ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Browns looking to trade Alex Mack and Joe Thomas (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=295775)

chiefzilla1501 11-01-2015 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 11856289)
The offensive line has given up 30+ sacks in 8 games. THAT. IS. A. PROBLEM.


Why are people trying to act like the offensive line is good or even average and that it's just Alex bringing them down? This is just idiotic.

The poor OL performance is a function of both poor OL play and a QB who doesn't make his OL better. If you give Alex 2-3 more seconds to throw, do you think that's going to get him out of the habit of throwing to his checkdowns? He'll be the same damn QB but he'll take less sacks.

-King- 11-01-2015 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower (Post 11856290)
zilla is 100% correct, but now anything outside of homerism is banned.

Homerism for a 3-5 team? Wut?

If we can improve a very important position on our team for the next 4-5 years, I'm all for it. Being against it is stupid.

Discuss Thrower 11-01-2015 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 11856296)
The problem with Alex Smith is he's dependent on a running game that will help him control clock, a defense that can close games for him, and now he's also dependent on WRs and OL as well? How many elite players do you have to put around him before you realize he's part of the problem? How do we possibly come up with the payroll to put 21 pro bowlers around him?

Exactly this. Can't say this any better.

-King- 11-01-2015 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 11856304)
The poor OL performance is a function of both poor OL play and a QB who doesn't make his OL better. If you give Alex 2-3 more seconds to throw, do you think that's going to get him out of the habit of throwing to his checkdowns? He'll be the same damn QB but he'll take less sacks.

I'd love an offense that took less stats. Taking less stats is EXTREMELY beneficial for having good drives you know.

ROFL

-King- 11-01-2015 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 11856296)
The problem with Alex Smith is he's dependent on a running game that will help him control clock, a defense that can close games for him, and now he's also dependent on WRs and OL as well? How many elite players do you have to put around him before you realize he's part of the problem? How do we possibly come up with the payroll to put 21 pro bowlers around him?

Has anybody said Alex Smith isn't part of the problem? Quote please?

And no one has said that every player has to be a probowler. But improving one of the worst units in professional football is a smart thing to do.

chiefzilla1501 11-01-2015 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 11856308)
I'd love an offense that took less stats. Taking less stats is EXTREMELY beneficial for having good drives you know.

ROFL

I've made it pretty damn simple. I have two demands for Alex Smith, but now I'll add a third.

Convert third downs
Close games
And now my third... throw into the ****ing end zone

If you take less sacks but can't do any of those things, what ****ing good does it do? When Smith has all the time in the world, he still throws 2 yards on 3rd and 8. Alex Smith has had impressive comebacks where he plays aggressive, then becomes a different QB on the last drive and turtles up. Alex Smith has been decently impressive this year between the 20's then won't throw a single pass into the end zone.

So no, taking away a few sacks when the above is the big part of the problem, puts lipstick on the pig.

SAUTO 11-01-2015 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 11856268)
Did someone really just suggest that the Bears would give up Alshon Jeffrey for a sixth round pick?

Is there a jenkum leak in your house?

I could have sworn I've seen at least one article posted here that thought that was feasible.

BigMeatballDave 11-01-2015 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower (Post 11856290)
zilla is 100% correct, but now anything outside of homerism is banned.

Completely untrue.

SAUTO 11-01-2015 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 11856305)
Homerism for a 3-5 team? Wut?

If we can improve a very important position on our team for the next 4-5 years, I'm all for it. Being against it is stupid.

This

jonzie04 11-01-2015 05:08 PM

I'd at least pick up the phone about Thomas. I mean he is a Hall of Fame LT who can likely give us 3-4 years. I wouldn't go trading away an early pick for him, but if the Browns want to let him go for a mid round pick I'd strongly consider it

-King- 11-01-2015 05:12 PM

Taking less sacks leads to easier 3rd downs which leads to a higher 3rd down percentage. Converting on more 3rd down leads to longer drives. Longer drives lead to more touchdowns. More touchdowns lead to more wins.

It's absolutely silly to say that taking less sacks wouldn't help this offense or any offense for that matter. When sacks knock you from 2nd and 6 to 3rd and 14, yes... drives will stall and the offense will suck. This isn't rocket surgery.

Discuss Thrower 11-01-2015 05:13 PM

The team can't afford to trade picks for old veterans. Too many depth issues on defense.

SAUTO 11-01-2015 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 11856331)
Taking less sacks leads to easier 3rd downs which leads to a higher 3rd down percentage. Converting on more 3rd down leads to longer drives. Longer drives lead to more touchdowns. More touchdowns lead to more wins.

It's absolutely silly to say that taking less sacks wouldn't help this offense or any offense for that matter.

Longer drives also helps keep the defense off the field. Taking less sacks helps the defense also.

Baby Lee 11-01-2015 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 11856317)
I've made it pretty damn simple. I have two demands for Alex Smith, but now I'll add a third.

Convert third downs
Close games
And now my third... throw into the ****ing end zone

If you take less sacks but can't do any of those things, what ****ing good does it do? When Smith has all the time in the world, he still throws 2 yards on 3rd and 8. Alex Smith has had impressive comebacks where he plays aggressive, then becomes a different QB on the last drive and turtles up. Alex Smith has been decently impressive this year between the 20's then won't throw a single pass into the end zone.

So no, taking away a few sacks when the above is the big part of the problem, puts lipstick on the pig.

**** you and your demands

If you're convinced he'll never be better, not matter how good the rest of the team is, AND you're convinced that the team sucks in other phases and areas simply because he's holding them back, AND you're convinced he'll never be better so there's not use in improving the team to see, **** your demands. You get to watch, the end.

BigMeatballDave 11-01-2015 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 11856305)
Homerism for a 3-5 team? Wut?

If we can improve a very important position on our team for the next 4-5 years, I'm all for it. Being against it is stupid.

She wants the team to implode so Clark will blow it up. Of course we know for certain now that this isn't happening anytime soon.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.