Chiefs' offense: "one of the worst in the league, by nearly every measure"

[the Talking Can]

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2013/9...chiefs-offense

some numbers to chew on from arrowhead pride

The Chiefs are actually 12th in the league in PPG, at 23.7. But if you take away the 14 points the defense is directly responsible for, that number drops to 19 PPG, which would be tied for 23rd - with the Raiders. The Chiefs are relying on the defense to score points, which isn't good. Defensive scoring is random and shouldn't be part of the game plan. They didn't need Tamba Hali's pick-6 to beat the Jaguars, but they did need Eric Berry's against the Eagles.

They also are just not moving the ball; their 333 yds/gm is 21st in the league and their 4.9 yds/play ranks 25th. "Well Kyle," you may ask, " if the Chiefs offense is so bad, how are they undefeated this year?" That's an excellent question, thank you for asking. The answer is that the defense and special teams are much, much better than we thought.

The problem the Chiefs are having is getting to the Red Zone in the first place. They're 30th in yards per drive, with only Tampa Bay and Jacksonville behind them, and Cleveland directly in front of them (not good company to be in). This is a really, really bad offense. But here's the real kicker: the Chiefs' offense has the best starting field position in the NFL this year, and still can't score.

The Chiefs average 17 yards per drive better field position than their opponents (ok, ok, 16.95), the best mark in the NFL (2nd table). Only two other teams average more than 10 yards better starting field position than their opponents (New England and Chicago). The Chiefs' average starting line of scrimmage (LOS) is their own 36.97 yard line (best in the NFL), while their opponents average starting LOS is their own 20.02 yard line (also best in the NFL). What all of that means is the Chiefs's offense is handed consistently great starting field position and can't do anything with it, then they let the special teams pin opponents deep in their own territory. The defense bails out the offense by not letting opponents move the ball, giving the offense the ball back with great starting field position. Lather, rinse, repeat.

There's a nice breakdown of our defense against philly over there as well:
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/9/2...p-kelly-eagles

I have to reiterate and emphasize just how much the Chiefs played man to man -- like a ton of it. And they have the secondary to handle it, unlike most teams in the NFL. Specifically, they matched up Sean Smith on Cooper a lot on the outside. If this had been a prize fight, Cooper's corner would have thrown in the towel somewhere around the middle of the second quarter. Smith owned him right up until the end of the game when he started cramping up. Cooper just couldn't shake him, especially on those aforementioned deep routes Kelly had him running all game.

[Hammock Parties]

A ****ing true fan thread disparaging Aaron Rodgers.

Some mother****ers are always tryin ta ice skate uphill.

[Sorter]

Bearcat is making me look like Mother Theresa with these posts.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

We're good, dude.

I'm feeling pretty annoyed and tired of the hypocrisy tonight. None of that is directed at you.

Cool.


And some of that stuff we talked about earlier and you asked why I said what I said, it's been present here in this thread.

So, like you, I was just tired of it and kind of snapped.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Sorter

I'd rather have an explosive offense that utilizes the run game effectively.

Arguably, the two don't always go hand-in-hand. Because a lot of people are pointing to Brees and Rodgers' performances as strong because they racked up yards and TDs. Lots of big plays often turn into quick scores, which means your running game becomes more of a red zone game versus between the 20's.

Running the ball more means less QB attempts, which means less QB yards. It also means more time of possession and probably less scores. I agree that you can still be explosive while establishing a strong running game. But there are explosive teams like the Saints, Lions, and Packers that gain a lot of yards at the expense of a consistent running game.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Pam Oliver's Forehead

A ****ing true fan thread disparaging Aaron Rodgers.

Some mother****ers are always tryin ta ice skate uphill.

JFC, you keep inventing this fake argument that I'm somehow saying Aaron Rodgers is better than Alex Smith. Stop it. Nobody is saying even anything remotely close to that. I have even said multiple times that I don't know that Smith has the chops to do what Eli Manning and Flacco do.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

That's interesting, because hasn't CP argued in the past that Trent Green shouldn't be considered franchise because he didn't consistently close in the 4th? I think Rodgers is one hell of a QB. I like the guy a lot and would obviously take him on the Chiefs in a heartbeat. But let's not ignore the fact that he hasn't proven he can consistently win games where the team has to battle it out in the 4th.

