Our problem isn't our running...

by 1kmilesfromkc on Nov 11, 2009 9:37 PM CST Comment 41 comments

First, I want to say that I do think that Charles is up to the task of being an every down back and should be running the ball more than 6 times per game. He should be toting the rock more, but that isn't going to happen unless we get more plays. We aren't getting enough plays because there is a glaring problem with our passing game.

Cassel isn't throwing the ball deep. These 1-6 yard passes on guys that are being covered and have to beat a LB and safety to get a first down just isn't cutting it. Here's the stat that proves it: Cassel's average yards per attempt is a paltry 5.58 yards. This is the 29th best in the NFL, just barely ahead of Jamarcus Russell (5.5). Here's what makes it even more depressing--Cassel's 5.58 is actually INFLATED because it takes into account the catch up drives we seem to get at the end of every game when the game is over and the defense we are playing against uses the prevent defense (like against Jax). I wonder, if we took these stat-padding drives out of the equation, just how low would this be?

Do I think that Cassel has the tools to succeed? Absolutely. But something isn't right here. It could be bad play calling, WR's not getting separation, Cassel's throws being off or not recognizing an open receiver, or the many drops we've had. Most likely it is several of these. But we need to increase the yards per pass. By doing this, we get the first downs to get Charles more carries.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 41 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

here here

and as much as i like seeing Long involved, please stop calling 8 yard passing plays on third and long

A man who says he can, and a man who says he can't are both right. Which one are you?

by Bashman on Nov 11, 2009 9:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I think your thinking is backwards

Throwing low percentage passes behind a crappy offensive line = incompletions, interceptions and a beat up QB.

Cassel does not have time to throw deep. People seem to forget that there is an amount of time required for Bowe or Bradley or Chambers to phsically run down the field for said deep pass. If it takes them 4 seconds to run 30 yards, but the defenders are in Cassels face in 2.5 seconds, the math does not add up.

If you want more plays, you need to get more 1st downs. Having Jamaal Charles or Kolby Smith averaging 4.5 – 6 yards per carry is the best way of doing that. It puts you in managable 2nd and 3rd downs.

You don’t get more 1st downs and thus more plays by having Matt Cassel throw incomplete, incomplete, sacked.

by ChiefDJ on Nov 11, 2009 9:46 PM CST reply actions 1 recs

Agreed with the time window to throw it.

Basically the WR don’t have enough time to go far before Cassel has to throw it…

by worc on Nov 11, 2009 9:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree and disagree

Your point is valid and is somewhat difficult to refute, but I’ll try. Aaron Rogers is the only QB sacked more than Cassel, and I would say he is a good comparision in skill set as well. Both QB’s have 5 interceptions, but Rogers has been sacked 10 more times than Cassel but averages 3 more yards per attempt and has 999 more yards than Cassel. And his team has 3 few more wins than the Chiefs (although I’d admit that it is not just because of Rogers).

I think this comes down to which camp you’re in. We’ve tried the run first to get the pass for half a season and it hasn’t worked. It may be because LJ sucks, or because our run blocking is as bad as our pass blocking.

Dick Vermiel seemed to be a pass first guy, and the run opened up because of it. I know that was a more talented squad with a better line, however.

by 1kmilesfromkc on Nov 11, 2009 9:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Aaron Rogers

Won’t last long. He’s a mobile guy, but he’s already sustained injuries to both feet. He seems to have inherited Favre’s gambler mentality, which makes him hold onto the ball a bit longer. Holding onto the ball longer is great for stats, but it’s terrible for career longevity. Cassel may hold up a little bit longer, as he doesn’t share the delusions that Rogers has, namely he’s not kidding himself that his team will make the playoffs. So Cassel throws the ball away a ton more than Rogers—-and if Cassel didn’t, he would have been sacked 20+ more times than anyone else in the league.

Bottom line. Hopefully Cassel won’t be a concussion-ridden zombie in 2010 and KC can find some decent protection for him through the draft.

by Pilcrow on Nov 11, 2009 10:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Cassel throws the ball away?

