Vermiel Retires...

[GrantDawg]

every coach deserves their own thread, and Dick deserves it more than others. Great career.

[st.cronin]

He appears to be one of the nicest people in professional sports. He also seems to be exactly the sort of guy who will thoroughly enjoy his retirement.

[Axxon]

He appears to be one of the nicest people in professional sports. He also seems to be exactly the sort of guy who will thoroughly enjoy his retirement.

Agreed.

I'm already looking forward to his next unretirement myself.

[MizzouRah]

I wish the Rams wouldn't have given in to Martz and basically push Vermeil out. What a class act he is. Just watching his press conference on the NFL Network made me want to cry right along with him. He is great for the game and will be missed.

FWIW, I think the Chiefs would have done some damage in the playoffs. Oh well...

[TroyF]

I wish the Rams wouldn't have given in to Martz and basically push Vermeil out. What a class act he is. Just watching his press conference on the NFL Network made me want to cry right along with him. He is great for the game and will be missed.

FWIW, I think the Chiefs would have done some damage in the playoffs. Oh well...


I doubt it. They were a very poor road team and I'm not sure they could have went to either first round site and pulled off a win, much less a second.

Still, it's to sad to see him go. The Larry Johnson move is panning out now, but if they would have went after defensive help in the 2003 draft instead of him they may have won a title. They decided to throw the entire blame on the defense on Robinson and didn't look at the obvious. . . their players were horrible.

By the time they spent money and draft picks to fix that problem, the offense had aged. (not to mention they'd never grabbed a reliable WR during this whole process either) I'd have loved to have seen him get another chance at a title. Whatever he does, I wish him well. (disclaimer here, if he goes the Raiders all bets with the wish him well stuff are off)

[MrBug708]

Second greatest UCLA football coach. I wouldnt mind seeing him in some sort of role for the University. He still remains a big donor

[MizzouRah]

I doubt it. They were a very poor road team and I'm not sure they could have went to either first round site and pulled off a win, much less a second.

Still, it's to sad to see him go. The Larry Johnson move is panning out now, but if they would have went after defensive help in the 2003 draft instead of him they may have won a title. They decided to throw the entire blame on the defense on Robinson and didn't look at the obvious. . . their players were horrible.

By the time they spent money and draft picks to fix that problem, the offense had aged. (not to mention they'd never grabbed a reliable WR during this whole process either) I'd have loved to have seen him get another chance at a title. Whatever he does, I wish him well. (disclaimer here, if he goes the Raiders all bets with the wish him well stuff are off)
<TABLE cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=2 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Sep 11 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week1)</TD><TD align=left>N.Y. Jets (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/NYJ)</TD><TD align=left>Won 27-7 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20050911_NYJ@KC)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Sep 18 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week2)</TD><TD align=left>@Oakland (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/OAK)</TD><TD align=left>Won 23-17 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20050918_KC@OAK)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Sep 26 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week3)</TD><TD align=left>@Denver (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/DEN)</TD><TD align=left>Lost 10-30 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20050926_KC@DEN)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Oct 2 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week4)</TD><TD align=left>Philadelphia (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/PHI)</TD><TD align=left>Lost 31-37 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051002_PHI@KC)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Week 5</TD><TD align=left>BYE</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Oct 16 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week6)</TD><TD align=left>Washington (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/WAS)</TD><TD align=left>Won 28-21 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051016_WAS@KC)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Oct 21 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week7)</TD><TD align=left>@Miami (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/MIA)</TD><TD align=left>Won 30-20 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051021_KC@MIA)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Oct 30 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week8)</TD><TD align=left>@San Diego (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/SD)</TD><TD align=left>Lost 20-28 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051030_KC@SD)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Nov 6 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week9)</TD><TD align=left>Oakland (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/OAK)</TD><TD align=left>Won 27-23 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051106_OAK@KC)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Nov 13 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week10)</TD><TD align=left>@Buffalo (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/BUF)</TD><TD align=left>Lost 3-14 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051113_KC@BUF)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Nov 20 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week11)</TD><TD align=left>@Houston (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/HOU)</TD><TD align=left>Won 45-17 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051120_KC@HOU)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Nov 27 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week12)</TD><TD align=left>New England (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/NE)</TD><TD align=left>Won 26-16 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051127_NE@KC)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Dec 4 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week13)</TD><TD align=left>Denver (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/DEN)</TD><TD align=left>Won 31-27 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051204_DEN@KC)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Dec 11 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week14)</TD><TD align=left>@Dallas (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/DAL)</TD><TD align=left>Lost 28-31 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051211_KC@DAL)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Dec 17 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week15)</TD><TD align=left>@N.Y. Giants (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/NYG)</TD><TD align=left>Lost 17-27 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051217_KC@NYG)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Dec 24 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week16)</TD><TD align=left>San Diego (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/SD)</TD><TD align=left>Won 20-7 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20051224_SD@KC)</TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD align=left> </TD><TD></TD></TR><TR class=bg2 vAlign=center align=right height=17><TD align=left>Jan 1 (http://www.nfl.com/scores/2005/week17)</TD><TD align=left>Cincinnati (http://www.nfl.com/teams/news/CIN)</TD><TD align=left>Won 37-3 (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20060101_CIN@KC)</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Ok, 3-5 on the road isn't great.. but they were still a VERY good team and I would have liked to watched them in the playoffs. Like Portis said yesterday, everyone is 0-0 now and anything can happen in the playoffs.

