Not saying Pat should turtle up. But he should be a little more careful with the ball. Especially when he knows the defense has already spent a lot of time on the field. Hell, he already knows anyway. Apparently, he already posted something basically letting the team know that he screwed up with those picks. He effectively left them out there for 3 11-play drives back-to-back-to-back. That's no bueno.

Plus, this was one game that just got weird. You can't look at the season or the last three years and say that the defense has even given up TDs on every scoring drive in a game. Mathematically it's an outlier. DEN only scored on 30% of their drives. 70% of their drives ended with NO points. Look it up, that's ridiculously good. They just got lucky that they scored TDs instead of what they normally do, which is one TD and two or three FGs.

Just made a thread on this yesterday.

-Cowboys nearly blow it at home to a 1 win team
-Titans get blown out at home by a Jags team they were previously 7-1 against with Vrabel
-Bucs get boat raced by a 3rd string QB
-Seahawks lose to Panthers at home

And for the “those people aren’t contenders” crowd…the Bengals, at full strength, lost to Cooper Rush in week 2.

Cooper ****ing Rush. Imagine if we lost to a backup QB, especially Cooper Rush, with Mahomes and Andy?

The server would explode LMAO

This is exactly what's happening. Spags is reminding me a lot of Dom Capers his last few years in Green Bay. He helped them win a Super Bowl and the defense was terrific. However, over the years he kept running the same tired scheme as offenses evolved, and eventually the whole thing collapsed.

I don't think Spags is quite at that point, mainly because he has better coaches around him. I think Cullen and Daly can help keep him be a little more innovative, but man, it's just not looking very scary right now.

All the guys on the D should know the scheme pretty well now, and we're headed into the final quarter of the season. Will he show some new wrinkles? I sure as hell hope so, because what we're seeing currently is the definition of the word "meh."

I'm really interested in what you guys think this tired scheme is exactly.

Lol. That'll be interesting to read.:spock:

You really think Spags would be uncomfortable running a ****ing cover two? Are you mental?

We don't have a front 4 that can pressure. You can sit back if you do. If you don't, you have to manufacture pressure. I wonder if you have any idea what you're talking about.

I'm sorry but how many years does Spags need and how many drafts before his defense approaches top 10?

Look at the best defenses in the league and they all have 1 thing in common

Play callers who have coached defenses to top 10 more than once in 20 years?

You're getting very emotional about this.

;)

Some defensive coordinators thrive in keeping things as simple as possible, letting players play fast. An example would be Buffalo and Leslie Frazier.

The NFL has moved back towards favoring simple schemes, play fast. I do think these type of defenses will do better in the regular season right now.

Spags complexity and blitzing is harder for players to run without mistakes, I think most would agree with that.

Where Spags can be useful is playoff games because just running simple and playing fast might not be enough then.

With all the young players we have on D, I actually think we are on schedule right now.

I have more issues with the FO on this than Spags as I wanted more than 1 vet DL. And of course there were some here who claimed we couldn't add anyone else because we had so much young DL talent ready to blossom.

That line of thinking looks dead wrong right now.

Seriously tho,

20+ years in the NFL and he has had a top defense how many times. He makes adjustments, but he DOESN'T adapt his scheme to his players strengths.

That is my biggest issue with Spags. His unwillingness to adjust his scheme to his players.

Same.

You want our defense to be top 10? And pay mahomes? And get stud OTs? And make sure our interior OL stays great? And get pass rushers? And get the experience we need in the secondary?

We need our Defense to be good enough. In more than half the games over the last 2 seasons they did more than their part to win games for us. This season they have won several games for us. Apart from buffalo last year they have mostly been solid in the playoffsand have had several big league playoff performances. We've been inconsistent this year. Guess what, that's what happens when over half of the starters has minimal playing experience.

I get if people think we can do better. I'm torn on that too. But the narrative that spags D has consistently underperformed and underachieved is hogwash. Or that he is too stuck in his own ways, nevermind that he made enormous adjustments our super bowl year which swung us a super bowl. Or that this Defense is stale even though we've had plenty of successes and showed a willingness to adjust. We have largely been more than good enough to win games when we absolutely needed it.

So yeah, he deserves scrutiny but he has more than earned the leeway to figure things out especially in a year where he has a wildly inexperienced defense.

I'll assume you're joking or you haven't actually watched the Chiefs the past 3+ years.

