Originally Posted by Sperm Edwards
me, me, me
Itâ€™s not the Chiefsâ€™ players or ownersâ€™ field. Itâ€™s Hermâ€™s. mmm-kay
Translation: write a piece with me as the hero & my predecessor as the goat & Iâ€™ll keep giving you stuff to write about.
Ok, so Vermeil going 10-6 the year before was an abysmal failure b/c there was enough good talent on the other teams that even a 10-6 record didnâ€™t get them into the playoffs. But when the other teams fall apart in the AFC to the point where 9-7 can get you in, that is a resounding success. Itâ€™s not about how good your team is; itâ€™s about how bad other teams are that define oneâ€™s success or failure.
A myth. The Chiefs ran the ball MORE times under Vermeil in 2005 (520) than under Edwards in 2006 (513). All Edwards did was give a higher percentage of carries to one person. It sure paid dividends by the time they were lucky enough to make the playoffs. Everyone knew what was coming up & even a piss-poor run defense like Indyâ€™s was able to stop Larry Johnson like he was William Green II.
What resistance? Only resistance I read about all season was the best TE over the past decade calling him out for only using him as a blocker. On defense? There was no resistance. Edwards made it up. What defense would be resistant to change after being among the leagueâ€™s worst for the past bunch of years.
Even the alleged drastic improvement on defense was a bit of a myth.
Teams passed more against the Vermeil Chiefs b/c their offense was so proficient that they scored so much. Only way for a team to keep in the game was to pass. A team with a bad run defense & a mediocre offense will generally give up fewer total yards. But when the Chiefs stopped scoring, teams were content with running the ball more since passing so much was no longer a necessity. Edwards takes this to mean the defense went from abysmal to very good.
Chiefsâ€™ 2005 rush defense: 2nd-fewest attempts, 7th-fewest yards, 4.10 ypc
Chiefsâ€™ 2006 rush defense: 21st in rush attempts, 18th in rush yds, 4.18 ypc
And for all the keeping of big plays in check,
Chiefsâ€™ 2005 pass defense: 6.92 ypa
Chiefsâ€™ 2006 pass defense: 6.96 ypa
The only real difference was that teams attempted more passes in â€™05 to keep up with their juggernaut offense:
Chiefs 2005: 558 pass attempts (27th fewest/6th most)
Chiefs 2006: 506 pass attempts (12th fewest)
What did all this translate to?
The 2006 Chiefs gave up 10 fewer points than the 2005 Chiefs (0.6ppg). If thatâ€™s an improvement, itâ€™s on paper only.
The Raidersâ€™ offense (at least early-on) was MUCH better in 2005.
The Broncosâ€™ offense was MUCH better in 2005. Added benefit to KC in 2006 of playing vs Cutler in his first NFL start.
The Jaguars played their 3rd-string QB against KC in 2006 vs KC
The Seahawks were without BOTH Hasselbeck AND Alexander in 2006 vs KC
Gave up 23 pts to a rookie QB in Matt Leinart in his first NFL start.
Pittsburgh scored 33 pts in the 3 prior games to the KC game. Vs Herm? 45 pts.
Gave up 31 pts to the Cleveland Browns.
Oh yeah, they were great.
They were aging at OT & OG. Herm was so keenly aware of this that they didnâ€™t address it in the most OL-rich draft in memory. His idea of addressing it was to add that high-performing youngster Kyle Turley to the mix & get younger in the secondary by giving a 32 year-old CB a giant contract.
Herm has never taken the hit; he blamed others for it as usual. Always calling his gameplan a sound one & that the players didnâ€™t execute well.
As far as listening quietly in the playoffs, he did nothing of the sort. What he did was babble on with his â€œI told you soâ€?â€™s when Chicago & Indy went to the superbowl with cover-2 defenses. Odd that he never uttered a peep about defensive schemes when non-cover-2 defenses were going to & winning superbowls for years.
The best OG in NFL history retiring is an example of â€œEdwards had had enoughâ€????
As soon as he became nothing once Herm got to town.
Trent Green wanted out. If Edwards was so insistent that the team go in another direction, what was wrong with last year? He had a QB with an 11:1 TD:INT ratio who was 5-3. It was HERM who chose to go back to Trent Green, not to exile him.
Until he shows that he can even perform at an NFL level, on 3rd & 2 you go to Tony Gonzalez, not a rookie.
What a complete a-hole.
The team got old? He added a 32 year-old CB to a big free-agent contract, added has-been Kyle Turley, and was all-too content to stick with his â€œoldâ€? offensive line that he inherited. And he reacted so quickly to this that they didnâ€™t address OL in the draft despite the loads of talent there.
So itâ€™s: â€œThe team was good before, but the second I got here they were terrible & got old. I was in a no-win situation & did as good as anyone could have done with such a lousy group of has-beenâ€™s.â€?
Then why all the going all-out on his own success in this league?
Herm, will never win a championship. When he has talented teams, he can beat lesser-talented teams. When the talent on his teams run dry, heâ€™s as bad as any coach in the league.
I have no problems with the man spending time with kids. One of the decent things he does.
So why did he go back to & stick with Green when Huard was playing so well & Green was playing so badly? Itâ€™s obvious: it was the path of least risk. If he stuck with Huard & failed, heâ€™d be open to criticism. Herm doesnâ€™t have the stones for that. He went with Green. If he wins, then he was smart for going back to Green; if he loses, itâ€™s because Trent Green got old.
And this is unlike any other subject in what way?
Typical Herm. Making up questions & comments that no one has asked or made, and then responding to his own fabricated questions & comments that â€œyouâ€? (â€œothersâ€?) say.
And Herm canâ€™t handle his own team. Why doesnâ€™t he just come out and say: â€œI donâ€™t think the team has enough faith in my football knowledge to have competition & play someone else while the veteran is on the roster.â€?
No one thinks that Herm. Absolutely no one.
Easy for Mr. All-talk to say, knowing full-well that Green wonâ€™t be there.
Read: I have no imagination
So which are you: a liar or a fool? What coach wouldnâ€™t spend 5 minutes thinking about whether or not his HOF left tackle would come back?
Does anyone else notice how many times Edwards uses the word â€œIâ€? in these interviews? There is no â€œweâ€? in Edwardsâ€™ mind. When itâ€™s relative success or his own perceived notion of what looks good to the public, itâ€™s â€œIâ€? all the time. When itâ€™s bad things, itâ€™s â€œtheyâ€? â€“ except when heâ€™s actually had the temerity to single out his scapegoats by name.
Of course he does. It means heâ€™s not expected to succeed. If the team fails, then itâ€™s not his fault. If the team plays well, then in his mind heâ€™s a genius.
So with such talent, will Edwards admit to being an idiot if they donâ€™t succeed? Fat chance. Itâ€™ll be another excuse du jour.
Only because they expect so little.
And if they donâ€™t? What will your excuse be? My moneyâ€™s on Brodie Croyle.
You know how itâ€™s obvious Hermâ€™s fibbing? Heâ€™s not talking about his gameplan.