The Good, the Bad, the Kansas City Zebras

[drfrey13]

1 hour ago, Geezy said:

I think PGs defense would look a lot better with some sort of interior pass rush. 

I said this as soon as it was announced that w got the DC from the Giants.  Did not even know about Graham but knew the Giants relied on some big bad men upfront in the middle.

 

4 hours ago, big_palooka said:

 

All about execution. Blame the DC, but when you have guys like Abram who can't cover, mistakes will be made. 

By that same logic Carr made a bad read and does not do a good job of running McDaniels system.  If Carr understands what the D is doing then he goes to Adams

[dante9876]

9 hours ago, big_palooka said:

Good question. But he is a DB who should be able to cover. Abram completely abandons him to chase a play fake. 

Goes back to the talent part of the argument. Abram brings little to the table. Makes some tackles but does not create turnovers and is a liability in coverage. 

He is a db and should be able to cover can't be why you put Abrams on the best redzone target. No reason why that should be his assignment. He we all know he can't cover, graham has to know he sucks in coverage. That was an easy fix. Your thumper in man is either on the fullback or running back. Hobbs or tevon should be on kelece. This just another example of not putting guys in best position to succeed. 

 

Interior dline sucks at pass rush, we all know that. So why aren't we basically using them as blockers and running more stunts especially on Chandler Jones side. 

 

He showed he knows his personal using deablo speed in man coverage to check rbs, using tevon on kelece. All good strategies for the game. But than in the game he throws up on himself with 3 man rushes and Abram in any kind of coverage. 

[NCOUGHMAN]

12 hours ago, big_palooka said:

 

All about execution. Blame the DC, but when you have guys like Abram who can't cover, mistakes will be made. 

Double rdz whammy 🤦🏽‍♂️ Off & def 

[SimonGruber]

11 hours ago, Geezy said:

I think PGs defense would look a lot better with some sort of interior pass rush. 

All this debate over the DC only thing I’m really going to criticize is the 3 man  rushes. In all honesty O/U sacks from DT ROS what should the line be 1.5 ? 🤮 

[Bitty 2.0]

On 10/10/2022 at 11:51 PM, jpaulthe1st said:

He didn’t even push him that hard. My man flopped like prime Bill Laimbeer on that push. 

Why did he run right at him??? The camera has zoom?? Setup

[big_palooka]

9 hours ago, dante9876 said:

He is a db and should be able to cover can't be why you put Abrams on the best redzone target. No reason why that should be his assignment. He we all know he can't cover, graham has to know he sucks in coverage. That was an easy fix. Your thumper in man is either on the fullback or running back. Hobbs or tevon should be on kelece. This just another example of not putting guys in best position to succeed. 

 

Interior dline sucks at pass rush, we all know that. So why aren't we basically using them as blockers and running more stunts especially on Chandler Jones side. 

 

He showed he knows his personal using deablo speed in man coverage to check rbs, using tevon on kelece. All good strategies for the game. But than in the game he throws up on himself with 3 man rushes and Abram in any kind of coverage. 

That was TD 4 with Abram in coverage. Nobody else lined up on him could cover him either. So again, talent becomes the issue here. 

Contrast this to a talented player like Derwin:

 

[RaidersAreOne]

Tough SOB

 

[Darbsk]

The Good

Jacobs - excellent all night. Really putting together a nice year.

Outside pass rush shows up. Jones and Crosby were both very good, Jones could easily have had a couple sacks himself. 

Playcalling - I thought the balance was great, no real bad calls I don’t think and good variety. Getting more in sync as the season progresses.

Run blocking - better than expected, Parham had a couple really nice blocks

The Adams second TD was beautiful, great route and great throw 

Carr - thought he played a good game, sensible decision making and the two long TD chances he had he hit.

Liked the limited blitzes we did, the double safety blitz was great. Maybe we should do it just a touch more.

