| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
holyghost
Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5302
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:23 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| oakdb36 wrote: | | holyghost wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | justwinbaby81 wrote: |
Hi, welcome to the Oakland Raiders, home of the personal foul and worst run defense. Starring Tommy Kelly.
|
The scheme had a lot more to do with that than Tommy Kelly. |
Yeesh. Scheme, scheme, scheme.... I hear alot of that around here. And to some degree it's true. SOME DEGREE. But to another large sum of a degree it's undisciplined physical specimens whose football skills are lacking in any scheme. Like Kelly, whose production plummeted in his worst year - you guessed it - in a modern scheme. He became a worse player in a better scheme. So I could say in opposition to this, that most or all of the players we have had, just lack the ability to execute a better scheme. And the bare bones scheme we ran was the most they were capable of on a football field. Or in other words, the past scheme hurt the team badly but helped these players look BETTER than they would have in a better scheme.
So it's not just scheme, nor is it more scheme than players. It's both.
Do we really know how many times the guy left his responsibility, play by play? We know what we saw, but we don't know how that compares with what he was SUPPOSED to do, play by play. But my guess is more often than not the guy dumped his gap in order to get up field. And it showed in the results... |
You've probably heard Warren Sapp say 100 times, gap responsibility wasn't assigned in the Raiders D.
We've been lining up 2 UTs next to each other for most of the last decade.
Tommy Kelly didn't became a worse player in a better scheme. He didn't put up the sexy stats anymore because he was asked to stay home and keep his assignment. The Raiders run D was the best it had been in years with the same Tommy Kelly starting at NT. |
No I have not heard that. Or perhaps Sapp says that (if he says it) because he chose to ignore a defensive responsibility? Nevertheless, you attribute the bold to Tommy Kelly? Of 15-18 men heavily involved on defense, he's the cornerstone? Find that real hard to believe. If that were the case you'd think they wouldn't be releasing him right now, so it stands to reason the staff and team thinks that's not the case....
Best part of my side of the discussion is how the team is backing it right now. You're swimming upstream on this one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Big Rob
Joined: 24 Sep 2011
Posts: 1075
Location: Long Beach, Ca
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I'm a Tommy Kelly guy, always loved his tenacity...I will say this though, he is incredibly undisciplined and you can't have that from one of your leaders...
I hope we can use some of the money we save from TK to re-sign DB90, he smart, athletic and extremely physical, and like TK said, he's only getting better... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dante9876
Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 17499
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| oakdb36 wrote: | | Nodisrespect wrote: | | TK was here for a long time, originally made the team as a UDFA out of Mississippi state, had a pretty good career, he was pretty good from 2007-2011. |
Agreed. Kelly has been one of the most underappreciated player amongst Raider fans the last few years. Not quite sure why, honestly.
Compare those:
http://www.nfl.com/player/darnelldockett/2506115/profile
http://www.nfl.com/player/tommykelly/2505830/profile
This isn't necessarily to say they were on the same level but with the amount of hate Kelly has been getting, you'd thought he wouldn't come close to comparing to a 3 time pro bowler. |
They dont really play the same position in the same kind of defense. If you put Dcokett in there beside a Seymour and ask him to play the way Kelly played he would blow Kelly stats out the water. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oakdb36
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 12723
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| holyghost wrote: | Nevertheless, you attribute the bold to Tommy Kelly? Of 15-18 men heavily involved on defense, he's the cornerstone? Find that real hard to believe. If that were the case you'd think they wouldn't be releasing him right now, so it stands to reason the staff and team thinks that's not the case....
Best part of my side of the discussion is how the team is backing it right now. You're swimming upstream on this one. |
I don't attribute that to Tommy Kelly. I'm just saying he played in a different scheme last season and it yielded better results with our run D.
I just don't understand how the past poor run D can be blamed on Kelly but he shouldn't get any credit for last year's improvement. Something just doesn't add up with this line of thinking.
No matter my opinion on him, it doesn't change the fact he's old and due a lot of money making him an obvious cap casualty. I have no problem with him being cut btw. That's the right thing to do at this point.
_________________
| Plush wrote: | | Papa was a trolling stone |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darbsk
Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 612
Location: Wales, UK
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 101Raider wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | justwinbaby81 wrote: |
Hi, welcome to the Oakland Raiders, home of the personal foul and worst run defense. Starring Tommy Kelly.
|
The scheme had a lot more to do with that than Tommy Kelly. |
I disagree, the scheme had nothing to do with Tommy Kelly making absolutely ridiculous decisions on the field. The worst part of it was he seemed to have a knack for personal fouls/encroachment penalties right after we had a 3rd down stop.