This sounds mostly right. The edge rusher is something that worries me too. Usually the chiefs do a good job midseason making moves based on adjustments they need to make. Their hard work trying to find pass rushers and receivers through trade seems to indicate they know of the problem.

I think there are a few things to consider....
First, we are the hunted and it seems this off-season teams were trying to outspend us or block us from getting the talent we need. Lesson learned.

Second, I think the chiefs in many ways view this as a transition year and didn't even expect we would be successful. It's not the worst idea. The bills and chargers and Bengals are riding super cheap contracts. Otherwisw we coiodve easily traded for... Say... Brian burns. We didn't treat the midseason with code red emergency and I get that would rub some the wrong way. But there's some logic to it.

Spags is the perfect coordinator to have against Josh Allen and last I checked they were one of the main teams we will have to take out for the next 3-5 years.

Last year Spags was ready to make Allen's head spin.

Daboll brilliantly told Allen in prep for KC to immediately take the checkdown anytime he was confused. If you remember how that game started, Buffalo fans were irate with how conservative their offense was.

That was brilliant coaching by Daboll to not let Allen make the big mistake as he still struggles with post-snap adjustments and Spags can really force that issue.

Once badger left we were forced to go vanilla and Buffalo opened up on us.

What scheme would you say would be best for a defense in which your front four cannot generate pressure?

I would say you'd have to blitz a lot, but that's just me.

They were able to pressure yesterday and Russell probably had his best game of the season

Simple how exactly?

We ran a lot of quarters first half against Cincinnati, looked like to me. Can't get much more simple than that; although like anything there are rules to that coverage that can be exploited 1)by an elite QB with time to throw and 2)an elite WR corps. Oh look at that! We got torched first half, and we got nothing pressure wise from the front four.

So second half, we ran more man and blitzed. Actually, I guess man is about the simplest defense you could dial up. Better, but scary. So I'm not sure exactly what you think we should do except 'be comfortable with shell', which is about the most generic thing anyone could possibly say in the hopes that someone else might think they know what they're talking about.

I'm not emotional at all other than being irritated by nonsensical, generic rage that 'this defense should be better, and Spags should be fired!!'

Yeah, well, I'm still waiting for anyone to offer up exactly what this magical scheme that plays to the strengths of his players better and will be successful when we can't get consistent pressure with our front four.

Because from where i'm sitting, when you have 3 lanky, fast corners and a technician like McDuffie, man coverage and sending heat is kind of your best bet-IF you're unable to generate pressure with your front four. Which we're not.

You want to sit in shell and watch opposing QB's get eight seconds in the pocket every down? I think that's a bad idea.

Spags has blitzed from everywhere (hey, did you notice that Willie Gay's pick 6 was on a blitz? It's true! That's why he was four feet from the QB! Wild!) In fact, almost all of the sacks and pressures came that way this week-even when they were credited to the defensive linemen. It was usually an overload of one side, the middle, or the other with blitzers. Sometimes it works! Sometimes it doesn't. When it doesn't it looks bad.

But I've been asking all day for someone to tell me what exactly we should be doing differently except being more successful.

With three rookie corners, a rookie LB, and a rookie S3. Oh, and did I mention Chris Jones and a collection of defensive linemen that cannot win one on one?

We're playing all of these rookies in the back 7, and our line leaves us no choice but to leave them manned up, so we can blitz to get some pressure. That's the reality. It is what it is.

almost all blitzes.

Even the sacks that went to d-line were mostly blitzes. Karlaftis I think was rushing 4, and was an effort sack.

Russell's yards on the ground? Well, when you're in man, your secondary is running with receivers with their back turned so it's easy for the QB to run.

In that 5 minute, 21 point run the Donks had there, we just flat didn't get to him with 4.

You're being emotional because you just saw my user name and started fuming and yelling at me even though as far as I can tell I am basically agreeing with you.

I have not called for Spags to be fired at any point this year.

Now with regards to just yesterday, I did think that Spags would blitz too much and it would cost us because that is exactly what you don't do against Wilson.

That's why I expected the Broncos to score 20+ before the game started.

Where are people getting this nonsense? Was Burns traded? If not, then he clearly wasn't going to be traded "easily." I have no idea what reality some of you all are residing in.

I'd be interested in knowing what our defensive stats looked like yesterday PRIOR to the first interception (that put them back on the field in denver without much rest).

Unfortunately if you cannot get to the QB with 4, you have to send 5, and if you can't get there with 5, you have to send 6.

