Trade for Josh Gordon???

[KCSLC2008 606]

This is how the NFL works. In ANY system, when there is 0 threat of something players and coaches will figure it out fast. When they figured out that the Chiefs are NOT going to at least try to stretch the field, the whole defensive gameplan changes. It happened for us. Remember we were like 3rd in the league in rushing Every week both of our RB's were tearing it up. One would have 100 the other would have about 70 yards. Then coaches are like, hey, these guys arent going to test us deep. lets bring the extra safety up and run blitz the shit out of these guys. So defense did and what happened? All of a sudden our running game went to hell.

 

In the NFL you have to stretch the field at least try. The Chiefs didnt all year until the game like 15 and 16 after the media local and national started drilling Alex for not stretching the field. YaC yards are great, but they still arent stretching the field passes. I remember listening to the local broadcast and even Len Dawson saying you gotta take your shot, if not the defense is going to stack the line and shut your running game down. Well they stacked it and they stopped it.

 

Denver the last few years runs a dink and dunk offense but Peyton still went deep. Manning is the king of short WC passes, but he knows you have to make the safeties respect that part of the game.

 

 

I think im done on this Site with talking about Alex Smith. We will just come back after his tenure and we will hear some kind of damned excuse why he wasnt successful. Again, take a look at successful franchises in the NFL 95 percent of the great ones have 1 thing in common, a great QB.

 

L

We started deeper shots in the last three games this year. Started doing so the last 6 games last year. I think going deeper had more to do with the team gelling in some way than any national or local pressure. It was also when we had a lot of our sacks, so we were just more aggressive but not necessarily much better in OL this time.

 

Oh, and if somehow we are successful in his tenure, we will hear how everyone else was so great just like how we'd hear excuses if we aren't. He gets the blame and others get the credit. Both should get blame and credit.

[PhataLerror 370]

 This is how the NFL works. In ANY system, when there is 0 threat of something players and coaches will figure it out fast. When they figured out that the Chiefs are NOT going to at least try to stretch the field, the whole defensive gameplan changes.  It happened for us. Remember we were like 3rd in the league in rushing Every week both of our RB's were tearing it up. One would have 100 the other would have about 70 yards. Then  coaches are like, hey, these guys arent going to test us deep. lets bring the extra safety up and run blitz the shit out of these guys.   So defense did and what happened? All of a sudden our  running game went to hell.

I'm all for passing to open up the run. You don't have to take downfield shots to accomplish that, and any argument to the contrary would grossly misrepresent what the West Coast Offense is really designed to do. That eighth man in the box can't run 25 yards laterally any faster than he can run 25 yards downfield.

 

Call these excuses for your least favorite quarterback, but the following statements are undeniably factual:

 

• The Chiefs' wide receiver corps was one of the league's worst

• The Chiefs' offensive line was one of the league's worst

 

Smith is perfectly capable of throwing the ball farther downfield than his receivers can run before he would be sacked on an average play. Therefore, what you advocate essentially plays into the defense's hands: The Chiefs would waste downs taking shots deep into the secondary on Three Flies Up-style passes floated by necessity because the offensive line can't block long enough for Smith to get a clear read of his receiver vs. the defense and throw at the designated time from the spot he is supposed to on a given play.

 

Why no mention of Jamaal Charles playing hurt for what seemed like most of the year? Why no mention that pretty much every "great quarterback" has a solid offensive line and solid receiver corps? You rip up Smith relentlessly when all he does is play within the scheme designated by his coaches under the constraints that his personnel present. Smith stood tall in the pocket long enough to end up with a lacerated spleen, proving that you can only make so much lemonade out of so many lemons.

[PhataLerror 370]

Denver the last few years runs a dink and dunk offense but Peyton still went deep.     Manning is the king of short WC passes, but he knows you have to make the safeties respect that part of the game.

