Making the Case for the Chargers

[KempBolt 498]

I'm writing this partially because I'd like some 3rd party eyeballs to critique my thought process, and partially because work slows to a crawl mid-month and I'm gonna lose my shit if I don't start killing time. Below are my points supporting why I believe that the Chargers are going to improve from 7-9 in 2013, and potentially push for a wildcard spot. I'm looking for anyone and everyone to tell me if and where my logic breaks down. Not to say that if you don't see any big issue in my thinking, you automatically think SD is bound for an improvement, but I know we all have blind spots when it comes to our teams.

 

1. Offensive Line and Scheme: We'll start with one more on the subjective side of the spectrum. If you watched much Charger football in 2012, you know that the offensive line was a problem and that its conjuction with a high volume, low % scheme was a very bad marriage. Rivers was sacked once every 11.9 drop backs, which was the league's worst sack rate. The offensive line is still suspsect, but can be fairly called an improvement over last season's unit. There are definite improvements at the tackles, and a pretty likely improvement at LG. Couple that with a scheme that is decidedly more normal in the depth of its routes, and a philosophy that will seek to run the ball more often and effectively, and I think you at least have a start towards improving Rivers' performance and thus the offense. Additionally, we're going from a head coach trying to manage the game while calling plays to a capable offensive coordinator who can take care of the offense while the head coach focuses on overall gameplan execustion and situational decisions.

 

2. A Young Defense: San Diego's stop unit is in the midst of a youth movement, the results of which could end up paying dividends. The defense was respectable last year and ought to be better considering how many of its important cogs are young and ascending. Corey Liuget and Donald Butler were only in their second seasons in 2012, while Kendall Reyes was a rookie. Cam Thomas has been a talent in development for 3 seasons now, and is taking over the starting job. Eric Weddle is a stalwart and should be helped by the turnover in the secondary (Cox, Wright, and Gilchrist taking over for Jammer, Cason, and Bigby). Losing Ingram hurt, but Freeney demonstrated last week that he still has a lot to offer as a pass rusher. The veterans we allowed to leave were mostly either disappointing to begin with (Cason, Bigby), in full decline (Phillips, Jammer), or one dimensional (Franklin, Spikes). It's also important to note the continuity on the coaching staff. John Pagano returns as defensive coordinator with Don Johnson and Joe Barry coming back as well.

 

3. One Score Games: The Chargers went a statistically improbable 1-5 in one score games last year. They lost in this way to the Saints, Browns, Broncos, Ravens, and Bengals. The lone victory in games decided by 7 points or less came against the Raiders. An abundance of losses (or wins) in close games is not a sustainable trend historically. Teams with great records based on a lot of close victories tend to do worse the next season, and teams with bad records based on a lot of close losses tend to do better the next season.

 

4. Point Differential: More than once this offseason, I've read something to the effect of "it's a miracle that San Diego even made it to 7 wins." The reality, however is much different. While some teams have a much better record than their point differential would normally achieve (see Colts last year; 11-5 despite minus 30 pt diff), the Chargers actually did slightly worse than theirs. They scored 350 points and allowed 350 points. A point differential of zero correlates most strongly to an 8-8 record. So while it's not as though we secretly should have been a 10 win team, we weren't a farce either. A two game improvement in point differential would mean double digit wins.

 

5. Second Half Leads: Closely related to the one score games, the Chargers lost 5 games in which they had a lead at halftime. These came against the Saints, Broncos, Buccaneers, Ravens, and Bengals. That's an abnormally large amount of games to lose when leading after two quarters. A typical regression towards the mean would mean that at least a couple of these losses would be wins.

Edited August 15, 2013 by KempBolt

[Vin+ 3,121]

Who is Mr. Rivers gonna throw to?

[Jules 98]

Who is Mr. Rivers gonna throw to?

 

The opposing teams defensive backs.

 

 

 

 

Sorry Chargers fans but this joke was coming too easily to me.

[Jules 98]

Honestly though, even though the Chargers gave the Colts fits in the past (who knows about now)...I always liked Rivers as a QB. I do hope he can rebound.

 

I was never on board with the Norv hire either. I was not on board with the Marty firing either. In 2006 the Chargers go 14-2 and one and done. But, they lost to an experienced Patriots squad with many pieces still there from their dynasty. The Chargers were still developing at the time.

 

SD has often been the offseason sexy pick in recent years and failed. This year it seems many have already counted them out to be one of the worst in the league.

 

Really who knows, a bit of an enigma team. Can go either way I feel.

