up running in '09.

In the end, I just hope we see aggressive football. On both sides of the ball. I'm sick of zone defense (which we've gotten for a decade, basically) and I'm sick of run-first neanderthal ball.

[raybec 4]

Originally Posted by FringeNC

I think he's better suited for some top PR job at NFL headquarters. Or perhaps a college HC, but you'd have to pick his coordinators for him.

You would also have to force him to let his coordinators do their jobs. I'm not defending Gunn but if he wasn't forced to run the cover who it may have been better this year.

[Ultra Peanut]

I think the problem is only at a few positions

A few handfuls, maybe.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by Ultra Peanut

A few handfuls, maybe.

Oh, there's so many directions to take that comment.

[beach tribe]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

That's where the disagreement will lie. I think the problem is only at a few positions, and I believe most of it can be addressed in one offseason. I also think the Chiefs were a 7- or 8-win team coached to 2-win results, primarily on defense. Which is why Herm should be gone, although I'm still not convinced he is. Either way, I'm thinking (or maybe just hoping) people will see more than they expect out of several players in 2009, specifically because so much of the roster is so young. I see growing or developing talent where other people see a lack.

Find a starting MLB, find a weak-side pass rusher, and I think the defense goes up 20 spots, particularly if Gunther is out the door. There's talent at the skill positions on offense, and while they need to settle the starting QB question, I think the most important thing is to get back to as dominant an offensive line as they can, regardless of what kind of system they end up running in '09.


In the end, I just hope we see aggressive football. On both sides of the ball. I'm sick of zone defense (which we've gotten for a decade, basically) and I'm sick of run-first neanderthal ball.

I agree. I believe that a few impact players at key positions will turn this Defense around big time. A pass rush, and a MLB will elevate everyone else on the field IMO.

[BossChief]

I figure Ill get "ripped a new Ehole" by my opinion here but oh well, Alot of the national media agrees with my opinions so whos right?

First thing that happpened before Herm even took over was he lost his best olineman in Roaf.....his first game he lost his starting QB in Trent....his luck didnt get better through the last two years.

I just thought that the consensus before the year started was that the measuring stick for our team was improvement throughout the year and not wins and losses.

We played the 3rd toughest schedule in the NFL (post season opponents records) and only let four games get out of our grasp...

We lost 8 games by a TD or less with a team that is chalk full of the most rookies in NFL history. 10 games lost by 10 points or less.

Herm took the tough road to building a great team and has a good nucleus in place.

Give us Jared (the equivelant to the draft picks DV and CP traded away for retired vets during the DV era, before Herm arrived, when we were trying to trade away the future for one last run for Lamar) and spend half of the 30 Mill we have to spend and we surely would have won alot more games and it wouldnt look as bad for Herms tenure and he might be in his second playoff appearence in three years here.

If we had our par defense of last year (before CP traded away our best player JA and most of our depth) we would be in the playoffs right now with the offensive output weve gotten out of our kids

He inherited alot of ancient talent (Trent, Roaf, Shields, Kennison, TRich, Wiegman, Holmes, Hicks) when he took the job and the youth either sucked (Sims, Siavii, Bartee, Warfield, Parker, Wilson) or hadnt hit the field (Wilkerson, Battle, Fox) What was he supposed to do, go to the superbowl with a team of retirees and never beens?

Bowe
Tank
Bradley
Carr
Flowers
Page
Pollard
Hali
Cottam
Dorsey
Charles
Thigpen
Cox

these are players that are coming along or have arrived and were brought in by Herms scouting

Tony G
Waters

These are the veterans we still have and they both made the pro bowl

I think Herm has laid a good foundation to a championship football team here and has been going with the 4 year plan and is due an offseason of a couple "premier free agents" as well as another fruitful draft, in which we would be very competitive next year.

I Feel that Herm has bought the best groceries, cooked the meal, and now someone else will be able to come in let it cool and eat it, because the foundation is already laid and he will have a great GM in place that will be able to get the few missing pieces we need to get back where we want.

Give us a Peppers and a Vilma and a good draft and boom we are back in the thick of things

proceed with slamming me, but consider the fact I may be more right than many here...

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

That's where the disagreement will lie. I think the problem is only at a few positions, and I believe most of it can be addressed in one offseason. I also think the Chiefs were a 7- or 8-win team coached to 2-win results, primarily on defense. Which is why Herm should be gone, although I'm still not convinced he is. Either way, I'm thinking (or maybe just hoping) people will see more than they expect out of several players in 2009, specifically because so much of the roster is so young. I see growing or developing talent where other people see a lack.

Find a starting MLB, find a weak-side pass rusher, and I think the defense goes up 20 spots, particularly if Gunther is out the door. There's talent at the skill positions on offense, and while they need to settle the starting QB question, I think the most important thing is to get back to as dominant an offensive line as they can, regardless of what kind of system they end up running in '09.

In the end, I just hope we see aggressive football. On both sides of the ball. I'm sick of zone defense (which we've gotten for a decade, basically) and I'm sick of run-first neanderthal ball.

As a fan, I hope you're right.

What I see:
1. A good back-up QB.
2. 1 WR. Nothing beyond this.
3. Decent RB, assuming LJ returns. I heard we're deep here.
4. An aging but still very good TE, who might not return.
5. Albert and Waters on the O-line. Not much else.
6. Nothing on the D-line. I'm still very hopeful about Dorsey, though.
7. Nothing at LB. DJ has proved he is average. There's nothing else.
8. Average at best at the safety position.
9. CB is a strength, but I'm not sold on Carr as a starter.
10. P, no problem.
11. K might be able to upgrade.

Serious lack of talent, IMO. The most hopeful players to me are Albert and Flowers. They look to have "star" potential.

[DeezNutz]

Interesting juxtaposition of posts.

[Archie Bunker]

Good luck BossChief