This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
That's the thing ... I don't think he does suck. But the Chiefs don't use him enough, which is very odd considering the dearth of talent at wideout on that team.
Okay, he's got talent and he is being underutilized. He still sucks for fantasy! He sucks! Like Brady quoted yesterday, "I just wish we won this one," said the Patriots quarterback. "I think we put a lot into this one. This was a great test for us. I think the guys knew how important it was for our season, and you hate to have the ball on the 20-yard line under three minutes with a chance to go ahead -- and not do it. I think that sucked."
Duh!!! That is why he should be putting up 1k and 10.
I have a feeling that Reid would have already replaced Alex Smith if KC would allow it. I could be wrong.
I'm a Kelce owner and want him to do well as much as anybody else, but Fasano catching those passes and making those plays means that it's working. If it's working with Fasano, why would they change it? Of course Kelce is a more dynamic player, but maybe he's receiving tougher coverage because of it.
I started watching The Walking Dead. It seemed pretty obvious early on that Kelce was going to be underutilized again so I tuned out rather than suffer through all of it again.
The thing is, though, that a couple weeks ago when Fasano was out Kelce was still limited. So even with Fasano out, Kelce wasn't used more. That tells me Fasano isn't having nearly as much of an impact on Kelce as Reid.steveski said:
Wasn't that the week where they barely threw the ball at all? If I remember correctly, Kelce had something like 40% of the teams targets. The problem is that they don't pass and when they do it's just Smith looking for the safest option.
You could make the argument a few weeks ago when they had won 5 in a row or whatever it was but with the offense looking impotent in back-to-back losses (including one against a horrible Raiders team) and their playoff lives on the line it seems pretty clear to me things should be changing and more of a focus should go on the team's best playmakers. In this case, that's clearly Charles and Kelce.
Completely agree.
They don't have a lot of offensive weapons, but you make them sound like the Raiders. Bowe is decent, Kelce is very good, and Charles is a stud. They are doing less with more, not the other way around.
Nothing needs to be dramatically changed here. You can still get Kelce much more involved even taking Smith's significant limitations into account.
That's a bit misleading. The TE position this year is probably the worst its ever been in fantasy football. There are maybe 5 quality options at the moment. So being the 11th ranked TE isn't saying much. At least this year. Its crappy and less crappy once u get past 5 guys...
I agree. TE is a disaster this year outside of Graham, Gronk, Julius, Olsen and Bennett. All the other ones could easily go off one week or put up an absolute dud. Very hard position to predict this year.
I agree but I still don't think Kelce isn't getting it done. He's among a group of TEs who may not always go off but typically (and yes there are always exceptions) aren't going to destroy you most weeks. And I'm referring only to PPR here. I don't play standard leagues so I don't know how things break down there.
i told you brohans that exploding burrito was the right nickname for this guy take that to the bank bromigos
I don't know bromigo...still think it's Kelce and the Sunshine BandSWC said:
It really is baffling. Especially since it's not like the Chiefs WRs have been anything special this year.
But it is really not all that baffling. Given Alex Smith's tendency to target RBs and TEs, and combine that with an o-line that is currently not able to even give Smith time to target downfield, opposing defenses have an easy job of figuring out who to stop. Andy Reid is a creative playcaller who has to use deception to get Charles and Kelce open. At times it works, at times it doesn't. When they can get the running game going it works a hell of a lot better than when it doesn't. Getting the ball to Kelce is not as easy as just deciding that he should have more targets. I don't think Reid is an idiot and still hasn't figured out that Kelce can be effective. Reid may run a play for Kelce but if coverage dictates the QB to go in a different direction Kelce's not going to be targeted. Defenses are clearly paying more attention to him and picking up his tendencies to avoid bad matchups now that they have game film on him. Ideally that should create opportunity for other Chiefs' players but when the WRs can't get open and the o-line can't give Smith time to find them then you'll have an offense that looks very rough in some games. Particularly when they aren't able to run the ball and find themselves in third-and-long far too frequently. With a poor o-line and a bad WR group it can look very ugly.
Look at the third-down stats I posted. Guy is money in clutch, move-the-sticks situations. Every metric available screams out for more usage but Reid just refuses to do the common sense thing.
The most ironic part in this is that Andy Reid, while coaching Philly, was notorious for always passing the ball constantly. I think that says way more about Alex Smith than anything else.
Smith must have a $2M bonus in his contract if he throws less than 7 int's so he'd rather have the offense stall than take a chance.
Smith is far from perfect. Reid can make the plays and progressions but Smith has to make the reads and use his judgment correctly. I will definitely concede that he is a risk averse decision maker. There's no denying that. But there are TV experts that have made arguments against Smith and there are TV experts that has come out in his support. I haven't seen the one you reference but I can find these evaluations to be a bit sensationalist. And they tend to swing depending on last week's performance. If he's had a good game they'll put on tape to show he is a true franchise QB and if he's had a bad week they'll pull up examples to show why he is awful. Are they looking at his entire body of work or are they digging up certain plays to support their argument? I follow a few KCC beat writers (Covitz, Teicher) and some of them like Terez Paylor study the All-22 every week. None of them have highlighted Smith as the problem of this offense as far as I have seen. The blame primarily falls on the WRs and the OL and the general opinion seems to be that they need to build more offensive talent in order to have a more consistent offense. Or you can turn to play by play grades like PFF or Football Outsiders do. PFF has him as QB14 and FO has him as QB12. He's not a top QB but he's good. He's an above average NFL QB.
