Welp. Looks like we need a RB.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger

Nope, I'm staying on this "train" as long as the likes of Seattle and The Ravens have a better run game than we do thank you very much.

Seattle's rush efficiency was well below ours. A more prolific running game doesn't not mean a more proficient one. They simply ran the ball more often.

They're a perfect example of exactly what we should NOT be doing. Russell Wilson was better than he'd ever been last year. He was very possibly the 2nd best QB in football but had one of the lowest usage rates of all NFL passers. The Seahawks kept taking the ball out of his hands and giving it to a set of RBs that just weren't all that great.

The Seahawks offense was significantly more effective and efficient when they were allowing Wilson to move the ball. Their loss to the Cowboys in the playoffs was precisely because they stubbornly and dogmatically committed to a running game that just was not working. Had they simply gone into that game and let Wilson throw the ball around, they'd have won going away.

The fact that you are citing the Seahawks is perfectly demonstrative of the flaw in your thinking. You see them as a team to be emulated when in fact, they're pretty much a textbook example of the worst possible way to utilize our offensive personnel.

[UChieffyBugger]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Seattle's rush efficiency was well below ours. A more prolific running game doesn't not mean a more proficient one. They simply ran the ball more often.

They're a perfect example of exactly what we should NOT be doing. Russell Wilson was better than he'd ever been last year. He was very possibly the 2nd best QB in football but had one of the lowest usage rates of all NFL passers. The Seahawks kept taking the ball out of his hands and giving it to a set of RBs that just weren't all that great.

The Seahawks offense was significantly more effective and efficient when they were allowing Wilson to move the ball. Their loss to the Cowboys in the playoffs was precisely because they stubbornly and dogmatically committed to a running game that just was not working. Had they simply gone into that game and let Wilson throw the ball around, they'd have won going away.

The fact that you are citing the Seahawks is perfectly demonstrative of the flaw in your thinking. You see them as a team to be emulated when in fact, they're pretty much a textbook example of the worst possible way to utilize our offensive personnel.

The teams I mentioned were statistically two of the best running teams In the league were they not? And didn't they dominate TIME OF POSSESSION? And you think that's a bad thing for this offense?

Ever heard of the word DIVERSITY? if not I'd urge you to look it up.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger

The teams I mentioned were statistically two of the best running teams In the league were they not? And didn't they dominate TIME OF POSSESSION? And you think that's a bad thing for this offense?

Ever heard of the word DIVERSITY? if not I'd urge you to look it up.

Did you just mention the Ravens and Seahawks and then say "diversity"?

[UChieffyBugger]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Did you just mention the Ravens and Seahawks and then say "diversity"?

Er NO, I meant adding a real run game to our offense that can run the ball down the oppositions throats and keep their offense off the field when we need to. No-one can argue that we have that right now.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger

Er NO, I meant adding a real run game to our offense that can run the ball down the oppositions throats and keep their offense off the field when we need to. No-one can argue that we have that right now.

We didn't have that WITH Kareem Hunt. This has always been a pass-first team. Hunt had more than 20 carries like 4 times in the last 2 years.

You live in fantasy land.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

We didn't have that WITH Kareem Hunt. This has always been a pass-first team. Hunt had more than 20 carries like 4 times in the last 2 years.

You live in fantasy land.

Fantasy land, I could live with.

He lives in some upside down hellscape where the way to make the team better is to make it dumber.

The Chiefs have been among the NFL leaders in rush efficiency since Reid got here. When they want to run the ball, they're good at it. But it's not what they're best at. Fortunately, what they're best at is the thing that is EASILY the best way to run an offense in today's NFL and it's throwing the ball.

Why would you want to spend significant draft capital on a tool that's expressly designed to take the ball OUT of the hands of 3 guys who are arguably the single most dangerous, dynamic threats at their position in all of football?

[UChieffyBugger]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

We didn't have that WITH Kareem Hunt. This has always been a pass-first team. Hunt had more than 20 carries like 4 times in the last 2 years.

You live in fantasy land.

Am I sayung it's not a pass first team? I'M SAYING WE NEED TO ADJUST OUR OFFENSE SO WE CAN KEEP THE BALL AWAY JUST LIKE THE PATS DID TO US. If you want the team to remain a one trick pony then good for you. I just don't agree and I never will.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger

Am I sayung it's not a pass first team? I'M SAYING WE NEED TO ADJUST OUR OFFENSE SO WE CAN KEEP THE BALL AWAY JUST LIKE THE PATS DID TO US. If you want the team to remain a one trick pony then good for you. I just don't agree and I never will.

You don't understand.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger

Am I sayung it's not a pass first team? I'M SAYING WE NEED TO ADJUST OUR OFFENSE SO WE CAN KEEP THE BALL AWAY JUST LIKE THE PATS DID TO US. If you want the team to remain a one trick pony then good for you. I just don't agree and I never will.

What part of "This team presently runs the ball more effectively than the teams you're asking us to emulate" is getting past you here?

