PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts on Gun's defensive scheme


B_Ambuehl
11-02-2005, 11:00 AM
There are fewer defenses funner to watch or more effective when they're hitting on all cyclinders but it requires too many good and more importantly, expensive, players at too many positions. You need a DT and a DE that can both draw a double team. You need a stud MLB and 2 shutdown corners. One of the reason people are going away from that traditional 4-3 is because it's much easier and affordable to find players to run a 3-4. You plug the middle with the fattest sumbitch you can find and rush the passer with a reject type outside linebacker like Steve Foley or even a Scott Fujita in Dallas who you can find very easily as there's no shortage of fast outside linebackers in this league. You can pay them 600 K per year vs 20 mil per year for a very hard to find a rare pass rushing elite defensive end type and a Warren Sapp type 3-technique DT who you need to run that scheme. It's more productive for your team to play cover 2 and some man then piss away 20 mil on 2 shutdown corners and try to play pressure D since the difference in results with the new rules won't be that much to justify cost of shutdown corners anyway. Simply look at the difference in turnovers Greg Robinson was able to generate in '03 with a much less talented defensive football team and look at a team like NE killing Indy and winning a superbowl last year with that secondary.

shaneo69
11-02-2005, 11:02 AM
I just responded to your post like this on the Fisher thread.

sedated
11-02-2005, 11:10 AM
Gunther's listening too much to Grandpa and not doing what he wants.
We have the talent, just not using it right.

Like putting Knight on Gates?
Playing zone after Warfield got back?
Having DJ stand around and do nothing?
Having Bell's fat ass drop into coverage instead of blitz?

B_Ambuehl
11-02-2005, 11:20 AM
One of the major points is it's easier to find or convert guys into pass rushing OLBs then it is to find pass rushing DEs. In fact Parcells is using Scott Fujita very effectively right now in that role on 3rd downs. There were 3 of them taken in the first round of this year's draft to play that role...Merriman, Ware, and Pollack - Yet I can't think of any who were taken early who anybody though would be elite at rushing out of the 4-3 DE position simply because that talent for that position is very difficult to find.

milkman
11-02-2005, 11:24 AM
Gunther's listening too much to Grandpa and not doing what he wants.
We have the talent, just not using it right.

Like putting Knight on Gates?
Playing zone after Warfield got back?
Having DJ stand around and do nothing?
Having Bell's fat ass drop into coverage instead of blitz?

I think Dick makes suggestions, but Gun has free reign to run this D.

Every one of these issues are Gun's responsibility, and Gun's alone.

I depise Dick as much as any man here, but I ain't placing the blame for Gun's stupidity on Dick's head.

milkman
11-02-2005, 11:26 AM
One of the major points is it's easier to find or convert guys into pass rushing OLBs then it is to find pass rushing DEs. In fact Parcells is using Scott Fujita very effectively right now in that role on 3rd downs. There were 3 of them taken in the first round of this year's draft to play that role...Merriman, Ware, and Pollack - Yet I can't think of any who were taken early who anybody though would be elite at rushing out of the 4-3 DE position simply because that talent for that position is very difficult to find.

Speaking of Fujita, aren't we all just ****ing jumping for joy at the decision to keep Stills and trade Fujita, because of Stills' pro bowl level special teams play. :cuss:

KCinNY
11-02-2005, 11:29 AM
Speaking of Fujita, aren't we all just ****ing jumping for joy at the decision to keep Stills and trade Fujita, because of Stills' pro bowl level special teams play. :cuss:

Anybody catch Stills' whiff on the Chargers kicker on one of Dante's long returns? Would have been a TD if he'd put the guy on the ground.

Rausch
11-02-2005, 11:29 AM
The Steelers have run an effective 3-4 for nearly 10 years.

Seems like every year they let a LB go and replace him with someone else who's just as effective.

What's helped is stability on the D line...

Mecca
11-02-2005, 11:31 AM
The Steelers generally evaluate LB talent pretty well. I think the only one they've whiffed on was Alonzo Jackson a 2nd round pick a few years ago they ended up cutting.

