Romeo's Job

[dbolan]

What makes any of think that if he did not get the job as HC that he would not return as DC???

No one is in the MARKET for HIM!!!

He is not the HC we need.

[OPLookn]

I don't care about that. They are elite athletes and are gassed in the 1st half?? Poor babies. Let's not forget that they get TV timeouts, injury timeouts and regular team timeouts. Plenty of time for these elite athletes to recover.

If the Jets had the ball THAT much, why couldn't the Chiefs D STOP THEM sooner vs. letting them sustain long drives??

PS- My son plays both sides of the ball for the ENTIRE game, every game. he is a TE and OLB along with special teams...He is gassed about midway of the 4th quarter but refuses to come off the field and continues to make plays.

So not to be rude...But I ain't buying the "gassed" excuse because that is all it is.

I'll throw my two cents in because I only played one side of the ball in high school as a WR. Some of the guys I went up against did play both sides of the ball and I can tell you that it was a lot sooner than the 4th qtr that I was able to tell a difference. They weren't mirroring me as well and when I'd cut off my route they took a little bit longer to get there. That resulted in more yards as soon as the 2nd qtr and it was even more evident in the 3rd. By the 4th qtr I was tearing away from them and being tackled by the safety.

Not only that but when I had to play defense (only my freshman year) I noticed that I got tired a lot faster because I was having to react instead of being the one knowing what was going to happen.

I could have gone on to play college because I had great hands and ran good routes but I didn't because I had a case of being white...aka I was to dang slow.

[Hayvern]

I'll throw my two cents in because I only played one side of the ball in high school as a WR. Some of the guys I went up against did play both sides of the ball and I can tell you that it was a lot sooner than the 4th qtr that I was able to tell a difference. They weren't mirroring me as well and when I'd cut off my route they took a little bit longer to get there. That resulted in more yards as soon as the 2nd qtr and it was even more evident in the 3rd. By the 4th qtr I was tearing away from them and being tackled by the safety.

Not only that but when I had to play defense (only my freshman year) I noticed that I got tired a lot faster because I was having to react instead of being the one knowing what was going to happen.

And this is the crux of the issue that people do not understand. It is much harder to be reactionary, to be able to shed off a blocker and make a move on a running back, to react to the wide receiver making a hard cut downfield. All those things take more energy than it does for the offensive players.

Add to that how many times our defensive players have been held at the line of scrimmage. The offense controls the pace of the game, not the defense, so the offense will always adjust quicker than the defense. Substitutions are easier on offense as you know what play you are going to call, defensive players have a harder time getting the correct packages on the field and switching out for fresh players based on what the offense is doing.

So many things go into it as to why defenses get wore down. You will never hear anyone say that the offense is tired.

[pojote]

I agree that most of blowouts were because the O wasn't able to move the ball. This is a territory and possession sport, you need help from the O to be able to stop your adversary.
There are two major game aspects to improve in defense: coverage exchange in zone defense, specially between CB with safeties, and second level tackling against run. Both are Romeo's duties.

[OPLookn]

I agree that most of blowouts were because the O wasn't able to move the ball. This is a territory and possession sport, you need help from the O to be able to stop your adversary.
There are two major game aspects to improve in defense: coverage exchange in zone defense, specially between CB with safeties, and second level tackling against run. Both are Romeo's duties.

Our secondary was pretty dang good last year. I don't think it's Crennel's fault per se as it is inconsistencies in personnel. Berry, McGraw, Piscitelli and Washington are all players that have played safety this year.

The second level tackling should be job of the assistants below him, granted the buck stops with Crennel on D but I don't think that's his job. If I'm wrong then so be it.

[TopekaRoy]

Excellent points made by you guys since my last post.

So not to be rude...But I ain't buying the "gassed" excuse because that is all it is.

Okay, don't buy it. That doesn't make it any less true. You use your son to defend your position. He sounds like an excellent athlete. What NFL team does he play for? How has he fared against the Patriots offense?

Let's just look at the raw numbers and see how the offense affects the defense.

Chiefs-opponent (difference, result)
3-48 (-45 blowout loss)
3-34 (-31 blowout loss)
3-31 (-28 blowout loss)
7-41 (-34 blowout loss)
7-3 (+4 win)
9-13 (-4 loss)
10-37 (-27 blowout loss)
10-17 (-7 loss)
10-3 (+7 win)
13-16 OT (-3 loss, 2 blocked FGs should have won)
17-20 (-3 loss)
19-14 (+5 win)
22-17 (+5 win)
23-20 OT (+3 win)
28-24 (+4 win)
28-00 (+28 blowout win)

Conclusion:
The Chiefs scored 10 points or less in 9 games this year. All 5 of their blowouts occurred when the Chiefs scored 10 points or less In fact the Chiefs defense was actually good enough to win 2 of those games and keep us close in 2 others.

In the 7 games where the Chiefs scored at least 13 points they were 5-2 and should have been 6-1 (2nd Oakland game). How good is your defense when you know that if the offense scores at least 13 points you are probably going to win? In those 7 games the defense only gave up more than 20 points one time (and that was in a win)!

Do you think it is just a coincidence that the defense only gave up a lot of points in games where the offense couldn't score? We are not losing any "shootouts" here. If we were you could blame the defense.

Facts are facts, whether you "buy" them or not.

[matthewschiefs]

I agree that most of blowouts were because the O wasn't able to move the ball.

You also have to look at the fact of how many times the offense gave the other team the ball already in field goal range. When you do that as much as this team did early on OF COURSE the other team is going to put up points on the board. Outside of getting a turnover even if the D gets a 3 and out they are likely going to get 3.

[chief31]

I don't care about that. They are elite athletes and are gassed in the 1st half?? Poor babies. Let's not forget that they get TV timeouts, injury timeouts and regular team timeouts. Plenty of time for these elite athletes to recover.

If the Jets had the ball THAT much, why couldn't the Chiefs D STOP THEM sooner vs. letting them sustain long drives??

PS- My son plays both sides of the ball for the ENTIRE game, every game. he is a TE and OLB along with special teams...He is gassed about midway of the 4th quarter but refuses to come off the field and continues to make plays.

So not to be rude...But I ain't buying the "gassed" excuse because that is all it is.

The range of talent levels is quite a bit different there, don't ya think?

Even in college, you have a range of NFL star, to high school level.

But in high school, you have the dedicated, gifted athletes, and those who will never play again, once they graduate high school.

Being "winded" still leaves the top athletes at a big advantage over the lesser players.

In The NFL, you are going against the top 50 players at their position, in the world. Even going against the lesser players is a physical chore.

But I agree with your overall statement, that the defense did not play well during the games mentioned.

More often than not, they played pretty well for the fist half. But they did fall apart.

But this defense was exceptional for most of their games in 2011.

[chief31]

I agree that if we add some consitency on offense that we'll see our defense only get better and better. All of our players are a year older and for once that's a good thing since we're young. In the Vermeil era I cringed at that thought because it meant going out and getting new free agents. So from this side I'm excited

I think for the "Not Crennel's fault"/some responsibility we're in a very gray area. We both know that you can only coach a player so much and what that player does during game time is solely their success or failure. It's why these guys get paid so much to play. I don't think that a coach is ever going to tell a player to take time off or do something differently. The game plan may change but it doesn't or shouldn't require new skills to be learned on the players part.

If our D has been good throughout the year or good enough to give you hope that they'll be in the top five with offensive consistency then it has to be on the players more than Crennel or even a 50/50. Otherwise you'd need to be concerned about the coaching and if you were you'd be screaming to the high heavens that you don't want that coordinator to be the HC. Or I'd hope you'd be, but that's just my line of thinking be it right or wrong.

When it's as simple as not having the talent on the field, I would agree.

But, when they have proven to have the talent to match-up, but simply suffer from breakdowns of technique, assignment, or discipline, then the coaching will always be on the hook for some of the blame.

Part of the coach's job is to get the players to do the right thing. So, when the player does not do the right thing, the coach has some of the responsibility.

[Bike]

The range of talent levels is quite a bit different there, don't ya think?

Even in college, you have a range of NFL star, to high school level.

But in high school, you have the dedicated, gifted athletes, and those who will never play again, once they graduate high school.

Being "winded" still leaves the top athletes at a big advantage over the lesser players.

In The NFL, you are going against the top 50 players at their position, in the world. Even going against the lesser players is a physical chore.

But I agree with your overall statement, that the defense did not play well during the games mentioned.

More often than not, they played pretty well for the fist half. But they did fall apart.

But this defense was exceptional for most of their games in 2011.

Absolutely. I wish there was a way to keep Romeo in his same position for the forseeable future. Am I the only one here who thinks it was a mistake to make Romeo the interim HC for the final 3 games? We either lose him as our DC to be our HC, or we lose him outright.

[matthewschiefs]

Absolutely. I wish there was a way to keep Romeo in his same position for the forseeable future. Am I the only one here who thinks it was a mistake to make Romeo the interim HC for the final 3 games? We either lose him as our DC to be our HC, or we lose him outright.

I don't who eles would have filled the job. Seeing that at the time we still had a shot to make the playoffs. Jim Zorn no thanks. He was the best man for the job on the coaching staff I think he was the right choice. I think he's going to be the Head coach now. He will still be a key part of the defense. I think Romeo would leave the offense more to the OC. And not meddle to much in it.