And I know I'm not really imparting knowledge when I say this, but Demaryius Thomas, Emmanuel Sanders, and Julius Thomas > Dwayne Bowe, Jason Avant, and Travis Kelce. Defensive coordinators don't watch film on only the opposing quarterbacks, and you can bet that good defensive coordinators get their guys onto the field with the appropriate respect for guys like Thomas, Sanders, and Thomas. It doesn't take near as much effort on the part of a defense to take the Chiefs' top receivers out of a play.

[Calichief 3,016]

This is how the NFL works. In ANY system, when there is 0 threat of something players and coaches will figure it out fast. When they figured out that the Chiefs are NOT going to at least try to stretch the field, the whole defensive gameplan changes. It happened for us. Remember we were like 3rd in the league in rushing Every week both of our RB's were tearing it up. One would have 100 the other would have about 70 yards. Then coaches are like, hey, these guys arent going to test us deep. lets bring the extra safety up and run blitz the shit out of these guys. So defense did and what happened? All of a sudden our running game went to hell.

 

In the NFL you have to stretch the field at least try. The Chiefs didnt all year until the game like 15 and 16 after the media local and national started drilling Alex for not stretching the field. YaC yards are great, but they still arent stretching the field passes. I remember listening to the local broadcast and even Len Dawson saying you gotta take your shot, if not the defense is going to stack the line and shut your running game down. Well they stacked it and they stopped it.

 

Denver the last few years runs a dink and dunk offense but Peyton still went deep. Manning is the king of short WC passes, but he knows you have to make the safeties respect that part of the game.

 

 

I think im done on this Site with talking about Alex Smith. We will just come back after his tenure and we will hear some kind of damned excuse why he wasnt successful. Again, take a look at successful franchises in the NFL 95 percent of the great ones have 1 thing in common, a great QB.

 

L

You have to stretch the field. You just have to. Other teams catch on quick. Shorten the field and you are screwed.

[PhataLerror 370]

You have to stretch the field. You just have to. Other teams catch on quick. Shorten the field and you are screwed.

I just won't subscribe to this theory because it violates the natural laws of the three-dimensional universe that football is played in. You can "stretch" defenses horizontally, tiring them out just as you would if you were running vertical routes, and the advantage of attacking horizontally is that you tire your own players out less relative to how you exhaust opposing defenders. The West Coast Offense has traditionally exploited this fact: You only have to "North" go ten yards every three downs, and you have more than 53 yards "East to West" to work with. The longer you keep that going, the more tired the defense will get, and the more rested your will be.

 

This is one of those cases where trigonometry skills come in handy.

[Handswarmer 645]

Man there is some funny shit in here....

 

But to answer the question, why would you want a guy who is one piss test away from being banned for life?

A guy who had to make 6 meetings to play in a game this year and only could make 5?

 

A guy who got a reprieve from a season long ban smoking pot and partying and decided the Friday night before the season finale to go out and party?

Might as well sign Lawrence Phillips....

[kcxiv 35]

You have to stretch the field. You just have to. Other teams catch on quick. Shorten the field and you are screwed.

 

 

  Yep, we didnt, not until what week 15? Play Man to man on the corners and  and go feast.  Once defenses figured out our running game, out offense went to crap.

[kcxiv 35]

Man there is some funny shit in here....

 

But to answer the question, why would you want a guy who is one piss test away from being banned for life?

 

A guy who had to make 6 meetings to play in a game this year and only could make 5?

 

A guy who got a reprieve from a season long ban smoking pot and partying and decided the Friday night before the season finale to go out and party?

 

Might as well sign Lawrence Phillips....

 

 It wont happen,  He's not coming to KC, but the reason why the Chiefs should attempt to sign him is well. Our number 1 WR is about to be Albert Wilson. lol  They need to do SOMETHING.  Dorsey has alot of work ahead.

[PhataLerror 370]

You have to stretch the field. You just have to. Other teams catch on quick. Shorten the field and you are screwed.

