PDA

View Full Version : Game Analysis: Anyone else think...


huskerdooz
12-05-2005, 01:40 AM
that we should have taken a timeout to give LJ a breather when it was 3rd and 1 with 4:06 remaining? Instead Dee brown was thrown for a 2 yard loss and we have to punt the ball away and Denver gets the ball with 3:42 remaining.

My apologies if this topic has already been posted.

Sure-Oz
12-05-2005, 01:41 AM
Maybe yeah, atleast have ran with richardson, brown has had like 3 touches total.

Miles
12-05-2005, 01:44 AM
Yep I was thinking the same thing. Otherwise at least not call a play that involved our very inexperienced backup RB in a situation like that.

Count Alex's Losses
12-05-2005, 01:47 AM
HELL NO

Richardson should have carried

Miles
12-05-2005, 01:51 AM
HELL NO

Richardson should have carried

That was my first thought as well. I wouldn't have been as anoyed if he had gotten stopped. Otherwise I felt we had quite good playcalling. Definitly liked the three called runs to LJ at the goal we had.

philfree
12-05-2005, 02:19 AM
I think LJ was supposed to be on the field but for some reason he wasn't. In the post game interview DV said if we was smart he would have called a time out. IMO it happened the way it did becsause the play before was thought to be a 1st down and LJ needed a blow but then it was ruled short and it was 3rd down with the play clock running. I think the gaffe was on LJ and he should have never left the field until the 1st down was official.

PhilFree:arrow:

huskerdooz
12-05-2005, 02:30 AM
I think LJ was supposed to be on the field but for some reason he wasn't. In the post game interview DV said if we was smart he would have called a time out. IMO it happened the way it did becsause the play before was thought to be a 1st down and LJ needed a blow but then it was ruled short and it was 3rd down with the play clock running. I think the gaffe was on LJ and he should have never left the field until the 1st down was official.

PhilFree:arrow:

This may be true, but I still say (and apparently in hindsight DV agreed) we call the TO at 4:06 and give LJ the extra time to get his breath then pound it up the middle. Sure we give the D a chance to catch their breat as well but I'll take my chances with LJ and our O-line. Even if we don't make it we only end up leaving just a few more seconds on the clock. As it turned out we ended up punting 17 seconds later anyway, although I can't recall whether Denver took a TO after they stopped Brown or not.

philfree
12-05-2005, 02:48 AM
This may be true, but I still say (and apparently in hindsight DV agreed) we call the TO at 4:06 and give LJ the extra time to get his breath then pound it up the middle. Sure we give the D a chance to catch their breat as well but I'll take my chances with LJ and our O-line. Even if we don't make it we only end up leaving just a few more seconds on the clock. As it turned out we ended up punting 17 seconds later anyway, although I can't recall whether Denver took a TO after they stopped Brown or not.


I don't think DV or AS realized that we had Brown on the field instead of LJ till it was to late. That's not a good thing in my mind you but just my perception which I can change with new facts.

PhilFree:arrow:

T-post Tom
12-05-2005, 03:25 AM
This may be true, but I still say (and apparently in hindsight DV agreed) we call the TO at 4:06 and give LJ the extra time to get his breath then pound it up the middle. Sure we give the D a chance to catch their breat as well but I'll take my chances with LJ and our O-line. Even if we don't make it we only end up leaving just a few more seconds on the clock. As it turned out we ended up punting 17 seconds later anyway, although I can't recall whether Denver took a TO after they stopped Brown or not.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

This was a coaching error. A serious one that could have cost the Chiefs the game. In a critical situation like that: you do NOT throw a back-up HB on the field when he's been sitting most of the game. DV admitted as much afterwards.

tk13
12-05-2005, 03:38 AM
I didn't tape the game, but before that play even happened, I thought I saw LJ get ready to take his chin strap off and one of the coaches pointed to him to go back out and he said no. I just think it caught everybody off guard, because he never really takes himself out, and that was a critical situation. I think we'll be better prepared if that happens again.

I said in another thread earlier that we need to probably give Dee Brown the occasional touch earlier in the game like we used to do with Blaylock. This 30-40 carry a game stuff is gonna kill LJ. If you project the pace LJ has touched the ball the last month, it would come out to 496 carries over a whole season. That would totally obliterate the modern NFL record.

Count Alex's Losses
12-05-2005, 03:42 AM
Yup. Dee Brown's not a rookie either. Give him a series or two per game.

tk13
12-05-2005, 03:47 AM
Seriously though, I was looking at those carry numbers, and it's about what I expected. A lot of the guys who had a monster number of carries often get hurt/go way downhill soon after they do that. You look on that list and you see the likes of Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Eddie George, Barry Foster, even Jamal Lewis... he hasn't been the same since going for 2000. That's the only thing that scares me about LJ, I don't think we can abuse him, usually physical backs like him you can really use for a couple seasons at that level, then they go downhill. Which is why I liked having the Priest/LJ tandem... so hard to keep running backs playing this well over a long period of time.

Duck Dog
12-05-2005, 03:57 AM
Seriously though, I was looking at those carry numbers, and it's about what I expected. A lot of the guys who had a monster number of carries often get hurt/go way downhill soon after they do that. You look on that list and you see the likes of Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Eddie George, Barry Foster, even Jamal Lewis... he hasn't been the same since going for 2000. That's the only thing that scares me about LJ, I don't think we can abuse him, usually physical backs like him you can really use for a couple seasons at that level, then they go downhill. Which is why I liked having the Priest/LJ tandem... so hard to keep running backs playing this well over a long period of time.

I think we'll see that tandem next season. 'Cept the carries will favor LJ.

tk13
12-05-2005, 04:05 AM
Yeah probably. At least I hope so. To be fair there are some backs who have handled a lot of carries, but of course we're talking guys like Emmitt Smith and Walter Payton. If LJ is truly one of those type guys then we're really lucky.

huskerdooz
12-05-2005, 04:06 AM
I think we'll see that tandem next season. 'Cept the carries will favor LJ.

I think you're probably correct in that assessment.

ChiefsFanatic
12-05-2005, 04:12 AM
On Tivo it looks like LJ landed a little funny on the tackle, maybe lost his wind on the ball. They showed him on the sidelines rocking back and forth on the bench, like he was trying to get some air.

Someone else shoukld review that, because I only checked it out once, during commercial. I am quite possibly wrong. That happens sometimes.