KANSAS CITY, Mo. _ One Sunday in August at the preferred church of a visitor, we ran into a friend on the way out. Perhaps in contrast to the spirit of the scene, her husband was compelled to leave me with this sermonette:
"The Chiefs really need to fire Bob Sutton."
Indeed, that deep-seated, default mindset about the Chiefs' defensive coordinator seems to be gospel to many. Somehow seemingly all the more so during a 4-0 start asterisked by a defense that has given up more yards than any team in the NFL (451.6 a game) and is 25th out of 32 in points allowed (28.8 a game).
But sometimes there's a difference between something being explicitly your fault and just being your problem. And unless you think you need the venting for your mental health, scapegoating Sutton is wasted energy in every way right now.
For openers, the time for change was in the offseason, the case deftly stated by my colleague Sam Mellinger after the Chiefs bungled a 21-3 halftime lead to lose, 22-21, to Tennessee in the playoffs.
And the next time to consider change will be the offseason ahead.
Barring an utter collapse, it makes zero sense for the Chiefs to consider any such move at mid-season amid the euphoria about Patrick Mahomes quarterbacking the team and the realistic perception that they can simply outscore anyone.
Because, first, do no harm: If firing Sutton would have made for at least a meaningful symbol of resetting a few months ago, it would hold just the opposite meaning now. The gratuitous chaos and message of panic could only be disruptive.
Plus ... what's the alternative? Coach Andy Reid's longtime coaching colleague and friend Dirk Koetter of Tampa Bay spoke to this point and more on Monday after a 48-10 loss to Chicago that was a far worse breakdown than anything we've seen out of the Chiefs this season:
"We fire (defensive coordinator) Mike Smith. OK, then what would the next move be? ... Mike Smith didn't miss any tackles. He didn't not rush the passer. He didn't blow any coverages. He didn't have any communication errors."
But there is something more to this than merely the suggestion that the Chiefs ought to just lug along Sutton, who playfully shares that no one questions his work more than his wife.
For that matter, as the former head coach at Army, where it's all about chain of command, few know better than Sutton that you're accountable even for what you can't completely control.
But it's fair for us to ask: How much is on him, how much is on the Chiefs' veteran players simply to be where they are supposed to be and make plays they should make, and how much on general manager Brett Veach to furnish better players?
There are good reasons for some of Veach's decisions that didn't help the defense. You witnessed in the volatile Marcus Peters' on-field fits and squabbles with coaches the root of the reasons for trading him. But losing the prolific turnover-producer obviously hurt.
Further, the Chiefs thought the bulk of their free-agent money was best invested in a three-year, $48 million contract for receiver Sammy Watkins rather than more defenders. That doesn't make it wrong, especially since Watkins is part of an exhilarating, multipronged offense, and since the Chiefs had to weigh just what they could get on defense for that amount. But, again, it didn't help the defense.
Beyond the fact that it's far easier to change one person than an entire unit, there is no one answer to why the defense is struggling ... but plenty of questions that come with it.
It's not Sutton's fault that the anticipated improvement against the run, with Anthony Hitchens joining Reggie Ragland at inside linebacker, isn't playing out as avowed in preseason by Ragland: "Oh, we're going to stop that run." It's not Sutton's fault that duo has been exploited in pass coverage, too.
Is it because of Sutton that six or seven Chiefs in position to tackle Royce Freeman on Monday became pylons for a 14-yard touchdown run punctuated by Hitchens being dragged the last 5 yards into the end zone?
Would a new coordinator, presto, make these guys better tacklers?
Is it on him that a defensive touchdown that would have given the Chiefs a game-breaking 28-0 lead at Pittsburgh was waved off because of a holding call away from the play against veteran cornerback Orlando Scandrick?
While injuries are just part of the deal, how much better would/will this defense be if/when safety Eric Berry returns as expected? Won't Daniel Sorensen's anticipated return in the next few weeks make a difference? That pair surely would be an improvement over struggling Ron Parker, who was cut by the team but brought back at a bargain rate, and Eric Murray, whose terrific interception against Denver doesn't negate his lapses.
Beyond all that, does it not mean anything in the grand scheme that the Chiefs have given up just nine first-quarter points as part of a winning formula of general fast starts?
Is it a random number or a meaningful tendency that the Chiefs lead the league in third-down defensive stops, allowing conversions just 23.8 percent of the time?
What does it say that they've given up the bulk of their yardage and points after the team has taken dramatic leads (31-12 at Los Angeles; 21-0 at Pittsburgh; 35-7 against San Francisco)? Is that all scheme-related ... or perhaps somewhat succumbing to human nature and sagging some?
Is it not significant that in the last three games, when it mattered most, the Chiefs' defense allowed a total of 15 fourth-quarter points ... forced Pittsburgh to punt three straight times in the second half ... held the 49ers to 56 yards in the fourth quarter ... and provided a pivotal three-and-out with Allen Bailey's sack at Denver to set up the game-winning rally?
There are plenty of valid counterpoints to all these observations, not the least of which is how this would all look different if the Chargers' Philip Rivers hadn't missed so many open targets in Week 1, and if Denver's Case Keenum hadn't overthrown a wide-open Demaryius Thomas for a late, go-ahead touchdown on Monday.
Even allowing for Mahomes' magic, it's inevitable that this defense is going to get the Chiefs beat here and there _ perhaps as soon as Sunday against Jacksonville at Arrowhead Stadium and/or at New England on Oct. 14.
When the Chiefs retained Sutton, they figured their issues were more about personnel than an assistant coach. Sutton has a fine track record _ in 2013 and 2016, the Chiefs led the league in turnovers forced; in 2014, they allowed a team-record four rushing touchdowns _ albeit one blemished by two of the biggest postseason collapses in NFL history: last year vs. Tennessee and the ghastly 45-44 loss to Indianapolis in 2014.
As it happens, the team's defensive personnel overall right now are no better despite multiple changes. So it's hard to know what's chicken and what's egg here.
The Chiefs' struggles on defense reflect an indistinguishable blend of being out-talented, questionable schemes and personnel rotations and highly paid professional players simply failing to do their jobs.
That said, there's at least a chance this defense gets better. Perhaps the newcomers gel and Dee Ford stays healthy. Or Berry and Sorensen return and Veach continues to churn to find better players. Maybe Sutton takes more chances, like he has done with his best defenses _ those had a knack for creating turnovers; this team has produced just three so far.
To be clear, more than anyone else, it's still on Sutton to fix this. It's ultimately a reflection of him and something he has to own however it plays out with whatever he has to work with.
And maybe the last word on this will be his demise at season's end if this defense proves irredeemable. But it would be counter-productive for the Chiefs to be thinking at all that way now _ no matter how restless the congregation feels.