I just won't subscribe to this theory because it violates the natural laws of the three-dimensional universe that football is played in. You can "stretch" defenses horizontally, tiring them out just as you would if you were running vertical routes, and the advantage of attacking horizontally is that you tire your own players out less relative to how you exhaust opposing defenders. The West Coast Offense has traditionally exploited this fact: You only have to "North" go ten yards every three downs, and you have more than 53 yards "East to West" to work with. The longer you keep that going, the more tired the defense will get, and the more rested your will be.

 

This is one of those cases where trigonometry skills come in handy.

No one is going to take this on, eh?

[arrowhead 1,070]

No one is going to take this on, eh?

only a handful of guys on here have trigonometry skills. You'd have better luck trying common core skills.

[DieHard 2,061]

I am not crazy about the guy, but if they think he can straighten out go for it. The guy is very young and could mature into a rock star. If we don't have to give up more than a sixth, it is worth it to me.

[Calichief 3,016]

No one is going to take this on, eh?

No. Because you have to do it once in a while. I didn't say every drive; you have to back them off 1 or two times a game. Agree to disagree.

[PhataLerror 370]

No one is going to take this on, eh?

only a handful of guys on here have trigonometry skills. You'd have better luck trying common core skills.

I certainly didn't mean that people needed to understand trigonometry to understand the validity of an offense that attacks defenses horizontally. My point was simply that you can make a mathematically sound argument that where a defense isn't giving up ground in the vertical game, they cannot at the same time not be giving up ground in the horizontal game. There is no defensive scheme that beats everything.

 

Ideally, if you have succeeded in tiring out defenses in a horizontal passing attack, you have opened up the opportunity to attack vertically. And to bring this back to Josh Gordon, he's a nice weapon to have in order to attack defenses horizontally and vertically. The problem still would be about whether or not Josh Gordon could keep his nose clean enough to stay on the field, and not whether or not Smith would make good use of him as a receiver. Josh Gordon as a physical talent is light years ahead of anything Smith ever had to throw to in his ten-year career.

[kccrow 529]

No one is going to take this on, eh?

 

Sure, I will. There is one fundamental flaw in your trigonometric theory here: angles. In order to effectively operate an offense horizontally, your offensive skill players must be extremely precise in their movements and create quick separation. Your quarterback must be extremely accurate and throw the ball with relatively good velocity on short passes. The reason being, is that the positioning of defenders is such that it significantly reduces the open angle between the quarterback and the target receiver. There is much less margin for error in all aspects of running a horizontal scheme. Also, by not stretching the defense vertically, you are going to have a difficult time running the football.

[Calichief 3,016]

Sure, I will. There is one fundamental flaw in your trigonometric theory here: angles. In order to effectively operate an offense horizontally, your offensive skill players must be extremely precise in their movements and create quick separation. Your quarterback must be extremely accurate and throw the ball with relatively good velocity on short passes. The reason being, is that the positioning of defenders is such that it significantly reduces the open angle between the quarterback and the target receiver. There is much less margin for error in all aspects of running a horizontal scheme. Also, by not stretching the defense vertically, you are going to have a difficult time running the football.

Yep. By not not stretching the field, those angles get tighter due to no fear of vertical.

[azchief21 5,278]

And I know I'm not really imparting knowledge when I say this, but Demaryius Thomas, Emmanuel Sanders, and Julius Thomas > Dwayne Bowe, Jason Avant, and Travis Kelce. Defensive coordinators don't watch film on only the opposing quarterbacks, and you can bet that good defensive coordinators get their guys onto the field with the appropriate respect for guys like Thomas, Sanders, and Thomas. It doesn't take near as much effort on the part of a defense to take the Chiefs' top receivers out of a play.

And I know I'm not really imparting knowledge when I say this, if Thomas, Thomas and Sanders played for the Chiefs this year people would not think they were very good. On the other hand, if Kelce, Bowe and Avant had Manning throw to them this year, we would be saying they had a good year.

