PDA

View Full Version : Still wrong to bash Surtain?


CupidStunt
10-17-2006, 08:50 AM
Because the dude was a f'ing embarrassment on Sunday.

Missed tackles for FUN and I don't remember him actually covering well.

Perhaps it doesn't come across like I'm nitpicking now. Perhaps people will see fit to actually criticize a player who's underperforming after a game when everyone else did the same thing.

Short Leash Hootie
10-17-2006, 08:57 AM
do you have to make a different thread for all of your thoughts?

Yes, we know. The Chiefs secondary sucked Sunday. Get over it.

CupidStunt
10-17-2006, 09:00 AM
do you have to make a different thread for all of your thoughts?

Do you have to reply to every thread that you have nothing to offer and/or no interest in?

Get a life...

Short Leash Hootie
10-17-2006, 09:01 AM
You posted two separate threads about how awful our secondary is...

We all SAW the game Sunday. We all SAW how terrible our secondary played. Why don't we just cut them all!?

DaWolf
10-17-2006, 09:02 AM
Why don't we just cut them all!?

Doesn't help. Dumther is still our coordinator...

NewChief
10-17-2006, 09:04 AM
Just out of curiosity... do you think anyone on this team other than LJ is any good?

Short Leash Hootie
10-17-2006, 09:04 AM
You guys are all dumb.

Our defense was the talk of the board until the Pittsburgh game, when we just didn't show up.

Let's see what happens against San Diego before we start bashing our coaching staff. We had one hiccup...we're 2-3...things could be a lot worse.

CupidStunt
10-17-2006, 09:04 AM
Doesn't help. Dumther is still our coordinator...

That's one point. Our mediocre-at-absolute-best interior linemen is another.

Just shut the f*ck up and stay out if you don't like it, Hootie. You've got no say in the threads that are started, commented on or finished. The only thing you do with your worthless contribution is bump the thread to the top, and if you hate it so much, that's a dumb move.

CupidStunt
10-17-2006, 09:06 AM
Just out of curiosity... do you think anyone on this team other than LJ is any good?

Of course. Pretty dumb statement, really. But I'll help you out (because it's wrong to bash players that suck):

Kennison - solid player; in no way a #1 WR, however
Green - top-10 QB when healthy
Waters - good player
Gonzalez - good player

Eh, that'll do. No sense in wasting time listing every player. The defense has some good players (Hali, Allen, DJ, Law) but it also has some bad and mediocre players - in most instances, they get free passes.

Short Leash Hootie
10-17-2006, 09:07 AM
why do you even post here?

No one gives a **** what you say. We could win out and you'd still find something negative about every player on the Chiefs.

Everyone here understands we didn't play well Sunday at Pittsburgh. We know. There have been a million threads stating how bad our secondary was. Go find one of those and post your two cents. No one here wants to read what you think. You're a waste of an account.

CupidStunt
10-17-2006, 09:08 AM
Our defense was the talk of the board until the Pittsburgh game, when we just didn't show up.


But those who don't see everything through red shades DID point to the weaknesses before this game.

I'm not changing my tune based on the Pittsburgh embarrassment. Surtain wasn't nearly worth $50M before the game and Sunday only reinforced that.

I still love the defense as a unit, its potential and many of the players.

ROYC75
10-17-2006, 09:12 AM
You guys are all dumb.

Our defense was the talk of the board until the Pittsburgh game, when we just didn't show up.

Let's see what happens against San Diego before we start bashing our coaching staff. We had one hiccup...we're 2-3...things could be a lot worse.


Hey, This just in, " Our Defense Is Still The Talk Of This BB " , OK !


FTR, the fans have every right to be pissed and concerned with this D, I was in the beginning of the year. Even after the # 4 ranking D we had,most everybody was goo goo over it , it was a paper ranking, it was fake . I knew it was, many here felt the same way, but many here were taken in by the hype of the # 4 ranking and the quick to judge media.

We will not be Top 10 with aging corners, weak DT and inept coaches.

It is what it is ........... Deal with it.

ck_IN
10-17-2006, 09:17 AM
Just for curiousity how much of the coverage breakdowns can be laid on the safetys?

The cover 2 depends on good safety play. The TD the Ward was because the safety didn't pick up Ward after Law released him. Neither Law nor Surtain has impressed me but the safety play seems to be worse.

