What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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!

Who/what is to blame for the Chargers' woes? (1 Viewer)

vote

  • AJ Smith

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Phillip Rivers

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Chargers Defensive Coaches

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Chargers Players

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Norv Turner

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • All of the above

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • "woes" is an overstatement, GB and NE are legit playoff teams

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
The Chargers' rushing offensive decline has been of historic proportions. I'll write up a full post for it tomorrow, but that's the truth so far. At some point we need to recognize that this isn't a bad start, but a huge deviation from last year's prior level. Since the running offense carried the team last year, this is a pretty serious concern.
Will you be following that up with a post about how last year was a deviation as well? (Or just ignore that, seeing it doesn't suit your interests?)
 
In my opinion it is none of the above. It's the schedule. Yes they went 14-2 last year, but their strength of schedule in 2006 was the 5th easiest per Clayton Gray. In 2007 they have the most dificult schedule. Getting off to a slow start is clearly affecting this team and the morale and the schedule is the cause.

 
I picked all of the above, but really it's not all the players - just some of them.
That's what I voted, although a vote for AJ Smith is basically the same.
Not even close. The players didn't hire Norv. Smith assembled good talent, and a horrid coach. It's as if the Chargers plan to miss the playoffs this year, blame it on Norv sucking, get another high pick, and load up some more.Smith is significantly to blame for this, though.
Yep. Norv sucks. Unbelievable that he lost to NE and GB on the road. Those teams absolutely suck, and the losses are inexcusable.
You're missing the point. The losses don't prove Norv sucks. Norv sucked before the Chargers signed him. The losses are actually quie explainable - the schedule has been hard. The problem is that Norv is probably worth an extra 2 losses over a year's time. And that's a problem to overcome when you are 1-2 and expected to be 2-1 or better.
 
Cherry Crunch:

INGREDIENTS

* 1 cup rolled oats

* 1 cup all-purpose flour

* 3/4 cup brown sugar

* 1/2 teaspoon ground cinnamon

* 1/2 cup butter

* 1 (21 ounce) can cherry pie filling

DIRECTIONS

1. Preheat oven to 375 degrees F (190 degrees C.)

2. In a medium bowl, combine the rolled oats, flour, brown sugar and cinnamon. Cut in butter until mixture resembles coarse crumbs.

3. Sprinkle one half of crumb mixture in the bottom of a 9 inch square baking dish. Cover with cherry pie filling. Sprinkle remaining crumb mixture over pie filling.

4. Bake in the preheated oven for 40 minutes, or until topping is golden brown. Serve warm.

 
you mean that "insult" that was supposed to pass as a legit extension :bs:
Please enlighten us with the details of this "insult" that you speak of.
:P Said Insult.....
I'm sure you would also be insulted if your boss offered you nearly $5 million a year. That's the kind of slap in the face I will take every day of the year.This was an interesting quote: "I like Smith. He's great at his job, which is 80 percent acquiring talent. On balanace, no one since 2001 has done a better job of building a franchise through the draft than the Chargers, and it's mostly due to Smith's keen eye."

 
The Chargers' rushing offensive decline has been of historic proportions. I'll write up a full post for it tomorrow, but that's the truth so far. At some point we need to recognize that this isn't a bad start, but a huge deviation from last year's prior level. Since the running offense carried the team last year, this is a pretty serious concern.
Will you be following that up with a post about how last year was a deviation as well? (Or just ignore that, seeing it doesn't suit your interests?)
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
 
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.

There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.

This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
I bolded the most significant part of your post. The Chargers play three divisional opponents (two of them at home) in the next three weeks. If they take care of business and enter their bye week at 4-2 overall and 3-0 in the division, are you still going to say this is a big, big deal? The overreactions in this forum are what give the Shark Pool such a bad name.
 
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.

There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.

This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
I bolded the most significant part of your post. The Chargers play three divisional opponents (two of them at home) in the next three weeks. If they take care of business and enter their bye week at 4-2 overall and 3-0 in the division, are you still going to say this is a big, big deal? The overreactions in this forum are what give the Shark Pool such a bad name.
I personally feel "Shark Pool" is an awesome name for this forum.
 
