PDA

View Full Version : Our Rushing Game is Under-Rated (by us also)...


Luzap
09-24-2005, 09:50 PM
As I watched NFL Playbook, and after following our board this week, I've come to the conclusion that our running game is vastly under rated.

Consider the following:

1) Ok, in week #1 it was obvious to everyone that 195 yards rushing was awesome, but I think it got lost in the shuffle because everyone was asking, 'What's wrong with the Jets?' Also, with Priest and Larry playing, no one back really captured the eye of the media, and let's face it, Larry Johnson's stats were just ridiculous ~ it had to be a fluke.

2) The Raiders run D is much, much better than most realize right now. Their switch to the 4-3 has put Washington and Sapp in positions to do what they do best. Even using a 3-4, how many yards did they hold Corey Dillion to in week #1? See Gretz's article on the Chiefs website if you want a view of how they tried to ambush us. We put 140 yards on them ~ and did it when we needed them the most. Yet again, those yards are divided between two backs. While we were focused on Black's (LT) miscues, our O Line (with two back-up tackles) quitely had a great game. This story was dramatically overshadowed by the play of our defense.

Personally, I am in awe not of the fact that this team has won it's first two games, but rather, in how they've won them. We've run the ball (because we've chosen to) successfuly against two teams that have good run defenses and done it with two tackles playing back-up. Our best run blocking tight end was out the last half of the last game. We are without the services of Weigeman (our veteran all purpose OL back-up), without Simms (who for pre-season and one series looked like a #6 pick), without Warfield (our #2 CB who was #1 last year), without Battle (who was considered to be the third best we had), and for part of the last game without Carlos Hall (our FA DE that was definitely making plays).
Throw in the fact that our offensive game plan was out the window last week, and the fact that everyone felt this was a brutal first four game stretch ~ I think we're setting on something special.

If you can run the ball and stop the run, you can dominate in the NFL. I think we will still be tested on defense, but I, for one, think we may have one of (if not the) most potent running attacks in the League.
I am salivating at the thought of getting all (most) our players back healthy. Can you imagine having a good record going into the second half of the season with Roaf, Hall, Sampson, Simms, and TRich healthy? Having Warfield back won't hurt either.

We could also talk about what a great job Trent Green and Al Saunders have done (not to mention Gun), but that's another conversation.

Luz
thinking we may have a dominating team...

Thig Lyfe
09-24-2005, 09:55 PM
Good points.

I think the Chiefs have something special as well. It feels a lot more specialer than 2003 even, because even from the start we knew that the D was a huge liability.

Not the case this year.

Deberg_1990
09-24-2005, 10:21 PM
Id put our run game up against any other team in the NFL. When we are at 100% there is no stopping it. No other team in the NFL can combine the O-line we have, and Priest + LJ. No other team can even come close to that deadly triple threat.

Halfcan
09-24-2005, 11:25 PM
Yeah great post. I agree, ou have to run and stop the run. We should be able to do that this weekend. I hope Al doesn't try another freakin double reverse. Just jam down their throats like a cheap porno.

Bowser
09-25-2005, 12:27 AM
Good post, Luz. i think our running game has stressed just how much the coaching staff DOESN'T want Trent to drop back and pass 40 times a game. And while it's good to have the balance that we've had, it sort of worries me about what could possibly be the real story with Trent's leg. Hopefully, that's just me worrying too much.

go bowe
09-25-2005, 12:36 AM
Good post, Luz. i think our running game has stressed just how much the coaching staff DOESN'T want Trent to drop back and pass 40 times a game. And while it's good to have the balance that we've had, it sort of worries me about what could possibly be the real story with Trent's leg. Hopefully, that's just me worrying too much.trent's leg is fine...

problems with the artery like he had are easily correctable with modern medical techniques...

he's had the procedure and he's good to go...

you're worrying too much... :harumph: :harumph: :harumph:

Logical
09-25-2005, 01:02 AM
without the services of Weigeman Huh, do you mean Wellbourn? I don't think Weigman is out or has been out.