Warrior5
11-02-2005, 11:46 AM
Anybody catch Stills' whiff on the Chargers kicker on one of Dante's long returns? Would have been a TD if he'd put the guy on the ground.

Same thing happened last year (can't remember which game, but it was during Hall's TD streak)...Dante had just about broken it and had Stills beside him. Don't know what Stills was staring at, but he let a defender come in and trip up Hall.

Mecca
11-02-2005, 11:48 AM
Stills cost Hall the return TD record for a single season in 2003 against Cleveland.

Warrior5
11-02-2005, 12:11 PM
Stills cost Hall the return TD record for a single season in 2003 against Cleveland.

That's it...thanks for clearing that up.

Redcoats58
11-02-2005, 12:13 PM
Stills cost Hall the return TD record for a single season in 2003 against Cleveland.
True, Stills has flubbed up some returns, but he is also one of the main reasons Dante was making those big returns.

Warrior5
11-02-2005, 12:14 PM
I rarely put much credence into football stats, but had to share these…

OAK Pass O – 258 ypg (4) vs KC Pass D – 275 ypg (31)…BIG Raider advantage
OAK Rush O – 87 ypg (26) vs KC Rush D – 94 ypg (8)…Chief advantage

KC Pass O – 231 ypg (11) vs OAK Pass D – 222 ypg (22)…Chief advantage
KC Rush O – 131 ypg (6) vs OAK Rush D – 115 ypg (19)…Chief advantage


Now here's the scoring offense comparison, pretty interesting:

Raiders – 23 ppg (13) vs Chiefs D – 23 ppg allowed (23)…wash
Chiefs – 24 ppg (10) vs Raiders D – 23 ppg allowed (22)…slight Chief advantage

Arrowhead advantage…Chiefs

Dear Gun: just like the Charger game, Oakland is going to pass a LOT. You can double Moss and Porter all you want; if you let Collins stand in the pocket untouched, he’s going to shred you. Our decent Run D is useless if Collins passes all day, so the F7 has to get after his butt all game long.

If the Chiefs O remembers how to convert inside the red zone this week, we’ll stomp the living crap out of Oakland.

sedated
11-02-2005, 12:34 PM
Speaking of Fujita, aren't we all just ****ing jumping for joy at the decision to keep Stills and trade Fujita, because of Stills' pro bowl level special teams play. :cuss:

I really like keeping the rookie free agent (Griffin) instead of Fujita - rookies really help when this is THE year to win it all.

Who needs smart experienced players when you can have fast rookie dumb-asses?

Count Zarth
11-02-2005, 12:36 PM
What really pissed me off Sunday was most of the "scheme" appeared to be locking Knight on Gates. Great idea. Put your worst cover safety on Gates, who outweighs him by 50 pounds.

Redcoats58
11-02-2005, 12:40 PM
What really pissed me off Sunday was most of the "scheme" appeared to be locking Knight on Gates. Great idea. Put your worst cover safety on Gates, who outweighs him by 50 pounds.
You think Knight is a worse cover safety then Woods or Wesley?

Count Zarth
11-02-2005, 12:42 PM
You think Knight is a worse cover safety the Woods or Wesley?

I'm not sure who sucks worse, actually. NONE of them should have been matched up one-on-one with Gates. Even worse, we had Woods assigned to him one play.

Doesn't DJ have the size and speed to cover Gates? Why not use him?

Lastly, why is San Diego's tight end allowed to run down the field unhindered while ours gets consistently raped? Get the defensive end to smash him in the face and then hit his ass with 1 or 2 more people in the first five yards. You know, like they DO TO US EVERY GODDAMN GAME?

Mr. Kotter
11-02-2005, 12:45 PM
Columbian or Afgan Gold?

Redcoats58
11-02-2005, 12:46 PM
I'm not sure who sucks worse, actually. NONE of them should have been matched up one-on-one with Gates. Even worse, we had Woods assigned to him one play.