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.

There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.

This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
I bolded the most significant part of your post. The Chargers play three divisional opponents (two of them at home) in the next three weeks. If they take care of business and enter their bye week at 4-2 overall and 3-0 in the division, are you still going to say this is a big, big deal? The overreactions in this forum are what give the Shark Pool such a bad name.
What exactly makes you think they're going to take care of business?
 
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.

There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.

This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
I bolded the most significant part of your post. The Chargers play three divisional opponents (two of them at home) in the next three weeks. If they take care of business and enter their bye week at 4-2 overall and 3-0 in the division, are you still going to say this is a big, big deal? The overreactions in this forum are what give the Shark Pool such a bad name.
What exactly makes you think they're going to take care of business?
Chase do you think KC will win at SD this weekend?
 
you mean that "insult" that was supposed to pass as a legit extension :bs:
Please enlighten us with the details of this "insult" that you speak of.
:rolleyes: Said Insult.....
I'm sure you would also be insulted if your boss offered you nearly $5 million a year. That's the kind of slap in the face I will take every day of the year.This was an interesting quote: "I like Smith. He's great at his job, which is 80 percent acquiring talent. On balanace, no one since 2001 has done a better job of building a franchise through the draft than the Chargers, and it's mostly due to Smith's keen eye."
Maybe you wouldn't be, but I would when I was worth so much more, but nice spin :thumbup: Edit: AJ outego'ed himself when Marty didn't quit and allowed his staff to go elsewhere and since AJ is a "make'em bleed" type of guy, he would have looked weak if he didn't have Marty fired.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
you mean that "insult" that was supposed to pass as a legit extension :bs:
Please enlighten us with the details of this "insult" that you speak of.
:rolleyes: Said Insult.....
I'm sure you would also be insulted if your boss offered you nearly $5 million a year. That's the kind of slap in the face I will take every day of the year.This was an interesting quote: "I like Smith. He's great at his job, which is 80 percent acquiring talent. On balanace, no one since 2001 has done a better job of building a franchise through the draft than the Chargers, and it's mostly due to Smith's keen eye."
Maybe you wouldn't be, but I would when I was worth so much more, but nice spin :thumbup:
What about this part from King's article:I support Schottenheimer if he felt that hiring his well-traveled brother, Kurt, to be defensive coordinator was the best decision for the team. Can't Schottenheimer have any say on who he goes to battle with for the next season? Granted, Kurt Schottenheimer is not a very well-regarded coordinator candidate. But if you're going to bring Marty back, you're not going to let him pick the players and he's got gaping holes on his coaching, he should be allowed to pick the staff. And from the smoke signals wafting from Chargerland, that was a major problem at the end.

Do you believe that Smith should have allowed Schottenheimer to hand his brother, an awful defensive backs coach, the defensive coordinator position in SD?

 
you mean that "insult" that was supposed to pass as a legit extension :bs:
Please enlighten us with the details of this "insult" that you speak of.
:rolleyes: Said Insult.....
I'm sure you would also be insulted if your boss offered you nearly $5 million a year. That's the kind of slap in the face I will take every day of the year.This was an interesting quote: "I like Smith. He's great at his job, which is 80 percent acquiring talent. On balanace, no one since 2001 has done a better job of building a franchise through the draft than the Chargers, and it's mostly due to Smith's keen eye."
Maybe you wouldn't be, but I would when I was worth so much more, but nice spin :thumbup:
What about this part from King's article:I support Schottenheimer if he felt that hiring his well-traveled brother, Kurt, to be defensive coordinator was the best decision for the team. Can't Schottenheimer have any say on who he goes to battle with for the next season? Granted, Kurt Schottenheimer is not a very well-regarded coordinator candidate. But if you're going to bring Marty back, you're not going to let him pick the players and he's got gaping holes on his coaching, he should be allowed to pick the staff. And from the smoke signals wafting from Chargerland, that was a major problem at the end.