Are we watching the same games?

by KCinAZ on Nov 11, 2009 11:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Don't have stats. But I've watched every game.

Seems like Cassel is throwing it away on 15-20% of his passes. If a QB approaches the 1 in 5 mark, that’s quite a lot.

by Pilcrow on Nov 11, 2009 11:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

ole brett favre

has lasted a pretty long time

by callmesir on Nov 12, 2009 12:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The exception doesn't disprove the rule.

Favre is lucky. Or a freak of nature. Both.

by Pilcrow on Nov 12, 2009 7:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

it's not like I picked a random guy....

IT’s the guy he compared rodgers too… do I think it’s a fair assesment

by callmesir on Nov 12, 2009 8:50 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah Favre is the EXCEPTION always to everything..he's amazing and different..

little, yellow, different!

by krayfish on Nov 12, 2009 11:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sacks are not the sole factor in poor QB peformance or getting the ball downfield

You have to put them into perspective. Are these sacks coming from the pressure of a speed rush off the edge a la Jared Allen? Or are they from pressure of the pocket collapsing because your entire OLine can’t seem to form a pocket for Cassel to step into.

The latter scenario is more of what we see, and is more the reason that Cassel can’t get the ball downfield. Not only does he get sacked plenty, be he’s getting pressured on MOST downs making it impossible to step into a throw.

We all saw the stat during the Cowboys game.. He was hit something like 20 times on 27 dropbacks. THAT’s a product of the pocket collapsing considerably, putting Cassel in way more pressure situations, which dictate much shorter routes.

"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius, in contrary to Glenn Dorsey lining up in the 2-tech

by ArrowSpread on Nov 11, 2009 11:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Both.

Are these sacks coming from the pressure of a speed rush off the edge a la Jared Allen? Or are they from pressure of the pocket collapsing because your entire OLine can’t seem to form a pocket for Cassel to step into.

The middle is blown up and teams are sending speed rushers (not just DEs like Allen, but corners, safeties, LBs) off the edge. There isn’t much chemistry between Cassel and the receivers, as yet, to beat the blitzing DB. Cassel has tried to throw to the area the DB vacated, but either missed the throw or the WR didn’t see what Cassel was seeing.

But I see some light at the end of the tunnel on this, now that Chambers and Long have boarded the train. Cassel’s odds of succeeding against the DB blitz, in particular, has ratcheted up, because abandoning Chamber or Long is a LOT more likely to hurt you than abandoning (singling) Bradley, Engram or even Bowe.

Numerous QBs around the league KNOW they have an open guy when they see a safety in the blitz mix. Cassel can only hope, and even then, he kinda has to wait to see, rather than just uncorkin’ it on general principles, like Rivers can do with Vincent Jackson, for instance. Chambers is no Vincent Jackson (or he’d still be a Bolt!), but he brings more of that kind of thing to this offense than any WR we’ve seen suit up in a KC uniform all year.

No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.

by hmills110 on Nov 12, 2009 10:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Give Cassel Jennings and Driver

and maybe the comparison to Rodgers makes sense.

Be interested to see YPA from last week.

No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.

by hmills110 on Nov 12, 2009 10:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

if my old Volkswagon Microbus had a much bigger engine, a sleeker body, a different transmission and better chassis, frame and wheels it coulda gone 170 mph

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!

by upamtn on Nov 11, 2009 9:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Do the math...

5.3 yrd per carry….seems to me if you do that twice in four downs thats 10.6 yrds and a first down…..Or at least a very managable 3rd down….seems pretty simple to me Haley. But then again Im just a fan

by KCinAZ on Nov 11, 2009 11:07 PM CST reply actions 1 recs

Rec'd

So true

Predictions as of 06.24.2009.

Larry Johnson will be a top 3 fantasy pick once again in 2010 (after a monster season in 2009.)
Dwayne Bowe will be a 2009 Pro Bowl selection.
Brandon Flowers will have at least 6 INTs in 2009 season.
Todd Haley will have a sideline shouting match caught on TV yelling at one of his asst. coaches.

by 58 was my friend on Nov 12, 2009 12:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Jamaal Charles phenomena

Since everything and most of all the past week has been about Charles carrying the teams’ running game. I like Charles but never believe his size and build was cut for 25 carries a game, let alone 16 game season.

