Chiefs trade for LB Reggie Ragland

[In58men]

Chiefs have acquired LB Reggie Ragland from the Bills in a trade.

Print'em

[FAX]

I was happy that Ragland might be a steal by the Veachy Gang.

But I've never been impressed with his play. At least, the reality doesn't live up to the hype as far as I can tell. The Star really loved this guy (still do, I guess), and people bought in. I haven't seen it on the field, though.

FAX

[FlopMahomesNuts]

Originally Posted by FAX

I was happy that Ragland might be a steal by the Veachy Gang.

But I've never been impressed with his play. At least, the reality doesn't live up to the hype as far as I can tell. The Star really loved this guy (still do, I guess), and people bought in. I haven't seen it on the field, though.

FAX

I agree with you completely Fax the Wise.

[KChiefs1]

Originally Posted by FAX

I was happy that Ragland might be a steal by the Veachy Gang.

But I've never been impressed with his play. At least, the reality doesn't live up to the hype as far as I can tell. The Star really loved this guy (still do, I guess), and people bought in. I haven't seen it on the field, though.

FAX

Yeah he missed a lot of tackles.

[KS Smitty]

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

Yeah he missed a lot of tackles.

and he was a leading tackler today...

[ChiefsFanatic]

Originally Posted by FAX

I was happy that Ragland might be a steal by the Veachy Gang.

But I've never been impressed with his play. At least, the reality doesn't live up to the hype as far as I can tell. The Star really loved this guy (still do, I guess), and people bought in. I haven't seen it on the field, though.

FAX

Ragland, to me, is so slow, and not a very good tackler. Hitchens still has decent quickness, which combined with his instincts, looks like speed but really isn't speed.

I don't understand why Sutton can't adjust the scheme to match the skill of our defensive players. I know I am just a scrub playing armchair Coach/GM but I don't think Houston should ever drop back in coverage playing zone, and he sure as hell shouldn't be trying to cover tight ends. He gets paid to rush the passer and to help stop the run. And he gets paid a lot of money to do those things, and I am nearly 100% positive that not a single dime of his salary can be attributed to his pass coverage skills.

One of the reasons I was fine with Dorsey getting fired is that outside of drafting Peters, he didn't do a single thing to improve our secondary. And Dorsey and Veach combined haven't done much to upgrade our linebacking corp.

I don't know what the solution is, but I know that odds of Sutton being part of the solution are very low.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk

[Aspengc8]

Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic

Ragland, to me, is so slow, and not a very good tackler. Hitchens still has decent quickness, which combined with his instincts, looks like speed but really isn't speed.

I don't understand why Sutton can't adjust the scheme to match the skill of our defensive players. I know I am just a scrub playing armchair Coach/GM but I don't think Houston should ever drop back in coverage playing zone, and he sure as hell shouldn't be trying to cover tight ends. He gets paid to rush the passer and to help stop the run. And he gets paid a lot of money to do those things, and I am nearly 100% positive that not a single dime of his salary can be attributed to his pass coverage skills.

One of the reasons I was fine with Dorsey getting fired is that outside of drafting Peters, he didn't do a single thing to improve our secondary. And Dorsey and Veach combined haven't done much to upgrade our linebacking corp.

I don't know what the solution is, but I know that odds of Sutton being part of the solution are very low.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk

Houston is actually pretty good in coverage, and a very good tackler. The reason he drops is because the offense is rolling protection to him. That lets Ford + extra rushers from the opposite side to get 1v1's. When the offense isn't shifting protection, Houston is typically rushing.

[O.city]

I thought Houston looked pretty good yesterday. Looked quick.

[DJ's left nut]

In fairness, the worst missed tackle of the day was Hitchens and it wasn't particularly close.

3rd and 17 is a situation where you have to get off the field 100% of the time. And the 49ers weren't even really trying to pick it up. They threw that underneath pass to, I think, Kittle. And Hitchens has him lined up for the easy tackle then he just overruns the angle and gives Kittle the massive cut back lane to blow past him. He gets to a makeable 4th down situation and like 3 plays later the 49ers score.

It gets back again to the amount of god awful execution we're seeing in some of these 2nd half meltdowns. People want to blame Reid or Sutton but lord - how can you not make that tackle? And when SF is just running the ball down our throats and it feels just like the damn Titans game, the problem is not scheme but rather awful tackling and execution. What the hell can Sutton call there? He can't put 8 in the box when you're up 3 scores - at some point the damn defensive front just has to get a stop.

That was what was so frustrating about that game - I really thought we'd maybe gotten our run defense ironed out. Guess not - looked as bad as it looked at any point last season. And so did our coverage over the middle.

[htismaqe]

Fuller missed him before Hitchens did. Fuller goes for the shoestring tackle every time. He had two brilliant stops yesterday but he also had 2 major whiffs that resulted in the chains moving.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

In fairness, the worst missed tackle of the day was Hitchens and it wasn't particularly close.

3rd and 17 is a situation where you have to get off the field 100% of the time. And the 49ers weren't even really trying to pick it up. They threw that underneath pass to, I think, Kittle. And Hitchens has him lined up for the easy tackle then he just overruns the angle and gives Kittle the massive cut back lane to blow past him. He gets to a makeable 4th down situation and like 3 plays later the 49ers score.

It gets back again to the amount of god awful execution we're seeing in some of these 2nd half meltdowns. People want to blame Reid or Sutton but lord - how can you not make that tackle? And when SF is just running the ball down our throats and it feels just like the damn Titans game, the problem is not scheme but rather awful tackling and execution. What the hell can Sutton call there? He can't put 8 in the box when you're up 3 scores - at some point the damn defensive front just has to get a stop.

That was what was so frustrating about that game - I really thought we'd maybe gotten our run defense ironed out. Guess not - looked as bad as it looked at any point last season. And so did our coverage over the middle.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

In fairness, the worst missed tackle of the day was Hitchens and it wasn't particularly close.

3rd and 17 is a situation where you have to get off the field 100% of the time. And the 49ers weren't even really trying to pick it up. They threw that underneath pass to, I think, Kittle. And Hitchens has him lined up for the easy tackle then he just overruns the angle and gives Kittle the massive cut back lane to blow past him. He gets to a makeable 4th down situation and like 3 plays later the 49ers score.

It gets back again to the amount of god awful execution we're seeing in some of these 2nd half meltdowns. People want to blame Reid or Sutton but lord - how can you not make that tackle? And when SF is just running the ball down our throats and it feels just like the damn Titans game, the problem is not scheme but rather awful tackling and execution. What the hell can Sutton call there? He can't put 8 in the box when you're up 3 scores - at some point the damn defensive front just has to get a stop.

That was what was so frustrating about that game - I really thought we'd maybe gotten our run defense ironed out. Guess not - looked as bad as it looked at any point last season. And so did our coverage over the middle.

I noticed Chris Jones didn't play a lot in the 2nd half, dunno why.

The Run D was bad in the 2nd half, but I will admit, in that situation they were probably ok with it. If I'm up that much and you want to run the ball, have at it.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by O.city

I noticed Chris Jones didn't play a lot in the 2nd half, dunno why.

The Run D was bad in the 2nd half, but I will admit, in that situation they were probably ok with it. If I'm up that much and you want to run the ball, have at it.

Probably has something to do with his groin injury. I’m guessing with the lead they decided to take it easy on him.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Fuller missed him before Hitchens did. Fuller goes for the shoestring tackle every time. He had two brilliant stops yesterday but he also had 2 major whiffs that resulted in the chains moving.

Talking to the wrong guy about a CB missing a tackle.

I am not now and have not ever been in the "Marcus Peters was a liability because he wouldn't tackle" school.

My corner being able to tackle for me is as important as my pitcher being able to bunt. It's a nice little bonus but in the end, it's way down on the list of shit I'm worried about.

Fuller missed the tackle - okay; he's a CB and a guy that outweighs him by 50 lbs had some momentum. He'll make that sometimes, he'll miss that sometimes. But he also at least slowed down Kittle enough to set him up for Hitchens to clean it up and leave them facing 4th and 8. It was fine. Hitchens now has a clean shot and just blows it.

My corners need to cover. My goddamn linebackers need to tackle. Hitchens has got to make that play.

[htismaqe]

Well, strong tackling fundamentals was supposed to be a reason the Fuller trade was a good one. It's all about performance versus expectations. We were supposed to see a CB that actually would, and could, tackle. So far he's been 50/50 which is FAR short of expectations.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Talking to the wrong guy about a CB missing a tackle.

I am not now and have not ever been in the "Marcus Peters was a liability because he wouldn't tackle" school.

My corner being able to tackle for me is as important as my pitcher being able to bunt. It's a nice little bonus but in the end, it's way down on the list of shit I'm worried about.

Fuller missed the tackle - okay; he's a CB and a guy that outweighs him by 50 lbs had some momentum. He'll make that sometimes, he'll miss that sometimes. But he also at least slowed down Kittle enough to set him up for Hitchens to clean it up and leave them facing 4th and 8. It was fine. Hitchens now has a clean shot and just blows it.

My corners need to cover. My goddamn linebackers need to tackle. Hitchens has got to make that play.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Well, strong tackling fundamentals was supposed to be a reason the Fuller trade was a good one. It's all about performance versus expectations. We were supposed to see a CB that actually would, and could, tackle. So far he's been 50/50 which is FAR short of expectations.

That's fair. He was supposed to be a more willing tackler if nothing else. But at some point the physics win man -- most CBs will simply not be stellar tacklers because they're just not big guys.

And Fuller, to his credit, is a willing tackler. He's been a little disappointing in his misses but he's game and I think over large numbers that will even up a bit.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

That's fair. He was supposed to be a more willing tackler if nothing else. But at some point the physics win man -- most CBs will simply not be stellar tacklers because they're just not big guys.

And Fuller, to his credit, is a willing tackler. He's been a little disappointing in his misses but he's game and I think over large numbers that will even up a bit.

Except he doesn't appear to be a willing tackler. He goes low every time, so low that he's generally grabbing at toes. He made two of those yesterday and missed two. At least hit them in the shins and wrap up. He's trying to play 7th grade trip em.