Worrisome Things... - Page 2

Gaz · 09-13-2005, 06:26 AM

Okay, the euphoric afterglow has subsided somewhat, so it is time to look at the Bad Stuff.

I have read some posts bemoaning the yardage we gave up to the Jets. Feh. Yardage means nothing. Just another playtoy for stat monkeys who have no idea what a standard deviation is or what it means. Fugeddaboutdit.

Offense disappeared in the 2nd half. So what? We were up by 17 and went conservative. Personally, I think that was a mistake. You should always firewall the throttle. However, the O did not disappear; Vermeil and Saunders put on the brakes. Well, maybe they just took their foot of the pedal and coasted. Again, not a concern.

Injuries. Ah, there’s the rub. It was a very costly victory. Four starters out. Yow.

In order of importance:

1. Surtain-
You do not mess with concussions, but I sure hope he is up for playing this weekend. I do not believe anyone is going to shut down the Raiders passing game by CBs smothering the WRs. However, the idea of McCleon, Sapp & Washington as the starting CB package makes my dangly bits shrivel up.

2. Sims-
I feel for this guy. First, the elbow injury. And then just when he seemed to be giving the game we thought we had drafted, another injury. Come to think of it, I feel for the fans more than for him. Stinking holdout bastage! The lack of pressure in the interior is going to hurt us. A lot. Hopefully, the Chiefs are looking for a widebody they can sign for the interim. We are woefully thin at DT already.

3. Roaf-
No one is going to replace Roaf, but at least we have some depth with which we can plug the Roaf-sized hole. The toss sweep play needs to be put aside for this week. It is simply not going to be as effective without Big Willie in there. Musical Linemen, anyone?

4. Richardson-
I love the way Richardson plays the game. I love seeing him pancake those Linebackers. But his loss is not as impactful [is that a word?] as the rest. Cruz is no Richardson. But he will have to do. The loss of Richardson indicates more Johnson and less Holmes to me. What do you think?

xoxo~
Gaz
Putting aside the rose-colored glasses.

Sam · 09-13-2005, 07:34 AM

I'd heard on one of the sports talk shows that one of those dj's spoke with TRich right after the Jets game and he said he would be playing against the Raiders. And the same guy was told by Sampson that he would be playing, and practicing this week.

I also heard this morning on 810 from Mike White that they intend to keep running the sweeps to wear down Sapp's and the rest of the Raiders D-line pass rush.

Vermeil on his show last night said he expected Surtain to play against the Raiders. Has anyone heard any news on Simms MRI? Vermeil didn't have anything last night.

I'm very concerned about the Raiders 'passing game. We'll need more of pass rush this week to help out the CB's, whoever plays. I watched New England only rush 3 and drop 8, but I don't see that working this week in Oakland.

htismaqe · 09-13-2005, 07:38 AM

Here's how I look at it, in order of importance:

1) Ryan Sims - it's quite simple. We didn't keep enough DT's and without him we've not only lost the only guy that was getting any push, but we've also got lesser players playing far too long, making them even less effective. The key to getting past Oakland is pressuring their QB. Period.

2) Roaf - this means more to Priest than it does to LJ. We can survive without Roaf for one game, especially considering the Raiders' struggles with the pass rush. The BIG key here is getting Sampson back -- Jordan Black can play, but having to use Chris Bober to sub for Black is the problem.

3) Patrick Surtain - I honestly don't think anybody can cover Randy Moss, not even Surtain. Like I said before, pressure, pressure, pressure. Having Surtain back would be a big help, but it's not the key.

4) Richardson - he's simply the most expendable of the bunch. We've run the ball without him before, and actually we've done quite well with 1-back sets.

**morphius** · 09-13-2005, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Here's how I look at it, in order of importance:

1) Ryan Sims - it's quite simple. We didn't keep enough DT's and without him we've not only lost the only guy that was getting any push, but we've also got lesser players playing far too long, making them even less effective. The key to getting past Oakland is pressuring their QB. Period.

2) Roaf - this means more to Priest than it does to LJ. We can survive without Roaf for one game, especially considering the Raiders' struggles with the pass rush. The BIG key here is getting Sampson back -- Jordan Black can play, but having to use Chris Bober to sub for Black is the problem.

3) Patrick Surtain - I honestly don't think anybody can cover Randy Moss, not even Surtain. Like I said before, pressure, pressure, pressure. Having Surtain back would be a big help, but it's not the key.

4) Richardson - he's simply the most expendable of the bunch. We've run the ball without him before, and actually we've done quite well with 1-back sets.