Straight, No Chaser
09-25-2005, 02:26 AM
As I watched NFL Playbook, and after following our board this week, I've come to the conclusion that our running game is vastly under rated...

thinking we may have a dominating team...


Your observations about the Chiefs running game in weeks one and two are on the mark, but are just that --observations:

...I think it got lost in the shuffle...

The Raiders only needed to make one smart play at the end and we'd have lost that game; they didn't of course, and the most impressive sequence for me, was the offense executing those two clock-draining drives that ended up in FG's. I'm not as sold as you on performance thus far, but concede the potential. We'll see on Monday night weather or not our running game has arrived. So too, we'll see if it's really personnel on defense and not the scheme.

For the most part, the games at Pile High & Invesco, have been bellwether games for us. They know what we run on both sides of the ball and vice versa. If we can play for 4 quarters and beat them with what they know is coming then we have indeed arrived.


--->

keg in kc
09-25-2005, 02:32 AM
The thing about "not being sold" on our wins the last two weeks because the other teams have f*cked up ignores the fact that we also had a number of f*ck ups in both games. We had several dropped INTs against the Jets and several key penalties against the Raiders. It's not like we played flawless ball and scraped by because we were lucky. We won because, while we did make mistakes, we made fewer, and we simply outplayed both teams, despite missing several starters at key positions.

And I think something's to be said for our conditioning, too. We were in a lot better physical shape towards the end of both games than either opponent. So much for all the "camp's too easy" and "we shouldn't be resting so many vets" talk.

jidar
09-25-2005, 02:35 AM
I agree. I've been thinking the same thing. Our running game is almost unstoppable. There isn't a D in the NFL right now that can keep us under 100 yards on the ground, let alone 80.

Earthling
09-25-2005, 02:38 AM
The thing about "not being sold" on our wins the last two weeks because the other teams have f*cked up ignores the fact that we also had a number of f*ck ups in both games. We had several dropped INTs against the Jets and several key penalties against the Raiders. It's not like we played flawless ball and scraped by because we were lucky. We won because, while we did make mistakes, we made fewer, and we simply outplayed both teams, despite missing several starters at key positions.

And I think something's to be said for our conditioning, too. We were in a lot better physical shape towards the end of both games than either opponent. So much for all the "camp's too easy" and "we shouldn't be resting so many vets" talk.

Good observation.

CosmicPal
09-25-2005, 02:40 AM
The thing about "not being sold" on our wins the last two weeks because the other teams have f*cked up ignores the fact that we also had a number of f*ck ups in both games. We had several dropped INTs against the Jets and several key penalties against the Raiders. It's not like we played flawless ball and scraped by because we were lucky. We won because, while we did make mistakes, we made fewer, and we simply outplayed both teams, despite missing several starters at key positions.

And I think something's to be said for our conditioning, too. We were in a lot better physical shape towards the end of both games than either opponent. So much for all the "camp's too easy" and "we shouldn't be resting so many vets" talk.

:clap:

I agree

Rausch
09-25-2005, 02:46 AM
If not for a Parker fumble and a block in the back on Dante's return we blow out the Raiders...

keg in kc
09-25-2005, 02:50 AM
Hell, no matter how you want to slice it, winning at Oakland on their home opener in prime time is no joke. If people are waiting on a "perfect game" before they're willing to believe, they'll be waiting a long damn time. Even if we should somehow manage to lose Monday (and I don't think we will, but anything's possible), nothing changes the fact that winning last Sunday was a hell of a difficult thing to do.

Straight, No Chaser
09-25-2005, 02:59 AM
Luzap thinks we have a dominating team... I think we can be. Oh, we dominated the Jets alright but the Raiders... dominating that crew means winning by more than 6 (IMO). They have much stingier defense than last years team. If that's the best run-D we'll face then I'd go with dominating too. Myopia abounds around here about Denver at Invesco. Don't get me wrong... I think we can win but I think their coaching staff is glad Gunther's running the same scheme. It's predictable to plan for. Denver's "D" toughened up after the half last week and put Diego's plans for running Tomlinson on the bench. If I remember correctly, Denver dominated the Bolts on both sides in 2nd half. I'll take a win by 1 point but no blowout predictions.


