14 replies to this topic

[nathanKent]

http://www.homeofthe...nalysis-part-2/

[milkman]

Quote

On the subject of Zach Thomas, I do not believe for a second that Jovan Belcher demonstrated anything which would make him more worthy of a roster spot than a future Hall of Famer coming off of a strong season

Thomas didn't have a strong season last year.

Sure, he made a lot of tackles, but Pollard led the Chiefs in tackles last year.

In Dallas, Thomas looked like an old man who was getting abused by younger, faster, stronger, more talented men.

Add the fact that Thomas coudn't even get on the field in this preseason because of some mysterious injury, and this paragraph has no merit.

[The_Jonas]

milkman, on 09 September 2009 - 07:14 AM, said:

Thomas didn't have a strong season last year.

Sure, he made a lot of tackles, but Pollard led the Chiefs in tackles last year.

In Dallas, Thomas looked like an old man who was getting abused by younger, faster, stronger, more talented men.

Add the fact that Thomas coudn't even get on the field in this preseason because of some mysterious injury, and this paragraph has no merit.

Besides... Belcher did show something.

He's AVAILABLE. Thomas is not.

If you can't play, you can't help.

[JTChief82]

Quote

While Dorsey and Jackson showed promise during the preseason, Tank didn't. I was a big Tank supporter last preseason, but I don't see the same intensity and brute strength from him this year. Maybe it's that he once again is being improperly utilized. Maybe it's that he just doesn't have the girth to play the nose. I don't know the exact cause, but I know the effect. This could be a banner year for AFC West running backs.

I know Tank may have looked shakey, but if you look at the preseason stats he was one of the leading tacklers on Defense, He actually may have had the most. Not saying that it says much for his performance, but I think he will progress through the season.

[nathanKent]

JTChief82, on 09 September 2009 - 07:30 PM, said:

I know Tank may have looked shakey, but if you look at the preseason stats he was one of the leading tacklers on Defense, He actually may have had the most. Not saying that it says much for his performance, but I think he will progress through the season.

Tackles are a poor measure of a DT's performance, but even if they were a good measure, I don't think his 16 would be all that impressive.

[Soda Popinski]

The Best Defense is a Good Offense? Wish that was the case in 2005.

[ChiefInAdel]

nathanKent, on 09 September 2009 - 09:34 PM, said:

Tackles are a poor measure of a DT's performance, but even if they were a good measure, I don't think his 16 would be all that impressive.

Really?

Cuz for some strange reason, I was under the impression that if your front linemen are the ones on your team with the most tackles, that is a HUGE reason to believe that they are...you know...doing their jobs. Stuffing the O-linemen and keeping the runner from busting up the middle, or that they are able to disengage their blockers and get to the ball to make the tackle...

Safeties having the most tackles on a team concerns me, since that means that..

A. too many RB's are getting loose and into the secondary
B. The QB's are completing WAY too many passes into the secondary with no pressure.

[The_Jonas]

ChiefInAdel, on 10 September 2009 - 12:01 PM, said:

Really?

Cuz for some strange reason, I was under the impression that if your front linemen are the ones on your team with the most tackles, that is a HUGE reason to believe that they are...you know...doing their jobs. Stuffing the O-linemen and keeping the runner from busting up the middle, or that they are able to disengage their blockers and get to the ball to make the tackle...

Safeties having the most tackles on a team concerns me, since that means that..

A. too many RB's are getting loose and into the secondary
B. The QB's are completing WAY too many passes into the secondary with no pressure.

Most of the problems I saw with the run defense had to do with the back 7 not properly filling their lanes.

Mostly LB's and safeties.

That's also why DJ and page were benched and pollard was cut.

[Hersheybar]

ChiefInAdel, on 10 September 2009 - 12:01 PM, said:

Really?

Cuz for some strange reason, I was under the impression that if your front linemen are the ones on your team with the most tackles, that is a HUGE reason to believe that they are...you know...doing their jobs. Stuffing the O-linemen and keeping the runner from busting up the middle, or that they are able to disengage their blockers and get to the ball to make the tackle...

Safeties having the most tackles on a team concerns me, since that means that..

A. too many RB's are getting loose and into the secondary
B. The QB's are completing WAY too many passes into the secondary with no pressure.

This is so true. The thing that upset me most about Pollard is how many times he got burnt.

[nathanKent]

ChiefInAdel, on 10 September 2009 - 12:01 PM, said:

Really?

Cuz for some strange reason, I was under the impression that if your front linemen are the ones on your team with the most tackles, that is a HUGE reason to believe that they are...you know...doing their jobs. Stuffing the O-linemen and keeping the runner from busting up the middle, or that they are able to disengage their blockers and get to the ball to make the tackle...

Safeties having the most tackles on a team concerns me, since that means that..

A. too many RB's are getting loose and into the secondary
B. The QB's are completing WAY too many passes into the secondary with no pressure.

http://www.nfl.com/p...le?id=HAM671173

[ChiefInAdel]

nathanKent, on 10 September 2009 - 10:39 PM, said:

http://www.nfl.com/p...le?id=HAM671173

...and then?

[Hersheybar]

nathanKent, on 08 September 2009 - 11:03 PM, said:

http://www.homeofthe...nalysis-part-2/

Have some faith. I believe in our coaching staff the players. It takes 53 players to win a game not just a couple. No matter what position they are playing, how much time they have in the league, they still have to play the game. 60 min. This blog post says they don't think or believe the D is improved and yet we have not even seen a regular season game yet? Last year we was for SHIT! This blog post is just that also

[nathanKent]

ChiefInAdel, on 11 September 2009 - 08:28 AM, said:

...and then?

I'm just pointing out that the Steelers D obviously sucks because their NT doesn't get very many tackles.

[The_Jonas]

nathanKent, on 11 September 2009 - 08:21 PM, said:

I'm just pointing out that the Steelers D obviously sucks because their NT doesn't get very many tackles.

That's not what he said.

I know you didn't fail reading comprehension, so you're obviously just being a dick.


http://www.nfl.com/p...le?id=WIL407346


http://www.nfl.com/p...le?id=WIL462033

I guess these guys suck because they get over 70 tackles pretty often huh?

[NOLA]

The_Jonas, on 12 September 2009 - 12:50 PM, said:

That's not what he said.

I know you didn't fail reading comprehension, so you're obviously just being a dick.

A better response would have been pointing out that Ryan Sims had over 80 tackles in 03 and still sucked because that falls in the line of what he said.

*raises hand*

*stands, clears throat"

"Ryan Sims sucks... f**k the Vikings. Who can't make a pick on time?"

Dwight f**king Freeney would've been our pick if they'd gotten there in time.