PDA

View Full Version : Teicher: Chiefs O-line hasn't been so fine


tk13
10-21-2004, 01:04 AM
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/football/nfl/kansas_city_chiefs/9971512.htm

This year, Chiefs' offensive line hasn't been so fine
Team has seen increase in sacks and penalties

By ADAM TEICHER
The Kansas City Star


The Chiefs allowed a season-high six sacks and couldn't get a first down at a crucial juncture on Sunday. Both were key factors in a painful defeat in Jacksonville.

It was not the finest of moments for an offensive line that otherwise played well this season. In the previous game, the Chiefs flattened one of the strongest defenses in the NFL on the way to their only victory of the season.

That's the way things work sometimes, though the Chiefs, spoiled so often by sterling line play in recent years, may not be aware.

“Different defense,” coach Dick Vermeil said when asked how the Chiefs could stand up so well against the Ravens but yield against the Jaguars. “(Baltimore's) was a defense with three down linemen and four standup linebackers. Totally different. It's not the same league. (The Jaguars had) two 330-pound defensive tackles inside and, incidentally, we blocked them pretty well.

“Priest Holmes would have been over 100 yards rushing against those guys and averaged better per carry than he would have against Baltimore if he doesn't get a 26-yard run called back.”

The Chiefs could use a big game from their offensive line Sunday when the Falcons are at Arrowhead Stadium. Atlanta leads the league in rush defense and is tied for the NFL lead with 20 sacks.

“That's as good a group as we've seen this year,” said Falcons defensive end Patrick Kerney, tied for second in the league with seven sacks. “Big and agile. They're just sort of like a wave moving guys off the line. It's definitely the biggest challenge for our defensive line that we've had this year.”

The Chiefs were vulnerable with their blocking unit in Jacksonville. The six sacks they allowed were the most since Vermeil arrived in Kansas City in 2001.

Trent Green has been sacked 14 times, a pace that over a season would be more than twice as many as the 21 sacks they allowed last year.

The line isn't the only guilty party. Fullback Tony Richardson missed an assignment on one sack in Jacksonville. Green held the ball too long on another.

“Sometimes the sacks aren't the offensive line's fault,” Vermeil said. “Sometimes it's a coverage sack where they cover everybody and the quarterback holds on to the ball and you go to do this and it's not there and you go to do that and it's not there. Sometimes a guy accidentally falls down and some guy comes rushing in there. Another time the quarterback tries to make a play. We pass-protected everybody, and he's standing there.”

Still, the Chiefs are having protection issues more frequently. They can come on plays that aren't sacks. The Chiefs missed a possible touchdown pass in Jacksonville when Green, faced with a collapsing pocket, rushed a throw to an open Eddie Kennison and fired too high.

“If he makes the play in the red zone for a touchdown, then nobody considers the pass protection being bad,” Vermeil said. “But actual true you-beat-me sacks, there weren't six you-beat-me sacks. Still, when they allow pressure on the quarterback and a hit on the quarterback, it's a downgrade. It's easy to say that Willie Roaf gave up a sack, but when you get through the other things it's not that clear.”

A bigger problem to guard Brian Waters is the Chiefs' failure to gain a first down when they were trying to protect a lead late in the game. Three running plays gained only 9 yards, and Lawrence Tynes missed a field goal.

The Jaguars then drove for the winning touchdown.

“We just wanted to get first downs,” Waters said. “They were out of timeouts at the time. Momentum was on our side. We were moving the ball the whole second half except for that one drive.

“If we make those first downs, the game is over. We didn't do a good job. It's something we've got to work on and something we've got to get better at.”

The Chiefs appear to be adjusting to new right tackle John Welbourn. He rotated in recent games with backup Chris Bober to save wear and tear on Welbourn's surgically repaired knee.

The Chiefs won't say it publicly, but they miss John Tait, who left for the Bears as a free agent. Tait is athletic and a good fit for things the Chiefs like to use. Welbourn is more of a classic lineman.

“He's done a good job adjusting to the way we protect,” said offensive coordinator Al Saunders. “As time goes on, he'll get better.”

Welbourn, acquired in an off-season trade with the Eagles, is still learning a new position. He was a guard in Philadelphia.

“I'd like to think I'm getting better every day,” he said. “I'm still years away from the player I want to be. It's a long process.”

DaWolf
10-21-2004, 02:27 AM
The Chiefs won't say it publicly, but they miss John Tait, who left for the Bears as a free agent. Tait is athletic and a good fit for things the Chiefs like to use. Welbourn is more of a classic lineman.

Perhaps then in hindsight this was another tactical error by Carl. Considering the cap room we had, maybe he should have just used the franchise tag on Tait. The transition tag invited the Bears to overpay Tait. Even at that, considering we had so much cap room, we could have matched the offer and fit Tait in and still continued our offseason plan of not signing any quality free agents.

I was totally against resigning Tait at that money and I thought the reason Carl didn't use the franchise tag was so that we could be a major player in free agency. Considering that that didn't happen and we still wound up with a ton of cap room, Carl probably screwed the pooch again as discontinuity in the OL has certainly helped cost us some games this year...

dtebbe
10-21-2004, 01:19 PM
Perhaps then in hindsight this was another tactical error by Carl. Considering the cap room we had, maybe he should have just used the franchise tag on Tait. The transition tag invited the Bears to overpay Tait. Even at that, considering we had so much cap room, we could have matched the offer and fit Tait in and still continued our offseason plan of not signing any quality free agents.

I was totally against resigning Tait at that money and I thought the reason Carl didn't use the franchise tag was so that we could be a major player in free agency. Considering that that didn't happen and we still wound up with a ton of cap room, Carl probably screwed the pooch again as discontinuity in the OL has certainly helped cost us some games this year...

I think Welborn alone has cost Priest about 200 yards so far...

DT

Cormac
10-21-2004, 02:12 PM
I don't really agree that Tait is being missed that much. Roaf is being beaten by certain plays this year (Rucker in particular). Waters is still penalty-prone. Welbourne is doing pretty well now all-in-all, IMO. Considering Tait was a RT and was definitely considered the weakest of the 5 OL, even the franchise tag for one year would have been a big over-payment. Not to mention, the Chiefs have never given up more than $10m in SB, and Tait got $14m from Chicago. There's just no way he's worth that, IMO.

htismaqe
10-21-2004, 02:29 PM
Welbourn is a convenient scapegoat because he's new.

Nobody on this line is playing at a pro-bowl level right now, ESPECIALLY Roaf.

TEX
10-21-2004, 03:51 PM
And why was Marcus Spears released again? He could easily out play everyone attempting to play RT in KC these days. :shake:

TEX
10-21-2004, 04:08 PM
Perhaps then in hindsight this was another tactical error by Carl. Considering the cap room we had, maybe he should have just used the franchise tag on Tait. The transition tag invited the Bears to overpay Tait. Even at that, considering we had so much cap room, we could have matched the offer and fit Tait in and still continued our offseason plan of not signing any quality free agents.

I was totally against resigning Tait at that money and I thought the reason Carl didn't use the franchise tag was so that we could be a major player in free agency. Considering that that didn't happen and we still wound up with a ton of cap room, Carl probably screwed the pooch again as discontinuity in the OL has certainly helped cost us some games this year...


:clap: :clap: :clap: