The Cheetah to return punts against the Raiders

[Hammock Parties]

BURN THEM DOWN

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">So, basically, Eric Bieniemy wants to see Tyreek Hill return punts against the Raiders. <br><br>Hill already has a punt return for a touchdown against the Raiders in his career.<br><br>&quot;Hell, I&#39;m going to get my popcorn as well,&quot; Bieniemy said.</p>&mdash; Nate Taylor (@ByNateTaylor) <a href="https://twitter.com/ByNateTaylor/status/1329487034470293505?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Pasta Little Brioni]

I mean they can pretty much wrap up the division and knock a bad Raider team to 6-4

[Hammock Parties]

DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">RELEASE THE CHEETAH <a href="https://t.co/v1AtDcJjaQ">https://t.co/v1AtDcJjaQ</a> <a href="https://t.co/vVhZstHquj">pic.twitter.com/vVhZstHquj</a></p>&mdash; 101 Sent (@ClayWendler) <a href="https://twitter.com/ClayWendler/status/1329489658791792642?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Megatron96]

I doubt the Raiders actually punt to him. But it might get their punter to make a mistake and shank one or two, giving us great field position.

You never know though. Sometimes Gruden will be overly aggressive.

[Hammock Parties]

THEY'RE GONNA DO IT

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I’m back ��✌��</p>&mdash; Ty Hill (@cheetah) <a href="https://twitter.com/cheetah/status/1329484168938606592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[carcosa]

let's fuck em up boyz

[-King-]

Ugh. Rather have Pringle back there even if he just fair catches all of them. Not worth the risk IMO to have Tyreek back there and plus, for as good as he is when he has the ball, he's not that good at catching punts on the run.

[FloridaMan88]

Mecole Hardman probably not playing Sunday night in related news.

[Megatron96]

Ugh. Rather have Pringle back there even if he just fair catches all of them. Not worth the risk IMO to have Tyreek back there and plus, for as good as he is when he has the ball, he's not that good at catching punts on the run.

:facepalm:

[The Franchise]

I want scorched earth. You wanted to celebrate that victory? Well we’re going to hang 60 on you.

[TinyEvel]

Why? was there a punt return problem? is this the risky edge we need to beat the LV Faders?

He's the TD leader. Keep him in the offense is my vote. (you know, because as fans we each get one vote in team management decisions)

[Pitt Gorilla]

Why? was there a punt return problem? is this the risky edge we need to beat the LV Faders?

He's the TD leader. Keep him in the offense is my vote. (you know, because as fans we each get one vote in team management decisions)

That's where I'm at. We don't need Reek out for any amount of time going forward.

[Hydrae]

Mecole Hardman probably not playing Sunday night in related news.

But Sammy should be back which is a boon for my fantasy team! PBJ

[Mecca]

Why? was there a punt return problem? is this the risky edge we need to beat the LV Faders?

He's the TD leader. Keep him in the offense is my vote. (you know, because as fans we each get one vote in team management decisions)

Hardmans probably not playing he tested positive last week you know...

[Hammock Parties]

The Raiders are pretty bad in punt averages.

29th gross, 25th net, 25th in return avg

:)

[dlphg9]

Ugh. Rather have Pringle back there even if he just fair catches all of them. Not worth the risk IMO to have Tyreek back there and plus, for as good as he is when he has the ball, he's not that good at catching punts on the run.

Wtf are you going on about? Has he fumbled a punt while catching it on the run or are you just giving some edgy hot take or trolling?

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Bet we see a fake punt again. Hope we're prepared!

[Hammock Parties]

look at the fucking bitches in this thread shaving and tucking

RELEASE THE CHEETAH

https://i.imgur.com/9gmC1EQ.gif

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Wtf are you going on about? Has he fumbled a punt while catching it on the run or are you just giving some edgy hot take or trolling?


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/I6N-rM8Mcik" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-UhhUAbqB0o" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Chief Roundup]

Unless Pringle or Hardman cannot go this a risk that is not necessary.

[Megatron96]

Why? was there a punt return problem? is this the risky edge we need to beat the LV Faders?

He's the TD leader. Keep him in the offense is my vote. (you know, because as fans we each get one vote in team management decisions)

Hardman may not play because COVID.

And I honestly think Pringle will probably receive some punts in this game, instead of Hill. But I've always felt that Hill should be receiving some punts, in specific situations, because he terrifies the opposing punt units, which has forced some of them to make mistakes.

All this announcement tells me is that Hill will be practicing with the ST unit this week, and should be fine back there with some practice snaps to get comfortable again in that role.

[Hammock Parties]

This is not a risk. At most it's 3-4 extra hits on Tyreek. LMAO

He's at greater risk on offense.

[ChiefBlueCFC]

Mecole Hardman probably not playing Sunday night in related news.

While not ideal, getting Sammy back definitely helps.

[Cheater5]

The spun-up bus controversy, and now three days out openly talking about putting #10 as punt returner, instead of just trotting him out there on Sunday night...



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DTOtUoVWsAAdTlK.jpg

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Pringle is a sub JAG, not some weapon

[Mecca]

Also because Pringle isn't a bad kick returner doesn't mean he can do punts, that's very different.

[KCUnited]

chunk up tha deuce

[Rain Man]

They're going to regret that bus thing. We're loading up the nukes.

[New World Order]

The Raiders are so fucked

[Megatron96]

I don't understand bagging on Pringle. He was fine as the returner a couple weeks ago, as I recall. He just doesn't scare people they way Hill does. The whole point of announcing Hill as the returner is psychological warfare.

Though if it were me, I would have kept it quiet, and just sprung it on the Raiders on gameday. Not give them a chance to make any preparations this week and see how they handled it spontaneously. Football players hate surprises, so I'd guess it would've gone badly.

[Hammock Parties]

I don't understand bagging on Pringle. He was fine as the returner a couple weeks ago, as I recall.

Pringle has never returned a punt. LMAO

[Why Not?]

More evidence that the bus lap did mean something to these guys. They absolutely want to embarrass the Faid.

[Hammock Parties]

The Raiders are so fucked

we're the best team in the league and they just made our focus and intensity razor sharp

:LOL:

[Rain Man]

....

Though if it were me, I would have kept it quiet, and just sprung it on the Raiders on gameday. Not give them a chance to make any preparations this week and see how they handled it spontaneously. Football players hate surprises, so I'd guess it would've gone badly.

If it's a close game or you're an underdog, you keep it quiet. If you're a hulking killer of men, you announce it.

It's like being in junior high when the 240 pound bully decides to pound you into dust. If he just jumps you after school, it's bad. But if he comes to you at 10 am and says, "At precisely 3:00 today, I'm going to find you and I'm going to make you eat your own toes", which is worse?

[Halfcan]

Ugh. Rather have Pringle back there even if he just fair catches all of them. Not worth the risk IMO to have Tyreek back there and plus, for as good as he is when he has the ball, he's not that good at catching punts on the run.

4 Punt Return TD's in his career so far- yeah he sucks!!

[comochiefsfan]

How is the risk on punt returns greater than any other play?

Tell me ONE time you can remember seeing a punt returner sustain a significant injury in an NFL game.

The whole idea that returning punts adds an extra layer of injury risk is pretty ridiculous imo.

Tyreek should always return punts for us. If nothing else he makes the other team punt away from him and gives us great field position.

