PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs kicking game


HemiEd
05-19-2005, 09:15 AM
I was thinking about the Chiefs kicking game. It has been a long time since I felt this good about it going into a new season. I think Lawrence Tynes and Dustin Colquitt are going to be a good tandem. I know they are mostly unproven, but I think the Chiefs finally have the talent at those positions intstead recycled talent.

jspchief
05-19-2005, 09:20 AM
As far as punting, we can only get better. We were 32nd in the league in net last year. Spending a 3rd round pick, I'd certainly like to more than to just get a little better though. Hopefully this kid was worth it. It will be nice to have a directional punter on the team agian.

For kicking, Tynes was just bad enough last year to scare me. He was certainly clutch in some situations, but he also missed a few chip shots. It's still nice to have a young guy that appears to have some upside.

Rain Man
05-19-2005, 09:24 AM
Who was our punter at the end of the season? I don't even remember. It wasn't Cheek, was it?

bricks
05-19-2005, 09:25 AM
Tynes looked pretty solid last year. I think he did a good job on kickoffs. His FG % was good. His leg is pretty solid, and strong. However, he did look a little shaky in some clutch situations. The Jacksonville game is an example of what I'm talking about, where he missed the extra point and field goal. If he nailed both, we could've easily won. I don't know to much about Colquitt. I'm excited to see he comes from a punting family. I hope D*ck Vermeil doesn't ruin the kids confidence like he does with most of his punters. The kid can't screw up I'll tell ya, if he does, D*ck Vermeil will let him have it to the media. jmo

jspchief
05-19-2005, 09:30 AM
Who was our punter at the end of the season? I don't even remember. It wasn't Cheek, was it?Nick Murphy? Or Nate Murphy? I'm pretty sure it was a Murphy, and Nick seems to be the name that sticks in my head.

Douche Baggins
05-19-2005, 09:33 AM
but he also missed a few chip shots.

No, he did not. Can you name one chip shot field goal he missed?

bricks
05-19-2005, 09:33 AM
Nick Murphy? Or Nate Murphy? I'm pretty sure it was a Murphy, and Nick seems to be the name that sticks in my head.

Yup..it is Nick

HemiEd
05-19-2005, 09:33 AM
Who was our punter at the end of the season? I don't even remember. It wasn't Cheek, was it?


Nick Murphy? Or Nate Murphy? I'm pretty sure it was a Murphy, and Nick seems to be the name that sticks in my head.


Nick is Correct, he is still shown on the roster.

jspchief
05-19-2005, 09:36 AM
No, he did not. Can you name one chip shot field goal he missed?I know for a fact he missed an extra point. That is a chip shot.

Douche Baggins
05-19-2005, 09:38 AM
I know for a fact he missed an extra point. That is a chip shot.

I'm talking about field goals.

bricks
05-19-2005, 09:40 AM
No, he did not. Can you name one chip shot field goal he missed?

The Jacksonville game. He missed a 40 yd field goal, and an extra point. We ended up losing the game 22-16. Think if he nailed both, it would've been an entirely different game. the missed field goal, led to a late Jacksonville score, which ended as the game winning touchdown for them.

jspchief
05-19-2005, 09:40 AM
I'm talking about field goals.I don't care what you're talking about. You quoted me, and I wasn't talking about FGs exclusively.

HemiEd
05-19-2005, 09:41 AM
I know for a fact he missed an extra point. That is a chip shot.


That is one of the games I blame on Vermiel for the loss. We should have never attempted that field goal right after the missed extra point. Leave the damn ball in the offenses hands. Oh well, we probably would not have gotten Johnson in the draft if we would have won that game.

Douche Baggins
05-19-2005, 09:41 AM
The Jacksonville game. He missed a 40 yd field goal, and an extra point. We ended up losing the game 22-16. Think if he nailed both, it would've been an entirely different game. the missed field goal, led to a late Jacksonville score, which ended as the game winning touchdown for them.

a 40 yard field goal is NOT a chip shot. And that was actually a 45-yarder.

Tynes is good. Or at the very least, had a good rookie season. I hope he keeps it up.

bkkcoh
05-19-2005, 09:41 AM
I know for a fact he missed an extra point. That is a chip shot.


I thought he missed 2 XP's. But I may be wrong... :banghead:

jspchief
05-19-2005, 09:46 AM
a 40 yard field goal is NOT a chip shot. And that was actually a 45-yarder.