I think Eddie Kennison has a superb year though and I can't believe how well he has turned into a top receiver under Vermeil, and he traded him when he was at St. Louis.

[kcchief19]

I doubt it. They were a very poor road team and I'm not sure they could have went to either first round site and pulled off a win, much less a second. 3-5 wasn't great, but it was a brutal road schedule. There were only two gimmes and they did indeed blow one of those (Buffalo). They would have beaten Dallas had Larry Johnson not whiffed on a block. After that, the Chiefs started pulling Johnson on every obvious passing down. I think they could have certainly gone on the road and won in Cincinnati, but Indianapolis would have been tough. Don't let the box score fool you -- the Chiefs manhandled the Bengals starters just as much if not more so than they mangled the backups.
Still, it's to sad to see him go. The Larry Johnson move is panning out now, but if they would have went after defensive help in the 2003 draft instead of him they may have won a title. They decided to throw the entire blame on the defense on Robinson and didn't look at the obvious. . . their players were horrible.

By the time they spent money and draft picks to fix that problem, the offense had aged. (not to mention they'd never grabbed a reliable WR during this whole process either) I'd have loved to have seen him get another chance at a title. Whatever he does, I wish him well. (disclaimer here, if he goes the Raiders all bets with the wish him well stuff are off)Interestingly, Carl Peterson selected Johnson over the express discontent of Vermeil. Vermeil wanted to draft a defensive player -- I think he was pushing for Tyler Brayton. I don't think that one defensive player in the 2003 draft would have made a significant difference in 2003 and it certainly wouldn't have made a difference last year. Without Larry Johnson, the Chiefs season this year would have been over when Priest Holmes went down.

I agree that Carl Peterson didn't do enough fast enough to address the defense. But this team should have made the playoffs. They didn't, and the fault for that largely rests with Vermeil. He did a poor job of game coaching and management this year.

I think the future is a mixed bag. Trent Green has one or two years left in him, then you need a new franchise QB. You need to make nice with Larry Johnson. You need a new WR to complement Samie Parker -- this guy looked really good the last few games of the season. I'm bullish on the defense. Jared Allen is a gem, Derrick Johnson will be just fine and the secondary is improving. The biggest question mark is the offensive line. Willie Roaf and Will Shields won't be easy to replace. I'm much more comfortable with replacing Shields -- Peterson has proven to be very successful in acquiring interior linemen. Tackle is another story. John Tait was always in over his head at left tackle, and really the only successful left tackles the Chiefs have had were inherited (John Alt) and a trade (Roaf).

[QuikSand]

Whether it's a function of the line personnel, or Vermeil, or the coordinator, or soemthing else... I have a boatload of respect for any team that gets to the point where you wonder whether it's "just the system" that generates such great performances. Priest Holmes for a few years, Derrick Blaylock from time to time, and now Larry Johnson -- all these guys are pretty much studs when toting it for the Chiefs. (We probably said something along these lines a few years ago when Marshall Faulk got dinged and the Rams brought in the Lamar Gordons and Trung Canidates of the world who also played well in that offense)

So -- in my mind, Vermeil presided over some pretty impressive changes on his teams since his long time off... one title is great, but it seems to me he is/was a major difference-maker, other shortcomings in overall team balance aside.

On a separate note...

Derrick Johnson will be just fine...

This sounds very far removed from the pretty lofty things we were saying/hearing about him back last spring, around and after the draft.

