Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster?

Is it time to end the Dexter McCluster experiment? Should the Chiefs add another legitimate NFL WR in his place on the roster?

7 months ago tpflanz 30 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

my answers:

NO, NO, and NO (especially not TO)

Dex will make some plays before the season is over, and he does provide value, even if he doesn’t put up huge numbers

by stagdsp on Oct 28, 2011 2:19 PM CDT reply actions

I hope you’re right, but in every game he has one solid play to 10 subpar plays. He doesn’t break tackles. He doesn’t make guys miss and his yards per reception is 3.1… Not good, no matter what position a player plays.

The Chiefs would be better not putting him into their game plan at all. 1/3+ of the Chiefs plays are designed with him in mind. That’s a ton of game planning for a guy who is inconsequential in the game.

McCluster does NOT require other teams to game plan to stop him… So, it is pretty obvious the Chiefs would be better without him on the active roster.

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 2:25 PM CDT reply actions

disagree

it’s all in how they use him… see: Sproles in N.O…. he’s having a terrific year, because the offense gets him the ball in space.

Dex has been given the ball behind the LOS in obvious situations WAY too much this year.

Get him the ball in the open field, and he’ll make plays… see: SF game last year

by stagdsp on Oct 28, 2011 2:40 PM CDT up reply actions

agreed…i don’t mid him in draws on passing situations. Sometimes they give him the ball, when the other team is expecting a run. He needs to provide that change of pace thing.

by kc571 on Oct 28, 2011 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions

disagree

McCluster does NOT require other teams to game plan to stop him

The fact that we keep throwing him the ball at the LOS or even behind it when he’s obviously covered is strongly skewing those numbers and even mooting the point. He’s ALWAYS covered and that means defenses are very aware of where he is on the field.

SB Nation Kansas City

Twitter - @bkissel7

by BJ Kissel on Oct 28, 2011 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions

Downfield

Watch – He never makes the catch when he is thrown the ball down field. One of two things always happens, he cannot create separation from the receiver or the defender outplays him to knock the ball down… I suppose there is a third – bad pass, but I am obviously referring to catchable balls.

Dex is a player I focus on every game when I rewatch the game.

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions

I agree that catching deep passes is not his best skill

but, he’s very dangerous and pretty reliable at: draws, swing passes, screens (when the blocking is there), and catching the ball in the flat…

and, as BJ mentioned, the defense DOES take notice of where he is…which shows he’s considered dangerous… AND that he can take the heat off of the other skill players

by stagdsp on Oct 28, 2011 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions

Draws Plays

I do like him on draws… The slower developing plays seem to suit his style of play very well

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions

in the OAK game alone

Dex had:
a 10yd run outside
a 9 yd run over the LT
an 8yd run around the right side
and a 13 yard run up the middle

I know he didn’t have 40 sub-par plays in that game!

in every game he has one solid play to 10 subpar plays

by stagdsp on Oct 28, 2011 2:51 PM CDT reply actions

like it or not, the guy gets 1st downs and is a big part of the offense

vs INDY
10 yd catch on 3rd and 3

vs MINN
5 yd run on 2nd and 1
6yd run up the middle
6yd run to the Left end
6yd catch on 2nd and 4
6yd catch set up a FG
12yd draw

by stagdsp on Oct 28, 2011 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions

Nobody

Nobody who averages 38 offensive yards per game as a RB is a “BIG” part of the offense. His touches and targets would be better suited going to Battle and the legit WRs on this roster. McCluster is nothing more than a kick/punt returner in the NFL

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions

I can see you are steadfast in your opinion

but, I disagree with every part of that statement.

we’ll have to “agree to disagree”

by stagdsp on Oct 28, 2011 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions

You don’t agree the team is better overall when other RBs get the ball more? The Chiefs offense has been best in games when McCluster has less targets and less carries.

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions

No

The Chiefs offense is better with Dexter McCluster in the mix and on the field.

SB Nation Kansas City

Twitter - @bkissel7

by BJ Kissel on Oct 28, 2011 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm w BJK

the Chiefs offense works best when all weapons get involved.

by stagdsp on Oct 28, 2011 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions

Stats show the exact opposite it true… The offense is MORE productive when a higher percentage of plays go to players NOT named McCluster.

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 10:07 PM CDT up reply actions

that doesn't take into account positive plays that came from Dex's presence

Defenses key on him when he’s in the game. That’s easy to see if you’re specifically watching him. He hasn’t been fantastic but he has a role in this offense and getting rid of him for a #6 WR without the same skill set doesn’t make any sense, and we don’t have anyone with that skill set.

Looking at a stat sheet doesn’t tell you the whole story, but you know that. Right?

SB Nation Kansas City

Twitter - @bkissel7

by BJ Kissel on Oct 29, 2011 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions

Probably not

You’re probably right, he didn’t have 40 subpar plays, but there were a few downfield targets where he was outplayed and at least 3 pass blocking situations where he was blown up.

Those are plays where he didn’t even touch the ball.

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions

Look at the Arenas wildcat touchdown run

The fake to Dex made the entire defense shift to him – and made the hole wide open from Arenas.

by InamedmypuppyDexter on Oct 28, 2011 3:08 PM CDT reply actions

yessir

by stagdsp on Oct 28, 2011 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions

Maybe...

But that play was 100% unnecessary. I am not a fan of gimmick plays. Save the gimmicks for games/situation when your team is being dominated and you need to use trickery to succeed. This was not that situation.

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 3:13 PM CDT reply actions

So it's unnecessary when it goes against your opinion?

by kcgiant06 on Oct 28, 2011 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions

As an offense we will never line up 4 wide

enough to justify dropping dex for yet another WR. We don’t efficiently use the ones we have. Dex is perfect for our offense because he can catch out of the backfield and he’s great on draws, that’s all we need him to do

by RamX21 on Oct 28, 2011 3:17 PM CDT via mobile reply actions

agreed.

I would love to see some 4WR sets with Bowe/Breaston/Baldwin and Colbert or McCluster

but, it doesn’t seem to be a part of the offense at this point.

McCluster IS a part of the offense, and WILL make more plays as the year goes on

by stagdsp on Oct 28, 2011 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions

Thanks for making my point… The Chiefs should use actual WRs who are capable of making plays instead of McCluster.

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 10:09 PM CDT up reply actions

I didn't make your point at all

I said we don’t use the WR’s that we have, why would we drop a good change of pace back for another wideout that wont see the field

by RamX21 on Oct 29, 2011 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions

Wow.........uh, just wow.........

Usually I do not just come right out and say something which might be deemed as derogatory………..but………………this is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. If the Chiefs would just let Dex run the ball and stop the cutesy, wootsy, take forever to develop end around stuff, his worth would be immeasurable. He is best in the open field, throw him the ball or let him run plays which will get him into the secondary where he can shine.

"The Hammer"

by G.L. on Oct 28, 2011 4:34 PM CDT reply actions

Let him run, really?

Really, you think Dexter McCluster is capable of being a featured back in the NFL… Now, that’s what I call dumb…

Chiefs Command: Are the Chiefs a better team without Dexter McCluster? | Where are the Bungles? | Over/Under set at 7 for No. of times Philip Rivers is caught whining on MNF!

by tpflanz on Oct 28, 2011 10:06 PM CDT up reply actions

Why? He may not be able to run ALL

the time, but there have been a number of backs who competed quite well at the NFL level who were the same size as McCluster. Discounting him because of his size alone is what is dumb.

"The Hammer"

by G.L. on Oct 31, 2011 8:00 AM CDT up reply actions