[ptlyon]

But if he comes to you at 10 am and says, "At precisely 3:00 today, I'm going to find you and I'm going to make you eat your own toes", which is worse?

Is the look of fear on their face incredible?

[Megatron96]

Pringle has never returned a punt. LMAO

A kick return. Whatever. While I agree they are different, having done both in HS, I can also say they aren't extremely different, at least not from the perspective of catching the ball and running with it. It's the blocking really that's different.

But from the returner's POV at least as I remember it, fielding a punt vs. a kick is basically the same thing.

[Hammock Parties]

A kick return. Whatever. While I agree they are different, having done both in HS, I can also say they aren't extremely different

LMAO

they're massively different in the NFL

especially in terms of injury risk and degree of difficulty in catching the thing

there's no fucking way Pringle should EVER return a punt

[eDave]

4 Punt Return TD's in his career so far- yeah he sucks!!

NOT crazy. Sup Halfcan?

[Why Not?]

How is the risk on punt returns greater than any other play?

Tell me ONE time you can remember seeing a punt returner sustain a significant injury in an NFL game.

The whole idea that returning punts adds an extra layer of injury risk is pretty ridiculous imo.

Tyreek should always return punts for us. If nothing else he makes the other team punt away from him and gives us great field position.


I totally agree with this. The number of WR’s who have been injured running routes or getting tackled after a catch is so significantly greater than dudes who have been injured retuning punts (even if you make adjustments for sample size) it’s not even close. It’s damn near the argument you make to people who are afraid to fly, but drive carefree on the highway everyday.

[Megatron96]

If it's a close game or you're an underdog, you keep it quiet. If you're a hulking killer of men, you announce it.

It's like being in junior high when the 240 pound bully decides to pound you into dust. If he just jumps you after school, it's bad. But if he comes to you at 10 am and says, "At precisely 3:00 today, I'm going to find you and I'm going to make you eat your own toes", which is worse?

Yeah, I see your point. I'm not saying one is significantly better than the other here. Just how I'd do it.

Btw, when this happened to me as a kid, if you threatened me in advance, I learned pretty quick to plan on setting you up somehow. Or just punch you in the face at that moment. Repeatedly. "Surprise!"

[Megatron96]

LMAO

they're massively different in the NFL

especially in terms of injury risk and degree of difficulty in catching the thing

there's no fucking way Pringle should EVER return a punt

:rolleyes: Okay, whatever. I don't remember them being terribly different, but that was over 30 years ago. Maybe I've forgotten something critical in the meantime.

Though I specifically was talking about just the act of catching the ball, not injury risks, etc.

[smithandrew051]

How is the risk on punt returns greater than any other play?

Tell me ONE time you can remember seeing a punt returner sustain a significant injury in an NFL game.

The whole idea that returning punts adds an extra layer of injury risk is pretty ridiculous imo.

Tyreek should always return punts for us. If nothing else he makes the other team punt away from him and gives us great field position.

Didn’t DAT’s dumbass break his leg on a punt return when he retreated awkwardly?

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Yeah, I see your point. I'm not saying one is significantly better than the other here. Just how I'd do it.

Btw, when this happened to me as a kid, if you threatened me in advance, I learned pretty quick to plan on setting you up somehow. Or just punch you in the face at that moment. Repeatedly. "Surprise!"

Yeah , if I was forewarned then it gives me time to get my sawed off 12 gauge out of my locker!:thumb:

[Megatron96]

Yeah , if I was forewarned then it gives me time to get my sawed off 12 gauge out of my locker!:thumb:

Well, never thought of that. Could've used someone like you to point out that option.:thumb:

But I could make sure I never placed myself in situations that invited an attack, preferably where an adult was. Basically dictate the ground on which I'd have to fight or flee. I could also put just so many books in my backpack so that it had good weight, but was still pretty easy to swing like a giant blackjack. change into my sneakers so i could run. Put a pen in my pocket. Stuff like that.

[Hammock Parties]

:rolleyes: Okay, whatever. I don't remember them being terribly different, but that was over 30 years ago. Maybe I've forgotten something critical in the meantime.

Though I specifically was talking about just the act of catching the ball, not injury risks, etc.

It seems like a GREAT IDEA to have a guy who has NEVER RETURNED A PUNT IN THE NFL do it this weekend!!!

[smithandrew051]

Let’s go with no punt returner and dedicate an extra person to either block the punt or watch for a fake.

Patrick Mahomes doesn’t need field position. He’ll go 99 yards for a TD every fucking play.

Fuck you if you disagree, you fucking pussy!!!!

[Megatron96]

It seems like a GREAT IDEA to have a guy who has NEVER RETURNED A PUNT IN THE NFL do it this weekend!!!

Gotta start somewhere, sometime. Might as well be now.:thumb:

[htismaqe]

They need to do whatever it takes to embarrass the Grudens.

Fuck 'em. Do whatever it takes to run them off the field.

[ChiefsFanatic]

This is not a risk. At most it's 3-4 extra hits on Tyreek. LMAO

He's at greater risk on offense.Tyreek is also very good about just stepping out of bounds and not taking an unnecessary hit, instead of trying some Jimmy G macho bullshit.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

[ThaVirus]

Eh, idk. To me, this says one of two things. Ideally, it'd be that the bus lap pissed the team off and they're about to go scorched Earth.

That's not Reid's style, so I think it's more likely to mean that the coaching staff is seeing things on tape that shows the Raiders as a greater threat to us than we all think, which is a bit worrisome.

[htismaqe]

Eh, idk. To me, this says one of two things. Ideally, it'd be that the bus lap pissed the team off and they're about to go scorched Earth.

That's not Reid's style, so I think it's more likely to mean that the coaching staff is seeing things on tape that shows the Raiders as a greater threat to us than we all think, which is a bit worrisome.

There's a 3rd thing.

Mecole Hardman tested positive for COVID. Tyreek is really the only other punt returner on the roster.

[ThaVirus]

There's a 3rd thing.

Mecole Hardman tested positive for COVID. Tyreek is really the only other punt returner on the roster.


Can’t Pringle return punts? I feel like I’ve seen him back there.

[htismaqe]

Can’t Pringle return punts? I feel like I’ve seen him back there.

He's returned 6 kicks in his career but zero punts.

[Megatron96]

Can’t Pringle return punts? I feel like I’ve seen him back there.

According to HP, no that cannot be allowed under any circumstances. Apparently Pringle is the worst punt returner alive.

[htismaqe]

According to HP, no that cannot be allowed under any circumstances. Apparently Pringle is the worst punt returner alive.

It's not that he can't, it's that he hasn't ever done it.

This is a HUGE game. You don't just trot a guy other there like that. One muffed punt could lose the game.

[Megatron96]

It's not that he can't, it's that he hasn't ever done it.

This is a HUGE game. You don't just trot a guy other there like that. One muffed punt could lose the game.

Apparently I still need to dial up the sarcasm meter. How about . . . "MAKE PRINGLE RETURN EVERY PUNT FROM HERE TO ARMAGEDDON BLINDFOLDED!!!!!!!!!!"


How's that?

[Deberg_1990]

Can’t Antonio Hamilton do this too?

Or Little Bopete?

[Demonpenz]

I hope pringle chip's in

[Megatron96]

Can’t Antonio Hamilton do this too?

Or Little Bopete?

Bopete is sick? Otherwise let's have them both return punts together. Hamilton can hold one end of the football and Bopete the other, as they run down the field!

[carcosa]

I hope pringle chip's in

Very fun post

[htismaqe]

Can’t Antonio Hamilton do this too?

Or Little Bopete?

Keyes is out with an illness and putting Hamilton back there is just silly. He barely plays, let alone returns punts.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Eh, idk. To me, this says one of two things. Ideally, it'd be that the bus lap pissed the team off and they're about to go scorched Earth.

That's not Reid's style, so I think it's more likely to mean that the coaching staff is seeing things on tape that shows the Raiders as a greater threat to us than we all think, which is a bit worrisome.

What the hell is this shit?

[-King-]

4 Punt Return TD's in his career so far- yeah he sucks!!

Did you read anything at all that I posted. Where did I say he sucks? It's the exact opposite. He's too good for us to risk on a meaningless play. We have the best offense in the league, we don't need a great punt return or anything to score so why risk putting tyreek back there?

[Megatron96]

Eh, idk. To me, this says one of two things. Ideally, it'd be that the bus lap pissed the team off and they're about to go scorched Earth.

That's not Reid's style, so I think it's more likely to mean that the coaching staff is seeing things on tape that shows the Raiders as a greater threat to us than we all think, which is a bit worrisome.

Don't overthink it.:)

Who are the guys available to return punts? Hardman, Hill, and I don't know exactly because I don't track that stuff. But even if we say it could be Pringle, or Watkins or even DRob . . . which of those would have the most experience?

Hill.

Which of those would generate the maximum level of respect from the Raiders?

Hill.

Which of those guys has the highest probability for either getting great field position or scoring?

Hill.

Mystery solved.

[MMXcalibur]

I hope we have a 50 point lead, and then decide to heap on another 50 points just because.

[htismaqe]

Did you read anything at all that I posted. Where did I say he sucks? It's the exact opposite. He's too good for us to risk on a meaningless play. We have the best offense in the league, we don't need a great punt return or anything to score so why risk putting tyreek back there?

It's not a meaningless play. One muffed punt could lose the game. Just having good hands back there is meaningful.

[O.city]

I'd rather have Pringle or someone else back tehre. Tyreek is too important to the offense to risk any injury.

[thabear04]

DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">RELEASE THE CHEETAH <a href="https://t.co/v1AtDcJjaQ">https://t.co/v1AtDcJjaQ</a> <a href="https://t.co/vVhZstHquj">pic.twitter.com/vVhZstHquj</a></p>&mdash; 101 Sent (@ClayWendler) <a href="https://twitter.com/ClayWendler/status/1329489658791792642?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


I was at this game.

[htismaqe]

I'd rather have Pringle or someone else back tehre. Tyreek is too important to the offense to risk any injury.

Punt returns aren't kick returns. The risk of injury isn't THAT high.

[Jethopper]

I hope pringle chip's in

Can it with the Pringles talk.

[ptlyon]

Can it with the Pringles talk.

Once you pop you can't stop

[-King-]

It's not a meaningless play. One muffed punt could lose the game. Just having good hands back there is meaningful.

Ok, so just have someone in there to just fair catch the ball. Ironically the last time Hill was returning punts was when he muffed it back to the Texans.

[ThaVirus]

Don't overthink it.:)

Who are the guys available to return punts? Hardman, Hill, and I don't know exactly because I don't track that stuff. But even if we say it could be Pringle, or Watkins or even DRob . . . which of those would have the most experience?

Hill.

Which of those would generate the maximum level of respect from the Raiders?

Hill.

Which of those guys has the highest probability for either getting great field position or scoring?

Hill.

Mystery solved.

I thought I had seen Pringle or DRob back there returning punts at one point but if not and we truly have no one else to return them, then I stand corrected.

The answers to your questions is always Hill, but we've taken him off the return team because he's more valuable on offense. Putting him back now if we had others who can adequately do the job would basically be an admission that we need him out there to give us an edge, which is what I was getting at.

[Hammock Parties]

Gotta start somewhere, sometime. Might as well be now.:thumb:

Holy fuck. Chiefsplanet geniouses at work.

[-King-]

Punt returns aren't kick returns. The risk of injury isn't THAT high.

For the returner the injury risk is higher on a punt return. For the blockers, it's higher on a kick return.

[htismaqe]

Ok, so just have someone in there to just fair catch the ball. Ironically the last time Hill was returning punts was when he muffed it back to the Texans.

Muffs happen on fair catches too.

You guys are worried about nothing.

Returning kicks is high risk. Returning punts is really no more dangerous than running routes. It's not that big of a deal.

[htismaqe]

For the returner the injury risk is higher on a punt return. For the blockers, it's higher on a kick return.

Gonna have to see some actual evidence of that.

[O.city]

Punt returns aren't kick returns. The risk of injury isn't THAT high.

Right, guys are closer to you on punt returns while you're looking up in the air.

[htismaqe]

Right, guys are closer to you on punt returns while you're looking up in the air.

They also don't have a full 50 yards of momentum.

The NFL changed kickoffs to reduce the danger.

If punts were as dangerous as kickoffs, they would have changed punt rules too. They didn't.

[Megatron96]

Holy fuck. Chiefsplanet geniouses at work.

geniuses

Genius.

And I couldn't turn up the sarcasm anymore than that. Check your sensor, it may need replacement.

[O.city]

They also don't have a full 50 yards of momentum.

The NFL changed kickoffs to reduce the danger.

If punts were as dangerous as kickoffs, they would have changed punt rules too. They didn't.

What do most punts average, 40 ish yards? So the momentum argument doesn't really fit.

The changed the blocking methods on kick returns, so woudln't that say that is where the most danger was?

[-King-]

Gonna have to see some actual evidence of that.

Punt returners get blown up soon as they touch the ball regularly. Kick returners rarely. The kicking team doesn't have the time to run down the field and beat the blockers in order to lay a big hit the way they do on punt return.

[Megatron96]

I thought I had seen Pringle or DRob back there returning punts at one point but if not and we truly have no one else to return them, then I stand corrected.

The answers to your questions is always Hill, but we've taken him off the return team because he's more valuable on offense. Putting him back now if we had others who can adequately do the job would basically be an admission that we need him out there to give us an edge, which is what I was getting at.

I don't remember DRob taking any returns so I'll have to take your word for it.

I know that Sammy took both punt and kick returns in college, and amassed nearly 1,400 yds and a TD doing so. So theoretically he could fill in.

But he hasn't done either duty since college, and of course, no one wants to see him get hurt doing something he hasn't done in nearly 8 years.


***********

And I don't get what's so different between returning a punt vs. a kick, because apparently no coach in the NFL thinks that either. Just about every team has one guy that does both duties, barring injury.

[-King-]

Muffs happen on fair catches too.

You guys are worried about nothing.

Returning kicks is high risk. Returning punts is really no more dangerous than running routes. It's not that big of a deal.
Yeah, he could get injured running a route. So why add to the injury risk by having him return punts? Our offense is so good the raiders could down the punt at the 1 every time and chances are we'd still score. So there's low reward in Tyreek returning punts.

[htismaqe]

What do most punts average, 40 ish yards? So the momentum argument doesn't really fit.

The changed the blocking methods on kick returns, so woudln't that say that is where the most danger was?

They pushed the kickoffs from the 30 to the 35 and in the years since, the number of kickoff returns has been cut in half. Before the rule change, about 80% of kickoffs were returned. Now it's about 40%.