Tynes is good. Or at the very least, had a good rookie season. I hope he keeps it up.

He missed a 33 yard FG in the San Diego game. He missed 2 extra points. He's only 50% beyond 40 yards. That's not horrible, but it's not great.

Like I said, he was just bad enough to scare me. Especially missing PATs.

TRR
05-19-2005, 10:05 AM
Tynes has a long way to go before I can consider him good. The main reason we kept him and released Morten Anderson was because of his kickoff abilities. Well, I thought he did pretty poor in the kickoff department last season. That, and the fact that I hold my breath on every PAT should say something.

bricks
05-19-2005, 10:10 AM
He missed a 33 yard FG in the San Diego game. He missed 2 extra points. He's only 50% beyond 40 yards. That's not horrible, but it's not great.

Like I said, he was just bad enough to scare me. Especially missing PATs.

I did some homework...Lawrence Tynes was 17/23 kicking FG's last season. Most of his misses we're from 40 yards and beyond, so that's not bad. that's normal for a kicker. He did a solid job of kicking, not great, but solid. and yeah, he did miss a 33 yard FG against San Diego. Him missing those extra points scares me. Extra point kicks should be money in the bank, and he missed 2 of them :(

HemiEd
05-19-2005, 10:12 AM
Tynes has a long way to go before I can consider him good. The main reason we kept him and released Morten Anderson was because of his kickoff abilities. Well, I thought he did pretty poor in the kickoff department last season. That, and the fact that I hold my breath on every PAT should say something.

Another reason he was kept instead of Anderson was his leg strength for long field goal attempts, Morten did not have that anymore by most opinions I have heard.
Also, it might be important to consider how many TDs the Chiefs made thus giving an opportunity for something to go wrong with a point after attempt. :hmmm:

TRR
05-19-2005, 10:15 AM
Another reason he was kept instead of Anderson was his leg strength for long field goal attempts, Morten did not have that anymore by most opinions I have heard.
Also, it might be important to consider how many TDs the Chiefs made thus giving an opportunity for something to go wrong with a point after attempt. :hmmm:

I'm not sure Morten Anderson ever missed an extra point while he was in KC. I'm not saying that keeping Tynes was a mistake, I am just hoping that he improves this season.

HemiEd
05-19-2005, 10:19 AM
I'm not sure Morten Anderson ever missed an extra point while he was in KC. I'm not saying that keeping Tynes was a mistake, I am just hoping that he improves this season.


I just have a gut feeling, with nothing to back it up that we have our kicker. I think he will get better with some seasoning.
When it comes to Morten Anderson, I do remember a kick that he missed that kept the Chiefs out of the playoffs. Of course, Anderson was not playing for the Chiefs at that time.

jspchief
05-19-2005, 10:21 AM
I did some homework...Lawrence Tynes was 17/23 kicking FG's last season. Most of his misses we're from 40 yards and beyond, so that's not bad. that's normal for a kicker. He did a solid job of kicking, not great, but solid. and yeah, he did miss a 33 yard FG against San Diego. Him missing those extra points scares me. Extra point kicks should be money in the bank, and he missed 2 of them :( To describe him as anything other than average is homerism IMO. He was bottom 3rd of the league in overall percentage, bottom 3rd of the league beyond 40 yards, and missed two PATs. He also was pretty mediocre on kick-offs. He wasn't particularly clutch. There's nothing he does exceptionally well. Hell, Todd Peterson was as good or better in about every category. Hopefully he improves, and turns into a good kicker, but the only thing to be excited about at this point is his youth.

I'm not trying to bag on the kid. I'm just calling a spade a spade. He was very average last year. The only argument you might be able to make in his favor is that KC was so good on their end of the field that he had less chance to make the 20-40 yd range FGs that may have padded his overall percentage.

I'm not looking to dump him, but it's a little early to commission a carver for his bust in Canton.

bricks
05-19-2005, 10:22 AM
I'm not sure Morten Anderson ever missed an extra point while he was in KC. I'm not saying that keeping Tynes was a mistake, I am just hoping that he improves this season.

Aside from missing those 2 extra points, how much better can the guy get? He did a solid job of kicking last year. He had a FG% of 74. Not bad. Most of the field goals he missed we're from 40 yds and beyond. And that is normal for a kicker. His kickoffs we're ok, they could be better. Aside from all that, I'm very pleased with the job he did. I don't expect him to be a Adam Vintieri or Mike Vanderjat in 1 season. I do think he'll get better, and if he doesn't I'm very pleased with the job he has done.

