PDA

View Full Version : It's time to quit blaming the O-line


FringeNC
11-18-2007, 02:57 PM
Croyle had plenty of time on non-obvious passing downs, which is about all you can hope for in the NFL. Also, the line opened some holes up for Priest early.

doomy3
11-18-2007, 02:57 PM
Bullshit.

Douche Baggins
11-18-2007, 02:57 PM
The line still sucks. But I agree coaching was a larger issue today, for sure.

suds79
11-18-2007, 02:58 PM
Chris Terry loves this thread. :rolleyes:

OnTheWarpath58
11-18-2007, 03:00 PM
IMO, the OL still is pretty bad, but Croyle made them look better today.

It's amazing what a QB who has the ability to move around can do for you.

Huard would have been sacked 6 times today.

NUMBER7
11-18-2007, 03:01 PM
Croyle had plenty of time on non-obvious passing downs, which is about all you can hope for in the NFL. Also, the line opened some holes up for Priest early.

Dude you better read the box score.

FringeNC
11-18-2007, 03:01 PM
Chris Terry loves this thread. :rolleyes:

What team doesn't give up sacks and neg. running plays? Even Brady occassionally gets sacked.

What I saw today was at least NFL average pass-protection.

BCD
11-18-2007, 03:01 PM
IMO, the OL still is pretty bad, but Croyle made them look better today.

It's amazing what a QB who has the ability to move around can do for you.

Huard would have been sacked 6 times today.That is it, right there. Croyle has MUCH better pocket awareness. Gets rid of the ball quicker, too.

FringeNC
11-18-2007, 03:02 PM
Dude you better read the box score.

If the defense knows what play is coming, it makes it quite a bit easier.

BCD
11-18-2007, 03:03 PM
The line still sucks. But I agree coaching was a larger issue today, for sure.Croyle made it look better today. No doubt. Or, maybe it was Huard making it look bad.

Mr. Arrowhead
11-18-2007, 03:03 PM
was you watching the same game, because our tackles, especially chris terry were horrible

NUMBER7
11-18-2007, 03:04 PM
What team doesn't give up sacks and neg. running plays? Even Brady occassionally gets sacked.

What I saw today was at least NFL average pass-protection.

I believe that may be your opinion...most would agree this line is terrible...again look at the box score, sacks, hurries, knockdowns...it is the same old s***. Part of it may not be all the lines fault we have 1 deep threat..so the D is always on top of the o line.

suds79
11-18-2007, 03:04 PM
What team doesn't give up sacks and neg. running plays? Even Brady occassionally gets sacked.

What I saw today was at least NFL average pass-protection.

You forgot to mention sacks causing fumbles & short fields in that.

I saw almost average pass-protection today in a season where it's been consistently bad.

banyon
11-18-2007, 03:04 PM
Dude you better read the box score.

This thread is for the tards who claimed that Huard was only getting sacked so much because of our O-line and it wouldn't make any difference who was QB.


If Huard had started this game, after a 13-10 loss they would've said "SEE, HUARD KEPT US IN THE GAME. HE MANAGED THINGS EFFECTIVELY" even if he was sacked six times and threw 3 picks.

doomy3
11-18-2007, 03:04 PM
This is just absoultely ridiculous. We might have the worst line in football. Period.

Wa-Z
11-18-2007, 03:05 PM
Even if they did ok...one game doesn't make up for all the other shit games they've had.

OnTheWarpath58
11-18-2007, 03:05 PM
This thread is for the tards who claimed that Huard was only getting sacked so much because of our O-line and it wouldn't make any difference who was QB.


If Huard had started this game, after a 13-10 loss they would've said "SEE, HUARD KEPT US IN THE GAME. HE MANAGED THINGS EFFECTIVELY" even if he was sacked six times and threw 3 picks.

Egg-zactly.

CupidStunt
11-18-2007, 03:05 PM
LT, LG and C were okay today. RG and RT still sucked hard.

