Originally Posted by RunKC:
Remember the Mahomes comeback in Denver? Chris Harris had to have an IV bc he was so exhausted.
He wore a Fitbit and said he ran about 15 miles bc of Mahomes extending plays.
That's the thing - 5 years ago I'd have been right there alongside Wallcrawler with this argument. But then I saw guys, DBs especially, coming off the field with NOTHING left in the tank. And DEs tapping their helmets during drives where it was all passes because the drives upfield were sapping their legs.
So I studied. I looked into the research on it. And man this stuff is getting to the point of damn near unassailable - again, at least over large numbers. Then you saw the apex of the philosophy in some of those games last year when the offense was not only exhausting guys that week, but running them so ragged that the teams they were playing were suffering hangover effects the following week.
I ain't new to this game, this isn't an opinion I came into this world fully formed with. It's a product of seeing stuff on the field that made me take pause and investigate. And when you're willing to explore this stuff with an open mind you realize that so much of the stuff we've believed to be true for decades simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Then you start really listening to former players and they say some of the same things.
Bottom line is that there's no sense in arguing with people in the internet age. "Perry Mason Moments" where some dude confesses the error of his ways and breaks down just don't happen w/ the veil of anonymity the internet allows. When you engage in these debates, it's not for the benefit of the opponent, but rather for the benefit of other readers who may be reading this with an open mind.
Wallcrawler wishes to remain militantly ignorant. So be it - there's no law against it. If he wants to call anyone who shares a pretty informed contrary opinion to his a dipshit, well more power to him. Enjoy your flat earth, Chief. This limpwrist character has brought effectively nothing with him to the discussion apart from quoting headlines and pining for Martyball. I'm pretty sure he's a dupe account and if he's not, he's largely irrelevant as I have no independent recollection of him anyway. Glorydaze wants to sit in the peanut gallery and thumb-down posts while not adding any counter-points of his own.
These aren't your target audience. The knuckle dragger, the troll and the peanut gallery will not be swayed, no matter how hard you try.
But someone else might. Ultimately reading discussions similar to this is how I slowly came to change my mind on a lot of stuff like this. That and the fact that I have the intellectual curiosity to bother to inform myself.
Others don't. But that's their cross to bear and not mine. [Reply]
Jeeeeezus ****ing Christ. Get over yourself. Get down off that soapbox before you fall and hurt yourself.
Simply because I view the defense getting the shit pounded out of them by having to go hit after hit with a rb (especially when its cold) as being more taxing than simply chasing after people with far less punishment, does not make me militantly ignorant. But please, continue to pound your chest like a shit slinging primate attempting the refuting a very basic concept that has been known since the inception of the ****ing game.
As for everyone in this and other threads that youre "saving" from "misinformation", well enjoy your imaginary little crusade. Frankly i can't think of an idea right offhand more pathetic, but hey, you do you.
What color cape would you like, as you save us all from thinking differently than you?
In the meantime, I hope that we don't buckle under the weight of these crosses we have to bear.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
That's the thing - 5 years ago I'd have been right there alongside Wallcrawler with this argument. But then I saw guys, DBs especially, coming off the field with NOTHING left in the tank. And DEs tapping their helmets during drives where it was all passes because the drives upfield were sapping their legs.
So I studied. I looked into the research on it. And man this stuff is getting to the point of damn near unassailable - again, at least over large numbers. Then you saw the apex of the philosophy in some of those games last year when the offense was not only exhausting guys that week, but running them so ragged that the teams they were playing were suffering hangover effects the following week.
I ain't new to this game, this isn't an opinion I came into this world fully formed with. It's a product of seeing stuff on the field that made me take pause and investigate. And when you're willing to explore this stuff with an open mind you realize that so much of the stuff we've believed to be true for decades simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Then you start really listening to former players and they say some of the same things.
Bottom line is that there's no sense in arguing with people in the internet age. "Perry Mason Moments" where some dude confesses the error of his ways and breaks down just don't happen w/ the veil of anonymity the internet allows. When you engage in these debates, it's not for the benefit of the opponent, but rather for the benefit of other readers who may be reading this with an open mind.
Wallcrawler wishes to remain militantly ignorant. So be it - there's no law against it. If he wants to call anyone who shares a pretty informed contrary opinion to his a dipshit, well more power to him. Enjoy your flat earth, Chief. This limpwrist character has brought effectively nothing with him to the discussion apart from quoting headlines and pining for Martyball. I'm pretty sure he's a dupe account and if he's not, he's largely irrelevant as I have no independent recollection of him anyway. Glorydaze wants to sit in the peanut gallery and thumb-down posts while not adding any counter-points of his own.
These aren't your target audience. The knuckle dragger, the troll and the peanut gallery will not be swayed, no matter how hard you try.
But someone else might. Ultimately reading discussions similar to this is how I slowly came to change my mind on a lot of stuff like this. That and the fact that I have the intellectual curiosity to bother to inform myself.
Others don't. But that's their cross to bear and not mine.
First, I never quoted any headline - I think you have me confused with Jimmya. I just jumped into this because people were glossing over Reid's well-documented flaws. I'm not one of the people just shitting all over andy. My position is that he's a great coach but with some very concerning flaws. So i'm not just trying to be a contrarian troll - i can find some common ground with what most people are saying.
Second, I'm not pining for Martyball. I brought up Marty b/c I believe he was also a great coach with deeply concerning flaws that proved to be fatal to winning a super bowl. I agreed with ChiefsFanatic's point about how we can all admit Marty's flaws yet some people are glossing over Reid's (one poster is even trying to rewrite history to erase them). Since I believe that Marty's flaws were fatal to winning a super bowl, why would that be something I would pine for? Notice I never agreed with the point about wearing out a defense with the running game - i actually agree with Chris Meck that it is the snap count and keeping the D on the field that matters more.
Finally, I'm not a dupe account. You don't have a recollection of me b/c I'm a fairly new poster. I've been a lurker since 2011/2012 and before that I was a poster on Wild Bill's Chiefs since 1999 and then some on Chiefs Coalition. I just joined the fray to have solid conversations about football, but I hesitated doing this for many years b/c I was worried about getting dragged into stupid petty sidetrack arguments and name-calling, which has predictably occurred. And that's fine - i knew what i was getting into (instead of responding logically, I should have just responded by calling my critics buttfucking morons). For the record, it was the ball-powdering thread that won me over to chiefsplanet - that and I've seen how people here rally to help each other when in need and how most people here are actually good people despite being buttfucking morons on the internet. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wallcrawler:
Jeeeeezus ****ing Christ. Get over yourself. Get down off that soapbox before you fall and hurt yourself.
Simply because I view the defense getting the shit pounded out of them by having to go hit after hit with a rb (especially when its cold) as being more taxing than simply chasing after people with far less punishment, does not make me militantly ignorant. But please, continue to pound your chest like a shit slinging primate attempting the refuting a very basic concept that has been known since the inception of the ****ing game.
As for everyone in this and other threads that youre "saving" from "misinformation", well enjoy your imaginary little crusade. Frankly i can't think of an idea right offhand more pathetic, but hey, you do you.
What color cape would you like, as you save us all from thinking differently than you?
In the meantime, I hope that we don't buckle under the weight of these crosses we have to bear.
****ing unbelievable level of stupid.
I worry you missed the point.
Again - the willfully uniformed are no concern of mine. You know what you know and by god, that's how you likes it.
Originally Posted by Lilmrp117:
First, I never quoted any headline - I think you have me confused with Jimmya...
Very possibly - I tend to gloss over the names on the side so if so, my apologies.
As for the rest...yeah, probably just lumped you in with the Jimmya guy. My bad, yo.
(But c'mon, I LIKED Marty and still defend him, but I can't see any fair argument to make that the dude was as good a coach as Reid - good coach who I feel has an undeserved historic rap because yes, he did get unlucky a couple of times - but not as good as Reid. ) [Reply]
As the white knight of this thread already stated, you aren't going to change anyones mind.
DJs left nut contends that Andys failure to run the ball over several YEARS with his best backs (yes, efdectively stopping his own rushing attack) was all just fine, because rushing the ball doesnt tire out defenses, and throwing it all the time puts more pressure on them.
So every time we lost a game because Andy gave Jamaal 7 carries the whole game, well thats all fine, because passing is so much better, and really we only run the ball because we are winning, we don't run it to win, even though we've had all world backs on the team. Andy didnt screw up by ignoring these players, no.no. no. He was putting more pressure on the d by gameplanning his all world back out of the games.
Going away from Kareem Hunt. Totally fine. Rushing the football is EASIER on the defense. Yes. They would rather get pounded all day by a physical rb than rush the passer and defend passes all day.
This dudes head is so far up his own ass that the lump In his throat is his nose.
I'd advise no further engagement, lest we have to suffer another post of him sniffing his own farts and explaining how willfully informed he is due to his immense intellectual curiosities, and begin rambling on about fucking crosses we have to bear. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wallcrawler:
As the white knight of this thread already stated, you aren't going to change anyones mind.
DJs left nut contends that Andys failure to run the ball over several YEARS with his best backs (yes, efdectively stopping his own rushing attack) was all just fine, because rushing the ball doesnt tire out defenses, and throwing it all the time puts more pressure on them.
So every time we lost a game because Andy gave Jamaal 7 carries the whole game, well thats all fine, because passing is so much better, and really we only run the ball because we are winning, we don't run it to win, even though we've had all world backs on the team. Andy didnt screw up by ignoring these players, no.no. no. He was putting more pressure on the d by gameplanning his all world back out of the games.
Going away from Kareem Hunt. Totally fine. Rushing the football is EASIER on the defense. Yes. They would rather get pounded all day by a physical rb than rush the passer and defend passes all day.
This dudes head is so far up his own ass that the lump In his throat is his nose.
I'd advise no further engagement, lest we have to suffer another post of him sniffing his own farts and explaining how willfully informed he is due to his immense intellectual curiosities, and begin rambling on about ****ing crosses we have to bear.
It’s probably best that you and Jimmy just not watch the game on Sunday. I understand this type of behavior after a playoff loss, but I don’t remember seeing this much Andy slander before game day aside from opposing fans.
Yes Andy has been the HC of teams who have not met expectations in the playoffs. And the answer is yes, I would take Andy over any coach not named Bill Belichick.
There have been multiple examples of players, coaches And franchises struggling to win it all for so long before finally getting it done. We obviously hope Andy joins that list.
But hey if you guys are going to spend your whole week bitching about the past the entire week of a playoff game, don’t expect the rest of us to join you. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Sure, ignore the comments from former players and the numbers themselves. There is NO correlation between running the ball early and defenses playing less effectively later. None at all.
Because gang-tackling some dude who's picking through a line who you probably outweigh by 40 lbs doesn't take much out of a guy who's body is conditioned for contact. Moreover, it takes just as much out of the RB who takes the blow.
Guys like Derrick Henry are EXTREME outliers. And guess what? He WASN'T why the Titans won. They ran and ran and ran and ran and guess how many points they scored in the second half of that Patriots game when the Pats should've been 'worn down' by having to tackle that mountain of a human-being?
Yeah - you guessed it - zero. Not a single ****ing point apart from the Brady pick-six. Nothing Derrick Henry did in the second half 'tired out' the defense. They simply gang-piled him then did it over and over again. The Titans defense and Tom Brady are why the Patriots lost that game, not Derrick Henry.
Like I said, you're just a mouth-breathing neanderthal who won't pay attention to what any of the actual research on this topic has clearly shown.
