Chiefs A guy on Sportsnation just said.... - Page 5

chop · 11-07-2011, 05:03 PM

If the Patriots didn't have Tom Brady they would be the Chiefs (no playmakers).

Hurts but it's kind of true.

aturnis · 11-08-2011, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oh Snap

I disagree.

And honestly, I don't think the full potential for this team is fully understood, atleast offensively. We have no identity on offense right now, and that is a problem. Its partly why this team is a mediocre team. IF we get the right OC, and adjustments made to the OL, this team can be scarey good imo.

Sure, cassel isnt going to set NFL records as our QB. But he can be a successful game time manager if he has the right supporting cast around him, like he had back in NE. There are several issues facing the offense, but we do have some srs firepower on offense as well. The triple B-threats we have on offense can do some srs damage to opposing secondaries. Once we get Moeaki back, along with Charles, this offense has some srs weapons. The issue imo then becomes the OL and OC. Get those issues fixed (goodbye richardson and Muir) we can finally give Cassel the protection and plays he needs to develop into a legit NFL QB.

I remember Vermiel talking about how we managed to have the dominate offense we had back when he coached. He said it all started with the OL. The OL is the foundation for your offense. If you have a strong OL, you will have a strong offense regardless of who you have at RB and QB. Just look back at our offense under Vermiel. Derrick Blaylock looked like a pro-bowler for christ sake! Even Trent Green was a top 5 QB back then.

We are a couple players away imo from being a srs contender in this league.

Like I said, OC has nothing to do with our injuries and lack of offensive line. Also, inconsistency at OC has nothing to do with why the current OC sucks so bad, nor why the offense sucks so bad. The OC Sucks b/c he sucks, same goes for the OL. A new, GOOD OC will change that, keeping consistency and therefore Muir, will not. The offense has not changed. The fact that the OC has changed is not what's holding this offense back, it's WHO the OC is and injuries and the OL and the QB that hold this offense back. This offense does have an identity, they are a running offense that is having to learn how to deal with the loss of the best RB in the NFL.

Simply Red · 11-08-2011, 08:29 AM

This was Cowherd, guys.

aturnis · 11-08-2011, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoneKrusher

ya, Cassel will never be able to read a defense.

Ricky Stanzi can read a defense...

Simply Red · 11-08-2011, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aturnis

Ricky Stanzi can read a defense...

why did this guy NOT get hardly any preseason snaps? What was the reason the org. gave, do you know?

Pasta Little Brioni · 11-08-2011, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simply Red

This was Cowturd, guys.

FYP

His opinion holds as much weight as one. The guy is ****ing clueless.

**RealSNR** · 11-08-2011, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simply Red

why did this guy NOT get hardly any preseason snaps? What was the reason the org. gave, do you know?

I honestly believe they're putting him as the inactive 3rd stringer because "that's just what you do." Got a rookie QB drafted in the later rounds? His ass goes on the bench for a year, that's where that goes.

It's very old school, almost like baseball. It's like there's some kind of magical skill that one picks up through one's ass sitting on the bench during games. That's the stuff that turns young project QBs into great ones.

Oh, wait, that's tuberculosis. Nevermind. I get magic and tuberculosis confused all the time.

aturnis · 11-08-2011, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simply Red

why did this guy NOT get hardly any preseason snaps? What was the reason the org. gave, do you know?

He got snaps in all but the last game.

vs. TB he was 4/8 for 34yds 0TD 0INT
vs. BAL he was 6/12 for58yds 0TD 1INT
vs. STL he was 8/14 for 121yds. 1TD 0INT

total he was 18/34 for 213yds 1TD 1INT

He did not play in the final game against Green Bay. That what the final "ramping up" game. Cassel played quite a bit, then Palko played the rest.

The majority of the board seemed pleasantly surprised with Stanzi. Namely his pocket awareness, escapability, accuracy, and ability to go through his reads. Kind of easy to be impressed when you look at the two QB's in front of him. He did pretty well despite being under CONSTANT pressure and his receivers dropping quite a few passes. Actually, his INT was a tipped ball by his receiver, Horne I beleive.

**HemiEd** · 11-08-2011, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsrGood

It's kind of a stupid statement I heard it myself. Sort of true though.

but two of our playmakers are on IR Charles, Moeaki
Baldwin has played in 3 games you can't label him a playmaker although I think he will be
McCluster is a playmaker in his own way. kickoffs, punts, reverses
So really the only playmaker we have now is bowe

Next year this team will be loaded with playmakers...especially with a new QB.

Playmakers can be on the Defensive side of the ball as well, just sayin.

whoman69 · 11-08-2011, 01:40 PM

Just goes to show the national media thinks they can make blanket statements about teams they have no information about just because they don't think the audience will either.

Oh Snap · 11-08-2011, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whoman69

Just goes to show the national media thinks they can make blanket statements about teams they have no information about just because they don't think the audience will either.

Thats the thing...the national media has no clue about this team until we play on MNF. The talent level on this team is good at several positions. QB is an issue, as is the OL. Obviously we need a GOOD OC as well. With Wies, we had a good OC IMO. Muir is an obvious downgrade for this team as offensive coordinator. Right now, I'm not even sure who we would go after for our OC.

Anyways, the more MNF/ESPN/Sunday night games we have, the more love we will get. That usually means that we have to win more games because that is virtually the only way you get on MNF.

milkman · 11-09-2011, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bump

it's amazing what an elite QB can do for a team. Without Brady they would be even worse, but even with him, their defense is so terrible this season they won't contend. You still need a good defense regardless of who your QB is.

What you need in today's NFL is an opportunistic defense.

Ravens-Dilfer/Bucs-Brad Johnson aren't going to win SBs anymore.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsrGood

It's kind of a stupid statement I heard it myself. Sort of true though.

but two of our playmakers are on IR Charles, Moeaki
Baldwin has played in 3 games you can't label him a playmaker although I think he will be
McCluster is a playmaker in his own way. kickoffs, punts, reverses
So really the only playmaker we have now is bowe

Next year this team will be loaded with playmakers...especially with a new QB.

Making 1 or 2 plays a year does not a playmaker make.

McSuckster is not a playmaker.

He's a wasted draft pick.

milkman · 11-09-2011, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oh Snap

I disagree.

And honestly, I don't think the full potential for this team is fully understood, atleast offensively. We have no identity on offense right now, and that is a problem. Its partly why this team is a mediocre team. IF we get the right OC, and adjustments made to the OL, this team can be scarey good imo.

Sure, cassel isnt going to set NFL records as our QB. But he can be a successful game time manager if he has the right supporting cast around him, like he had back in NE. There are several issues facing the offense, but we do have some srs firepower on offense as well. The triple B-threats we have on offense can do some srs damage to opposing secondaries. Once we get Moeaki back, along with Charles, this offense has some srs weapons. The issue imo then becomes the OL and OC. Get those issues fixed (goodbye richardson and Muir) we can finally give Cassel the protection and plays he needs to develop into a legit NFL QB.

I remember Vermiel talking about how we managed to have the dominate offense we had back when he coached. He said it all started with the OL. The OL is the foundation for your offense. If you have a strong OL, you will have a strong offense regardless of who you have at RB and QB. Just look back at our offense under Vermiel. Derrick Blaylock looked like a pro-bowler for christ sake! Even Trent Green was a top 5 QB back then.

We are a couple players away imo from being a srs contender in this league.

I had to respond to this seperately.

This is a special kind of stupid.

True fan stupid.

The Chiefs through the 90s had one of the top O-Lines in the league, and among the better defenses.

They could pound the rock, control the clock, created turnovers, intimidate offenses.

The one thing they couldn't do.
Throw the ball.

QB wasn't nearly as important then as it is now, but it was still, even then, even as far back as I've watched football, the most important position on the field.

It's no coincidence that all the great teams all had one single thing in common.

They had great QBs.

Teams like the Bucs, the Ravens, the 85 Bears, teams that played defense had outstanding O-Line play and good running games all only won 1 SB.

They all had one thing in common.

They had marginal, at best, QB play.

Games are won or lost in the trenches.

Championships are won under center.

Cornstock · 11-09-2011, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aturnis

It's not like they've changed to offense, it's just a different guy calling the plays. That defense does not work in this situation.

I'd say theres very little,if anything, left of the Chan offense. You can still see a lot of Charlie Weis stuff in play though (minus his great playcalling...call a play to set up a play, working the matchups, etc.) However right how the offense looks like something cross between Weis and Mike Solari's offense. Or worse, Bill Muir.

Moral of the story: promoting offensive line coaches to OC has not worked for the Chiefs in recent history.

Fish · 11-09-2011, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oh Snap

I disagree.

.
.
.

I remember Vermiel talking about how we managed to have the dominate offense we had back when he coached. He said it all started with the OL. The OL is the foundation for your offense. If you have a strong OL, you will have a strong offense regardless of who you have at RB and QB. Just look back at our offense under Vermiel. Derrick Blaylock looked like a pro-bowler for christ sake! Even Trent Green was a top 5 QB back then.

We are a couple players away imo from being a srs contender in this league.

We had the best OLine in the league, for sure. Yet.... how many playoff wins did that strategy net us? I can't seem to remember......

milkman · 11-09-2011, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC Fish

We had the best OLine in the league, for sure. Yet.... how many playoff wins did that strategy net us? I can't seem to remember......

Meanwhile, we have Ben Roethlisberger with a questionable O-Line, Drew Brees with a questionable O-Line, and Aaron Rodgers with a questionable O-line, all winning SBs.

But lets keep trying to win a SB with mediocre QB play.

It's so obvious that's how championships are won.

11-07-2011, 05:03 PM
chop Go Chiefs! Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Michigan Casino cash: $894270	A guy on Sportsnation just said.... If the Patriots didn't have Tom Brady they would be the Chiefs (no playmakers). Hurts but it's kind of true.
Posts: 2,964

11-08-2011, 08:29 AM	#62
Simply Red You Sweetie! Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $2021206219 VARSITY	This was Cowherd, guys.
Posts: 71,691