Busy days end up leaving me behind on answering some of your posts and questions. Trying to catch up, so here we go.
Responses to “Chiefs Without 2011 Contracts”
el cid says: What a list, makes you think. For a young team we have a lot of starters who can walk. Add the CBA and what do the Chiefs do? Cannot win for trying. Things that pop out to me: Carr, Hali, all DL free agents, how do you not re-sign them? If the veterans walk, no center left on roster (with experience) and no RT who played last year. Can a college FB start next year? If Thomas Jones is done, do you go into the season without Battle on roster? Does anyone want O’Connell at the second TE? This is a very hard time for Pioli/Haley/OCs to pick and chose. Would not like their job with this.
Bob says: It’s hard to know how tough the list of 25 players without contracts is going to be for the Chiefs to deal with since we do not yet know how they will all be classified. I would rank them in this order:
- Must sign (3): OLB Tamba Hali, CB Brandon Carr, DE Wallace Gilberry.
- Should sign (3): OT Barry Richardson, LB Cory Greenwood, RB Jackie Battle.
- Wait and see (4): WR Terrance Copper, NT Ron Edwards, DL Shaun Smith, DB Maurice Leggett.
- Wait and wait (7): FB Tim Castille, FB Mike Cox, TE Leonard Pope, C Rudy Niswanger, S Reshard Langford, TE Brad Cottam, WR Kevin Curtis.
- Goodbye/Retirement (8): QB Brodie Croyle, OT Ryan O’Callaghan, C Casey Wiegmann, LB Charlie Anderson, LB Corey Mays, LB Mike Vrabel, CB Travis Daniels, S Jon McGraw.
The lack of true center presents a challenge, but last year’s draft choice Jon Asamoah can snap, so don’t discount that possibility.
SG says: I think one question we should be considering is…which of our top FA’s is most likely to be allowed to leave for another team? Don Pioli has proven history that shows he is prone to take this approach from time to time.
Bob says: I don’t think there is anybody in the group of 25 that Pioli & Company are going to chase away. The players with the arrow pointing out in the group are Gilberry, Greenwood and Carr. After that, they all become for the most part interchangeable parts.
Responses to “Hall of Fame Vote In the Rearview”
jim says: Clear this up for me, not that it really matters – but, you state that of the five that you didn’t vote for -Dawson, Dent, Martin, Reed and Roaf, all were eliminated but Dent. Then you state “I voted FOR Roaf”, who did not advance. Seems like a contradiction. Just asking, and not being picky.
Bob says: Good catch Jim, I did not word that very well. In the final 10, I did vote for Roaf, but he was eliminated. I did not vote for Dawson, Dent, Martin, Reed or Kennedy. My mistake.
Petey says: So is it safe to assume Bob that you will be speaking on behalf of Will Shields next year?
Bob says: Yes, if Shields makes the final 15 then I will make the presentation. I think his chances are very good of getting to the last group. I’m sure there are those who believe he should be a first-ballot inductee, but Chiefs fans should not get their hearts set on that. Shields and Willie Roaf will both be in Canton before all is said and done.
Rex says: Just curious what your thoughts are on this, Bob. We heard for years about how DT wasn’t getting in because he was too one dimensional and didn’t play the run. But Sanders, a known avoider of contact, gets in on the first ballot. As if he ever played the run. Did you notice any hypocracy from the people who were against DT those first few years? Did their objections just magically vanish once it was Deion’s name up for discussion?
Bob says: Rex, can’t say that I did. Most of the voters who were not convinced of D.T.’s worthiness have moved off the committee. They tended to be among the older voters and they’ve been replaced by younger members. In the case of Deion the cover corner vs. Derrick the pass rusher, the general impression I got was that the voters felt Sanders was the best cover corner of his generation, while Thomas was one of the best pass rushers.
Responses to “Chiefs Stay In-house For O.C. – Bill Muir”
el cid says: If this is what Haley needs, got to go along. Would be interesting to know if anyone else was considered (as in out of house), betting no one.
George says: Bill Muir is another knowledgeable NFL person to state the Chiefs and Haley are building this organization the right way. I’m not that knowledgeable, just a fan. But, I’m seeing evidence from our play this year that these NFL experts seem to be on to something. The Chiefs think maintaining continuity is important to continue being successful and elevating Bill will help accomplish this. They are very secretive about who they have researched, discussed and talked to and who may also be joining the team. So, I’ll have to take their word that they are doing a thorough job to get the offensive staff adjusted to improve offensive play for the coming season. Bob, what are your thoughts on this. Do you think the Chiefs are building the football side of the organization the right way?
Bob says: Haley says he’s not done with his offensive staff yet, so I’ll withhold final opinion status until we see what other moves might be coming. But based on the promotion of Muir, I think it’s a good, solid move and one that will bring the continuity that QB Matt Cassel badly needs. There’s nothing sexy about naming Muir, certainly not as big a splash as hiring Charlie Weis last year. But this guy is one of the best assistant coaches in the NFL and has been. People like Bill Parcells and Jon Gruden swear by this guy – that’s pretty impressive when you start lining up recommendations. What’s needed now is a QB coach-passing game type, who can help pull the game plan together each week. If Haley wants to call the plays, then that’s fine; he’s probably going to be the best offensive play caller on the staff.
As to whether the Chiefs are building the football side of the organization the right way, so far I haven’t seen any bad moves. There have been some that might have been better to go in a different direction or a different coach or scout. But the true test of the scouting, selecting and developing process is sustained success and that’s what we need to see in 2011. They got it turned in the right direction, but staying there is a lot harder than getting there.
SG says: I have two questions: 1.) what is Muir’s position on the Thomas Jones deal? 2.) Will this be a slight change from the run-run-pass-punt philosophy to the run-run-run-punt approach? My opinion: not impressed at all. Coach Haley better negotiate a serious pay raise for Coach Crennel and keep him on staff or he (Haley) won’t be around past 2011-2012. “The 68-year old Muir” – does this guy carry health insurance? At age 68, seems to be something that will create more pressure and stress on anyone, much less somebody working for someone as intense as Haley obviously is.
What’s the chance we wanted to talk to someone with Green Bay or Pittsburgh but were declined permission to approach after the Super Bowl?
Bob says: I’m not sure what you mean by Muir’s position on Jones deal, but if it’s in using him in combination with Jamaal Charles, I’m sure that Muir was one of the architects of the situation. Understand that Muir was actively involved in game planning and play selection throughout the 2010 season. This idea that there’s this person sitting up in the box or on the sideline that makes every decision on what the offense, defense or special teams is going to do is just wrong. These are almost always collaborative efforts. There has to be a final say, but that generally comes after consultation during the week and in the game.
Also remember that while he would never say so, Haley knows that in year No. 3 of his four-year contract, his team cannot go backwards. The best way to assure that is to create some continuity on his offense.
Don’t worry about whether Muir can handle Haley. There is nobody on the coaching staff that can give it back to the head coach better than his new offensive coordinator. There is total respect between these guys and that won’t be a problem. Plus, Muir won’t be angling for his next job.
As for missing out on somebody from Green Bay or Pittsburgh, I don’t think so. First, the Packers offense is very different than what the Chiefs have done under Haley – that wasn’t going to fit. The Steelers offense is closer to what K.C. does, but there’s nobody on the Pittsburgh staff that has the NFL experience or background that Haley would have been looking for.