But with Surtain there you at least make the QB pause before just tossing it up to Moss, with McCleon or any of our other nickelbacks out there you don't give the Raiders a reason to not just toss it up and let him go after it. No amount of pressure is going to help if all the QB has to do is take three steps and toss the ball up in the air, at least with Surtain you have to attempt to make a good pass.

Coach · 09-13-2005, 07:44 AM

Yes, I also think losing Roaf hurts, becuase since he went out, the Chiefs ouside running game, such as sweeps and counters on the outside of the tackle position, went straight to the crapper. So I agree with the majority of you folks on the see more of LJ running up in the middle, but, keep in mind, that the Chiefs can use Priest for a few runs up in the middle and some quick hitting draws as a change of pace.

There's also a possibility that we could see some 2 TE sets, along with 2 WR's and a TE (Gonzo) and Kris Wilson starting at the FB spot, but going into motion to the oppisite TE area (Away from Gonzo). In other words, 1 back, 2 TE's and 2 WR's could be deployed more often from the Chiefs.

htismaqe · 09-13-2005, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morphius

But with Surtain there you at least make the QB pause before just tossing it up to Moss, with McCleon or any of our other nickelbacks out there you don't give the Raiders a reason to not just toss it up and let him go after it. No amount of pressure is going to help if all the QB has to do is take three steps and toss the ball up in the air, at least with Surtain you have to attempt to make a good pass.

I disagree.

The Raiders whole gameplan the other night was to toss it up and see what happened.

They're going to do it regardless of who we have back there. And at that point, Sammy Knight and Greg Wesley are the keys anyway, not a CB.

Don't get me wrong, Surtain being back would be BIG...it's just not KEY.

siberian khatru · 09-13-2005, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

The Raiders whole gameplan the other night was to toss it up and see what happened.

They're going to do it regardless of who we have back there.

Absolutely right. And it wouldn't surprise me to see Randy catch a couple of bombs for TDs. But that's still just 14 points. The rest of their O looked like crap. If we can do to Jordan what we did to Martin, and don't let Porter or Curry or Gabriel go nuts (which may be a tall order), just let Randy be Randy, I think we outscore them and win the game.

**morphius** · 09-13-2005, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I disagree.

The Raiders whole gameplan the other night was to toss it up and see what happened.

They're going to do it regardless of who we have back there. And at that point, Sammy Knight and Greg Wesley are the keys anyway, not a CB.

Don't get me wrong, Surtain being back would be BIG...it's just not KEY.

Do you remember last season at all? Seriously? My game plan with Surtain out is keep Moss to the outside where the safeties can't get over in time, add in a little play action to slow them down half a step and just toss it up. The play was gold against our D last year, and on many of those plays we even got some pressure with the blitz. In this case I'm not talking bombs either, just down the line hit the guy running 10-15 yards down the field and watch him fly.

**the Talking Can** · 09-13-2005, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaz

In order of importance:

1. Surtain-
You do not mess with concussions, but I sure hope he is up for playing this weekend. I do not believe anyone is going to shut down the Raiders passing game by CBs smothering the WRs. However, the idea of McCleon, Sapp & Washington as the starting CB package makes my dangly bits shrivel up.

2. Sims-
I feel for this guy. First, the elbow injury. And then just when he seemed to be giving the game we thought we had drafted, another injury. Come to think of it, I feel for the fans more than for him. Stinking holdout bastage! The lack of pressure in the interior is going to hurt us. A lot. Hopefully, the Chiefs are looking for a widebody they can sign for the interim. We are woefully thin at DT already.

3. Roaf-
No one is going to replace Roaf, but at least we have some depth with which we can plug the Roaf-sized hole. The toss sweep play needs to be put aside for this week. It is simply not going to be as effective without Big Willie in there. Musical Linemen, anyone?

4. Richardson-
I love the way Richardson plays the game. I love seeing him pancake those Linebackers. But his loss is not as impactful [is that a word?] as the rest. Cruz is no Richardson. But he will have to do. The loss of Richardson indicates more Johnson and less Holmes to me. What do you think?

xoxo~
Gaz
Putting aside the rose-colored glasses.

yeah, I agree with order...Surtain is crucial given Warfield's abscence and Moss' presence...Sims is not more important than Roaf, but we have more depth on the OL than the DL, so Sims abscence is more impactful to an already thin defense....Roaf is key, of course, to our long term success but we can survive until the bye without him -imho- if it means getting him close to 100% healthy...I'm convinced we'll be 2-2 then, at the worst, even with the injuries...T-Rich, same as Roaf...I'm confident AS can scheme around their abscences, less so about Gun and Surtain/Sims...

htismaqe · 09-13-2005, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morphius

Do you remember last season at all? Seriously? My game plan with Surtain out is keep Moss to the outside where the safeties can't get over in time, add in a little play action to slow them down half a step and just toss it up. The play was gold against our D last year, and on many of those plays we even got some pressure with the blitz. In this case I'm not talking bombs either, just down the line hit the guy running 10-15 yards down the field and watch him fly.