Fire Me Boy!
05-19-2005, 10:22 AM
I'm not sure Morten Anderson ever missed an extra point while he was in KC. I'm not saying that keeping Tynes was a mistake, I am just hoping that he improves this season.
I seem to remember Morten missing one in the 13-3 season... could be wrong, but when everything else is clicking and it doesn't cost us the game, that kind of stuff is hard to remember.

nascher
05-19-2005, 10:22 AM
Tynes will be fine it's not always the Kicker's fault (missing PAT's). He kicked the Game winner against the Faiders.

jspchief
05-19-2005, 10:28 AM
I seem to remember Morten missing one in the 13-3 season... could be wrong, but when everything else is clicking and it doesn't cost us the game, that kind of stuff is hard to remember.Morten Anderson was on the downside. He was no longer the dependable rock that he had been. He missed the OT game winner against GB, but we were fortunate enough that Ahman Green fumbled.

When you get to the point that you can't attempt anything over 40 yards, it's time to move on.

HemiEd
05-19-2005, 10:38 AM
Tynes will be fine it's not always the Kicker's fault (missing PAT's). He kicked the Game winner against the Faiders.


And that was so SWEEEET!

B_Ambuehl
05-19-2005, 10:59 AM
I wish Tynes would do a better job getting the ball down the field on kickoffs. He was suposed to be pretty good at that, according to DV, but didn't look like it to me.

Chris Meck
05-19-2005, 11:14 AM
I think Tynes was a little inconsistent in all phases; but he was a ROOKIE. I expect he'll be a bit more consistent this year-and he does have a 'big leg' so to speak. He's capable.

PastorMikH
05-19-2005, 11:28 AM
I just have a gut feeling, with nothing to back it up that we have our kicker. I think he will get better with some seasoning.




Exactly! The kid was a rookie last year, which to me explains some of the shakes in clutch situations. Reliability will grow with experience.


FWIW, I wasn't too confident in Mort anymore, and I don't think Tynes did any worse that Mort would have done. Mort's leg isn't what it used to be. Seems to me also that Mort missed one or two inside 40 that cost us too. We haven't had a solid kicker year in and year out since Carl sent Nick packing.

PastorMikH
05-19-2005, 11:30 AM
I wish Tynes would do a better job getting the ball down the field on kickoffs. He was suposed to be pretty good at that, according to DV, but didn't look like it to me.



For him to kick it way down the field, we have to have gunners that can get down there. Losing Bo on ST was huge. When Tynes did kick it deep, the coverage couldn't get there in time.

HemiEd
05-19-2005, 11:59 AM
Exactly! We haven't had a solid kicker year in and year out since Carl sent Nick packing.


I remember being upset about that, do not remember why Carl let him go. I was also ticked when the Raiders took, WildmanJanakowski, but now I am glad they have him.

go bowe
05-19-2005, 03:08 PM
No, he did not. Can you name one chip shot field goal he missed?you're just biased because tynes is scottish, aren't you? :p :p :p

tk13
05-19-2005, 03:32 PM
I was fairly happy with Tynes by the end of the year. He was a rookie kicker, and he kicked like a rookie kicker at times, but in the end I was pleased enough with his performance. Most of his misses were long, and Arrowhead is a tough place to kick anyway. We were actually 11th in the league in touchbacks with 7, so I think we did pretty well there. If you want a rookie comparison, Nate Kaeding only had 2 touchbacks, and he played half his games in perfect weather San Diego. Now with a year under his belt hopefully Tynes will kick better and keep improving.

HemiEd
05-19-2005, 03:53 PM
I was fairly happy with Tynes by the end of the year. He was a rookie kicker, and he kicked like a rookie kicker at times, but in the end I was pleased enough with his performance. Most of his misses were long, and Arrowhead is a tough place to kick anyway. We were actually 11th in the league in touchbacks with 7, so I think we did pretty well there. If you want a rookie comparison, Nate Kaeding only had 2 touchbacks, and he played half his games in perfect weather San Diego. Now with a year under his belt hopefully Tynes will kick better and keep improving.


That is some nice information about Nate Kaeding, after Marty took him just ahead of where I thought the Chiefs were going to pick him.