Do you believe that Smith should have allowed Schottenheimer to hand his brother, an awful defensive backs coach, the defensive coordinator position in SD?
I looked at that as a "who can I trust/control" type of move. Marty was was getting his knees chopped out from him by AJ at every turn, so why not get someone in as a figurehead and will listen to you and you alone?
 
Maybe you wouldn't be, but I would when I was worth so much more, but nice spin :rolleyes:
No spin. Honestly, how much more do you think a coach who is 0-5 in the playoffs since 1993 (and only 5 playoff wins in 21 years) is worth?
And that's the only knock on him. Up until last year, everyone was saying that Dungy/Manning couldn't win the big one. Things do change.Who's to say that it wouldn't have been different this time around if he didn't have the egomanic undermining him?That's the problem with the NFL, it's concrete mindset that once someone has lost value, they can rarely get it back.He took the team to 14-2, I would have given him some latitude. AJ wanted control, plain and simple.
 
you mean that "insult" that was supposed to pass as a legit extension :bs:
Please enlighten us with the details of this "insult" that you speak of.
:rolleyes: Said Insult.....
I'm sure you would also be insulted if your boss offered you nearly $5 million a year. That's the kind of slap in the face I will take every day of the year.This was an interesting quote: "I like Smith. He's great at his job, which is 80 percent acquiring talent. On balanace, no one since 2001 has done a better job of building a franchise through the draft than the Chargers, and it's mostly due to Smith's keen eye."
Maybe you wouldn't be, but I would when I was worth so much more, but nice spin :thumbup:
What about this part from King's article:I support Schottenheimer if he felt that hiring his well-traveled brother, Kurt, to be defensive coordinator was the best decision for the team. Can't Schottenheimer have any say on who he goes to battle with for the next season? Granted, Kurt Schottenheimer is not a very well-regarded coordinator candidate. But if you're going to bring Marty back, you're not going to let him pick the players and he's got gaping holes on his coaching, he should be allowed to pick the staff. And from the smoke signals wafting from Chargerland, that was a major problem at the end.

Do you believe that Smith should have allowed Schottenheimer to hand his brother, an awful defensive backs coach, the defensive coordinator position in SD?
I generally side with Marty in the Marty-vs-AJ debate, but for Marty to hire his brother was just about asking to be fired. And Marty has been guilty of this kind of ill-advised nepotism before. Remember that Drew Brees stunk until Marty fired his son as qb coach and hired Brees a real coach.
 
Up until last year, everyone was saying that Dungy/Manning couldn't win the big one.
Which one of those two still couldn't get it done after TWENTY-ONE years? How many more years do you need to see what seems to be obvious to the rest of the world? Another twenty-one?
 
I generally side with Marty in the Marty-vs-AJ debate, but for Marty to hire his brother was just about asking to be fired. And Marty has been guilty of this kind of ill-advised nepotism before. Remember that Drew Brees stunk until Marty fired his son as qb coach and hired Brees a real coach.
Actually, I think Brian was a pretty good QB coach. Two of Brees' three Pro-Bowl years came under little Schotty. He also seemed to do a pretty good job with the Jets' offense last year, despite having no real RB and inexperience all across the line.
 
The Chargers' rushing offensive decline has been of historic proportions. I'll write up a full post for it tomorrow, but that's the truth so far. At some point we need to recognize that this isn't a bad start, but a huge deviation from last year's prior level. Since the running offense carried the team last year, this is a pretty serious concern.
Will you be following that up with a post about how last year was a deviation as well? (Or just ignore that, seeing it doesn't suit your interests?)
Paranoid much ? What exactly would those interests be ?
 
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.

There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.

This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
I bolded the most significant part of your post. The Chargers play three divisional opponents (two of them at home) in the next three weeks. If they take care of business and enter their bye week at 4-2 overall and 3-0 in the division, are you still going to say this is a big, big deal? The overreactions in this forum are what give the Shark Pool such a bad name.
What exactly makes you think they're going to take care of business?
Chase do you think KC will win at SD this weekend?
No.
 
Let this be a lesson (actually two) to all NFL teams: 1. If a coach goes 14-2, don't fire him.

