ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 278 of 435
« First < 178228268274275276277278 279280281282288328378 > Last »
Nzoner's Game Room>Frank Clark fucking sucks
RealSNR 02:33 PM 09-15-2019
Guy has done NOTHING in two games. Barely any pressures to speak of against trash OTs.

Yeah, I'm in bitchy gameday mode. Don't care. I'm tired of paying out the ass for defensive players who don't make plays.

At least Justin Houston could dominate against bad teams after we paid him.
[Reply]
IowaHawkeyeChief 12:21 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
I swear. And honestly I know some of you guys are smarter than this.

How many sacks did PIT get vs. CLE two weeks ago?

With the no. 1 sack-producing defense in the league? And arguably the best edge rusher? C'mon, I know you guys know the answer to this.

ZERO

How many 'pressures' did they get?

QB knock downs?


Did any of you pay attention watching that game?

Does this maybe ring a bell? "Baker Mayfield gets rid of the ball on average in about 2.2 seconds." Some guy, commenting on the game, maybe you had your sound on? Can any of you even name 3 DLs that can get to the QB in under 2.2 seconds? RSNR, I know you're smarter than I am when it comes to individual players' abilities, can you name 3 DLs that can consistently beat the OL in 2.1 seconds? I'm not sure I can name 2. Or even 1.

One of the things I commented on almost a week before the game was that I hoped Spags wouldn't send our best pass-rushers on blitz after blitz trying to get to Baker throughout the game, because it would be a waste of resources. That to have success we'd have to win 1st and 2nd down, and only send Clark in specific situations, AND EVEN THEN OUR DL HAD TO BE VERY DISCIPLINED IN THEIR RUSHES.

Otherwise, defend the run, protect against Baker rolling out to his left, where he's been the most dangerous this season, Don't allow your edge rushers to rush too deep and allow Baker to escape behind the rush, and guard against WR/HB/TE screens.

And how did Spags try to blitz? Oh yeah, he sent CBs. In fact, the only sack we got on Baker was by sending two CBs from either side, and Sneed got home, right?

So, based on what you could clearly see on the field on Sunday, is it reasonable to assume that Spags learned valuable lessons from reviewing the CLE/PIT game? That he didn't even try PIT's attempted solution of sending Watt on his rush, and trailing a LB/S/CB behind TJ to try and keep Baker from leaking out of the pocket, which didn't work for shit?

So when you watched Clark faking rushes, lining up wider than he's really ever lined up, Rushing at an angle that would never actually bring him to the QB, etc., what? You thought Clark was freelancing all of that? That he'd just lost his mind?

You really think Spags would've kept him on the field if any of that were true?

Clark did exactly what he was supposed to do in that game. Exactly what Spags wanted him to do.

What we saw from Clark was disciplined football. Set the edge. Defend the screens. Drop into coverage if necessary. Keep Baker from rolling left. Keep Baker from escaping behind the rush. Check, check, check, check.

JC. Did you guys really think that Jones and Clark were going to get a handful of sacks vs. an OL/QB that just stoned the best pass-rushing DL in football? Especially when the QB gets rid of the ball in 2.2 seconds?

Thank God Spags wasn't that dumb.
Good Post... Bills are different. You need to contain Allen to his right, while pressuring him from the left. I hope we get a few this week.
[Reply]
Megatron96 12:28 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief:
Good Post... Bills are different. You need to contain Allen to his right, while pressuring him from the left. I hope we get a few this week.
I don't care if we get any sacks vs. Allen. We didn't last time, and Spags made him look like Lamar.

But yeah, force him to his right, make him have to move in a direction he isn't as comfortable with, and process at the same time. It's how Spags handled him last time, and it worked beautifully.
[Reply]
IowaHawkeyeChief 12:35 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
I don't care if we get any sacks vs. Allen. We didn't last time, and Spags made him look like Lamar.

But yeah, force him to his right, make him have to move in a direction he isn't as comfortable with, and process at the same time. It's how Spags handled him last time, and it worked beautifully.
I could give a shit whether we have any sacks as well. I win is a win. You meant force him to his left, right? I think we need to set the edge with the left defensive side so he can't roll to his right, and Frank's responsibility when rushing from the defensive right can be less disciplined and more "shark like" than this past week. Also, any notable pressure from the middle will not allow him to step up or stay in a tight pocket like Baker was able to do.
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 12:38 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by Bowser:
Two pressures on the stat sheet against a second string tackle then a third string tackle that had been on the roster a week. That would be a shitty day for K-Pass much less Clark.
And there is the issue right there. We really don't have a legit force on the opposite side of Frank. There was a reason Veach brought in Suggs last year.
[Reply]
OKchiefs 12:40 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
I don't care if we get any sacks vs. Allen. We didn't last time, and Spags made him look like Lamar.

But yeah, force him to his right, make him have to move in a direction he isn't as comfortable with, and process at the same time. It's how Spags handled him last time, and it worked beautifully.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe to the right is where Allen actually wants to go, so we want to keep him from being able to move the pocket to the right. I would think the DE or whoever has contain on that side would actually want to rush up field a bit and keep him in the pocket over actually trying to crash the pocket. Allen seems to do most of his damage when he's rolling to the right.
[Reply]
Megatron96 12:54 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief:
I could give a shit whether we have any sacks as well. I win is a win. You meant force him to his left, right? I think we need to set the edge with the left defensive side so he can't roll to his right, and Frank's responsibility when rushing from the defensive right can be less disciplined and more "shark like" than this past week. Also, any notable pressure from the middle will not allow him to step up or stay in a tight pocket like Baker was able to do.
Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe to the right is where Allen actually wants to go, so we want to keep him from being able to move the pocket to the right. I would think the DE or whoever has contain on that side would actually want to rush up field a bit and keep him in the pocket over actually trying to crash the pocket. Allen seems to do most of his damage when he's rolling to the right.
You guys are probably right. Or left. Whatever. i know we've faced a couple different QB this season that like rolling out, one likes the left, the other the right. It gets confusing sometimes. Whichever way Allen doesn't like (I'm sure Spags isn't confused), we push him that way and get some pressure on him while he tries to escape, and try to force him to make a mental mistake. Or throw the ball away. Either way is a win for the defense.

IMO, this type of game-plan frustrates Allen. And over the course of the game that frustration can reap dividends. If Spags can get in his head and keep frustrating him, Allen should start making mistakes. And those mistakes should translate into INTs or other turnovers. Which are far better than sacks. Give me the ball back. Who cares if we have a crooked number in the "sack" stat line.

And the best way to execute that plan is for the defense to play extremely disciplined football. Stay in your lane, keep Allen contained, send an occasional but well-timed extra blitzer, and let HB/Thornhill/Sneed/Breeland/Sorenson ball-hawk.

Sacks are for stats mavens. Turnovers win games.
[Reply]
-King- 03:56 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
You guys are probably right. Or left. Whatever. i know we've faced a couple different QB this season that like rolling out, one likes the left, the other the right. It gets confusing sometimes. Whichever way Allen doesn't like (I'm sure Spags isn't confused), we push him that way and get some pressure on him while he tries to escape, and try to force him to make a mental mistake. Or throw the ball away. Either way is a win for the defense.

IMO, this type of game-plan frustrates Allen. And over the course of the game that frustration can reap dividends. If Spags can get in his head and keep frustrating him, Allen should start making mistakes. And those mistakes should translate into INTs or other turnovers. Which are far better than sacks. Give me the ball back. Who cares if we have a crooked number in the "sack" stat line.

And the best way to execute that plan is for the defense to play extremely disciplined football. Stay in your lane, keep Allen contained, send an occasional but well-timed extra blitzer, and let HB/Thornhill/Sneed/Breeland/Sorenson ball-hawk.

Sacks are for stats mavens. Turnovers win games.

No disrespect to a “tackle” but that shit doesn’t feed my family, “sacks”do. New team, new system, doubles, chips, etc. IRRELEVANT. Save the excuses, success in the league isn’t driven with excuses. ♥️🏁
-Black Elvis

— Frank Clark (@TheRealFrankC_) September 29, 2019

[Reply]
Megatron96 04:44 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by -King-:
:-)
You're witty response is to bring up a twaddle from 14 months ago?

Yay. Kudos for being able to find something that's nearly a year-and-a-half old, and not relevant to the actual current conversation.
[Reply]
ThaVirus 04:46 PM 01-19-2021
It's relevant. That goes to show that Frank himself likely isn't even satisfied with his play.

We can try and sweep it under the rug all we want because ultimately we won, but if we had lost, he'd have shared a lot of the blame for no-showing in the backfield.
[Reply]
IowaHawkeyeChief 04:49 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
It's relevant. That goes to show that Frank himself likely isn't even satisfied with his play.

We can try and sweep it under the rug all we want because ultimately we won, but if we had lost, he'd have shared a lot of the blame for no-showing in the backfield.
If we lose because we constantly lost the edge and let Allen get out of the pocket and make plays, but Frank had 3 sacks, you good?
[Reply]
-King- 04:52 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief:
If we lose because we constantly lost the edge and let Allen get out of the pocket and make plays, but Frank had 3 sacks, you good?
Why do you act like it's one or the other? You pay a player $100mil because you believe he can do both the stat sheet impact plays and the "hidden" plays.
[Reply]
ThaVirus 04:53 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief:
If we lose because we constantly lost the edge and let Allen get out of the pocket and make plays, but Frank had 3 sacks, you good?
What kind of question is this? Lol

Frank Clark got a $100m deal. He's an edge rusher. He is expected to set the edge against the run AND have a meaningful impact on the pass rush.

Dude's taking up $26m of cap space next season. We need more than an edge-setter in run defense.
[Reply]
Megatron96 04:58 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
It's relevant. That goes to show that Frank himself likely isn't even satisfied with his play.

We can try and sweep it under the rug all we want because ultimately we won, but if we had lost, he'd have shared a lot of the blame for no-showing in the backfield.
That twit thing was written in SEPT. 2019.
[Reply]
RealSNR 05:42 PM 01-19-2021
$26 million?

Have Clark and Mathieu swap salaries next year. Even afterward, Clark would still be overpaid.
[Reply]
IowaHawkeyeChief 05:55 PM 01-19-2021
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
What kind of question is this? Lol

Frank Clark got a $100m deal. He's an edge rusher. He is expected to set the edge against the run AND have a meaningful impact on the pass rush.

Dude's taking up $26m of cap space next season. We need more than an edge-setter in run defense.
I have not problem with that, but if he was just concentrating on sacks vs. the Browns, we would have probably lost. Baker gets rid of the ball fast and we had limited pressure up the middle if he lingered in the pocket. My point being, it appears Spags is coaching them to be deliberate in their responsibilities, and we prefer to get pressure more from intermittent blitzes from our LB's and DB's. The stats aren't going to get Frank another big contract, I agree, but he is playing fairly well within the scope of the defense and what Spags is asking of our D. Dee Ford would be far less effective, let alone be on the field, and if he was healthy he would probably have quite a few sacks, but our D would be worse for having him. I wish Frank was both for the amount of his contract, I get it, but he is way better than Dee Ford...
[Reply]
Page 278 of 435
« First < 178228268274275276277278 279280281282288328378 > Last »
Up