Originally Posted by htismaqe:
See, I just don't think what we've watched is "good". It worked fine against the Steelers and Texans, two teams that are spiraling towards death.
We are really going to struggle with this in the playoffs - we are depending on scheme too much and there's going to be a hard counter that someone figures out in the next couple of weeks.
But the two toughest teams we'll face both have really iffy secondaries.
We really should be able to move the ball methodically and consistently against both of them in very similar ways to what we did against Pittsburgh and Texas.
Hell, if we face Detroit, same story. Probably Minn and LA as well.
There just aren't any lockdown secondaries we're likely to face in the post-season unless we get another rematch with Philly.
With these questionable secondaries on the other side, why SHOULDN'T we fire fast and let YAC do the work. It's likely to avoid turnovers and keep us in a positive game script. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
But the two toughest teams we'll face both have really iffy secondaries.
We really should be able to move the ball methodically and consistently against both of them in very similar ways to what we did against Pittsburgh and Texas.
Hell, if we face Detroit, same story. Probably Minn and LA as well.
There just aren't any lockdown secondaries we're likely to face in the post-season unless we get another rematch with Philly.
With these questionable secondaries on the other side, why SHOULDN'T we fire fast and let YAC do the work. It's likely to avoid turnovers and keep us in a positive game script.
Again, I don't disagree. I just don't think that's what the Chiefs want to do. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Again, I don't disagree. I just don't think that's what the Chiefs want to do.
And I'm just playing Devil's advocate.
I MIGHT disagree with myself. I really have no idea.
The ability to unlock the entire playbook has been why I wanted to see Humphries grab the job. But if he hasn't (and I don't think he's seized it with both hands by any means) then I don't think we need to force the issue.
If Thuney at LT protects Andy from himself...well shit, maybe that's the best case scenario. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
You're acting like you have seen everything there is to see, and we play a game tomorrow. Neither is true.
and your assessment of what you DID see is hyperbolic nonsense.
You're also acting like Wince's indecision and holding the ball is equal to Mahomes getting the ball out in 2.5 seconds like he was against Pittsburgh. This is also a false comparison.
AND your assessment of what you DID see is also not taking account DJ's supporting cast, which as the game went on became lesser and lesser.
So your whole premise is totally flawed.
If it's Thuney, that'll be because the three time Super Bowl winning coaching staff feels like he gives them the best chance to win. If that's so, okay, so be it.
but if DJ is anywhere NEAR 100%, he's playing LT and Thuney's at LG. It's that simple.
Thanks for chiming in, Andy. Glad you finally let us know. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I guess the biggest question is....why not?
Or at least, why don't they want to stick with that sort of offense? I mean this quick-hitter stuff is WORKING. And the downfield chemistry with Worthy is still not there. No reason to expect it to show up at this point.
Just do what you did for those 3 weeks. You can win with that.
If the reason they don't want Thuney is because they don't want to run the offense that his presence necessitated, I just have to ask why they're so opposed to that? I get that it's not sexy but if Watson is back healthy and with the return of Omenihu, this defense should be at/near where it was last post-season.
You don't NEED sexy.
Run that same offense with DJ and get our superior interior running game back too. In a way that RPO is similar to play action. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
I counted 2 bad plays there. If that's getting "WRECKED" sign me up for it.
Honestly watching that film I thought Kingsley looked pretty damn good at LG. He doesn’t have to kick step as much (which I think is his biggest weakness). Maybe we have something with him at guard? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Palangi:
Honestly watching that film I thought Kingsley looked pretty damn good at LG. He doesn’t have to kick step as much (which I think is his biggest weakness). Maybe we have something with him at guard?
He's probably your starting RG next year would be my guess. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
I counted 2 bad plays there. If that's getting "WRECKED" sign me up for it.
Oh no! He was totally WRECKED, he was TERRIBLE, he was unbelievably BAD and clearly not anywhere near being in football shape! Maybe not even better than Kingsley, who is the WORST NFL LT GUARDIAN HAS EVER SEEN. [Reply]
If Hump's biggest issue is conditioning as the game goes on, but he's decent when in the first half...
Is it a terrible strategy to have him start the first half, and slide Thuney in for the second half if/when (before) he starts to drop off?
I know a mid-game shuffle is normally not ideal and typically done out of desperation after poor performance or injury.
But if that's the gameplan all along, and everyone is ready/on the same page, could that be a net-positive? Essentially a LT by committee approach. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
And I'm just playing Devil's advocate.
I MIGHT disagree with myself. I really have no idea.
The ability to unlock the entire playbook has been why I wanted to see Humphries grab the job. But if he hasn't (and I don't think he's seized it with both hands by any means) then I don't think we need to force the issue.
If Thuney at LT protects Andy from himself...well shit, maybe that's the best case scenario.
I think this is the correct analysis. As soon as he got the hamstring injury Humphries was a long shot for the playoffs.
Maybe he does ultimately offer the higher ceiling, but he really hasn't shown that, and probably never could once he lost that time. I just don't think they can bank on his past form to reappear. I'd be amazed if they don't go with Thuney.
Plus side, maybe he is a more affordable option next year now, with a full offseason and a chance for us to give him a fair chance to learn the offense and build some chemistry with the OL, maybe we'll see that higher ceiling yet. [Reply]
Everybody is talking about how this affects Mahomes and the passing game, but I wonder how much it changes our ability to run the football. Thuney is a beast at LG. Putting him at LT and somebody else at guard has to hurt the Chiefs running game, right?? [Reply]
So, in watching that tape DJ looked halfway decent, and all these comments about them having to change the offense for Thuney make you think they want to go with Humphries. I really wonder if they have a plan as of now, or if they are still figuring things out. They didn't exactly put anyone in a position to succeed yesterday, so you have to think they aren't overly concerned or excited over what they saw and weren't going to put much stock in the film that came out of it because of the situation.
Maybe they've already seen enough in practice and the film room to know he's the guy. Obviously, if you really want to put the best group out there, it's going to include him, at least on paper. I hope he's up for this, because this isn't the Arizona Cardinals anymore. I know he's used to big games in college, but this is an entirely different beast. [Reply]