[PhataLerror 370]

Sure, I will. There is one fundamental flaw in your trigonometric theory here: angles. In order to effectively operate an offense horizontally, your offensive skill players must be extremely precise in their movements and create quick separation. Your quarterback must be extremely accurate and throw the ball with relatively good velocity on short passes. The reason being, is that the positioning of defenders is such that it significantly reduces the open angle between the quarterback and the target receiver. There is much less margin for error in all aspects of running a horizontal scheme. Also, by not stretching the defense vertically, you are going to have a difficult time running the football.

Why would "angles" be a factor in the short-range passing game, but less so in the long-range passing game? Wouldn't the advantage of "angles" be dependent on a defender's vector to intercept the ball carrier as determined by the ball carrier's speed and his distance from both the sideline and the goal line? I think there's an assumption here that shouldn't be made that horizontal passing schemes are at a disadvantage if the passes are primarily thrown underneath the safeties. Blocking after the catch is a big factor in springing big plays out of the West Coast Offense.

 

Otherwise, you've acknowledged most of what I've stated concerning the West Coast Offense in the past: You need an intelligent quarterback capable of throwing the ball at an appropriate velocity to the right spot (which the Chiefs have), and you need capable receivers that can execute their assignments correctly (something certain "starting" receivers like Frankie Hammond struggled with).

 

I don't agree with your argument that stretching defenses vertically is a necessity for the proper execution of the running game within the West Coast Offense. Most run plays develop so quickly that a safety's ability to react to the play is going to be highly dependent on where he lines up. If you want to take the safety out of the box, you need an effective passing game, and that has little to do with horizontal vs. vertical passing schemes and everything to do with what an offense can do with the pieces it has when the defense is bringing eight-man fronts.

 

Perhaps you meant something else by "angles". I had very little to go on in your response.

No. Because you have to do it once in a while. I didn't say every drive; you have to back them off 1 or two times a game. Agree to disagree.

According to the stat listed above that started this discussion, Smith attempted 1.2 such passes a game on average, which falls inside your range. Those pass attempts were largely unsuccessful because Smith often didn't get enough time in the pocket to throw from his spot. Defenses will generally oblige an offense shooting itself in the foot by wasting plays on deep incompletions in a vain effort to 'keep the defense honest'. It's a play unlikely to succeed in the case of the Chiefs because they don't have the prerequisite offensive line and receiving corps to effectively throw vertically.

 

I just keep seeing the same circular argument: 'Jamaal Charles is the best player on the offense' > 'Jamaal Charles can't do everything by himself' > 'Smith needs to throw the ball more' > 'Smith needs more time in the pocket' > 'The Chiefs aren't winning by throwing the ball and need to run the ball more as they typically have in winning efforts' > [repeat from beginning]. Smith doesn't have the appropriate supporting cast to execute a vertical or a horizontal passing attack, but the given the limitations of that cast the lesser of two evils is to attempt the horizontal passing attack. When the offensive line did its job and the receivers did their job, defenses had to pick their poison and eventually either Charles or Smith got them, despite whatever limitations you perceive to exist in the West Coast Offense. When one or the other of the line and receivers faltered, there was no margin for error left, and it was largely up to the defense to atone for the sins of the offensive line and receivers.

[Calichief 3,016]

Why would "angles" be a factor in the short-range passing game, but less so in the long-range passing game? Wouldn't the advantage of "angles" be dependent on a defender's vector to intercept the ball carrier as determined by the ball carrier's speed and his distance from both the sideline and the goal line? I think there's an assumption here that shouldn't be made that horizontal passing schemes are at a disadvantage if the passes are primarily thrown underneath the safeties. Blocking after the catch is a big factor in springing big plays out of the West Coast Offense.

 

Otherwise, you've acknowledged most of what I've stated concerning the West Coast Offense in the past: You need an intelligent quarterback capable of throwing the ball at an appropriate velocity to the right spot (which the Chiefs have), and you need capable receivers that can execute their assignments correctly (something certain "starting" receivers like Frankie Hammond struggled with).