[KempBolt 498]

Who is Mr. Rivers gonna throw to?

 

A fair question.

 

WR's- Vincent Brown, Malcom Floyd, Keenan Allen, Eddie Royal

 

TE's- Antonio Gates, Ladarius Green

 

RB's- Danny Woodhead, Ronnie Brown

 

So a fair number of options, but no one dominating pass catcher. I think it can fairly be called an upgrade over last year (we get Brown back, Woodhead is an important addition, Allen has upside as he gets comfortable, Royal is healthy, and Green has a year under his belt). Which is really the case I'm building-- not for a dominating 14-2 season but for an improvement on last year's 7-9. Mostly because I see a lot of projections in the 4-12 to 6-10 range and I don't really get why.

[Jules 98]

Well you guys did get Tom Telesco to run the ship who IMO is pretty damn good.

[Attyla the Hawk 197]

When I look at the Chargers, I see a team that doesn't perform in the clutch.

 

This is a team that has a dynamic passer. A good young defense. But I don't see a team that has drafted particularly well deep into the draft. They have a lot of players picked on day 2 and 3, but in general they are all pretty garbage.

 

I don't see a team that is mentally tough offensively and I think that permeates both sides of the ball over time. This is a team that I can see will put up ungodly numbers against inferior opponents. But is also a team that when facing a tough team in the fourth quarter -- consistently wilts under the pressure to make plays in pressure situations. They are in my estimation a classic front running type of team. When it's all going good, they are almost unstoppable. But if you're a team that can put them under stress, they will give you the game.

 

This has been a long time problem for this club. And I don't see the organization as a whole making the necessary commitment to be physical in the run game. The simple fact is, that team doesn't run the ball other than to pay lip service to being balanced. They are one dimensional to a fault. And Rivers, while a franchise QB -- he has zero elusiveness. He is a human pinata back there, and the fault always seems to be laid at the feet of the OL. But that team doesn't do any of the other things they SHOULD do to alleviate him being pummeled. Rivers would fare much better with an effective run game, and that really starts with a commitment from the organization to run the ball come hell or high water. At the intentional expense of passing success.

 

It's a team that doesn't value a 3 yard run in the first quarter, always opting for the 6+ ypa average of a pass. Their lack of balance is what dooms them against good clubs. Really, when I look at that team, I see a team not unlike a Mike Holmgren team. Mike, both in Green Bay and in Seattle, was frustrating in that his commitment to the run would last up until a running back was stopped for no gain. Then you might as well wait a quarter and a half before you saw another rush attempt. His teams had good balance on paper, but it was only because he'd run the ball about 80% of the plays in the final quarter to close games out.

 

San Diego doesn't have the talent that the early '00s Hawks or the '90s Packers possessed. They need to alter their blueprint for success. Because they are just a soft team mentally and it's pretty easy to see when you watch them. I'd say they are pretty similar to the current Carolina Panthers squad in that regard. Put the screws on them and let them lose the game for you. Both QBs tend to really fall apart under pressure and have difficulty letting plays go and having miscues taint their performance for significant portions of the game.

 

I see them as very akin to the Chicago Bears if they'd really commit to the run. They have similar talent levels outside of WR and in the secondaries. But SD has a better QB and a better OL. They could rise to a 10 win club if they'd appreciate what those consistent 2 and 3 yard runs in the first quarter means.

[BJORN 679]

Tonight, to some credit of the Bears defense, looked a lot like last year. Sacks,INT, and fumbles with shoddy o-line play. Fumble would be harsh to blame Rivers for but the INT was bad. The only silver lining is that Mathews and the run game looked good. Really dread passing downs nowadays cause I always expect something wrong to happen. Preseason or not our passing game tonight should've looked quite alarming to us Charger fans.

Edited August 16, 2013 by BJORN

[theMileHighGuy 656]

That was a rough game for the ones. I think the Chargers have a shot at 9-7, but the problem there being that it hinges on Ryan Mathews staying healthy and productive. As I see it, the Chiefs have just as good of a young defense, better o-line, and a better running game (arguably the best in the AFC). I also personally think Mike McCoy is a joke, and don't think he's going to help them take a step forward. Whiz might be a saving grace for the offense, but those pieces still have to come together. I have a hard time seeing a 10-11 win team with this schedule considering what we've seen thus far.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Ryan Matthews was running hard and with authority... Had to have liked that, San Diego fans. How long can he do it for before hurting himself or do his ball security issues rear their ugly head first?

[KempBolt 498]

When I look at the Chargers, I see a team that doesn't perform in the clutch.