I see the scheme thing being quoted alot for Kelly's lack of production in the run game. However, bottom line is that Kelly is a reckless, undisciplined, penetrating defensive tackle.
On a side note our "scheme" changed right around 2004-2005 when Sapp and Kelly became our duo. If you look at our rosters in 2002 we had Parrella, Sam Adams and Rod Coleman. In 2003 we had Parrella, Coleman, Sean Gilbert and Stubblefield. We used to be a pretty heavy, run stuffing d-line before switching to the "double penetrating UT" game plan under Rob Ryan. Consequently, our defense has been pretty terrible stopping the run. |
I think you've hit the nail on the head with regard to the 'run stopping' abilities and scheme changes.
To be fair to Kelly I think it's probably a bit of both scheme and player, Kelly is undisciplined and notorious for guessing the snap count but he is very good at penetrating and making big plays like sacks, if we had played a John Parella or Ted Washington type next to him I'm absolutely convinced he would have flourished and been more disciplined. As you rightly said, the fact we were playing 2 penetrating UTs together, compounded with Kelly's obvious flaws made for obvious consequences of inopportune penalties, poor gap discipline and run defence.
_________________
“It may take us a short while, but we'll get that nastiness of the Raiders back.”
Mr. Al Davis RIP |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oaktown
Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Posts: 3125
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I won't be surprised if Kelly goes to a 34 team. Kelly is too tall and plays upright to play inside. W Sapp always said the same. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dessie
Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 3841
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| oakdb36 wrote: | | holyghost wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | justwinbaby81 wrote: |
Hi, welcome to the Oakland Raiders, home of the personal foul and worst run defense. Starring Tommy Kelly.
|
The scheme had a lot more to do with that than Tommy Kelly. |
Yeesh. Scheme, scheme, scheme.... I hear alot of that around here. And to some degree it's true. SOME DEGREE. But to another large sum of a degree it's undisciplined physical specimens whose football skills are lacking in any scheme. Like Kelly, whose production plummeted in his worst year - you guessed it - in a modern scheme. He became a worse player in a better scheme. So I could say in opposition to this, that most or all of the players we have had, just lack the ability to execute a better scheme. And the bare bones scheme we ran was the most they were capable of on a football field. Or in other words, the past scheme hurt the team badly but helped these players look BETTER than they would have in a better scheme.
So it's not just scheme, nor is it more scheme than players. It's both.
Do we really know how many times the guy left his responsibility, play by play? We know what we saw, but we don't know how that compares with what he was SUPPOSED to do, play by play. But my guess is more often than not the guy dumped his gap in order to get up field. And it showed in the results... |
You've probably heard Warren Sapp say 100 times, gap responsibility wasn't assigned in the Raiders D.
We've been lining up 2 UTs next to each other for most of the last decade.
Tommy Kelly didn't became a worse player in a better scheme. He didn't put up the sexy stats anymore because he was asked to stay home and keep his assignment. The Raiders run D was the best it had been in years with the same Tommy Kelly starting at NT. |
Exactly. People just look at the stats. He played his assignments pretty well. Unfortunately it isn't recognised by the majority.
_________________
| bitty wrote: | I don't understand why everybody thinks Green Bay is the pinnacle of NFL franchises?
In my opinion they are a joke. In the last ten years there drafts sucked. |
#clueless |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
holyghost
Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5302
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Dessie wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | holyghost wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | justwinbaby81 wrote: |
Hi, welcome to the Oakland Raiders, home of the personal foul and worst run defense. Starring Tommy Kelly.
|
The scheme had a lot more to do with that than Tommy Kelly. |
Yeesh. Scheme, scheme, scheme.... I hear alot of that around here. And to some degree it's true. SOME DEGREE. But to another large sum of a degree it's undisciplined physical specimens whose football skills are lacking in any scheme. Like Kelly, whose production plummeted in his worst year - you guessed it - in a modern scheme. He became a worse player in a better scheme. So I could say in opposition to this, that most or all of the players we have had, just lack the ability to execute a better scheme. And the bare bones scheme we ran was the most they were capable of on a football field. Or in other words, the past scheme hurt the team badly but helped these players look BETTER than they would have in a better scheme.
So it's not just scheme, nor is it more scheme than players. It's both.
Do we really know how many times the guy left his responsibility, play by play? We know what we saw, but we don't know how that compares with what he was SUPPOSED to do, play by play. But my guess is more often than not the guy dumped his gap in order to get up field. And it showed in the results... |
You've probably heard Warren Sapp say 100 times, gap responsibility wasn't assigned in the Raiders D.
We've been lining up 2 UTs next to each other for most of the last decade.
