Doug Pensinger - Getty Images
Our first approval poll for Kansas City Chiefs interim head coach Romeo Crennel. We did monthly approval polls for former Chiefs head coach Todd Haley from April 2009 to December 2011. You can see all of those results here.
Crennel isn't the full-time head coach -- yet -- but he was the head coach for much of December so we have enough to judge him on.
Among the highlights of his short head coaching tenure are beating the previously undefeated Green Bay Packers as well as the playoff-bound Denver Broncos. He seems to have rallied the locker room around him as he has received a lot of recommendations for the job.
Among the negatives are the Chiefs continued inability to score touchdowns on offense.
So, do you approve of the job Romeo Crennel is doing as the Chiefs (interim) head coach?
0 recs | 94 comments
If the ST would have actually blocked someone on the FG attempts against the Raiders
We would be getting ready to beat the Steelers this weekend
KingChief - January 4, 2012
Don't let Bowe off the hook there either.
He catches that TD pass and Orton’s INT never happens.
citadelchief - January 4, 2012
Yes well there was half a game left after that. anything could happen.
not excusing Bowe but if the second blocked FG doesn’t happen. we win. Time expired after the kick if i remember correctly
trentchiefsfan - January 5, 2012
I approve based on the Green Bay victory alone.
Truthfully, he’s a blocked field goal away from 3-0 and a playoff game.
Hard to argue with that.
That being said, I’m still on the fence about next year.
craig in calgary - January 4, 2012
Yes hard not to approve
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
I Approve
In 3 games, he has a 2 wins against teams with winning records…..it took Todd Hayley 2 and a half seasons to accomplish that……look it up
KCinAZ - January 4, 2012
I approve
Of course a few things could have been better, like some adjustments to blocking on FGs, but he stared adversity in the face and kept the team motivated. Even got them to put a hurting on Tebow when they weren’t playing for anything but pride.
Chief Willie Wildcat - January 4, 2012
If you're not sure
Then don’t vote.
JayhawksNChiefs - January 4, 2012
Would you have liked it better if it would have said "None of the above"? ; > )
I approve.
Get a solid OC in here along with other staff and let’s ride it out.
KCRowdy - January 4, 2012
[ ] Not Sure
that’s standard issue on any Joel Thorman poll
upamtn - January 4, 2012
You Sure?
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
Why?
nateforchiefs - January 4, 2012
Not Sure
gives us a chance to see how EVERYONE feels, not just those that are at one extreme or the other.
misterbrain - January 4, 2012
I voted "not sure".
The reason is that it was just 3 games. I have no idea how he can manage a full staff, player problems, challenges, clock management, etc. Too often people have knee jerk reactions. Most of the “approve” would have voted that way after the GB game alone. We were poor against Oakland and barely beat a pretty pathetic team in Denver. On the other hand, he did this with a staff and team molded by Haley. I could care less what the players want, and so should Pioli. Players want “one of the guys” who will go easier on them. Just human nature. Pioli needs to hire the “best” HC, not the most popular. So that leaves me a “not sure”.
BinSC - January 4, 2012
I approve of Romeo Crennel.
I do not approve of our offense. Our offense needs totally revamped.
G.L. - January 4, 2012
Crennel
If hte Chiefs had a decent QB, they mighht have gotten into the endzone more often
trchief - January 4, 2012
That's our number one problem right now.
G.L. - January 4, 2012
damn, Joel ... you come up with the most controversial topics sometimes!
upamtn - January 4, 2012
That's why it's such a close vote.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
Looks like 6 voters are Bronco or Packers fans
65 Toss Power Trap83 - January 4, 2012
A-
Outstanding defense. Excellent motivation. No change on offense, except for Orton completing a few passes Cassel probably wouldn’t have. No change on special teams. Bonus points for team chemistry.
Brsrkr - January 4, 2012
I guess I'll be mostly on my own here, but
I did not see enough improvement from the offense to approve. Playcalling was still crap, there was a continued overuse of Thomas Jones, and the team looked like the same team it was under Haley against the Raiders.
KCMizzou - January 4, 2012
It was 3 games
Was he supposed to hire a new OC, get a better RB and sign a QB that would do better? I guarantee he didn’t do a damn thing to change the offense except throw Palko to the bottom of the depth chart, which was good enough for me
craig in calgary - January 4, 2012
Exactly.
Not much he could do with the offense at that point. At least the team was very competitive, became the only team to beat Green Bay this year (and beat them pretty handily), and was a blocked FG away from going 3-0.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
Two blocked field goals. In the same game, at the same place on the line.
Brsrkr - January 4, 2012
Two blocked field goals and a dropped pass in the end zone.
citadelchief - January 4, 2012
He had a better RB and QB on the team.