You could have Deion Sanders x4 in the secondary and those clones would still get burnt if you give a QB/WR that much time.

Fact is, our Dline are failing their 1x1 matchups, while other teams are getting pressure on Mahomes with 3 vs 5. It's quite pathetic.

The chiefs gave enormous trade comp for Frank Clark and obj. Theres no reason to believe kc couldn't offer something aggressive or that Carolina wouldn't entertain it. We stayed disciplined this season because we don't have red fire emergency to win now at all costs. We are in a new world where we can afford to be much pickier.

The Chiefs gave up too much for Clark (1st and 2nd) and appear to have learned their lesson. The Chiefs gave up the equivalent of a 2nd round pick for OBJ.

If you think Burns could be had for a 2nd rounder, several NFL teams would have made that pitch. He's still in Carolina. But, yeah, the Chiefs are at fault for not getting him.

5 drives, 27 snaps, 65 yards, INT-6, 3 sacks.

To be fair, our losses this year have just as much blame on the offense / special teams not executing to put the game away, as much as it does on the defense. Don't get me wrong, I know the defense has it's issues.

Against Buffalo, KC is winning by less than a TD, mid-4th quarter & the offense couldn't convert to put it away on the 1st drive. Defense comes out stops BUF and forces a punt. Again, offense can't convert, but this time the defense couldn't stop BUF & it's 24-20. Mahomes gets picked-off and we lose 24-20.

Against CIN, KC is winning by less than a TD, mid-4th quarter. Defense holds CIN to 3 and it's 24-20. The offense couldn't convert to put it away (Kelce fumble) and the defense comes out & couldn't stop CIN so it's 27-24. Offense gets another shot but ultimately stumble & Butker misses the FG to tie. We lose 27-24.

We need to get Kadarious and Mecole healthy. Watson and Sky and to a degree MVS are not really cutting it.

JuJu been good against zones but really need a above average athlete to put a little pressure on teams.

I didn't say the chiefs are at fault for not getting him, now did I. I agree with their decision not to. They are building for the future and aren't as desperate as other teams to fling lots of picks to solve a need for a year.

Kind of what I figured. The D was damn good until we put them on the field in bad spots.

This was the post I was responding to:

"Otherwisw we coiodve easily traded for... Say... Brian burns."

And you responded to my response. That is, literally, the context.

I realize we live and die by the blitz because Jones is the only one that can win one on one, but that almost seems like something Spags should excel at since he designs all these crazy blitz schemes. For whatever reason though it sure doesn’t seem like the blitzes have been very imaginative lately. Everything looks so vanilla on defense.

Uh, well, we just had 6 sacks and a pick six almost entirely because of blitzes, so i guess I don't know what to tell you.

Giants SB’s and Chiefs 2019.

Any time he’s had a good pass rush he’s had success.

So in other words, what I'm understanding is that a lot of people think Spags sucks, and we should be running a different defense that takes better advantage of the talent on the field, but nobody has any idea whatsoever what that is other than we like Fangio's shell cover scheme. I have great suspicion that several of you have no idea what that even is, but have heard it talked about, so that must mean it's good, and Spags is outdated with his scheme, which you don't really have any idea about other than he blitzes a lot, you know, because that must be it.

Of course, that 'shell coverage' concept only works when you can pressure with four. Which we can't.

So in other words, a bunch of teeth gnashing and complaining with no viable alternative beyond 'FIRE THE SPAGS'.

That's what I thought.

Sigh.

I'll tell you this much, Williams getting snaps is interesting because he requires a double team, and Jones requires a double team, which means we have numbers advantage on the line when he's in there. 5 blockers, four defenders, and two require a double team to reliably block. This should help both against the run AND the pass, as Williams and Jones should at the very least collapse the pocket quickly, which helps the secondary. So that's good. It's possible that even though we can't draft high enough to get a stud EDGE rusher, we MIGHT be able to draft a stud DT as they are generally valued lower positionally and so maybe if we kept Jones and drafted another stud DT we could get by with less at EDGE and be better.

I’m not a Spags hater. I’m middle of the road on him. I was just making an observation.

I really don't know what you're arguing about. Youre acting like I'm bitching about it. I'm on the same page as you that we aren't in the desperate mode anymore to fling picks to solve a short term problem. We could have aggressively brought in a receiver or pass rusher if we wanted to go the frank Clark comp route. But we don't need to do that anymore.

There's nothing vanilla going on.