Overall, running a great team with the NFLs best coaching very, very close. Some say there are no moral victories, but that IMO is nonsense, our guys now know they can go to the Chiefs backyard and compete, they know they can compete with any team now and they know they could and should have won that match. That should breed confidence moving forward. We still have a few issues but once all the cogs are in sync we’ll be good.

The Bad

The Chris Jones roughing penalty was not a penalty IMO. Hate the fact that defenders can’t rough up the QBs a little.

Rushing three linemen. I would never, ever rush just three. Just self defeating.

Eluemunor was rough on the right side, beaten quite a few times and beaten badly two or three times.

Tackling was poor all game, way too many misses.

Interior pass rush still lacking, Bilal Nichols in MIA.

Waller missing again is becoming an issue. Poor when he has played and now likely to be hobbled for a few weeks.

The Ugly

The Koonce holding call was pure BS. At least the others there was some technicality but that one was just nonsense. At such a crucial time too. 

Abrams just letting Kielce wander across the field open for his last TD wtf? Didn’t you watch the first three TDs?!?!?! Speechless.

The last play where the two receivers ran into each other! Couldn’t have happened at a more crucial time. Adams may have been wide open too as the safety was late……….. what might have been…………

 

[big_palooka]

45 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

Hate the fact that defenders can’t rough up the QBs a little.

Imagine what Al Davis would be thinking in this era. The man who coined "the QB must go down and he must go down hard".

A lot of these young QBs would look different today if you could hit them. QBs have nothing to fear anymore. Further, WRs have little to fear anymore. I miss the days when a WR would get blasted trying to go across the middle and shy away from it the rest of the day. 

Game is not what it used to be. 

[Darbsk]

25 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

Imagine what Al Davis would be thinking in this era. The man who coined "the QB must go down and he must go down hard".

A lot of these young QBs would look different today if you could hit them. QBs have nothing to fear anymore. Further, WRs have little to fear anymore. I miss the days when a WR would get blasted trying to go across the middle and shy away from it the rest of the day. 

Game is not what it used to be. 

Yeh, exactly. Obviously we don’t want people being outright assaulted and guys like Atkinson and Tatum did go over the top at times but I feel there should be a small amount of, shall we say ‘menace’ from the defence. They have their reasons for over protecting the QBs but it’s just gone over the top for me, DBs should be allowed to get away with a little more on coverage too IMO. I like to see two guys really battling out there on a route. 

[Frankie2Gunz]

54 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

Yeh, exactly. Obviously we don’t want people being outright assaulted and guys like Atkinson and Tatum did go over the top at times but I feel there should be a small amount of, shall we say ‘menace’ from the defence. They have their reasons for over protecting the QBs but it’s just gone over the top for me, DBs should be allowed to get away with a little more on coverage too IMO. I like to see two guys really battling out there on a route. 

What's the main reason for all of this?  Point totals and game excitement.  The more "protected" a Qb is the more he can sit back, read the field and not feel threatened.  The more points in a game the more perceived excitement there is, which means more viewers and revenue for the NFL.  This protection of the QB's has allowed Brady to play until he was 45.  30 years ago he would be long retired by now.  

Is this a good ro a bad thing?  I feel like the game is too soft and a middle point between 30 years ago and now would be a happy place.  If a players finger touches a QB's helmet that is a roughing the QB penalty.  The subjectivity of penalties is what is maddening to me.

I've seen WR mugged and not get flagged then I've seen a Wr have a finger graze his jersey one second early and have PI called and the call impacted the outcome of the game.  It's insanity.   

What's also maddening is how the announcers can influence the perception of how average fans view the game.  The announcers are paid shills who tote the company line.   

Edited October 14, 2022 by Frankie2Gunz

[ronjon1990]

19 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

What's the main reason for all of this?  Point totals and game excitement.  The more "protected" a Qb is the more he can sit back, read the field and not feel threatened.  The more points in a game the more perceived excitement there is, which means more viewers and revenue for the NFL.  This protection of the QB's has allowed Brady to play until he was 45.  30 years ago he would be long retired by now.  

