Running Game ?? - Page 3

Bull · 09-10-2001, 06:31 AM

Where was the running game that keeps the defense off balance and opens up the passing game.

Pitt Gorilla · 09-10-2001, 09:07 AM

We have that back on our roster. His name is Derrick Blaylock. Why do you think we need to acquire a "new" back when we haven't seen what the ones we have can do? That doesn't make sense.

Gaz · 09-10-2001, 09:07 AM

[font=Garamond][size=4]
No, thanks.

IMO, the problem is not Holmes or Richardson. The problem is run blocking. Vermeil warned us about this in his pregame show.

xoxo~
Gaz
Prefers Richardson to Gary.
[/font][/size]

nmt1 · 09-10-2001, 09:08 AM

Gaz:

You're right on the money. Where the he!! were the screen passes and passes to backs in the flat? I think they only tried one screen (almost picked off by a DL) and one to Priest in the flat for not much.
Maybe our oline is just not that good.

**Lzen** · 09-10-2001, 09:24 AM

Can,
Our backs were getting stuffed in the backfield a lot. Their safeties and linebackers were cheating up to the line of scrimmage. You can't run against 8 and 9 man fronts. Even when they didn't stack the LOS, our offensive line didn't seem to run block very well. That has been something DV has talked about all preseason. They need to improve on that. Now, that being said, you loosen up a defense that stacks the LOS by passing. Green wasn't accurate and the wide receivers weren't getting open. The Raiders didn't respect the passing game and we didn't give them much reason to respect it. Hopefully, the next time these teams meet in December, Trent and his receivers will have their timing down a little bettter. This offense was just out of sync. I expect it to improve a lot over the course of this season. This is only the first game, don't bail on the team yet. I was kinda disappointed to not see more creativity in the offense. Also, was it just me or did the defense stop blitzing as much in the 2nd half? It seemed as though they laid back and allowed Oakland to pick us apart.
As far as Priest Holmes, hold your judgement on him until the season is over. I think he'll be a good one.

**ChiefGator** · 09-10-2001, 10:14 AM

[QUOTE]A superstar RB would be great but where is he going to come from?[/QUOTE]

Hate to say it, but after that first game, it looks like the RB should have come from SF. Garner looked [I]fast[/I] and he was surehanded. Oh well.. here's to hoping Sunday was the aberation and not the norm.

- Mark

htismaqe · 09-10-2001, 10:15 AM

You can't blame Holmes for his performance yesterday, plain and simple..

The o-line looked terrible...

**ChiefGator** · 09-10-2001, 10:16 AM

Parker,

I can blame him for the dropped pass early in the first quarter. He should have had that.

- Mark

htismaqe · 09-10-2001, 10:56 AM

What game were you watching? That ball was WAY above his head...yes, he could have caught it, but it would have been a great catch with no help from Green...

**ChiefGator** · 09-10-2001, 01:36 PM

Parker,

Sorry to bring this up again and make too much over one play (perhaps), but..

I just watched the play over and over again. The pass was fine. It bounced off Holmes's fingers as he was looking at where to run next, not concentraiting on catching the ball. Too bad too, that looked to be a BIG gainer. One guy had a chance to tackle him but with Priest's speed he could probably have made ALOT of yards. It would have been a GOOD catch, certainly not a GREAT catch. It was thrown to him in stride and if he hadn't tried to catch it, it would have likely sailed right next to his helmet. He didn't even have to extend his arm. Shoulda had that.

The slip on the preceeding play wasn't as bad as it first looked, but it did seem like he ran into his own player.

By no means am I discounting Holmes's ability (and the rest of the offense) to rebound, but let's be honest. He gets a C for his performance yesterday. Meanwhile, Garner looks like a big addition for the Raiders. I wasn't afraid of Napolean, but Charlie scares me when he is in the ballgame.

- Mark

htismaqe · 09-10-2001, 03:34 PM

Garner? Other than one catch, he didn't look any better than Holmes...

Hoover · 09-10-2001, 03:46 PM

Maybe we should give the back the ball 20 time in a game. Thats what the problem is. Look at all the top rushers for the week, they all start slow, 7 for 21 yards is not uncommon. If he breaks on for 25 then the average looks good. Give them the damn ball.

