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.

[Ace Gunner]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

/thread

Cut. Print. That's a wrap.

I don't think they have wha they want at several OL positions. G to G are probably not a fit here, they certainly aren't helping their own cause for the future.

Also, they need much better TE's than this. Fasano is a keeper, but since he's been injured, that position has been horrible. None of those guys can block worth shit. Routes look horrible too.

[mcaj22]

cause 2nd and 3rd round picks we have wasted on all these overhyped unproductive o-lineman the last four years havent done shit

sad really, all these busts. Fat Scott basically hit on 3 players in the draft.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Skeptics: "The Chiefs defense is great, and so are special teams. They are carrying the offense so far, which is a troubling trend. Unless the offense improves, this formula is not good enough to win in the playoffs, based on recent historical evidence, unless the Chiefs' D is legendarily good.

It's the same ride I've been on multiple times. I can enjoy games again, but I realize there probably is an expiration date (end of regular season) on this being a winning approach."

Non-skeptics: "Well, but the offense is probably going to get better once it is healthy and gels more! Gotta give it time. And the defense/special teams are great!"

Skeptics: "That's fine, but many offenses have hit the ground running in a similar situation as the Chiefs. It's possible/likely this is what the Alex Smith-led offense is. And while making the playoffs might be more fun than earning the No. 1 overall pick, I've ridden that bus many times before. It doesn't do much for me."

Non-skeptics: "3-0! 22-5-1! He just wins!"

NINERS fans: "We are giant douchebags and should have been universally banned a few weeks ago. You guys should be SO HAPPY to just win 10 games! We have struggled so much! We know what it is like, how can you not be happy now? We would be!"

Rinse, repeat, devolve.

There was plenty of good conversation yesterday about what makes up a good offense. Is it excitement and points? Or is there something to be said for efficiency?

I'm an Alex Smith skeptic. But as uncomfortable as game management may be, Smith has won an awful lot of games behind it, and somehow teams like the Sanchez-led Jets and recently the Russell Wilson led Seahawks are too. And yes, Smith did put the 49ers in a position to beat the Super Bowl champion Giants in the playoffs. So we can dismiss the wins and the playoff performance, but somehow... they're winning. And skeptics are closing down every single door to suggest that maybe there's something to it.

So I think it's a little one-sided to act like one side's being rational and the other is not. I hope the Chiefs find a new QB, but there's absolutely reason to think Smith can actually take this team deep into the playoffs.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Jamaal Charles had damn near 2000 yards from scrimmage last year, with the worst QB situation in the league, and the OL is WORSE?

Get the **** out of here.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Jamaal Charles had damn near 2000 yards from scrimmage last year, with the worst QB situation in the league, and the OL is WORSE?

Get the **** out of here.

I think you're not watching the games.

[mcaj22]

well yea

No Winston
No Lijla

insert Hudson, Jeff Allen bum scrub turd garbage here.

Amount of shit Lilja got he was a veteran presence that kept that interior line together on a bum leg with no strength. Kind of sad really.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by mcaj22

well yea

No Winston
No Lijla

insert Hudson, Jeff Allen bum scrub turd garbage here

Meaningless

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Jamaal Charles had damn near 2000 yards from scrimmage last year, with the worst QB situation in the league, and the OL is WORSE?

Get the **** out of here.

Because a rookie small- school RT, a revolving door of Jeff Allen/Geoff Schwarz, a center returning from injury and a whole new philosophy = the exact same situation from last year.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

There was plenty of good conversation yesterday about what makes up a good offense. Is it excitement and points? Or is there something to be said for efficiency?

I'm an Alex Smith skeptic. But as uncomfortable as game management may be, Smith has won an awful lot of games behind it, and somehow teams like the Sanchez-led Jets and recently the Russell Wilson led Seahawks are too. And yes, Smith did put the 49ers in a position to beat the Super Bowl champion Giants in the playoffs. So we can dismiss the wins and the playoff performance, but somehow... they're winning. And skeptics are closing down every single door to suggest that maybe there's something to it.

So I think it's a little one-sided to act like one side's being rational and the other is not. I hope the Chiefs find a new QB, but there's absolutely reason to think Smith can actually take this team deep into the playoffs.

Alex and "this type of offense" wins games - would he/they have won games with an average defense?

Of course not.

Alex doesn't win without an elite defense.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I think you're not watching the games.

Funny, the OL looks just fine in the 4th quarter.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Alex doesn't win without an elite defense.

This is new information

[mcaj22]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Meaningless

how is that meaningless

Hudson and Jeff Allen are god awful with a small sample size of NFL starting experience.

They are the Tyson Jackson of the offense without being picked 3rd overall, but need 5 years to develop into something serviceable, at best

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

This is new information

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Alex and "this type of offense" wins games - would he/they have won games with an average defense?

Of course not.

Alex doesn't win without an elite defense.

And it's more than fair to ask if this defense could be elite without a QB like Alex Smith.

Like I said yesterday... there are QBs like Eli and Big Ben that piece together some atrocious 3-quarter performances. They make their mark by keeping their team in games (getting in shootouts when necessary), then making big plays when asked to, especially in the 4th quarter. I don't see why Smith couldn't be that guy. It's frustrating to watch, but why couldn't it be that way?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Funny, the OL looks just fine in the 4th quarter.

Really? I beg to differ.

Fisher sucks ass. How many times have the Chiefs run right this season? Hudson's getting his shit pushed in during all four quarters. Asamoah can't pass block. Allen sucks ass, period.

The reason they've been able to run the ball effectively in the fourth quarter is because the opposing defenses have been on the field for too long, not because the line "magically" learns how to block.