We aren't PRESENTLY a 1-trick pony. The Chiefs are, right this very second, better at running the ball than the Seahawks and Ravens.

You 'don't agree' because you're not paying attention to any of the arguments being presented. You seem to believe that he fact that the Ravens ran it often means that they ran it well. And at least when you get to the Patriots you're now starting to get closer to the argument that people before you have made and made far better.

This team can presently run the football well. And if you go looking to replace Williams its exclusively because you want to run between the tackles - because nobody available is going to be an appreciable upgrade from Williams off-tackle or out of the backfield. So you're saying we should spend significant assets to upgrade on a solid RB so we can run a power run game that simply cannot work from the shotgun.

So now you're also asking us to scrap our 'base' formation and the shotgun/spread concepts that the rest of the NFL is copying as fast as they can see them. I'm sure it's because they're silly ideas.

You're simply not paying attention to anything Andy Reid wants to do or anything the Kansas City offense is built to do.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger

The teams I mentioned were statistically two of the best running teams In the league were they not? And didn't they dominate TIME OF POSSESSION? And you think that's a bad thing for this offense?

Ever heard of the word DIVERSITY? if not I'd urge you to look it up.

The teams you mentioned were among the most likely teams in the league to run the football. They were not the teams in the league that ran it best. The Chiefs were actually one of the 5 most efficient rushing teams in the league. The Seahawks were ranked behind them and the Ravens were actually considered a below average rushing team in terms of efficiency and to even get there they had to expose their QB to a slew of hits. They aren't even remotely comparable to whatever point it is you're trying to make.

The Chiefs can presently run the ball BETTER than both the Ravens and Seahawks and it's not even particularly close. They simply elected to run the ball less often because they have a better QB and a smarter coaching staff than both of those squads.

The irony of you citing variety and then using 2 of the least flexible teams in football to make your point shouldn't be lost on you.

Neither of the teams you're referencing are teams that are better at running the football than the Chiefs. Neither of them have a better runningback than the Chiefs. They're just teams that are more committed to running than the Chiefs. As a consequence their offenses were significantly worse as was their record.

Trying to dumb down this offense to fit some 'blueprint' established by the Ravens and Seahawks is the height of stupidity.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The teams you mentioned were among the most likely teams in the league to run the football. They were not the teams in the league that ran it best. The Chiefs were actually one of the 5 most efficient rushing teams in the league. The Seahawks were ranked behind them and the Ravens were actually considered a below average rushing team in terms of efficiency and to even get there they had to expose their QB to a slew of hits. They aren't even remotely comparable to whatever point it is you're trying to make.

The Chiefs can presently run the ball BETTER than both the Ravens and Seahawks and it's not even particularly close. They simply elected to run the ball less often because they have a better QB and a smarter coaching staff than both of those squads.

The irony of you citing variety and then using 2 of the least flexible teams in football to make your point shouldn't be lost on you.

Neither of the teams you're referencing are teams that are better at running the football than the Chiefs. Neither of them have a better runningback than the Chiefs. They're just teams that are more committed to running than the Chiefs. As a consequence their offenses were significantly worse as was their record.

Trying to dumb down this offense to fit some 'blueprint' established by the Ravens and Seahawks is the height of stupidity.

THIS

[UChieffyBugger]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The teams you mentioned were among the most likely teams in the league to run the football. They were not the teams in the league that ran it best. The Chiefs were actually one of the 5 most efficient rushing teams in the league. The Seahawks were ranked behind them and the Ravens were actually considered a below average rushing team in terms of efficiency and to even get there they had to expose their QB to a slew of hits. They aren't even remotely comparable to whatever point it is you're trying to make.

The Chiefs can presently run the ball BETTER than both the Ravens and Seahawks and it's not even particularly close. They simply elected to run the ball less often because they have a better QB and a smarter coaching staff than both of those squads.

The irony of you citing variety and then using 2 of the least flexible teams in football to make your point shouldn't be lost on you.

Neither of the teams you're referencing are teams that are better at running the football than the Chiefs. Neither of them have a better runningback than the Chiefs. They're just teams that are more committed to running than the Chiefs. As a consequence their offenses were significantly worse as was their record.

Trying to dumb down this offense to fit some 'blueprint' established by the Ravens and Seahawks is the height of stupidity.

Smh are people just naturally DUMB In this place? Smdh YET AGAIN SOMEONE ELSE FAILS TO COMPREHEND THE BASICS. No-one is saying we should mould are offense to be exactly like those teams. I'M SAYING WE SHOULD IMPROVE OUR ABILITY TO KEEP THE BALL AND TAKE TIME OFF THE CLOCK. And as far as those teams were concerned they were the best at it. You can spew your "efficiency" bs all you like. The fact is those were the best ranked run games last season and they kept the ball away from the opposition week in, week out. If you think consistently throwing the ball to Rb's makes our running game much better than theirs then go ahead buddy, have at it .