 

This is a team that has a dynamic passer. A good young defense. But I don't see a team that has drafted particularly well deep into the draft. They have a lot of players picked on day 2 and 3, but in general they are all pretty garbage.

 

I don't see a team that is mentally tough offensively and I think that permeates both sides of the ball over time. This is a team that I can see will put up ungodly numbers against inferior opponents. But is also a team that when facing a tough team in the fourth quarter -- consistently wilts under the pressure to make plays in pressure situations. They are in my estimation a classic front running type of team. When it's all going good, they are almost unstoppable. But if you're a team that can put them under stress, they will give you the game.

 

This has been a long time problem for this club. And I don't see the organization as a whole making the necessary commitment to be physical in the run game. The simple fact is, that team doesn't run the ball other than to pay lip service to being balanced. They are one dimensional to a fault. And Rivers, while a franchise QB -- he has zero elusiveness. He is a human pinata back there, and the fault always seems to be laid at the feet of the OL. But that team doesn't do any of the other things they SHOULD do to alleviate him being pummeled. Rivers would fare much better with an effective run game, and that really starts with a commitment from the organization to run the ball come hell or high water. At the intentional expense of passing success.

 

It's a team that doesn't value a 3 yard run in the first quarter, always opting for the 6+ ypa average of a pass. Their lack of balance is what dooms them against good clubs. Really, when I look at that team, I see a team not unlike a Mike Holmgren team. Mike, both in Green Bay and in Seattle, was frustrating in that his commitment to the run would last up until a running back was stopped for no gain. Then you might as well wait a quarter and a half before you saw another rush attempt. His teams had good balance on paper, but it was only because he'd run the ball about 80% of the plays in the final quarter to close games out.

 

San Diego doesn't have the talent that the early '00s Hawks or the '90s Packers possessed. They need to alter their blueprint for success. Because they are just a soft team mentally and it's pretty easy to see when you watch them. I'd say they are pretty similar to the current Carolina Panthers squad in that regard. Put the screws on them and let them lose the game for you. Both QBs tend to really fall apart under pressure and have difficulty letting plays go and having miscues taint their performance for significant portions of the game.

 

I see them as very akin to the Chicago Bears if they'd really commit to the run. They have similar talent levels outside of WR and in the secondaries. But SD has a better QB and a better OL. They could rise to a 10 win club if they'd appreciate what those consistent 2 and 3 yard runs in the first quarter means.

 

I won't argue with the wilting in the 4th Q stuff because last year we folded in close games. I happen to think that the "mental toughness" argument is bologna as we often see teams who earn that monicker turn around and become "mentally tough" the next year (i.e. close games start going their way), but I'll just let that one play out.

 

As for the chunks in bold- you seem to know an awful lot about the offensive philosophy of a coaching staff that hasn't actually implemented a regular season gameplan yet. They've looked balanced in both preseason games thus far and spent the #11 pick on the best run blocker the draft had to offer. That's about all we know so far about this regime's committment to running the ball and taking pressure off of Rivers. I do agree with you that doing so is vitally important to Rivers' success.

[KempBolt 498]

Tonight, to some credit of the Bears defense, looked a lot like last year. Sacks,INT, and fumbles with shoddy o-line play. Fumble would be harsh to blame Rivers for but the INT was bad. The only silver lining is that Mathews and the run game looked good. Really dread passing downs nowadays cause I always expect something wrong to happen. Preseason or not our passing game tonight should've looked quite alarming to us Charger fans.

 

The OL was bad last night- there's no getting around it. But three things:

 

1) The sack, fumble came against Max Starks who has looked behind in the LT competition all camp long. It's some small consollation to know that the guy who got beat does not figure to be the starter.

 

2) Rivers' pick was a good throw. Tim Jennings basically took Keenan Allen's legs out from under him while the ball was still in the air. The pass went right to where Allen should have been if he hadn't been impeded. I don't see how that wasn't blatant PI. The announcers said it was because he was "going for the ball" which really amounted to cutting Allen by diving in the direction of the ball way before the ball was actually due to arrive.

 

3) The run blocking continued to look much improved. Mathews has room to get solid chunk yardage, and Fluker's makign his presence felt in that regard.

 

Again, I'm not trying to say that the OL wasn't bad because it was. Clary and Fluker both got beat, and they both figure to start. But the worst of the sacks came against a backup and the interception should have been a penalty IMO.

[KempBolt 498]

Ryan Matthews was running hard and with authority... Had to have liked that, San Diego fans. How long can he do it for before hurting himself or do his ball security issues rear their ugly head first?

 

He has to have at least one season in his career where he plays 16 games, right? Right?!

[KempBolt 498]

That was a rough game for the ones. I think the Chargers have a shot at 9-7, but the problem there being that it hinges on Ryan Mathews staying healthy and productive. As I see it, the Chiefs have just as good of a young defense, better o-line, and a better running game (arguably the best in the AFC). I also personally think Mike McCoy is a joke, and don't think he's going to help them take a step forward. Whiz might be a saving grace for the offense, but those pieces still have to come together. I have a hard time seeing a 10-11 win team with this schedule considering what we've seen thus far.

 

I would challenge the statement in bold. The Chiefs indeed have nice pieces in Johnson, Houston, Flowers, Hali, and possibly Berry but the Chargers can definitely match them talent-wise with Liuget, Reyes, Butler, Weddle, and Freeney. But the Chargers were 11 slots better in total defense last season, and 9 better in scoring defense. So if we're both young, both talented, but the Chargers perform better- how does that make them just as good?

[BJORN 679]

The OL was bad last night- there's no getting around it. But three things:

 

1) The sack, fumble came against Max Starks who has looked behind in the LT competition all camp long. It's some small consollation to know that the guy who got beat does not figure to be the starter.

 

2) Rivers' pick was a good throw. Tim Jennings basically took Keenan Allen's legs out from under him while the ball was still in the air. The pass went right to where Allen should have been if he hadn't been impeded. I don't see how that wasn't blatant PI. The announcers said it was because he was "going for the ball" which really amounted to cutting Allen by diving in the direction of the ball way before the ball was actually due to arrive.

 

3) The run blocking continued to look much improved. Mathews has room to get solid chunk yardage, and Fluker's makign his presence felt in that regard.

 

Again, I'm not trying to say that the OL wasn't bad because it was. Clary and Fluker both got beat, and they both figure to start. But the worst of the sacks came against a backup and the interception should have been a penalty IMO.

Jennings made a break for the ball and beat Allen to the spot. Could argue that Conte didn't make the catch but I don't think it was PI on Jennings.

[KempBolt 498]

Jennings made a break for the ball and beat Allen to the spot. Could argue that Conte didn't make the catch but I don't think it was PI on Jennings.

 

Breaking for the ball is one thing. Taking out the receivers legs while doing so is pass interference. Otherwise DB's could just play outside coverage and basically tackle receivers "on their way to the ball" all game. At least most 3rd party observers I've read thought that should have been called. And even then, Allen got a hand on it and it hit the ground before Conte caught it.

 

But my point is that Rivers didn't throw a duck, which would have me more concerned. Even if that play was legal, it was fluky and not the result of a bonehead decision on Philip's part. I came into the preseason wanting to see him make good decisions and deliver the ball on time. He's basically done just that so far.

 

EDIT: I just rewatched it. My ass Jennings was going for the ball. If anything, he took himself out of position for the pass. He basically just fell down and took out Allen's legs in doing so. That was actually the second big play in Chicago's favor as the result of a non-call. The other being Forte's 58 yard run which would have been basically no gain had Jarrett Johnson not been blatantly held. The TE (I think it's Bennett) bear hugs him off the snap and doesn't let go. No wonder Forte found that lane. Some preseason home cookin' for the Bears last night.

Edited August 16, 2013 by KempBolt

[Attyla the Hawk 197]

As for the chunks in bold- you seem to know an awful lot about the offensive philosophy of a coaching staff that hasn't actually implemented a regular season gameplan yet. They've looked balanced in both preseason games thus far and spent the #11 pick on the best run blocker the draft had to offer. That's about all we know so far about this regime's committment to running the ball and taking pressure off of Rivers. I do agree with you that doing so is vitally important to Rivers' success.

 

No question I don't know anything about the new staff. This is completely based on the last couple of seasons. If they want to turn this around, I'd expect the new staff to make these adjustments. Fluker is a big BIG dude. They have some pieces to make a run like that. It'll mean a philosophical departure from what they've done the last few years.

[KempBolt 498]

No question I don't know anything about the new staff. This is completely based on the last couple of seasons. If they want to turn this around, I'd expect the new staff to make these adjustments. Fluker is a big BIG dude. They have some pieces to make a run like that. It'll mean a philosophical departure from what they've done the last few years.

