Have we reached critical mass with Reiter and/or Wylie?

[DJ's left nut]

Because those guys were getting mauled. There were a half dozen plays yesterday that simply died at the snap because Reiter and Wylie were immediately pushed into the backfield.

It isn't just about losing a snap, it's about how they're losing theirs (and how quickly). The best you can hope from either of them, especially in the run game, is a draw.

Wisniewski has looked good out there. At the very least, he seems stout at the point of attack. Don't we have to give the guy a look there? As the weather turns and the playoffs arrive, we're gonna HAVE to be able to convert some of these short yardage situations without these long-developing crossers from Hill or the inside screens that teams are largely prepared for now.

I just can't handle watching those two guys get abused anymore. I can handle LDT's mediocre play because at least he's not getting beat immediately and badly. He's not blowing guys off the ball, but he's generally holding his own. But Reiter and Wylie are playing poorly enough that they're smothering some of these plays in the cradle. It's just completely unacceptable.

[New World Order]

Originally Posted by Superturtle

Put Erving at G. Put Wisnewski at C. Make good with Allen.

This is what I would do.

Erving was solid last year at LG

[O.city]

Andy went a whole season with McGlynn at LG. He's not making an inseason change unless there's an injury.

[Sassy Squatch]

Too bad Rankins went down.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla

I'm curious why Veach thought he could let Morse walk without finding an adequate replacement. That makes absolutely no sense, unless they were seriously counting on Allegretti.

If Veach was, it seems Andy wasn't told.

That said, the C position was awfully tough in the draft this year, especially after McCoy and Jenkins went early in the 2nd. I wonder if the Chiefs take one of them if they fell to our spot in the 2nd (probably not).

And they were in on some second tier FA centers.

I would've liked to have taken a shot at Michael Jordan, who's occasionally starting at G for the Bengals now. I thought he had real potential as a long-term C. That said, he's been pretty much ass this year as well. I'm not sure he's actually any better than Allegretti would be. And the Chiefs didn't have any picks in the 4th or 5th round so he was never really in play unless we wanted to use a 3 on him (and Saunders just had too much ceiling to pass on there).

I can kinda understand how this happened, but I don't understand how they're unwilling to give Wiz or Allegretti a longer look. I just don't get the divestiture aversion w/ Reiter right now. He's a real problem.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Reiter looked promising last year imo. At the time, most of us were fine with Reiter taking over.

He really didn't, though. He was never athletic or strong enough to even be average at the position. Perhaps he wasn't getting dominated as often last season, but I imagine that's a defensive scheme issue that has been figured out by the opposition.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Reiter looked promising last year imo. At the time, most of us were fine with Reiter taking over.

Yeah, that was an argument I kept having when I was arguing to look at Garrett Bradbury in the 1st. The point was moot - he went too high - and he's struggled this year as well, but the argument was "We're fine at C" and I just didn't understand that.

I didn't think Reiter looked promising at all last season. I thought Wylie did and was hopeful that they could do a C conversion with him somehow. But Reiter looked weak and indecisive. I felt like getting Morse back was a big part of the reason Damien Williams looked passable after we cut Hunt. Morse's return coincided w/ Hunt's release and it wasn't an accident, IMO, that Damien looked like a solid RB when Morse was in the middle.

Reiter's a backup quality player and a guy we should've been looking to turf.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Yeah, that was an argument I kept having when I was arguing to look at Garrett Bradbury in the 1st. The point was moot - he went too high - and he's struggled this year as well, but the argument was "We're fine at C" and I just didn't understand that.

I didn't think Reiter looked promising at all last season. I thought Wylie did and was hopeful that they could do a C conversion with him somehow. But Reiter looked weak and indecisive. I felt like getting Morse back was a big part of the reason Damien Williams looked passable after we cut Hunt. Morse's return coincided w/ Hunt's release and it wasn't an accident, IMO, that Damien looked like a solid RB when Morse was in the middle.

Reiter's a backup quality player and a guy we should've been looking to turf.

With the expensive players we've got here though, some times some guys like that are gonna have to play and be passable. He's just not.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

With the expensive players we've got here though, some times some guys like that are gonna have to play and be passable. He's just not.

Agreed.