--->

keg in kc
09-25-2005, 03:18 AM
There's flashy domination and there's practical domination. When Oakland tied the game early in the second half, after blocking a field goal, we answered with a 9 minute scoring drive, and held the the ball for a grand total of 17 of the game's final 25 minutes, keeping Oakland off the scoreboard.

I don't know what else people wanted.

Rausch
09-25-2005, 03:29 AM
There's flashy domination and there's practical domination. When Oakland tied the game early in the second half, after blocking a field goal, we answered with a 9 minute scoring drive, and held the the ball for a grand total of 17 of the game's final 25 minutes, keeping Oakland off the scoreboard.

Which protected our defense, and make me sport wood...

keg in kc
09-25-2005, 04:46 AM
Which protected our defense, and make me sport wood...My only complaint was that we scored FGs instead of TDs. The game was closer than it should have been.

And the defense took care of itself, following that 9 minute scoring drive by forcing a 3 and out and then a 4 and out, giving up a total of 20 yards. The last drive by Oakland came after Parker's fumble. And that whole situation scared the shit out of me, because momentum on the road is a bitch. We left the door open for them by kicking those FGs and then handing them the ball. Vintage Martyball, that. Stupid football. Couldn't have scripted it better for a 24-23 come-from-behind win. Thankfully we didn't shoot ourselves in the foot.

htismaqe
09-25-2005, 05:29 AM
If you can run the ball and stop the run, you can dominate in the NFL.

That's it, right there.

tiptap
09-25-2005, 07:23 AM
OK, the Jets defense should be a good test, but the Raiders had trouble on defense last year with the run. Dillion running came of the Pats hasn't shown up at all so don't get high on running on Oakland. We do get to test your theory though. We get to play Washington, Buffalo and Miami all teams that have, the last few years and this year, played the run, along with the pass, well.

Luzap
09-25-2005, 01:17 PM
OK, the Jets defense should be a good test, but the Raiders had trouble on defense last year with the run. Dillion running came of the Pats hasn't shown up at all so don't get high on running on Oakland. We do get to test your theory though. We get to play Washington, Buffalo and Miami all teams that have, the last few years and this year, played the run, along with the pass, well.

There's logic in what you say, but I think the Raiders D Line played outstanding against us ~ I was very impressed by them (even though that's kind of hard to say).

Also, it's not like we don't have some history behind us ~ we've always had a good running game (remember the Atlanta game?).

Someone said it was just my observation, and they are right. My entire contention is not that we've proved we have a dominating running game, but rather that what I'm seeing is making me think we very well could.

And again, all of this is happening with what most could consider 'key' injuries.

Luz
thinking we have something special...

Luzap
12-05-2005, 02:17 PM
Bump.

I wanted to bring this back up because it gives us some perspective on the season. We knew the injuries were going to hurt us ~ the question was, 'Can we survive them,' and, ' How long will it take the D to Gel.'

Personally, I think DV and the coaching staff have done an outstanding job (all things considered).

Below is a recent post from just before the Donks game...

Luz
we're comming on at the right time. will it be enough???...


My gut feeling is that we will win.

When the injuries started happening in the first game, I knew the first half of the season would be a huge challenge. We've actually come through it better than I expected. My only disapointment is how we played in Buffalo (the Philly loss was disappointing, but I didn't expect a win anyway).

IMHO, the issue for the '05 Chiefs has always been 'how fast can they come together?'

It appears that both sides of the ball are starting to get into the groove at the same time ~ and at the best point of the season to start comming on strong.

With Roaf, Parker, and Simms comming back healthy and playing well (we hope Simms will play well), this team is a MUCH better team than it was when we played the Donks in Denver.

I actually have a lot of faith in Simms ~ if he can stay healthy he will dominate on the inside.

We could very well be looking at the best Chiefs team in decades.

Luz
time will tell, but i wouldn't be surprised to see us win out...

Luzap
12-05-2005, 02:19 PM
Note: I think Simms did play well, and if he can stay healthy (always the knock on him) we are going to continue to improve.

Luz
sees good things happening...