PDA

View Full Version : Mythbusters: Chiefs O-Line


ChiefsFan4Life
04-26-2007, 08:16 PM
This is just a rant but I am f'n sick and tired of reading on all of these different forums and people think we still have one of the best O-Lines in all of football. Are people that retarded that they are still living in the past? It seems impossible for non-Chiefs fans to believe that we had a crappy O-Line for basically all of last year.

People are retarded.

Dr. Facebook Fever
04-26-2007, 08:19 PM
Dude... it's a game. Chill.

CoMoChief
04-26-2007, 08:21 PM
GoChiefs thinks our Oline is good and that our offense won't skip a beat.

ChiefsFan4Life
04-26-2007, 08:21 PM
Dude... it's a game. Chill.

At least your username had me chuckling from The Office episode earlier tonight.

Claynus
04-26-2007, 08:23 PM
GoChiefs thinks our Oline is good and that our offense won't skip a beat.

I think our offensive line was shit last year. I think it's improved this year. That's all I have ever said.

ChiefaRoo
04-26-2007, 08:29 PM
yeah, people are retarded... yeah

chief52
04-26-2007, 08:33 PM
What forums could you possibly be reading? Maybe you should screen your sites a little better.

Priest4Prez
04-26-2007, 08:35 PM
I think our offensive line was shit last year. I think it's improved this year. That's all I have ever said.

How has it improved? Shields just retired and there are no backups worthy to start anywhere on the chiefs roster. I will wait until the draft until i make my desicion on anything that has to deal with chiefs football

Claynus
04-26-2007, 08:38 PM
How has it improved? Shields just retired and there are no backups worthy to start anywhere on the chiefs roster.

McIntosh> Black

Terry> Scab RT's 'o 2006

I think Welbourn can fill in at guard adequately, he's got starting experience at that position.

Now if Terry gets hooked by the league it gets bad.

Mecca
04-26-2007, 08:39 PM
When Terry gets suspended it will be about the same....

Priest4Prez
04-26-2007, 08:41 PM
Is there any way we could move up to get Thomas?

Mecca
04-26-2007, 08:44 PM
Is there any way we could move up to get Thomas?

Uh no........we sure as **** don't need a 1 player draft.

Dr. Facebook Fever
04-26-2007, 08:49 PM
At least your username had me chuckling from The Office episode earlier tonight.
I do what I can.

SNR
04-26-2007, 09:30 PM
Let me get this straight: you're bitching about non-Chief fans saying we're good when we're really not. :spock:

Crashride
04-26-2007, 09:36 PM
we havent seen our line play yet...last year our line was average at best

SNR
04-26-2007, 09:44 PM
we havent seen our line play yet...last year our line was average at bestIt wasn't even average. LJ had so many carries because we could never get the running game going because of crap blocking up front.

Mr. Kotter
04-26-2007, 09:48 PM
....

Now if Terry gets hooked by the league it gets bad.

In the current NFL climate....Terry is as good as gone. And maybe it's rightfully so. Dirtbag. :shake:

So, that...by your own admission means, "it gets bad"....which I agree with.

So, that leaves us in the position of "HOPING" that three of the following six folks can START on an NFL offensive line: McIntosh, Svitek, Bober, Sampson, Wellborne, and Stallings....

Now I think we can be "adequate"....but a GOOD O-Line??? We are, at least, 1-2 years away from that....barring a first round steal of an O-Lineman.

This does NOT bode well... :shake:

Ebolapox
04-26-2007, 09:49 PM
I think our offensive line was shit last year. I think it's improved this year. That's all I have ever said.

and your proof is... what exactly?

Rausch
04-26-2007, 09:54 PM
I think our offensive line was shit last year. I think it's improved this year. That's all I have ever said.

How the loss of Shields and a year added to Watters and Weigman makes us better is beyond me...

Logical
04-26-2007, 09:57 PM
and your proof is... what exactly?
Exactly, as far as I can tell we exchanged one poor young player for one washed up mediocre older player and we retired an 11 year all pro.

keg in kc
04-26-2007, 10:30 PM
How the loss of Shields and a year added to Watters and Weigman makes us better is beyond me...Playing devil's advocate, while he won't be the equal of Shields at his prime, Welbourn at guard may be a significant week-to-week upgrade from the Shields of the last two years, which will help both Wiegmann and whoever the right tackle ends up being. Black leaving is addition by subtraction at left tackle, regardless of how McIntosh performs. I think for those reasons alone we'll be better than a year ago.

Which is, admittedly, like saying boiled labrador tastes better than boiled chihuahua when you're broke and looking for roadkill stew.

ChiefsCountry
04-27-2007, 12:31 AM
I think McIntosh is an upgrade over Black, which doesnt take much. That is a positive. Welbourn moving to guard shouldnt really hurt, Shields played pretty crappy last year and Welbourn was a good guard with Philly. The key is what we do in the draft. If we get Sears or Yanda we could be in better shape than last year.

Easy 6
04-27-2007, 04:24 AM
Our line will NEVER be as good as it was, how often does a team have 2 HOFer's & a potential HOFer in a 5 man group???

That said, we are still better off than a lot of teams...there is still an All-World gaurd around & one of the top line coaches in the NFL to whip the rest into shape.

This year wont be nearly as bad as 06, especially if we can stop the merry-go-round at RT.

Braincase
04-27-2007, 04:57 AM
I'd say we have one of the best offensive linemen in football... two if you count Tony G. At the other 4 positions.... we suck.