I confess I don't follow the Chiefs too closely -- is this basically what has happened with him? The NFL equivalent of the FOF guy dropping from 35/75 to 35/66 after the first season is underway?

Just curious...

[panerd]

3-5 wasn't great, but it was a brutal road schedule. There were only two gimmes and they did indeed blow one of those (Buffalo). They would have beaten Dallas had Larry Johnson not whiffed on a block. After that, the Chiefs started pulling Johnson on every obvious passing down. I think they could have certainly gone on the road and won in Cincinnati, but Indianapolis would have been tough. Don't let the box score fool you -- the Chiefs manhandled the Bengals starters just as much if not more so than they mangled the backups.


LOL. I was at the game, when did Palmer come out when the score was 10-3? Too bad they can't go on the road and win in Cincinnati, due to the fact that they couldn't go on the road and win in Dallas, or San Diego, or Buffalo, or New York. The complete pass that every other team gets that pulled it's starters (ie. Denver, Seattle, Indy, New England) and the disrespect Cinci gets for pulling theirs is mind boggling. The Chiefs aren't in the playoffs because they were not one of the top 6 teams in the AFC.

[kcchief19]

So -- in my mind, Vermeil presided over some pretty impressive changes on his teams since his long time off... one title is great, but it seems to me he is/was a major difference-maker, other shortcomings in overall team balance aside.My criticism of Vermeil may be indicative of the minute details a local fan perceives versus national reputation. Vermeil was clearly well liked here, but I think he was perceived locally as having nothing to do with the success of the offense, with the praising being lauded on Al Saunders. There are critics close to the team who have alleged that Vermeil is often slow on the uptake during games and that he is often overruled his coordinators during games and more often than not been on the wrong side of calls. I don't know if that is true or fair. He could certainly been an effective manager as a coach and his history of success suggests to me he certainly deserves some benefit of the doubt.
This sounds very far removed from the pretty lofty things we were saying/hearing about him back last spring, around and after the draft.

I confess I don't follow the Chiefs too closely -- is this basically what has happened with him? The NFL equivalent of the FOF guy dropping from 35/75 to 35/66 after the first season is underway?

Just curious...I think my praise came across as less hearty than intended. Johnson had a pretty darn good year for a rookie linebacker -- he was in on almost 100 tackles either solor or assisted, and he almost twice as many tackles as Shawne Merriman who seems to have gotten more ink.

I think there are a few factors to consider with Johnson. First, Vermeil doesn't like putting rookies into positions where they need to make plays -- witness the Larry Johnson and diaper comments and playing him behind Derrick Blaylock. Despite being a starter, he was sheltered somewhat in that they didn't take the reins off of him and let him do what he wants, ala a Derrick Thomas. He also rarely blitzed the QB, since Cunningham's system relied more on Johnson defending the run and blitzing with safeties. That kept his sack total down. But even discounting that, I think Johnson's presence helped boost Jared Allen's sack total since Allen rarely gets double teamed.

The sophomore year is typically the year to watch Chiefs rookies blossom. I would be very surprised in Johnson doesn't have a break out year next year. I think he showed some evidence of a rookie let down at the end of the season -- his production slowed down right around the time he hit 12 preseason and regular season games.

[kcchief19]

LOL. I was at the game, when did Palmer come out when the score was 10-3? Too bad they can't go on the road and win in Cincinnati, due to the fact that they couldn't go on the road and win in Dallas, or San Diego, or Buffalo, or New York. The complete pass that every other team gets that pulled it's starters (ie. Denver, Seattle, Indy, New England) and the disrespect Cinci gets for pulling theirs is mind boggling. The Chiefs aren't in the playoffs because they were not one of the top 6 teams in the AFC.Well, Palmer came out when it was 6-3, but he was the only one -- the Johnsons and the defense stayed in much longer. Rudi Johnson ran 10 times for 18 yards -- not exactly playoff caliber. And as for pulling the starters, Dee freakin' Brown scored a touchdown.

I think it's oversimplifying to say the Chiefs aren't in the playoffs because they are not one of the top 6 teams in the AFC. No duh -- they finished seventh. But this team was one or two plays from another one or two, and they have plenty of credentials you can point to on the flip side -- dominating wins against New England, San Diego and Cincinnati.

[st.cronin]

If the Chiefs played in the NFC, they'd be in the playoffs with a first round bye.

[panerd]

Well, Palmer came out when it was 6-3, but he was the only one -- the Johnsons and the defense stayed in much longer. Rudi Johnson ran 10 times for 18 yards -- not exactly playoff caliber. And as for pulling the starters, Dee freakin' Brown scored a touchdown.

