PDA

View Full Version : You May Run, But You May Not Catch....


CosmicPal
10-05-2004, 08:40 AM
Question:

I was quite surprised to see Priest go another game without catching many balls. As a matter of fact, I don't recall him catching any passes in last night's brilliant win.

What's up with this?

Are we really trying to help Priest gain the single season rushing record by abandoning the pass to him?

BigRedChief
10-05-2004, 08:43 AM
And while we are at it...WTF is the Priest screen? We havent saw it all year...And why doesnt Priest pull up on those sweeps and throw the ball down field sometimes?

Gaz
10-05-2004, 08:44 AM
Teams are covering the screen to Holmes. When he slips out of the backfield, someone goes with him. Once we establish the ground game, the screen will follow. Until then, enjoy the 125 yards against the ‹berDefense of Baltimore.

xoxo~
Gaz
Uses the weapons where they do the most damage.

Hoover
10-05-2004, 08:46 AM
I have no proble on how we use Priest.

The dude is a work horse, 32 carries last week, 33 this week, wanting more touches is stupid. I'll take him running the ball over catching the ball. Just watch, when we need it the most we will use him in the passing game. What I would like to see more of is Trich in the passing game.

CosmicPal
10-05-2004, 08:49 AM
Teams are covering the screen to Holmes. When he slips out of the backfield, someone goes with him. Once we establish the ground game, the screen will follow. Until then, enjoy the 125 yards against the ‹berDefense of Baltimore.

xoxo~
Gaz
Uses the weapons where they do the most damage.


he only has 5 catches for 14 yards after 4 games, very unPriest-like

I don't think the Chiefs would abandon the screen play after 5 throws

jspchief
10-05-2004, 08:54 AM
Baltimore was not the team to try and get the screen working against...their LBs are too fast and Reed is too solid at picking up plays like that.

We won't have an effective screen until we have a legitimate deep threat. When teams are comfortable with 1-on-1 against our WRs, safeties are able to sit back and cover Gonzo and the screen. Hopefully a healthy Kennison can scare some teams alittle.

Gaz
10-05-2004, 08:56 AM
125 yards against the formidable Baltimore Defense. He did not NEED to catch any passes. This time, he did it on the ground and the WRs handled the passes.

And it worked, did it not?

Why complain that we did not do an unnecessary thing?

You might as well complain that we used Gonzalez as a decoy and threw to Dunn. That was very un-Gonzalez-like, wasn't it?

xoxo~
Gaz
Groping for the objection.

ROYC75
10-05-2004, 09:06 AM
Agreed that teams are prepaired for the screens this year plus last night wasn't a good time to use them.

Agreed when we get the deep threat back on offense and teams are respecting the run again, we will then dump off the screen passes for large gains.

It time, all will come together well at the end of the year. It's called peaking at the right time.

Our problem now is, with the 3 losses, can we get to the end of the year with our team peaking for the playoffs.

CosmicPal
10-05-2004, 09:21 AM
Guys..please....

I'm not complaining or beetching...I am just simply curious. It seemed to be the normal offense the past few years to have Priest run while catching quite a few balls.

It just seems like they've abandoned it thus far...and I'm just curious to know why

Gaz
10-05-2004, 09:29 AM
The screen depends on deception. When you have no deep threat [Kennison], The Enemy can condense the field. The screen does not work when the area just beyond the LOS is jammed with defenders. Too much clutter.

The screen will return when circumstances call for it.

xoxo~
Gaz
Saw too many Chiefs screens blown up already this year.

Straight, No Chaser
10-05-2004, 09:33 AM
Question:

I was quite surprised to see Priest go another game without catching many balls. As a matter of fact, I don't recall him catching any passes in last night's brilliant win.

What's up with this?
...

1/2 of it: The John Tait factor. Whatever you think about the RLDS with money in both hip pockets, he could pull out and play roadgrater on that play. I'm hoping AL keeps that on the back burner until Welbourn develops.

other 1/2 of it: Teams have highlight clips of that play committed to memory.


---->

Coogs
10-05-2004, 09:35 AM
I'll take that game plan last night every single game the rest of the way in. Ball control by way of the run and play-action pass is exactly what this team needs. We don't need quick scores. Look what that did for Baltimore last night. Wore out a great defense.

Let the offensive line dominate the game. BTW, Black was very impressive in relief of Waters last night too. Good to see.

DV, Gun, and AS were very good last night. I thought they were against the Texans too. The players were very good last night. I thought they were against the Texans too. We dominated two straight games. We were a bit unlucky against the Texans.

Things are looking up. We have a pulse.

morphius
10-05-2004, 09:35 AM
Guys..please....

I'm not complaining or beetching...I am just simply curious. It seemed to be the normal offense the past few years to have Priest run while catching quite a few balls.

It just seems like they've abandoned it thus far...and I'm just curious to know why
It seems that everytime we have tried to run it the other teams have read it and kept Holmes from getting out of the backfield or had someone all over him.

I'm sure we willl see it soon, but right now the play action pass is working great.

Coogs
10-05-2004, 09:36 AM
One other note....


Tynes... :clap: :clap: :clap:

BigRedChief
10-05-2004, 09:38 AM
Okay so they are ready for the screen, he's running the ball well. Why bother...good points. But what about having Priest throw the ball? Seems like that ia play that is et up real well if they are all keying on Priest.

Logical
10-05-2004, 09:45 AM
I believe part of the reason the screen has disappeared is the offensive line chemistry is screwed up with Tait gone. Welbourn is no where near as effective in the passing game as Tait was and the effects are showing.

CosmicPal
10-05-2004, 09:45 AM
I'll take that game plan last night every single game the rest of the way in. Ball control by way of the run and play-action pass is exactly what this team needs. We don't need quick scores. Look what that did for Baltimore last night. Wore out a great defense.



I absolutely agree with you....maybe this is after all, a change for the better. They've been talking about trying to keep our defense off the field, and last night's offense certainly kept our defense fresh.

Coogs
10-05-2004, 09:50 AM
I absolutely agree with you....maybe this is after all, a change for the better. They've been talking about trying to keep our defense off the field, and last night's offense certainly kept our defense fresh.

Yep! And that fresh defense rocked.

And if our offense can ball control the Ravens in their house.....

well that is a damn good plan for anyone we go up against.

Straight, No Chaser
10-05-2004, 10:04 AM
I'll take that game plan last night every single game the rest of the way in. Ball control by way of the run and play-action pass is exactly what this team needs. We don't need quick scores. Look what that did for Baltimore last night. Wore out a great defense.
...


Those 12 and 13 play drives in the second half were the best of last night...I like it against JAX.
LOOK AHEAD 1 GAME: back-to-back games against Micheal Vick and Peyton Manning... Ball control is great when you're playing the Ravens with a lead but I don't see it happening in weeks 7 & 8.


--->

Coogs
10-05-2004, 10:53 AM
Those 12 and 13 play drives in the second half were the best of last night...I like it against JAX.
LOOK AHEAD 1 GAME: back-to-back games against Micheal Vick and Peyton Manning... Ball control is great when you're playing the Ravens with a lead but I don't see it happening in weeks 7 & 8.


--->

If we have the lead against Vick and Manning, I would think it would work wonders as well. Vick and Manning on the sidelines can't hurt you. Vick and Manning on the field can.


Early in the game, we were down 3-0 to the Ravens. Ball controll down the field for a score and a 7-3 lead. That was critical IMO. If we fall behind the Falcons or Colts, stay the course. Now, if we fall behind by 14 to 17, that is a different story.

But for now, run the ball and play action pass. It made Morton, Horn, and Dunn look like pro-bowlers. And if it ain't broke....

Logical
10-05-2004, 10:57 AM
Does any QB have a worse play action fake than Trent. They need to bring in Steve Deberg and have him teach Trent the right way to do it. Frankly Trent's play action fake is pathetic.

Coogs
10-05-2004, 11:00 AM
Does any QB have a worse play action fake than Trent. They need to bring in Steve Deberg and have him teach Trent the right way to do it. Frankly Trent's play action fake is pathetic.

:thumb:

Straight, No Chaser
10-05-2004, 12:09 PM
Does any QB have a worse play action fake than Trent. They need to bring in Steve Deberg and have him teach Trent the right way to do it. Frankly Trent's play action fake is pathetic.

It worked last night! Priest's size helps that some.

I remember getting bent because the cameramen would pan on the back and DeBerg would be there, off camera, all alone...


---->

KC Kings
10-05-2004, 12:21 PM
Why didn't Gonzo catch more than a couple balls last night? The same reason Priest hasn't been getting the screen. They have been the only play makers, so they are getting all of the attention.

I can't believe people are concerned about Priest not catching balls after he ran for 125 yards on a night when Chris Horn, Johnny Morton, and Jason Dunn stood up and caught passes giving us an affective passing game.