Vanilla would be rush four, play zone with two deep. That's vanilla.

Spags has blitzed LB'ers, safeties, corners, zone blitzed (that's when you see like Karlaftis drop while like Sneed blitzes) jailbreak blitzes, you name it. Rush 5, 6, from anywhere.

It's risky as ****.

Sometimes it gets your burned, and looks bad when it does.

I don't think that's what anyone, especially Spags would prefer. I bet he'd LOVE to be able to sit back in two deep most of the time. But if we did that now, we would NOT be 10-3 and this close to the #1 seed, I'll tell you that with no question.

We can't get home with 4. This is our biggest weakness. That, or our OT play. Either one of those might be enough to derail us from a SB trophy.

But as we're talking about defense, let's talk defense.

We have a player talent/production problem on the defensive line. We have Jones, who is doubled as much or more than anyone in football, a rookie who's trying to figure it out in Karlaftis, and a bunch of JAGS who can get some pressure here and there, maybe even a sack every once in awhile but cannot win one on one consistently.

This is where the Clark trade still hurts us. He's lousy. He's been lousy most of the time except the 2019 post season. We vastly overpaid in hindsight and it's handicapped us in terms of available resources. It was a fair bet that Veach made, there was no reason to expect the production to fall off of the cliff, but it sure did.

And the problem is, you can't get double digit sack production picking #30 or worse every year.

So we're going to have to try to buy a pass rusher (or multiple) again.

That's it. That's the only thing that makes for a top ten type defense.

Watch the Eagles defense, the Cowboys defense, or even the Titans defense.

There is a clear difference in how the defensive players on those teams play. I am not talking about scheme, I am talking about technique on the defensive line and secondary, and I am talking fundamentals like tackling.

None of Spags defensive units for the Chiefs have ever been good tacklers. And they have never been great at taking the ball away. And until this year, they were never really any good at sacking the QB either.

There is a deficiency in the approach Spags takes to coaching his defenses. His defenses had those issue when he had veteran players all around, so blaming the young players is ridiculous.

Young player have given this defense something we have never had on defense during the Reid era, and that is very good overall team speed on that side of the ball. So maybe they have improvements to make in some areas, they also add value as well.

The common denominator is Spags. And like I said in another post, when people actually start blaming Denver's 4 TDs on Mahomes, instead of holding Spags accountable, you know that the ball washing has just gone too far, and needs to stop.

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G using Tapatalk

I'm not absolving Spags by any means, but mentioning defenses like the Eagles is ridiculous.

With our talent deficiencies, there's no good scheme. We cannot pressure the QB without blitzing, so blitz? Obviously we'll give up big plays. Sit back and play coverage? Obviously we'll give up 1st down after 1st down.

I wouldn't hate replacing him, but there's a lot more turnover needed than that. Hopefully they understand that and go hard in the offseason to bring the D closer to league average than the same dogshit year after year. It's crystal clear 15 will make the offense good enough with anyone. F overpaying Juju or anyone else. Pray some guy can be a competent LT. Let Skyy, Toney etc battle it out. And invest heavily on the DL and secondary.

get rid of Spags

While they can always look to improve the secondary, I don’t think they need to invest heavily in it. DLine? Absolutely! Same with LT/RT. We get pressure on the QB without blitzing and our secondary will look much better.

I don't agree. I think some schemes are better than others when you have a QB like Mahomes.

The scheme Spags is playing right now forces teams to kill us by papercuts. They eat up clock, they limit the possessions, and really good QBs pick us apart anyway.

If the Chiefs play hyperaggressive on D, which is what I'd favor this year, you're limiting the amount of time per snap the QBs hold the ball and wait for the receivers to come open. It's going to burn you a lot, but it's going to reduce their time of possession.

It'll up Mahomes' time of possession, increase the number of his possessions per game, and force teams to beat Mahomes in a shootout. Shootouts he'll win 90% of the time.

Instead they are obsessing with taking the big play away, and it's allowing teams to chew clock and put more pressure than necessary on Mahomes.

I think the defense is fine, if the offense would quit turning the ball over

LOLWHUT?!

I have zero idea what games you're watching. We blitz like mad. Like crazy. INSANE. We leave our rookie secondary one on one CONSTANTLY. Jailbreak blitzes, 5 rush, 6 rush, zone blitzes, you name it. Kitchen ****ing sink, man.