He had Kyle Orton which Haley did not. Orton was clearly better than Cassel, and yet we still couldn’t score. LeRon McClain has proven in the past that he can carry the football. Battle has shown that he can be productive when given and opportunity, yet he wasn’t. He’s averaged 4 YPC compared to TJ’s 3.1. As for OC, he could have told Muir to shut up and color.
Additonally, where has he shown that he CAN provide a good offense. He sure didn’t show it in Cleveland.
KCMizzou - January 4, 2012
What kind of reasoning is that?
Haley had Orton, he just refused to play him! So Haley gets a pass because his offense was just as shitty, but he was handcuffed by his own decision to ride Palko 4 games?
Re: Offense in Cleveland. He won 10 games with Derek Anderson as QB. I’m not sure Vince Lombardi and Bill Billichick’s love child could boast that.
craig in calgary - January 4, 2012
He had to give Orton time to learn the offense.
Anyone still hanging on the idea that Orton should have started his first week on the team is still in dreamland. Look what Palmer did his first 2 weeks. That really worked out…
The offense in Cleveland had one good year. It was ranked in the 25th or worse in the other 3 years.
KCMizzou - January 4, 2012
What about his second week?
Palko started, and I don’t want to hear about learning the offense. It doesn’t take long to learn an offense that produces 10 points/game.
In Palmer’s second week with the team, he was actually very good.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
If you call 3 INT's, a 50% completion rate, and 80 rating
“very good” then I can’t see how we can continue this.
KCMizzou - January 4, 2012
I stand corrected.
I was thinking of his third week.
Still, a different situation. Orton had been practicing and/or playing all year. Palmer was signed off the street. But the main point is, Palko was so bad, there was nothing to lose. If Orton sucked, so what? If Stanzi sucked, so what? At worst you’d be in the same situation, but at least you would have tried.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
I agree
And if Stanzi and Orton looked bad, then Haley could at least point to Management not giving him the tools he needed to succeed. It is Clear Ego’s got in the way of winning no doubt. Pioli and Haley’s.
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
So Palmer was just sitting on the couch playing Madden?
Not buying that.
KCMizzou - January 4, 2012
I didn't say that.
He wasn’t practicing and playing with an NFL team.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
A guy that's been around as long as Palmer
can work on the side and keep about as fresh as the back-up quarterback at practice.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/08/carson-palmer-is-working-out/
KCMizzou - January 4, 2012
I would expect Orton to at least know the the parts of the playbook
needed for at least game 3, but the what if are just that, we don’t know what Haley would have done with a healthy orton, or against GB, we only have assumptions.
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
Assumptions
based on almost three years of watching him coach. Watching him lead the team to a historic number of blowout losses.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
I think you are overlooking
that the Haley offensive playbook probably looked like calculus that only Einstein or Openhiemer could make sense of.
Haley’s failing was too much scheming and not enough developing of players. And I hope beyond all hope that the next OC is not one of these elaborate schemers.
BCRavenJHawkfan - January 4, 2012
Orton could have drawn up plays in the dirt
and produced 10 points/game. I don’t give a shit about Haley’s playbook. His offense sucked.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
Let's be fair
he did decide to put him in, he got hurt. No, he didnt put him in game 1 but we all saw what happened to the raiders when they just chucked a brand new qb in (a qb that went on to have greater success than Orton did). Haley may have held on to Palko a quater to long for most people but we did win against the bears regardless. IMO Haley keeps Palko in because he gave him the best chance to win, and from what i understand of the situation, he had to win to keep his job. Stuck between a rock and a hard place really.
ottawachiefsfan - January 4, 2012
He wasn't replacing Palko when Orton got hurt, though.
Haley said they had a couple packages for Orton. He was just in for that. Palko was going to come back into the game even without the injury.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
And if he had "a couple packages"
then he must not have been too against having him play like some conspiracy theorists think. And if this is true, then he must not have felt Orton was ready to take on more.
KCMizzou - January 4, 2012
Right.
Just like he felt like Gaither couldn’t play, but Richardson could. Just like he felt 2.7 was a better back than Jamaal Charles.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
So where was Pioli at
while Haley was cutting Gaither?
KCMizzou - January 4, 2012
No reason to keep him.
He was a free agent at the end of the year, and wasn’t playing. He was a wasted roster spot.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
Valid point.
I choose to take it as a good sign for my boi Mims rather than a good sign for Barry or a bad sign for Muir/Haley.
Brsrkr - January 4, 2012
Other guys could have been cut to protect Mims.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
Another valid point.
Who?
Brsrkr - January 4, 2012
Maneri, Becht.
Just off the top of my head.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
I like Becht.
Maneri was the guy on his back during those blocked field goals, so…….
Damn, just realized if Maneri had been cut, then that might well have been Mims standing in front of Seymour. sonofabitch
Brsrkr - January 4, 2012
Oh sure, cut Maneri.
Then who lines up as our third TE with minimal pass catching ability?
BinSC - January 4, 2012
I disagree with this, Gaither had been sent out on a number of plays
over the game weeks, he showed no real genius out there. Perhaps Haley was overly committed to Richardson but it doesn’t seem like it to me, seem more like Gaither was not happy here, and was performing based on that.
And 2.7 was dump pretty quick, after all he was always 2.7.
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
So you're judging him based on his play as an injury replacement?
Gaither was probably not happy backing up someone who sucked, true. But he was happy when he was signed. Excited to be playing with one of his best friends, Brandon Albert.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
He was happy to be signed because
It looked like he wasn’t going to have a team..
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
So what made him unhappy?
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
Question isn't what made him unhappy
The Question is why didn’t he preform better. You can say the same for Haley, and Haley got fired, so I think it also holds true for Gaither. Neither was being professional any longer, both got cut.
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
So you're cool
with continuing to play Richardson while he sucked for entire games throughout the season, because Gaither didn’t do particularly great when he came in for a series here and there as an injury substitute?
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
I would say I can't know
If in practice I were to feel that Gaither wasn’t doing what I needed him to do, Then I got Richardson, or Maneri, so it that sense I would feel pretty stuck.
As a fan I can say, should have tried, could have done this, but I was watching the players performances so don’t know.
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
I think its hard to Judge the Sitution
With Gaither, because he was plugged into the LT in SD not the right.
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
on my own here
Crennel can’t stick the ball in the endzone for the team. Considering what he had to work with, he did a commendable job. KC needs a decent qb, cassel and orton ain’t them. Playcalling wasn’t that Muir’s job, ya can’t lay it on Crennel.
trchief - January 4, 2012
I didn't notice any improvement in the team
than when Haley was doing it. The defence got a little better (they love him and wanted him to succeed), the ST regressed (not just because the blocks, they really didnt seem to know what was going on personel wise) and the offence was just as, if not more OFFENSIVE.
ottawachiefsfan - January 4, 2012
We didn't get blown out in the 1 lose
that’s an improvement
KingChief - January 4, 2012
We lost to the Raiders, in a must-win, at home.
Brsrkr - January 4, 2012
Because of Romeo?
You think it was Romeo Crennels fault we lost to the Raiders? You think the head coach needs to be responsible for making sure Richard Seymour is blocked? That’s why you have position coaches.
craig in calgary - January 4, 2012
Yup, and it's also his fault we beat the Packers.
That’s why I gave him an A minus.
Brsrkr - January 4, 2012
yes right, he gets the blame both ways
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
must-win
how about Orton’s pick in the endzone?
trchief - January 4, 2012
What about it?
It sucked, is about the best way I can describe it.
Brsrkr - January 4, 2012
We went 3 whole games without being blown out!
That would have been a record under Haley!
craig in calgary - January 4, 2012
no it wouldnt have.
ottawachiefsfan - January 4, 2012
We beat 0 playoff teams in 13 games under Haley, and 2 in 3 games under Crennel.
m.yashi - January 4, 2012
the only difference between the two teams really are
Tyler Palko and Kyle Orton. That’s the one move Romeo made. I think anyone on the Planet except Todd Haley (for reasons i’d be interested in hearing) would make that move. I think 3 games at the end of the season is not enough of a body of work to say good job to someone.
ottawachiefsfan - January 4, 2012
The poll asked about how he is doing
not if he should be the head coach next season of if he’s the best coach ever. In his three games as HC, the Chiefs went 2-1 beating two playoff-bound teams (one that should go to the Super Bowl), and came close to beating the third team which was also on the threshold of going to the playoffs (granted, in a weak division). I don’t know how you can look at that and say he didn’t do a good job in those three games.
Chiefs4Life - January 4, 2012
i just didnt see much difference in the team
If Haley did a poor enough job to get fired and the team looks the same under Crennel, is he doing a good job?
ottawachiefsfan - January 4, 2012
And 0 wins against 10 win teams in almost 3 years under Haley.
But 1 win against a 15 win team in 3 games under Crennel. No, not much improvement.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
When its a regular winning
I’ll be more convienced. Crennel had great games in Cleveland too, he just also had 12 blowouts there.
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
The question was whether there was improvement.
Not whether he is the long term answer as the head coach.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
True enough
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
Ummm...that wasn't the question...the question in the poll was -
Not about improvement or keeping him as HC…just do you approve.
I voted yes.
