Originally Posted by Mecca:
At some point there are some serious questions to be asked. Like..why is the OL less than it's parts. In no way shape or form should that OL look that way when you factor in the players.
Are the players underperforming? Is the scheme not suited for their strengths? Is the coaching bad?
We have a very highly thought of and paid LG, the highest paid center, a RG that is well thought of and a RT that was well thought of before he got here. That is a lot more than so many QBs are working with on the OL.
Then comes this question..when Mahomes hits the top of his drop and doesn't fire, is that because the receivers are a problem and aren't getting open in time..or is Mahomes averse to throwing to guys without clear separation.
These problems are honestly probably all amplifying the other...and don't even get me started on the WR snap counts.
I think that's the correct answer. Smith gets beat too often as a "good" interior OL. Our LT gets beat too often, period. Our receivers probably aren't getting open as quickly as Rice and Brown would have. It's all of those factors that are likely leading to Pat holding the ball a few tenths of a second longer than he should. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DRM08:
Jacksonville did not like Taylor enough to spend $20M per year on him. Chiefs might have been better off with Andrew Wiley at $8M per year and use the other $12M to help other aspects of the team, such as CB/DL/LB or LT.
Did you complain when we signed Taylor because you were still pining for Wylie?
Lots of decisions can look better after the fact. The issue at hand is the process the front office took. We didn't have a LT or a RT and they pivoted by signing the highest-rated FA tackle out there. Unless you have some receipts where you claimed it was a terrible idea at the time because Wylie was super competent, I don't understand why it needs to be re-litigated.
Plenty of decisions the organization has made have worked out; plenty of decisions haven't. We judge this team based on Super Bowls, not on an after-the-fact basis of micro-decisions.
And "Jacksonville didn't like Taylor enough..." blah blah. Is this some kind of joke? Are we holding ourselves to the standard of the Jacksonville Jaguars? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
Taylor was literally the top OT FA that year he was getting paid.
Yep he was getting paid. Now that being said the rules and how they are enforced seem to have taken almost a whole step away from him. They make him stand closer to the line and he can not come close to anticipating the snap like he used to ... This has really hurt his game. Prior to us signing him the above was looked at like a positive. Also think that the rules on being closer to the line would have given Smith problems last year. IT has put a lot more pressure on the tackles of teams that like to leve them on an island,
Further he does seem almost a focal point of all of the crews. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Shields68:
Yep he was getting paid. Now that being said the rules and how they are enforced seem to have taken almost a whole step away from him. They make him stand closer to the line and he can not come close to anticipating the snap like he used to ... This has really hurt his game. Prior to us signing him the above was looked at like a positive. Also think that the rules on being closer to the line would have given Smith problems last year. IT has put a lot more pressure on the tackles of teams that like to leve them on an island,
Further he does seem almost a focal point of all of the crews.
He gets away with more bullshit than any other tackle in the league. It's so fucking dumb that he can't line up correctly and start plays correctly. To the point we expect refs to allow him to do that shit and get mad the couple times they flag him for it.
Teams are now attacking the line just based on how he sets up. It puts us at a disadvantage before the play even starts. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
He gets away with more bullshit than any other tackle in the league. It's so fucking dumb that he can't line up correctly and start plays correctly. To the point we expect refs to allow him to do that shit and get mad the couple times they flag him for it.
Teams are now attacking the line just based on how he sets up. It puts us at a disadvantage before the play even starts.
Sorry but your first sentence just isn't true. Every game, every week, there's at least one tackle doing the exact same thing. It used to be a cheat code. Now it's a penalty. But lots of guys are still doing it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Sorry but your first sentence just isn't true. Every game, every week, there's at least one tackle doing the exact same thing. It used to be a cheat code. Now it's a penalty. But lots of guys are still doing it.
Him and Lane Johnson are the ones who consistently do it. Other guys might do it and refs miss it but for him and Lane you can tell it's a strategic part of their game. It's not like that for others. Wanya is doing that. Wylie wasn't doing that. OBJ wasn't doing that. Fisher wasn't doing that. Humphries won't be doing that. It's Taylor constantly daring the refs to flag him on something [Reply]
Originally Posted by BossChief:
You need your eyes checked.
Morris gave up 4 pressures, 2 hurries, a QB hit and a sack against Carolina.
He’s terrible and Andy will need to give him a lot of help to prevent Maxx from wrecking shit.
That's exactly what I said. My bad I called them pressures instead of 2 hurries. The way it's written out makes it seem worse than it is. That makes it seem like 7 plays that he gave up pressure, but it's just 4. It could be written out as 1 pressure, 2 hurries, and 1 sack. A sack is a pressure and a QB hit. Hurries are also pressures.
I said 3 pressures and 1 sack. That's completely correct. Also one of those pressures is iffy. [Reply]
I wonder if the Chiefs were feeding Humphries team info before they even signed him.
That's remarkable they were able to get him ready this fast.
They had a very clear plan to go get him and executed it. Nobody the wiser for weeks, perhaps months. Makes you wonder about their other secret plans. :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties:
I wonder if the Chiefs were feeding Humphries team info before they even signed him.
That's remarkable they were able to get him ready this fast.
They had a very clear plan to go get him and executed it. Nobody the wiser for weeks, perhaps months. Makes you wonder about their other secret plans. :-)
Also testament to the issues at LT and their faith in Morris.
Really don't hate Morris as the swing tackle but he can't start. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
Did you complain when we signed Taylor because you were still pining for Wylie?
Lots of decisions can look better after the fact. The issue at hand is the process the front office took. We didn't have a LT or a RT and they pivoted by signing the highest-rated FA tackle out there. Unless you have some receipts where you claimed it was a terrible idea at the time because Wylie was super competent, I don't understand why it needs to be re-litigated.
Plenty of decisions the organization has made have worked out; plenty of decisions haven't. We judge this team based on Super Bowls, not on an after-the-fact basis of micro-decisions.
And "Jacksonville didn't like Taylor enough..." blah blah. Is this some kind of joke? Are we holding ourselves to the standard of the Jacksonville Jaguars?
Think this is the right take. I didn't like Taylor, didn't like the contract, but we needed a guy and he was the best available [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Sorry but your first sentence just isn't true. Every game, every week, there's at least one tackle doing the exact same thing. It used to be a cheat code. Now it's a penalty. But lots of guys are still doing it.
It’s just bullshit. Play to the fucking rules and line up straight without trying to cheat a few inches when you know the TV crews and the refs have you under the magnifying glass constantly.
If you are too dumb to line up accurately as a group then you should not be a lavishly paid professional player. [Reply]
