Chiefs' offense: "one of the worst in the league, by nearly every measure"

[the Talking Can]

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2013/9...chiefs-offense

some numbers to chew on from arrowhead pride

The Chiefs are actually 12th in the league in PPG, at 23.7. But if you take away the 14 points the defense is directly responsible for, that number drops to 19 PPG, which would be tied for 23rd - with the Raiders. The Chiefs are relying on the defense to score points, which isn't good. Defensive scoring is random and shouldn't be part of the game plan. They didn't need Tamba Hali's pick-6 to beat the Jaguars, but they did need Eric Berry's against the Eagles.

They also are just not moving the ball; their 333 yds/gm is 21st in the league and their 4.9 yds/play ranks 25th. "Well Kyle," you may ask, " if the Chiefs offense is so bad, how are they undefeated this year?" That's an excellent question, thank you for asking. The answer is that the defense and special teams are much, much better than we thought.

The problem the Chiefs are having is getting to the Red Zone in the first place. They're 30th in yards per drive, with only Tampa Bay and Jacksonville behind them, and Cleveland directly in front of them (not good company to be in). This is a really, really bad offense. But here's the real kicker: the Chiefs' offense has the best starting field position in the NFL this year, and still can't score.

The Chiefs average 17 yards per drive better field position than their opponents (ok, ok, 16.95), the best mark in the NFL (2nd table). Only two other teams average more than 10 yards better starting field position than their opponents (New England and Chicago). The Chiefs' average starting line of scrimmage (LOS) is their own 36.97 yard line (best in the NFL), while their opponents average starting LOS is their own 20.02 yard line (also best in the NFL). What all of that means is the Chiefs's offense is handed consistently great starting field position and can't do anything with it, then they let the special teams pin opponents deep in their own territory. The defense bails out the offense by not letting opponents move the ball, giving the offense the ball back with great starting field position. Lather, rinse, repeat.

There's a nice breakdown of our defense against philly over there as well:
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/9/2...p-kelly-eagles

I have to reiterate and emphasize just how much the Chiefs played man to man -- like a ton of it. And they have the secondary to handle it, unlike most teams in the NFL. Specifically, they matched up Sean Smith on Cooper a lot on the outside. If this had been a prize fight, Cooper's corner would have thrown in the towel somewhere around the middle of the second quarter. Smith owned him right up until the end of the game when he started cramping up. Cooper just couldn't shake him, especially on those aforementioned deep routes Kelly had him running all game.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Pam Oliver's Forehead

Don't care. Top 5 QB.

But again, the question is... if you were to build a Super Bowl team, who would you take as your QB? A healthy Eli or Big Ben in his prime? Or Aaron Rodgers?

[BossChief]

I'd give the whole 2014 draft, my 2015 first and Alex Smith for Aaron Rodgers.

If they said they wanted more, I'd be willing to listen.

You pair Aaron Rodgers with this defense and this team is nearly unstoppable.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by BossChief

I'd give the whole 2014 draft, my 2015 first and Alex Smith for Aaron Rodgers.

If they said they wanted more, I'd be willing to listen.

You pair Aaron Rodgers with this defense and this team is nearly unstoppable.

Of course you would. And you should. He's a huge upgrade and an elite QB. But that's not the argument here.

If I could do that to trade for Eli Manning, I would do that as well. If I could do that for Big Ben (in his prime), I'd do that as well. Even moreso, because I believe those guys are a better fit with Charles and this defense than Aaron Rodgers is.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/stor...17-close-games

I've yet to hear anybody respond to this.

5-17 in close games
Only 5 comeback victories in his career

It is a more than fair argument and everybody is talking about it.

The argument to that would be to look at those games... sure, there are a few clunkers, but there are a lot of ~30-27 type games where he's certainly not the problem. The argument to that would be ToP, where the 49ers have dominated them in the past 2 games, among other teams. So, it becomes about style... but, if your offensive line isn't that good and you have no running game, and you can score in under two minutes several times game, are you really going to tell your quarterback to stop scoring so quickly?

The 5 comeback victory thing is really odd though... it's not a stat I like in general, as I'd always laugh when hearing someone say Tim Tebow was so freakin' clutch (I think they said the same about Vince Young for a while?), when it was mostly him shitting down his leg for 3 quarters and then making a couple plays....... but, to be 15 behind Brees and almost 30 behind Manning is kind of staggering stats-wise. It's not like either of them haven't had to put up with bad defense or any other number of variables.

[notorious]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

I'd always laugh when hearing someone say Tim Tebow was so freakin' clutch (I think they said the same about Vince Young for a while?), when it was mostly him shitting down his leg for 3 quarters and then making a couple plays....... .

This was John Elway before Shanahan and Terrell Davis.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

The argument to that would be to look at those games... sure, there are a few clunkers, but there are a lot of ~30-27 type games where he's certainly not the problem. The argument to that would be ToP, where the 49ers have dominated them in the past 2 games, among other teams. So, it becomes about style... but, if your offensive line isn't that good and you have no running game, and you can score in under two minutes several times game, are you really going to tell your quarterback to stop scoring so quickly?