Yes, I remember last season.

This isn't last season, and Sammy Knight isn't Jerome Woods.

Gaz · 09-13-2005, 08:01 AM

I worry more about Sims because of the dearth of depth at DT.

Sims becomes less crucial if we bring in a widebody DT to take up space in the middle. I would not anticipate the penetration Sims has been getting, but he could at least clog up the inside running lane and keep Dalton and Browning from getting exhausted. Sorry to say, I have lost faith in Siavii this season. Those knees are scary.

At least until I see who the Chiefs bring in. The Sims/Roaf order may swap at that point.

xoxo~
Gaz
Awaiting further developments.

htismaqe · 09-13-2005, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

yeah, I agree with order...Surtain is crucial given Warfield's abscence and Moss' presence...Sims is not more important than Roaf, but we have more depth on the OL than the DL, so Sims abscence is more impactful to an already thin defense....Roaf is key, of course, to our long term success but we can survive until the bye without him -imho- if it means getting him close to 100% healthy...I'm convinced we'll be 2-2 then, at the worst, even with the injuries...T-Rich, same as Roaf...I'm confident AS can scheme around their abscences, less so about Gun and Surtain/Sims...

I pretty much agree with all that, except for Surtain. I think people are overestimating how successful we (or anyone) will be in shutting down Moss. He's gonna score, you can't stop it. The key is to disrupt the rest of their offense, IMO. But that's JMO.

What you said about Sims and Roaf is exactly why I listed Sims where I did. No way am I saying anything about the player, to me it's more the circumstances. Jordan Black is a good fill-in player, Junior Siavii is not.

Hammock Parties · 09-13-2005, 08:02 AM

Well, at least we still stopped the run without Sims. That is encouraging.

Mecca · 09-13-2005, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Yes, I remember last season.

This isn't last season, and Sammy Knight isn't Jerome Woods.

Thank god for that........... It's really really crucial to stop the run with our front 7 this week so our safeties can give deep help. It's going to be extremely important.

**morphius** · 09-13-2005, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Yes, I remember last season.

This isn't last season, and Sammy Knight isn't Jerome Woods.

Yes, but Knight isn't going to get from the middle of the field to Moss on the sideline before that toss gets there. Plus who knows if Moss is even going to be lined up on the same side as Knight very often. Plus none of the CB's we have healthy are really going to get much of a meaningful bump on Moss to slow him down, which is what we really need to be able to do.

Luckily Surtain is probably going to play, making the point pretty much moo.

beavis · 09-13-2005, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaz

I have read some posts bemoaning the yardage we gave up to the Jets. Feh. Yardage means nothing. Just another playtoy for stat monkeys who have no idea what a standard deviation is or what it means. Fugeddaboutdit.

We kept hearing this after the first couple games of the 2003 season. Sure turned out to be nothing then, didn't it?

The troubling thing about it is, it's probably a sign of things to come. We caught all the breaks on Sunday, and that's not going to continue for the entire season.

09-13-2005, 06:26 AM
Gaz Defense Homer Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Rancho Gaz Casino cash: $10010793	Worrisome Things... Okay, the euphoric afterglow has subsided somewhat, so it is time to look at the Bad Stuff. I have read some posts bemoaning the yardage we gave up to the Jets. Feh. Yardage means nothing. Just another playtoy for stat monkeys who have no idea what a standard deviation is or what it means. Fugeddaboutdit. Offense disappeared in the 2nd half. So what? We were up by 17 and went conservative. Personally, I think that was a mistake. You should always firewall the throttle. However, the O did not disappear; Vermeil and Saunders put on the brakes. Well, maybe they just took their foot of the pedal and coasted. Again, not a concern. Injuries. Ah, there’s the rub. It was a very costly victory. Four starters out. Yow. In order of importance: 1. Surtain- You do not mess with concussions, but I sure hope he is up for playing this weekend. I do not believe anyone is going to shut down the Raiders passing game by CBs smothering the WRs. However, the idea of McCleon, Sapp & Washington as the starting CB package makes my dangly bits shrivel up. 2. Sims- I feel for this guy. First, the elbow injury. And then just when he seemed to be giving the game we thought we had drafted, another injury. Come to think of it, I feel for the fans more than for him. Stinking holdout bastage! The lack of pressure in the interior is going to hurt us. A lot. Hopefully, the Chiefs are looking for a widebody they can sign for the interim. We are woefully thin at DT already. 3. Roaf- No one is going to replace Roaf, but at least we have some depth with which we can plug the Roaf-sized hole. The toss sweep play needs to be put aside for this week. It is simply not going to be as effective without Big Willie in there. Musical Linemen, anyone? 4. Richardson- I love the way Richardson plays the game. I love seeing him pancake those Linebackers. But his loss is not as impactful [is that a word?] as the rest. Cruz is no Richardson. But he will have to do. The loss of Richardson indicates more Johnson and less Holmes to me. What do you think? xoxo~ Gaz Putting aside the rose-colored glasses.
Posts: 5,911

