Chiefs Cribbs on the Chiefs defense... [Archive]

DaWolf

12-21-2009, 11:40 AM

Ignore if repost:

“Kansas City has some talented guys, but what they are is smaller linebacker-type bodies,” Cribbs explained. “Smaller d-line bodies that run sideline-to-sideline. But as far as hitting holes, A-Gap and B-Gap, our guys were just too big for them.

“In run blocking we were just too big for them, it was no match,” Cribbs continued. “As you saw, the wildcat wasn’t as successful because I was trying to get that edge and their guys did good going sideline-to-sideline. Where we hurt them was in the trenches and they had no answer for it.”

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2009/12/21/the_morning_after__cleveland/

Bane

12-21-2009, 11:42 AM

So Cribbs has a better idea than any of our coaches as to why our defense is FAIL and can clearly identify the problem after seeing us 1 time.Fukk maybe we can hire him as our HC cause clearly he has figured out more in 1 game than Haley has all year.

beer bacon

12-21-2009, 11:42 AM

One of the most embarrassing defensive performances I have ever seen from the Chiefs. That is saying a lot considering where this team has been this decade.

Reaper16

12-21-2009, 11:44 AM

We've got to lose weight, though.

PhillyChiefFan

12-21-2009, 11:44 AM

One of the embarrassing defensive performances I have ever seen from the Chiefs. That is saying a lot considering where this team has been this decade.

This. And the fact that our defense just got called out by the Browns.

That is embarassing too.

talastan

12-21-2009, 11:44 AM

So NT? :hmmm:

PhillyChiefFan

12-21-2009, 11:49 AM

So NT? :hmmm:

That would be logical after the distruction the Chiefs endured this past week.

So, naturally we will select Suh and try to squeeze a square peg into a round hole and force another converted player to a position he is not accustomed to.

LaChapelle

12-21-2009, 11:49 AM

He's soon to be former head coach will make a fine soon to be DC for KC
he and Haley yelling at each other on the sideline next season will rule

TrickyNicky

12-21-2009, 11:50 AM

it was pretty evident. Watching the entire D get blasted off the line 3 yards back right at the snap was pretty embarassing.

BigCatDaddy

12-21-2009, 11:59 AM

Hopefully we all now see Dorsey's importance to this defense.

brent102fire

12-21-2009, 12:06 PM

Hmmm...I wonder if this is breaking news or does every other NFL team and fan know this?

Buehler445

12-21-2009, 12:18 PM

So Cribbs has a better idea than any of our coaches as to why our defense is FAIL and can clearly identify the problem after seeing us 1 time..

LOL. This.
Posted via Mobile Device

MahiMike

12-21-2009, 12:39 PM

Raji.

Brock

12-21-2009, 12:40 PM

Raji.

What does this mean?

Chiefnj2

12-21-2009, 12:42 PM

I never realized our linebackers were good running sideline to sideline.

Mecca

12-21-2009, 12:42 PM

And this makes the Chiefs look even dumber because guess what, the front of a 3-4 is suppose to be big.

And for him saying their smaller, this defense is very slow.

58kcfan89

12-21-2009, 12:46 PM

Hopefully we all now see Dorsey's importance to this defense.

I fracking love Glenn Dorsey, he's been my favorite player since we drafted him. But honestly, this probably would have happened no matter who was in there, considering we have no NT. I'm sure Dorsey would have held up a lot better at the LOS, but in the end, I don't think it would have made a huge difference.

People bitch all the time at the decisions of this coaching staff/administration. I think the worst decision they've made thus far was running a 3-4 (and knowing they were running it throughout the offseason) and not adressing the NT position. I wasn't a big fan of Raji in the last draft, but in hindsight, he would have been amazing to have yesterday.

HemiEd

12-21-2009, 12:48 PM

Hopefully we all now see Dorsey's importance to this defense.

This

Mecca

12-21-2009, 12:49 PM

Switching to the 3-4 was a pure dunce move plain and simple.

12-21-2009, 12:52 PM

I never realized our linebackers were good running sideline to sideline.