[htismaqe]

Punt returners get blown up soon as they touch the ball regularly. Kick returners rarely. The kicking team doesn't have the time to run down the field and beat the blockers in order to lay a big hit the way they do on punt return.

That's just false.

On a punt return, the kicking team has all the momentum.

In your scenario, the returner is rarely ever moving. They're getting hit immediately.

It's like saying that a moving train hitting a stationary train hits with as much force as two moving trains head on. That's just plain false.

[htismaqe]

Yeah, he could get injured running a route. So why add to the injury risk by having him return punts? Our offense is so good the raiders could down the punt at the 1 every time and chances are we'd still score. So there's low reward in Tyreek returning punts.

Better put him on a play count then, since running routes is so dangerous.

[O.city]

That's just false.

On a punt return, the kicking team has all the momentum.

In your scenario, the returner is rarely ever moving. They're getting hit immediately.

It's like saying that a moving train hitting a stationary train hits with as much force as two moving trains head on. That's just plain false.

When the returner is standing still, waiting to field a punt they could get blindsided. It's rare these days, so I woudln't worry about that part of it.

I just don't think the benefit outweighs the risk. He's too good on offense and the chances of him making that much different on a punt return is small.

Like if Mahomes was the holder for PAT or something.

[htismaqe]

The NFL has all the data on this. Pages and pages of data.

They set out with a stated goal of reducing CTE and other catastrophic injuries.

They made changes to personal fouls, they made changes to roughing, they made changes to several rules.

They changed the kickoff and immediately saw the desired change - less kickoff returns.

If a punt return was THAT dangerous, the NFL would have targeted the punt return for changes. They didn't. It's not.

[htismaqe]

When the returner is standing still, waiting to field a punt they could get blindsided. It's rare these days, so I woudln't worry about that part of it.

I just don't think the benefit outweighs the risk. He's too good on offense and the chances of him making that much different on a punt return is small.

Like if Mahomes was the holder for PAT or something.

Just fielding the punt is critical.

It would be colossally stupid for them to put someone back there that has never fielded a punt in a real game just because they're scared of injury.

[O.city]

Just fielding the punt is critical.

It would be colossally stupid for them to put someone back there that has never fielded a punt in a real game just because they're scared of injury.

We've seen that Hill is better at it than Hardman and has better hands. Do you think they shoudl have Hill back there at all times?

[htismaqe]

We've seen that Hill is better at it than Hardman and has better hands. Do you think they shoudl have Hill back there at all times?

No. Hardman fields punts all the time and doesn't muff.

No reason not to trust him.

That's wholly unlike putting somebody back there that's never done it before in a game of this magnitude.

[O.city]

Also, being scared of injury isn't the same as an unnecessary risk to one of the most valuable/important players on their team.

Especially when you weigh in the offense as a whole. I was good with it when Alex Smith was the QB, you needed as many sparks and scores from non offensive plays as possible.

Not now.

[Megatron96]

I thought I had seen Pringle or DRob back there returning punts at one point but if not and we truly have no one else to return them, then I stand corrected.

The answers to your questions is always Hill, but we've taken him off the return team because he's more valuable on offense. Putting him back now if we had others who can adequately do the job would basically be an admission that we need him out there to give us an edge, which is what I was getting at.

My point was that we really don't have anyone nearly as qualified as Hill if Hardman doesn't play. We have a couple guys that might be able to fill the spot, but neither are as good as Hill at returning or understanding when not to return it.

From a business perspective, Hill makes perfect sense. We have three guys for a position. One guy has several years of experience and performed at a very high level for at least 4 years before relinquishing his spot there? The other two have almost no experience at this level.

As the owner of a business it's not even close. I take the guy with the experience and the history, even if he's a year removed from doing that job regularly over the other two guys that are still basically rookies at the job. Simple.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but Hill has never been injured returning anything, ever.

[htismaqe]

Also, being scared of injury isn't the same as an unnecessary risk to one of the most valuable/important players on their team.

Especially when you weigh in the offense as a whole. I was good with it when Alex Smith was the QB, you needed as many sparks and scores from non offensive plays as possible.

Not now.

There's just not that much risk.

1. It's necessary. They don't have another punt returner on the team.

2. It's not a huge risk. It's just not.

The real risk is screwing up a punt catch and losing the game.

[Megatron96]

When the returner is standing still, waiting to field a punt they could get blindsided. It's rare these days, so I woudln't worry about that part of it.

I just don't think the benefit outweighs the risk. He's too good on offense and the chances of him making that much different on a punt return is small.

Like if Mahomes was the holder for PAT or something.

:LOL:

Um, back in the day, apparently before your time, like in the 2000s, QBs held for kickers all the time. It was a regular sight to see all over the NFL. No kidding.

[-King-]

Better put him on a play count then, since running routes is so dangerous.

Stop being ridiculous. He's integral to the offense. He's not to special teams. We can score without great returns or any returns at all. So why risk him on a play that really won't affect the game?

[CasselGotPeedOn]

Eh, idk. To me, this says one of two things. Ideally, it'd be that the bus lap pissed the team off and they're about to go scorched Earth.

That's not Reid's style, so I think it's more likely to mean that the coaching staff is seeing things on tape that shows the Raiders as a greater threat to us than we all think, which is a bit worrisome.

https://i.giphy.com/media/cMF4UcYNn6LI0rL90X/giphy.webp

[-King-]

That's just false.

On a punt return, the kicking team has all the momentum.

In your scenario, the returner is rarely ever moving. They're getting hit immediately.

It's like saying that a moving train hitting a stationary train hits with as much force as two moving trains head on. That's just plain false.

So yeah the punt returner risks getting hit as soon as they get the ball AND when they're moving. You basically just made my point.

[Otter]

I'm so looking forward to this game. It's gonna be old time hockey!

[alanm]

geniuses

Genius.

And I couldn't turn up the sarcasm anymore than that. Check your sensor, it may need replacement.


Genious - CP spelling version. Damn noobs. :)

[KChiefs1]

He hasn't been good at it since they took him off regular duty.

He muffs a lot of punts when he does it.

[KCUnited]

Any word on Hardman? Pringle? A good stream for the game? This girl lived close?

[Megatron96]

He hasn't been good at it since they took him off regular duty.

He muffs a lot of punts when he does it.

Hadn't heard this. What's 'a lot'? I remember one.

[Megatron96]

Any word on Hardman? Pringle? A good stream for the game? This girl lived close?

Hardman's on the list. Pringle's in a can. Buffstreamz. She's moving because you're a Peeping Tom.

[PattyFlakes]

Hadn't heard this. What's 'a lot'? I remember one.

The only one I remember was in the Divisional round against the Texans.

[Megatron96]

Genious - CP spelling version. Damn noobs. :)

Well shit. Is there a list of these somewhere?

[KChiefs1]

Hadn't heard this. What's 'a lot'? I remember one.

One is too many...but I've counted 3 muffs. I count a muff when he bobbles it when catching it...not a fumble.

The memorable one is the playoff game. He just hasn't been as effective as he was early in career when he was doing it every game. I'll happily be wrong on him returning punts but it doesn't exactly excite me like it did in 2016-2018.

[CasselGotPeedOn]

He hasn't been good at it since they took him off regular duty.

He muffs a lot of punts when he does it.

You are an underrated moron on this site.