Easy 6
10-17-2006, 09:22 AM
Hey, This just in, " Our Defense Is Still The Talk Of This BB " , OK !


FTR, the fans have every right to be pissed and concerned with this D, I was in the beginning of the year. Even after the # 4 ranking D we had,most everybody was goo goo over it , it was a paper ranking, it was fake . I knew it was, many here felt the same way, but many here were taken in by the hype of the # 4 ranking and the quick to judge media.

We will not be Top 10 with aging corners, weak DT and inept coaches.

It is what it is ........... Deal with it.
I disagree that the ranking was a mirage, it included 2 good performances IMO against 2 good teams as well as 2 bad ones....the dinvr game even though a loss made me proud, and mighty palmer looked mighty average against us to. Even with this ridiculous blow-out we are still #11, when was the last time we were ranked that high? I dont think that numbers lie and i really believe we will get an angry pride game from them this sunday.

DaWolf
10-17-2006, 09:39 AM
I disagree that the ranking was a mirage, it included 2 good performances IMO against 2 good teams as well as 2 bad ones....the dinvr game even though a loss made me proud, and mighty palmer looked mighty average against us to. Even with this ridiculous blow-out we are still #11, when was the last time we were ranked that high? I dont think that numbers lie and i really believe we will get an angry pride game from them this sunday.

Well I hope you're right but I've seen this defense play mirage ball before, particularly in I think it was 2003 when we started strong and then just fell apart in the 2nd half of the year under GRob. An impressinve defense will finish stronger than it may start. Now granted this was game 5 for us and it may have been a blip, and I hope i'm wrong, but I think once people start figuring out what we're running, they won't have too many problems exploiting it. We still struggle rushing the passer and our interior line still sucks. And this is three years later under Dumther, with his guys. Herm is gonna slowly start figuring this out...

ck_IN
10-17-2006, 09:46 AM
<i>the dinvr game even though a loss made me proud, and mighty palmer looked mighty average against us to.</i>

I hate to be a Scrooge but this isn't your fathers Broncos. They only put up 13 against Oaktown. They aren't running the ball like before and Plummer is actually worse. As for Cinci, that game wasn't as close as the score. As soon as Cinci went to the no huddle we were done defensively. That game could've gotten real ugly if Cinci was in better form.

Halfcan
10-17-2006, 10:32 AM
It does suck watching Patrick drop interceptions repeatedly. No way is he worth 50 mil.

ROYC75
10-17-2006, 10:34 AM
I disagree that the ranking was a mirage, it included 2 good performances IMO against 2 good teams as well as 2 bad ones....the dinvr game even though a loss made me proud, and mighty palmer looked mighty average against us to. Even with this ridiculous blow-out we are still #11, when was the last time we were ranked that high? I dont think that numbers lie and i really believe we will get an angry pride game from them this sunday.


Nice homer , nice homer ............... I do hope you are correct but from what I see and watching the same team for 40 years, I don't see what you see.

noa
10-17-2006, 10:37 AM
Right now, I think only a handful of Chiefs are actually playing up to their contract value. Surtain is just one of many that we should criticize.

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 10:38 AM
I'm pretty disappointed in Surtain. With a stud corner opposite, he was supposed to see more passes thrown his way this year. He's dropped the interceptions he's had a chance to get, and really hasn't made many plays this year. I think Law is earning his money. Surtain isn't.

Easy 6
10-17-2006, 10:38 AM
Nice homer , nice homer ............... I do hope you are correct but from what I see and watching the same team for 40 years, I don't see what you see.
Keep F%&@*!$ doubting KC D... :)

ROYC75
10-17-2006, 10:41 AM
Keep F%&@*!$ doubting KC D... :)

Watch that 1st step when you fall watching the Chiefs D, OK. I wouldn't want you to get hurt when you come crashing down with them . :D

Chiefnj
10-17-2006, 10:45 AM
Which long passes and/or TD passes were Surtain's fault?

ROYC75
10-17-2006, 11:01 AM
FTR here, I see improvement in the D, but not enough like we need. We are lacking quality play at ...........

DT's
Aging CB's
Aging FS / SS
OLB ( Bell )

The overall scheme doesn't fit our players.

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 11:05 AM
Which long passes and/or TD passes were Surtain's fault?

It doesn't matter. He's paying paid to make plays. He's not making them.

Chiefnj
10-17-2006, 11:15 AM
It doesn't matter. He's paying paid to make plays. He's not making them.


