PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs defense, 7th in the league in sacks.....


bricks
12-22-2004, 09:47 AM
as a team that is. they have 38 sacks as a team. Which makes them 7th in the league. Just found this interesting, trying to look for some positives on a crappy a$$ defense. :shrug:

tyton75
12-22-2004, 09:48 AM
At least that is something that you can point to and say that Gunther is getting something out of this trash he has to work with

Wile_E_Coyote
12-22-2004, 09:54 AM
Allen is said to be in the running for AFC defensive rookie of the year

bricks
12-22-2004, 09:58 AM
At least that is something that you can point to and say that Gunther is getting something out of this trash he has to work with

I think a large part of that has to do with the defensive scheme. Remember, Gunther Cunningham's defensive schemes involve a lot press man-to-man coverage, with a lot of blitzing. It is a very aggressive attacking style defense.
Sacks and QB pressure wouldn't be a problem in that type of defensive scheme. More a less, it is improper reads, utilization, execution, blown coverages and miss tackles that have killed us.

bricks
12-22-2004, 10:02 AM
i wish they had stats for missed tackles and blown coverages. I'd love to see where we rank with the rest of the league in those categories. :hmmm:

Warrior5
12-22-2004, 10:12 AM
Chiefs also ranked 9th in rushing yards per game allowed.

bricks
12-22-2004, 10:16 AM
Chiefs also ranked 9th in rushing yards per game allowed.

that's in the AFC my friend. In the NFL, they are 14th in rushing defense.

tyton75
12-22-2004, 10:17 AM
I am still glad that we got Gunther, I think his style is more effective than Grob's style.. esp if we can get him some players (did I just state the obvious or what?) :)

bricks
12-22-2004, 10:18 AM
here's an interesting stat, did you know that the Chiefs pass defense has allowed 14.5yds per avg completion? Yet, that is by far the worst in the league by a 1.1 yd margin. :Lin:

bricks
12-22-2004, 10:24 AM
I am still glad that we got Gunther, I think his style is more effective than Grob's style.. esp if we can get him some players (did I just state the obvious or what?) :)

For his scheme, they need at least 1 solid cover corner. Doesn't have to be shut down, but, solid. Bartee and McCleon are awful starters. I have no problems keeping them, only as nickel and dime backs. They also need Jerome Woods to step up and play like he used to, cause he's been god awful this year. They need a couple of LBers that can play downhill, physical and attack at los. More speed, intellegence, and toughness are the ways to go in improving our defense. Partically, in the back seven.

Warrior5
12-22-2004, 10:26 AM
that's in the AFC my friend. In the NFL, they are 14th in rushing defense.

Correct. Compare that stat with 2003 against a weaker schedule.

bricks
12-22-2004, 10:40 AM
Correct. Compare that stat with 2003 against a weaker schedule.

Ok.

2003:we were 30th in the league last year in rush defense. Teams ran the ball on us 453x's, an average of 28.3x's per game, 146.5yds avg per game, rush def avg was 5.2yds per carry. In total, we gave up 2344 yds in a season, 18TD's against, and 16 runs of 20t yards or more.

2004:we are 14th in the league in rush defense. Teams ran the ball on us 345x's, an average of 24.6x's per game, 114.2yds per game, rush def avg is 4.6yds per carry. In total, were giving up 1599 rushing yds this season, 16tds against, and 10 runs of 20t yards or more.

htismaqe
12-22-2004, 10:43 AM
Team Defense 2003
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
333 565 3614 6.40 19 25 453 2344 5.17 18 5958
NFL rank ---> 29 29 24 12 13 3 18 30 32 26 29

Team Defense 2004
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
254 413 3515 8.51 27 9 325 1467 4.51 15 4982
NFL rank ---> 19 19 32 32 30 25 4 14 25 24 31


I think it's obvious the weakest link on the team is now CB, and maybe it was all along. The defensive line and linebackers last year were busy covering passes instead of shutting down the run and rushing the passer.

bricks
12-22-2004, 11:05 AM
Team Defense 2003
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
333 565 3614 6.40 19 25 453 2344 5.17 18 5958
NFL rank ---> 29 29 24 12 13 3 18 30 32 26 29

Team Defense 2004
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
254 413 3515 8.51 27 9 325 1467 4.51 15 4982
NFL rank ---> 19 19 32 32 30 25 4 14 25 24 31


I think it's obvious the weakest link on the team is now CB, and maybe it was all along. The defensive line and linebackers last year were busy covering passes instead of shutting down the run and rushing the passer.

