PDA

View Full Version : Part of our problems on offense...


Chiefs Pantalones
10-02-2005, 07:59 PM
IMO, the Oline missing Roaf isn't that big. It's big, but it's doable.

Now what's really hurting the offense, IMO, is the 2 series Priest, 1 series LJ. That's a lose-lose situation. One RB gets into a groove, then he's taken out a series or two later. I saw in this game there is nothing wrong with Priest. He just needs to keep getting the ball to get flowing.

LJ can whine all he wants, but that shouldn't make the Chiefs put him in there. I was all for the 2-1 change-up, but it has not worked. It's just a neater way of saying RBBC. Keep Priest in there until he needs a breather. If LJ whines, ignore him. He'll get his chance next year or the year after.

Douche Baggins
10-02-2005, 08:02 PM
I'm beginning to agree with you.

JBucc
10-02-2005, 08:02 PM
I don't care who was in there we couldn't run the ball period in the second half

Bowser
10-02-2005, 08:05 PM
I agree with this. The coaches seemingly are giving up what's good for the team in favor of stroking two of their stars' egos.

And after the first two series on O, playcalling was for shit.

KCChiefsFan88
10-02-2005, 08:06 PM
Agree completely. It is difficult for a RB to get into a groove when you are rotating them in and out of the game. Especially a RB like Priest who really isn't a home-run threat, rather his strength is continue to hit a defense and getting those 10-15 yard runs.

Today for example, Priest comes out on fire and Philly couldn't stop him, so why take him out for virtually the entire 2nd quarter?

JBucc
10-02-2005, 08:07 PM
Let's not forget we basically died when Johnson fumbled and I doubt Priest would have

Chiefs Pantalones
10-02-2005, 08:07 PM
I don't care who was in there we couldn't run the ball period in the second half

In running the ball, it's just not all Oline. The RB and the Oline have to be one with another and work together the whole game.

You could put anyone at RB behind the broncos oline and they would get 1,000 yards. But it wasn't by RBBC, they had one guy doing it all season. It's chemistry, it's teamwork. It's so much more than "we make hole, you run through."

The 2-1 series change has hurt the offense.

Now the pass protection...that's a different story. Run blocking is so much easier. We definitely need Roaf back for pass protection, and obviously a HOFamer doesn't hurt at run blocking.

Simplex3
10-02-2005, 08:08 PM
I still think the biggest problem is that we won't go deep and the whole league knows it.

morphius
10-02-2005, 08:08 PM
I'm not a fan of the 2 - 1 written in stone idea. It doesn't really keep the D guessing, which is what you try to do with two talented guys running the ball.

Oh well...

JBucc
10-02-2005, 08:10 PM
I still think the biggest problem is that we won't go deep and the whole league knows it.Because the one fast reciever we have couldn't catch a boner in the playboy mansion

headsnap
10-02-2005, 08:11 PM
I still think the biggest problem is that we won't go deep and the whole league knows it.
Trent hasn't had time to go deep..

Simplex3
10-02-2005, 08:13 PM
Trent hasn't had time to go deep..
Bull. He doesn't have time on every play but he had plenty of time on multiple plays today. Issue is nobody is EVER going deep so they can capitalize on those well-blocked plays.

Chiefs Pantalones
10-03-2005, 12:24 PM
Anyone else think we should do it like we used to? Priest in until he needs a breather?

ChiefsCountry
10-03-2005, 12:33 PM
Anyone else think we should do it like we used to? Priest in until he needs a breather?

Man, didn't you read the posts the first couple weeks of the season? If we don't give LJ 20 carries a game, we are screwed. ROFL

redhed
10-03-2005, 12:42 PM
Johnson is going to have a tough time justifying his PT if he keeps coughing up the rock. Of course, he prolly thinks he's the #1 RB, so maybe not.

Dunit35
10-03-2005, 12:46 PM
AGREED..this 2-1 isnt working so well...and if we dont go deep enough teams will just stack 8 up front and make us throw long on them...but we might have someone go deep and someone run a 2 yard slant and thats what we throw too because he doesnt have enough time to throw long..

cdcox
10-03-2005, 12:59 PM
I don't care who was in there we couldn't run the ball period in the second half

40 yds in 7 carries is still better than 5 yds a carry. Kennison's reverse was a chunk of that, but we had two series where Holmes gained 4 yds on first down (bringing up 2nd and 6) where we went back to the pass. This was at a time where the pass was getting killed by a strong pass rush coupled with their defenders right on top of our receivers. I think we went away from the run more than they stopping it. In the 1st Q when we were truely committed to the run, we were very successful, which opened up the passing game too. We basically abandoned the run in the second half.

Shox
10-03-2005, 01:02 PM
And after the first two series on O, playcalling was for shit.

Absolutely. The Eagles figured out out game plan was going to be short passes, quick hitches, slants, screens. They started jumping routes and did not repect the deep threat at all and we never tired to push the ball deep.

Early in the second half we ran the ball OT or something and Kinnison was running the fake reverse and nobody even paid any attention to him. Easily the entire 1/3 or more of the field was wide open. Did we come back with play and run the reverse. No. Not until midway in the 4th quarter when it was to late. The play went for 23 yards.

You can't blindly just stick to the gameplan. Just because you didn't run the play during the week does not mean these guys can't run the play. Our offense are vets, they have run these plays countless times, they will remember them just because they did not run them during the week of practice.. Make some adjustments and put them in a postion to get positive plays.

MOhillbilly
10-03-2005, 01:03 PM
you know what is hurting this team on offense?
Smarter coaches on the otherside of the field.

htismaqe
10-03-2005, 01:12 PM
Johnson is going to have a tough time justifying his PT if he keeps coughing up the rock. Of course, he prolly thinks he's the #1 RB, so maybe not.

Hell, the 2-1 rotation may be CONTRIBUTING to LJ's fumblitis. Neither back is allowed to get into a rhythm...

Bowser
10-03-2005, 01:56 PM
Hell, the 2-1 rotation may be CONTRIBUTING to LJ's fumblitis. Neither back is allowed to get into a rhythm...

Absolutely.

I really hope the coaches wake up out of this strange funk they have been wandering around in. It's almost like they just expect good things to happen, no matter the call, because we've had a top 5 offense for the last four years.

PastorMikH
10-03-2005, 02:12 PM
Got to agree with Cody on this one. I thought that pulling Priest when the O was clicking like it was wasn't the best idea. Priest should be the starter, if he breaks off a long run and wants a beather, LJ goes in for a play or two. BUT Priest comes in at the start of every series until the game is out of reach and he can sit down and eat nachos.


On the LJ Fumble, as loose as he carries the ball at times, I'm surprised it hasn't happened more. AND when Priest does fumble, usually the D pays big for the next couple of series because Priest is angry.

jspchief
10-03-2005, 02:14 PM
We gave up on the run in the second half. They didn't shut it down.

We only ran 6 times (excluding the reverse).

In fact, we only had 12 rushing attempts in the final 3 quarters of the game. Ridiculous.

htismaqe
10-03-2005, 02:15 PM
Got to agree with Cody on this one. I thought that pulling Priest when the O was clicking like it was wasn't the best idea. Priest should be the starter, if he breaks off a long run and wants a beather, LJ goes in for a play or two. BUT Priest comes in at the start of every series until the game is out of reach and he can sit down and eat nachos.


On the LJ Fumble, as loose as he carries the ball at times, I'm surprised it hasn't happened more. AND when Priest does fumble, usually the D pays big for the next couple of series because Priest is angry.

By the same token, they pulled LJ during some times when he was rolling and Priest wasn't.

I have no problem with a game-by-game rotation, but the 2 series in-1 series out thing has to go...

ArrowheadHawk
10-03-2005, 02:17 PM
i thought two good backs was a good problem to have...i guess not

Calcountry
10-03-2005, 02:18 PM
IMO, the Oline missing Roaf isn't that big. It's big, but it's doable.

Now what's really hurting the offense, IMO, is the 2 series Priest, 1 series LJ. That's a lose-lose situation. One RB gets into a groove, then he's taken out a series or two later. I saw in this game there is nothing wrong with Priest. He just needs to keep getting the ball to get flowing.

LJ can whine all he wants, but that shouldn't make the Chiefs put him in there. I was all for the 2-1 change-up, but it has not worked. It's just a neater way of saying RBBC. Keep Priest in there until he needs a breather. If LJ whines, ignore him. He'll get his chance next year or the year after.Its time to put the diapers back on LJ.

You don't drop the rock 2 consecutive weeks, at critical times no less, and expect to keep gettin it.

Holmes' only fumble that I can remember was in the Colts playoff game, and even then, he was careful enough to make sure he fumbled it deep in the Colts territory, not that that mattered much.

PastorMikH
10-03-2005, 02:25 PM
By the same token, they pulled LJ during some times when he was rolling and Priest wasn't.

I have no problem with a game-by-game rotation, but the 2 series in-1 series out thing has to go...


I can agree with that. Let the RB with the hot hand have the PT.

Coogs
10-03-2005, 02:53 PM
Believe it or not, I still think the coaching staff ignores the fact that we are a running team. I really believe they want to be the Rams on offense. Yesterday, we were up 17-0 with the Chiefs running the ball 15 times and passing the ball 7. Time-of-Possession was huge in our favor after 1 quarter.

From that point on, we passed the ball 23 times and ran the ball 12.

Rams style.

It didn't work for us last year either. Took until the Ravens game for AS to start running the ball 2 times for every 1 pass instead of the other way around.

If this season is going to go anywhere, AS must go back to that style of play, and do it by the Washington game in two weeks. 2 rushes for every 1 pass is far more important than 2 series for every 1 series for the RB's. But if LJ continues to have what appears to be a crappy attitude when he is shown on the sidelines, then Holmes should return to his full time duty of seasons past.

htismaqe
10-03-2005, 03:29 PM
Its time to put the diapers back on LJ.

You don't drop the rock 2 consecutive weeks, at critical times no less, and expect to keep gettin it.

Holmes' only fumble that I can remember was in the Colts playoff game, and even then, he was careful enough to make sure he fumbled it deep in the Colts territory, not that that mattered much.

Goddamn board! I spent the time doing the research and it's all wiped out with the click of a button, you'd think I'd have learned by now to type stuff out in Notepad... :cuss:

Anyway, LJ has 2 career fumbles in 177 career carries. That's lower than Tomlinson, Lewis, and most other feature backs.

In addition, LJ carried the ball 120 times last year without a fumble at all.

What the difference? He wasn't sharing carries with anybody.

This "rotation" does a disservice to both backs.

You, just like everybody else here, are kinda spoiled when it comes to fumbles -- Priest Holmes has one of the lowest fumble-to-carry ratios in the HISTORY of football.

Shox
10-03-2005, 03:59 PM
You, just like everybody else here, are kinda spoiled when it comes to fumbles -- Priest Holmes has one of the lowest fumble-to-carry ratios in the HISTORY of football.


Just another reason to keep Priest in the game and feed him.

ArrowheadHawk
10-03-2005, 04:02 PM
....feed him.
the rock

Calcountry
10-03-2005, 04:24 PM
I agree with this. The coaches seemingly are giving up what's good for the team in favor of stroking two of their stars' egos.

And after the first two series on O, playcalling was for shit.They are not stroking TG's ego.

Calcountry
10-03-2005, 04:31 PM
Goddamn board! I spent the time doing the research and it's all wiped out with the click of a button, you'd think I'd have learned by now to type stuff out in Notepad... :cuss:

Anyway, LJ has 2 career fumbles in 177 career carries. That's lower than Tomlinson, Lewis, and most other feature backs.

In addition, LJ carried the ball 120 times last year without a fumble at all.

What the difference? He wasn't sharing carries with anybody.

This "rotation" does a disservice to both backs.

You, just like everybody else here, are kinda spoiled when it comes to fumbles -- Priest Holmes has one of the lowest fumble-to-carry ratios in the HISTORY of football.Exactly my point. I am spoiled, but we still lost.

Perhaps our team really sucks if it can't afford to turn the ball over EVER and expect to win.

Holmes is closer to perfection than LJ right now. He fumbles less, that was meant more as shithouse sarcasm than real criticism.

You are the coach, who do you play?

My answer to the Question is to play Holmes until the game is safe in the 4rth quarter, with an occaisional rep for LJ when Holmes is winded.

htismaqe
10-04-2005, 09:45 AM
Exactly my point. I am spoiled, but we still lost.

Perhaps our team really sucks if it can't afford to turn the ball over EVER and expect to win.

Holmes is closer to perfection than LJ right now. He fumbles less, that was meant more as shithouse sarcasm than real criticism.

You are the coach, who do you play?

My answer to the Question is to play Holmes until the game is safe in the 4rth quarter, with an occaisional rep for LJ when Holmes is winded.

Who do I play? Whoever presents the best matchup that week.

Like I said, I wouldn't rotate IN-GAME, but I might rotate from game-to-game.

TEX
10-04-2005, 10:59 AM
IMO, the Oline missing Roaf isn't that big. It's big, but it's doable.

Well I disagree. Not having ROAF is HUGE. He's one of the best LT's ever to play the game. He can not be easily replaced. Both Holmes and L.J. ran better and our offense as a whole was better with him in there. His absense negitively effects all facets of the offense.

Now, IMO I think the other issues on offense (# 2 WR, Gonzo, RB) are all "doable." If I were in charge of things I'd do the followng to fix them.

1. Move Boerigter to # 2 WR. Parker is not getting it done.
2. Give most of the carries to Priest. L.J. only touches the ball when Priest gets tired or if Priest is not getting it done.
3. Work Gonzo into the game plan cause he won't be blocking as much with Roaf in the game.