[alanm]

Well shit. Is there a list of these somewhere?I believe there is. Probably in the Hall of Classics somewhere. Someone wrote the lexicon down. Moran. :p

[Megatron96]

One is too many...but I've counted 3 muffs. I count a muff when he bobbles it when catching it...not a fumble.



Uh, no. You can't have your own definition of a common football occurrence, where the definition is already unanimously accepted and historically unchanged since the beginning of Time itself, as something different from your own. That's not how it works.

A 'muff' is when the player mishandles the catch and puts it on the ground for anyone to recover. Period.

A bobble is a bobble, something completely different.

So the definitive answer is "ONE."

[Megatron96]

I believe there is. Probably in the Hall of Classics somewhere. Someone wrote the lexicon down. Moran. :p

Duly noted.

Of course the chances of me actually going down that rabbit hole and looking for said list? Slim and none, and Slim . . .:D

[Bl00dyBizkitz]

Can Sunday get here faster so we can embarrass these fools?

[CasselGotPeedOn]

We shouldn't risk starting Mahomes, he's just too valuable to the offense. We should start Leveon instead. Now I know he's never played Qb at the NFL, college, or high school level, but he probably played some in pickup games and that's good enough.

[TEX]

We shouldn't risk starting Mahomes, he's just too valuable to the offense. We should start Leveon instead. Now I know he's never played Qb at the NFL, college, or high school level, but he probably played some in pickup games and that's good enough.

Naw, Bell does not know all of the offense. Id roll with Pringle.

[Megatron96]

One is too many...

:facepalm:

"One is too many . . ." JFC


Hill has over 100 returns, for about 1,400 yds and 5 TDs. So he muffs ONE, giving him a muff percentage of less than 1%, but that's too many.

Genious.

Hey, I got that one right, right?

[ROYC75]

I would have rather them not announce this and let it be a surprise come game time . Now they practice all their kicks out of bounds.

[O.city]

:LOL:

Um, back in the day, apparently before your time, like in the 2000s, QBs held for kickers all the time. It was a regular sight to see all over the NFL. No kidding.

I know I’m not 12

Tony Romo famously fucked one up in a playoff game that’s as hilarious as it gets

[KChiefs1]

:facepalm:

"One is too many . . ." JFC


Hill has over 100 returns, for about 1,400 yds and 5 TDs. So he muffs ONE, giving him a muff percentage of less than 1%, but that's too many.

Genious.

Hey, I got that one right, right?


https://media1.giphy.com/media/l41YmQjOz9qg2Ecow/giphy.gif

[PattyFlakes]

One is too many...

Patrick Mahomes has 1 INT this season, that's way too many. What a garbage QB, we should throw Henne out there instead. :rolleyes:

[-King-]

Uh, no. You can't have your own definition of a common football occurrence, where the definition is already unanimously accepted and historically unchanged since the beginning of Time itself, as something different from your own. That's not how it works.

A 'muff' is when the player mishandles the catch and puts it on the ground for anyone to recover. Period.

A bobble is a bobble, something completely different.

So the definitive answer is "ONE."

He also muffed one in the colts playoff game.

[Easy 6]

Count me in the "but, why?" camp

If the O & D show up like they should, this is not necessary

[Megatron96]

Naw, Bell does not know all of the offense. Id roll with Pringle.


How about Kelce? He played QB at some level. Grade school I think. And he knows the offense backwards and forwards. Whatever it takes to protect the billion dollar man, I say. Maybe Andy should leave Pat locked up in a broom closet at the stadium . . . just to be safe.

[Chief Roundup]

This is not a risk. At most it's 3-4 extra hits on Tyreek. LMAO

He's at greater risk on offense.

Wrong again. Special Teams is the most dangerous unit of the sport.

[Megatron96]

He also muffed one in the colts playoff game.

ROFL

So two muffs. For about 1.4% now? Yeah, the evidence is overwhelming. :rolleyes:

You should stop while your well behind.

[Megatron96]

Patrick Mahomes has 1 INT this season, that's way too many. What a garbage QB, we should throw Henne out there instead. :rolleyes:

Gfu.:clap:

[-King-]

ROFL

So two muffs. For about 1.4% now? Yeah, the evidence is overwhelming. :rolleyes:

You should stop while your well behind.

2 muffs in his last probably 10 returns. Likely coming from a lack of practice.

Regardless, that's not my main point. My main point is that he's too valuable to be used in a non-valuable position. We have the best offense in the league, we don't need him to make a big play or anyone to do anything spectacular on special teams. So why risk our best WR there?

[ThaVirus]

https://i.giphy.com/media/cMF4UcYNn6LI0rL90X/giphy.webp

Can't see anything, playa. I'll just assume you agree.

[PattyFlakes]

I think he's going to be out there purely because he's the only one other than Hardman with experience doing it. Can't get that Offense on the field and in good field position unless you have someone who knows what they're doing returning the punts.

[Megatron96]

2 muffs in his last probably 10 returns. Likely coming from a lack of practice.

Regardless, that's not my main point. My main point is that he's too valuable to be used in a non-valuable position. We have the best offense in the league, we don't need him to make a big play or anyone to do anything spectacular on special teams. So why risk our best WR there?

I was wrong; it's 1.7%.

What risk? You realize that the Raiders probably won't kick to him at all if they can help it, right? He won't be risking anything in all likelihood. But even if they do, Hill's not an idiot like DAT. And neither is EB. He's not going to try and make something out of nothing, unless he has no choice.

Otherwise, he's going to let the ball bounce out of bounds, or fair catch it or whatever, unless he gets a really good ball to return. Which probably won't happen.

And EB doesn't want Hill to risk much either, because a good quarter (at least) of the offense is about getting Hill the ball. This is about gamesmanship and not much else, IMO.

But worrying about Hill muffing a return, when he's historically not a muffer, or injury, when he's never been injured returning, is overly reactionary. There's absolutely no compelling evidence to support the idea.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Muffs happen on fair catches too.

You guys are worried about nothing.

Returning kicks is high risk. Returning punts is really no more dangerous than running routes. It's not that big of a deal.

The risk of injury isn't that great on a punt but the risk of a muff is 100 x higher because the receiver has to peek at the players coming at him taking eyes off the ball and usually they are really close to hitting as quick as the catch is made.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

I remember hearing Toub state they have multiple players that can field punts but can't remember who. Watkins for sure and Robinson can I know.

[-King-]

I was wrong; it's 1.7%.

What risk? You realize that the Raiders probably won't kick to him at all if they can help it, right? He won't be risking anything in all likelihood. But even if they do, Hill's not an idiot like DAT. And neither is EB. He's not going to try and make something out of nothing, unless he has no choice.

Otherwise, he's going to let the ball bounce out of bounds, or fair catch it or whatever, unless he gets a really good ball to return. Which probably won't happen.

And EB doesn't want Hill to risk much either, because a good quarter (at least) of the offense is about getting Hill the ball. This is about gamesmanship and not much else, IMO.

But worrying about Hill muffing a return, when he's historically not a muffer, or injury, when he's never been injured returning, is overly reactionary. There's absolutely no compelling evidence to support the idea.

2 muffs in his last 10 returns can show that he's out of practice. Or simply not comfortable returning punts anymore because he knows his value to the offense.

The risk/reward is little to none doing it. The chiefs offense can score from anywhere on the field, so why does Hill need to return punts or threaten to return punts?

