Ranking Chiefs GMs, coaches, best-worst players 89-19

[Stargazer]

Pull up a chair and feel free to immerse yourself in all the highs and lows of the past 30 years of Chiefs history.

https://gasnsports.com/ranking-89-19...92Mr703Llpbd9E

[smithandrew051]

Veach should be number 1 in my book. I get that he took over a good situation, but look at our record in the playoffs since he took over. Look at the improvement in the defense in 1 offseason of cap hell.

No way in hell is Marty 1B. Reid has created separation there. Reid and Stram are the greatest coaches in franchise history...by a lot.

Kelce should be higher than 8. I’d have him ahead of Priest and Charles. Montana at 3 seems high too.

[Rain Man]

Lists like these really drive home how important the quarterback position is. If you're a GM or a coach, your legacy will be driven by your quarterback, and guess what? Your quarterback will be a result of your philosophy toward quarterbacks.

If you unwaveringly hitch your wagon to a guy who's not good (Pioli with Cassel), you'll be reviled. If you never take a chance to get a great quarterback, you'll never succeed (Peterson with retreads). And if you find and draft the greatest quarterback we've ever seen, you'll never buy a beer in this town again (Veach).

[Deberg_1990]

Veach is #1. But Carl had the tougher job.

The Chiefs were a wasteland for nearly two decades before he came in.

[wazu]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Veach is #1. But Carl had the tougher job.

The Chiefs were a wasteland for nearly two decades before he came in.

Dorsey is #2. Carl would've cut his own dick off before trading up 15 spots to draft Mahomes.

[AdolfOliverBush]

Originally Posted by wazu

Dorsey is #2. Carl would've cut his own dick off before trading up 15 spots to draft Mahomes.

Not only that, but he wouldn't have drafted Mahomes at all, even if he was on the board at 27. Not that it would've mattered if he did, because Vermeil was the only coach during his time in KC that knew how to use a QB properly.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Lists like these really drive home how important the quarterback position is. If you're a GM or a coach, your legacy will be driven by your quarterback, and guess what? Your quarterback will be a result of your philosophy toward quarterbacks.

If you unwaveringly hitch your wagon to a guy who's not good (Pioli with Cassel), you'll be reviled. If you never take a chance to get a great quarterback, you'll never succeed (Peterson with retreads). And if you find and draft the greatest quarterback we've ever seen, you'll never buy a beer in this town again (Veach).

It's fair to point out that Peterson just operated in a different time.

We use the rearview mirror to deify a LOT of mediocrity in the 90s. The Cowboys didn't win because Troy Aikman was a great quarterback. Troy Aikman is considered a great quarterback BECAUSE the Cowboys won.

Jim Kelly's the same way. Watch videos of the guy and he wasn't amazing - he was a glorified game manager. Mark Rypien is another.

There are LEGITIMATE arguments for somehow placing Bobby Hebert among the 10 best quarterbacks of the 90s, likewise with Randall Cunningham. I'd have taken Trent Green over Hebert, Cunningham, Rypien and probably Kelly. I'm not sure he was notably worse than Aikman, he just didn't have the defense the Cowboys had those years. And while Elvis Grbac was by no means a real success here, he was also not clearly worse than someone like Jimmy Grapes - he just didn't have the surrounding cast Garappolo had.

Steve Bono was the only egregiously stupid decision he made at quarterback when you consider the majority if the era he operated in. By the end of his run, the worm had started to turn but through most of his Chiefs career, he made decisions that were reasonable when they were made. And even then, can you imagine a scenario in the modern draft when "These two quarterbacks are vying for 1.1!" yields the loser a slide all the way down to 24?

In 2020 the 4th best quarterback in the draft was taken at 26 to replace a guy many thought was the single best player in the draft when he was taken at 24 in 2005. Tua will never be taken at 24 again. I don't imagine there will be many years where Herbert slides out of the top 20 going forward and he was never truly in the mix for a top 5 selection. Rodgers was a legit possibility at 1.1 and went into free-fall when a single team passed on him.

Even at the end of Carl's run, an elite quaterback was considered a luxury, especially when the prototype of an elite quarterback over the previous 25 years or so never won a championship.