2. Norv Turner is a great offensive coordinator and lousy head coach.

 
When you fire a coach that just went 14-2 you should be very aware that should the team go south tons of people will eagerly and joyusly bash you. 1-2 isn't the end of the season for the Chargers, but those tons of people are starting to get warmed up. It's to be expected.

 
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.

There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.

This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
I bolded the most significant part of your post. The Chargers play three divisional opponents (two of them at home) in the next three weeks. If they take care of business and enter their bye week at 4-2 overall and 3-0 in the division, are you still going to say this is a big, big deal? The overreactions in this forum are what give the Shark Pool such a bad name.
Is there ANYTHING the Chargers rushing offense could have done in the first three games that would have you worried? What if they had 2.0 YPC? 1.5? 1.0? Zero yards rushing? Negative yards rushing?There has to be a point where the Chargers rushing offense becomes a concern, even after only three games. Considering that having last season's YPC cut more than in half is unprecedented historically over a three-game stretch, IMO it has reached that point.

And by no means am I saying the Chargers are a bad football team right now. I'm saying they're a bad running football team right now. That doesn't mean it can't be fixed, but the running game is definitely broken and not just a product of variance over a small sample size.

 
Tomlinson/Turner averaged 5.4 YPC last season and 145 rushing yards per game. Tomlinson/Turner are averaging 2.6 YPC this season and 62 rushing yards per game. This is the equivalent of Peyton Manning playing like Rex Grossman. We can't just ignore it.
Clearly the problem is that the league shortened the season to just three games and didn't tell anybody else.
Just curious what you think of the Saints' passing game here. It's fallen as hard as the Chargers' running game, and doesn't even have a change in coaching staffs. Do you believe the Saints passing issues are as irrelevant as the Chargers' rushing problems?
 
Tomlinson/Turner averaged 5.4 YPC last season and 145 rushing yards per game. Tomlinson/Turner are averaging 2.6 YPC this season and 62 rushing yards per game. This is the equivalent of Peyton Manning playing like Rex Grossman. We can't just ignore it.
Clearly the problem is that the league shortened the season to just three games and didn't tell anybody else.
Just curious what you think of the Saints' passing game here. It's fallen as hard as the Chargers' running game, and doesn't even have a change in coaching staffs. Do you believe the Saints passing issues are as irrelevant as the Chargers' rushing problems?
First, your comparison would hold more water if NO had faced upper tier pass defenses of the same quality the SD rushing game has faced. Of NO's three losses only IND was in the top half of the league in pass defense last season. On the other hand all three of the defenses SD has faced was an upper half running defense last year with NE being the fifth best and CHI being the sixth best in the league vs the run.Secondly, I think they both stem from the same problem - both OL's are playing WAY below the level they played at last season for whatever reason. I don't think the skill position players are playing all that different. Brees is just in a completely different situation than he was in last year. One of the reasons I wasn't too bummed SD finally handed the reins of the offense over to Rivers was my concern Brees couldn't bring his team back from adversity and really "WIN" games. He's always been spectacular at managing a game when the defense keeps him in it and the running game plays well enough to keep the defense honest. Neither has happened this year.
 
I think he believes LT is just going through the absolute worst stretch in his career, he'll swallow a magic bean and somehow return to his former self regardless of the fact he's being mis-utilized. I mean, 3 weeks in a row is just a fluke right? It couldn't be indicative of a possible change. :confused:
The only Tomlinson-hater I have ever met in my entire life. This guy was lobbying for Marty to bench Tomlinson for the Burner in absolutely every Chargers thread last year... only to admit later that he had only seen Tomlinson play once before. Shouldn't this be a bannable offense? Chase should immediately re-think any of his posts that this guy wants to defend.
I always thought he was an H.K. alias or disciple.
 
Chase Stuart said:
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.

There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.

This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
I bolded the most significant part of your post. The Chargers play three divisional opponents (two of them at home) in the next three weeks. If they take care of business and enter their bye week at 4-2 overall and 3-0 in the division, are you still going to say this is a big, big deal? The overreactions in this forum are what give the Shark Pool such a bad name.
What exactly makes you think they're going to take care of business?
Chase do you think KC will win at SD this weekend?
No.
Do you think Oakland will win at SD in a couple weeks? (Keep in mind Oakland has not won any AFC West game in 3+ years).
 
Tomlinson/Turner averaged 5.4 YPC last season and 145 rushing yards per game.

Tomlinson/Turner are averaging 2.6 YPC this season and 62 rushing yards per game. This is the equivalent of Peyton Manning playing having stats like Rex Grossman. We can't just ignore it.
For what it's worth, Chase, I think worrying about three bad games from a group of players that have proven they can run effectively is exactly like worrying about a 5-12 playoff record from a coach who's proven he can coach effectively.Splits happen, especially with small sample sizes.

 
Chase Stuart said:
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.

There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.

This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
I bolded the most significant part of your post. The Chargers play three divisional opponents (two of them at home) in the next three weeks. If they take care of business and enter their bye week at 4-2 overall and 3-0 in the division, are you still going to say this is a big, big deal? The overreactions in this forum are what give the Shark Pool such a bad name.
What exactly makes you think they're going to take care of business?
Chase do you think KC will win at SD this weekend?
No.
Do you think Oakland will win at SD in a couple weeks? (Keep in mind Oakland has not won any AFC West game in 3+ years).
No.Do you think the Saints' passing attack is going to revert to prior season form soon? Do you think the Chargers' rushing attack will? Why, or why not? Which unit do you think have underachieved more this year?

 
Tomlinson/Turner averaged 5.4 YPC last season and 145 rushing yards per game.

Tomlinson/Turner are averaging 2.6 YPC this season and 62 rushing yards per game. This is the equivalent of Peyton Manning playing having stats like Rex Grossman. We can't just ignore it.
For what it's worth, Chase, I think worrying about three bad games from a group of players that have proven they can run effectively is exactly like worrying about a 5-12 playoff record from a coach who's proven he can coach effectively.Splits happen, especially with small sample sizes.
I'm not so sure I agree with your comparison. We're not dealing with a very small sample size and the magnitude of the underproduction is incredibly large. 50 carries at 4.0 YPC would be "hey the Chargers are still the best running team in the league, it's just a small sample size." 77 carries at 2.57 YPC is a lot different.Question(s) for all: Answer as many or as few you like:

1) Where will Chargers running backs finish the season in rushing yards? (Last year, Chargers running backs were 1st with 2,482 yards)

2) Where will Chargers running backs finish the season in rushing YPC? (Last year, Chargers running backs were 1st with 5.38 YPC)

3) Where will Chargers running backs rank in rushing yards over 3.0 YPC (Last year, Chargers running backs were 1st with 1,099 yards)

4) Where will Chargers running backs rank the rest of the season in rushing yards?

5) Where will Chargers running backs rank the rest of the season in rushing YPC?

6) Where will Chargers running backs rank the rest of the season in yards over 3.0 YPC?

Perhaps we're not really disagreeing, in which case we can stop arguing.

 
BoltBacker said:
Chase Stuart said:
Tomlinson/Turner averaged 5.4 YPC last season and 145 rushing yards per game. Tomlinson/Turner are averaging 2.6 YPC this season and 62 rushing yards per game. This is the equivalent of Peyton Manning playing like Rex Grossman. We can't just ignore it.
Clearly the problem is that the league shortened the season to just three games and didn't tell anybody else.
Just curious what you think of the Saints' passing game here. It's fallen as hard as the Chargers' running game, and doesn't even have a change in coaching staffs. Do you believe the Saints passing issues are as irrelevant as the Chargers' rushing problems?
First, your comparison would hold more water if NO had faced upper tier pass defenses of the same quality the SD rushing game has faced. Of NO's three losses only IND was in the top half of the league in pass defense last season. On the other hand all three of the defenses SD has faced was an upper half running defense last year with NE being the fifth best and CHI being the sixth best in the league vs the run.Secondly, I think they both stem from the same problem - both OL's are playing WAY below the level they played at last season for whatever reason. I don't think the skill position players are playing all that different. Brees is just in a completely different situation than he was in last year. One of the reasons I wasn't too bummed SD finally handed the reins of the offense over to Rivers was my concern Brees couldn't bring his team back from adversity and really "WIN" games. He's always been spectacular at managing a game when the defense keeps him in it and the running game plays well enough to keep the defense honest. Neither has happened this year.
Fair enough. Please see my question(s) in the above post so I can see where you're coming from.
 
