Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'm tellin' ya - if you want to improve this team's running game, draft T.J. Hockenson.
I couldn't draw up a better fit for this offense in a lab. He is letter perfect for what Andy likes to do. If the Chiefs went out there in twin tight ace formations 75% of the time, they'd just rape faces man.
I've seen him inching closer and closer to the top 10 in mock drafts so I think that's just not gonna happen. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'm tellin' ya - if you want to improve this team's running game, draft T.J. Hockenson.
I couldn't draw up a better fit for this offense in a lab. He is letter perfect for what Andy likes to do. If the Chiefs went out there in twin tight ace formations 75% of the time, they'd just rape faces man.
TJ is probably going to be a top 15 pick at this point. But DJ's point still stands, a good #2 TE helps the running game far more than a RB at this point. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
I've seen him inching closer and closer to the top 10 in mock drafts so I think that's just not gonna happen.
I'm still hopeful that relatively pedestrian stopwatch times are going to have him painted as 'old school' in the draft and he'll slip. If he goes out there and runs in the 4.6 range, we're probably screwed. But if he's in the 4.7-4.8 range we might have a shot at him. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'm still hopeful that relatively pedestrian stopwatch times are going to have him painted as 'old school' in the draft and he'll slip. If he goes out there and runs in the 4.6 range, we're probably screwed. But if he's in the 4.7-4.8 range we might have a shot at him.
I think he's going to tank his 40 and pull up lame with a hamstring all because he wants The Chiefs to draft him so he can play with Mahomes. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'm still hopeful that relatively pedestrian stopwatch times are going to have him painted as 'old school' in the draft and he'll slip. If he goes out there and runs in the 4.6 range, we're probably screwed. But if he's in the 4.7-4.8 range we might have a shot at him.
I think teams will be enamored by him regardless of how he tests. Iowa cranks out quality players and his tape does not lie. The “Kittle effect” also will cause teams to want Hockenson early. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Northman:
I think teams will be enamored by him regardless of how he tests. Iowa cranks out quality players and his tape does not lie. The “Kittle effect” also will cause teams to want Hockenson early.
Hock and Fant are both better prospects than Kittle was at this point. He's a huge surprise and I'm a lifetime Hawkeye fan. I mean he was good in college but he wasn't THIS good. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
We didn't have that WITH Kareem Hunt. This has always been a pass-first team. Hunt had more than 20 carries like 4 times in the last 2 years.
You live in fantasy land.
Am I sayung it's not a pass first team? I'M SAYING WE NEED TO ADJUST OUR OFFENSE SO WE CAN KEEP THE BALL AWAY JUST LIKE THE PATS DID TO US. If you want the team to remain a one trick pony then good for you. I just don't agree and I never will. [Reply]
Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger:
Am I sayung it's not a pass first team? I'M SAYING WE NEED TO ADJUST OUR OFFENSE SO WE CAN KEEP THE BALL AWAY JUST LIKE THE PATS DID TO US. If you want the team to remain a one trick pony then good for you. I just don't agree and I never will.
Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger:
Am I sayung it's not a pass first team? I'M SAYING WE NEED TO ADJUST OUR OFFENSE SO WE CAN KEEP THE BALL AWAY JUST LIKE THE PATS DID TO US. If you want the team to remain a one trick pony then good for you. I just don't agree and I never will.
What part of "This team presently runs the ball more effectively than the teams you're asking us to emulate" is getting past you here?
We aren't PRESENTLY a 1-trick pony. The Chiefs are, right this very second, better at running the ball than the Seahawks and Ravens.
You 'don't agree' because you're not paying attention to any of the arguments being presented. You seem to believe that he fact that the Ravens ran it often means that they ran it well. And at least when you get to the Patriots you're now starting to get closer to the argument that people before you have made and made far better.
This team can presently run the football well. And if you go looking to replace Williams its exclusively because you want to run between the tackles - because nobody available is going to be an appreciable upgrade from Williams off-tackle or out of the backfield. So you're saying we should spend significant assets to upgrade on a solid RB so we can run a power run game that simply cannot work from the shotgun.
So now you're also asking us to scrap our 'base' formation and the shotgun/spread concepts that the rest of the NFL is copying as fast as they can see them. I'm sure it's because they're silly ideas.
You're simply not paying attention to anything Andy Reid wants to do or anything the Kansas City offense is built to do. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
The teams you mentioned were among the most likely teams in the league to run the football. They were not the teams in the league that ran it best. The Chiefs were actually one of the 5 most efficient rushing teams in the league. The Seahawks were ranked behind them and the Ravens were actually considered a below average rushing team in terms of efficiency and to even get there they had to expose their QB to a slew of hits. They aren't even remotely comparable to whatever point it is you're trying to make.
The Chiefs can presently run the ball BETTER than both the Ravens and Seahawks and it's not even particularly close. They simply elected to run the ball less often because they have a better QB and a smarter coaching staff than both of those squads.
The irony of you citing variety and then using 2 of the least flexible teams in football to make your point shouldn't be lost on you.
Neither of the teams you're referencing are teams that are better at running the football than the Chiefs. Neither of them have a better runningback than the Chiefs. They're just teams that are more committed to running than the Chiefs. As a consequence their offenses were significantly worse as was their record.
Trying to dumb down this offense to fit some 'blueprint' established by the Ravens and Seahawks is the height of stupidity.
Smh are people just naturally DUMB In this place? Smdh :-) YET AGAIN SOMEONE ELSE FAILS TO COMPREHEND THE BASICS. No-one is saying we should mould are offense to be exactly like those teams. I'M SAYING WE SHOULD IMPROVE OUR ABILITY TO KEEP THE BALL AND TAKE TIME OFF THE CLOCK. And as far as those teams were concerned they were the best at it. You can spew your "efficiency" bs all you like. The fact is those were the best ranked run games last season and they kept the ball away from the opposition week in, week out. If you think consistently throwing the ball to Rb's makes our running game much better than theirs then go ahead buddy, have at it :-) . [Reply]