Hoover

htismaqe · 09-10-2001, 03:49 PM

Bingo, Hoover...

kcchiefs222001 · 09-10-2001, 03:59 PM

Why are some of you guys already talking about getting a new running back? I mean this was just one game out of 16. Yes we lost but only by 3 points to the so called best in the west. And we would have won that game if Todd (I couldn't hit a 5 yarder if my life depended on it) Peterson. Priest didn't get the ball so he never really had a chance. The offensive line just was not playing well. You can bet on it that they'll be ready for Seattle. Oh and are there any centers out there that we could pick up until Casey gets back. Talk about costing us the game.

Warrior5 · 09-10-2001, 04:02 PM

I see the problem as a combination of things already mentioned...

1. <B>Run-blocking stunk.</B> Raider front 7 may have "forced that hand" initially, but the offense <I>has</I> to dictate the terms of battle and retain the initiative; otherwise all is lost. Honestly think Saunders/Green tried to adapt with some screens to back Raiders off LOS, but failed. Once it failed, they essentially abandoned the run. Hoping Wiegman's return will help.

2. Green did have a lousy day; O-line gave him all the time in the world, and he still missed receivers. Consistently tried to force ball into coverage all day...was lucky to not get picked several times (still remember him trying to jam it into DA with Raider all over him).

Better synch w/receivers = more completions = stretching D = set up run = defense guessing.

Packfan · 09-10-2001, 04:03 PM

kcchiefs2001,

Take it with a grain of salt. These are some of the same guys that were annointing Trent Green as the savior after a good preseason game.

09-10-2001, 06:31 AM
Bull Starter Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Crawford Texas Casino cash: $10004900	Running Game ?? Where was the running game that keeps the defense off balance and opens up the passing game.
Posts: 48

09-10-2001, 09:07 AM	#31
Pitt Gorilla Banned! Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: NOT Columbia, MO 65201 Casino cash: $-159806	We have that back on our roster. His name is Derrick Blaylock. Why do you think we need to acquire a "new" back when we haven't seen what the ones we have can do? That doesn't make sense. __________________ Your son is a bench warmer because of your weak genetics not because of the coach Norlin Mommsen is disgusting.
Posts: 47,384

09-10-2001, 09:07 AM	#32
Gaz Defense Homer Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Rancho Gaz Casino cash: $10010793	Another stinkin' Bronco? [font=Garamond][size=4] No, thanks. IMO, the problem is not Holmes or Richardson. The problem is run blocking. Vermeil warned us about this in his pregame show. xoxo~ Gaz Prefers Richardson to Gary. [/font][/size]
Posts: 5,911

09-10-2001, 09:08 AM	#33
nmt1 Veteran Join Date: Sep 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	Gaz: You're right on the money. Where the he!! were the screen passes and passes to backs in the flat? I think they only tried one screen (almost picked off by a DL) and one to Priest in the flat for not much. Maybe our oline is just not that good.
Posts: 1,735

09-10-2001, 09:24 AM	#34
Lzen Banded Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Oz Casino cash: $-719308	Can, Our backs were getting stuffed in the backfield a lot. Their safeties and linebackers were cheating up to the line of scrimmage. You can't run against 8 and 9 man fronts. Even when they didn't stack the LOS, our offensive line didn't seem to run block very well. That has been something DV has talked about all preseason. They need to improve on that. Now, that being said, you loosen up a defense that stacks the LOS by passing. Green wasn't accurate and the wide receivers weren't getting open. The Raiders didn't respect the passing game and we didn't give them much reason to respect it. Hopefully, the next time these teams meet in December, Trent and his receivers will have their timing down a little bettter. This offense was just out of sync. I expect it to improve a lot over the course of this season. This is only the first game, don't bail on the team yet. I was kinda disappointed to not see more creativity in the offense. Also, was it just me or did the defense stop blitzing as much in the 2nd half? It seemed as though they laid back and allowed Oakland to pick us apart. As far as Priest Holmes, hold your judgement on him until the season is over. I think he'll be a good one. __________________ Conversation would be vastly improved by the constant use of four simple words: I do not know.
Posts: 42,485

09-10-2001, 10:14 AM	#35
ChiefGator Can these boys not play? Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Northcentral Florida Casino cash: $6452956	[QUOTE]A superstar RB would be great but where is he going to come from?[/QUOTE] Hate to say it, but after that first game, it looks like the RB should have come from SF. Garner looked [I]fast[/I] and he was surehanded. Oh well.. here's to hoping Sunday was the aberation and not the norm. - Mark
Posts: 4,706