So for fun sake, I inserted Charles into my lineup as the starter – Week 1 vs Ravens… After making 4 incredible runs of 7+ yards/carry, he got creamed by Ray Lewis. And now my Madden football says he could be out 8-10 weeks.

Well..that was video but I doubt he’d be durable if he was getting the beating every single week.

Predictions as of 06.24.2009.

by 58 was my friend on Nov 12, 2009 12:18 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

perhaps

he did have 18-25 carries a game in college though… don’t think i’m wrong in saying he could handle 15 in the nfl…

Sub him and kolby with some dantrell here and there and we are fine. There are like 2 or 3 teams who only run one guy and not everybody has a Steven Jackson or Cedric Benson.

No one is saying run him 30 times a game. That is just a death sentence.

by Lucasjr5 on Nov 12, 2009 9:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not a strong believer in "The Madden Method" for game preps, but...

… I’ve seen numerous Heisman winners go to shitty teams and have their careers shortened as a result.

Personally, I’m just happy to see LJ out of the mix. Savage and Charles give defenses a lot more to worry about, even though LJ has shown more versatility this season.

I’d rather have the whole Charles/Savage/Other debate AFTER the O-Line is upgraded and stable.

I’m still not quite sure Smith is going to make it all the way back from injury. And I can’t remember his ball skills quotient. But last year, I remember thinking he had a step or three on LJ and played with better power than anybody but LJ.

No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.

by hmills110 on Nov 12, 2009 10:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Every team has those catch up plays

Ecspecially the ones at the bottom record wise. So his numbers arent inflated at all.

OHANA!

by darwithabar on Nov 12, 2009 1:19 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Disagree-every team with close losses have the catch up plays.

teams that are ahead kill the clock (which is never us) and run the ball. Teams that are behind (us) get the prevent d against them.

by 1kmilesfromkc on Nov 12, 2009 6:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thats exactly what were talking about...

Every team has catch up plays whether its in rushing or passing yards.

OHANA!

by darwithabar on Nov 12, 2009 9:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

win on first down

if we can do that consistently, it opens up the playbook more. 2nd and 4 is a heck of a lot easier to come up with a play to fool a defense, than when the opposing D knows its going to be a pass. obviously..

Just like novocaine. give it time; always works..

by be cee on Nov 12, 2009 7:21 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

chief dj is correct IMO..

Lets evaluate your hypothesis for a second 1k. First off I don’t need to repeat Chief Dj’s correct evaluation of the time it takes to set up a deep play versus the time we ACTUALLY have before Cassel is buried in a heap of defenders.

It starts but doesn’t end with the O line. They are terrible. I don’t care how you slice it. I don’t care what slight improvements we’ve seen because to me Improvement isn’t something you see for one drive here and there or one game against Oakland for example. It’s consistency at any given position. So for a particular position to actually be considered improved, it must be improved over an extended period of time.
For example. The Ravens defense is considered probably the premiere defense in the NFL over the past decade. But they have had bad games here and there. That doesn’t make them NOT great, just because they had one bad game. Nor would it make our offensive line improved or GOOD just because they mess up and actually have a good drive here and there or a decent game once in a great while. It’s what you do week in and week out, the norm, that defines your identity.

But it doesn’t end with the O line. It’s play calling as well. We are predictable on first and second and then when in 3rd and long when we need time to develop a play that can get us 12 yards on 3rd down for a first down, the other team’s D blitzes and kills us. So no time …. again.

We’ve tried throwing deep. It never works until we’re down by two scores in the final 3 minutes of a game. When the defense is playing prevent and it’s pointless anyway.
If we could get better play calling on first and second we wouldn’t always be in a predictable 3rd and long.