Keep shouting into the darkness, hoss. No skin off my ass.
You should do everyone a favor and follow your on advice.
Or bring something to the discussion other than hot take headlines, factually baseless rantings about the lack of a running attack (which has been disproved multiple times in this thread alone), and maundering over clock management. [Reply]
Dude's teams are in the top 10 in points scored 2/3 of the seasons he's coached in this league, but you probably know more about running an offense than him. And hey, guy also has FREQUENTLY had a top 10 running game (and almost always top 10 in terms of rush efficiency), but you're right - he's just constantly getting away from it.
Guy's had 5 seasons in 21 where he had a clearly below average rushing attack. This season's shitshow being one of them, a season where we are just flat-out bad at running the football because we can't keep a RB healthy and our IOL is lousy. In '04 & '05 he lost Westbrook for large chunks of the year, in '08 & '09 he had serious OL issues, Westbrook had lost a step (after making an All-Pro team under Reid, mind you) and he turned the reigns over to the rookie McCoy in '09 who the following season ALSO became an All-Pro under Reid in a season where he had 17 rushing touchdowns. Charles gets as many carries per game under Reid in 2013 as he ever has in his career and makes an All-Pro team. Duce Staley gets 325 carries (60+ more carries than he had under Ray Rhodes the previous year) for his career season the year Andy takes over in Philly. Then of course Kareem Hunt leads the league in rushing under Andy.
I mean, we're gonna bitch about the fact that he didn't hand off the ball to the "League's leading rusher" in the Titans game where they got a whopping 3 possessions in the 2nd half, one of which was stalled precisely because of a negative rushing attempt on 1st down, and just gloss right over the fact that Andy Reid ran an offense that yielded the league's leading rusher that season.
You're right - a dude w/ a track record of getting exceptional seasons out of 2nd day picks and who managed to do stuff like get 564 yards at 5 yards/clip out of Bryce Brown as his backup RB clearly just doesn't care about the running game. Dude who's average season is above average in rushing yards and who routinely finishes in the top 10 in rushing YPC (and top 5 nearly half the time) while managing to create careers for guys like Spencer Ware and Correll Buckhalter clearly doesn't know how to utilize his backs.
Andy Reid, who's average offensive output over a 21 year career is a top 10 offense despite thoroughly average QBs, simply doesn't understand that if he'd have just handed the ball off more, everything would've been BETTER. The guy with the .600+ winning percentage who will almost certainly retire as one of the top 5 winningest coaches in football history - secret idiot all along. Doesn't know how to use runningbacks or score points, a 21 year track record of high scoring offenses and productive runningbacks be damned.
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
More nonsensical headlines/factless hot takes upcoming . . .
"IF HE'D HAVE JUST POUNDED THE BALL WITH THE BRUISING TAILBACKS HE HAD LIKE LESEAN MCCOY, BRIAN WESTBROOK AND JAMAAL CHARLES, HE'D HAVE WON 70% OF HIS GAMES!!!!"
Guys had one truly big back in his entire career and he handed him the ball 325 times in the season before an injury took the starch out of his legs. The 2nd most powerful back he had led the league in rushing yards in the sole season Reid had him.
But to hear him tell it, the problem is really that he didn't have all 205 lbs of Brian Westbrook hurling himself into middle linebackers to 'tire them out'. I'm sure LeSean McCoy picking his way through holes before being tripped up just exhausted that LB who had to take two steps and whack the dude he outweighs by 35 lbs. Jamaal Charles was handled delicately by every coach he had including a true 'throwback' in Herm Edwards. It wasn't because they didn't recognize how dangerous he could be, but rather because they knew a 200 lb RB had no business carrying the ball 350 times.
It's just such a mindlessly dogmatic argument that ignores situations and personnel - the same as the tired 'Andy can't manage a game' argument. Just gotta bite on that narrative and gnaw on it like a rabid dog, man. [Reply]