Like you said - I have no issues with the decision to let Morse go. That was a harsh reality of a cap league; you lose guys like that to the cap and you hope that you gain guys like Mitchell Schwartz because OTHER teams lose them to the cap. It's the way the league works.

You just have to have credible replacements for them. When it was Hudson we lost, we got Morse. When it was Morse we lost, we spun the wheel on a guy who gave little indication that he was a real long-term option.

My frustration is with the blind spot Reid appears to have for him. Why does Andy think he's good? Why is he so inflexible here? And the answer is mostly that this is just who he's always been.

Andy doesn't **** with his OL. Usually you know who he's going to have starting games in week 17 (health permitting) based on who he has starting them in week 2 of the pre-season. It's frustrating but it's clearly his philosophy - continuity trumps all.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Agreed.

Like you said - I have no issues with the decision to let Morse go. That was a harsh reality of a cap league; you lose guys like that to the cap and you hope that you gain guys like Mitchell Schwartz because OTHER teams lose them to the cap. It's the way the league works.

You just have to have credible replacements for them. When it was Hudson we lost, we got Morse. When it was Morse we lost, we spun the wheel on a guy who gave little indication that he was a real long-term option.

My frustration is with the blind spot Reid appears to have for him. Why does Andy think he's good? Why is he so inflexible here? And the answer is mostly that this is just who he's always been.

Andy doesn't **** with his OL. Usually you know who he's going to have starting games in week 17 (health permitting) based on who he has starting them in week 2 of the pre-season. It's frustrating but it's clearly his philosophy - continuity trumps all.

In general, with the OL I think it's the way to go. When you have talented good players there that is, sometimes they just need time.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

In general, with the OL I think it's the way to go. When you have talented good players there that is, sometimes they just need time.

As a general rule, I agree. An good OL is always greater than the sum of its parts. Continuity is commendable.

But not when it's Mike McGlynn. And Reiter is approaching that level of suck, IMO. He's really creating problems out there.

[DJ's left nut]

Y'know what, let me back that up just a little bit.

Reiter doesn't truly suck in pass pro. He's not great (Morse was) but he's adequate. He's essentially poverty Morse. Morse was an elite pass protection C and an adequate run blocker. Reiter is an adequate pass protection C and an ABYSMAL run blocker.

So maybe Andy's simply making the calculation that ANY step back in pass protection for Mahomes is unacceptable. If you drop from adequate to below average in PP but step up from hideous to average in RP, that's not a trade Andy's willing to make.

It's the most 'reasonable' argument I can come up with. It's the best I can do if I'm trying to make the argument without resorting to "Andy's just being a stubborn ass...."

And it's not completely ridiculous, I guess.

[Titty Meat]

I was never a fan of those guys Wylie especially sucks

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Y'know what, let me back that up just a little bit.

Reiter doesn't truly suck in pass pro. He's not great (Morse was) but he's adequate. He's essentially poverty Morse. Morse was an elite pass protection C and an adequate run blocker. Reiter is an adequate pass protection C and an ABYSMAL run blocker.

So maybe Andy's simply making the calculation that ANY step back in pass protection for Mahomes is unacceptable. If you drop from adequate to below average in PP but step up from hideous to average in RP, that's not a trade Andy's willing to make.

It's the most 'reasonable' argument I can come up with. It's the best I can do if I'm trying to make the argument without resorting to "Andy's just being a stubborn ass...."

And it's not completely ridiculous, I guess.

But wouldn’t Wiz be a better option at both? It looks like it to me.

[O.city]

IIRC, Wiz had snap issues in Philly.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by The Franchise

But wouldn’t Wiz be a better option at both? It looks like it to me.

Based on my very limited impressions of him? Yes. Slight upgrade at PP (from adequate to...I dunno, slightly more than adequate) and a significant improvement at RB.

But that's where Andy's continuity theory comes into play. Maybe Andy agrees with me that Wiz, in a vacuum, would be a better pass-protector at C than Reiter but that the Gs aren't as familiar with him and thus overall PP would decline.

Best guess I can come up with. Otherwise I just can't see a reason for not giving someone else a shot at C (unless O.City is right and Wiz can't snap a ball; but Morse couldn't snap it at Mizzou and did just fine in KC so guys can be taught...).