WorL4Chiefs - January 4, 2012
again
that win should be credited to the defence. The O couldnt get it into the endzone. My question is i guess, what makes that a Crennel victory, what stamp did he put on that team before they won?
ottawachiefsfan - January 4, 2012
Well,
the defen s e. That’s his stamp. That plus all the players playing their asses off for him, which is really the main thing you want out of a head coach. My only concern going forward is whether the players would still play like that when Romeo’s job isn’t on the line.
Brsrkr - January 4, 2012
He immediately made Palko #3 on the depth chart.
That was his stamp, and the offense went out and played their best game of the year.
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
really
You want to call Denever a Playoff Calibre Team?
Bigcherokeechief - January 4, 2012
I'm going to go out on a limb here..
Romeo will be named as Chiefs’ head coach within the next 10 days.
chiefsfan62 - January 4, 2012 via mobile
Woah!
Don’t go all crazy on us!
Tarkus - January 4, 2012
You should change doing to done
bonesjackson - January 4, 2012
I voted "no" simply because of the most important loss of the season....
Everything fell into line two weekends ago for KC to make it to the playoffs….
Yet they lost to the f’ing Raiders AT HOME. Haley’s Chiefs beat them in Oakland by 4 TDs with an inferior Cassel.
Do not argue the other two games with me or the lack of sample size. The poll isn’t about would I like him to be HC (which I’m undecided about…..like him back? Yes. As HC? Unsure).
One thing is certain: RAC’s three games showed a team that merely plays to he level of their competition….watching the same team end the defending SB champs’ year long win streak just to come out flat and uninspired…for the Raiders AND knowing it was elimination from Playoffs is enough for me to disapprove.
chief Stevie_k - January 4, 2012
The team played at the same level for all three games. How was the defense any worse in Denver than against GB? How was the offense any better?
JComp11 - January 4, 2012
Make it easy for Pioli
Just hire RAC and the McHoodie and any other buddie of his, because nobody with a name or reputation wants to come here because of Pioli`s fagile ego, certainly don`t hire anyone who will disagree with him or he will emotionally shut down and go back to his little cave where he hides out at One Arrowhead Dr. Please keep status quo so we can have Matt Cassel back and keep it rolling.
chadb - January 4, 2012
I don't get where this comes from
Pioli may have an ego problem, but I don’t think it’s because his ego is too fragile. He doesn’t exactly have a history of hiring and working with only docile coaches. He co-existed for years with Belichick (is he weak?) and McDaniels (who ran roughshod all over Denver’s program), brought in Haley (who had a history of being a hothead), hired Crennel (not exactly a weak coach), and Weis (who has also been known for his large ego). Pioli has his faults, but fragility doesn’t appear to be one.
Chiefs4Life - January 4, 2012
I think the world of Romeo, but are we maintaining the staus quo with him?
I have some mixed feelings about Romeo. I know the players like him, and respect him, which is important. He has gotten our defense to play at a very high leve, and I would hate to lose him totally. My concern is his age (64), and if he ends up being another stop gap HC. I guess alot depends on the OC that they hire, if Crennel maintains the job, and if Crennel trusts his OC enough to delegate the offense too, and still focus mainly on the defense, it could work fine.. It would also help though, if one of the coordinators is good enough to be groomed as the next HC, to try and finally maintain some damn continuity. If Romeo fails, we may have waited too long to take advantage of what I feel, is a team with enough talent to compete for, and even advance in the playoffs, with just a few additions. We don’t want to lose the window of opportunity playing musical chairs with Head Coaches, and ultimately GM’s, as Pioli will likely be gone if Crennel fails. Tough call!
Racyman - January 4, 2012
Defense is almost in the top 10. Offense needs the work.
I say keep Crennel but get one hell of an OC. Cassel still has a chance to shine but the OC has to come in and reshape this offense. With Charles and Moeaki back next year, that should make things better. I think the main focus needs to be the o-line to create those gaps and protect the QB. I think we have a good corp of receivers.
dude1983 - January 4, 2012
Not Sure...
As DC, there is no questioning his elite abilities. As head coach, I’m not so sure. I want a guaranteed 5 years minimum and someone who is able to oversee the whole team, not just a defensive minded coach who has a hot hand on the defense and puts little say in the offense (just as the opposite was for Haley). A win over the Packers was a highlight and joy for the season, but one game in which a team was shaken and fired up as a result of a mid season staff change (played their hearts out) isn’t enough for me to immediately throw my eggs in one basket. The following game we lost our shot at the playoffs and week 17, yes we stopped Tebow, but did very little else on offense. Regardless I’m a firm Chiefs supporter, not fair weather fan, but Romeo will have to prove he can learn from his tenure as head coach in Cleveland before I give my vote of confidence if named HC of the Chiefs.
JMagsKC1 - January 5, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Arrowhead Pride to post a comment.