Take a look at Denver. Orton has taken the Broncos to 6-2 by doing just that. Short 1-6 yd passes. If you get two 6 yd passes on any given 3 downs…you get a first down and move the chains. If you do that you can score. So it’s not the short passes that are killing us. It’s several things…but one of the most glaring to me is the lack of talent after the catch.
Okay, believe me I’ve watched EVERY Denver game this year. They would NOT be 6-2 if it weren’t for after the catch effort by BM.

He doesn’t go down to the first tackler. Ok, he busts his ass and get the extra 5 yards needed for the first. He actually BREAKS tackles. Something we don’t know how to do yet in KC. Our RB’s and our receivers fall down after the first contact WAY more often that not. Those short passes you hate, were the staple of great teams like the 49ers. They work when you can count on your receivers to do something after the catch. Watch Bradley, he’s made of paper evidently. Like most of our receivers so far, they have no ability to make yards after the catch. Plus unlike Denver’s 6 yd passes for completions. Our receivers drop 50% of what is thrown to them.

You can’t win if you don’t move the chains. You can’t move the chains if you can’t catch the ball. Catching the pass is only as effective as yards after the catch a lot of the time. Play calling can help or hinder all of the above.

Until it ALL comes together from the coaches to the individual efforts, you will nothing improve. IMO

by krayfish on Nov 12, 2009 7:39 AM CST reply actions 1 recs

I hate Marshall, but he plays like a man.

I agree we have to play tougher in every aspect not just running and receiving. Our line has to get tough and not let themselves get knocked 5 yards back into our QB. I still think once the players get this then they are on their way.

by Helmets on Nov 12, 2009 8:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think

you saw my post as a knock on Cassel, which it isnt. My point is that we aren’t stretching out the defense. I understand that our O-line is vulnerable. However, Orton can make the short throws because he has the home run receivers that can go deep. When teams play us, they keep their safeties up and contain the short pass so we can’t get much YAC. When we throw it deep, as I said in the final paragraph, there are a variety of reasons why we are unsuccessful. Bottom line-we are unsuccessful. Once we become successful throwing the deep ball (which we should be doing on either first or second down instead of third down when the d is expecting it-i.e. my reference to bad playcalling), it will force the defense to not put 8 men in the box and respect our passing game.
My point is similar to yours-the deep ball is not working for a variety of reasons. But I feel that in order to have the chains move, we need to get defenders out of the box, and the best way to do that is to prove that we can actually throw the ball beyond the box.

by 1kmilesfromkc on Nov 12, 2009 9:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

no I didn't take it as a knock on Cassel, I'm not big on Cassel thus far

but it’s not all his fault. He needs protection. Orton doesn’t throw long hardly ever. He lives and dies by his short passes. McDaniels doesn’t trust him to throw long, as he throws a lot of int’s.

by krayfish on Nov 12, 2009 10:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

that Orton does throw a lot of short routes to protect the team against him, and he does it fairly well. However, I think that the rest of the league is now on to him. They have lost their last two games and Orton’s yards per attempt in the first 6 games was 7.5, while his yards per attempt in the past two games (losses) is below 5 yards per attempt. I think this further proves that yards per attempt is a stat indicative of how a team is performing. Also, the Broncos have better WR’s and TE’s than we do so he has a higher completion percentage as well, even when averaging a lower ypa. Bottom line in my opinion-the short game is something we’ve tried with very little success. I’d like to see the ball thrown to intermediate and long routes on first and second down more often. And when it is, it would be wonderful if the pass was on target. I understand this is difficult to do because of our o-line. But why can’t we just throw it away when the blitz comes instead of holding on to it and putting ourselves in a bigger hole?

by 1kmilesfromkc on Nov 12, 2009 10:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yah I tend to agree with you 1k...

I think the league is catching on. Their playing tighter against Denver and it is showing. They can’t run like they did. They aren’t completing quite as many as they used to. Still though, they sure look better doing it than we do.

And now it’s to the point where you can’t keep making excuses about the talent of our receivers. Bowe has talent. Long, Wade and Chambers have talent. They look smoother than us because their better prepared and way better coached.

