Originally Posted by Giant Octopodes:
but both teams are facing defenses which are worse than they did last week, and offenses which are better,
The Raiders have a better offense than the Jags?
Dude, you're trippin'.
They got Tyrell Williams who was a #3 WR in San Diego, a rookie RB that averaged 3.7 YPC in his debut, a HC who calls an offense like it's 1995, and a QB that melts under pressure.
And then they have....? A bunch of guys that would never even make the Chiefs roster.
The only way the Chiefs lose this game is if they show up unmotivated and hungover. [Reply]
Pretty sure that the Raiders gameplan on both sides of the ball was exactly how Gruden envisions the Raiders playing winning football from this point forward. He wants that huge offensive line to control the line of scrimmage, keep Carr upright and pound opposing defenses with the run. In the passing game he wants Carr to throw on time, not have to make a lot of reads, or have to throw more than 20 yards downfield. And eat up clock in the process.
And against the Broncos this strategy worked to perfection. The Raiders only had one 3-and-out series, four out of six drives scored, and the average time of possession was about 5 minutes. If they can do something similar against the Chiefs, they'll steal at least one if not two possessions from us at the end of the game.
On defense he obviously isn't thinking about a great pass rush to get things done. Instead he's apparently going to trust in a secondary to keep the WRs locked down and force the QB to either force something or play dink and dunk.
Again, this worked flawlessly against the Broncos for most of the game, until Denver went to their no-huddle offense.
The way to beat this plan is to get up by two TDs+ before the half and force the Raiders to abandon the running game. For the most part anyway, I don't think Gruden will entirely give up the run unless he's down by 17 or more halfway through the third quarter.
If Carr has to be a pass-first QB, make his reads, and throw downfield, probably under pressure, we probably win that scenario. It also gives Clark and co. the necessary time to defeat their blocks and get to Carr.
I believe that Gruden looked at the AFC West last year and quickly understood that the team to beat for the next 8-10 years was going to be the Chiefs and Mahomes. I think he concluded that the way to beat Mahomes wasn't to try and sack him because of his elusiveness and his incredible off-script play-making ability. He decided that the way to beat Mahomes is to keep him on the bench as much as possible by putting together long, clock-eating, rock-pounding drives. And when the Chiefs were on the field, keep Mahomes in the pocket and force him to throw a low percentage pass to a tightly covered receiver. Or to allow a short pass to a RB.
For this game, I think the combination of Raiders' injuries and no competitive match-up for Kelce over the middle is going to ensure a Chiefs' victory. But I wouldn't be surprised if the game ended up being closer than a TD. If Hill were playing I think it'd be more of a blowout. [Reply]
I think he concluded that the way to beat Mahomes wasn't to try and sack him because of his elusiveness and his incredible off-script play-making ability. He decided that the way to beat Mahomes is to keep him on the bench as much as possible by putting together long, clock-eating, rock-pounding drives. And when the Chiefs were on the field, keep Mahomes in the pocket and force him to throw a low percentage pass to a tightly covered receiver. Or to allow a short pass to a RB.
I highly doubt that's what he thinks. I mean, i don't think he's that stupid. That's the kind of shit fans and the media say.
Phillip Rivers said it best years ago: T.O.P is the most over rated stat in football.
Gruden was also emphasising the deep ball to Carr. But Carr is another check down game manager. It's not in his DNA and he sure as fuck doesn't have the receivers for it.
If Breeland can matchup against Williams and keep him in check most of the game the Raiders are fucked.
Because Jacobs' 3.7YPC ain't gonna get it done. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
I highly doubt that's what he thinks. I mean, i don't think he's that stupid. That's the kind of shit fans and the media say.
Phillip Rivers said it best years ago: T.O.P is the most over rated stat in football.
Gruden was also emphasizing the deep ball to Carr. But Carr is another check down game manager. It's not in his DNA and he sure as **** doesn't have the receivers for it.
