PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs We gave up on the run game too early.


ChiefsNow
11-15-2010, 07:52 AM
.

Chiefless
11-15-2010, 07:56 AM
I'm afraid the days of big rushing totals is over until the Chiefs find a consistent counter to stacked lines and rush-bitzes.

Extra Point
11-15-2010, 07:56 AM
Well, at least you care about something! (From one 51 year old dumbass to another.)

KCtotheSB
11-15-2010, 07:56 AM
I seem to recall a lot of "run, run, pass" series when we were only down 7-0. Charles wasn't doing anything and Jones was doing even less than that. The entire game, our running game just wasn't working as it was in the past.

KC native
11-15-2010, 07:58 AM
I seem to recall a lot of "run, run, pass" series when we were only down 7-0. Charles wasn't doing anything and Jones was doing even less than that. The entire game, our running game just wasn't working as it was in the past.

Yes, and it won't work until Mark shows he can do something with his arm.

Chiefnj2
11-15-2010, 08:04 AM
They were only averaging 2.5 yards per carry in the first half of the game. Plus, they were down 28 points. The run game was toast and useless.

ChiefsNow
11-15-2010, 08:10 AM
I seem to recall a lot of "run, run, pass" series when we were only down 7-0. Charles wasn't doing anything and Jones was doing even less than that. The entire game, our running game just wasn't working as it was in the past.

my point is we should have stuck with it, even when we were down by 21. I think the tide would have turned. We let ourselves get out of our own comfort zone too early. I don 't know how many runs we actually had in the game, but it should have been alot more. We gave up on it too early. On another point , I would like to see more of Battle. He has heart. I think he would do more for us than Jones.

KC native
11-15-2010, 08:21 AM
my point is we should have stuck with it, even when we were down by 21. I think the tide would have turned. We let ourselves get out of our own comfort zone too early. I don 't know how many runs we actually had in the game, but it should have been alot more. We gave up on it too early. On another point , I would like to see more of Battle. He has heart. I think he would do more for us than Jones.

You are fucking nuts. More Battle? As lackluster as TJ has been in the last few games, he is still head and shoulders above Battle.

ChiefsNow
11-15-2010, 08:34 AM
You are fucking nuts. More Battle? As lackluster as TJ has been in the last few games, he is still head and shoulders above Battle.

Not sure how you can make a sure judgment on that. Battle has not been given alot of chance, but he gives me a gut feeling and he is a hell of alot younger than Jones. I don't dislike jones and I actually was hoping Battle would make the team. There is something about Battle that I like and I have a feeling that if he does not get a decent chance here, he will blossom on another team. i would rather see it happen here. My gut feeling is that he is similar to the bus, and I would like to see him beat up on some opposing defenses.

Garcia Bronco
11-15-2010, 08:35 AM
I don't think so. Your run game was getting smashed. Then you were down 21-0 and had to score.

ChiefsNow
11-15-2010, 08:48 AM
I don't think so. Your run game was getting smashed. Then you were down 21-0 and had to score.

we were down by 21 in the first quarter. That means we had 3 quarters to get back in it. Our running game is our bread and butter and we threw it aside to go into unknown land. Now it's not unknown anymore, we cannot come back on the arm of Cassel and with Bowe, chambers and Copper. We had plenty of time to come back with OUR game. Just my opinion.

InChiefsHell
11-15-2010, 08:48 AM
Being down 21-0 in the FIRST QUARTER will do that to you. It was painfully obvious that we were not going to stop them, they were going through us like a hot knife through butter...we had to score quickly if we were going to have a prayer of staying in the game. Unfortunately, that meant leaning on Cassel and our passing game...well...

KC Dan
11-15-2010, 09:15 AM
They gave up on the running game at the start of the 2nd half of the Raider game and haven't returned to it....

Pestilence
11-15-2010, 09:16 AM
We could have kept with the running game on the first two drives.....if that piece of shit QB of ours could hit anybody on 3rd down.

The game could have been close if Cassel could have kept the offense on the field longer than a minute.

DaFace
11-15-2010, 09:18 AM
Regardless of whether or not that was true, this game wasn't lost on offense.

siberian khatru
11-15-2010, 09:20 AM
Regardless of whether or not that was true, this game wasn't lost on offense.

Shouldn't you be concentrating on moderating instead of analyzing football?

Sully
11-15-2010, 09:31 AM
I seem to recall a lot of "run, run, pass" series when we were only down 7-0. Charles wasn't doing anything and Jones was doing even less than that. The entire game, our running game just wasn't working as it was in the past.