[Megatron96]

2 muffs in his last 10 returns can show that he's out of practice. Or simply not comfortable returning punts anymore because he knows his value to the offense.

The risk/reward is little to none doing it. The chiefs offense can score from anywhere on the field, so why does Hill need to return punts or threaten to return punts?

No. 2 out of (maybe) 10 shows almost nothing because the dataset is too small to determine anything. And . . . simply not comfortable returning punts anymore because he knows his value to the offense. is nonsensical; no player thinks that way. Ever.

As for why? Well the obvious answer is "because EB wants it that way," which for a player should be enough. Coach wants, coach gets, simple as that.

Otherwise, please refer to post #67.

[htismaqe]

Stop being ridiculous. He's integral to the offense. He's not to special teams. We can score without great returns or any returns at all. So why risk him on a play that really won't affect the game?

Why worry about a play that's not actually a risk?

Do you have data to show that punt returns represent a higher risk than any other play?

[htismaqe]

Wrong again. Special Teams is the most dangerous unit of the sport.

Nope.

KICKOFFS are the most dangerous.

Not punts.

The NFL doesn't agree with you and they have reams of data on injuries.

[BigRedChief]

Yeah yeah everyone want to see it until he gets hurt. You have NFL players with a running start that can’t wait to put a hit on him.

[htismaqe]

Yeah yeah everyone want to see it until he gets hurt. You have NFL players with a running start that can’t wait to put a hit on him.

He's not going to get hurt.

This is pure chicken little garbage.

Punt returns are not more dangerous than any other play.

[Megatron96]

Yeah yeah everyone want to see it until he gets hurt. You have NFL players with a running start that can’t wait to put a hit on him.

115 returns without an injury. Think we good.

Actually, I'm trying to remember when he actually took a real hit during a return, other than the Divisional last year. Usually he just steps out of bounds.

OMG. Do you think he forgot that he can step out of bounds? Maybe you guys are onto something!

[Chief Roundup]

Nope.

KICKOFFS are the most dangerous.

Not punts.

The NFL doesn't agree with you and they have reams of data on injuries.

Ok notice I did say ST. I would love to see that data got a link to said data?

[-King-]

Why worry about a play that's not actually a risk?

Do you have data to show that punt returns represent a higher risk than any other play?

It's an unnecessary play for Tyreek to risk being injured on. If he gets injured while on offense, that's the luck of the draw because the chiefs can't prevent that without hindering the team overall. But if he gets injured returning a punt, then everyone would be pissed because that would be preventable and him not being on special teams doesn't hinder the team much. It's all about mitigating risk.

[htismaqe]

Ok notice I did say ST. I would love to see that data got a link to said data?

The proof is in the rule changes.

The NFL has made dozens of rule changes in the interest of player safety. They've made multiple changes to the kickoff rules.

They've made zero changes to punt rules.

If it were REALLY dangerous, they would have.

Simple as that.

Plus, the burden isn't on me. I'm not the one asserting that having Tyreek return punts is a doomsday scenario.

[htismaqe]

It's an unnecessary play for Tyreek to risk being injured on. If he gets injured while on offense, that's the luck of the draw because the chiefs can't prevent that without hindering the team overall. But if he gets injured returning a punt, then everyone would be pissed because that would be preventable and him not being on special teams doesn't hinder the team much. It's all about mitigating risk.

The only risk here is losing to the Raiders, screwing up playoff seeding, and potentially losing a stranglehold on the division.

There's no elevated risk to having Tyreek return punts. None.

[Megatron96]

It's an unnecessary play for Tyreek to risk being injured on. If he gets injured while on offense, that's the luck of the draw because the chiefs can't prevent that without hindering the team overall. But if he gets injured returning a punt, then everyone would be pissed because that would be preventable and him not being on special teams doesn't hinder the team much. It's all about mitigating risk.

Uh, football is about taking risks, not mitigating them. It's in the definition.

[htismaqe]

Uh, football is about taking risks, not mitigating them. It's in the definition.

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimagesvc.timeincapp.com%2Fv3%2Ffan%2Fimage%3Furl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Ffansided.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fgetty-images%2F2017%2F12%2F858669446-nfl-oct-02-redskins-at-chiefs.jpg.jpg%26&f=1&nofb=1

[CasselGotPeedOn]

King gonna queen

[displacedinMN]

I doubt the Raiders actually punt to him. But it might get their punter to make a mistake and shank one or two, giving us great field position.

You never know though. Sometimes Gruden will be overly aggressive.

Put two back. Hill on one side, whoever can on the other. Force them to punt to one of them.

Then if the punt to the other, he can pass it to Hill.

Too many threats

[Chief Roundup]

The proof is in the rule changes.

The NFL has made dozens of rule changes in the interest of player safety. They've made multiple changes to the kickoff rules.

They've made zero changes to punt rules.

If it were REALLY dangerous, they would have.

Simple as that.

Plus, the burden isn't on me. I'm not the one asserting that having Tyreek return punts is a doomsday scenario.

ROFL You are the one that told me I was wrong prove it.
ST is much more dangerous than offense and or defense. The players still have a lot more momentum on any ST play than they do on any Off. vs Def. play. Hill is one of our stars if they get a chance to do more damage they will take that opportunity.

[TwistedChief]

They need to do whatever it takes to embarrass the Grudens.

Fuck 'em. Do whatever it takes to run them off the field.

This.

You announce this in advance to intimidate them. And it'll work.

Fuck these clowns up.

[htismaqe]

ROFL You are the one that told me I was wrong prove it.
ST is much more dangerous than offense and or defense. The players still have a lot more momentum on any ST play than they do on any Off. vs Def. play. Hill is one of our stars if they get a chance to do more damage they will take that opportunity.

I already proved it.

You're welcome.

[Hammock Parties]

geniuses

Genius.

And I couldn't turn up the sarcasm anymore than that. Check your sensor, it may need replacement.

Holy fuck dude.

You are some kind of genious.

But just checking - we're not putting Pringle on punt returns, coach Megatard?

[BigRedChief]

Punt returns are not more dangerous than any other play.



There's no elevated risk to having Tyreek return punts. None.any NFL play can cause an injury. We saw that theory in action last year with the QB sneak. An injury to a QB had never happened in the history of the NFL. Yet it happened to our football savior.

The difference between a punt and just another NFL play is that with a a punt return the NFL player has 30-50 yards of running momentum to lay a hit on Hill.

[King_Chief_Fan]

he might get killed

[htismaqe]

any NFL play can cause an injury. We saw that theory in action last year with the QB sneak. An injury to a QB had never happened in the history of the NFL. Yet it happened to our football savior.

If we're going to bank on freak accidents, better put Tyreek on a play count. He might get hurt blocking on a running play.

The difference between a punt and just another NFL play is that with a a punt return the NFL player has 30-50 yards of running momentum to lay a hit on Hill.

And yet there's no evidence that a punt return is actually that dangerous, unlike kick returns.

[Megatron96]

Holy fuck dude.

You are some kind of genious.

But just checking - we're not putting Pringle on punt returns, coach Megatard?

Nope. We're putting in Johnny Townsend.

[Hammock Parties]

LMAO

this thread is full CP burst

[carcosa]

Put two back. Hill on one side, whoever can on the other. Force them to punt to one of them.

Then if the punt to the other, he can pass it to Hill.

Too many threats

This idea fuckin rox!!!!

[Megatron96]

Holy fuck dude.