 

I don't agree with your argument that stretching defenses vertically is a necessity for the proper execution of the running game within the West Coast Offense. Most run plays develop so quickly that a safety's ability to react to the play is going to be highly dependent on where he lines up. If you want to take the safety out of the box, you need an effective passing game, and that has little to do with horizontal vs. vertical passing schemes and everything to do with what an offense can do with the pieces it has when the defense is bringing eight-man fronts.

 

Perhaps you meant something else by "angles". I had very little to go on in your response.

According to the stat listed above that started this discussion, Smith attempted 1.2 such passes a game on average, which falls inside your range. Those pass attempts were largely unsuccessful because Smith often didn't get enough time in the pocket to throw from his spot. Defenses will generally oblige an offense shooting itself in the foot by wasting plays on deep incompletions in a vain effort to 'keep the defense honest'. It's a play unlikely to succeed in the case of the Chiefs because they don't have the prerequisite offensive line and receiving corps to effectively throw vertically.

 

I just keep seeing the same circular argument: 'Jamaal Charles is the best player on the offense' > 'Jamaal Charles can't do everything by himself' > 'Smith needs to throw the ball more' > 'Smith needs more time in the pocket' > 'The Chiefs aren't winning by throwing the ball and need to run the ball more as they typically have in winning efforts' > [repeat from beginning]. Smith doesn't have the appropriate supporting cast to execute a vertical or a horizontal passing attack, but the given the limitations of that cast the lesser of two evils is to attempt the horizontal passing attack. When the offensive line did its job and the receivers did their job, defenses had to pick their poison and eventually either Charles or Smith got them, despite whatever limitations you perceive to exist in the West Coast Offense. When one or the other of the line and receivers faltered, there was no margin for error left, and it was largely up to the defense to atone for the sins of the offensive line and receivers.

Rodgers

Manning in his prime

Flacco

Eli

Ben

Brady

Wilson

Cam

On and on

All stretch the field

All in playoffs consistently

[KCSLC2008 606]

Asking a team to go deep when their oline can't protect, receivers can't get open, receivers don't get calls (Wilson on Steelers deep ball), and for arguments sake a QB who is "inaccurate deep" in order to keep defenses honest, is like asking for more pick and rolls when the point guard can't shoot the ball. The defense doesn't stay honest on the pick and roll, they will just let the point guard shoot the ball and miss.

 

Will the PG make some? Sure. Are those good for the team? Yes. Will he miss more often than not? Yes. Will he miss the PF who had an easier shot? Yes. Will missing the shot keep the defense honest? No. The same goes for this offense.

 

Now, we definitely need to run deeper plays and for Smith to not miss them either in execution (bad throw when not just a throw where only the receiver can get it) or not seeing them. We have to understand when the "open" player was there to draw defenders away from who we threw the ball to. When the defense isn't fooled by the decoy, the decoy it becomes wide open. If Smith is supposed to pass to the target he passes to and the decoy becomes open, we cry foul.

[kcxiv 35]

someone them other qb's seem to find the wide open guy more times then not even if its a "decoy" THey run through thier progressions pretty fast.   Luck, Rodgers, Wilson, Big Ben all have played with terrible lines and still get the job done when they have too.   I know Oline needs to play better i wont ever say they wont and at times they were just flat our horrid, but we still have to make plays somehow.

 

  Sometimes you gotta let the ball go and good things can happen.  Bowe used to be able to make cathes like that with some really terrible qb's ones way worse then who we have now and what happened to the back shoulder throw? i dont even recall the CHiefs throwing them at all this year. lol

[PhataLerror 370]

Rodgers

Manning in his prime

Flacco

Eli

Ben

Brady

Wilson

Cam

On and on

All stretch the field

All in playoffs consistently

Russell doesn't deserve mention in this list: The 'stretched' plays are often broken plays. Roethlisberger and The Lesser Manning have been hit-or-miss, and Roethlisberger didn't win the Super Bowl in which his defense wasn't elite. Cam? Really? The Panthers win games because of Cam Newton? Newsflash: No, they don't. The worst of all of these was Eli Manning: 11 seasons, and only five post-seasons in which he was 0-3 in games where the opponent scored more than 20 points.