Carl operated in an era when you could create the myth of greatness for a quarterback by surrounding him with talent. Marty is in a similar boat. What they did at the time wasn't absurd or unheard of - in fact it was largely conventional wisdom.

[AdolfOliverBush]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

And while Elvis Grbac was by no means a real success here, he was also not clearly worse than someone like Jimmy Grapes - he just didn't have the surrounding cast Garappolo had.

You bastard.

Grbitch was and is a wart on the face of humanity. He should feel blessed for never being tossed into a acidic rape fire by Chiefs fans.

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Steve Bono was the only egregiously stupid decision he made at quarterback when you consider the majority if the era he operated in. By the end of his run, the worm had started to turn but through most of his Chiefs career, he made decisions that were reasonable when they were made. And even then, can you imagine a scenario in the modern draft when "These two quarterbacks are vying for 1.1!" yields the loser a slide all the way down to 24?

Bono decision in 1995 was one where Montana kind of put them in a pickle. Montana didn't officially retire until April of that year. Kind of hard to go out in free agency or trade for a QB if you don't really officially know what Montana was going to do. Then kind of hard to replace a QB that just went 13-3 unfortunately. Takes a lot of stones to do that and most personal types won't do that do.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

Bono decision in 1995 was one where Montana kind of put them in a pickle. Montana didn't officially retire until April of that year. Kind of hard to go out in free agency or trade for a QB if you don't really officially know what Montana was going to do. Then kind of hard to replace a QB that just went 13-3 unfortunately. Takes a lot of stones to do that and most personal types won't do that do.

Fair, but I also remember Montana being something of a Roaf situation (and Shields for a bit) where he didn't officially retire until fairly late in the game but the feeling around the organization and the city was that it was all but inevitable.

Dude was 38 years old and was clearly in sharp decline. He'd had significant injuries in like 4-5 straight years. You simply cannot feign shock when he retires. They had to have a backup plan in place and just...didn't. How do you NOT have a guy like Chris Chandler on hand? Or draft a Todd Collins or Rob Johnson since you know that Montana's gone in a year tops? Those were successful major college QBs who could've been had in the 2nd and 4th rounds.

I mean....I guess I can give them the benefit of the doubt and say that was their plan with Steve Stenstrom but...Yikes.

Ultimately I don't fault him for most of what went on at QB for those years. But man, the Bono thing was just so !@#$ing awful and with even moderately credible QB play, they could've nabbed a ring in there. Any team that goes 13-3 w/ Bono under center could've won a SB with Chris Chandler. And I guess it's also fair to point out that we had Gannon, but that was on Marty. I think that was HIS major misstep. And not because he didn't play him, but because he simply didn't know how to use him. Gannon wasn't actually all that great here, but that was because Marty couldn't figure out what to do with him.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by wazu

Dorsey is #2. Carl would've cut his own dick off before trading up 15 spots to draft Mahomes.

How many future HOFer's did Dorsey draft in his 5 drafts in KC? Maybe one, in Travis Kelce, who was really an Andy pick because he was familiar with him and his family.

Dorsey sucked ass in KC and he's not even a pimple on Peterson's ass.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

It's fair to point out that Peterson just operated in a different time.

And let's not forget that Peterson didn't **** up, like so many other GM's and teams have done when picking Top 5 in the NFL Draft.

He took Derrick Thomas with #4 overall instead of Broderick Thomas, who was also seen as a pass rushing monster (he had a nice career but obviously not a Hall of Fame career).

1993 was a phenomenal year for Peterson. He chose Will Shields, a future Hall of Famer, in the 3rd round of the draft, then gave up very little in acquiring Joe Montana and Marcus Allen. Sure, they fell short in the AFC Championship Game that year but what team could overcome losing their HOF QB in the first half of that game?

Carl's first 16 years were very successful but unfortunately, most people remember his final years from 2006-2008. Had Vermeil not insisted on Trent Green, I fully believe that Carl would have drafted Drew Brees with the 12th overall pick in 2001 but he trusted Vermeil way too much, IMO.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

It's fair to point out that Peterson just operated in a different time.