09-13-2005, 07:34 AM	#16
Sam Starter Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Liberty, MO Casino cash: $10004900	I'd heard on one of the sports talk shows that one of those dj's spoke with TRich right after the Jets game and he said he would be playing against the Raiders. And the same guy was told by Sampson that he would be playing, and practicing this week. I also heard this morning on 810 from Mike White that they intend to keep running the sweeps to wear down Sapp's and the rest of the Raiders D-line pass rush. Vermeil on his show last night said he expected Surtain to play against the Raiders. Has anyone heard any news on Simms MRI? Vermeil didn't have anything last night. I'm very concerned about the Raiders 'passing game. We'll need more of pass rush this week to help out the CB's, whoever plays. I watched New England only rush 3 and drop 8, but I don't see that working this week in Oakland.
Posts: 356

09-13-2005, 07:38 AM	#17
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $8149900	Here's how I look at it, in order of importance: 1) Ryan Sims - it's quite simple. We didn't keep enough DT's and without him we've not only lost the only guy that was getting any push, but we've also got lesser players playing far too long, making them even less effective. The key to getting past Oakland is pressuring their QB. Period. 2) Roaf - this means more to Priest than it does to LJ. We can survive without Roaf for one game, especially considering the Raiders' struggles with the pass rush. The BIG key here is getting Sampson back -- Jordan Black can play, but having to use Chris Bober to sub for Black is the problem. 3) Patrick Surtain - I honestly don't think anybody can cover Randy Moss, not even Surtain. Like I said before, pressure, pressure, pressure. Having Surtain back would be a big help, but it's not the key. 4) Richardson - he's simply the most expendable of the bunch. We've run the ball without him before, and actually we've done quite well with 1-back sets.
Posts: 104,317

09-13-2005, 07:44 AM	#19
Coach Champs! Join Date: Mar 2004 Casino cash: $3738476	Yes, I also think losing Roaf hurts, becuase since he went out, the Chiefs ouside running game, such as sweeps and counters on the outside of the tackle position, went straight to the crapper. So I agree with the majority of you folks on the see more of LJ running up in the middle, but, keep in mind, that the Chiefs can use Priest for a few runs up in the middle and some quick hitting draws as a change of pace. There's also a possibility that we could see some 2 TE sets, along with 2 WR's and a TE (Gonzo) and Kris Wilson starting at the FB spot, but going into motion to the oppisite TE area (Away from Gonzo). In other words, 1 back, 2 TE's and 2 WR's could be deployed more often from the Chiefs. __________________ Super Bowl IV, LIV, LVII & LVIII Champions 2020, 2021, 2023, 2024, & 2025 AFC Champions 1985 & 2015 Major League Baseball World Series Champions 1980, 1985, 2014, & 2015 Major League Baseball American League Champions 2015 American League Central Division Champs
Posts: 54,703

09-13-2005, 08:01 AM	#25
Gaz Defense Homer Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Rancho Gaz Casino cash: $10010793	Sims Vs Roaf... I worry more about Sims because of the dearth of depth at DT. Sims becomes less crucial if we bring in a widebody DT to take up space in the middle. I would not anticipate the penetration Sims has been getting, but he could at least clog up the inside running lane and keep Dalton and Browning from getting exhausted. Sorry to say, I have lost faith in Siavii this season. Those knees are scary. At least until I see who the Chiefs bring in. The Sims/Roaf order may swap at that point. xoxo~ Gaz Awaiting further developments.
Posts: 5,911

09-13-2005, 08:02 AM	#27
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $850478	Well, at least we still stopped the run without Sims. That is encouraging. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 297,259