Making the Case for the Chargers

[KempBolt 498]

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

 

Liuget, Reyes, and Thomas put their starting DL to shame. And our ILB's can hang with theirs. Their outside linebackers are better, but we're not bad there either. And the reality is that we outperformed them last year. If they were "much better" you'd think it would show.

 

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

 

The offensive line it clearly better. Visibly so already in preseason, especially in the running game. Dunlap >>> Harris, Rinehart > Green, Hardwick = Hardwick, Clary < Vasquez, and Fluker > Clary. And even then, Clary has shown better as a run blocker through two games than Vasquez typically did here. Fluker's pass pro is definitely a work in progress. But it's only the bad that gets highlighted- he's been mostly reliable in that regard and he's improving. Orlando Franklin and Anthony Davis also took time to get their technique right in protection. His run blocking is as advertized and fun to watch. And the worst gaffe in protection so far this season has been from Max Starks, who figures to be a #2.

 

I'd say our strengths as a team are mostly on defense. The line, Butler, and Weddle as you mentioned. Freeney has looked very dangerous thus far and the secondary has covered well enough to force coverage sacks/pressure. It also appears that the running game is going to be a strength, as the blocking has consistently been there and Mathews has been picking up chunk yardage. Also, Te'o has played exactly 9 snaps so I don't really know what you think you've seen to draw that conclusion.

 

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

 

The FO decided to go for the guys they had highest on their boards rather than reach for players they didn't like as much at more convenient positions. I can't tell you that they're telling the truth when they say that or that it will turn out to be the right decision, but that is the approach that I prefer. Reaching for need is a really good way to kill a franchise over the long haul. The Broncos "needed" (according to the media) DT help much more than LB in 2011 when they took Miller over Dareus. I recall the hand wringing over their interior DL after that pick and concerns over how Miller would fit a 4-3. Seems to have worked out. You draft talent and lets the chips fall where they may.

[Crash 105]

Liuget, Reyes, and Thomas put their starting DL to shame. And our ILB's can hang with theirs. Their outside linebackers are better, but we're not bad there either. And the reality is that we outperformed them last year. If they were "much better" you'd think it would show.

 

 

 

The offensive line it clearly better. Visibly so already in preseason, especially in the running game. Dunlap >>> Harris, Rinehart > Green, Hardwick = Hardwick, Clary < Vasquez, and Fluker > Clary. And even then, Clary has shown better as a run blocker through two games than Vasquez typically did here. Fluker's pass pro is definitely a work in progress. But it's only the bad that gets highlighted- he's been mostly reliable in that regard and he's improving. Orlando Franklin and Anthony Davis also took time to get their technique right in protection. His run blocking is as advertized and fun to watch. And the worst gaffe in protection so far this season has been from Max Starks, who figures to be a #2.

 

I'd say our strengths as a team are mostly on defense. The line, Butler, and Weddle as you mentioned. Freeney has looked very dangerous thus far and the secondary has covered well enough to force coverage sacks/pressure. It also appears that the running game is going to be a strength, as the blocking has consistently been there and Mathews has been picking up chunk yardage. Also, Te'o has played exactly 9 snaps so I don't really know what you think you've seen to draw that conclusion.

 

 

 

The FO decided to go for the guys they had highest on their boards rather than reach for players they didn't like as much at more convenient positions. I can't tell you that they're telling the truth when they say that or that it will turn out to be the right decision, but that is the approach that I prefer. Reaching for need is a really good way to kill a franchise over the long haul. The Broncos "needed" (according to the media) DT help much more than LB in 2011 when they took Miller over Dareus. I recall the hand wringing over their interior DL after that pick and concerns over how Miller would fit a 4-3. Seems to have worked out. You draft talent and lets the chips fall where they may.