I'm not arguing the 4th quarter stuff.

You said he played bad in the playoffs.

66% completion with a 18:5 ratio is as far from bad as you can get.

Wanna take out the Super Bowl season? That should help your argument.

64% completion with a 9:3 ratio.

Horrible.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

They win a lot of games, so it's hard to compare as far as the yards you need in the 4th compared to earlier in games, but I included 2008 and 2006 when they weren't so good...

BY QUARTER	CMP	ATT	YDS	CMP%	AVG	LNG	TD	INT	SACK	RAT	ATT	YDS	AVG	LNG	TD
QUARTER = 1	83 	122 	939 	68.0 	7.70 	61 	9 	1 	18 	112.0 	14 	117 	8.4 	25 	1
QUARTER = 2	115 	168 	1,178 	68.5 	7.01 	32 	12 	2 	14 	107.2 	7 	29 	4.1 	15 	0
QUARTER = 3	98 	145 	1,230 	67.6 	8.48 	73 	7 	3 	9 	101.2 	9 	63 	7.0 	27 	1
QUARTER = 4	75 	117 	948 	64.1 	8.10 	49 	11 	2 	10 	113.5 	24 	50 	2.1 	19 	0

BY QUARTER	CMP	ATT	YDS	CMP%	AVG	LNG	TD	INT	SACK	RAT	ATT	YDS	AVG	LNG	TD
QUARTER = 1	89 	121 	1,094 	73.6 	9.04 	50 	11 	0 	6 	131.4 	11 	53 	4.8 	11 	0
QUARTER = 2	105 	160 	1,268 	65.6 	7.93 	93 	12 	2 	14 	109.6 	20 	112 	5.6 	25 	1
QUARTER = 3	82 	123 	1,382 	66.7 	11.24 	79 	12 	0 	9 	137.0 	16 	83 	5.2 	19 	1
QUARTER = 4	67 	98 	899 	68.4 	9.17 	84 	10 	4 	7 	114.3 	13 	9 	0.7 	8 	1

BY QUARTER	CMP	ATT	YDS	CMP%	AVG	LNG	TD	INT	SACK	RAT	ATT	YDS	AVG	LNG	TD
QUARTER = 1	73 	112 	1,072 	65.2 	9.57 	86 	6 	3 	7 	103.0 	11 	100 	9.1 	27 	0
QUARTER = 2	99 	161 	1,103 	61.5 	6.85 	57 	9 	2 	10 	95.3 	18 	80 	4.4 	18 	0
QUARTER = 3	77 	104 	985 	74.0 	9.47 	61 	8 	3 	5 	116.9 	11 	58 	5.3 	15 	2
QUARTER = 4	62 	94 	757 	66.0 	8.05 	46 	5 	2 	7 	99.5 	24 	118 	4.9 	17 	2

2008

BY QUARTER	CMP	ATT	YDS	CMP%	AVG	LNG	TD	INT	SACK	RAT	ATT	YDS	AVG	LNG	TD
QUARTER = 1	73 	117 	714 	62.4 	6.10 	46 	4 	1 	7 	87.3 	10 	29 	2.9 	7 	0
QUARTER = 2	106 	152 	1,282 	69.7 	8.43 	62 	12 	4 	8 	110.7 	13 	77 	5.9 	21 	2
QUARTER = 3	75 	124 	979 	60.5 	7.90 	63 	4 	3 	10 	86.1 	10 	61 	6.1 	16 	0
QUARTER = 4	87 	143 	1,063 	60.8 	7.43 	71 	8 	5 	9 	87.8 	23 	40 	1.7 	8 	2

Rodgers is 5-17 in games decided by 4 or fewer points. So there's that.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

JFC, you keep inventing this fake argument that I'm somehow saying Aaron Rodgers is better than Alex Smith. Stop it. Nobody is saying even anything remotely close to that. I have even said multiple times that I don't know that Smith has the chops to do what Eli Manning and Flacco do.

No Chiefs fan should disparage Aaron Rodgers. Ever.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by O.city

I do agree, but I also think with said efficiency, what you are doing is shrinking the game down to a point where it's eventually going to have to come down to a QB or a defense making a play when it counts.

If you have those, like Eli or Big Ben, or Flacco, or the Ravens defense, yes, it can and will always be something that is there in the playoffs.