If he isn't giving up TD's or long passes and isn't a liability on the run D, isn't he doing his job?

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 11:16 AM
If he isn't giving up TD's or long passes and isn't a liability on the run D, isn't he doing his job?

He is paid to be one of our top playmakers. "Good coverage" is not worth 40 million. See Champ Bailey for what 40 million should get you. That guy is a total stud corner. He changes games. Surtain did a good job last year, but so far this year, he is not impressing me.

NewChief
10-17-2006, 11:18 AM
Of course. Pretty dumb statement, really.

It wasn't a statement; it was a question. In my mind, it was a legitimate question because while I've never noticed your posts much before, you seem to be a consistently negative poster in the last week or so. I was just curious if you had any current players that you actually liked.

Chiefnj
10-17-2006, 11:19 AM
He is paid to be one of our top playmakers. "Good coverage" is not worth 40 million. See Champ Bailey for what 40 million should get you. That guy is a total stud corner. He changes games. Surtain did a good job last year, but so far this year, he is not impressing me.

So you admit he is doing what is asked of him. You just want more. You want him downfield picking off passes. It isn't going to happen much in the current scheme where he is often playing off the LOS and then releasing receivers after 10 yards.

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 11:22 AM
So you admit he is doing what is asked of him.

No, I don't. His contract obviously indicates he's supposed to be playing at a much higher level. He's supposed to be making plays like the one Law made in Arizona last week.

King_Chief_Fan
10-17-2006, 11:24 AM
No, I don't. His contract obviously indicates he's supposed to be playing at a much higher level. He's supposed to be making plays like the one Law made in Arizona last week.

but he played like Law did this week ROFL

King_Chief_Fan
10-17-2006, 11:25 AM
Under the rules of Carl Peterson, you can bash anyone you want, provided of course you are a season ticket holder which indicates that you are a true fan

Chiefnj
10-17-2006, 11:27 AM
No, I don't. His contract obviously indicates he's supposed to be playing at a much higher level. He's supposed to be making plays like the one Law made in Arizona last week.

How many times was he thrown at against Pitt?

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 11:28 AM
How many times was he thrown at against Pitt?

Beats the hell out of me. He's not making plays. He's paid to.

Chiefnj
10-17-2006, 11:30 AM
Beats the hell out of me. He's not making plays. He's paid to.
How can he make plays if he isn't being thrown at and the scheme isn't putting him in a position to make plays?

IMO, the best corners are the ones you never hear from or about.

58-4ever
10-17-2006, 11:31 AM
How can he make plays if he isn't being thrown at and the scheme isn't putting him in a position to make plays?

IMO, the best corners are the ones you never hear from or about.

The scheme seems like a big problem to me. Every time a big completion was made over the middle, our defenders just looked around like "I thought YOU were suppossed to be there."

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 11:34 AM
IMO, the best corners are the ones you never hear from or about.

Look, whatever. Go watch Champ Bailey play. That dude is worth 40 million.

Mr. Laz
10-17-2006, 11:48 AM
You guys are all dumb.

says a guy who names himself "Hootie"







our entire secondary had a terrible game ...... missed tackles, blown assignments. :banghead:


it was pathetic

Chiefnj
10-17-2006, 11:53 AM
Look, whatever. Go watch Champ Bailey play. That dude is worth 40 million.


Yeah, he did great against Kennison last year and the Broncos had that fabulous 29th ranked pass D.

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 11:54 AM
Yeah, he did great against Kennison last year and the Broncos had that fabulous 29th ranked pass D.

Are you kidding me? That guy made more plays than any other corner in the league last year.

'Hamas' Jenkins
10-17-2006, 12:21 PM
Are you kidding me? That guy made more plays than any other corner in the league last year.

That's just stupid.

Nathan Vasher
Ty Law

both of them made a lot more plays than Bailey did last year.

The problem with this D is a problem of scheme. The Cover 2 is absolutely dependent upon a great defensive line, which we only have half of. Without an ability to generate an interior rush, it's the easiest defense aside from the prevent to pick apart.

The safeties are also more important than the corners in a cover 2, which in our case exacerbates our greatest weakness while ignoring our greatest strength.

All teams that run the Tampa 2 well have great safeties and great interior linemen.

The Bears have Mike Brown and Tommie Harris.
The Bucs had a motivated Booger McFarland and that asshat Lynch
Hell last year when the Colts D looked great, they had Corey Simon and Bob Sanders.