Donger
05-19-2005, 03:56 PM
you're just biased because tynes is scottish, aren't you? :p :p :p

Tynes is a Scot?

Ultra Peanut
05-19-2005, 04:01 PM
WHO CARES WE'VE GOT ERIC CROUCH!

Douche Baggins
05-19-2005, 06:09 PM
Tynes missed six kicks, but one was a FREAKING 58-YARDER and another was blocked.

People bitching about his kickoffs are ignorant. Last year when the coaching staff told him to kick it deep, he did every time. However, because our kickoff coverage was so piss poor, many times he was called upon to kick it higher, which naturally means kicking it shorter.

The ONLY issue, in my mind, are his extra points. Missing two in one year is inexcusable. It was an issue in Canada too if you look at his history. Hopefully he can overcome it.

Douche Baggins
05-19-2005, 06:10 PM
Tynes is a Scot?

Aye.

Inspector
05-19-2005, 07:12 PM
Us old guys got spoiled years ago with Stenerud.

Followed up by Nick.

For many years our kicking was spot on. Be nice to get some of that kind of talent again. Who l
knows - maybe Tynes is that guy with a little more experience.

I didn't think he was a rookie last year. I thought he had some involvement with the Chiefs the year before or something, but my memory sucks so who knows....

HemiEd
05-19-2005, 08:29 PM
Us old guys got spoiled years ago with Stenerud.

Followed up by Nick.

For many years our kicking was spot on. Be nice to get some of that kind of talent again. Who l
knows - maybe Tynes is that guy with a little more experience.

I didn't think he was a rookie last year. I thought he had some involvement with the Chiefs the year before or something, but my memory sucks so who knows....


I agree, we used to be able to take our kicking for granted, but that has been a while.
IIRC Tynes came to a few training camps but did not make the 53 man roster.

SNR
05-19-2005, 09:29 PM
Who was it who said Tynes was only 50 percent from 40 yards out?

You're telling me you'd rather have Morten kicking from beyond 40 than Tynes?

PastorMikH
05-19-2005, 10:21 PM
I remember being upset about that, do not remember why Carl let him go.




I was living in KC at the time. I remember the local news and talk radio programs talking about it. Now it has been 10 years or so now so I'm a bit cloudy on all the details. Nick was either due a roster bonus or was a FA, I'm not sure. Nick wanted to stay in KC and made that clear to the Chiefs and the local media. He even said he was willing to take a lot less (for some reason I'm thinking he was willing to take a third and possibly even half of his salary cut in pay to help the team). That wasn't low enough for Carl and Carl let him go. I told some friends then that we would miss out on our shot at possibly making the Superbowl because we let Lowrey go. And that was before they even signed *#%&^.

PastorMikH
05-19-2005, 10:22 PM
I didn't think he was a rookie last year. I thought he had some involvement with the Chiefs the year before or something, but my memory sucks so who knows....



Tynes was at camp for 2 years prior and kicked in the Canadian league the year before last. Last year was his first official season in the NFL though, thus the Rookie status.

HemiEd
05-20-2005, 08:30 AM
Nick was either due a roster bonus or was a FA, I'm not sure. Nick wanted to stay in KC and made that clear to the Chiefs and the local media. He even said he was willing to take a lot less (for some reason I'm thinking he was willing to take a third and possibly even half of his salary cut in pay to help the team). That wasn't low enough for Carl and Carl let him go. I told some friends then that we would miss out on our shot at possibly making the Superbowl because we let Lowrey go. And that was before they even signed *#%&^.


I was just thinking about what you said, who was the kicker in 95 playoffs? I can not believe I forgot his name. :hmmm:

bkkcoh
05-20-2005, 08:46 AM
I was living in KC at the time. I remember the local news and talk radio programs talking about it. Now it has been 10 years or so now so I'm a bit cloudy on all the details. Nick was either due a roster bonus or was a FA, I'm not sure. Nick wanted to stay in KC and made that clear to the Chiefs and the local media. He even said he was willing to take a lot less (for some reason I'm thinking he was willing to take a third and possibly even half of his salary cut in pay to help the team). That wasn't low enough for Carl and Carl let him go. I told some friends then that we would miss out on our shot at possibly making the Superbowl because we let Lowrey go. And that was before they even signed *#%&^.

http://www.nicklowery.com/pictures/accurracy_graph1.gif


IIRC, Nick the kick had lost a lot of distance on his FG's.