I agree we do need a CB. But, I think all these stats are just smoke in mirrors.
Scheme has a lot to do with it. Our defensive schemes this year are far more aggresive than last year, coincedentally that's why we suck in pass defense. Last year, we weren't as much attacking as this year, coincedentally we sucked in rush defense.

Mr. Laz
12-22-2004, 11:08 AM
I think it's obvious the weakest link on the team is now CB, and maybe it was all along.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

Hoover
12-22-2004, 11:09 AM
So If teams never ran the ball aginst us because they knew they could light up our DB's would we then have the best rushing defense in the NFL?

Deberg_1990
12-22-2004, 11:09 AM
Team Defense 2003
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
333 565 3614 6.40 19 25 453 2344 5.17 18 5958
NFL rank ---> 29 29 24 12 13 3 18 30 32 26 29

Team Defense 2004
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
254 413 3515 8.51 27 9 325 1467 4.51 15 4982
NFL rank ---> 19 19 32 32 30 25 4 14 25 24 31


I think it's obvious the weakest link on the team is now CB, and maybe it was all along. The defensive line and linebackers last year were busy covering passes instead of shutting down the run and rushing the passer.

Its been that way all along..since about 2000 or so this secondary has been on a slow steady decline. Whats amazing is, it was absolutely awful in 2002 and we didnt rebuild it from scratch after that????

htismaqe
12-22-2004, 11:10 AM
:eek: :eek: :eek:

:D

You can stop patting yourself on the back now.

Gaz
12-22-2004, 11:15 AM
...I think it's obvious the weakest link on the team is now CB, and maybe it was all along...

While I concede that Bartee seems to be a lost cause, Warfield is okay and McCleon plays well in a zone scheme. I like what I have seen of Sapp and would like to see him more.

The NFL will continue to handcuff CBs in its insatiable gluttony for more points. As the ever-articulate Shannon Sharpe pointed out [grammatical corrections by Gaz]: why pay big bucks to CBs when they are not allowed to do anything?

The NFL and Referees have castrated the CBs. Man coverage is dead. The battle for air supremacy must take place in the backfield. If the QB has time to throw and a clear view of the field, the Offense wins the battle. Former “shutdown corner” Champ Bailey went to a lot of trouble to demonstrate this [and I would like to thank him for his breath-takingly clear illustration at Arrowhead last Sunday]. You must attack the QB, rather than expecting a CB to battle the WR,the Referees and the NFL front office.

An upgrade a CB is desirable, but it is far from our primary need.

MLB, DE, OLB & CB, in that order.

xoxo~
Gaz
Playing within the rules the NFL foisted off on the public.

Rain Man
12-22-2004, 11:15 AM
662 786

The hidden good news in those stats is that offenses are on pace to run 662 plays against the Chiefs this year, while they ran 786 plays last year. That equates to fewer excruciating long, brutal drives due to cornerbacks ten yards off the line of scrimmage and other Robinsonisms.

philfree
12-22-2004, 11:22 AM
Its been that way all along..since about 2000 or so this secondary has been on a slow steady decline. Whats amazing is, it was absolutely awful in 2002 and we didnt rebuild it from scratch after that????


We are much better without Bartee on the field. I wonder how many TDs he's giving up per? Replace Bartee with a 1st round CB and we're better immediately. There's three or four CBs in the draft (besides Rolle) that would be a major upgrade over him. If they we're to get attacked as much as Bartee I'm pretty sure they'd get a pick or two even if they did give up some big plays.


PhilFree :arrow:

Hoover
12-22-2004, 11:23 AM
I think we should go DE in round one to get us Bookend young DE's to go with Sims, Jr, and Dalton. That D Line in Carolina makes that defense go.

Mr. Laz
12-22-2004, 11:25 AM
:D

You can stop patting yourself on the back now.
who ......... me??????? o:-)








:fire:




where ya been? busting u ass 4 the holidays?

ROYC75
12-22-2004, 11:26 AM
More a less, it is improper reads, utilization, execution, blown coverages and miss tackles that have killed us.

That's it in a nutshell according to DV.

BTA, wasn't that the reason in GROB schemes too ?

Mr. Laz
12-22-2004, 11:31 AM
That's it in a nutshell according to DV.

BTA, wasn't that thereason in GROB schemes too ?

ya... at least that is what they said all the time


but then again, better corners prolly = less "improper reads, utilization, execution, blown coverages and miss tackles"


so the 2 things aren't mutual inclusive


the question is: Since they haven't been able to get the consistancy from the current players for the last several years ... what makes next year any different?


i still think our secondary coach sucks @ss ... the discipline is just pathetic back there.


IMO we should change secondary coaches AND bring in 1 veteran corner and 1 high drafted corner

Deberg_1990
12-22-2004, 11:34 AM
the question is: Since they haven't been able to get the consistancy from the current players for the last several years ... what makes next year any different?




Exactly! It hasnt gotten any better in 4 years with basically the same personal! When is Vermeil gonna pull his head out of his butt and rebuild the whole secondary??

philfree
12-22-2004, 11:36 AM
ya... at least that is what they said all the time


but then again, better corners prolly = less "improper reads, utilization, execution, blown coverages and miss tackles"


so the 2 things aren't mutual inclusive


the question is: Since they haven't been able to get the consistancy from the current players for the last several years ... what makes next year any different?


i still think our secondary coach sucks @ss ... the discipline is just pathetic back there.


IMO we should change secondary coaches AND bring in 1 veteran corner and 1 high drafted corner

Those are my exact thoughts on the CB situation.

PhilFree :arrow:

Frosty
12-22-2004, 12:09 PM
662 786

The hidden good news in those stats is that offenses are on pace to run 662 plays against the Chiefs this year, while they ran 786 plays last year. That equates to fewer excruciating long, brutal drives due to cornerbacks ten yards off the line of scrimmage and other Robinsonisms.

Why go a long drive when you can get it all on one play?

At least it puts our offense back on the field quicker.

jspchief
12-22-2004, 12:27 PM
Our rush defensive rank is misleading because teams don't bother with the run due to our aweful pass defense. 28th in the league allowing 4.6 per carry is the more telling stat. I don't think our Run D is even moderately better.

Same goes with sacks, we get more sacks because we see more passing plays. Although I do still think we've improved in this area...question is, at what cost?

crossbow
12-22-2004, 09:20 PM
When the season started, other teams remembered how easy it was to run against the Cheifs the previous year so they planned on running it the whole game. Gunther stopped most of it except for the ocasional long run that got through. We all thought that improvements were made and that the long runs would eventualy be contained when the middle linebackers and safeties settled down.

After Gunther put the teams in third and long a ton of times and forced them to throw...they did so and they found out that our pass defense was even worse then what our run defense was last year. So "bombs away" became the new strategy to defeat the Chiefs. Gun tried to counter it with blitzes and dogs but McCleon was injured and Bartee/Battle couldn't cover the receivers well enough for the blitzes to work. End result: the middle was wide open because of the blitzes and the other teams tightends and slant route receivers made a zillion catches.

So following that logic and history, the Chiefs should draft a playmaker end to complement J. Allen. Beaf up the middle linebacker position through free agency (or teach Mitchel how to tackle). And draft a real corner that doesn't have to be converted from a safety. A corner with hands that can intercept.

Question: Does our scouting staff look at how well a linebacker can tackle becore they draft him? Can these guys tackle in college and then as soon as they put on a Chiefs uniform they suddenly forget this fundamental skill? Its frustating to say the least that these guys can't do what high school kids and college men can do.

Logical
12-22-2004, 11:10 PM
...


i still think our secondary coach sucks @ss ... the discipline is just pathetic back there.


IMO we should change secondary coaches AND bring in 1 veteran corner and 1 high drafted corner:thumb: