Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 64

Thread: What positions do the Chiefs really have to address this year?

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Topeka, Kansas
    Posts
    8
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4
    Given: 2

    Talking What positions do the Chiefs really have to address this year?


    0 Not allowed!
    Hey Chiefs Crowd,

    The Chiefs have been "slow" to get things done this offseason. Most fans are upset about the lack of moves that Kansas City has made after going 11-5 last season. So, Chiefs fans, what positions do you all think the team HAS to address now? And what do you think can wait till next year or after?

    Here's my take:
    I think the key positions of need are Middle Linebacker, Outside Linebacker, Offensive Guard, Offensive Tackle, Free Safety, and Defensive End.

    Now, Outside Linebacker, Offensive Guard, Defensive End, and Defensive End are positions that mostly need depth. We aren't looking for anyone to replace Hali or Houston yet, but we need to build a rotation due to the fact that Hali is aging. I think that Middle Linebacker and Free Safety are the positions where we need to look to find potential starters.

    My main reasons for the two positions that I selected are that, though we added Joe Mays, he never has been a true starter. He has been a good special teams player and a very average starter when he had the opportunity. Husain Abdullah (whom I really like) is returning, but he, like Joe Mays, has been solid at times, but we never know what he really would be as a full time starter.

    Here's a quick view of my expected starting lineup, thus far into the offseason:
    QB - Alex Smith
    RB - Jamaal Charles
    FB - Anthony Sherman
    WR - Dwayne Bowe
    WR - AJ Jenkins
    TE - Anthony Fasano
    LT - Eric Fisher
    LG - Jeff Allen
    C - Rodney Hudson
    RG - Rishaw Johnson
    RT - Donald Stephenson

    LE - Mike DeVito
    RE - Vance Walker (FA)
    NT - Dontari Poe
    LOLB - Tamba Hali
    ROLB - Justin Houston
    LILB - Derrick Johnson
    RILB - James Michael - Johnson
    CB - Sean Smith
    CB - Brandon Flowers
    FS - Husain Abdullah
    SS - Eric Berry

    What do you guys think about these thoughts???

  2. #41
    Member Since
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,854
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 420
    Given: 78

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by doobs_05 View Post
    But heres the thing, both sides of the ball didn't show up the second half.

    the strip from alex was the begining of everything falling apart. The defense made some plays (i remember one INT in the second half) but we came away with 6 points after that strip on alex.

    Defense and Offense did it's job up until the strip on alex

    Defense deserves most of the blame but the offense deserves some as well
    Well I said the offense wasn't perfect. but the thing still comes back to even though the offense lost their best player on the first drive they did enough to win over 99% of the time. They had all the reason to fall apart after losing the team MVP. The defense was the unit that fell apart far more then the offense. They fell apart the last month they are more to be worried about IMO
    ​BAN ROY


  3. #42
    Member Since
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Topeka< KS
    Posts
    2,420
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 226
    Given: 59

    Default


    2 Not allowed!
    Interesting thread.

    Some good arguments have been made for taking a defensive end, a safety, a WR or even a guard with the first draft pick. Here are my thoughts.

    Let's look back at last season. Before the bye our defense played very well and the team gave up an average of 10.6 ppg. Even though the offense only averaged 23.9 ppg (and many of those points were generated by the defense and special teams) the Chiefs went 9-0. It's true that the defense benefitted from weak competition. It is also true that the offense was learning a brand new playbook and were handcuffed by a vey vanilla, basic, do-just-enough-to-win game plan. But the fact is that with great defensive play and not much offense, the Chiefs were undefeated.

    After the bye Reid took the handcuffs off and we got to see just what the offense was capable of. Unfortunately, this was at the same time that we lost Houston and then Hali the very next week, just in time to face some of the very best offenses in the NFL. The offense averaged 30.7 ppg, yet we only went 2-5 over that stretch. In fact, in the only two games we won, we scored 45 and 56 points. There is no clearer illustration of the old cliche that defense wins football games than this.

    Without Hali and Houston our defense couldn't pressure the QB, our secondary was exposed, and good QBs tore us up. Not being able to get off of the field, the defense would tire quickly and that just made them look even worse. With everyone healthy, the defense was pretty good, but a few injuries exposed our lack of depth. (My Bears went through the same thing last year, losing four of their starting front seven.)

    All of this tells me that we need to focus on defense. We certainly need to replace Kendick Lewis, but just about anybody (including some players that we may already have on our roster) would be an upgrade over him. But a solid pass rush hides a lot of flaws in the secondary, forces the QB to rush his passes or throw the ball away, improves field position, and creates turnovers through fumbles and interceptions. T-Jax needs to be replaced and I'm not sure Vance Walker is an upgrade over him. While he didn't get many sacks, he was very good at tieing up blockers, allowing Hali, Houston and Berry to blitz the QB, and solid at stuffing the run. With him gone we have the perfect opportunity to get a DE (like Tuitt) that can get to the QB himself, taking some of the pressure off of the linebackers and allowing them to cover the pass, or stuff the run at the line of scrimmage.

    As far as LBs go, more depth would be good, but with the "nickel" (and sometimes the "dime") package being used so much, I think we are ok with what we have for this year, provided Hali and Houston don't both get hurt at the same time again. I think I would maybe bring in a FA for depth after the draft or pick one up after the first round of cuts in preseason and wait on drafting one until next year, when we wil have far more picks and, hopefully, fewer holes to fill.

    A star WR would certainly make our offense better, but, as I have just shown, it doesn't matter how good our offense is if our defense can't stop the other team, and the Broncos showed that in the Super Bowl as well. Add to this the fact that the Chiefs have a run heavy (or at least it should be) ball control west coast style offense that emphatizes the TEs and uses the WRs less, and drafting another WR becomes even less of a priority.

    I get the impression that those who are hollering for a WR want us to have an offense like Denver has, that scores quickly and trots the defense back out there to give up another touchdown. That's not what the Chiefs offense is. That's not who Andy Reid is and, as much as some of you would like to turn him into Peyton Manning, that's not who Alex Smith is.

    If we go offense with the first pick, a guard is more of a priority than a WR, but, after taking an OT with the first pick, last year, I don't think anyone wants to see that. The problem with O-linemen is that they are so hit-and-miss that a 4th round pick is just about as likely to be as good as a first round pick and a first rounder is as likely to be a bust as a third rounder. So I don't hink we should risk possibly wasting a first round pick on a guard.

    It's not that we shouldn't try to develop a great o-line. In the early 2000s we had that and our offense was great. Since losing Roaf, Waters, Shields, etc. we haven't had a great o-line, or a great offense. The Bears replaced 4 of their starting 5 o-linemen and, in one year, went from one of the worst offenses to the 2nd highest scoring offense in the NFL. They did take OG Kyle Long in the first round, but OT jordan Mills wasn't selected until the 5th round and both are very good starters. They also picked up two o-linemen in FA. Fortunately we don't have four holes to fill on our o-line; just one.

    So, in summary, to me it's a no brainer. A good pass rusher gives the team the most return on their investment. Free safety is a need, to be sure, but a great DE would make a huge difference and would help us beat Denver and San Diego. Let's not forget that those two teams accounted for 4 of our 5 losses, last year. Every game counts, but winning the division is a must. You aren't likely to beat the Donkeys in a shootout. You have to stop them with defense.
    ***Official Chiefs Crowd Game Thread Starter***

    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    MatthewsChiefs can't stand MatthewsChiefs

  4. #43
    Member Since
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,371
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 257
    Given: 793

    Default


    1 Not allowed!
    Agreed with you on many points, TR - but last year was more of a 60/40 pass/run offense. Not sure that the TE situation is that stable either. Hopefully Kelce will go a long ways to changing that.

    My main reason for a new WR is all the dropped passes we had last season, and don't like the prospect of relying on D.Bowe or Avery as the top two recievers. There's no way I'd want an offense that hinged on one person (Manning). With all the different formations that we ran, and all the possible options that could be ran from each one, would rather stick with what we've got now until every kink was worked out.

    Do agree about getting a pass rusher. It'd be great to add an upgrade to DeVito or Walker alongside Poe. It's also feasible to draft one with the first pick, and go after a WR later in the draft, and still upgrade both spots. Getting a good guard at #4 or 5 shouldn't be impossible, getting a monster one would be very unlikely, though. Another hesitation I have with drafting a WR at #1 is the injury bug (for ex. Yatil Green, Sylvester Morris, Baldwin) Same goes for the DB's & Safeties.

  5. #44
    Member Since
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Topeka< KS
    Posts
    2,420
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 226
    Given: 59

    Default


    1 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Eydugstr View Post
    Agreed with you on many points, TR - but last year was more of a 60/40 pass/run offense.
    This is true, but there are some good reasons for that. First, a lot of those pass plays were just flips to someone in the backfield (dinks and dunks ) and effectively worked like running plays. Remember Charles was also our leading receiver catching 70 passes for 693 yds.

    I'm sure you recall, Reid admitted that we weren't running the ball enough and he intended to "fix" that. However, it was shortly after that that our defense fell apart and we were forced to pass more because we were playing from behind a lot. In fact, in our first post-bye win (against the 'Skins) we actually ran the ball 38 times and only passed it 23 times. We led 17-0 at the end of the first qtr and were up 31-0 in the 2nd qtr before Washington ever scored so we could do that. Plus we were averaging 5.1 ypc so that made sense. Our other post-bye win (against the Faders) was far more balanced, passing 25 times and rushing 24, but that was only because we were only averaging 3.3 ypc, but 7.5 yds per pass and we completed 80% (20 out of 25) of our passes. Why NOT throw the ball until your opponent finds a way to stop it?