09-10-2001, 10:15 AM	#36
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $8089900	You can't blame Holmes for his performance yesterday, plain and simple.. The o-line looked terrible...
Posts: 104,433

09-10-2001, 10:16 AM	#37
ChiefGator Can these boys not play? Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Northcentral Florida Casino cash: $6452956	Parker, I can blame him for the dropped pass early in the first quarter. He should have had that. - Mark
Posts: 4,706

09-10-2001, 10:56 AM	#38
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $8089900	What game were you watching? That ball was WAY above his head...yes, he could have caught it, but it would have been a great catch with no help from Green...
Posts: 104,433

09-10-2001, 01:36 PM	#39
ChiefGator Can these boys not play? Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Northcentral Florida Casino cash: $6452956	Parker, Sorry to bring this up again and make too much over one play (perhaps), but.. I just watched the play over and over again. The pass was fine. It bounced off Holmes's fingers as he was looking at where to run next, not concentraiting on catching the ball. Too bad too, that looked to be a BIG gainer. One guy had a chance to tackle him but with Priest's speed he could probably have made ALOT of yards. It would have been a GOOD catch, certainly not a GREAT catch. It was thrown to him in stride and if he hadn't tried to catch it, it would have likely sailed right next to his helmet. He didn't even have to extend his arm. Shoulda had that. The slip on the preceeding play wasn't as bad as it first looked, but it did seem like he ran into his own player. By no means am I discounting Holmes's ability (and the rest of the offense) to rebound, but let's be honest. He gets a C for his performance yesterday. Meanwhile, Garner looks like a big addition for the Raiders. I wasn't afraid of Napolean, but Charlie scares me when he is in the ballgame. - Mark
Posts: 4,706

09-10-2001, 03:34 PM	#40
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $8089900	Garner? Other than one catch, he didn't look any better than Holmes...
Posts: 104,433

09-10-2001, 03:46 PM	#41
Hoover Rufus Dawes Jr. Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $-2201821	Maybe we should give the back the ball 20 time in a game. Thats what the problem is. Look at all the top rushers for the week, they all start slow, 7 for 21 yards is not uncommon. If he breaks on for 25 then the average looks good. Give them the damn ball. Hoover
Posts: 18,023

09-10-2001, 03:49 PM	#42
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $8089900	Bingo, Hoover...
Posts: 104,433

09-10-2001, 03:59 PM	#43
kcchiefs222001 Rookie Join Date: Aug 2001 Casino cash: $10004900	Why are some of you guys already talking about getting a new running back? I mean this was just one game out of 16. Yes we lost but only by 3 points to the so called best in the west. And we would have won that game if Todd (I couldn't hit a 5 yarder if my life depended on it) Peterson. Priest didn't get the ball so he never really had a chance. The offensive line just was not playing well. You can bet on it that they'll be ready for Seattle. Oh and are there any centers out there that we could pick up until Casey gets back. Talk about costing us the game.
Posts: 15

09-10-2001, 04:02 PM	#44
Warrior5 Stram was Cav Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $8054010	Being the Monday Morning QB... I see the problem as a combination of things already mentioned... 1. <B>Run-blocking stunk.</B> Raider front 7 may have "forced that hand" initially, but the offense <I>has</I> to dictate the terms of battle and retain the initiative; otherwise all is lost. Honestly think Saunders/Green tried to adapt with some screens to back Raiders off LOS, but failed. Once it failed, they essentially abandoned the run. Hoping Wiegman's return will help. 2. Green did have a lousy day; O-line gave him all the time in the world, and he still missed receivers. Consistently tried to force ball into coverage all day...was lucky to not get picked several times (still remember him trying to jam it into DA with Raider all over him). Better synch w/receivers = more completions = stretching D = set up run = defense guessing. __________________ The best pass defense is attacking the passer.
Posts: 5,240

09-10-2001, 04:03 PM	#45
Packfan Starter Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Green Bay, WI, Door Casino cash: $10004900	kcchiefs2001, Take it with a grain of salt. These are some of the same guys that were annointing Trent Green as the savior after a good preseason game. __________________ Ken Dienberg
Posts: 938