Tommy Kelly didn't became a worse player in a better scheme. He didn't put up the sexy stats anymore because he was asked to stay home and keep his assignment. The Raiders run D was the best it had been in years with the same Tommy Kelly starting at NT. |
Exactly. People just look at the stats. He played his assignments pretty well. Unfortunately it isn't recognised by the majority. |
Nor is it recognized by the staff and organization he plays for, which will be cutting him shortly? Come on...
Most times all I saw him doing was sucking up one blocker and not moving his feet at all. Lemme tell ya, it's no football player's job at any position to be doing that.
My belief is that the guy doesn't know how to do anything but penetrate and shoot a gap without discretion, and he definitely can't find the ball or get himself to it consistently despite the blockers. I don't know what you guys were watching but he was a ghost a large portion of the time in most games last year. Just an absolute ghost. And not because he was double teamed either. I honestly think he is lost having any responsibility in any scheme. He's noticeably effective while playing for himself and guessing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dessie
Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 3841
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| holyghost wrote: | | Dessie wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | holyghost wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | justwinbaby81 wrote: |
Hi, welcome to the Oakland Raiders, home of the personal foul and worst run defense. Starring Tommy Kelly.
|
The scheme had a lot more to do with that than Tommy Kelly. |
Yeesh. Scheme, scheme, scheme.... I hear alot of that around here. And to some degree it's true. SOME DEGREE. But to another large sum of a degree it's undisciplined physical specimens whose football skills are lacking in any scheme. Like Kelly, whose production plummeted in his worst year - you guessed it - in a modern scheme. He became a worse player in a better scheme. So I could say in opposition to this, that most or all of the players we have had, just lack the ability to execute a better scheme. And the bare bones scheme we ran was the most they were capable of on a football field. Or in other words, the past scheme hurt the team badly but helped these players look BETTER than they would have in a better scheme.
So it's not just scheme, nor is it more scheme than players. It's both.
Do we really know how many times the guy left his responsibility, play by play? We know what we saw, but we don't know how that compares with what he was SUPPOSED to do, play by play. But my guess is more often than not the guy dumped his gap in order to get up field. And it showed in the results... |
You've probably heard Warren Sapp say 100 times, gap responsibility wasn't assigned in the Raiders D.
We've been lining up 2 UTs next to each other for most of the last decade.
Tommy Kelly didn't became a worse player in a better scheme. He didn't put up the sexy stats anymore because he was asked to stay home and keep his assignment. The Raiders run D was the best it had been in years with the same Tommy Kelly starting at NT. |
Exactly. People just look at the stats. He played his assignments pretty well. Unfortunately it isn't recognised by the majority. |
Nor is it recognized by the staff and organization he plays for, which will be cutting him shortly? Come on...
Most times all I saw him doing was sucking up one blocker and not moving his feet at all. Lemme tell ya, it's no football player's job at any position to be doing that.
My belief is that the guy doesn't know how to do anything but penetrate and shoot a gap without discretion, and he definitely can't find the ball or get himself to it consistently despite the blockers. I don't know what you guys were watching but he was a ghost a large portion of the time in most games last year. Just an absolute ghost. And not because he was double teamed either. I honestly think he is lost having any responsibility in any scheme. He's noticeably effective while playing for himself and guessing. |
It's the $6.5m he is due to be making that is mostly the reason he is getting cut and that money could be used on younger cheaper players. Pretty obvious I would say...
Reggie even commented that he was happy with the way the d-line was playing.
| Quote: |
Our D-line is not getting knocked off the ball. We’re stout. When you talk about run defense, run game, the one thing you worry about is getting knocked around up front. And our guys are not. |
_________________
| bitty wrote: | I don't understand why everybody thinks Green Bay is the pinnacle of NFL franchises?
In my opinion they are a joke. In the last ten years there drafts sucked. |
#clueless |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dante9876
Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 17499
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Dessie wrote: | | holyghost wrote: | | Dessie wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | holyghost wrote: | | oakdb36 wrote: | | justwinbaby81 wrote: |
Hi, welcome to the Oakland Raiders, home of the personal foul and worst run defense. Starring Tommy Kelly.
|
The scheme had a lot more to do with that than Tommy Kelly. |
Yeesh. Scheme, scheme, scheme.... I hear alot of that around here. And to some degree it's true. SOME DEGREE. But to another large sum of a degree it's undisciplined physical specimens whose football skills are lacking in any scheme. Like Kelly, whose production plummeted in his worst year - you guessed it - in a modern scheme. He became a worse player in a better scheme. So I could say in opposition to this, that most or all of the players we have had, just lack the ability to execute a better scheme. And the bare bones scheme we ran was the most they were capable of on a football field. Or in other words, the past scheme hurt the team badly but helped these players look BETTER than they would have in a better scheme.