But if you went back and looked at the draft they could have taken talented offensive lineman that were not reaches. The offensive line is what will hold the chargers back and if I was the GM I would have been aggressive in remaking the entire line, took same chances on guys and drafted heavy at the position. There is talent at a lot of positions but the oline will again hold you guys back

[KempBolt 498]

But if you went back and looked at the draft they could have taken talented offensive lineman that were not reaches. The offensive line is what will hold the chargers back and if I was the GM I would have been aggressive in remaking the entire line, took same chances on guys and drafted heavy at the position. There is talent at a lot of positions but the oline will again hold you guys back

 

No, they could have taken offensive lineman who you think are especially talented and who you don't think would have been reaches. They obviously had different ideas. And that doesn't make you or anyone else wrong and them right, but I'm not going to moan that a brand new regime went after the players that they said were highest on their board before I even see said players in an NFL game. All that now remains to be seen is whether or not their scouting and assessment was accurate.

 

Besides, the rookie success rate for offensive linemen outside of round 1 is not good. It's at least unlikely that a 2nd-5th rounder would have provided an immediate upgrade over the starters we have currently.

[Crash 105]

No, they could have taken offensive lineman who you think are especially talented and who you don't think would have been reaches. They obviously had different ideas. And that doesn't make you or anyone else wrong and them right, but I'm not going to moan that a brand new regime went after the players that they said were highest on their board before I even see said players in an NFL game. All that now remains to be seen is whether or not their scouting and assessment was accurate.

 

Besides, the rookie success rate for offensive linemen outside of round 1 is not good. It's at least unlikely that a 2nd-5th rounder would have provided an immediate upgrade over the starters we have currently.

They had a shot at both Menelik Watson and Larry warford who would have instantly rebuilt the oline. Flucker just reminds me of osemeli in Baltimore, a guy who will be a average tackle and may end up being a great guard and if they would have been aggressive at the weakest position they would have much better depth and much better competition

[KempBolt 498]

They had a shot at both Menelik Watson and Larry warford who would have instantly rebuilt the oline. Flucker just reminds me of osemeli in Baltimore, a guy who will be a average tackle and may end up being a great guard and if they would have been aggressive at the weakest position they would have much better depth and much better competition

 

I did not and do not like Watson. I liked Warford, but he has some things to clean up. It's no lock that he would have been an instant upgrade for us at guard. And we could only have had one or the other, with our 2nd round pick. Had it been Warford, I wouldn't have complained; but it wasn't so I'm going to see how the guys they actually chose pan out. At least I know that Fluker will be matched up a lot on Wolfe when we play the Broncos. D.J.'s gonna eat him. He needs to learn to adjust to outside speed, but if you try and go through him instead of past him, you're going to get man-handled.

[Crash 105]

I did not and do not like Watson. I liked Warford, but he has some things to clean up. It's no lock that he would have been an instant upgrade for us at guard. And we could only have had one or the other, with our 2nd round pick. Had it been Warford, I wouldn't have complained; but it wasn't so I'm going to see how the guys they actually chose pan out. At least I know that Fluker will be matched up a lot on Wolfe when we play the Broncos. D.J.'s gonna eat him. He needs to learn to adjust to outside speed, but if you try and go through him instead of past him, you're going to get man-handled.

Wolfe graded out as one of the best run defenders at DE and has a year on fluker, why do you think he's going to eat him up? His weight? Wolfe is somewhere between 305-310 so that's not exactly a slam dunk especially since Wolfe practices against a power tackle so I think it is a wash matchup in the run game and miller is going to make him look like turnstyle in pass protection. If it was last year I would say yes fluker may have had the edge but no one knows how good Wolfe is going to be this year

Edited August 19, 2013 by Crash

[KempBolt 498]

Wolfe graded out as one of the best run defenders at DE and has a year on fluker, why do you think he's going to eat him up? His weight? Wolfe is somewhere between 305-310 so that's not exactly a slam dunk especially since Wolfe practices against a power tackle so I think it is a wash matchup in the run game and miller is going to make him look like turnstyle in pass protection. If it was last year I would say yes fluker may have had the edge but no one knows how good Wolfe is going to be this year

 

Honestly, I was just trying to rile you up a bit. Sorry.

 

It's too soon to call on Fluker. He was quite effective run blocking Red Bryant who is similar to Wolfe in run defense so I am optimistic. They'll settle it on the field. But I do believe there's a chance that D.J. is one of the best run blockers at OT in the league as a rookie. That's how he's looked through 2 preseason games. And it's shown in Mathews YPC (5.3) versus last year's (3.8). But I'll put a lid on the smack talk until he does the same in the regular season.

 

Miller makes everyone look like a turnstile in pass pro. I laugh at everyone who says "the Chargers didn't draft for their division because they still can't match up with Von Miller..." Who the hell can match up with Von Miller? Him and J.J. Watt- two guys that you do your best to double and scheme around and hope that you do so well enough to limit the damage.

[KempBolt 498]

Interesting preseason observation:

 

Based on what I've seen, Fluker has been better at RT than Eric Fisher, and about as good as Joeckel and Johnson. All three, especially Fisher, have had tough moments in pass pro to match Fluker's.

 

I get it... Fluker came out of college with those concerns so we're going to pay more attention to his lapses on passing downs. But I wonder, if a 3rd part observer looked at these 4 tackles with no preconceived notions, what the conclusion would be?

 

His run blocking has looked better to me than that of any rookie, including the guards. I am interested to see if and how he adjusts in protection.

[Dutch 874]

Lane Johnson has been phenomenal so far. He's been handling everyone that has stood across from him. However, he did allow 1 sack but that was against a high caliber DE; Charles Johnson. Outside of that one play in that matchup, Lane Johnson was handling him as well. I can't speak much for Fluker because I haven't seen much of the Chargers this preseason but just thought I'd get that out there.

[KempBolt 498]

Lane Johnson has been phenomenal so far. He's been handling everyone that has stood across from him. However, he did allow 1 sack but that was against a high caliber DE; Charles Johnson. Outside of that one play in that matchup, Lane Johnson was handling him as well. I can't speak much for Fluker because I haven't seen much of the Chargers this preseason but just thought I'd get that out there.

 

That wasn't an indictment of Lane. I realize he was dealing with Charles Johnson, who is a stud and that he held up well. I saw the sack, and PFF apparently said he gave up two more "hurries" (whatever that means- I didn't see the whole game). So don't think that I'm trying to disparage your guy. All of the linemen outside of Fisher and maybe Cooper have looked very respectable for rookies and have all had some not so great moments thus far as should be expected.

 

My point is simply that Johnson has given up basically as many/much sacks/pressure as Fluker, but it's all optimism for Johnson (rightfully so) and a whole lot of hand wringing over Fluker. And I basically understand why- it's just interesting to me how much preconceived notions affect interpretation of gameplay.

[Dutch 874]

That wasn't an indictment of Lane. I realize he was dealing with Charles Johnson, who is a stud and that he held up well. I saw the sack, and PFF apparently said he gave up two more "hurries" (whatever that means- I didn't see the whole game). So don't think that I'm trying to disparage your guy. All of the linemen outside of Fisher and maybe Cooper have looked very respectable for rookies and have all had some not so great moments thus far as should be expected.

 

My point is simply that Johnson has given up basically as many/much sacks/pressure as Fluker, but it's all optimism for Johnson (rightfully so) and a whole lot of hand wringing over Fluker. And I basically understand why- it's just interesting to me how much preconceived notions affect interpretation of gameplay.

 

Oh, I know. You were basically just letting everyone know that he was playing just as well as the other high pick draft guys seeing as though people were skeptical about Fluker. I saw Lane Johnson mentioned and saw the opportunity to brag how awesome he's been

[the Lions fan 19]

The Chiefs and Broncos have taken better steps forward in recent years.

 

I like SD I do I grew up in the bay area and tend to side with CAL teams from a little homerism. But I look at this team and I see a shoddy OL, no depth, question marks everywhere, if this guy, if that guy, if we stay healthy, if Rivers rebounds, most teams face these questions, SD is in trouble, no answers.

 

No pass rush, one dimensional offense, shoddy OL play, poor pass defense, poor special teams play and the ground game is an issue. In my eyes SD has tipped to being a middle of the pack team and it will begin/has been showing. Expectations are the only thing they've got going. Sorry Bolts fans, hope I'm wrong ill eat my words if I am. Literally.

