Lets Draft

Discussion in 'Kansas City Chiefs' started by stoeknee, Jan 28, 2008.

  1. stoeknee

    stoeknee Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    0
    Carl Peterson HAS done a good job. Unfortunately, a GM has to do a great job in order for his team to win a championship, and Carl has obviously fallen short of that. Anybody who thinks Carl has done a horrible job clearly did NOT follow the Chiefs at all during the 70's and 80's. If they had, they would remember the remarkable turnaround the franchise made because of Carl. Carl does deserve credit for making what had become the worst franchise in the NFL one of the best. The Chiefs were one of the best teams in the NFL during the 90's, numbers don't lie. Arrowhead became the best place in the world to see a football game because of Carl. There are some things Carl does VERY well, unfortunately, drafting isn't necessarily one of them and that has ultimately killed the team. Herm DOES draft well. Herm is smart enough to know that the player's ability to play football is more important that their athleticism. I can't even count how many players who entered the NFL who were exceptional athletes but still ended up as complete busts because they just weren't good FOOTBALL players. I'll take an average athlete who was a great player in college over a great athlete who was just an average player in college. Walter Payton and Jerry Rice were average athletes, but they were great players even though they were not the biggest, strongest, or fastest. I'm willing to give Herm and Clark a chance to rebuild the team. They both inherited a complete mess that was left over from the unbelievably bad drafting that occured while Vermeil was here. I think Carl will be gone soon enough. A team that has more holes than solid spots takes more than one or two years to rebuild. Give it some time
     
  2. Rupert

    Rupert The Long Wind

    Messages:
    9,749
    Likes Received:
    2,778
    I don't think Herm drafts that well. He has a particular style of player in mind for most positions, and he reaches now and then to get his kind of guy. I'm not going to run through his draft history to demonstrate, but let me leave it at the fact it's not a New England-style player acquisition strategy.

    Need an example, just take a look at what the Jets had to do when herm left. They had to turn the whole thing over, and they're not done rebuilding. Herm believes in a throwback approach. He likes throwback players. And he values character a little too highly, in other words he'll take a solid citizen who needs a little work and might never be a star over a star who needs to baby sat every now and then.

    Herm's way will make you competitive, but you'll struggle to stay there. He's no Denny Green or Marty Schottenheimer. Check out his tenure with the Jets for reference. Up, down, up down. In and out of the playoffs, up down. You want to throw down the injury gauntlet? Fine, but he drafted and acquired a lot of those players that couldn't stay healthy for him.
     
  3. stoeknee

    stoeknee Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    0
    Still, here at the Super Bowl, watching the New England Patriots trying to complete the first 19-0 season in NFL history, I thought it might be fun to compare what the New England Patriots have done this decade vs. what the Kansas City Chiefs have done. It seems quite probable that since this is the Patriots' fourth Super Bowl so far in the 00s while the Chiefs have been to -- hold on, let me do some research here, OK, got it -- none, that the Patriots have done things a lot better than the Chiefs.

    But what exactly have they done better? The Chiefs have had higher draft picks for the most part. They have been at least as active on the free-agent market, probably more so. What have the Patriots done better? I think it comes down to five major things.

    No. 1: Patriots got a franchise quarterback; Chiefs did not.

    There is a lot of talk about how the Patriots got lucky when they snagged Tom Brady in the sixth round of the 2000 draft. Well, sure, they did get lucky. The Patriots thought so little of Brady going into the 2001 season, that they spent good money that off-season on Damon Huard as backup to then starter Drew Bledsoe. The rest -- Brady beat out Huard for the backup role, Bledsoe got hurt, Brady led the team to the Super Bowl victory -- is history. But you know the old line about how good people tend to get lucky. Well the Patriots have drafted four quarterbacks this decade. That improves the odds of finding one.

    The Chiefs, meanwhile, did not even try to get lucky. They drafted one quarterback this entire decade -- third-round pick Brodie Croyle. That's it. Truth is, they were content to trade a first-round pick for a 31-year-old Trent Green and grow old with him. Which is exactly what happened.

    No. 2: Patriots built a dominating offensive line; Chiefs let one crumble.

    It's fascinating to go back and see just how Bill Belichick and company built this fabulous Patriots team. A whole lot has been made about a few of their showier movies -- like trading for Randy Moss or signing Junior Seau -- but when you look more closely you see that that their big priority was building the infrastructure.

    They took left tackle Matt Light in the second round in 2001, took center Dan Koppen in the fifth round in 2003, grabbed guard Logan Mankins in the first round in 2005 and took right tackle Nick Kaczur in the third round that same year. The first three guys are going to the Pro Bowl, Koppen started 15 games this year, Brady was sacked just 21 times and the Patriots offense scored more points than any team in NFL history. It all works together.

    The Chiefs probably had the best offensive line in football from 2002-2005 -- and, not coincidentally, the highest-scoring offense in football. They had traded for future Hall of Famer Willie Roaf, signed center Casey Wiegmann, and kept convincing Chiefs all-time great Will Shields to come back. But it was, even then, a very old line; the Chiefs had to know that. But they did nothing to replenish the line. This decade the Chiefs have not taken a single offensive lineman on the first day of the draft, which is just incredible. I would argue that this was the biggest reason for the Chiefs fiasco in 2007 -- they let their offensive line decay and rot.

    No. 3: Patriots drafted the right defensive linemen; Chiefs did not.

    Both the Chiefs and Patriots realized the importance of getting talented defensive linemen. The Pats have just been a lot better finding them. New England has three first-round picks on their defensive line -- Ty Warren, Vince Wilfork and Richard Seymour -- and that is where everything starts with this Patriots defense. Wilfork and Seymour have been or are going to the Pro Bowl; Warren has started all but one game the last four seasons.

    The Chiefs also have wanted power defensive linemen, and they have spent high draft picks to get them. But they've mostly missed. They took defensive tackle Ryan Sims with the sixth overall pick in 2002, and that was obviously a disaster. They took defensive tackle Junior Siavii in the second round in 2004, and that pick was ?laffin
     
  4. Rupert

    Rupert The Long Wind

    Messages:
    9,749
    Likes Received:
    2,778
    1: Yep. You possibly have a good QB, franchise? Hmmmm. If he does a Drew Brees off-season workout, maybe. But since he's a feel QB, he might never get the feel. And he'll find it easier to get the feel if #2 is in place.
    2: Yep. Can't say I'm sorry to have seen it crumble. Looking forward to the same thing happening in New England.
    3. Yep. Well, it also has to do with knowing how to scout for your system. And that also requires a system to scout for.