    Now, if our defense had been better we would have run the ball more, protecting our lead and keeping the other team's offense off of the field. So even there, it all centers around the defense.

    Not sure that the TE situation is that stable either. Hopefully Kelce will go a long ways to changing that.
    Agreed, but between Kelce, Fasano and McGrath, our TE by committee should be able to get the job done. Fasano and McGrath both showed flashes of potential last year, but nobody is really saying that a TE is a high priority. Everyone is focused on a WR on that side of the ball.

    My main reason for a new WR is all the dropped passes we had last season, and don't like the prospect of relying on D.Bowe or Avery as the top two receivers. ...
    Agreed, here too. And yet, even with all of those dropped passes, we still managed to put up 27 or more points in 5 of our last 7 games (including the wild card). The only two we didn't were against the Colts when we scored only 7 points and our last regular season game when none of our starters played. It's almost scary to think how good our offense would have been without many of those drops, but they still put up a lot of points.

    I totally agree with you on the rest of our comment.
    Last edited by TopekaRoy; 04-10-2014 at 12:15 AM.
    ***Official Chiefs Crowd Game Thread Starter***

    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    MatthewsChiefs can't stand MatthewsChiefs

  6. #45
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,127
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 28
    Given: 26

    Default


    1 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by doobs_05 View Post
    But heres the thing, both sides of the ball didn't show up the second half.

    the strip from alex was the begining of everything falling apart. The defense made some plays (i remember one INT in the second half) but we came away with 6 points after that strip on alex.

    Defense and Offense did it's job up until the strip on alex

    Defense deserves most of the blame but the offense deserves some as well
    45-44. The defense did not do their job. They allowed five second half TDs.

    The offense didn't do anything in the second half? That's because they were playing defense instead of offense.

    I get that "the offense wasn't eating up enough time from the clock.... Well, unfortunately, neither was the defense. They were giving up TDs quicker than The Chiefs' offense was going three & out. And, even playing it so conservative, they still put points on the board, and held TOP edge for the second half.

    The problem was five TDs being scored, with an average time for those five drives being 2:03.

    And the offense is somehow THAT BAD?!?!?!?!?!?!? HOW? How many turnovers would ACTUALLY relate to a defense giving up five TDs at an average of 2:03 per possession?

    80 yards, 5 plays, 1:52 ToP - TD Colts
    41 yards, 5 plays, 1:28 ToP - TD Colts
    80 yards, 6 plays, 1:41 ToP - TD Colts
    90 Yards, 12 plays, 4:02 ToP - TD Colts
    80 yards, 4 plays, 1:15 ToP - TD Colts.

    That's 371 yards of offense, and 35 points, in 10:18 of game-clock.

    The primary goal of the defense is to prevent points. If they do score, make it FG, for only three points, instead of seven. Second would be to make them work hard for any of it, and keep their gains short. Third would be to get the ball back quickly.

    Note... Failing at jobs one and two, does not mean you did a good job of goal number three, because the offense gets the ball back. It actually amplifies the failure of the first two goals.

    But let's extrapolate that, for context.... The average ToP for a game is about 30 minutes. AT the rate of those five possessions for The Colts, were a team to ever manage to fail that poorly for a full 30 minutes of game-clock, then they will have allowed 102 points. (101.61)

    How one can see that, and go on to propose how much more the offense could have done, than to put up 44 points.... I just don't know what kind of motivation that requires.

    It's a strange position to be in. Because I agree with the core sentiment, that the offense is not great.

    But where some reach to make that case is astonishing. You have an entire season you can point at. And you have chosen their best output of the year, to contrast the worst output the defense had all year?

    It has to be done for dramatic effect. We are, after all, nothing if not internet drama-queens.

  7. #46
    Member Since
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,322
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 607
    Given: 788

    Default


    1 Not allowed!
    Gotta hand it to TopekaRoy and chief31, because much of the media hasn't really been paying attention and insists on pimping a WR to the Chiefs with their top draft pick.

    Pat Kirwan at CBS Sports, however, is projecting Tuitt to be the Chiefs top draft pick.

    http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/m...ert/pat-kirwan

    I don't have a problem with a WR being taken with the top draft pick IF guys like Tuitt and Hageman are off the board, but if either are there, the Chiefs brass has to consider taking them, as there is a huge need for a 3-4 DE that can attack the QB & that's what much of the media is NOT paying attention to.

  8. #47
    Member Since
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Topeka< KS
    Posts
    2,420
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 226
    Given: 59

    Default


    1 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by doobs_05 View Post
    ...
    Defense deserves most of the blame but the offense deserves some as well
    Just to add to what Chiefs31 said...

    I would give a little credit to Andrew Luck. He's a very good QB.

    But I would put most of the blame on injuries.

    I'm not saying the Colts did anything illegal or dirty, but their coach said before the game that Jamaal Charles was "public enemy #1" and the first thing they did was take him out of the game. On the offensive side we also lost Knile Davis and Donnie Avery. On defense we lost Flowers with a concussion, Houston was out with a knee injury when Hilton caught the game winning pass and he was "probable" for the game to start with. Hali was also playing hurt he was a game-time decision. If we had avoided just one, or certainly two of those injuries, I'm pretty sure we would have won the game.

    I don't think it is fair to blame the offense. They scored 31 points in the first half. You can't really expect them to score a total of 62 points against a playoff team. If you do then that says a lot about your faith in the defense. Remember the Colts are the same team that held the Chiefs to just 7 points in week 15 when we were still fighting to win the division. The Chiefs scored 101 points in the two games prior and Indy held them to one touchdown. Two weeks later we light them up for 44.

    No, the offense excelled in spite of all the injuries. The defense flopped because of all the injuries. I don't see how you can blame the offense.

    I can't seem to say this enough: "Defense wins championships."
    ***Official Chiefs Crowd Game Thread Starter***

    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    MatthewsChiefs can't stand MatthewsChiefs

  9. #48
    Member Since
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,000
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 120
    Given: 4

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by brdempsey69 View Post
    Gotta hand it to TopekaRoy and chief31, because much of the media hasn't really been paying attention and insists on pimping a WR to the Chiefs with their top draft pick.

    Pat Kirwan at CBS Sports, however, is projecting Tuitt to be the Chiefs top draft pick.

    http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/m...ert/pat-kirwan

    I don't have a problem with a WR being taken with the top draft pick IF guys like Tuitt and Hageman are off the board, but if either are there, the Chiefs brass has to consider taking them, as there is a huge need for a 3-4 DE that can attack the QB & that's what much of the media is NOT paying attention to.
    so the Chiefs have already upgraded the hole left by Jackson with V. Walker. I hate how national guys do little homework on a team when writing about them. If you want to say that Tuitt would help bolster a struggling defense by adding additional depth at De by challenge their current average DE Mike Devito, Allen Bailey and Vance Walker. I would take him more serious because then he actually tells me that he has an idea on what the Chiefs would have and may see as value. Losing Jackson was an upgrade.

  10. #49
    Member Since
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Topeka< KS
    Posts
    2,420
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 226
    Given: 59

    Default


    1 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Seek View Post
    so the Chiefs have already upgraded the hole left by Jackson with V. Walker. ... Losing Jackson was an upgrade.
    I don't think we lose much with Walker, but I don't see how you can say he is an "upgrade." Compare their career stats.

    Vance: 73 games 119 tackles (82 solo) 8 sacks 2 forced fumbles
    Tyson: 74 games 201 tackles (139 solo) 9 sacks 0 forced fumbles

    How is Walker better than Jackson? Cheaper, yes. One year younger, yes but both have played for 6 years. But better? I don't see it.
    ***Official Chiefs Crowd Game Thread Starter***

    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    MatthewsChiefs can't stand MatthewsChiefs

  11. #50
    Member Since
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,322
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 607
    Given: 788

    Default


    1 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Seek View Post
    so the Chiefs have already upgraded the hole left by Jackson with V. Walker. I hate how national guys do little homework on a team when writing about them. If you want to say that Tuitt would help bolster a struggling defense by adding additional depth at De by challenge their current average DE Mike Devito, Allen Bailey and Vance Walker. I would take him more serious because then he actually tells me that he has an idea on what the Chiefs would have and may see as value. Losing Jackson was an upgrade.
    What's being overlooked is that Walker has played in a 4-3 all through his career, Bailey is in the last year of his rookie contract and hasn't been any ball of fire, DeVito could be gone after 2015, and even if Catapano emerges, the need for a guy like Tuitt is still there. None of those guys have the physical ability or upside that Tuitt does.

    Not saying that losing Jackson wasn't an upgrade, BUT the need for a BEAST 3-4 DE that can attack the QB and help out Poe, Houston, and Hali is still there. It's very rare to see a draft prospect that decked opposing QB's 20.5 times in 28 starts as a TRUE 3-4 DE in college.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Lack Of Depth At Some Positions Could Determine The Chiefs
    By pbatrucker in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-03-2010, 09:59 AM
  2. When will the Chiefs address ILB!!
    By pbatrucker in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-12-2010, 04:31 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •