1. You can't trot Ammendola out again. You just can't. It'd be mutiny. I don't care what you do, you have to cut him and sign someone else. I'd go for two every time and have Reid kick off before I did that again.
2. Justin Watson needs way more snaps. Yes, he could've caught that one ball today, but he's big, he's fast, hes a physical match-up problem, and he usually catches the ball. He was inches away from another big TD today. Play him.
3. It's time to get Pacheco more touches. The midget squad isn't getting it done. It's not all their fault, but at least Pacheco is big and strong enough to maybe break some tackles.
4. It's time to bench Wylie. Wanegho can't be worse, and might have upside. Just do it, for accountability's sake if nothing else.
5. I think it's time to force feed more snaps to Moore. I don't want him returning punts anymore. Put Hardman there, you know what Hardman is, and he's not a route running WR. At least he might break a PR. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
Then why didn't he start Chark West instead of Hunt, who had years in his offense already and had already earned significant snaps? Or kept CJ Spiller?
How come Pacheco has already surpassed McKinnon and Ronald Jones?
I'll tell you why. It's because Hunt/Pacheco are/were better than the vets on the roster.
And we don't even have to focus on the starting bit. How about just some damn snaps in general?
There are far more examples of Reid playing capable rookies early than their aren't.
Moore is clearly an injury away from getting a huge boost in snaps too though, so I don't really see your point. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
He's the 5th WR on the roster right now.
Hardman has a banged up foot and the Chiefs don't seem to be in any rush to siphon snaps to Moore.
Pacheco, a 7th round rookie, is the 1st back off the bench in a RB/FB room that's 5 deep.
I don't really care what he technically is on the depth chart. He's clearly an injury away from getting an acceptable level of snaps this early on.
Pachecho is not the first back off the bench. He's the 2nd.
I also think there's a difference between RB and WRs even if Andy seems hesitant to play rookies early on at both positions. RB is obviously a little easier. [Reply]
I think someone already mentioned that Butt-Kicker is supposed to be back next week.
The Chiefs don't need to make any radical changes. We have a great team. They just didn't do their jobs on Sunday. They played flat like they do a few times every year.
This week's practice just needs to be about doing your job. Review the film of the game, have individual critique & accountability, practice to play better than the abortion you put on that film and move on.
I had been bragging about our special teams ever since the preseason. They screwed the pooch this time, and it wasn't just our temp kicker. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
WR has been a known exception.
It's been something that CP completely made up, is what it's been.
Trying to use examples like Cornell Powell, Chris Conley, and Hardman as examples when none of those guys were high end talents.
And then when shown examples of Reid starting talented WR's it gets met, "well that was a decade ago!"
Well.....has anyone considered the examples are that old because the Chiefs have never invested in a WR that wasn't a project?
And because we're constantly taking either late round or project WR's that's somehow manifested into Reid won't start rookies. Then it become, "Ok, well, Reid won't start rookie WR's then".
Because apparently being the C in Reid's offense and being responsible for line calls is a much less complicated matter than running a route. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
Don't really care whether you think it's a good argument, because it's clearly the case.
Not my fault that you haven't been paying attention to Reid's tendencies with rookie skill positions in the decade that he's been here.
He's not going to bench JuJu or MVS 3 games into the season, and he's not going to cut their snaps when they're also trying build chemistry and continuity.
I'm not saying I agree with it, but I never expected Moore to get a ton of snaps this early on the season.
Again, if this continues for the entire season while our WRs struggle, then you have a point.
I'm only speaking to a clear overreaction after our third game.
That's because you have a 'yeah but' for everything. Or you go assuming facts not in evidence.
"Yeah but, Tyreek got hurt..." -- Okay, but what's that have to do with Hardman getting more snaps than Robinson? Dude got 53 snaps in that game. He didn't go from 4th to 3rd in snaps - he went to #2 in snaps immediately. Moore wouldn't have and in fact DIDN'T when Hardman got dinged. Watson is getting snaps over him.
"Yeah but, Maclin and Jackson were first round picks years ago" - okay, what's the closest analogue we've had since? We haven't gone out there grabbing high end WRs since then now have we?
Or you'll hand-waive Hill's contributions as a rookie and say "Well Moore will get there..." Hill was getting about twice the snaps that Moore is getting from the very beginning of that season. As a 5th round converted RB.
When you want to keep narrowing your end-points and/or excusing away examples, you narrow your 'trends' so much you make them meaningless. The way you're addressing this gives you a sample size of ONE. Chris Conley - and he was starting games and getting significant snaps by week 4 of his rookie year.
Or it requires that you make presumptions (like CEH wasn't drafted to start) that you don't have any basis for. Kareem Hunt was the immediate game 1 bellcow back over West because someone as fungible as Spencer Ware went down - and you're really gonna say they didn't draft him as a possible starter? That RB room was a couple of UDFA/Street free agent JAGs.
But sure, it's just those of us who preferred alternatives to Moore (who are simultaneously calling on him to play more) picking on the poor guy.
You say you have some ironclad argument when in fact you haven't actually PRESENTED an argument at all. You've made a declaratory statement and then brushed off any examples that don't fit your narrowly defined sample set. That's no argument at all. It's just using hope as a justification and little else. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
This ain't just a narrative from fans. People in the media have also been saying this about Andy for a long time.
I guess it's just all made up though!
Again, I don't think it is an excuse for an entire rookie season, but to say it isn't for the first 3 games? That's just being hard headed.
Saying it's not surprising that Reid is being patient with Moore 3 games in is far from off the wall stuff.
Look, i'm not OUT on Moore. He needs to get snaps before we can determine what he is or isn't.
But not getting snaps is not encouraging and i don't find, "Reid doesn't play rookies!" as some inescapable truth.
There's a reason Moore isn't seeing snaps. I have no idea why that is. None of us do. But i sincerely doubt it's simply because he's a rookie and Reid doesn't play rookies.
Especially considering how many rookies play for this team every year. It just doesn't hold water. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
Look, i'm not OUT on Moore. He needs to get snaps before we can determine what he is or isn't.
But not getting snaps is not encouraging and i don't find, "Reid doesn't play rookies!" as some inescapable truth.
There's a reason Moore isn't seeing snaps. I have no idea why that is. None of us do. But i sincerely doubt it's simply because he's a rookie and Reid doesn't play rookies.
Especially considering how many rookies play for this team every year. It just doesn't hold water.