If Breeland can matchup against Williams and keep him in check most of the game the Raiders are ****ed.
Because Jacobs' 3.7YPC ain't gonna get it done.
TOP may be "over-rated," but that doesn't mean it's entirely superfluous. Long offensive drives keeps the opponent's offense off the field, while simultaneously giving your defense more rest, and more time to make adjustments on the sideline.
And I agree Carr is a GM, and not very good under pressure. But Gruden had him throwing the ball in just under 2 seconds, which predicates shorter passes. And 10 of his 26 passes went for less than 10 yards. And a couple of his longer passes were actually thrown for right around 10 yards and then went for longer yardage; in other words, Carr wasn't throwing 20-30 yards downfield except for a couple times.
And Tyrell Williams is going to be considered a top 20 WR by the end of the season, unless something happens to that OL. But I sincerely hope that Breeland can keep him in check Sunday. And I think that Spags isn't going to let Tyrell run around singled up on Sunday.
As for Jacobs, again, the stats don't tell the whole story. Gruden is a WC offense guy; he doesn't need his RB to run for 100 yards/4+ yds a carry. He needs his RB to be efficient.
Jacobs (and the other RB) was very efficient against the Broncos. He didn't get stopped behind the line for losses, and converted some 1st downs. But just as important to the WC offense, Jacobs put his team in 2- or 3-and short situations more often than not. Actually I think every drive but one. At the end of the game he closed out Denver almost single-handedly just by keeping the sticks moving.
Again, I'm not saying Jacobs is great or a world-beater. I'm just saying that the Chiefs need to play solid run D or this guy will expose them and make this game more of a struggle than it should be. If he can give the Raiders a lot of 2nd/3rd and shorts, that takes any pass-rush we might get out of Clark out of the picture, and opens the entire playbook for Gruden. [Reply]
Spags' defense is conceptually designed to take away a lot of what Oakland does offensively, so I'm kind of excited to see that play out.
Aside from the worries about our defense, I can't fathom Oakland stopping anything KC does offensively. I'd be surprised if KC doesn't hang 40+ on them. Had Denver not come out flatter than shit on offense, I don't think Oakland beats them. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
Spags' defense is conceptually designed to take away a lot of what Oakland does offensively, so I'm kind of excited to see that play out.
Aside from the worries about our defense, I can't fathom Oakland stopping anything KC does offensively. I'd be surprised if KC doesn't hang 40+ on them. Had Denver not come out flatter than shit on offense, I don't think Oakland beats them.
Oakland doesent have the horses to beat the Chiefs. Well say both Defenses suck or at least both Ds arent very good. The Chiefs O should have no trouble with Oaklands D scoring points almost every possession. Oakland should have a good game offensively (points/yards) by Oakland standards vs the Chiefs D, but just a few stops by the Chiefs D and/or inevitable mistakes by Oaklands O pretty much seals it. Chiefs should end up scoring some where in the 40s while the Raiders will end up in the 20s maybe low 30s. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
Spags' defense is conceptually designed to take away a lot of what Oakland does offensively, so I'm kind of excited to see that play out.
Aside from the worries about our defense, I can't fathom Oakland stopping anything KC does offensively. I'd be surprised if KC doesn't hang 40+ on them. Had Denver not come out flatter than shit on offense, I don't think Oakland beats them.
When you say that Spag's defense is conceptually designed to take away a lot of what Oakland does, please elaborate so I may see more clearly and share your confidence. Are you talking about Spags defense against the run, or the pass? The run, I can see, but I have trouble with the passing part. We all know what Oakland's passing game is all about - short passes with the QB getting rid of the ball early to negate a pass rush - and take some shots down field. JVille did that with Minchew, and he completed his first 12 in a row or something like that, and went on to go something like 23 / 27 (1 INT) for the game. Maybe a lot of his success was because the Chiefs weren't really playing to stop it, because they were up big, but to see them trying to defend it, the way they did, was a bit troubling IMO. [Reply]