A lot of run, run, pass series before it was more than 7-0?
Wasn't that two series?

Chiefnj2
11-15-2010, 09:33 AM
A lot of run, run, pass series before it was more than 7-0?
Wasn't that two series?

Actually, after one KC possession, it was 14-0.

Sully
11-15-2010, 09:34 AM
Actually, after one KC possession, it was 14-0.

Corrected, I stand!

jd1020
11-15-2010, 10:29 AM
When the Chiefs are behind because their defense cant stop a peewee team and the run is getting stuffed its almost a gaurenteed loss. You cant count on Cassel to sustain drives to ice the opposing teams offense and give your D a rest. Weis/Haley just need to come up with ways to get the ball in the hands of their best offensive player (Charles) when the Oline cant create a hole. They wanted to go down field every pass and as soon as a pass rush comes within 5 yards of Cassel he stutter steps backwards and sidearms a pass into the abyss. Or he'll leave the box and take a sack.

Pawnmower
11-15-2010, 10:34 AM
before the game was out of hand. Even when we were down by 21 to zip, we should have stuck with the run.

Oh so thats why we ,lost. Thanks for clearing that up.

:doh!:

LaChapelle
11-15-2010, 10:39 AM
Oakland 6(?) 3 and 1 fail
Denver can't get it in on the 1 yard line on 3 trys
?

InChiefsHell
11-15-2010, 10:43 AM
Oakland 6(?) 3 and 1 fail
Denver can't get it in on the 1 yard line on 3 trys
?

I don't understand your post...:spock:

Deberg_1990
11-15-2010, 10:46 AM
Heres KC's game log on 3rd down in the 1st half...

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore?gid=20101114007&page=plays

3rd-12, KC40 9:09 M. Cassel incomplete pass down the middle

3rd-4, KC27 2:51 M. Cassel incomplete pass to the right

3rd-3, DEN27 14:06 M. Cassel sacked by M. Haggan

3rd-5, DEN41 8:57 J. Charles rushed to the left for 7 yard gain

2nd-10, DEN34 7:43 M. Cassel sacked by J. Hunter. Denver committed 15 yard penalty

1st-8, DEN8 5:48 M. Cassel sacked by M. Haggan. M. Cassel fumbled. J. Hunter recovered fumble and returned for 75 yards


After that it was 35 to zip....

jd1020
11-15-2010, 10:56 AM
I don't understand your post...:spock:

Pretty sure hes trying to point out the Chiefs offensive failures in the last 2 games. With the 3-1 's in Oakland and the goal line failure in Denver.

LaChapelle
11-15-2010, 11:05 AM
The Chiefs run game ain't what it use to be
they've been figured out or the 0-line aint getting it done
The ball is in Cassel's court to loosen up the D /panic button denial

milkman
11-16-2010, 08:22 AM
You're a n00b, but that's no excuse for being a dumbass.

Just when I thought dumbassey couldn't reach any lower level.

Rausch
11-16-2010, 08:28 AM
I agree.

Panicked teams without an identity flounder around and dump the game plan once behind.

There is a reason you stick with the running game (if that's how you're built.)

Pitt and Bmore and a number of others might lose a game here or there but they're in Championship games because they know who they are and play to it...

SenselessChiefsFan
11-16-2010, 08:36 AM
I'm afraid the days of big rushing totals is over until the Chiefs find a consistent counter to stacked lines and rush-bitzes.

It is no coincidence that the Chiefs struggles in the run game have come while McCluster has been out. This isn't to excuse their inefficiency. Any team should overcome the loss of any single player.

But, it has magnified just how over-matched the offensive line is still. Add in Waters and Lilja being less than 100%, and it is not surprising.

Guys forget that defenses get stretched vertically AND horizontally. McCluster does a good job of spreading defenses horizontally.

The Chiefs are in the second year of the program. Todd Haley was honest the entire time when he said the Chiefs 'aren't' a good team yet.

Pestilence
11-16-2010, 09:12 AM
Waters is done.

Are Lilja and Asamoah strictly RGs or can either one play LG?

patteeu
11-16-2010, 09:14 AM
We could have kept with the running game on the first two drives.....if that piece of shit QB of ours could hit anybody on 3rd down.

The game could have been close if Cassel could have kept the offense on the field longer than a minute.