You know they did lose their QB, their coach etc. They went to a whole new scheme just like we did. But they look good out there even when they lose. They look poised. They look the opposite of us.

by krayfish on Nov 12, 2009 11:29 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

rec'd

im starting to wonder the same thing…

by 1kmilesfromkc on Nov 12, 2009 11:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Gotta defend Orton here...even though I dont like defending a Bronco..

Orton had thrown one INT this yr…and it was a hail mary thrown at the end of the first half….then in Mondays game he threw 3 INTs against the Steelers…..They lost to the Ravens, who have a pretty good D, and the Steelers who have an awesome D.

by KCinAZ on Nov 12, 2009 12:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No need to defend him...that's not what was we were saying...

he hasn’t thrown a lot of int’s this year simply because McDaniels doesn’t put him in a position to throw them. He designs short easy quick slants and curls which are very easy for a below average QB to make.

Orton doesn’t throw down the field very often because if he did he WOULD throw interceptions. That’s what we were saying. It’s his coach who designs very simple easy to execute plays for average Orton that are helping him succeed in Denver as a QB.

Remember Orton had a hard time keeping the starting QB job and his competition was Rex Grossman for God sakes. Truth be told…Orton is a smart saavy Qb with a very inconsistent arm when he throws for more than 15 yards at a pop.

by krayfish on Nov 12, 2009 1:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

1K

They are bringing there safeties up, They are just stopping the run with there front 7 or less. When a team canrt run on 4 Dlmen, They can keep everyone in coverage no problem. Ecspecailly if they are getting pressure on the QB.

OHANA!

by darwithabar on Nov 12, 2009 9:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I meant

They are not bringing there safeties up

OHANA!

by darwithabar on Nov 12, 2009 9:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It's ironic that you would be making this comparison to Orton

Fact is, though, if not for a fluke play in Game 1 versus Cincy, Denver would be 5-3, and the teams that recently beat Denver WERE more and more willing to sit on routes and attack the backfield. There’s a definite “shortening of the field” feeling about Denver, lately, even with the occasional heroics by Marshall.

No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.

by hmills110 on Nov 12, 2009 10:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Bowe breaks tackles...

He only touches the ball about 4 times a game though because he drops and is double covered much of the time.

by Lucasjr5 on Nov 12, 2009 9:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Nice comment.

But with Walsh’s WCO, he also had WRs who would INSTANTLY beat their guy over the top if there were no cushion, and, because of this, and Walsh’s willingness to throw the timing pass over the top, the quick throws underneath usually saw his WRs in better position to GET YAC.

It still comes back to the quality of the WRs, so I’m OK with that, but I don’t think toughness is the issue.

No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.

by hmills110 on Nov 12, 2009 10:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you will nothing improve?? Did I just write that?? OMG me dumb.

by krayfish on Nov 12, 2009 7:42 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

in watching the games, I think the short to intermediate yardage passes are more effective for this team

I don’t think airing it out is the right way to go. When we get into a rhythm of dink and dunk offense, we seem to be able to move the ball. I think that’s where we need to build from. From there, you start to set up the run game, (provided Charles and Co. are up to it) and then you can start to stretch the field with longer (low percentage I might add) pass plays. I’m not real wild about Cassel’s long range accuracy anyway.

Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!

by Buck'O on Nov 12, 2009 3:25 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

And that's just it.

The great teams find ways to set their QB up for that extra beat. Middle-tier-at-best teams like KC get fewer of THOSE opportunities and there has to be GREAT chemistry between QB and WRs for those NARROW windows that might be all you see in a dink-and-dunk style of play.

Unlike others, above, I don’t see coaching as the big issue. The INSTANT improvement I see on the field with Long and Chambers (Get both of ‘em on the field and KEEP both of ’em on the field) says sheer talent was a limiting factor. Now, we have a period of Football IQ being a limiting factor, unsure if Chambers and Long will bring THAT to the field, as well. I’m guardedly optimistic on that.

And if Chambers and Long DO step it up, we’ll all be marveling at the vast improvement in Cassel.

No question. Otis Taylor should be in the Hall of Fame.

by hmills110 on Nov 12, 2009 10:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs