Chiefs defense- is there an elixir?

[riceman80]

On 11/28/2018 at 6:14 AM, blizofoz45 said:

If defense were a tradeable stock I would have sold off any shares I had left after the last superbowl.  

The ridiculousness of the Eagles playcalling all because Tom Brady only needs enough time to complete 3 passes before the Patriots are lining up for a PAT told me everything I needed to know about defense in today’s game.

All the hubub over Peters and Mack in the offseason seemed way overblown to me.

Peters i get but Mack has made a serious impact on the Bears entire season and changed that defense. He wrecks games, lives in backfields, and forces punts and turnovers regularily. Mack wasn't overblown at all. He's had a ripple effect on their D and playing like an All-Pro. Meanwhile, without him Oakland has maybe the most pathetic pass rush in league history.

Trading Mack had drastic repercussions for 2 entire divisions. His trade was a HUGE deal. And you'll very likely see it in the playoffs when he makes plays that impacts a playoff game.

We watched as Raider fans, knowing our D sucked every game, just waiting for Mack to make a big play that would force a turnover or give us the ball back to give us a chance. More often than not, he delivered. The plays he made and attention he commanded were a big reason why we made it to 12-4 in 2016, the same year he won DPOY.

In summary, Mack is a big deal. He's a top 5 defensive player in the league.

[jaa1025]

On 11/28/2018 at 3:41 AM, CKS97 said:

Am I the only one who thinks the coordinator is at fault and a change could help?

they DO have a good pass rush. Eric Berry potentially returning can’t make things worse.

Is this basically last year’s Steelers? Are they THAT unsalvageable?

The Chiefs defense has improved tremendously from the beginning of the season. The scheme changed after the NE game, DoD has taken Raglands spot at ILB and Hitchens slid over to WILB which allows him to attack more. EB is coming back and if he's 70% of the player he was 15 months ago then our biggest weakness has been fixed. Barring injuries, i'm not concerned at all with the defense.

[CKS97]

The elixir has still yet to be found.

[SBLIII]

Just now, CKS97 said:

The elixir has still yet to be found.

could be their downfall. Mahomes vs Chiefs defense. Who wins?

[CKS97]

13 minutes ago, SBLIII said:

could be their downfall. Mahomes vs Chiefs defense. Who wins?

TV viewers

[kingseanjohn]

I really hope Berry can be 1/2 of what he was pre-injury.

I think he will be. But I hope so too.

[BlaqOptic]

On 11/30/2018 at 6:16 AM, riceman80 said:

Peters i get but Mack has made a serious impact on the Bears entire season and changed that defense. He wrecks games, lives in backfields, and forces punts and turnovers regularily. Mack wasn't overblown at all. He's had a ripple effect on their D and playing like an All-Pro. Meanwhile, without him Oakland has maybe the most pathetic pass rush in league history.

Trading Mack had drastic repercussions for 2 entire divisions. His trade was a HUGE deal. And you'll very likely see it in the playoffs when he makes plays that impacts a playoff game.

We watched as Raider fans, knowing our D sucked every game, just waiting for Mack to make a big play that would force a turnover or give us the ball back to give us a chance. More often than not, he delivered. The plays he made and attention he commanded were a big reason why we made it to 12-4 in 2016, the same year he won DPOY.

In summary, Mack is a big deal. He's a top 5 defensive player in the league.

Both of those teams would be exactly where they are with/without Mack. Raiders Defense would just be slightly better, Bears D slightly inferior. Vic Fangio is one of the 15 greatest Defensive minds in NFL history. He gets the best out of everyone.

[CKS97]

Like, should they change scheme? All out blitzes? Send all the pass rushers all out?

What would YOU do if you were in Sutton’s shoes?

[Jimmy Austin]

This should help

[3rivers]

Berry should help but to me I would think if Houston is healthy and actually allowed to rush  the passer, this would help them the most. He might be good in coverage, but when he is healthy they have one of the best there. In the Rams game, he beat one of the best LT's n the game in decent time for that S/FF TD play.  Only certain players make those types of plays vs top tier OL in crucial points in great games. Sutton has a tendency to have Houston in coverage, and while he is good, just let him rush. 

The elixir is have the Offence score 40+ and they have that.

[Jakuvious]

On 12/3/2018 at 4:43 AM, CKS97 said:

Like, should they change scheme? All out blitzes? Send all the pass rushers all out?

What would YOU do if you were in Sutton’s shoes?

I think being more aggressive is probably the best solution at this point. We're giving up yards regardless, our best chance for stops on D is sacks or turnovers, so we may as well commit to that. Sutton goes all in on situational play calling, so he's aggressive when he thinks he can get away with it (red zone, inside their own 10, 3rd and short, etc.) but conservative the rest of the time. I'd kind of like to see us get aggressive on neutral downs (1st and 10, 2nd and 6, that kind of thing) so we can try to push teams into bad situations rather than just hoping they put themselves there. But I don't expect Sutton to change at this point in his career. Main reason I'd like to see us move on. Not because of the ranking, but because Sutton is a set in stone kinda guy.

[Broncofan]

I'd disagree that the Chiefs D is actually good - they're built to be a frontrunner D and capitalize on teams that have to play catchup.   Their pass rush is very good, and Chris Jones is an emerging interior force.   It's unfortunate that Eric Berry has missed time, no doubt.  And don't get me wrong - I like Speaks a lot, love Jones, and think they've got some interesting young talent emerging.  

But the CB's still give up a lot of chunk plays, and they don't often come up with critical stops on 3rd down - if the pressure doesn't get there, they don't make a lot of stops on their secondary's talent (although ironically the FS who's replaced Berry is the one that impresses me the most - Eric Murray).  Kendall Fuller has really struggled, which surprised me.  And most importantly...they're awful against the run.   That's a formula where KC is going to struggle a lot vs. evenly matched teams.  Thing is, there aren't a lot of teams that can match KC's O output, well, at least their output pre-Hunt drama (and yes, I realize KC put up 40+ on OAK..but I think we know OAK's D is a bottom-5 D).  

They do give up a lot of yards because of gamescript...but they also have very real vulnerabilities.   The real Q is can they play well if behind, or even up.   I realize it was a road game, but the part that worried me about KC's D vs. LAR - Gurley was a decoy from the time his ankle got rolled up on...and LAR still scored a ton on them.  That's worrisome.

The D can make big plays, especially when they are ahead.   A lot of D's are built that way, though, and are far less effective once that lead vanishes.   Maybe the KC O doesn't let that happen too often, but that's also more likely as we get to the playoffs.  I guess we'll find out then. 

[Jakuvious]

2 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

I'd disagree that the Chiefs D is actually good - they're built to be a frontrunner D and capitalize on teams that have to play catchup.   Their pass rush is very good, and Chris Jones is an emerging interior force.   It's unfortunate that Eric Berry has missed time, no doubt.  And don't get me wrong - I like Speaks a lot, love Jones, and think they've got some interesting young talent emerging.  

But the CB's still give up a lot of chunk plays, and they don't often come up with critical stops on 3rd down - if the pressure doesn't get there, they don't make a lot of stops on their secondary's talent (although ironically the FS who's replaced Berry is the one that impresses me the most - Eric Murray).  Kendall Fuller has really struggled, which surprised me.  And most importantly...they're awful against the run.   That's a formula where KC is going to struggle a lot vs. evenly matched teams.  Thing is, there aren't a lot of teams that can match KC's O output, well, at least their output pre-Hunt drama (and yes, I realize KC put up 40+ on OAK..but I think we know OAK's D is a bottom-5 D).  

They do give up a lot of yards because of gamescript...but they also have very real vulnerabilities.   The real Q is can they play well if behind, or even up.   I realize it was a road game, but the part that worried me about KC's D vs. LAR - Gurley was a decoy from the time his ankle got rolled up on...and LAR still scored a ton on them.  That's worrisome.

The D can make big plays, especially when they are ahead.   A lot of D's are built that way, though, and are far less effective once that lead vanishes.   Maybe the KC O doesn't let that happen too often, but that's also more likely as we get to the playoffs.  I guess we'll find out then. 

I don't think anyone is saying they're good. Just not as bad as the stats looked early on.

I do disagree greatly on some of your specific analysis though. Murray has not been good this year, at all. And he wasn't good last year either. The only S we have that's been remotely impressive this year has been Jordan Lucas, and that's been on a VERY small snap count. Parker is terrible. Murray is bad. Sorensen is hopefully just still shaking off the rust, but he's been bad since returning. The CBs really haven't been bad. Not great, but not bad. Nelson, Scandrick, and Fuller have actually been solid in man coverage, the bigger issue is they're just on their own out there. The safeties provide no help. The LBs aside from Dorian O'Daniel who is just now seeing snaps have been terrible in coverage on RBs and TEs. But our CB play has really not been as bad as you'd think based on the passing stats allowed. The number of deep passes attempted on us, complete or otherwise, where there's no S on the screen is horrendous. No one back there has the range or instincts to support the CBs in man underneath.

This is kind of a weird stat to use, but the Chiefs defense is like the 7th best in the NFL in fantasy points by WRs against us. But we're bottom 5 with both RBs and TEs. Against the Raiders we allowed like 130 yards to WRs. Against the Cards it was David Johnson that beat us. Duke Johnson against the Browns. The Rams TEs combined for 100+ yards. James White destroyed us on third down against New England. The most receiving yards we've allowed all season? Jesse James. We're actually okay at covering WRs. It's everything else that we're probably the worst in the league at. And even in the games where WRs have found success against us, the coverage hasn't usually been bad. The two TDs Scandrick allowed against the Rams were tight coverage, just perfectly placed passes, for example. Scandrick, Nelson, and Fuller have all honestly had good seasons. It's just the combo of bad coverage at LB and S along with the volume of attempts.

And we do suck against the run. Always have under Sutton, probably always will. We have the talent for it, up front. As bad as Hitchens and Ragland have been in pass coverage, they've certainly demonstrated good run defense in the past. Houston is elite at it on the edge. No reason Jones or Bailey should struggle there. This has to just be a scheme thing. Sutton just doesn't care about stopping the run.

[CKS97]

About the best case scenario at this point for KC is that Eric Berry can do for them what Bob Sanders did for the '06 Colts

[3rivers]

9 hours ago, CKS97 said:

About the best case scenario at this point for KC is that Eric Berry can do for them what Bob Sanders did for the '06 Colts

if he can be healthy and in shape ready to play at his best, then they could be ready .  The front with Houston healthy, Jones and Ford should be able to get pressure. Just a matter of rushing them instead of dropping them into coverage.