[the Lions fan 19]

I wonder, if a 3rd part observer looked at these 4 tackles with no preconceived notions, what the conclusion would be?

 

Those 4? I like Johnson, but you could make a case for Fluker and I've seen lots of film, but more on Johnson. He's faced tougher competition and is in the same boat performance wise. Flukers been good but even if he's great that won't fix their OL. Not even close. Hopefully they continue to address it.

 

If your being objective, Longs the best of the bunch thus far. Look up some video, he attacks, should be a center IMO. Anyways, he wins the most impressive 2.2 weeks into the preseason for a rookie OL award this year.

 

Sorry for 2x post, trouble copying and pasting on phone.

Edited August 24, 2013 by the Lions fan

[KempBolt 498]

The Chiefs and Broncos have taken better steps forward in recent years.

 

I like SD I do I grew up in the bay area and tend to side with CAL teams from a little homerism. But I look at this team and I see a shoddy OL, no depth, question marks everywhere, if this guy, if that guy, if we stay healthy, if Rivers rebounds, most teams face these questions, SD is in trouble, no answers.

 

No pass rush, one dimensional offense, shoddy OL play, poor pass defense, poor special teams play and the ground game is an issue. In my eyes SD has tipped to being a middle of the pack team and it will begin/has been showing. Expectations are the only thing they've got going. Sorry Bolts fans, hope I'm wrong ill eat my words if I am. Literally.

 

Every team has questions and "ifs." I'm merely pointing out the important ones for the Chargers. That's the nature of preseason.

 

The pass rush was decent in 2012 and has looked good in preseason. The offense has been balanced so far in preseason and that's all we have to go on. Judging this group based on what they did under Norv Turner is pointless. The OL is indeed a concern. But the run blocking has looked strong and the protection figures to make a modest gains now that Mike Harris and Jeromey Clary aren't the tackles. The secondary has new starters at CB1, CB2, nickel, and SS. It would be premature for me to crown them as excellent now, and by that some token it's premature to say they're lousy. They've been good in preseason. And I realize that doesn't necessarily mean good things for the real deal- but it's literally all we have to go on for these new starters.

 

And what I'm saying is that even with some issues, they were good enough to win 7 games despite losing 5 close ones and 5 that we led at the half. Combine some coaching/personnel gains and consider that it would be statistically normal for us to come out of more close games on top this year and a 2-3 game improvement seems logically optimistic to me.

 

The way people talk about the Chargers, you'd think we went 4-12 last year and lost all our best players in the offseason.

[Jules 98]

Every team has questions and "ifs." I'm merely pointing out the important ones for the Chargers. That's the nature of preseason.

 

The pass rush was decent in 2012 and has looked good in preseason. The offense has been balanced so far in preseason and that's all we have to go on. Judging this group based on what they did under Norv Turner is pointless. The OL is indeed a concern. But the run blocking has looked strong and the protection figures to make a modest gains now that Mike Harris and Jeromey Clary aren't the tackles. The secondary has new starters at CB1, CB2, nickel, and SS. It would be premature for me to crown them as excellent now, and by that some token it's premature to say they're lousy. They've been good in preseason. And I realize that doesn't necessarily mean good things for the real deal- but it's literally all we have to go on for these new starters.

 

And what I'm saying is that even with some issues, they were good enough to win 7 games despite losing 5 close ones and 5 that we led at the half. Combine some coaching/personnel gains and consider that it would be statistically normal for us to come out of more close games on top this year and a 2-3 game improvement seems logically optimistic to me.

 

The way people talk about the Chargers, you'd think we went 4-12 last year and lost all our best players in the offseason.

 

I think a problem is also that the Broncos are in your division and the Chiefs are the new sexy dark horse pick as well.

 

People think the Chargers have too much of a hill to climb in the division.

 

Fair or not I think that is how many see it at the moment until proven otherwise. And it might actually be a good thing to be so doubted. The Chargers have often fell on their faces in recent years when so many have picked them to do well.

 

I personally believe SD can "potentially" make some noise just because somewhere deep down in there.....there is still a good QB in Rivers. And Norv is gone, finally. I would not bet on it, but I don't think it's impossible for them to win more games then expected.

