D-Dog, you’re gonna make a believer out of me yet man – they keep playing and not giving up – they’ve found some heart – which is a foundation for the future. If we can get the talent on this team to buy in and stop being a bunch of wimps, this could be a team that others will get behind as well as the faithful. By the way, a certain Raider should be put on notice that KC has its third win of the season, 3 more than he predicted.

I’m not going to criticize them. With any victory comes a number of things a team does wrong. Instead, I want to concentrate on how they rose up, came from behind and beat a very good football team. The D played an inspired 2nd half, the O delivered when it had to, and we have a W to post. Have they turned a corner? Maybe, maybe not. But this is the kind of game which can get a team believing in itself, and if there is one thing this team needs, it’s belief.

Great game, KC. I hope this is a harbinger of the future.

CASSEL needs to GET RID OF THE BALL!!!

I had forgotten about Pitt only having had 3 coaches in the modern era. They seem to be the exception that proves the rule…

I live in Indy, and have for almost 15 years. What I’m going to say applies not only here, but in NE, Pitt, Phila, and any other winning club out there. They ALL go through their growing pains.

Here in Indy, the Colts went through a couple of coaches — the most notable being Jim Mora — before bringing in Dungy and a winning system. They now have Caldwell, who has changed some details, but has retained most of the system and coaches. You can also look at Pitt and Cowher. Pitt was competitive, if not awe inspiring, before Cowher came along. Their current coach (his name escapes me) is only carrying on the winning that Cowher developed when he got there. My point is this: The teams mentioned all had to do one thing before they “established” their system — they had to find it first. All these gold teams — Indy, NE, Phila (though I dispute them being included) Pitt, et al, went through multiple coaches and multiple systems before hitting on the right one. The Chiefs have to do the same thing. The formula is different in each situation.

Say what you will about the P/H era now. In my opinion, it is too early to tell whether they have what it takes. Will Haley be a bust? Hard to say right now, we haven’t even really seen a true first draft out of the P/H regime. And yes, I’m discounting the 2009 draft; 1 year does not a draft positive/negative make. As I’ve said before, and I’ll say again, the Chiefs are talent poor right now. Even Dungy, or Cowher, or (fill in the blank) couldn’t make a silk purse out of the sow’s ear of talent we have.

Bottom line. It takes time — two seasons minimum — to find out if a rookie head coach, or GM, has what it takes to build a winning program. Couple that truth to Lamar (may he RIP) was desperately trying to find a way to the Super Bowl in his final years on this planet, and the Chiefs have a mess on their hands not easily repaired in a season or two. Patience is the watch word. The way to stop the revolving door is to quit going through it. Pick a GM, and a head coach, and ride them to a conclusive point — yea or nay. If anyone thought the Chiefs would be competitive this year, they are either very naive, or view the world through rose colored glasses.

bob has him throwing 2 tds against Oakland…

The Star said today, “The Art of War” is a book used by Haley. Well, read the book and there is nothing except getting rid of herm’s guys that Haley is doing. If he wanted to do that, should of cut all ties (players) before the season started and brought in 53 new Chiefs. Point is do not think much of Haley’s style or ability. Win more than 10 games and I will probably call him the next Lombardi or Stram. Just do not see it. No personal control, not a deep thinker, and no innovater, given time with enough new players he may be adequate but look and smells like a bust to me.