Chase Stuart said:
There was nothing historically unique or significant about last year's deviation. A good running team got better. That happens. And as far as I know the general consensus was that it was improvements along the O-line (specifically Marcus McNeill) that were responsible for the change as opposed to just random variance.

There is something historically unique about a great running team from the year before, with largely the same personnel, ranking dead last in the league in yards per carry after three games.

This is not comparable to Peyton Manning having a 70 QB rating early in the season a few years ago. This would be like Peyton Manning averaging 4 yards per pass attempt and the Colts losing football games because of their inability to pass. This is a big, big deal.
I bolded the most significant part of your post. The Chargers play three divisional opponents (two of them at home) in the next three weeks. If they take care of business and enter their bye week at 4-2 overall and 3-0 in the division, are you still going to say this is a big, big deal? The overreactions in this forum are what give the Shark Pool such a bad name.
What exactly makes you think they're going to take care of business?
Chase do you think KC will win at SD this weekend?
No.
Do you think Oakland will win at SD in a couple weeks? (Keep in mind Oakland has not won any AFC West game in 3+ years).
No.Do you think the Saints' passing attack is going to revert to prior season form soon? Do you think the Chargers' rushing attack will? Why, or why not? Which unit do you think have underachieved more this year?
So you asked what exactly makes you think they're going to take care of business, yet you yourself are predicting them to win those 2 home games. I just find it odd that you would question what makes you think they will take care of business, yet you yourself hold the belief that they will do just that.As for your question, do I think the Saints passing attack is going to revert to last seasons form, the answer is No. I don't believe their Offensive line to be able to give Brees the kind of time he needs to make himself a good QB. Add to the fact their running game is not hitting on all cylinders and with the injury to McCalister I don't see that changing soon. Do I think the Chargers running game will get back on track, the answer is yes kind of. Not to the level that they were last season, as it is evident that teams are going to be even more committed to stopping the Running game then ever before. A couple more games like the one Rivers had Sunday and it should open up more running improvement. Thus I see the SD running game getting back on track, because I have belief that their passing game is improving. I can not say the same for the Saints, thus I believe they will underachieve to a higher degree.

 
Fair enough. Please see my question(s) in the above post so I can see where you're coming from.
I think they finish a top 5 rushing offense but no worse than a top 10 rushing offense. I argued with several Charger fans myself over the summer that when you have a great thing(Chargers offensive players + Cam Cameron) you shouldn't screw that up even if Cam Camerons offense was based on Norv Turners offense. I was convinced there would be an offensive drop-off and even tried to wager with some because I believed it so much. Wasn't trying to argue with you with regard to your example just pointing out there was a big asterisk to the comparison.I think this is one of those typical knee-jerk reactionary threads that are all too common in the "shark" pool. LHUCKS hasn't given me his list of teams he thinks would go into NE right now and win so I'm going to assume there is no list. So in other words the "Chargers' WOES" amounts to a 7 point loss in Lambeau. Fair enough. I assume if SD beat KC and OAK he'll just pretend this thread didn't exist much the same way he bumps threads about how bad Rivers is(306 yards and 3 TD's in the single game behind all these "WOES" by the way) whenever he has a bad game. But he doesn't bump the thread where he said Chris Simms was better than Rivers. He's not alone in that by the way. There was a pretty big bandwagon that enjoyed criticizing the Chargers and AJ in particular because they went with Rivers and let Brees walk instead of paying him FRANCHISE QB $. Haven't heard from those people in awhile either. I like Brees, I really do. But Charger fans saw him for a long time and we realized he wasn't going to Brett Favre a team on his shoulders and will a team to a win. Brees can manage a game with the best of them when he's in a good situation with protection, a solid running game and a defense that at least keeps him in the game. He didn't have the arm to win a game by himself when he didn't have that and IMO Rivers came very, very close to doing just that in the one game that's behind all these "WOES".
 