And let's not forget that Peterson didn't **** up, like so many other GM's and teams have done when picking Top 5 in the NFL Draft.

He took Derrick Thomas with #4 overall instead of Broderick Thomas, who was also seen as a pass rushing monster (he had a nice career but obviously not a Hall of Fame career).

1993 was a phenomenal year for Peterson. He chose Will Shields, a future Hall of Famer, in the 3rd round of the draft, then gave up very little in acquiring Joe Montana and Marcus Allen. Sure, they fell short in the AFC Championship Game that year but what team could overcome losing their HOF QB in the first half of that game?

Carl's first 16 years were very successful but unfortunately, most people remember his final years from 2006-2008. Had Vermeil not insisted on Trent Green, I fully believe that Carl would have drafted Drew Brees with the 12th overall pick in 2001 but he trusted Vermeil way too much, IMO.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

How many future HOFer's did Dorsey draft in his 5 drafts in KC? Maybe one, in Travis Kelce, who was really an Andy pick because he was familiar with him and his family.

Dorsey sucked ass in KC and he's not even a pimple on Peterson's ass.

The fact that people still refuse to give Dorsey any credit for pulling a rabbit out of the hat, misleading EVERYONE and executing a damn good trade to get immediately ahead of 2 teams that badly wanted Mahomes remains bizarre as hell.

He made the obvious right choice in 2013 w/ Fisher. Is it his fault that draft was tragically awful? No, no it is not.

Ford, LDT and Fulton were very good picks in '14. We'll always have a bad taste in our mouths over how Ford's tenure ended, but FFS, look at what most of the teams around us did. Relative to his peers, the Ford pick was excellent.

Peters, Morse, Conley and Nelson is a very good first 4 picks of '15 and I'd imagine few did better.

'16 yielded Chris Jones, Demarcus Robinson and Tyreek Hill. But hey, that's only 2 guys that are considered top 5 in the sport at their positions - who cares?

'17 he executed the trade for Mahomes.

Seriously - what in the actual **** are you talking about? I won't try to debate Dorsey vs. Carl because I think they both did outstanding jobs and won't loudly argue w/ ranking either ahead of the other. But saying "Dorsey sucked ass in KC" is just facially ridiculous. He was, at worst, good over his period in Kansas City. In his 5 years he drafted, what, 9 Pro Bowlers? And acknowledge it or not (you won't) he was instrumental in the acquisition of Kelce, Hill, Jones and yes, Mahomes - all of whom could easily end up with legitimate HoF cases by the time their careers are over.

Carl Peterson was the GM for 20 drafts - Dorsey for 5. And you're honestly going to try to use a count of HoFers as your barometer? Especially when there's a solid possibility that Dorsey comes out ahead in 5 years of where Peterson was over 20.

[Chief Roundup]

Where is Hank Stram?
Where is Jack Steadman?
Peterson kept us in mediocrity by not EVER drafting a QB high enough to make a difference.

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

And let's not forget that Peterson didn't **** up, like so many other GM's and teams have done when picking Top 5 in the NFL Draft.

He took Derrick Thomas with #4 overall instead of Broderick Thomas, who was also seen as a pass rushing monster (he had a nice career but obviously not a Hall of Fame career).

1993 was a phenomenal year for Peterson. He chose Will Shields, a future Hall of Famer, in the 3rd round of the draft, then gave up very little in acquiring Joe Montana and Marcus Allen. Sure, they fell short in the AFC Championship Game that year but what team could overcome losing their HOF QB in the first half of that game?

Carl's first 16 years were very successful but unfortunately, most people remember his final years from 2006-2008. Had Vermeil not insisted on Trent Green, I fully believe that Carl would have drafted Drew Brees with the 12th overall pick in 2001 but he trusted Vermeil way too much, IMO.

Well since he only had 2 and the other was Glenn Dorsey, he was 50/50 at best and then you consider he didn't draft up there because he would not take chances and was happy with mediocrity combine that with all the other misses in his tenure, he sucked but he was still better than Pissoli, Rossi and Schaaf. Dorsey will always have a special place because of Mahomes.