We need to draft a guard, center and tackle, for sure.

Delano
11-18-2007, 03:06 PM
Considering how important continuity is to an offensive line, this unit is at an automatic disadvantage.

Even if they were more talented, it would be tough considering how the men are moving on and off the field with injury or a coaching decision.

I think they can make next year work with a new tackle and a guard. Casey is good enough for one more year IMO.

Coach
11-18-2007, 03:09 PM
IMO, the OL still is pretty bad, but Croyle made them look better today.

It's amazing what a QB who has the ability to move around can do for you.

Huard would have been sacked 6 times today.

That's what I been trying to explain all along the whole course of the season. I even brought up the Bledsoe/Brady comparsion on one partictular thread becuase of their mobility.

Now the whole season will be fun to watch, yes, but there will be growing pains becuase, for whatever reason, the Chiefs went to the Huardite, which meant that Croyle wouldn't have any chance to work with the starting receivers to get in snyc.

NUMBER7
11-18-2007, 03:11 PM
This thread is for the tards who claimed that Huard was only getting sacked so much because of our O-line and it wouldn't make any difference who was QB.


If Huard had started this game, after a 13-10 loss they would've said "SEE, HUARD KEPT US IN THE GAME. HE MANAGED THINGS EFFECTIVELY" even if he was sacked six times and threw 3 picks.

Banyon, you are correct many would...I would not...I see the problem as multi-faceted. However IMO to say the o line played better today is wrong. If they played better today I am sure we would have had more than 10 points...I was taught it all starts in the trenches...these guys are not getting the job done. Terry is way out of his league, Wellborne is past his prime...and if I see another false start by our center this season I think I will scream. BC played well today behind this crap line.

FringeNC
11-18-2007, 03:13 PM
This thread is for the tards who claimed that Huard was only getting sacked so much because of our O-line and it wouldn't make any difference who was QB.


If Huard had started this game, after a 13-10 loss they would've said "SEE, HUARD KEPT US IN THE GAME. HE MANAGED THINGS EFFECTIVELY" even if he was sacked six times and threw 3 picks.

Yep. Our offensive line is by no means good, but any offensive line would look like shit with Huard as QB and Herm Edwards/Curl/Solari as play-callers. We eliminated one huge problem, and the offensive line looks much better, just as many of us predicted.

burt
11-18-2007, 03:16 PM
Yep. Our offensive line is by no means good, but any offensive line would look like shit with Huard as QB and Herm Edwards/Curl/Solari as play-callers. We eliminated one huge problem, and the offensive line looks much better, just as many of us predicted.

nuff said

GarySpFc
11-18-2007, 03:19 PM
What team doesn't give up sacks and neg. running plays? Even Brady occassionally gets sacked.

What I saw today was at least NFL average pass-protection.

No, you didn't see good pass protection. What you saw was a quarterback who gets rid of the ball half a second faster, and one the defense cannot stack 9 in the box.

Tribal Warfare
11-18-2007, 03:23 PM
We need to draft a guard, center and tackle, for sure.


or obtain one or more through FA

FringeNC
11-18-2007, 03:24 PM
No, you didn't see good pass protection. What you saw was a quarterback who gets rid of the ball half a second faster, and one the defense cannot stack 9 in the box.

I don't think we disagree too much. Huard took forever to get rid of the ball, which made the pass protection look horrid, even if it was not.

How bad is our offensive line? I don't know. There are a lot of contributing reason why we have the worst offense in the league. The o-line is one of those, but not the sole factor. Huard and Herm are (were) HUGE problems, too.

Douche Baggins
11-18-2007, 03:25 PM
the offensive line looks much better, just as many of us predicted.

This is quite a reach. For several reasons.