Where's the lousy DB play option - that's the choice for me. How the #### do you let Jennings go for a 60 yard TD with a 4 point lead and 6 minutes left?

And it's been this way for years. It's disgusting to me that this area has still not been addressed, especially when all the other positions have been.

In reference to the running game - it's funny that Chase brings up the Saints for comparison. Both teams have the same problem - their offensive lines have been playing extremely poorly. I don't know if the Saints can turn their line around, but I saw signs of improvement for the Chargers yesterday. I think there is a period of adjustment to all the new coaches going on still. I think people will just have to be patient with that, but that it will get turned around.

Another option I'm not seeing that I think has been a big factor is that the Chargers obviously bought the hype. They've been going out there expecting teams to lie down just because they got great pub running up to the season. You could see it on the field and you could hear it in their comments. Hopefully they now understand that you have to actually prepare intensely and go out and play every game like the other team is playing at a SB level regardless of what people have determined about relative "talent". I'm seeing an attitude shift in some of the player comments this week after the loss, I think they might be starting to get it, we'll see next week.

If the Chargers (and this includes LaDainain especially - I don't know who was telling him what in the offseason, but he needs an attitude revertment to sometime prior to midseason last year) shut up and play they'll do much better.

 
Where's the lousy DB play option - that's the choice for me. How the #### do you let Jennings go for a 60 yard TD with a 4 point lead and 6 minutes left?And it's been this way for years.
Boy, that's the truth. Can you name one other DB who played for the Chargers besides Gil Byrd who was really worth a crap without going back to the AFL days?
 
Where's the lousy DB play option - that's the choice for me. How the #### do you let Jennings go for a 60 yard TD with a 4 point lead and 6 minutes left?And it's been this way for years. It's disgusting to me that this area has still not been addressed, especially when all the other positions have been. In reference to the running game - it's funny that Chase brings up the Saints for comparison. Both teams have the same problem - their offensive lines have been playing extremely poorly. I don't know if the Saints can turn their line around, but I saw signs of improvement for the Chargers yesterday. I think there is a period of adjustment to all the new coaches going on still. I think people will just have to be patient with that, but that it will get turned around.Another option I'm not seeing that I think has been a big factor is that the Chargers obviously bought the hype. They've been going out there expecting teams to lie down just because they got great pub running up to the season. You could see it on the field and you could hear it in their comments. Hopefully they now understand that you have to actually prepare intensely and go out and play every game like the other team is playing at a SB level regardless of what people have determined about relative "talent". I'm seeing an attitude shift in some of the player comments this week after the loss, I think they might be starting to get it, we'll see next week.If the Chargers (and this includes LaDainain especially - I don't know who was telling him what in the offseason, but he needs an attitude revertment to sometime prior to midseason last year) shut up and play they'll do much better.
I agree with 99% of this post.Only part I disagree with is the comment suggesting that the defensive backfield hasn't been addressed. We've spent what, 3 or 4 #1's on DBs, several 2nd rounders, and significant FA money (McCree) on corners and safeties in recent years. For some reason, the fantastic scouting the Chargers have done in other areas hasn't translated to their ability to identify talent in the defensive backfield, although I think Weddle is the real deal.
 
Where's the lousy DB play option - that's the choice for me. How the #### do you let Jennings go for a 60 yard TD with a 4 point lead and 6 minutes left?And it's been this way for years. It's disgusting to me that this area has still not been addressed, especially when all the other positions have been.
To be fair it has been addressed. It just hasn't been succesfully addressed. They've brought in FA's. Thrown high draft picks at the problem. In comparison to their efforts to OL they've put a lot more resources to improving the DB's but haven't found and evaluated players very well. It's one thing to draft Jammer with a high first rounder. It's a whole other thing not to recognize his shortcomings and find a replacement. I was very crititcal SD didn't spend a lot more $ to persuade Ty Law to come to SD instead of KC last year(it was a small contract) but it's not fair to say they haven't tried to address that glaring weakness.
 
I agree with 99% of this post.Only part I disagree with is the comment suggesting that the defensive backfield hasn't been addressed. We've spent what, 3 or 4 #1's on DBs, several 2nd rounders, and significant FA money (McCree) on corners and safeties in recent years. For some reason, the fantastic scouting the Chargers have done in other areas hasn't translated to their ability to identify talent in the defensive backfield, although I think Weddle is the real deal.
I just wanted to add that the FA $ was spent on more than just McCree. Molden and Ryan McNeil were both signed the same off season. Not to Nate Clements-type deals but still sizable contracts and given starting jobs.
 
Where's the lousy DB play option - that's the choice for me. How the #### do you let Jennings go for a 60 yard TD with a 4 point lead and 6 minutes left?And it's been this way for years. It's disgusting to me that this area has still not been addressed, especially when all the other positions have been. In reference to the running game - it's funny that Chase brings up the Saints for comparison. Both teams have the same problem - their offensive lines have been playing extremely poorly. I don't know if the Saints can turn their line around, but I saw signs of improvement for the Chargers yesterday. I think there is a period of adjustment to all the new coaches going on still. I think people will just have to be patient with that, but that it will get turned around.Another option I'm not seeing that I think has been a big factor is that the Chargers obviously bought the hype. They've been going out there expecting teams to lie down just because they got great pub running up to the season. You could see it on the field and you could hear it in their comments. Hopefully they now understand that you have to actually prepare intensely and go out and play every game like the other team is playing at a SB level regardless of what people have determined about relative "talent". I'm seeing an attitude shift in some of the player comments this week after the loss, I think they might be starting to get it, we'll see next week.If the Chargers (and this includes LaDainain especially - I don't know who was telling him what in the offseason, but he needs an attitude revertment to sometime prior to midseason last year) shut up and play they'll do much better.
I agree with 99% of this post.Only part I disagree with is the comment suggesting that the defensive backfield hasn't been addressed. We've spent what, 3 or 4 #1's on DBs, several 2nd rounders, and significant FA money (McCree) on corners and safeties in recent years. For some reason, the fantastic scouting the Chargers have done in other areas hasn't translated to their ability to identify talent in the defensive backfield, although I think Weddle is the real deal.
Spending draft picks and free agent money and signing mediocre (well bad in my opinion) players like Quentin to fat long term deals != addressing. Until I see good players show up at the positions, particularly CB, they haven't addressed ****. Who's coaching these guys by the way? Why can't we get some decent secondary coaches in here? Why do I have to sit and watch the Broncos bring in Dre Bly to add to Champ Bailey while we're playing grab ### trying to coach our project Cromartie into something like an NFL capable DB? The Raiders seem to have found some good young CBs who don't get smoked at least seven times a game routinely. My god, Troy Brown became a better DB in a couple of months after being converted from WR than the Chargers have had in about twenty years!!!WTF!?!?!? ARRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!!
 
Where's the lousy DB play option - that's the choice for me. How the #### do you let Jennings go for a 60 yard TD with a 4 point lead and 6 minutes left?And it's been this way for years.
Boy, that's the truth. Can you name one other DB who played for the Chargers besides Gil Byrd who was really worth a crap without going back to the AFL days?
Harrison.
Okay... I'll give you that one. Two, in almost 40 years since the merger. It might be tough to find any other franchise with this much disappointment in one entire unit.
 
The Chargers' rushing offensive decline has been of historic proportions. I'll write up a full post for it tomorrow, but that's the truth so far. At some point we need to recognize that this isn't a bad start, but a huge deviation from last year's prior level. Since the running offense carried the team last year, this is a pretty serious concern.
http://blog.footballguys.com/2007/09/25/mi...s-running-game/Once again, I'm not a Chargers homer (I'm actually Pro-Chargers more often than not), I'm not an LT hater, and I'm a pro-AJ Smith guy. I'm simply doing some objective analysis that has really piqued my interest.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top