But if you don't, ala Marty's offenses of the 90's, you can shrink yourself out of the game.

Damn it, I thought this was a good post and it isn't getting much play.

Don't gloss over my posts assholes.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I'm not arguing the 4th quarter stuff.

You said he played bad in the playoffs.

66% completion with a 18:5 ratio is as far from bad as you can get.

Wanna take out the Super Bowl season? That should help your argument.

64% completion with a 9:3 ratio.

Horrible.

Aaron Rodgers is the type of person that puts you in a position to win by playing an unbelievable first 3 quarters. And he's won a lot of games that way because he can be so consistently explosive.

But sorry, when it's the 4th quarter of a close games, there's plenty of QBs who have proven success over Rodgers. And the problem is, then you get into arguments saying Eli isn't the QB Rodgers is just because you're looking at stat lines. Sorry, but if it's a close game in the 4th quarter, give me Eli.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by O.city

I do agree, but I also think with said efficiency, what you are doing is shrinking the game down to a point where it's eventually going to have to come down to a QB or a defense making a play when it counts.

If you have those, like Eli or Big Ben, or Flacco, or the Ravens defense, yes, it can and will always be something that is there in the playoffs.

But if you don't, ala Marty's offenses of the 90's, you can shrink yourself out of the game.

I don't advocate Marty Ball. At all. Yeah, you don't want to shrink it down too much. It takes a special kind of QB to play this kind of offense, and again, I don't know that Alex Smith is that guy and I've had strong doubts that he ever will be.

But the kind of offense we're talking about here is a QB who can consistently convert on 3rd downs (unlike passing offenses where you have 3 shots at a passing first down, these offenses often give their QBs one shot only), who can extend long drives, and in the 4th quarter, you expect that QB to win in a gunfight and you have confidence they'll do it every time. Eli and Big Ben are exceptional at this. Flacco showed that to me last year. And I think a lot of people underrate how good these players are because of how well they do this.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I don't advocate Marty Ball. At all. Yeah, you don't want to shrink it down too much. It takes a special kind of QB to play this kind of offense, and again, I don't know that Alex Smith is that guy and I've had strong doubts that he ever will be.

But the kind of offense we're talking about here is a QB who can consistently convert on 3rd downs (unlike passing offenses where you have 3 shots at a passing first down, these offenses often give their QBs one shot only), who can extend long drives, and in the 4th quarter, you expect that QB to win in a gunfight and you have confidence they'll do it every time. Eli and Big Ben are exceptional at this. Flacco showed that to me last year. And I think a lot of people underrate how good these players are because of how well they do this.

Agree.


And FTR, with Andy Reid, we'll never get Marty Ball. But, those short throws on early downs are similar to runs so there is that.

It essentially limits your mistakes. As much as we all want dynamic great offenses, in the playoffs, mistakes (turnovers) will get you beat more times than not because of the level of teams you are playing at that time.

You also have to be able to put the ball in the endzone though, and up to this point, thats not something we have excelled at. So until we do, its all just talk.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by O.city

Agree.


And FTR, with Andy Reid, we'll never get Marty Ball. But, those short throws on early downs are similar to runs so there is that.

It essentially limits your mistakes. As much as we all want dynamic great offenses, in the playoffs, mistakes (turnovers) will get you beat more times than not because of the level of teams you are playing at that time.

You also have to be able to put the ball in the endzone though, and up to this point, thats not something we have excelled at. So until we do, its all just talk.

I am with you. LIke I said, what separates Eli and Big Ben from Alex Smith is that I have complete confidence that Eli and Big Ben will consistently come through whenever a big play is asked for. I don't know if Smith can. He did big time against Philly, but we need to see it more consistently. And his lack of big play potential makes it a little harder for him to do it, versus a guy like Big Ben. But you know what? He deserves that shot and while he wasn't stellar in his first playoff run, he did put his team in a position to win both games.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Pam Oliver's Forehead

No Chiefs fan should disparage Aaron Rodgers. Ever.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/stor...17-close-games

I've yet to hear anybody respond to this.

5-17 in close games
Only 5 comeback victories in his career

It is a more than fair argument and everybody is talking about it.

[Hammock Parties]

Don't care. Top 5 QB.