 

Can you check your own posts for accuracy so I don't have to?

[PhataLerror 370]

Sometimes you gotta let the ball go and good things can happen.  Bowe used to be able to make cathes like that with some really terrible qb's ones way worse then who we have now and what happened to the back shoulder throw? i dont even recall the CHiefs throwing them at all this year. lol

Eli Manning since 2010: 134 touchdowns, 97 interceptions

 

Sometimes bad things can happen. Three Flies Up is not a winning strategy.

[kcxiv 35]

Eli Manning since 2010: 134 touchdowns, 97 interceptions

 

Sometimes bad things can happen. Three Flies Up is not a winning strategy.

2 Superbowls, CHiefs franchise? 1, 0 since 1970. Ill take Eli's career with 2 Super bowls anytime.  I also recall him just throwing it up and Tyree and him making a catch that lead to a SUPERBOWL victory.  You have to give your WR's a chance to make a play!!!!!!  not throwing that pass gives you 0 chance to make a play. Throwing it, while the chance is small, it CAN work. the percentage while not good is NOT 0.

[KCSLC2008 606]

someone them other qb's seem to find the wide open guy more times then not even if its a "decoy" THey run through thier progressions pretty fast.   Luck, Rodgers, Wilson, Big Ben all have played with terrible lines and still get the job done when they have too.

 

We, as fans, don't necessarily know who the decoy is and who isn't. A decoy isn't part of the progressions if that decoy's job is to open it up for the first read. If the decoy does this and Smith throws to the first read, Smith executed the play. What you are asking for is Smith to abandon the play that was working (first read open) in a scramble drill.  What happens when a defense knows who the first read is, the decoy doesn't bring anyone with him - wide open. But the problem is, when does this happen? After Smith has to throw or get sacked (or tuck it and run). Smith has to go to his first read, second read, etc.

 

If the wide open player is a second read, he's not a decoy. Don't get that confused. I absolutely want Smith to go through his reads. He has to give his options a chance. My problem was when people point to the guy who's trying to clear it out for the first read and saying, "see!!!" when passing to that guy would have required Smith to abandon the open first read to go with someone the play wasn't designed for. Again, if the open guy is the second read and Smith needed to see that the second read was better, fine. But we don't know what the reads are per se, and wouldn't know either whether those great QBs were ad libbing it to the decoy or if those "decoys" were really the second or third read.

[PhataLerror 370]

2 Superbowls, CHiefs franchise? 1, 0 since 1970. Ill take Eli's career with 2 Super bowls anytime.  I also recall him just throwing it up and Tyree and him making a catch that lead to a SUPERBOWL victory.  You have to give your WR's a chance to make a play!!!!!!  not throwing that pass gives you 0 chance to make a play. Throwing it, while the chance is small, it CAN work. the percentage while not good is NOT 0.

I guess you're a dice-roller and I'm not, but there's a lot more to this than being merely risk-averse: I just watched that play for old-times sake, and it's still a terrible throw on a broken play in which the Patriots seemingly lose the ability to make a tackle or cover a receiver. That play represents one of the worst defensive efforts of all time. You disrespect NFL defenses by suggesting that the Chiefs would be going somewhere if Smith throws that pass to any of his receivers.

 

Manning Light is watching football from home this post-season. Manning Light would have participated in zero Super Bowls if not for his elite defense bailing him out when he threw up balls like the one to Tyree and they got picked off instead of being caught or harmlessly falling to the ground. In 2007, Manning Light was 0-6 in games against teams that scored more than 21 points against the Giants' defense. Don't put Manning Light as the model for Smith to emulate. Manning Light has often been the weak light in numerous winning team efforts.