Um...Where the hell is Chris Wilson? ROFL

htismaqe
10-04-2005, 12:16 PM
Well I disagree. Not having ROAF is HUGE. He's one of the best LT's ever to play the game. He can not be easily replaced. Both Holmes and L.J. ran better and our offense as a whole was better with him in there. His absense negitively effects all facets of the offense.

Now, IMO I think the other issues on offense (# 2 WR, Gonzo, RB) are all "doable." If I were in charge of things I'd do the followng to fix them.

1. Move Boerigter to # 2 WR. Parker is not getting it done.
2. Give most of the carries to Priest. L.J. only touches the ball when Priest gets tired or if Priest is not getting it done.
3. Work Gonzo into the game plan cause he won't be blocking as much with Roaf in the game.

Um...Where the hell is Chris Wilson? ROFL

So who are we going to move to #2 WR when Boerigter fails to get it done? He's not a #2 WR.

kcirnamffoh
10-04-2005, 01:11 PM
Well I disagree. Not having ROAF is HUGE. He's one of the best LT's ever to play the game. He can not be easily replaced. Both Holmes and L.J. ran better and our offense as a whole was better with him in there. His absense negitively effects all facets of the offense.

Unfortunately I have to agree with this. I do not like to think an offensive lineman could be so indispensable. But I guess its possible. Look at all the success Cincinnati had in Anthony Munoz’s prime. Once his level of play dropped off, maybe in 1990 or so, the Cincinnati Bengals turned into the Bungles. Tony Boselli’s departure from the Jaguars likewise seemed to have coincided with that franchises sudden downturn. Both players were outstanding backside tackles and played huge roles in those offense’s successes. Willie Roaf is that same type of extraordinary tackle and could be that crucial to this team’s success, as well.

Um...Where the hell is Chris Wilson? ROFL

I might have an answer for this. Jason Dunn has not been playing 100% healthy since the first half of the first game. In fact I believe he was inactive for one game. I think he is another reason for the Chiefs inconsistent offense so far this season. He’s been touted as perhaps the best blocking TE in football. If he is playing hurt you lose a lot in the running game and pass protection. But even hurt he probably is 100% better at blocking than Wilson. Its blocking that KC needs right now so Wilson sits or blocks for the most part. Once again Roaf’s absence shakes up this offense to that point. Hell, Gonzo is having his worst year perhaps because of Roaf’s absence.

htismaqe
10-04-2005, 01:13 PM
I find it funny that people are bagging on Kris Wilson given Tony Gonzales' current level of production.

Obviously, there's something wrong with the system...

wolfpack0735
10-04-2005, 01:30 PM
what we`ve seen without roaf these last games willbe worst next year. sheilds willbe gone also. so unless queen carl buys a top dog LT in the offseason then we should start getting use to it.as said it maybe.

Chiefnj
10-04-2005, 01:32 PM
I find it funny that people are bagging on Kris Wilson given Tony Gonzales' current level of production.

Obviously, there's something wrong with the system...

The system the past two weeks has been "Let's keep Trent alive for the final 12 games of the season when Roaf is back."

Brock
10-04-2005, 01:43 PM
I find it funny that people are bagging on Kris Wilson given Tony Gonzales' current level of production.

Obviously, there's something wrong with the system...

Being a Hall of Famer gets you some slack.

htismaqe
10-04-2005, 01:51 PM
The system the past two weeks has been "Let's keep Trent alive for the final 12 games of the season when Roaf is back."

Absolutely. And my point stands.

philfree
10-04-2005, 02:05 PM
The Chiefs got beat because of TO. NO not Owens, Turnovers! You know fumbles and interecptions. TOs! It wasn't Roaf being out it was Green, Dante and LJ giving the ball to the other team. They get three extra possessions and we get three less. It's that's simple.
Sure having Roaf on the field would make us better on O but with the three TOs we probably wouldn't have won the game anyways.

PhilFree:arrow:

Fish
10-04-2005, 02:09 PM
I think the bye week could solve a lot of the problems people listed here. I'm working on a Roaf clone in my basement at home..... I'll let y'all know how it goes.....

TEX
10-04-2005, 03:11 PM
So who are we going to move to #2 WR when Boerigter fails to get it done? He's not a #2 WR.

Bla...bla...bla and Kennison isn't a true # 1 either but he's getting the job done.

Fred Ex maybe?

There's where we disagree. I'm saying Boe is and he would have been the # 2 last year had he not gotten hurt.

One thing for sure is that Parker most certainly does not deserve to be the # 2 guy based on his play thus far.