You are some kind of genious.

But just checking - we're not putting Pringle on punt returns, coach Megatard?

Btw, the Pringle idea wasn't originally mine, Hammock Panties. I just responded to someone else's post about it. What I wrote was:

Hardman may not play because COVID.

And I honestly think Pringle will probably receive some punts in this game, instead of Hill. But I've always felt that Hill should be receiving some punts, in specific situations, because he terrifies the opposing punt units, which has forced some of them to make mistakes.

All this announcement tells me is that Hill will be practicing with the ST unit this week, and should be fine back there with some practice snaps to get comfortable again in that role.

Now I did write 'punts' but all I meant was I figured that Pringle and Hill would split return duties. In other words, I didn't expect Hill to return every kick, whether it was a punt or otherwise.

Now if that irked you, well tough titty, as they say.

And now I'm back to the game.

[Hammock Parties]

bla bla bla

you are stupid, own it

[Megatron96]

bla bla bla

you are stupid, own it

Are you on the rag or something? you should take something for that.

[Hammock Parties]

Are you on the rag or something? you should take something for that.

i took CP genious pills, they cure everything

[htismaqe]

i took CP genious pills, they cure everything

HOCK!

[lostcause]

If we're going to bank on freak accidents, better put Tyreek on a play count. He might get hurt blocking on a running play.



And yet there's no evidence that a punt return is actually that dangerous, unlike kick returns.

Fair enough, but it does open him up to a lot more potential cheap shots. Nobody is going to risk a 15 yarder to lay out Mecole, but they (and especially the Raiders) might not mind an unnecessary roughness to take out Hill.

[PattyFlakes]

bla bla bla

you are stupid, own it


wow that's extremely Rude!

[htismaqe]

Fair enough, but it does open him up to a lot more potential cheap shots. Nobody is going to risk a 15 yarder to lay out Mecole, but they (and especially the Raiders) might not mind an unnecessary roughness to take out Hill.

Just stop. That's silly. If they're dumb enough to cheap shot opposing players, they'd do it to whoever they can.

Furthermore, if they, for some reason, are targeting Reek, they'll have plenty of offensive plays to do it. Might as well just sit him the whole game. They might target him.

[BigRedChief]

wow that's extremely Rude!you have 200+ posts on here. I hope this is sarcasm.

[PattyFlakes]

you have 200+ posts on here. I hope this is sarcasm.


Did I not use the correct font for sarcasm? I'm sorry BRC :doh!: I know my post count is low, but I'd like to think my years of lurking under a different user name count for something.

[-King-]

Uh, football is about taking risks, not mitigating them. It's in the definition.

No it's not. That's why star players don't typically play special teams. Mathieu is probably a great special teamer but you don't want to see him out there covering kicks and punts do you?

[-King-]

The only risk here is losing to the Raiders, screwing up playoff seeding, and potentially losing a stranglehold on the division.

There's no elevated risk to having Tyreek return punts. None.

You think the difference between us beating the raiders and losing is Tyreek returning punts?

And how the fuck is there no elevated risk? It's a play he's in unnecessarily. Any play is an injury risk. The modre plays you're in, the larger the injury risk. I'd rather not risk an injury to our best WR on a play we don't really need him in.

Please don't use the We ShoUlD bEnCH MaHomEs TheN sO he DoEsnT gET inJuRed dumb ass retort.

[htismaqe]

You think the difference between us beating the raiders and losing is Tyreek returning punts?

And how the fuck is there no elevated risk? It's a play he's in unnecessarily. Any play is an injury risk. The modre plays you're in, the larger the injury risk. I'd rather not risk an injury to our best WR on a play we don't really need him in.

Please don't use the We ShoUlD bEnCH MaHomEs TheN sO he DoEsnT gET inJuRed dumb ass retort.

Do we really need him on a running play? He could get injured blocking on a play where he'd never actually get the ball.

Your whole argument is just silly. There's nobody else on the team with experience returning punts. The coaches know what the fuck they're doing.

[ChiefsFanatic]

You think the difference between us beating the raiders and losing is Tyreek returning punts?



And how the fuck is there no elevated risk? It's a play he's in unnecessarily. Any play is an injury risk. The modre plays you're in, the larger the injury risk. I'd rather not risk an injury to our best WR on a play we don't really need him in.



Please don't use the We ShoUlD bEnCH MaHomEs TheN sO he DoEsnT gET inJuRed dumb ass retort.If we were up 20 with 3 minutes left in the game, and Tyreek was returning punts or just running go routes and got injured when there was no reason for him to be playing, we would all be upset and angry, but for good reason.

But, returning punts in a game we really need to win, if we want to have a chance at the bye, there is no reason to second guess the coaches. Your logic about Tyreek getting injured on a random play doesn't make sense. He could get hurt blocking on a CEH run, or get hurt blocking down field on a catch and run by Kelce.

This is football, and football players play football, and injuries are a risk literally every single play.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

[-King-]

Do we really need him on a running play? He could get injured blocking on a play where he'd never actually get the ball.

Your whole argument is just silly. There's nobody else on the team with experience returning punts. The coaches know what the fuck they're doing.

There's a big fucking difference between an offensive play and a special teams play. Why are you being dense? And yes, him being in on a run play keeps the defense honest.

[-King-]

If we were up 20 with 3 minutes left in the game, and Tyreek was returning punts or just running go routes and got injured when there was no reason for him to be playing, we would all be upset and angry, but for good reason.

But, returning punts in a game we really need to win, if we want to have a chance at the bye, there is no reason to second guess the coaches. Your logic about Tyreek getting injured on a random play doesn't make sense. He could get hurt blocking on a CEH run, or get hurt blocking down field on a catch and run by Kelce.

This is football, and football players play football, and injuries are a risk literally every single play.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

So we should put Mathieu in punt and kick coverage right?

There's a big difference between being injured on an offensive play where he belongs and being injured on a special teams play where he's moonlighting because Hardman is out. I don't see how that's a hard concept to grasp. But yeah, lets put Mathieu in at punt and kick coverage too while we're at it.

[ChiefsFanatic]

So we should put Mathieu in punt and kick coverage right?



There's a big difference between being injured on an offensive play where he belongs and being injured on a special teams play where he's moonlighting because Hardman is out. I don't see how that's a hard concept to grasp. But yeah, lets put Mathieu in at punt and kick coverage too while we're at it.You are right. We should put only UDFA players on special teams. And we may need Butker to kick a game winning FG, so better take up another roster spot for someone who just does kick offs.

Get real man. Players who contribute significantly on offense and defense play special teams on every team in the NFL.

Tyreek Hill is an All-Pro kick returner. He was returning kicks two years ago, while being a great WR, and he didn't stop returning kicks because of fear of injury, but because we drafted Hardman who could also return kicks.

Playing a player, at a position where they have played at an All-Pro level, for one game because of whatever reason, is not stupid, it's not irresponsible, but make perfect sense.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

[PattyFlakes]

We should probably put Henne in for running plays. We don’t want Mahomes to get injured when he’s not throwing the ball.

[htismaqe]

There's a big fucking difference between an offensive play and a special teams play. Why are you being dense? And yes, him being in on a run play keeps the defense honest.

I'm being dense?

Stop saying "special teams". In terms of injury probability, there's no comparison between kickoffs and punts.

Punt returning is NOT dangerous like kick returning and no amount of you whining about it is going to change that.

[htismaqe]

So we should put Mathieu in punt and kick coverage right?

There's a big difference between being injured on an offensive play where he belongs and being injured on a special teams play where he's moonlighting because Hardman is out. I don't see how that's a hard concept to grasp. But yeah, lets put Mathieu in at punt and kick coverage too while we're at it.

Do we have other guys on the roster that have experience playing punt and kick coverage that aren't key players on offense and defense?

Oh yeah, that's right. :rolleyes:

[htismaqe]

You are right. We should put only UDFA players on special teams. And we may need Butker to kick a game winning FG, so better take up another roster spot for someone who just does kick offs.

Get real man. Players who contribute significantly on offense and defense play special teams on every team in the NFL.

Tyreek Hill is an All-Pro kick returner. He was returning kicks two years ago, while being a great WR, and he didn't stop returning kicks because of fear of injury, but because we drafted Hardman who could also return kicks.

Playing a player, at a position where they have played at an All-Pro level, for one game because of whatever reason, is not stupid, it's not irresponsible, but make perfect sense.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

:bravo:

[-King-]

I'm being dense?

Stop saying "special teams". In terms of injury probability, there's no comparison between kickoffs and punts.

Punt returning is NOT dangerous like kick returning and no amount of you whining about it is going to change that.

Playing more unnecessary reps is an injury risk even if you don't think the play itself is more dangerous than kick return. It's still an added injury risk. I don't even know why you're comparing it to a kick return in the first place. It's not like I'm saying he should be returning kicks instead.

[-King-]

We're just going to keep rehashing the same shit so I'll just leave it with, I fully understand why you'd like Tyreek out there. But I just don't think the added risk of him being on special teams is worth it when he's arguably the 2nd most important player on the team. Our offense could be backed up on the 1 inch line and I'd still have confidence in them scoring so I don't particularly care if we get a big return or anything. Hopefully they just kick it out of bounds or something every play. But yeah, I fully understand that he's a very good punt returner. I'm not saying he's not.

[htismaqe]

Playing more unnecessary reps is an injury risk even if you don't think the play itself is more dangerous than kick return. It's still an added injury risk. I don't even know why you're comparing it to a kick return in the first place. It's not like I'm saying he should be returning kicks instead.

Several people in this thread have said "special teams" players are higher risk.

They're wrong.

Kickoffs are higher risk. That's a fact acknowledged by the NFL when they started changing the rules and born out when touchbacks doubled and injuries started declining.

[htismaqe]

We're just going to keep rehashing the same shit so I'll just leave it with, I fully understand why you'd like Tyreek out there. But I just don't think the added risk of him being on special teams is worth it when he's arguably the 2nd most important player on the team. Our offense could be backed up on the 1 inch line and I'd still have confidence in them scoring so I don't particularly care if we get a big return or anything. Hopefully they just kick it out of bounds or something every play. But yeah, I fully understand that he's a very good punt returner. I'm not saying he's not.

I don't WANT Tyreek Hill out there.

I want Mecole Hardman out there but he's not available.

Just so it's clear.

I simply do not want to see somebody else out there receiving punts for the first time ever in their career in one of the most important games of the season.

[PattyFlakes]

I don't WANT Tyreek Hill out there.

I want Mecole Hardman out there but he's not available.

Just so it's clear.

I simply do not want to see somebody else out there receiving punts for the first time ever in their career in one of the most important games of the season.

Yup.

[ChiefsFanatic]

I don't WANT Tyreek Hill out there.



I want Mecole Hardman out there but he's not available.



Just so it's clear.



I simply do not want to see somebody else out there receiving punts for the first time ever in their career in one of the most important games of the season.It wouldn't matter if we were playing the Jets. If we were, we could have Townsend return punts and it wouldn't matter.

But, to me, this is a must win game. In the past this would be a must win game because we needed it to make the playoffs, or win the division.

Now, it's a must win game because we have a chance to win the one and only bye week in the playoffs, because we are trying to repeat as SB champs.

We have to win this game to keep pace with Pittsburgh. We have to win this game because we don't want to hand the Raiders a tiebreaker if we finish with the same record.

The importance of this game, to me, dictates the necessity for Hill to return punts in Hardman's possible absence. He was an All-Pro return man, he is the fastest player in football, and I think Hill will be amped up not only because of the opponent, but also because he wants to wipe that muffed punt against the Texans out of everyone's memory.

I hope he does something special.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

[COchief]

I don't understand why you would announce this, just do it on game day. Gruden probably has a bounty on Hill now or telling his ST to blow him up regardless of fair catch signal or not. The added risk for Hill also is going to seem really stupid if he happens to get hurt doing a punt return in regards to the bigger picture of the season and repeating.

It's been sort of interesting to see Reid fired up and talking a little shit this week, but I'd prefer the Belichick approach of shut up and destroy them on Sunday.

[htismaqe]

I don't understand why you would announce this, just do it on game day. Gruden probably has a bounty on Hill now or telling his ST to blow him up regardless of fair catch signal or not. The added risk for Hill also is going to seem really stupid if he happens to get hurt doing a punt return in regards to the bigger picture of the season and repeating.

It's been sort of interesting to see Reid fired up and talking a little shit this week, but I'd prefer the Belichick approach of shut up and destroy them on Sunday.

ROFL

If Gruden were to put a bounty on Hill, they could execute it any time.

Yeah, I'm sure Gruden said "injure Tyreek Hill but ONLY on a punt return."

:doh!:

[wazu]

I don't understand why you would announce this, just do it on game day. Gruden probably has a bounty on Hill now or telling his ST to blow him up regardless of fair catch signal or not. The added risk for Hill also is going to seem really stupid if he happens to get hurt doing a punt return in regards to the bigger picture of the season and repeating.

It's been sort of interesting to see Reid fired up and talking a little shit this week, but I'd prefer the Belichick approach of shut up and destroy them on Sunday.

More likely he's telling his punter to kick it out of bounds all day.

[Megatron96]

Someone earlier said they thought they saw DRob out there on a return. According to Toub he did.

Per coach Toub:
"Tyreek Hill — obviously — is a pretty good option for us,” Chiefs special-teams coordinator Dave Toub told reporters on Thursday. “We would use that option if we needed it. Like I’ve said before, we have other guys. Demarcus Robinson could do it. Rashad Fenton can play it. We have a number of guys that could do it. Byron Pringle could play.”
https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2020/11/19/21575912/with-mecole-hardman-out-chiefs-tyreek-hill-could-return-kicks-sunday-nfl-raiders-week-11

Also, Toub says that Pringle could be an option as well.

[Wallcrawler]

Last punt Tyreek was back for resulted in a fumble inside the five and a TD for the Texans.

If Tyreek plays smart and doesnt play like hes under pressure to rip off 40 yards or a TD each time, then fine.

Pressing, trying to stick it to them when probably letting it go or calling fair catch is the better play, and possibly turning the ball over just helps them.

But should they do something monumentally stupid and outkick coverage or something, Tyreek is absolutely the best guy to have back there.

[Mama Hip Rockets]

So...uh... what happened to this?

[Megatron96]

I missed about a quarter of the game, did Hill even return a punt?

[-King-]

I missed about a quarter of the game, did Hill even return a punt?

Nope. They only punted twice and Robinson was back there both times.

[Sannyasi]

The coaches did the common sense thing and didn't ask their number 1 receiver to return punts as well.