I think it's oversimplifying to say the Chiefs aren't in the playoffs because they are not one of the top 6 teams in the AFC. No duh -- they finished seventh. But this team was one or two plays from another one or two, and they have plenty of credentials you can point to on the flip side -- dominating wins against New England, San Diego and Cincinnati.

Pulling Palmer was a huge event, Kitna couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. Did you see his interceptions? He would throw balls 2-3 feet over wide open receivers head's! He was just downright awful yesterday. I will give the Chiefs credit for the win and think they probably would have beat the Bengal starters yesterday, but the fact is the by halftime it was obvious that Cinci had given up and had nothing to play for while the Chiefs obviously did.

I just don't get why teams like Denver get free passes for meaningless games, but when Cinci decides to fold it in it somehow strongly effects their chances to win a future playoff game. (i.e. KC would beat them, Pittsburgh is going to kill them, etc) Wait and see. I think a different team will be showing up in Cinci next Sunday.

[MizzouRah]

I don't think Pittsburgh will beat the Bengals. I want to see one of those classic Cowher disgusted looks.

[kcchief19]

I just don't get why teams like Denver get free passes for meaningless games, but when Cinci decides to fold it in it somehow strongly effects their chances to win a future playoff game. (i.e. KC would beat them, Pittsburgh is going to kill them, etc) Wait and see. I think a different team will be showing up in Cinci next Sunday.I think primarily because Cincinnati professed all week that they wanted to win and all the stories in the media and during the broadcast was that Lewis put the stick to them to come out with a strong effort and build momentum for the playoffs and they come out and got manhandled. Other than Palmer, the Bengals played the first half with both first team units and they were roughed up. If the Bengals had played tough with the Chiefs in the first half and then got steamrolled with the backups in during the second half, they would have gotten a free pass. That didn't happen.

Cincinnati is a great story and an up-and-coming team, but like all up-and-coming teams there will be doubters until they prove themselves. The impression the rest of the league has of Cincy right now is that they are not ready for primetime. That could very well be proven wrong next week.

I do think Cincinnati was unfortunate to get the broom handle end of Vermeil's retirement decision. I don't think there is any doubt that the players and coaching staff decided they were going to win for Vermeil and put the pedal to the floor and didn't let up.

Sadly, if they had played with that same fire at home against Philadelphia or on the road at Buffalo, he'd still be coaching.

[cthomer5000]

I don't think Pittsburgh will beat the Bengals. I want to see one of those classic Cowher disgusted looks.
I see Pittsburgh running up and down the field. Pittsburgh winning is the outcome I'm most confident about. We'll see!

[TroyF]

Please spare me the details of the Chiefs brutal road schedule. They won three road games this year. One was a solid win at Miami. The other two came against teams who won six games all year (and if they don't get a couple of breaks in that Raider game, they'd have lost it, anyone remember that ridiculous offensive PI on Moss?)

Then they go on the road for two games to define their season. Win one of the two, they are probably in. They proceed to blow two fourth quarter leads against Dallas (I hear about that missed block and how it killed them, and it DID kill them, but they gave up 445 yards to the Cowboys offense, that may have had an impact in that game as well) They gave up over 400 yards to the Giants the following week.

It was set up for them. And they choked. I don't know any nice way to say it. I have zero confidence they'd have went to either Cincy or NE and came away with a win. Maybe I'm wrong, though I'd think the fact they didn't pull off a single important road win in the final 2 months of the season lends at least a little big of credibility to my claim.

kcchief,

I couldn't disagree more about the Chiefs draft in 2003. They had no third round pick that year. They ended up spending exactly one pick in the top four rounds to shore up a defense that was not only bad, they may have been one of the worst all time. (and I'm not trying to put a play on words here. Over the last eight games of the 2003 season, opposing teams AVERAGED over 7 yards per first down play. That's historically bad.

For some unknown reason they decided a backup running back was more critical to the team than adding as much defensive help as they could find. The result was expected. The top offense in the league wasted by a defense that was beyond horrible.

And you wouldn't be anywhere without LJ? No, you wouldn't be anywhere without that offensive line. As QS said above, the RB is probably the least important cog in that KC arsenal. Holmes, Blaylock, Richardson, LJ. . . they can replace those guys at will. (and don't get me wrong here, I think LJ is an absolute stud, I don't think it's just the system, but I think they needed a stud defensive player more than they needed a stud RB. . . And still do.)