Doesn't DJ have the size and speed to cover Gates? Why not use him?

Lastly, why is San Diego's tight end allowed to run down the field unhindered while ours gets consistently raped? Get the defensive end to smash him in the face and then hit his ass with 1 or 2 more people in the first five yards. You know, like they DO TO US EVERY GODDAMN GAME?
Oh I agree with everything you said. It's funny Lb's can molest Gonzo but we don't do the same to a player that is a mold of him.

jspchief
11-02-2005, 12:50 PM
Lastly, why is San Diego's tight end allowed to run down the field unhindered while ours gets consistently raped? Get the defensive end to smash him in the face and then hit his ass with 1 or 2 more people in the first five yards. You know, like they DO TO US EVERY GODDAMN GAME?I mentioned this before the game. KC should have an entire library on how to play a TE like Gates. We've been watching teams face Gonzo for years.

Denver puts their pro bowl CB on Gonzalez.

KC puts guys that are bad in coverage on Gates.

I wonder why one team has been better at deffense than the other?

Extra Point
11-02-2005, 12:52 PM
There are none, apparently from Gun, based on most posters.

Mr. Laz
11-02-2005, 01:43 PM
You think Knight is a worse cover safety then Woods or Wesley?

i think all 3 are bad in coverage ... but Knight wasn't brought here for his coverage.

i think the real issue is that we shouldn't of had a safety on Gates period.

Know thy personnel


our coaches should of known that our knight/wesley/woods weren't good enough to cover gates


we would of been better off with Warfield on Gates and let washington cover McCardell(slow veteran against slow veteran).

chief99
11-02-2005, 02:11 PM
You have to play LB on the guy.

jspchief
11-02-2005, 02:16 PM
You have to play LB on the guy.That's stupid.

Only 1 LB in the NFL has effectively stopped Gonzo (Julian Peterson). what makes you htink any of our LBs would be able to cover Gates? That would be more of a mismatch than a safety.

It's not about who can tackle him. It's about who can cover him.

Iowanian
11-02-2005, 02:23 PM
I like Gunther's scheme as a concept, however his ability to adjust during a game has alot to be desired.

Covering a TE thats shredding your d? I think a Jr High coach would have an OLB Check him at the line and pick him up with a corner or safety.

Walls is a big corner....maybe they could bring his ass in long enough to pillage Denver's scheme, and see if he can play nickle-dime well enough to stick and cover TEs.....a Big, fast Corner on a TE..

This Defense would be alot better with some DTs that could push in the pocket.

InChiefsHell
11-02-2005, 02:24 PM
That's stupid.

Only 1 LB in the NFL has effectively stopped Gonzo (Julian Peterson). what makes you htink any of our LBs would be able to cover Gates? That would be more of a mismatch than a safety.

It's not about who can tackle him. It's about who can cover him.

Apparently so, since Knight couldn't do either...

Area 51
11-02-2005, 02:26 PM
I like Gunther's scheme as a concept, however his ability to adjust during a game has alot to be desired.

Covering a TE thats shredding your d? I think a Jr High coach would have an OLB Check him at the line and pick him up with a corner or safety.

Walls is a big corner....maybe they could bring his ass in long enough to pillage Denver's scheme, and see if he can play nickle-dime well enough to stick and cover TEs.....a Big, fast Corner on a TE..

This Defense would be alot better with some DTs that could push in the pocket.

Two things you said seem to be an oxymoron:

Gunther:adjust

There has been no evidence that anything has happened in the games this year to indicate that he has modified the defensive game plan one iota.

Iowanian
11-02-2005, 02:27 PM
Thats my point...

I don't see ANY ability(outside 2nd half passing vs Eggo) for ANY of the Chiefs coaches to make in-game adjustments, and if they do, its for the worse.