So it's not just scheme, nor is it more scheme than players. It's both.
Do we really know how many times the guy left his responsibility, play by play? We know what we saw, but we don't know how that compares with what he was SUPPOSED to do, play by play. But my guess is more often than not the guy dumped his gap in order to get up field. And it showed in the results... |
You've probably heard Warren Sapp say 100 times, gap responsibility wasn't assigned in the Raiders D.
We've been lining up 2 UTs next to each other for most of the last decade.
Tommy Kelly didn't became a worse player in a better scheme. He didn't put up the sexy stats anymore because he was asked to stay home and keep his assignment. The Raiders run D was the best it had been in years with the same Tommy Kelly starting at NT. |
Exactly. People just look at the stats. He played his assignments pretty well. Unfortunately it isn't recognised by the majority. |
Nor is it recognized by the staff and organization he plays for, which will be cutting him shortly? Come on...
Most times all I saw him doing was sucking up one blocker and not moving his feet at all. Lemme tell ya, it's no football player's job at any position to be doing that.
My belief is that the guy doesn't know how to do anything but penetrate and shoot a gap without discretion, and he definitely can't find the ball or get himself to it consistently despite the blockers. I don't know what you guys were watching but he was a ghost a large portion of the time in most games last year. Just an absolute ghost. And not because he was double teamed either. I honestly think he is lost having any responsibility in any scheme. He's noticeably effective while playing for himself and guessing. |
It's the $6.5m he is due to be making that is mostly the reason he is getting cut and that money could be used on younger cheaper players. Pretty obvious I would say...
Reggie even commented that he was happy with the way the d-line was playing.
| Quote: |
Our D-line is not getting knocked off the ball. We’re stout. When you talk about run defense, run game, the one thing you worry about is getting knocked around up front. And our guys are not. |
|
I think that was more about taking a shot at McClain personally. McClain was a huge problem in our run game up front. Then terrible safety angles didnt help the issues. I do think the dline has to shoulder part of the blame to though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NCOUGHMAN
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 12572
Location: Stockton via East Palo Alto
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Oaktown wrote: | | I won't be surprised if Kelly goes to a 34 team. Kelly is too tall and plays upright to play inside. W Sapp always said the same. |
i remember when belecheat was gushing over the idea of tko as his 3-4 de
_________________
| green24 wrote: | | NCOUGHMAN >>>>>> all of you |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DOCLEW 28
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 10586
Location: East Oakland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I have always liked Kelly. Good dude and would sit and chop it up with you when you run into him. But the penalties are maddening. Whatever the reason they are going to part with him doesn't really matter at this point. All that matters is using some of that saved $4.8M to re-sign Desmond Bryant.
I would actually play Bryant at DE and replace Shaugnessey. Then draft heavy on DT's and CB's this April. Bryant and Houston on the ends can be a scary and larger combination of DE's that the league will see.
_________________
Raider X hooked me with the sig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darkness
Joined: 24 Jun 2012
Posts: 4154
Location: CA-TX
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DOCLEW 28 wrote: | I have always liked Kelly. Good dude and would sit and chop it up with you when you run into him. But the penalties are maddening. Whatever the reason they are going to part with him doesn't really matter at this point. All that matters is using some of that saved $4.8M to re-sign Desmond Bryant.
I would actually play Bryant at DE and replace Shaugnessey. Then draft heavy on DT's and CB's this April. Bryant and Houston on the ends can be a scary and larger combination of DE's that the league will see. |
Terrible idea that doesn't do a thing for our terrible pass rush.
_________________
El ramster made the sig!
| candyman93 wrote: | Reading Darkness posts you'd think the warriors were playoff contenders  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dante9876
Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 17499
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Darkness wrote: | | DOCLEW 28 wrote: | I have always liked Kelly. Good dude and would sit and chop it up with you when you run into him. But the penalties are maddening. Whatever the reason they are going to part with him doesn't really matter at this point. All that matters is using some of that saved $4.8M to re-sign Desmond Bryant.
I would actually play Bryant at DE and replace Shaugnessey. Then draft heavy on DT's and CB's this April. Bryant and Houston on the ends can be a scary and larger combination of DE's that the league will see. |
Terrible idea that doesn't do a thing for our terrible pass rush. |
Yeah teams would have all day to throw with those two at the ends in a 4-3. In a 3-4, I wouldnt mind Bryant and Houston as ends if we have two very good pass rushing linebackers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jimkelly02
Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 117
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Kelly will be missed for sure. He has his issues with penalties and not keeping gap control. However, he was a UDFA who became a pretty good player. I'd like to keep him, he's got 2-3 years left in him. Maybe we'll cut him and resign him cheap if he cant find a good deal on the free agent market. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