1. It was one game.

2. The Colts had only one legit pass rusher, and he was beating Terry ALL DAY LONG.

3. The run-blocking still sucked ass.

Cochise
11-18-2007, 03:25 PM
Add one or two legitimate NFL starters to this O-line, and we probably win today.

dj56dt58
11-18-2007, 03:31 PM
agreed..there were times today where Croyle had time to drop back, make a sandwich, then throw it. Then Terry found out what he was doing and left to go steal the sandwich

NUMBER7
11-18-2007, 03:31 PM
Add one or two legitimate NFL starters to this O-line, and we probably win today.

This team has more holes on the offense than swiss cheese...how about some deep threat receivers...heck I would settle for someone who can catch the ball at all...D Bowe can't do it all.

burt
11-18-2007, 03:32 PM
Add one or two legitimate NFL starters to this O-line, and we probably win today.

Add 3 more inches and I'd be a porn star. I haven't so I won't. The Chiefs are what they are, so we lose.

NUMBER7
11-18-2007, 03:34 PM
Add 3 more inches and I'd be a porn star. I haven't so I won't. The Chiefs are what they are, so we lose.

ROFL Dude, you can be Buck Naked.

FringeNC
11-18-2007, 03:34 PM
Add one or two legitimate NFL starters to this O-line, and we probably win today.

Change a couple of play-calls and we may very well win, also.

burt
11-18-2007, 03:36 PM
ROFL Dude, you can be Buck Naked.

Absolutely!!! As soon as we stop calling a stagnant offence game. Or "add two legitimate NFL starters to this O-line" we didn't...so we lose. IF is a big f*cki ng word.

burt
11-18-2007, 03:37 PM
Change a couple of play-calls and we may very well win, also.

"Hi there, I am Buck Naked." Didn't happen.....therefore we loose.

gblowfish
11-18-2007, 03:57 PM
Chris Terry loves this thread. :rolleyes:

OnTheWarpath58
11-18-2007, 04:00 PM
Chris Terry loves this thread. :rolleyes:

I can't help but think that......


*throws up in mouth*


.....Jordan Black would/could be doing a better job at RT than Terry.

Douche Baggins
11-18-2007, 04:02 PM
I can't help but think that......


*throws up in mouth*


.....Jordan Black would/could be doing a better job at RT than Terry.

Without question.

OnTheWarpath58
11-18-2007, 04:03 PM
Without question.

Sad, ain't it?

NUMBER7
11-18-2007, 04:04 PM
Without question.

Bring back I-65?

KCJohnny
11-18-2007, 04:05 PM
This is quite a reach. For several reasons.

3. The run-blocking still sucked ass.

That's my beef with this OL.

ChiefaRoo
11-18-2007, 05:18 PM
Croyle had plenty of time on non-obvious passing downs, which is about all you can hope for in the NFL. Also, the line opened some holes up for Priest early.

Idiot.

tk13
11-18-2007, 05:26 PM
Our offensive line is horrible. It should be our 1st, 2nd, and 3rd priority in the offseason. It's that bad. You just have to go back to last week against Denver, we actually made them look like they had a good pass rush. And on top of that, we made them look like a good run defense. That's why we saw what happened today... last week we tried spreading it out against a bad defense and they still repeatedly got to the QB.

scott free
11-18-2007, 05:28 PM
The line still sucks. But I agree coaching was a larger issue today, for sure.

FringeNC
11-18-2007, 05:35 PM
Croyle has been sacked 4 times over his last 60 attempts (not bad)...but don't let numbers get in the way of the narrative that the line is entirely responsible for our offensive woes.

Douche Baggins
11-18-2007, 05:40 PM
don't let numbers get in the way of the narrative that the line is entirely responsible for our offensive woes.

What's our yards per carry average for the season? 3.0?

If we can't run the ball, we won't score points.

Mr. Laz
11-18-2007, 05:42 PM
was you watching the same game, because our tackles, especially chris terry were horrible
did the tackles choose to play for a field goal every time we go into the redzone?