PDA

View Full Version : O-line! O-line! O-line!!!!



chief31
02-03-2008, 07:51 AM
Just to emphasize the point about the offensive line being the top-two (at least) priorities for this team, this offseason...

Since 2002, the Chiefs' sacks allowed total has risen.


Year sacks allowed rank


'02 26 8th


'03, 21 4th


'04, 32 10th


'05, 32 15th.


'06, 41 22nd.


'07, 55 - 32nd.

But that is only one half of the evidence. The running game has also taken a beating...


Year YPC Rank


'02, 5.1 2nd


'03, 4.3 12th


'04, 4.6 3rd


'05, 4.6 5th


'06, 4.2 13th


'07, 3.3 - 31st


Here is a look at the trend that our offense has taken altogether...


Year Points rank yards rank


'02 29.2 1st 375 4th


'03 30.3 1st 369.4 2nd


'04 30.2 2nd 418.4 1st


'05 25.2 6th 387 1st


'06 20.7 15th 321.4 16th


'07 14.1 31st 276.8 - 31st


Rather you like the "high-flying" offense, or not, you have to score points to win the game. And if you want to have a "ball-control" offense, then you have to be able to move the ball when you have it, or the clock doesn't move. The better that you can do these things, the better the chances are that you will win games.


Aside from a coaching change, the obvious change that has caused the erosion of our offensive production is the loss of Hall of Fame offensive linemen, Willie Roaf, and Will Shields. (Roaf retired before the '06 season, and Shields before '07. Do you see how the numbers reflect that?) and with Wiegman set to retire, the offensive line will be losing a third stater from the offensive line.


With only Damien MacIntosh having been added, and Welbourne needing to be replaced, That leaves two qualified starters, in a combined, five starting positions.


Every other position that we have is covered with qualified NFL starters. While depth and youth are required at Cornerback, the need is not for an immediate starter. (Yet.)


Either through free-agency, trade, or the draft, we have to find, or make, three starters for the offensive line, before the '08 season.






(I was bored.)

chief31
02-03-2008, 07:58 AM
Oh, and, the Reputation scales (Located to the top-right of the post) are for giving your "kudos" to a post that you liked, or thought was a good post.

Not sure why I was posting it here. Maybe the "Reputation" thread would have worked. Or the "Rep-whores" thread. :D Or both.

:lol:

Chiefster
02-03-2008, 08:04 AM
O-Line!!!!!












That is all.

AkChief49
02-03-2008, 09:46 AM
so you're thinking o-line?-I agree

tornadospotter
02-03-2008, 12:50 PM
Just to emphasize the point about the offensive line being the top-two (at least) priorities for this team, this offseason...

Since 2002, the Chiefs' sacks allowed total has risen.


Year sacks allowed rank


'02 26 8th


'03, 21 4th


'04, 32 10th


'05, 32 15th.


'06, 41 22nd.


'07, 55 - 32nd.

But that is only one half of the evidence. The running game has also taken a beating...


Year YPC Rank


'02, 5.1 2nd


'03, 4.3 12th


'04, 4.6 3rd


'05, 4.6 5th


'06, 4.2 13th


'07, 3.3 - 31st


Here is a look at the trend that our offense has taken altogether...


Year Points rank yards rank


'02 29.2 1st 375 4th


'03 30.3 1st 369.4 2nd


'04 30.2 2nd 418.4 1st


'05 25.2 6th 387 1st


'06 20.7 15th 321.4 16th


'07 14.1 31st 276.8 - 31st


Rather you like the "high-flying" offense, or not, you have to score points to win the game. And if you want to have a "ball-control" offense, then you have to be able to move the ball when you have it, or the clock doesn't move. The better that you can do these things, the better the chances are that you will win games.


Aside from a coaching change, the obvious change that has caused the erosion of our offensive production is the loss of Hall of Fame offensive linemen, Willie Roaf, and Will Shields. (Roaf retired before the '06 season, and Shields before '07. Do you see how the numbers reflect that?) and with Wiegman set to retire, the offensive line will be losing a third stater from the offensive line.