RedThat
11-02-2005, 02:38 PM
I dont know if its just me. Knight had pretty decent coverage on Gates 1 play in the game. Had he executed on a tackle he woulda prevented Gates from getting a first down, more importantly from scoring. Just bad, pathetic tackling by Sammy Knight. Cost us BIG

Coogs
11-02-2005, 02:52 PM
What really pissed me off Sunday was most of the "scheme" appeared to be locking Knight on Gates. Great idea. Put your worst cover safety on Gates, who outweighs him by 50 pounds.

That is still an improvement from the Eagles game, where we covered TO with nobody. :p

philfree
11-02-2005, 03:16 PM
What really pissed me off Sunday was most of the "scheme" appeared to be locking Knight on Gates. Great idea. Put your worst cover safety on Gates, who outweighs him by 50 pounds.


On various plays I saw Woods on Gates with help over the top from Knight, I saw Wesley on him tight at the line, I saw Knight on him alone, and then then I saw Knight over and Mitchell under.....When he was in single coverege with anyone we were in trouble and the one TD play he was covered bt Mitchell stride for stride and Knight had good position behing him. The pass was perfect and Mitchell did kind of a Bartee and didn't turn his head. Gates has been tearing up the league so I have a hard time blaming the scheme for his big day. The Chargers have a really good O and we're supposed too but we aren't getting it done in the redzone.

PhilFree:arrow:

B_Ambuehl
11-03-2005, 11:00 AM
They seemed to defend them well early on the first 2 drives with Wesley up at the line playing bump and run. Hell, they even stopped a 4th down play on SDs second series.

StcChief
11-03-2005, 11:18 AM
If it's cheaper we will be on fulltime 3-4 sooner than later.

B_Ambuehl
11-03-2005, 11:26 AM
Well you can't throw that all on him as the personnel when he came back here was 4-3 oriented and a coach has to work with what he's given. Sims is purely a 4-3 DT and we'd just wasted a high draft and a bunch of money on him etc. But you can blame him for trying to do something with his secondary that they're not capable of and I put over half the lead leading big plays given up squarely on him.

He's mixed in the 3-4 this year and if Sims is hurt probably the best thing to do is shitcan him and switch entirely to a 3-4. If you don't then you might as well shitcan Bell cause he can't play the 4-3. Parcells did it (made the switch) in one year and this KC defense is a lot further along in the process already.

htismaqe
11-03-2005, 12:18 PM
All this talk is BS.

The 4-3 defense works fine. You just can't run it the way Gunther runs it and expect it to work.

Mecca
11-03-2005, 12:22 PM
All this talk is BS.

The 4-3 defense works fine. You just can't run it the way Gunther runs it and expect it to work.

I agree with this, the 3-4 is just the new "fad" defense in the NFL. A few years ago there were only 3-5 teams even running that defense.

Spicy McHaggis
11-03-2005, 12:24 PM
Speaking of Fujita, aren't we all just ****ing jumping for joy at the decision to keep Stills and trade Fujita, because of Stills' pro bowl level special teams play. :cuss:

I'm going to the Chiefs game in Dallas with some buddies and you can bet your ass I'm wearing my Fujita jersey there. I'm still pissed about that.

htismaqe
11-03-2005, 12:37 PM
I agree with this, the 3-4 is just the new "fad" defense in the NFL. A few years ago there were only 3-5 teams even running that defense.

The question isn't even 3-4 vs. 4-3. Both schemes work if they're run right.

The question is what the place in the modern NFL is for man-to-man defense.

As the thread starter pointed out, current NFL economics, as well as attempts to slant the rules towards the offense, pretty-much preclude running straight-up man-to-man defense.

philfree
11-03-2005, 01:43 PM
I can't believe so many are turning on Gun so soon. For a comparison the Colts 5 years ago were alot like the Chiefs have been the last few years. They had offense but no D. So what did they do? The hired a new HC but kept the O intact. Tony Dungy is defensive minded HC and his job besides to coach the whole team was to turn the defense around. Up until last year the results weren't there. But now in his 4th year his D is playing pretty damn good. It took over 3 years for Dungy to get that D turned around. Part of that process I believe is getting the right players and I believe it's taken the Colts until this year to get all the players they needed. I'd like for it happen faster with our D but it hasn't happened yet. Although I do think we are better on D in that we are pretty good against the run we still have a ways to go. It's just gonna take a little more time. Looking at those things I have a hard time blaming Gun and his scheme for our short comings on D. It took Dungy over three years to turn that D around so Gun should at at least one more year with ours. I believe he can do it in a year less. IMO as unpopular as it will be here we need to give Gun, DV and Al one more year to put the whole thing together.