We almost NEVER just sit back in two deep and take away the deep ball. The only time I remember doing that with any regularity was the first half of the Bengals game. And after a half of getting burnt with it, we went back to blitzing like mad.

I really don't understand this football take at all.

There is more to the football field than what you see on the broadcast. All 22 shows the Chiefs drop a lot and take the deep ball away.

Spags is splitting the difference this season, between blitzing and dropping deep. There's a reason the Chiefs are among league leaders in big plays given up.

Can we get rid of you instead?

It’s the pass rush. You can’t expect Spags to have enough blitz packages every game to cover for a pass rush that isn’t getting home. There’s enough tape for Em teams to exploit it like Denver did on the long screen TD.

This off-season has to be about adding to the pas rush

My only complaint, and one that had been mentioned before, is the poor tackling and defensive back technique. How often do we see a Chiefs player throw a shoulder at a RB or TE and simply bounce off or try to tackle someone bigger than them high? What about the DBs turning their heads to look for the ball? Unless you are Travis Kelce, throwing your arms up and running into the offensive player is going to result in a DPI 99.9% of the time. The receiver has a better chance of dropping the ball.

The Chiefs defense is a product of their continued success. How long has it been since the Chiefs drafted in the top 20, 10, 5? These players simply aren't available and teams that get them aren't giving them away for peanuts so the Chiefs can have a top 5 offense AND defense.

Some of it probably is scheme; we compare the Chiefs to the Patriots and their success. That team always seems to have a good defense, yet, without an elite QB, they aren't scaring anyone. They do seem better able to find players that fit their scheme and be successful. They also seem to know when to drop a player for maximum return.

1/3 of our sacks come from blitzes that Spags dials up.

1/3.

Go up against QBs who roast the blitz, like Allen and Burrow, and you magically see how exposed the DL is.

It's not "fine"

Direction is a complete imbecile at evaluating foot ball

So are you saying they've given up the most big plays or have given up the fewest?

My apologies for not being clear.

They're among the league leaders in preventing the big play.

Ok that's what I thought.

Makes sense. With the rookies and such to play the way they are and do that. The issue with it is the red zone D IMO.

If you were better there, hold teams to FG's, you're fine.

Nothing else matters unless the Chiefs are able to get to Burrow and Allen.

If the defense can't. The Chiefs are gonna have a hard time winning vs those teams. That's just the way it works. Both of those teams matchup with KC very well and rise to the occasion when it matters.

The bad part about being top dog is you constantly have a target on your back. You're more likely to get everyone else's A game.

Playing both of those teams have playoff feel and implications attached and for some reason the Chiefs dont play with nearly enough sense of urgency, they get destroyed in the trenches vs both these teams.

Both of these teams have better defenses than KC and that's usually what the difference is. Tyreek Hill no longer here to bail KC out with a HR play that can shift momentum in games when KC offense goes stale. KC needs to get much better on 1st and 2nd downs to make 2nd n short. They're the best in NFL in 3rd down conv, they're breaking norms in this area, eventually its going to come back to haunt them in Jan. Need to run the ball more. I hope Reid decides to go a lil bit different direction of game plan once Jan starts. I think the Chiefs need to run to open up the offense. Run more offtackles, sweeps, screens. This OL is much more suited for a running game.

I think people also need to keep in mind is that the Chiefs are technically in the middle of a "small" rebuild. They're 10-3 in a rebuilding yr. It's hard to notice because we're damn lucky to have Reid Mahomes and Kelce. Their greatness can overshadow/band aid much of the bad stuff. Veach has done a poor job on the front 7 the entire time he's been GM here, although Gay and Bolton do show flashes of greatness, still need work on coverage.

But things do need a fixing or else Chiefs will be knocked out of the playoffs from 1 of the 2 teams mentioned above. And I'm not sure TEN loses to KC earlier in season had Tannehill been playing that night. That was a gift in itself.

Spags is a stubborn mule and personally not a fan of his but hes not the bigger problem. It's just personnel. Next offseason I hope the Chiefs use their draft picks and cap space to beefen up the defense. Need to resign Sneed and obtain a stud CB somehow. A good safety. But mainly need DL/pass rush help. Addition by subtraction when Clark leaves.

Probably one of the best CoMo posts to have ever graced the planet.

I agree with everything outside of "Veach has done a poor job on the front 7"

I would say the front 4.

when a third of your sacks is blitzers, no, I don't think so. If you're blitzing, it's a numbers game in coverage.