ChiefsFan4Life
04-27-2007, 05:51 AM
Let me get this straight: you're bitching about non-Chief fans saying we're good when we're really not. :spock:

Yes, because it's a false belief and it leads people to say ridiculous things like "Larry Johnson is just a product of the system. Anyone can run behind that O-Line - look what Priest Holmes did" and I'm getting sick of hearing that

:rolleyes:

rad
04-27-2007, 05:57 AM
In the current NFL climate....Terry is as good as gone. And maybe it's rightfully so. Dirtbag. :shake:

So, that...by your own admission means, "it gets bad"....which I agree with.

So, that leaves us in the position of "HOPING" that three of the following six folks can START on an NFL offensive line: McIntosh, Svitek, Bober, Sampson, Wellborne, and Stallings....

Now I think we can be "adequate"....but a GOOD O-Line??? We are, at least, 1-2 years away from that....barring a first round steal of an O-Lineman.

This does NOT bode well... :shake:

Don't forget the giant Mexican dude, whats-his-name......

tiptap
04-27-2007, 06:18 AM
The Roaf led line was unique in both the run game and the passing game. In 2003 with Tait the line was versatile going either direction. Dunn's play allowed this to continue with Tait's absense in the running game. And in the passing game you only need one tackle either L or R to be consistent in pass protection one on one to make the passing game good. We still had that in spades with Roaf.

Last year we didn't have any tackle that consistently could make plays on their own in the passing game. More troubling was the drop off in the running game. This was from shifting to runs outside tackle to runs mainly inside tackle. That takes a more physical presence in the middle. Shields age was showing and Weigman's undersize for that type of play was on show. Add the lack of Tackle muscle in the run game and the line was below average.

With the additions at tackle there was reason to anticipate the running game would improve because the signings were productive in the running game. And a chance that one or the other could be successful game to game to make the passing game respectable. We will have to see what the NFL does to that situation at tackle.

jspchief
04-27-2007, 08:08 AM
Yes, because it's a false belief and it leads people to say ridiculous things like "Larry Johnson is just a product of the system. Anyone can run behind that O-Line - look what Priest Holmes did" and I'm getting sick of hearing that

:rolleyes: Well, in that context there is some truth to what was being said.

Holmes likely was a product of the best O-line in football. And so far it appears that LJ was too, when you consider the way his production dropped last year with the loss of Roaf.

ChiefsFan4Life
04-27-2007, 08:19 AM
Well, in that context there is some truth to what was being said.

Holmes likely was a product of the best O-line in football. And so far it appears that LJ was too, when you consider the way his production dropped last year with the loss of Roaf.

Holmes definitely benefited from the O-Line he had, but there is no denying that he also had the perfect skills to complement that type of blocking he had. It was a perfect match and a beauty to watch.

What gets me mad is people like you saying that LJ is a "product of the excellent O-Line". Do you not watch the Chiefs? Did you see how below average the line was last year? How does that at all benefit LJ?

P.S. - Larry ran for 1,789 yards last year (must have been that AWESOME O-Line) :rolleyes:

Mecca
04-27-2007, 08:20 AM
Derrick Blaylock put up 150 in a game behind that line....

Chiefnj
04-27-2007, 08:23 AM
Well, in that context there is some truth to what was being said.

Holmes likely was a product of the best O-line in football. And so far it appears that LJ was too, when you consider the way his production dropped last year with the loss of Roaf.

Didn't Holmes have one good season in KC before Roaf came aboard?? I forget.

Claynus
04-27-2007, 08:24 AM
No one questioned LT when he was gaining 3.8 and 4.3 YPC...

jspchief
04-27-2007, 08:26 AM
What gets me mad is people like you saying that LJ is a "product of the excellent O-Line". Do you not watch the Chiefs? Did you see how below average the line was last year? How does that at all benefit LJ?

P.S. - Larry ran for 1,789 yards last year (must have been that AWESOME O-Line) :rolleyes: The simple fact is Larry Johnson's production dropped last year. He reached 1800 yards via a record breaking number of carries, while his YPC average dropped by almost a full yard.

Without Willie Roaf, Larry Johnson went from being the next Jim Brown to just being a good, durable back.

Claynus
04-27-2007, 08:28 AM
The simple fact is Larry Johnson's production dropped last year. He reached 1800 yards via a record breaking number of carries, while his YPC average dropped by almost a full yard.

Without Willie Roaf, Larry Johnson went from being the next Jim Brown to just being a good, durable back.

So what do you call LT when he was averaging less than 4.5 YPC? That's half of his time in the league.

jspchief
04-27-2007, 08:34 AM
So what do you call LT when he was averaging less than 4.5 YPC? That's half of his time in the league.

I've never claimed LT was the jesus christ of NFL RBs. In fact, I imagine a search will show plenty of posts where I've talked down on Tomlinson. I've certainly never made any "the next Jim Brown" type claims about Tomlinson.


Besides, how does LT's YPC average disprove that Johnson's production dropped last year behind a worse O-line?

Claynus
04-27-2007, 08:39 AM
It doesn't, but you're talking like LJ was pedestrian last year. He wasn't.

And neither has LT ever been...in any year.

FringeNC
04-27-2007, 08:48 AM
I do think some of the success of the running game is a function of Solari's line calls and was a function of Al keeping them off-balance.

On obvious passing downs, our pass blocking was nothing special, even with Roaf.

The success our offense had during the previous regime was not only a function of talent (Roaf), but of coaching.

There seems to be a near-complete dismissal in the role that coaching plays on offensive-line performance.

ChiefsFan4Life
04-27-2007, 08:50 AM
It doesn't, but you're talking like LJ was pedestrian last year. He wasn't.

Exactly!