We need to get back to being.......

[Blitzer88]

The Kansas City Chiefs of the NFL. The Chiefs currently do what we used to do. They are a team that relies on a stout defense, running the football and playing small ball on offense as well as solid special teams play. We need to get back to our roots. Is this team capable of that? I'm not too sure right now.

 

[FlyingGreg]

They force a lot of turnovers, something we used to do also.

 

[cymatica]

Seems like since the percy trade, they have gradually gone away from that. They admitted it this offseason that they have gotten too cute.

The way I felt this team was turning into smashmouth back in 2011, it feels like we are trending the opposite direction. It seems like they are stuck in an identity crises, not sure what kind of team they want to be

 

[gowazzu02]

Wow, yes lets be super jealous of KC, who have won their division 3 times since 1997.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

It's not switch you turn on and off.........it's a hunger, it's a mentality, it's there or it isn't.

So I don't think we can just "get back to it."

We had this discussion last year, this team has lost it's identity as the bullies of the NFC, and unfortunately I don't think you get that back without major roster changes. Guys got paid, guys aren't the same insanely hungry with a chip on their shoulders players they were 2-3 years ago.

Still good, still good enough to win.............but what you're talking about doesn't exist anymore IMO on this team. It's a different team.

We used to have an entire roster of Frank Clarks, now we only have a handful of them. So if you TRULY want to "get back to it," then it means some tough decisions roster wise, for good and bad.

 

[Siouxhawk]

The Kansas City analogy is good in that both head coaches prefer a formula of bonafide defenses mixed with a lower-risk offense that seldom turns the ball over, allowing the team to dominate in the plus/minus turnover battle. The Chiefs also lost a key defensive piece last week. I think we would match up well in the Super Bowl.

 

[mikeak]

The Kansas City Chiefs of the NFL. The Chiefs currently do what we used to do. They are a team that relies on a stout defense, running the football and playing small ball on offense as well as solid special teams play. We need to get back to our roots. Is this team capable of that? I'm not too sure right now.

I agree -- I wished we had drafted someone like Spencer Ware to run the ball....................... :stirthepot:

 

[cymatica]

The Kansas City Chiefs of the NFL. The Chiefs currently do what we used to do. They are a team that relies on a stout defense, running the football and playing small ball on offense as well as solid special teams play. We need to get back to our roots. Is this team capable of that? I'm not too sure right now.

I agree -- I wished we had drafted someone like Spencer Ware to run the bal....................... :stirthepot:

Or Jaye Howard

 

[Hawk-Lock]

Totally agree with OP. A physical run first offense pairs perfectly with our defense. Unfortunately, we don't really have the pieces to be that. Ever since we traded for Graham I think it became clear that this offense was going to be more pass heavy. I'm not sure we ever get back to being one of the most run heavy teams in the league, but if we want to we need to find the right guys.

I've said this a few times, but I think we peaked a few years ago in terms of talent and style of play. Not sure we ever get back there. By no means does that mean we can't win another SB.

 

[Hawks46]

I like the direction of trying to be a balanced offense. And I understand that sometimes you swing the other way, especially when you pay your QB so much money.

My biggest problem is that we should've come out and run on GB and bullied them. They were hurting in the front 7. We started out well, then just started slinging it, to poor effect. Then, we just had to keep flinging it around and it slid down hill fast.

Why can't we have a balanced offense that attacks certain teams weaknesses ? You know, like the Patriots do ? Is it on Bevell for poor game planning ? Is it on Pete for signing off on bad game plans ?

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

I haven't given up on Rawls yet. He may never be the Beast of the locker room but in time his effect could approach that, in a different way.

I already like Reece for that tough mentality and physicality thing he brings, the running game does need leadership.