PhilFree:arrow:

htismaqe
11-03-2005, 01:52 PM
I turned on Gunther long before Dick Vermeil arrived here...

philfree
11-03-2005, 01:55 PM
I turned on Gunther long before Dick Vermeil arrived here...


When was that? When he was HC or when he was DC and we had one of the best Ds in the league?

PhilFree:arrow:

Cochise
11-03-2005, 01:58 PM
In 2003, there was talent, we just needed to lose Robinson. In 2004, Gunther was a god, we just needed talent. In 2005, Gunther is still a god and we have talent, but Vermeil is somehow making it all suck anyway.

We're running out of excuses.

htismaqe
11-03-2005, 03:57 PM
When was that? When he was HC or when he was DC and we had one of the best Ds in the league?

PhilFree:arrow:

I gave up on Gunther during the 1996 season I believe it was. The guy fielded one of the best D's in the league EVERY OTHER YEAR.

Clint in Wichita
11-03-2005, 04:06 PM
There are fewer defenses funner to watch or more effective when they're hitting on all cyclinders but it requires too many good and more importantly, expensive, players at too many positions. You need a DT and a DE that can both draw a double team. You need a stud MLB and 2 shutdown corners. One of the reason people are going away from that traditional 4-3 is because it's much easier and affordable to find players to run a 3-4. You plug the middle with the fattest sumbitch you can find and rush the passer with a reject type outside linebacker like Steve Foley or even a Scott Fujita in Dallas who you can find very easily as there's no shortage of fast outside linebackers in this league. You can pay them 600 K per year vs 20 mil per year for a very hard to find a rare pass rushing elite defensive end type and a Warren Sapp type 3-technique DT who you need to run that scheme. It's more productive for your team to play cover 2 and some man then piss away 20 mil on 2 shutdown corners and try to play pressure D since the difference in results with the new rules won't be that much to justify cost of shutdown corners anyway. Simply look at the difference in turnovers Greg Robinson was able to generate in '03 with a much less talented defensive football team and look at a team like NE killing Indy and winning a superbowl last year with that secondary.

Jesus...with those pieces in place I could successfully run the defense.

Calcountry
11-03-2005, 06:34 PM
I can't believe so many are turning on Gun so soon. For a comparison the Colts 5 years ago were alot like the Chiefs have been the last few years. They had offense but no D. So what did they do? The hired a new HC but kept the O intact. Tony Dungy is defensive minded HC and his job besides to coach the whole team was to turn the defense around. Up until last year the results weren't there. But now in his 4th year his D is playing pretty damn good. It took over 3 years for Dungy to get that D turned around. Part of that process I believe is getting the right players and I believe it's taken the Colts until this year to get all the players they needed. I'd like for it happen faster with our D but it hasn't happened yet. Although I do think we are better on D in that we are pretty good against the run we still have a ways to go. It's just gonna take a little more time. Looking at those things I have a hard time blaming Gun and his scheme for our short comings on D. It took Dungy over three years to turn that D around so Gun should at at least one more year with ours. I believe he can do it in a year less. IMO as unpopular as it will be here we need to give Gun, DV and Al one more year to put the whole thing together.

PhilFree:arrow:So why not just make Gun the Head Coach? Wait a minute; been there done that already.

Calcountry
11-03-2005, 06:35 PM
In 2003, there was talent, we just needed to lose Robinson. In 2004, Gunther was a god, we just needed talent. In 2005, Gunther is still a god and we have talent, but Vermeil is somehow making it all suck anyway.

We're running out of excuses.Lamar needs to go. It begins at the top.