The Colts lose Simon and Sanders, and know their D is an absolute sieve....I wonder why :hmmm:

The fact of the matter is that this team is better suited to run Cunningham's style of defense than Edwards', and as long as we run a cover 2 with this personnel, we will get gashed by teams with competent offensive lines.

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 12:25 PM
I think you are overreacting. We were playing well on defense until Pittsburgh. Does one game really mean that much?

'Hamas' Jenkins
10-17-2006, 12:43 PM
I think you are overreacting. We were playing well on defense until Pittsburgh. Does one game really mean that much?

Ok...we played well on defense, this is true. But we did it against a rookie QB, who however good he may be, was still making his first start, a 2nd year QB behind a crap O-line with no receivers, and a team that just packed it in and didn't want to risk their QB losing the game for them (Dungver, of course). Our D played well against Cincy, but they have been sluggish this year, and they also knew they didn't have to throw the ball down the field to win that game, seeing as how their D was playing and the hole we were in.

We aren't as bad as we were in Pittsburgh, but we aren't as good as we were against SF, of course. We are going to have problems against the run all year, and that is going to wear us out come the latter part of the year.

ROYC75
10-17-2006, 12:56 PM
The fact of the matter is that this team is better suited to run Cunningham's style of defense than Edwards', and as long as we run a cover 2 with this personnel, we will get gashed by teams with competent offensive lines.


BINGOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo !

Coogs
10-17-2006, 01:24 PM
The fact of the matter is that this team is better suited to run Cunningham's style of defense than Edwards',

"Gun the Bus Driver's" list of casualties...

... GRob - played the safties to close (or maybe it was too far)
from LOS. Needed to move DE's out, and re-position DT's.

... next season... needed new players. CP fills shopping list + DJ.

... last season... DV and all assistants left him on an island.
New defensive HC and new assistant coaches re-charge
Gun's batteries.

... next year... forced to run Herm's system. Needs new players.

'Hamas' Jenkins
10-17-2006, 01:27 PM
I'm not disagreeing with you on Cunningham's passing of the buck, but you can't really say that this is an ideal cover 2 team given the makeup of the defensive personnel.

Coogs
10-17-2006, 01:32 PM
I'm not disagreeing with you on Cunningham's passing of the buck, but you can't really say that this is an ideal cover 2 team given the makeup of the defensive personnel.

I really don't know anything about what the ideal cover 2 team personnel is. But I do know the "effort" we saw Sunday from the Chiefs defense has been seen many times during Gun's tenur.

'Hamas' Jenkins
10-17-2006, 01:35 PM
Read my above post.

Chiefnj
10-17-2006, 01:37 PM
I think you are overreacting. We were playing well on defense until Pittsburgh. Does one game really mean that much?
You really think the D played well against Leinart making his first NFL start?

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 01:38 PM
The defense won the game in Arizona.

tk13
10-17-2006, 01:38 PM
I don't think you can compare Bailey and Surtain completely. I actually agree with Hamas that our D is probably more suited to play Gunther-ball. Put the corners up on the WR's and blitz a lot. Kinda like how Denver plays when they're rolling. Although Hali and Allen have done a pretty good job so we can play more Cover 2.

But really Champ Bailey is asked to do different things than Surtain. Herm wants the corners to keep the play in front of them and not allow big plays. A lot of times Champ Bailey is up on the line pressuring the WR, trying to disrupt him while the front 7 blitzes, which does lead to Champ getting burned deep sometimes.

Coogs
10-17-2006, 01:41 PM
Read my above post.

:thumb:

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 01:43 PM
I'm not really comparing them.

Surtain is being paid to be a playmaker, just like Law. He's paid to make game-changing plays. He's not doing it!

'Hamas' Jenkins
10-17-2006, 01:47 PM
Perhaps we overrated him because he was protected by a very good (at the time) Sam Madison in Miami :shrug:

Count Alex's Losses
10-17-2006, 01:49 PM
See, that's what I don't get. Surtain had a solid year last year. Pairing him with Law should have really given him some opportunities this year. Maybe we need to play more man coverage.

'Hamas' Jenkins
10-17-2006, 01:51 PM
See, that's what I don't get. Surtain had a solid year last year. Pairing him with Law should have really given him some opportunities this year. Maybe we need to play more man coverage.

Which is what I said in my original post.