FWIW, I stil love Johnson . I think he's going to be an amazing player.

[TroyF]

Pulling Palmer was a huge event, Kitna couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. Did you see his interceptions? He would throw balls 2-3 feet over wide open receivers head's! He was just downright awful yesterday. I will give the Chiefs credit for the win and think they probably would have beat the Bengal starters yesterday, but the fact is the by halftime it was obvious that Cinci had given up and had nothing to play for while the Chiefs obviously did.

I just don't get why teams like Denver get free passes for meaningless games, but when Cinci decides to fold it in it somehow strongly effects their chances to win a future playoff game. (i.e. KC would beat them, Pittsburgh is going to kill them, etc) Wait and see. I think a different team will be showing up in Cinci next Sunday.


Right or wrong, it's the belief that teams like Denver, NE, and Indy are all "veteran" teams. They've all been in the playoffs before.

That loss to Buffalo showed how young the Bengals are. They could have been playing for a bye in round one and instead are going to face a pretty hot Steeler team.

I think the Bengals would have beat the Chiefs and I think they'll beat the Steelers, but that was not the way you want to head into the playoffs with a young roster. Turning it on/off isn't easy at this time of year for the young guys.

[scooper]

Palmer was really the only starter pulled, but he was not the only starter sitting. There were starters who were knicked up who didn't play at all, but would have had they needed this game. Most notably, Deltha O'neal and Levi Jones-a pro bowler and a pro bowl alternate. Both could have played.

Cincy's lineup was shuffled across the board. This isn't an excuse. They can't stop the run when at full strength and probably would have lost this emotional KC game on the road anyway, but at full strength it would not have been a blowout.

[stevew]

Please spare me the details of the Chiefs brutal road schedule. They won three road games this year. One was a solid win at Miami. The other two came against teams who won six games all year (and if they don't get a couple of breaks in that Raider game, they'd have lost it, anyone remember that ridiculous offensive PI on Moss?)

Then they go on the road for two games to define their season. Win one of the two, they are probably in. They proceed to blow two fourth quarter leads against Dallas (I hear about that missed block and how it killed them, and it DID kill them, but they gave up 445 yards to the Cowboys offense, that may have had an impact in that game as well) They gave up over 400 yards to the Giants the following week.

It was set up for them. And they choked. I don't know any nice way to say it. I have zero confidence they'd have went to either Cincy or NE and came away with a win. Maybe I'm wrong, though I'd think the fact they didn't pull off a single important road win in the final 2 months of the season lends at least a little big of credibility to my claim.

kcchief,

I couldn't disagree more about the Chiefs draft in 2003. They had no third round pick that year. They ended up spending exactly one pick in the top four rounds to shore up a defense that was not only bad, they may have been one of the worst all time. (and I'm not trying to put a play on words here. Over the last eight games of the 2003 season, opposing teams AVERAGED over 7 yards per first down play. That's historically bad.

For some unknown reason they decided a backup running back was more critical to the team than adding as much defensive help as they could find. The result was expected. The top offense in the league wasted by a defense that was beyond horrible.

And you wouldn't be anywhere without LJ? No, you wouldn't be anywhere without that offensive line. As QS said above, the RB is probably the least important cog in that KC arsenal. Holmes, Blaylock, Richardson, LJ. . . they can replace those guys at will. (and don't get me wrong here, I think LJ is an absolute stud, I don't think it's just the system, but I think they needed a stud defensive player more than they needed a stud RB. . . And still do.)

FWIW, I stil love Johnson . I think he's going to be an amazing player.

I'm pretty sure their 2003 pick was spent on Troy Polamalu(by virtue of a steelers trade up). Something tells me he would have been a pretty good factor to have for their defense.

[TroyF]

I'm pretty sure their 2003 pick was spent on Troy Polamalu(by virtue of a steelers trade up). Something tells me he would have been a pretty good factor to have for their defense.


Steve,

You and I would have been an upgrade to their defense. :)

kc says it was Peterson who made the decision and that's what I've heard as well. And God was it horrible. Greg Robinson isn't a top 5 defensive coordinater, not even close. But the guy won 2 Super Bowls. He's not and never was one of the top 5 worst DC's in the game. I'm not sure anything has ever amazed me more in sports than KC deciding a DC switch was going to solve their defensive problems after that season.

Just a mind boggling, stupid decision that (IMO) cost the Chiefs a spot in at least one, if not two Super Bowls.