 

Agreed. Norv Turner abandoned the running game as soon as it stopped picking up big yardage, and it cost us two wins, minimum, last season. Hopefully that won't be the case this season. The last time Whisenhunt was an OC, he was doing a pretty good job of using the run game to mask issues in the passing attack. And McCoy's whole thing is adapting scheme to personnel. So as long as he's not a total idiot, he'll realize that the running game is a good way to take pressure off the relatively poor pass protectors on the OL. I will say though, that in the running game Fluker has been money so far. He consistently collapses the LE, creates a lot of space in his drive blocks, and combo blocks like a veteran. It's a joy to watch. At least I know he'll make a hell of a RG if things don't pan out on the outside.

 

This team is best built to be conservative, run-first offense that plays keep away and plays great defense. Once they fix the line, Rivers can sling it all over the yard again.

[Crash 105]

I just don't see the improvements that were needed the most along the offensive line, especially when matched up in the division. I don't think Fluker fits what is needed to match up in the division and until that offensive line is completely rebuilt I can't say the chargers will be better then .500

Edited August 16, 2013 by Crash

[KempBolt 498]

I just don't see the improvements that were needed the most along the offensive line, especially when matched up in the division. I don't think Fluker fits what is needed to match up in the division and until that offensive line is completely rebuilt I can't say the chargers will be better then .500

 

But what I'm saying is that the offensive line was worse a year ago and that the team went 7-9 despite losing a stastically improbable number of close games. Had they just been average in tight contests, that team was 9-7 or 10-6. So I don't see how .500 is our ceiling when we did in fact improve, even if it's modest improvement.

[theMileHighGuy 656]

I would challenge the statement in bold. The Chiefs indeed have nice pieces in Johnson, Houston, Flowers, Hali, and possibly Berry but the Chargers can definitely match them talent-wise with Liuget, Reyes, Butler, Weddle, and Freeney. But the Chargers were 11 slots better in total defense last season, and 9 better in scoring defense. So if we're both young, both talented, but the Chargers perform better- how does that make them just as good?

 

My reasoning is mostly based on the fact that the Bolts' secondary looks like:

 

   Weddle   ?
?              ?

 

And they play some of the best passing offenses in the league this year, some twice. While the Chefs added Sean Smith to pair with Brandon Flowers. I'm not saying one is better than the other, just that they both have a chance to be pretty good, and you're going to have to be better than the Chiefs to get that playoff spot.

[KempBolt 498]

My reasoning is mostly based on the fact that the Bolts' secondary looks like:

 

   Weddle   ?
?              ?

 

And they play some of the best passing offenses in the league this year, some twice. While the Chefs added Sean Smith to pair with Brandon Flowers. I'm not saying one is better than the other, just that they both have a chance to be pretty good, and you're going to have to be better than the Chiefs to get that playoff spot.

 

My reasoning is based on this:

 

? > some of the worst defensive backs in the NFL.

 

Antoine Cason, Quentin Jammer, and Atari Bigby were some of the worst players at their positions in the league last year. So while we don't know what we have in Cox, Wright, and Gilchrist, it's almost certainly better than those first three. And has already looked that way in preseason.

 

We won't be better than the Chiefs at CB. But they also won't be better than us up front.

[Crash 105]

But what I'm saying is that the offensive line was worse a year ago and that the team went 7-9 despite losing a stastically improbable number of close games. Had they just been average in tight contests, that team was 9-7 or 10-6. So I don't see how .500 is our ceiling when we did in fact improve, even if it's modest improvement.

Idk if the offensive line is better. Vasquez is twice the guard clary is, it's maybe a little better at left tackle but your rolling with king Dunlap who hasn't been outstanding and fluker is going to seriously struggle in pass blocking especially against guys like Von miller. The only real strength I see on the chargers is the 3 down lineman, butler and Weddle. The corners are unproven and Te'o had the exact same problems everyone said he was going to have coming into the draft

[Crash 105]

My reasoning is based on this:

 

? > some of the worst defensive backs in the NFL.

 

Antoine Cason, Quentin Jammer, and Atari Bigby were some of the worst players at their positions in the league last year. So while we don't know what we have in Cox, Wright, and Gilchrist, it's almost certainly better than those first three. And has already looked that way in preseason.

 

We won't be better than the Chiefs at CB. But they also won't be better than us up front.

KC is much better up front, 4 very very good starting linebackers and maybe the best OLB duo in the league, mike devito is a underrated DE, Jackson is a average DE and dantori Poe has potential to be a very good NT. it's the linebackers that make the chiefs better up front

[Crash 105]

The chargers have good talent don't get me wrong, I just think they should have went hard after olineman in the draft. There was really good talent that fell in the draft and the chargers had a clean shot that they could have used to instantly rebuild their oline