Is this a good ro a bad thing?  I feel like the game is too soft and a middle point between 30 years ago and now would be a happy place.  If a players finger touches a QB's helmet that is a roughing the QB penalty.  The subjectivity of penalties is what is maddening to me.

I've seen WR mugged and not get flagged then I've seen a Wr have a finger graze his jersey one second early and have PI called and the call impacted the outcome of the game.  It's insanity.   

What's also maddening is how the announcers can influence the perception of how average fans view the game.  The announcers are paid shills who tote the company line.   

Yep. This right here. Especially with QBs. 

I understand protecting a QB to an extent, but it's gone too far, imo. If a guy can't get sacked or tackled like any other player on the field they don't deserve to be out there making the big bucks and getting the glory. 

[drfrey13]

44 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

What's also maddening is how the announcers can influence the perception of how average fans view the game.  The announcers are paid shills who tote the company line.   

I do not know how many times I have heard announcers talk about a play and it sounds they are are not watching the same game and/or they are reading a script that they do not believe,

[Darbsk]

1 hour ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

What's the main reason for all of this?  Point totals and game excitement.  The more "protected" a Qb is the more he can sit back, read the field and not feel threatened.  The more points in a game the more perceived excitement there is, which means more viewers and revenue for the NFL.  This protection of the QB's has allowed Brady to play until he was 45.  30 years ago he would be long retired by now.  

Is this a good ro a bad thing?  I feel like the game is too soft and a middle point between 30 years ago and now would be a happy place.  If a players finger touches a QB's helmet that is a roughing the QB penalty.  The subjectivity of penalties is what is maddening to me.

I've seen WR mugged and not get flagged then I've seen a Wr have a finger graze his jersey one second early and have PI called and the call impacted the outcome of the game.  It's insanity.   

What's also maddening is how the announcers can influence the perception of how average fans view the game.  The announcers are paid shills who tote the company line.   

Yep I think you’re right and the casual fan probably does like the big plays and QBs throwing the ball all over the place so they seem to be catering for that and increasing the audience numbers rather than thinking of the longer term fans who are kinda a captive audience already. It’s like insurance companies giving discounts to new customers and forgetting their existing customers. 

Most long term fans I speak to seem to be of the same opinion that it’s gone too offence heavy and the defences have been neutered somewhat. Also that there’s more and more rules being stringently enforced and it’s hard not to be pedantic on the penalty front.

I honestly prefer the defensive side of the game, so for me, probably early 90s was the Zenith where you had great defences that could shut down a game and beat people up, RBs were highly regarded and could still take over a game like Bo Jackson but you also could still have guys like Marino, Moon, Elway, Everett and Young posting huge passing numbers. I also much preferred the uniforms then too 😂

[ronjon1990]

2 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

Yep I think you’re right and the casual fan probably does like the big plays and QBs throwing the ball all over the place so they seem to be catering for that and increasing the audience numbers rather than thinking of the longer term fans who are kinda a captive audience already. It’s like insurance companies giving discounts to new customers and forgetting their existing customers. 

Most long term fans I speak to seem to be of the same opinion that it’s gone too offence heavy and the defences have been neutered somewhat. Also that there’s more and more rules being stringently enforced and it’s hard not to be pedantic on the penalty front.

I honestly prefer the defensive side of the game, so for me, probably early 90s was the Zenith where you had great defences that could shut down a game and beat people up, RBs were highly regarded and could still take over a game like Bo Jackson but you also could still have guys like Marino, Moon, Elway, Everett and Young posting huge passing numbers. I also much preferred the uniforms then too 😂

Not to mention, fantasy football is a huge business. 

At the very least, it gets people watching more than just their favorite team's games and maybe the weekly MNF and TNF game. 

Take away the fantasy boon QBs are, people have little incentive to flip around watching multiple games and increasing viewership or buying packages to watch every game.