His theory is because when defenses are playing the Chiefs, they change up their tendencies completely.
Teams normally do not play two-high shells like they've played against the Chiefs and other teams this season. So ultimately, when they face up against the Chiefs, they are trotting out a new look that the Chiefs simply don't have on tape. Certain players are playing in certain areas that they normally don't, so it's hard to tell in certain circumstances whether this player or that player will play shallow or deeper or bite on certain routes and whatnot. It's simply not on tape.
He mentions this because of the games where the offense has rolled. In particular, the Raiders played a lot of single-high, which they've done all season. Andy Reid's extensive scouting meant the Chiefs had a counter for everything they did and ended up dominating.
The Chargers played us in a two-high shell, but they normally play in a two-high shell anyway, so Andy Reid had that on tape, and had a counter for everything they did and the offense ended up dominating, even though we lost the game.
Otherwise, we're facing two-deeps from teams that simply don't play two-deep and they can only gameplan against what they think the scheme may end up -- all the defensive tape leading up to the game is not very helpful.
It's a plausible theory that we obviously can't prove at this point, but we can certainly keep an eye on it.
Does anybody know what defense Denver usually plays? Any Denver fans among us? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Direckshun:
His theory is because when defenses are playing the Chiefs, they change up their tendencies completely.
Teams normally do not play two-high shells like they've played against the Chiefs and other teams this season. So ultimately, when they face up against the Chiefs, they are trotting out a new look that the Chiefs simply don't have on tape. Certain players are playing in certain areas that they normally don't, so it's hard to tell in certain circumstances whether this player or that player will play shallow or deeper or bite on certain routes and whatnot. It's simply not on tape.
He mentions this because of the games where the offense has rolled. In particular, the Raiders played a lot of single-high, which they've done all season. Andy Reid's extensive scouting meant the Chiefs had a counter for everything they did and ended up dominating.
The Chargers played us in a two-high shell, but they normally play in a two-high shell anyway, so Andy Reid had that on tape, and had a counter for everything they did and the offense ended up dominating, even though we lost the game.
Otherwise, we're facing two-deeps from teams that simply don't play two-deep and they can only gameplan against what they think the scheme may end up -- all the defensive tape leading up to the game is not very helpful.
It's a plausible theory that we obviously can't prove at this point, but we can certainly keep an eye on it.
Does anybody know what defense Denver usually plays? Any Denver fans among us?
That's Horse shit because regardless if teams normally play it or not that what most teams are doing so we should have figured it out by now. I get taking a few weeks to get through it but now it shouldn't be an issue.
Here is my opinion, I thought for a while it was just Mahomes being off or having a child etc and there is a little bit that probably plays into this for him.
but my theory is this. Lets say we rate players on a scale of 0-100 ( like in school) and grading players as such.
Hill is probably a 95-98
Kelce is probably a 92-95
The rest of our receivers high water mark is probably a 65.
I don't think we have one average "75" receiver on the team so my theory is if we had a
84 and our number four receiver is a 75 so we are lining up.
Hill - 96 average
Kelce - 93 average
Player x - 84 average
Player y - 75
then he has more players that can run great routes and get open . after hill and Kelce our best receivers are D's or lower. [Reply]
Turning the ball over and shitty defense will make any offense look putrid but things are turning up and I don't for see much more mistakes on offense as long as they stay focused and I think they are.
I like that we punched the Cowboys in their face and that's their words. We are good and getting healthy after a bye week we will be a dangerous team.
Now it's our turn to get some turnovers and Sneed and HB have a knack for that.
I'm more pumped for the second half of the season just knowing this team has made comebacks and don't have quit in them. Andy Reid keeps his team from hanging their heads and that is why we won our last four. There is no more struggle just ready for some dominance both sides of the ball and special teams. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties:
The Chiefs didn't even struggle that much against Buffalo. It was mostly just drops and turnovers. Again. They had almost 400 yards of offense. There was a 14-point swing in the third quarter alone on back to back drives based solely on entirely preventable turnovers.
And the BS flag on Clark hitting Allen that was an interception. If that call never happens, we have all the momentum and probably win. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88:
Lamar Jackson has won a Super Bowl? A Super Bowl MVP?
Lamar Jackson has thrown 50 TD passes and 5,000+ passing yards in a single season?
Super Bowl wins are a team accomplishment.
Not to mention, the year Mahomes won the Super Bowl was statistically his worst season. That same year, Lamar threw 36 TDs to 6 INTs. He added another 1200 yards and 7 TDs on the ground. Dude won unanimous MVP. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
Super Bowl wins are a team accomplishment.
Not to mention, the year Mahomes won the Super Bowl was statistically his worst season. That same year, Lamar threw 36 TDs to 6 INTs. He added another 1200 yards and 7 TDs on the ground. Dude won unanimous MVP.
Ask 10 NFL GMs which QB they'd rather have and how many pick Jackson over Mahomes. GTFO with that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
Super Bowl wins are a team accomplishment.
Not to mention, the year Mahomes won the Super Bowl was statistically his worst season. That same year, Lamar threw 36 TDs to 6 INTs. He added another 1200 yards and 7 TDs on the ground. Dude won unanimous MVP.
In that same season Lamar Jackson choked in the playoffs at home as the #1 seed, while Mahomes led three comeback wins, including in the Super Bowl.
You aren’t going to win the Lamar Jackson’s best = Mahomes’ best argument. [Reply]