What being among the league leaders in big plays given up as well as sacks with 1/3 being from blitzers tells me is that we live by the blitz and die by the blitz.

It's probably the best choice, honestly; hope you get some stops and the opposition gets desperate because you have Mahomes, who's going to put up 30.

If we could get home with 4, it'd all be a lot easier and we might never lose a game.

Also keep in mind that it’s not like burrows and Allens are going to pop up every year. We’re in a unique time where we have two really good QBs on rookie contracts matched with solid coaching staffs. The bengals timing is especially ideal because unlike the chiefs they were stockpiling cheap top 10 talent for years. They’re gonna have to get paid eventually.

So the timing of our mini rebuild is actually pretty good. We are rebuilding when they are their strongest but they’re going to slip over time as these guys get paid.

Keep in mind that for several decades there were really just a few QBs that dominated. In spite of that with them at their peak strongest and us in a rebuild we can still beat them. That makes me feel really confident in our future

I'm tired of hearing about "rebuilding year" absolutely ****ing tired of it. NFL teams have turnover...deal with it

Ehremagawd we're starting a few roooookies!!! Oh noooooooo

The institutional advantages I was talking about the other week.

I don't agree spags blitzes like mad. He's known for exotic blitzes but the amount of blitzes have not been as high this year. I also don't agree with direkshun that he has been obsessed with preventing the big play either. I think he's been in the middle. I hate to say that I agree with direkshun but I would like to see more blitzing than what he's been doing rather than let other teams chew clock. If they're going to get burned, might as well do it quicker and get more possessions for mahomes and the o. And maybe every once in a while, the blitz creates a turnover.

You mean he's mixing up schemes and coverages, but players are missing too many tackles is the defense sucking because not enough blitz?

Fire the tackling coach....

Bad tackling will keep happening despite the coach, the defensive players are going to make business decisions.

Yeah. The offense was responsible for the momentum change in the last 2 games.

4 defensive drives before the Kelce fumble in Cincy: Punt, downs, FG, FG.

4 offensive drives before Kelce fumble: TD, kneel for half, TD, TD.

If Kelce doesn’t fumble the ball we likely score a TD which would have put us up 11 with probably about 8 or so mins left in the game.

Same thing in Denver. Offensive turnovers gave Denver momentum

Someone check for me: The two AFC playoff teams we played scored how many points?

Haven't we played at least three and maybe four?

Well yeah, this is true. I was thinking just BUF and CIN. The two we actually have to worry about

Uhh, we kind of need to worry about TEN too. They have by far been the best team at stymieing this offense.

Yeah, especially at this point.

It's week 15. That was a fine excuse early. Now, they need to finish strong on the last quarter here.

Keep these 4 teams under 20ish points.

They can’t put up points the way the other two teams can. Get ahead of TEN and take away Henry, it’s over. Also, TEN averages about 25 points. BUF and CIN are closer to 30.

I mentioned tackling, but the ABSOLUTE dog shit redzone defense is going to be what knocks us out

This defense would look a hell of a lot better if they caused some turnovers.

Vagasil will clear that right up.

sorry, I guess TEN has fallen off a bit. They average about 19pts/gm, not 25. So even less to worry about with TEN. The Chiefs have scored less than 20 pts in a game just twice in the last 37 games. And of course, KC has averaged about 29 pts/gm over that span.

Interesting read on Spags and the state of our defense

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl...5e0eb018a95301

accurate and highlights why he should be fired.
A dinosaur that hasn't kept up with the NFL

The problem is, do we really think Reid will hire some young, innovative defensive mind? He'll just hire another dinosaur to coach the defense, someone he's worked with before.

Just curious, but how do you get faster, bendier EDGEs in the draft when you're constantly picking in the high 20s and 30s for the last 4 years?

Also, outside of McDuffie, hasn't it been true that the other rookie DBs have been a little hit-and-miss in their performances so far? I mean, I don't want to blame them too much considering that they're rookies and the fact that one of them was drafted int he 4th and the other was drafted in the 7th, but it's not like they've been really consistent, even play-to-play. The have shown flashes, and in some games have played pretty well, but they're far from polished products at this point.


Anyway,

I'll tell you what has been noticeable, it's how unnoticeable the safety play has been. They're covering okay for the most part, but they aren't making the big plays, like INTs, pass breakups, etc. Neither Reid nor Thornhill have been able to be, either alone or in concert with the other, the play-maker that HB was back there, for whatever reasons.