The 5 comeback victory thing is really odd though... it's not a stat I like in general, as I'd always laugh when hearing someone say Tim Tebow was so freakin' clutch (I think they said the same about Vince Young for a while?), when it was mostly him shitting down his leg for 3 quarters and then making a couple plays....... but, to be 15 behind Brees and almost 30 behind Manning is kind of staggering stats-wise. It's not like either of them haven't had to put up with bad defense or any other number of variables.

I remember watching Eli drop that pass into Manningham's hands and knew the guy was something special. Big Ben... his drive against Arizona. Special. I know numbers are just numbers, but Rodgers just doesn't inspire that (yet). I've seen him take way too many coverage sacks in game-winning drives. I don't know. There are several QBs I'd rather have on a 2-minute drill than Rodgers, but that can always change.

On Tebow... I will say this. I have never seen a QB so Jekyll and Hyde. I don't know how a QB can be so terrible for 3 quarters and just be a complete animal in the 4th. I remember watching mic'd up and much as I can't stand him, his leadership and attitude in the 4th quarter are almost out of this world. Shame he doesn't have the talent to back it up.

[Tribal Warfare]

Originally Posted by BossChief

I'd give the whole 2014 draft, my 2015 first and Alex Smith for Aaron Rodgers.

If they said they wanted more, I'd be willing to listen.

You pair Aaron Rodgers with this defense and this team is nearly unstoppable.

or ****in Trent Green when he was playing

[Bearcat]

Peyton Manning
One 4th quarter comeback for every 5.97 games.
2.7 per season

Tom Brady
One 4th quarter comeback for every 6.66 games.
2.45 per season

Eli Manning
One 4th quarter comeback for every 5.83 games
2.8 per season

Ben Roethlisberger
One 4th quarter comeback for every 5.91 games.
2.44 per season

Drew Brees
One 4th quarter comeback for every 8.65 games.
1.82 per season

Aaron Rodgers
One 4th quarter comeback for every 17.6 games.
1 per season


That really is crazy, especially considering Wilson and Luck also have 5 each.

Mind blown.

[Ragged Robin]

We're also 4th in most dropped passes btw.

[Kaepernick]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Peyton Manning
One 4th quarter comeback for every 5.97 games.
2.7 per season

Tom Brady
One 4th quarter comeback for every 6.66 games.
2.45 per season

Eli Manning
One 4th quarter comeback for every 5.83 games
2.8 per season

Ben Roethlisberger
One 4th quarter comeback for every 5.91 games.
2.44 per season

Drew Brees
One 4th quarter comeback for every 8.65 games.
1.82 per season

Aaron Rodgers
One 4th quarter comeback for every 17.6 games.
1 per season


That really is crazy, especially considering Wilson and Luck also have 5 each.

Mind blown.

The Aaron Rodgers stat is very misleading. How can you have a 4th quarter comeback when you are leading in every game? So now Rodgers is punished statistically for not trailing going into the 4th quarter. Give me a break.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by Kaepernick

The Aaron Rodgers stat is very misleading. How can you have a 4th quarter comeback when you are leading in every game? So now Rodgers is punished statistically for not trailing going into the 4th quarter. Give me a break.

It's a huge anomaly. Brady's probably been on the best all around teams and he's 2nd. Peyton had to deal with some pretty poor defenses, but Rodgers has dealt with poor defense, no run game... do you really think Rodgers' stats of leading at halftime or after 3 quarters is THAT much better? And it's not like the Packers go 15-1 every year... they've had some 11-5 seasons, an 8-8 season... saying he didn't have 1-2 more chances per season than everyone else on the list seems absurd.

[Bearcat]

I'm not writing him off as not clutch, and I think that article's headline is overly dramatic... 5-17 in close games can be explained somewhat. I'm not sure there is a good explanation for the comeback stat, but I'd like to see it.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Here's food for thought. In Brees and Rodgers' 6 playoff losses, they ran the ball less than 20 times each game. In 5 of those losses, they ran the ball less than 15 times. They pretty much threw 40 times or more in each of those games, with Brees throwing a few in the 60s.

In the playoffs... would you rather an explosive offense? Or do you think there's something to be said for establishing a strong running game, and having a QB that can efficiently put up solid numbers? You have your opinion, but I'm also getting shit for what I think you would agree is a fair point that there is nothing wrong with focusing on efficieincy in the postseason.

Playing catch up tends to skew the pass to run numbers, no?

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by aturdis

Playing catch up tends to skew the pass to run numbers, no?

Not that much. The majority of those games were close enough that there wasn't a desperate need for catch-up. Those two teams like to be explosive offense and put points up on the board, and I think there's a lot to be said about whether that hurts your defense. Me? I'd much rather a team that prefers a balanced attack.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

I'm not writing him off as not clutch, and I think that article's headline is overly dramatic... 5-17 in close games can be explained somewhat. I'm not sure there is a good explanation for the comeback stat, but I'd like to see it.

I agree, it's not fair to say he's not clutch. But when you compare him to elite QBs, it's absolutely something that has to be thrown in there. When you watch him in late minute drills, he doesn't feel like the same QB. He takes a lot of unnecessary sacks, sets up long yardage situations... I just don't see the same kind of Joe Montana coolness in him.

That can always change and I wonder if he starts playing with a chip on his shoulder. But in recent history... it's something that gets overlooked because he's so damn good for the first 3 quarters.