Originally Posted by petegz28:
dropping 8 and giving a QB all day to wait for a WR to come open is not going to stop any offense worth a shit in this league.
In the day and age of "your shadow touched him" DPI calls, it's brilliant. Only Andy doesn't get that, he's convinced the bubble screen is the next great thing. Not unlike running it up the gut on 2nd and 15. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Aspengc8:
How do you scheme around bad tackling and crap personnel? One of your starting OLB's is Frank ****ing Zombo. How do you adjust scheme to account for liabilities such as Acker, Gaines & Sorensen in the secondary? You can't blitz and leave these dudes 1v1. You guys are trying to make chicken salad out of chicken ****. Scheme doesn't make up for this stuff.
Agreed. I don't know how much of this is personnel and how much of it is scheme. But we've been way too slow to realize we don't have the right personnel to run dime, nor should we have dumbly run it against Pittsburgh a few weeks ago. The scheme hasn't adjusted to the personnel. And that's why it's been a very big part of the problem. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Maybe. I don't have nearly as much of a problem with this. This is a checkdown, short slant league. And Houston is outstanding in coverage and run defense. Maybe keeping Houston rushing helps create a little more pressure. I hardly think it's even close to the biggest problem. The biggest problem by a mile is in the middle and on the other edge. Just my opinion. I don't know if Dime's been schemed out or if we just don't have the personnel this year. But it's clearly not the scheme we should be running this year. Rushing Houston more often doesn't fix that.
But here's the thing though. We're in the league now where WR's can draw a phantom DPI so much easier against a DB on a intermediate to deep passes if a defense decides to play 3/4 man rushes and dropping 7/8 in coverages. Especially if your pass rush is suspect at best.
So in an attempt to nullify that phantom DPI's on long pass plays, wouldn't it be smarter to send 5-6 players against the QB and make the QB get rid of the ball quicker (slants/in/outs) than say a 20+ yard pass play? Then all you can hope is to keep the YAC short, assuming your DB's can tackle worth a lick. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Agreed. I don't know how much of this is personnel and how much of it is scheme. But we've been way too slow to realize we don't have the right personnel to run dime, nor should we have dumbly run it against Pittsburgh a few weeks ago. The scheme hasn't adjusted to the personnel. And that's why it's been a very big part of the problem.
That's what I'm asking. What type of scheme do you guys think KC should be running with this group? You have to run sub packages if they are coming out in 3/4wr sets, and that means acker/gaines/sorensen are in coverage. They are short on talent and there's no way around it. The Berry injury hit them hard because they could bring 5 and let him cover the tight end solo or play robber all day. Not sure what Houston's deal is, I saw he had intra-v during halftime. What I saw from Hali when he was in was not bad. I think Hali and Houston on the field at same time helps their sub package a bit from a pass rush, but teams can still get it out and play the 3 step game.
They need long sustained drives at this point to keep the D off the field.
Originally Posted by Coach:
But here's the thing though. We're in the league now where WR's can draw a phantom DPI so much easier against a DB on a intermediate to deep passes if a defense decides to play 3/4 man rushes and dropping 7/8 in coverages. Especially if your pass rush is suspect at best.
So in an attempt to nullify that phantom DPI's on long pass plays, wouldn't it be smarter to send 5-6 players against the QB and make the QB get rid of the ball quicker (slants/in/outs) than say a 20+ yard pass play? Then all you can hope is to keep the YAC short, assuming your DB's can tackle worth a lick.
I like your thoughts but you hit the nail on the head- tackling issues. I lost my shit on the last TD by Beasley- no physical contact on the line, they gave him a free release and then peters could of laid out to interrupt him extending over the pylon but gave no effort. [Reply]
There are two things that can be done immediately that should help improve the defense, and Sutton refuses to do either:
1. Put Marcus fucking Peters on the best WR on the field, regardless of where he lines up. Teams have been taking advantage of this all year by lining up their best guys on Mitchell, Gaines, and Acker.
2. On 3rd and long, rush the mother fucking passer.
These two things will not fix the defense....but they would at least create some opportunities to stop some drives and make the other team fucking punt once in awhile. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Coach:
But here's the thing though. We're in the league now where WR's can draw a phantom DPI so much easier against a DB on a intermediate to deep passes if a defense decides to play 3/4 man rushes and dropping 7/8 in coverages. Especially if your pass rush is suspect at best.
So in an attempt to nullify that phantom DPI's on long pass plays, wouldn't it be smarter to send 5-6 players against the QB and make the QB get rid of the ball quicker (slants/in/outs) than say a 20+ yard pass play? Then all you can hope is to keep the YAC short, assuming your DB's can tackle worth a lick.
It's damned if you do, damned if you don't. Sure, it's worth a shot but it's not like it's an obvious solution. The DPI issue is a big one. But we're also in a league with a lot of quick strike offenses and a ton of checkdowns. And our ILBs and Murray are flat out terrible right now, and Sorenson is mediocre at best. I wish there was an easy answer. If we blitz more, QBs will have a lot more quick options and will get rid of the ball super quick. And our defense is not well suited to stop that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
It's damned if you do, damned if you don't. Sure, it's worth a shot but it's not like it's an obvious solution. The DPI issue is a big one. But we're also in a league with a lot of quick strike offenses and a ton of checkdowns. And our ILBs and Murray are flat out terrible right now, and Sorenson is mediocre at best. I wish there was an easy answer. If we blitz more, QBs will have a lot more quick options and will get rid of the ball super quick. And our defense is not well suited to stop that.
What we are doing now is not working, and Sutton has made no changes or adjustments. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy:
What we are doing now is not working, and Sutton has made no changes or adjustments.
That's not true he has made no changes or adjustments. We ran a bigger front at the end of the Pittsburgh game that we carried into the Oakland game. Today, we ran more of a base 3-4. We ran a lot of cover 2/zone to disastrous results. I agree, none of what we've tried is working. But I disagree we haven't tried anything. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
I don't understand one bit trying to use GRob to defend anything. I don't give a shit what he tried to do. And stop with the "he didn't have shit for talent" nonsense. GRob was a terrible DC. Period. It had nothing to do with personnel. If you want to bring GRob's name up to discuss how much our defense sucks right now, fine. I don't understand anybody who would defend a single thing GRob did or make even a single excuse for him.
As much as you act like it's so obvious the "things you're supposed to do", those things worked the past 3 years. They aren't right now. So this idea of just rushing Houston and blitzing more is so oversimplistic. It's not like that's an obvious fix to the problem.
We're not defending GRob you moron, we're saying Sutton is as bad now, or worse, than GRob was.
Originally Posted by GloryDayz:
We're not defending GRob you moron, we're saying Sutton is as bad now, or worse, than GRob was.
You're overthinking this.
No, I am not.
I have said over and over and over and over again that Sutton's defense right now is bad or worse than GRob's. I've mentioned our defense is terrible, and then people argue back that the defense is terrible as if I'm going to disagree. That's overthinking it.
That doesn't come with an "at least GRob did this..." That's laughable. You don't need to prop up a damn thing GRob did to prove the point that Sutton's defense right now looks terrible. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
No, I am not.
I have said over and over and over and over again that Sutton's defense right now is bad or worse than GRob's.
That doesn't come with an "at least GRob did this..." That's laughable. You don't need to prop up a damn thing GRob did to prove the point that Sutton's defense right now looks terrible.
Let's just agree that Sutton needs to be fired tonight, so his replacement gets two weeks. But Sutton hasn't earned anything more than a ride on the flight home. He should not have made it this far, but he should be fired now. [Reply]