He did hit someone, but the glorious savior running back had a pre-snap penalty that nullified the conversion and turned a 3rd and 7 into a 3rd and 12. This was after Matt Cassel converted the first first down of the game on a 2nd and 8. The runs during this drive were Jamaal Charles for 2, Jamaal Charles for 1, and Thomas Jones for 2. Matt Cassel wasn't the guy who stalled that drive.

On the second drive, the running backs were marginally better with Jamaal Charles running twice for a total of 6 yards on the first two downs. Cassel threw incomplete on 3rd and 4.

So in the first two drives, Cassel completed two passes for 1st downs (one was nullified) and threw incomplete twice on 3rd down (one was a 3rd and 12). Meanwhile, the running backs averaged 2.2 yards over 5 carries with a long of 3 and a first down nullifying penalty.

I think it's funny how people can get so irrational with their hate. The defense sucks because Cassel didn't keep the offense on the field long enough for the defense to rest and revise their gameplan. The running game sucks because Denver keys on the run knowing that Cassel sucks. The offensive line gives up sacks only because Cassel holds the ball too long. Cassel sucks no matter how many good passes he throws and no matter how few times he's intercepted because a couple of his incompletions were way off the mark. Some of you are becoming self-parodies.

milkman
11-16-2010, 09:14 AM
I agree.

Panicked teams without an identity flounder around and dump the game plan once behind.

There is a reason you stick with the running game (if that's how you're built.)

Pitt and Bmore and a number of others might lose a game here or there but they're in Championship games because they know who they are and play to it...

When have the Ravens or Steelers been down 21 points before the end of teh first quarter?

DieChief
11-16-2010, 09:30 AM
HAHAHAHAHA, You douchebags lost, no got your asses raped cut off and handed back to you covered in shit. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

BigChiefTablet
11-16-2010, 09:30 AM
He did hit someone, but the glorious savior running back had a pre-snap penalty that nullified the conversion and turned a 3rd and 7 into a 3rd and 12. This was after Matt Cassel converted the first first down of the game on a 2nd and 8. The runs during this drive were Jamaal Charles for 2, Jamaal Charles for 1, and Thomas Jones for 2. Matt Cassel wasn't the guy who stalled that drive.

On the second drive, the running backs were marginally better with Jamaal Charles running twice for a total of 6 yards on the first two downs. Cassel threw incomplete on 3rd and 4.

So in the first two drives, Cassel completed two passes for 1st downs (one was nullified) and threw incomplete twice on 3rd down (one was a 3rd and 12). Meanwhile, the running backs averaged 2.2 yards over 5 carries with a long of 3 and a first down nullifying penalty.

I think it's funny how people can get so irrational with their hate. The defense sucks because Cassel didn't keep the offense on the field long enough for the defense to rest and revise their gameplan. The running game sucks because Denver keys on the run knowing that Cassel sucks. The offensive line gives up sacks only because Cassel holds the ball too long. Cassel sucks no matter how many good passes he throws and no matter how few times he's intercepted because a couple of his incompletions were way off the mark. Some of you are becoming self-parodies.

This.

I'm not a big Cassel fan, but people need to pull their heads out of their asses and quit blaming him for every single facet of every loss. He played a hell of a lot better game than McNabb did under similar circumstances.

Chiefnj2
11-16-2010, 09:35 AM
He did hit someone, but the glorious savior running back had a pre-snap penalty that nullified the conversion and turned a 3rd and 7 into a 3rd and 12. This was after Matt Cassel converted the first first down of the game on a 2nd and 8. The runs during this drive were Jamaal Charles for 2, Jamaal Charles for 1, and Thomas Jones for 2. Matt Cassel wasn't the guy who stalled that drive.

On the second drive, the running backs were marginally better with Jamaal Charles running twice for a total of 6 yards on the first two downs. Cassel threw incomplete on 3rd and 4.

So in the first two drives, Cassel completed two passes for 1st downs (one was nullified) and threw incomplete twice on 3rd down (one was a 3rd and 12). Meanwhile, the running backs averaged 2.2 yards over 5 carries with a long of 3 and a first down nullifying penalty.

I think it's funny how people can get so irrational with their hate. The defense sucks because Cassel didn't keep the offense on the field long enough for the defense to rest and revise their gameplan. The running game sucks because Denver keys on the run knowing that Cassel sucks. The offensive line gives up sacks only because Cassel holds the ball too long. Cassel sucks no matter how many good passes he throws and no matter how few times he's intercepted because a couple of his incompletions were way off the mark. Some of you are becoming self-parodies.

Stop it with those facts.