I think we all expect that the trio of Mahomes, Kelce, and Hill will still be a potent group, and that the offense will work itself out to some degree.
There are pieces we need to fit in to be complete, but I think it's also obvious that the defense is the most pressing issue.
so what's your plan?
Can Spags? Who's your hire?
What players are you letting walk, re-sign, what positions are you drafting?
Who do you feel good about rolling with moving forward? [Reply]
What all is required to run a Gus Bradley D talent wise? Trying to remember what made that Seattle d click.. Earl Thomas, Kj Wright, Wagner, Sherman and browner and his pile of adderal? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Dunerdr:
What all is required to run a Gus Bradley D talent wise? Trying to remember what made that Seattle d click.. Earl Thomas, Kj Wright, Wagner, Sherman and browner and his pile of adderal?
What made it work was that it was new at the time.
Defenses are evolving every week (more so every season) because offense gets tape on defenses weaknesses and give versa
Andy Reid wasn’t lying when he said he’s seeing stuff on d that he’s never seen on tape before. [Reply]
I don't see why we can't expect this defense to regain something close to the form of last year's. I don't think that losing Wilson, Kpass and Breeland crippled the talent level.
The narrative that they were trying to do too many new things for the first month made a lot of sense. When they went back to a more basic approach vs WFT, the difference was drastic. But of course they looked worse than ever in the first half vs Tennessee. I wonder if they miss Hitchens' presence more than expected. It seems like there's always been a noticeable decline when he's missed games in the past.
I also think the schedule has made the defense look a bit worse than it is. It wasn't unusual for KC's defense to give up 30 to quality offenses the past few years. This year's schedule just happened to be front-loaded with good offenses. 5 of the 7 they've faced are potent offensive teams. Playing the Giants, Denver 2x, Pittsburgh, etc should help the defense get some of its confidence back. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
I don't see why we can't expect this defense to regain something close to the form of last year's. I don't think that losing Wilson, Kpass and Breeland crippled the talent level.
The narrative that they were trying to do too many new things for the first month made a lot of sense. When they went back to a more basic approach vs WFT, the difference was drastic. But of course they looked worse than ever in the first half vs Tennessee. I wonder if they miss Hitchens' presence more than expected. It seems like there's always been a noticeable decline when he's missed games in the past.
I also think the schedule has made the defense look a bit worse than it is. It wasn't unusual for KC's defense to give up 30 to quality offenses the past few years. This year's schedule just happened to be front-loaded with good offenses. 5 of the 7 they've faced are potent offensive teams. Playing the Giants, Denver 2x, Pittsburgh, etc should help the defense get some of its confidence back.
Take the point re the schedule, but talent wise we have to consider it's a poor roster. It may not have changed much but in each area it's hard to argue they've not gone backwards - partly this is replacements and partly it's players getting older.
DT - Reed is worse than Jones there, obviously. Nnadi has dropped off a cliff. Wharton is being criminally mis/over-used. Saunders is about what we thought he was.
DE - Clark has got even worse, Okafor has gone backwards, Jones hasn't improved things. Danna should be a rotational piece, Kaindoh is pure projection. We moved on Charlton and Ward who can't have been worse than Okafor.
LB - Wilson is nothing special but is better than Hitchens and Niemann. Bolton is a run stopper and seems to have limited value beyond that.
CB - Breeland looks done, but Hughes and Baker are not much better, they look like decent depth/backup. Sneed has looked far more like a R4 pick - who knows if that's who he is or if it's the rookie version.
S - Sorensen is even worse. HB has gone backwards.
The roster isn't drastically different but perhaps it's a case of "if you're not getting better you're going backwards". [Reply]
If your players are in a position to make plays and they aren't, I think it can be because:
1) They don't respect their coaching.
2) They no longer have the passion to win. (because they got a ring or got paid)
3) They lack talent and/or have gotten old.
I don't think option 3 is the case here with most of the Chiefs D players.
Either bring in a new Coach/Scheme or start dumping players and find a defense who is HUNGRY for a Ring. [Reply]
The 1st question that needs to be answered is do you keep Spags? He seems to wear out his welcome everywhere he goes about the 3rd year. The 2nd question would be who do you replace him with? If the new DC is a 4-3 guy we're in better shape in our front 7 than with a 3-4 with our existing players. I don't believe there's an existing DC out there that would take a lateral, so now you have to take a chance on an up and comer. I have no clue who that might be. I'll have to go with fire Spags and get a hungry up and comer 4-3 assistant.
The 1st obvious move is to move on from Clark and his overstuffed contract. We still have 1 more year with Hitchens, but taking a $4.2M dead cap hit is probably better than $12.725M to watch him whiff tackles. The next question is Reed. It's not been a banner year for him, so do you extend him at his current $5.5M or let him walk? Walk. Next up, everyone's favorite drama queen, Mr. Mathieu. Real live salary this year, $14.8M. Personally, I think he's worth less than that. Chase a ring, tweet, or whatever somewhere else. If he wants to say, it has to be in the $15-6M range.
Next let's look at CP's favorite whipping boys, Sorenson and Neimann. Sorenson makes a little over $1.2M. Just for money comparison, Wylie makes $2.1M. I'll keep Dirty Dan for $1.2 and cut Wylie to save some cash if we have to. Neimann ($1.55M) or ST ace(?) DOD at $1.1M? How many D snaps has Dorian played this year? If you drop Sorenson and HB, you now have Thornhill and Watts as your starting safeties with few or no viable backups. Moving on from Neimann leaves Gay, Bolton, DOD, and a massive amount of dreck at LB. I'm not saying either should be a starter, but they are depth in areas of need.
I'd keep all our starting CBs and Fenton. The existing 2nd and 3rd stringers can be pretty easily replaced.
Now comes the elephant in the room. Most of us here wanted to keep Jones -- at DT. I don't think there would have been that support for his contract demands at DE. Either he has to move back inside or Veach has to find someone stupid enough to take that $56M cap anchor.
Keeping a 4-3 we'll need 2 DEs, a FS, and another LB at minimum. Going to a 3-4 forces us to get a NT and 2 OLBs plus the FS. That doesn't count depth and turnover. As much as my philosophy has always been more LBs, more better, I think we have to stay with the 4-3 next year. Either way, that's a lot of holes to fill with not a lot of money. Keep in mind we have to have at least 1 new OT. The draft isn't going to fix it all, neither is snapping up mid-tier FAs. Bottom line, Clark, Hitchens, Reed, and Mathieu (barring a team-friendly deal) have to go. Say buh-bye to hangers-on like Wylie, DOD, Kemp, LDT, and DRob. Those salaries give you roughly another $9.75M. [Reply]
