Author Topic: CHIEFS  (Read 1462135 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39044
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16675 on: January 24, 2019, 07:13:41 AM »
I'm seeing a lot of all-22 on twitter from the Patriots game that makes me think it's more bob probs

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 41960
  • Pfizer PLUS Moderna and now Pfizer Bivalent
    • View Profile

Offline ChiComCat

  • Chawbacon
  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16677 on: January 24, 2019, 08:04:05 AM »
Not to defend Spags, but I don't know that I put much value in an Eli Apple quote about the NYG

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2541
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16678 on: January 24, 2019, 08:47:49 AM »
Not to defend Spags, but I don't know that I put much value in an Eli Apple quote about the NYG

fair enough, but the general sentiment has been expressed by other players through the years, and it seems that there's a definite learning curve with learning spags's scheme. next year's defense is likely to have at least three new starters and an infusion of rookies or free agents who will play prominent roles, playing in a system that's brand new and has been described as complicated. given that spags' ceiling (to this point) has seemed lower than sutton's, it makes me wonder what the net benefit will be for next year's team. it can definitely be argued that the chiefs D will be better off in the next 2-4 years with spags. but next year? i'm not so sure.

anyway, who knows what will happen, or what defensive approach the chiefs will take. maybe they'll reimagine the scheme and do things differently than spags has ever done it before. also, maybe andy will switch up the rest of the defensive staff as well. he flirted with the idea of having multiple coordinators (which i can't ever recall seeing in the NFL?) late in his eagles stint.

Offline mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39044
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16679 on: January 24, 2019, 09:00:45 AM »
j rake could you do a breakdown of del rio's performances as Dcoord?

Offline Cartierfor3

  • Fattyfest Champion
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 27058
  • I just want us all to be buds.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16680 on: January 24, 2019, 10:25:08 AM »
I'm finding myself more upset by the day at our defensive performance on Sunday. The more All-22 stuff I see, the more breakdowns of our basic coverage with no disguises, its making me mad.

Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16725
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16681 on: January 24, 2019, 10:32:04 AM »
I'm finding myself more upset by the day at our defensive performance on Sunday. The more All-22 stuff I see, the more breakdowns of our basic coverage with no disguises, its making me mad.

i am still very mad. not sure if i'll ever forgive Dee.

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2541
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16682 on: January 24, 2019, 10:32:21 AM »
j rake could you do a breakdown of del rio's performances as Dcoord?

i generally think he is solid, but i don't know enough to be honest.

evaluating NFL coaches is really hard. the league is basically designed to not let any team, or any particular unit, dominate for a prolonged period of time. if you have the best record, you get the worst pick, and you play a 1st-place divisional schedule. if you stink, you get a great pick, and a last-place schedule. so it becomes harder on the best teams, easier on the worst teams, and in the end they end up in the middle. if you draft a stud, then you have to pay him, and then you have to get rid of your good players. if you draft complete crap, you won't have to pay them, and now you can overspend on impact free agents. if your offense is really good, but your defense isn't, you allocate more of your cap space to the struggling unit; but then your offense takes a hit (and vice versa).

finally in coaching, if you have short-term failure, the head coach is getting fired and a new staff comes in. if you sustain success, the coordinator gets promoted to head coach by another team and the new guy steps in. other than the pats, who are consistently in the top 3rd of the league defensively under belichick, i'd be curious to know which coordinators have sustained anything close to consistent top-10 defenses year after year. i have to think the list is a very short one.

the fact is, no coordinator was going to have the 2018 chiefs playing top-10 level defense. i'd have to scroll back up, but i believe they played half of their games against top-10 level offenses (pats twice, chargers twice, rams, etc.). the chiefs would have been a top-10 level defense (unadjusted stats, of course) if they got to play the same schedule as the colts. but they didn't. and i find it funny that mellinger acts so surprised that this chiefs D performed so poorly - he himself stated in a preseason column that he thought the chiefs defense didn't do enough to address its personnel shortcomings BY CHOICE! in mellinger world, this season was all about building for next season.

here's mellinger on the chiefs D as a whole in a column from five months ago:

Quote
The truth is the Chiefs’ defense probably had too many holes to fix all in one offseason, but certain circumstances also played against them.

here's mellinger on the secondary (which lost sorensen to injury early in the year, berry for essentially the entire year after he published it, and also watts):

Quote
The roster is full of “development guys,” particularly in the secondary — corners Charvarius Ward and Tremon Smith, safety Jordan Lucas and to a slightly lesser extent Armani Watts. The Chiefs will have an extra second-round pick next year, and will likely draft at least one cornerback high.

here's mellinger on the pass rush, which he thought would be bad but was actually league-best:

Quote
If that’s the way it goes, the biggest concern going forward could be the pass rush.

so to recap: mellinger thought the chiefs D didn't address its personnel shortcomings as part of a strategic plan to build toward 2019, he thought the pass rush was the biggest concern, and he thought the secondary was full of development guys. well, here on earth, most of us know that if you play a hard offensive schedule with an apparent pass-rush lacking defense with a developmental secondary and injuries to your star players (houston missed four games, berry missed 14), then you probably won't perform well! and by standard metrics, the chiefs D did not play well (though i will remind that they were exactly average using weighted DVOA by season's end.)

bottom line, i don't think sutton was as good as the stats suggested early in his tenure, and i don't think he was as bad as these last two years indicate. i suspect the same is likely true with jack del rio or spags or countless other defensive coordinators, including gregg williams (whose defensive units have been far more up-and-down than i think most realize.)

Offline Cartierfor3

  • Fattyfest Champion
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 27058
  • I just want us all to be buds.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16683 on: January 24, 2019, 10:47:16 AM »
I'm finding myself more upset by the day at our defensive performance on Sunday. The more All-22 stuff I see, the more breakdowns of our basic coverage with no disguises, its making me mad.

i am still very mad. not sure if i'll ever forgive Dee.

I will forgive him but my gosh. That was bad.

I mean, I'm no football guru but our safeties play like 30 yards from the line of scrimmage and Brady can't throw deep very well. I didn't care for it at all.

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 41960
  • Pfizer PLUS Moderna and now Pfizer Bivalent
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16684 on: January 24, 2019, 10:48:00 AM »
Smellinger.

Offline Cartierfor3

  • Fattyfest Champion
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 27058
  • I just want us all to be buds.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16685 on: January 24, 2019, 10:50:23 AM »
Patrick is better than basically anyone who ever breathed, but its no guarantee we'll ever get another home AFC Championship game, with 2 (2!) 4th quarter leads. I think we'll be back, we should be the favorite going into 2019, but this narrative that this was the 2014 Royals, and next year we'll be watching Hosmer slide into home is, to me, a bit naive. Even with the best QB in the league getting a home conference championship game is hard. We should've won.

That game sucked.

Offline Powercat Posse

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4585
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16686 on: January 24, 2019, 10:52:16 AM »
Blitzing 6. And trying to play zone with the 5. Lol Bob.  Fortunately, Brady immediately looked to Hogan and threw the out route.  Edelman and the FB were wide open, and Gronk isn't exactly covered

https://mobile.twitter.com/jco3215/status/1088166010417491969

Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16725
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16687 on: January 24, 2019, 11:04:19 AM »
Patrick is better than basically anyone who ever breathed, but its no guarantee we'll ever get another home AFC Championship game, with 2 (2!) 4th quarter leads. I think we'll be back, we should be the favorite going into 2019, but this narrative that this was the 2014 Royals, and next year we'll be watching Hosmer slide into home is, to me, a bit naive. Even with the best QB in the league getting a home conference championship game is hard. We should've won.

That game sucked.

people that so arrogantly claim "we'll be back" need to gtfoomf. aaron rodgers has been to 1 super bowl. sunday was a colossal heart break.

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2541
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16688 on: January 24, 2019, 11:06:22 AM »
Patrick is better than basically anyone who ever breathed, but its no guarantee we'll ever get another home AFC Championship game, with 2 (2!) 4th quarter leads. I think we'll be back, we should be the favorite going into 2019, but this narrative that this was the 2014 Royals, and next year we'll be watching Hosmer slide into home is, to me, a bit naive. Even with the best QB in the league getting a home conference championship game is hard. We should've won.

i'm pretty optimistic about the chiefs' chances of sustaining success w mahomes at QB and hosting a ton more playoff games. when arrowhead is truly rocking, it's (obviously) a hard place to play, and the chiefs won't be home underdogs in any game for the next five years. even with this year's team expected to be .500-ish, the chiefs were favored in all their early-season home games by at least a field goal; and overall, they were favored in every game by an average of 8 points.

through six years, andy is 36-12 at home since taking over the chiefs. i'd be shocked if the chiefs finish worse than 6-2 at home in the next several years, and they're likely to sprinkle in occasional 7-1's (like this year) or 8-0's. if you do that, the path to a top-2 seed is pretty easy. beat inferior teams on the road, win a couple coin flip games, and you're sitting at 12-4 or 13-3.

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2541
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16689 on: January 24, 2019, 11:14:14 AM »
Patrick is better than basically anyone who ever breathed, but its no guarantee we'll ever get another home AFC Championship game, with 2 (2!) 4th quarter leads. I think we'll be back, we should be the favorite going into 2019, but this narrative that this was the 2014 Royals, and next year we'll be watching Hosmer slide into home is, to me, a bit naive. Even with the best QB in the league getting a home conference championship game is hard. We should've won.

That game sucked.

people that so arrogantly claim "we'll be back" need to gtfoomf. aaron rodgers has been to 1 super bowl. sunday was a colossal heart break.

the chiefs will be back.

green bay made the playoffs eight straight years under rodgers - including nine playoff wins - and played in three NFC championship games (and of course a super bowl), and also made the playoffs in a year where rodgers was injured. these last two years have been rough (rodgers injured in '17, mccarthy fired this year), but it's been a good run on the whole.

i think most would agree that andy is a superior coach to mccarthy, who most packer fans think held the team back all these years.

Offline Cartierfor3

  • Fattyfest Champion
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 27058
  • I just want us all to be buds.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16690 on: January 24, 2019, 11:31:07 AM »
Patrick is better than basically anyone who ever breathed, but its no guarantee we'll ever get another home AFC Championship game, with 2 (2!) 4th quarter leads. I think we'll be back, we should be the favorite going into 2019, but this narrative that this was the 2014 Royals, and next year we'll be watching Hosmer slide into home is, to me, a bit naive. Even with the best QB in the league getting a home conference championship game is hard. We should've won.

i'm pretty optimistic about the chiefs' chances of sustaining success w mahomes at QB and hosting a ton more playoff games. when arrowhead is truly rocking, it's (obviously) a hard place to play, and the chiefs won't be home underdogs in any game for the next five years. even with this year's team expected to be .500-ish, the chiefs were favored in all their early-season home games by at least a field goal; and overall, they were favored in every game by an average of 8 points.

through six years, andy is 36-12 at home since taking over the chiefs. i'd be shocked if the chiefs finish worse than 6-2 at home in the next several years, and they're likely to sprinkle in occasional 7-1's (like this year) or 8-0's. if you do that, the path to a top-2 seed is pretty easy. beat inferior teams on the road, win a couple coin flip games, and you're sitting at 12-4 or 13-3.

I am no longer satisfied with anything less than the Super Bowl. Lamar Hunt trophy is a minimum.

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2541
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16691 on: January 24, 2019, 01:13:49 PM »
Patrick is better than basically anyone who ever breathed, but its no guarantee we'll ever get another home AFC Championship game, with 2 (2!) 4th quarter leads. I think we'll be back, we should be the favorite going into 2019, but this narrative that this was the 2014 Royals, and next year we'll be watching Hosmer slide into home is, to me, a bit naive. Even with the best QB in the league getting a home conference championship game is hard. We should've won.

i'm pretty optimistic about the chiefs' chances of sustaining success w mahomes at QB and hosting a ton more playoff games. when arrowhead is truly rocking, it's (obviously) a hard place to play, and the chiefs won't be home underdogs in any game for the next five years. even with this year's team expected to be .500-ish, the chiefs were favored in all their early-season home games by at least a field goal; and overall, they were favored in every game by an average of 8 points.

through six years, andy is 36-12 at home since taking over the chiefs. i'd be shocked if the chiefs finish worse than 6-2 at home in the next several years, and they're likely to sprinkle in occasional 7-1's (like this year) or 8-0's. if you do that, the path to a top-2 seed is pretty easy. beat inferior teams on the road, win a couple coin flip games, and you're sitting at 12-4 or 13-3.

I am no longer satisfied with anything less than the Super Bowl. Lamar Hunt trophy is a minimum.

i'm pretty certain i don't care if the chiefs ever actually win the super bowl. i just want to see them in it, and i want to watch two weeks of nonstop coverage of the chiefs leading up to the super bowl, and i want to buy chiefs super bowl paper plates and chief super bowl themed cups, and i want to walk into my local sporting goods store and see chiefs super bowl tv shirts, and i want to walk into my grocery store and see chiefs balloons and chiefs cakes, and i want to be able to wear my chiefs shirt and have someone stop me on the street and say, "hey, chiefs, big game sunday!", and i want friends and family i haven't talked to in years to text messages like "go chiefs!" and "i'll be rooting for you" (as if i actually play on the team), and i want to see 500 chiefs related super bowl prop bets, and i want to see bud light roll its stupid beer fridges into all the local bars, and finally, i want to spend days torturing myself on how best to actually watch the game - home alone by myself? attend a friend's super bowl party? drive to vegas and watch at a sportsbook? fly to kc and watch at a bar? actually go to the game?

don't get me wrong, it would be cool to win one. but on some level, i feel like this lifelong journey of being a chiefs fan would be over if they actually did. :frown:

Offline ChiComCat

  • Chawbacon
  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16692 on: January 24, 2019, 01:30:17 PM »
I feel similarly about K-State football making the playoff or basketball the F4.  Of course I want them to win, but much of the achievement is getting there and getting to be a part of it.

Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16725
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16693 on: January 24, 2019, 01:36:05 PM »
don't get me wrong, it would be cool to win one. but on some level, i feel like this lifelong journey of being a chiefs fan would be over if they actually did. :frown:

this is easy to say because they suck, but it's how i feel about the royals. they're still my team, but i don't really care. 2014-15 probably won't ever be topped and i'm okay with that.

Offline mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39044
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16694 on: January 24, 2019, 05:10:10 PM »
welp i hope he blitzes more and doubles #1 targets in obvious passing downs

https://twitter.com/MikeGarafolo/status/1088564261704683521

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2541
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16695 on: January 24, 2019, 05:52:15 PM »
i'm excited about the spagnuolo hire...if greg robinson was the alternative.  :Yuck:

Offline SkinnyBenny

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16698
  • good time rock-n-roll plastic banana FM type
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16696 on: January 24, 2019, 08:36:18 PM »
I have been against instant replay reviews in baseball from the start. I love baseball and even I can admit its kinda boring, no need to slow it down even more. I'm against it now in football too. I'm still unsatisfied after reviews, and it is such a time suck during games. Make the call, stick with it, and lets keep playing. Sunday the reviews took forever and I'm still unconvinced they were right. Just play sheesh.

Haven't caught up on the thread yet so this may be addressed after your post right here, but if you were at the Chiefs game then I'm guessing you probably weren't watching the end of the Saints game before it. I can tell you that the end of regulation showed the Saints getting absolutely jobbed on a PI no call that is one of the most egregious and costly no calls in the history of sports. Unfortunately, somehow, that was not one of the things the NFL deemed reviewable. I am confident that if you had followed that game and watched that no call, and understood its repercussions, not only would you no longer be against replays, but you'd probably be for expanding it to include more.
"walking around mhk and crying in the rain because of love lost is the absolute purest and best thing in the world.  i hope i fall in love during the next few weeks and get my heart broken and it starts raining just to experience it one last time."   --Dlew12

Offline SkinnyBenny

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16698
  • good time rock-n-roll plastic banana FM type
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16697 on: January 24, 2019, 08:38:36 PM »
seeing lots of commentary this morning about the NFL needing to change its overtime rules. i think the overall concept is fine. the only thing i would change is making the team that chooses to receive begin their drive at their own 20 yard line. or maybe you start em even further back, say to the 15 yard line. you have to tweak it to the point where the decision if you win the toss is less obvious.

belichick was an early proponent of kicking off to start OT, depending on conditions and opponent. he's won by kicking off first in OT and he's also lost.