Yep, they're real good at that. They're not real good at tackling ball carriers, but boy can they run.

Fish

12-21-2009, 12:54 PM

Switching to the 3-4 was a pure dunce move plain and simple.

Yup. Just think of what could have been done had we waited on the 3-4 conversion, kept Tank, Turk, and Pollard, and actually put resources into the OLine, WRs, LBs, etc. You can't tell me that the defense would be any worse off had we stuck with the 4-3 for another year.

Mecca

12-21-2009, 12:55 PM

It was just tarded, the best defensive scheme in football is the one the Eagles run, copy that one.

Bane

12-21-2009, 12:55 PM

Yup. Just think of what could have been done had we waited on the 3-4 conversion, kept Tank, Turk, and Pollard, and actually put resources into the OLine, WRs, LBs, etc. You can't tell me that the defense would be any worse off had we stuck with the 4-3 for another year.

Shit!!! That would have made sense.You should know better than that:cuss:

baitism

12-21-2009, 12:59 PM

I never realized our linebackers were good running sideline to sideline.

Very good at over pursuing too.

PhillyChiefFan

12-21-2009, 01:00 PM

What does this mean?

If I'm right, he is talking about BJ Raji, who is the rookie NT for the Packers.

'Hamas' Jenkins

12-21-2009, 01:01 PM

suds79

12-21-2009, 01:02 PM

Sounds like Cribbs believes in the same thing I do.

Good teams have huge dudes up front.

Our coach? Concerned with them cutting weight and not being as productive as last year. ;) (Brandon Albert)

Mecca

12-21-2009, 01:02 PM

Where are all the people that called us idiots for saying switching to the 3-4 was a fuckin stupid thing to do?

Brock

12-21-2009, 01:02 PM

If I'm right, he is talking about BJ Raji, who is the rookie NT for the Packers.

Okay, but why?

Mecca

12-21-2009, 01:04 PM

Would the Chiefs be better off if they had taken Raji, odds are they would be. But they'd be even better off than that if they hadn't shoehorned in their preferred defensive scheme that we have no players for.

SAUTO

12-21-2009, 01:05 PM

Switching to the 3-4 was a pure dunce move plain and simple.

It was just tarded, the best defensive scheme in football is the one the Eagles run, copy that one.

Where are all the people that called us idiots for saying switching to the 3-4 was a fuckin stupid thing to do?

all on one page with no one disagreeing with you. why? does it make you feel better to say the same thing over and over and over?

Mecca

12-21-2009, 01:07 PM

It makes me laugh to realize things said 4 months before the season started are now true and everyone agrees.

Having the foresight to point it out before the year, got you called a moron.

TheGuardian

12-21-2009, 01:08 PM

Ignore if repost:

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2009/12/21/the_morning_after__cleveland/

Well let's see our best defensive lineman was out (Dorsey), we have no real nose tackle, and Tyson is a rookie. Not really saying anything earth shattering here.

'Hamas' Jenkins

12-21-2009, 01:08 PM

Sauto, it's bullshit because the entire offseason the only counter people were met with was,

"Why not switch to the 3-4, this defense can't get any worse".

:facepalm:

BigChiefFan

12-21-2009, 01:14 PM

Our defense is still putrid, but you have to admit, we've had more sacks this season. Last year was the worst lack of pressure I've ever seen. We had TEN, TOTAL SACKS, last year. TEN. I don't think moving to the 3-4 is that big of a deal for our roster.

OnTheWarpath15

12-21-2009, 01:21 PM

Sauto, it's bullshit because the entire offseason the only counter people were met with was,

"Why not switch to the 3-4, this defense can't get any worse".

:facepalm:

One of my favorite stats from yesterday:

Going into the game, Cleveland ranked 30th in points scored with 158.

We allowed them 25% of that total in one game.

A team scoring 12 PPG comes into your building and scores 41.

If that's not epic fail, fire everyone, burn the whole motherfucker down and start over bad, I don't know what is.

