Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Coogs
All-in-all, this post seemed pretty much right on the money yesterday.
|
Yep. And on the offensive side of the ball, our lack of running against Arizona was indeed a result of our O-line and play-calling. Arizona had given up almost 300 yards on the ground the previous week, and they shut us down, and Pitt shut us down even more.
Amazingly, the offensive coaches didn't learn anything from that game, and came out throwing the same short passes and running plays which didn't even work against Arizona. It'd be one thing if Herm and Solari were trying to install a totally new system; they're not. They're using the same system, but not calling the variety of plays necessary to keep the defense honest. Yeah, Huard will make some mistakes, but can it be worse than the zero first downs we got after the first drive (until Pittsburgh lost interest).
I listened to part of the 2nd half on the radio (couldn't bear to watch it), and the radio guys were commenting that Pittsburgh corners were the weak link on their defense, and were wondering why KC hadn't tried to eploit that. It was just a pathetic attempt to play "not to lose" football against a superior team. Just a complete coaching (and execution) embarrasment on both sides of the ball.
Playing "not to lose" football is tolerable if you can actually win some games; when you lose, it is just so painful to watch.