NFL teams score touchdowns on roughly 20 percent of their drives. this year, teams that got ball first in OT scored TDs on their first possession 4 of 17 times (23.5%). these percentages will obviously skew up or down depending on quality of offense or defense, but each coach is free to build their team in accordance with the rules as much as they want.

if the ravens played the pats to a regulation draw and won the toss in OT, my guess is that they would kick off.

i'm obviously not opposed to each team getting a possession in playoff OT. that would be perfectly fine. i don't think that's necessary in regular season games however.

I'm fine with overtime the way it is. In the regular season keep it how it is, in the playoffs, guarantee each team a possession. I've never liked college overtime. It feels gimicky.

And everyone complaining about the overtime, at some point the Chiefs were going to have to get a stop. Even if the Chiefs were guaranteed a possession, we'd need a TD, and unless you go for 2, you'd need a stop AND a score after that to win. It was going to be tough regardless.

Pro overtime is awful. I understand seeing college OT as gimmicky, because it is completely unlike every other setup in football. It is unbelievably exciting, however, and no one could possibly make a case that it is unfair. Unfortunately, that's not the case with the NFL's awful setup.
"walking around mhk and crying in the rain because of love lost is the absolute purest and best thing in the world.  i hope i fall in love during the next few weeks and get my heart broken and it starts raining just to experience it one last time."   --Dlew12

Offline bucket

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9524
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16698 on: January 24, 2019, 08:44:43 PM »
quick story (update: not quick!) ...

so back in 2011, when andy reid was coach of the eagles, his defense was led by first-time coordinator juan castillo. the defense performed so poorly that most expected reid to fire castillo after just one season. but a month after the season ended, castillo still had his job, and reid confirmed at a press conference that he would remain on staff. but would he remain as coordinator?

rumors swirled that reid might demote castillo and hire a new defensive coordinator. reid's top choice?

steve spagnuolo.

Reid's d-coordinator, Juan Castillo, had also previously been offensive line coach for 13 years. Had never coached defense before. So, at least he didn't make that mistake again.

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2541
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #16699 on: January 24, 2019, 09:15:25 PM »
spags negativity aside, i'm honestly fine with it. it's possible that andy has a blind spot here, but he deserves the benefit of the doubt with just about any staff or roster move he makes. nobody wants to win a super bowl more than andy. he knows he needs it to legitimize his status as one of the all-time greats. he's not getting any younger. these next 3-5 years will likely be his last realistic chances at it. he ain't gonna hire his old pal if he doesn't think he's the right guy to get the job done.

i would like to see andy make a few other changes to the defensive staff, however, even if it means hiring a DC lite to assist with spags and to add brain power to planning and in-game adustments. any NFL team that has an offensive-minded head coach is asking a lot of its defensive coordinator to single handedly carry the burden of stopping literal machines like belichick/brady/mcdaniels. i mean, at its simplest, that was the matchup last sunday. it was the pats offensive machine vs bob sutton. just like it was manning vs sutton. it's a mismatch in talent and it's a mismatch in brain power.

i don't know if sutton wanted/needed complete autonomy, or if andy just didn't have an interest in getting new voices to help on defense. but the chiefs haven't been creative on that side of the ball like they have with the offense. beyond speaking with countless college coaches, andy has brought chris ault on board as a consultant, brad childress as a special packages guy, and generally has done a better job of identifying talent/replenishing it on the offensive staff. i'd love to see andy pursue a guy like rex ryan to serve as a consultant or special assistant. with mahomes at QB, and a team that's the favorite to win the super bowl next year, i gotta think plenty of fringe guys would jump at the chance to be a part of this.