OnTheWarpath15

12-21-2009, 01:21 PM

Fish

12-21-2009, 01:24 PM

And what's really painful, is that we could have stuck with the 4-3 and most of the personnel we had with it, and still bring in defensive players that could have easily converted to a 3-4 later when we were actually ready for it. Instead, we cut those draft picks because of the forced switch to the 3-4, and brought in Jackson, Magee, and supplemented the rest with AARP reps Thomas and Vrabel, and Brown and the rest of the journeyman douchebags. Now our LBs and safeties are still complete shit, and our "foundation" players Jackson and Magee are playing just like most people predicted they would. No progress is made, and young promising guys like Morgan are still unknown while Brown and McGraw run around in slow motion. And we continue to regress.

Hooray that we have more sacks this season.... but at what cost? We just gave up 351 fucking rushing yards.

Frazod

12-21-2009, 01:25 PM

One of my favorite stats from yesterday:

Going into the game, Cleveland ranked 30th in points scored with 158.

We allowed them 25% of that total in one game.

A team scoring 12 PPG comes into your building and scores 41.

If that's not epic fail, fire everyone, burn the whole motherfucker down and start over bad, I don't know what is.

Hard to argue with this. Every time we think it can't get worse, it gets a lot worse. Fuck I'm sick of this crap. :shake:

Chiefnj2

12-21-2009, 01:47 PM

Where are all the people that called us idiots for saying switching to the 3-4 was a ****in stupid thing to do?

Because the 43 brought us all those memorable championships the last 10 years, right?

SAUTO

12-21-2009, 01:49 PM

Sauto, it's bullshit because the entire offseason the only counter people were met with was,

"Why not switch to the 3-4, this defense can't get any worse".

:facepalm:

i wasnt saying that the point didnt make some sense, just why say it three times on the same fucking page?

Mecca

12-21-2009, 01:51 PM

Part of the process is not getting your ass thoroughly raped by a RB that I'm guessing 90% of this forum had never heard of before yesterday.

chiefbowe82

12-21-2009, 01:54 PM

Glad to see we sucked so bad to aquire a 3rd overall pick. And sucked bad enough to aquire the 5th overall pick. Both who combined enough suckage to let Jerome Harrison run wild.

Coogs

12-21-2009, 01:56 PM

Glad to see we sucked so bad to aquire a 3rd overall pick. And sucked bad enough to aquire the 5th overall pick. Both who combined enough suckage to let Jerome Harrison run wild.

One of those two did not play. The other one is a rookie.

chiefbowe82

12-21-2009, 02:01 PM

One of those two did not play. The other one is a rookie.

the other one hasn't done anything either.

Haley's days are numbered to. I could understand if the team just sucked. But christ almighty the the calls that guy makes are beyond me. His timeout usuage and game management is worse than herm.

Baby Lee

12-21-2009, 02:27 PM

One of my favorite stats from yesterday:

Going into the game, Cleveland ranked 30th in points scored with 158.

We allowed them 25% of that total in one game.

A team scoring 12 PPG comes into your building and scores 41.

If that's not epic fail, fire everyone, burn the whole motherfucker down and start over bad, I don't know what is.

Reminds me of the 95-98 Rams. I've recounted before, but in the 97 season, they lost to offensive powerhouse 15-12 and lost to the anemic offense/decent defense of Atlanta 34-31.

Blindside58

12-21-2009, 02:29 PM

http://www.maniacworld.com/donkey-kong-game.jpg

DJ's left nut

12-21-2009, 02:31 PM

We've got to lose weight, though.

Couldn't find room for Tank Tyler on this club, no sirree Bob.

DJ's left nut

12-21-2009, 02:32 PM

Switching to the 3-4 was a pure dunce move plain and simple.

But that's what papa Bill says to run.

So that's what his nutless crony is going to do.

Sweet Daddy Hate

12-21-2009, 02:47 PM

Because the 43 brought us all those memorable championships the last 10 years, right?

:facepalm:

No, :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

There it was.

CRIBOLI!