With only Damien MacIntosh having been added, and Welbourne needing to be replaced, That leaves two qualified starters, in a combined, five starting positions.


Every other position that we have is covered with qualified NFL starters. While depth and youth are required at Cornerback, the need is not for an immediate starter. (Yet.)


Either through free-agency, trade, or the draft, we have to find, or make, three starters for the offensive line, before the '08 season.







(I was bored.)

I think you have a valid point here.:D O- line instead of offensive line.:yahoo:

hermhater
02-03-2008, 12:57 PM
Nice stats chief31!

(Actually the stats suck, but nice research!)

After we use our first two picks on O linemen, we will probably use Free Agency to get the rest.

I am positive Carl and Herm will focus on the O line this off season, and the new O coaches will make us the number one offense in the league again!

:yahoo:

Pro_Angler
02-03-2008, 04:27 PM
I cannot agree with you anymore we need O-line young and tough not some older free agent!!!!!!!!!!!!

We need a RB as well a FRIKIN CORNER AND LB we have descen safety's.

chief31
02-03-2008, 09:57 PM
I cannot agree with you anymore we need O-line young and tough not some older free agent!!!!!!!!!!!!

We need a RB as well a FRIKIN CORNER AND LB we have descen safety's.


Where exactly is the disagreement?

Oh, now I see it. How important is a third-string RB?

AkChief49
02-03-2008, 11:37 PM
quote=chief31;67619]Where exactly is the disagreement?

Oh, now I see it. How important is a third-string RB?[/quote]
:lol::lol::bananen_smilies046:

Delaney37
02-10-2008, 06:45 PM
I think if Jake Long is gone we should go after Jordan Gross in free agency or if McFadden is there trade with Dallas for theyre 2 no.'1

Coach
02-10-2008, 11:11 PM
I think if Jake Long is gone we should go after Jordan Gross in free agency or if McFadden is there trade with Dallas for theyre 2 no.'1

I definitely agree with your thoughts on trading McFadden to the Cowgirls if he is still there. But he won't be. Because everyone else knows the Boys would trade for him too. I think it would be smart for the Raiders to make that trade.

Canada
02-10-2008, 11:17 PM
I definitely agree with your thoughts on trading McFadden to the Cowgirls if he is still there. But he won't be. Because everyone else knows the Boys would trade for him too. I think it would be smart for the Raiders to make that trade.

I thought the cowgirls and the fins were working on a deal...or was that just speculation?

Coach
02-10-2008, 11:20 PM
I thought the cowgirls and the fins were working on a deal...or was that just speculation?

Speculation as far as I know.

Canada
02-10-2008, 11:21 PM
Speculation as far as I know.

I say we take a kicker!! Then we would screw up every one elses draft!! :beer:

hermhater
02-10-2008, 11:24 PM
I definitely agree with your thoughts on trading McFadden to the Cowgirls if he is still there. But he won't be. Because everyone else knows the Boys would trade for him too. I think it would be smart for the Raiders to make that trade.


I thought the cowgirls and the fins were working on a deal...or was that just speculation?

Why would Dallas be wanting McFadden? Marion Barber has proved he is a starter in the NFL.

Is he gonna leave in FA or something?

hermhater
02-10-2008, 11:24 PM
I say we take a kicker!! Then we would screw up every one elses draft!! :beer:


I say we trade Herm for a 4th round pick!

:bananen_smilies046:

Coach
02-10-2008, 11:28 PM
Why would Dallas be wanting McFadden? Marion Barber has proved he is a starter in the NFL.

Is he gonna leave in FA or something?

This is just the buzz. Dallas would trade Barber along with draft picks.

hermhater
02-10-2008, 11:36 PM
This is just the buzz. Dallas would trade Barber along with draft picks.


I heard this a few weeks ago, but haven't been paying very close attention I guess, if it's still being discussed.