 

It remains to be seen with the Chiefs if they are going to live up to the new hype. The Raiders are a mess sadly. And frankly even though Manning and the Broncos should glide through the regular season ...stranger things have happened and they may have some cracks not everyone acknowledges either.

[KempBolt 498]

Good post Jules. I definitely don't expect everyone to climb on board the bandwagon. I just wanted to give my thoughts and see if anyone could show if I was way off base. So far it seems that my thoughts on why the Chargers could do better are fairly reasonable. Doesn't guarantee anything but it's a reason for SD to have some optimism this year.

 

And the Chiefs are actually the old sexy dark horse pick. Analysts jock them as a "sleeper" every year. I don't buy it.

[BJORN 679]

Offensive line was still shocking against the Bears, won't be convinced until Rivers has a pocket to throw in and teams think twice before blitzing him on third downs. Give him time and I guarantee he will do just fine if not great and we will win games. Saying the o-line will be improved doesn't really mean much to me when they were terrible last year.

[KempBolt 498]

Offensive line was still shocking against the Bears, won't be convinced until Rivers has a pocket to throw in and teams think twice before blitzing him on third downs. Give him time and I guarantee he will do just fine if not great and we will win games. Saying the o-line will be improved doesn't really mean much to me when they were terrible last year.

 

They're not going to be good. At least not in pass pro. I would just make your peace with that right now. My point is that is we won 7 games and were tight in 5 more last year when the protection was an abomination, we had no running game, and the play calling was dialing up 7 step drops-- is it then crazy to think we could see more wins with better (average?) protection, a running game, and play calling that isn't completely insane? I think no.

[the Lions fan 19]

They have a tough schedule, they don't match up well against the AFC South teams, and IMO couldn't be worse hosting the 2 titans while playing the Jags and Titans away.

 

4 wins... how's 5 sound? I actually have them at 5 wins in my imaginary season. Though they deserve 7. Check out their schedule, the 2 vs, OAK split w/KC, JAX and I figured they'd beat TEN or DAL but not both for other reasons, those are their wins in my imaginary season.

 

The rest are very losable, HOU, PHIs home opener, they might have IND as they play them between SEA and DEN and could catch them unprepared/whatever. But I feel like SD doesn't have any signifigant edges that being caught offguard would penalize anyways... onto WSH at home, after your bye, he's not Norv but its still a tough trip after a bye. I suppose you could make a case against DEN late. But they'd have to be so far ahead with 3 games left. I think the AFC will be competetive enough with 3 powerhouses and 1 HFA. MIA is winnable, can't argue that, but CIN and NYG late in the year are tough. Your schedule is signifigantly more difficult this year than last. But who knows.

Edited August 25, 2013 by the Lions fan

[Jules 98]

Good post Jules. I definitely don't expect everyone to climb on board the bandwagon. I just wanted to give my thoughts and see if anyone could show if I was way off base. So far it seems that my thoughts on why the Chargers could do better are fairly reasonable. Doesn't guarantee anything but it's a reason for SD to have some optimism this year.

 

And the Chiefs are actually the old sexy dark horse pick. Analysts jock them as a "sleeper" every year. I don't buy it.

 

Look on the plus side. You are the Eagles home opener. We'll see if the streak is broken or not by your very own Chargers. :grinno:

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/22098477/chargers-will-win-super-bowl-xlviii-according-to-eagles-schedule

 

Edited August 25, 2013 by Jules

[KempBolt 498]

They have a tough schedule, they don't match up well against the AFC South teams, and IMO couldn't be worse hosting the 2 titans while playing the Jags and Titans away.

 

4 wins... how's 5 sound? I actually have them at 5 wins in my imaginary season. Though they deserve 7. Check out their schedule, the 2 vs, OAK split w/KC, JAX and I figured they'd beat TEN or DAL but not both for other reasons, those are their wins in my imaginary season.

 

The rest are very losable, HOU, PHIs home opener, they might have IND as they play them between SEA and DEN and could catch them unprepared/whatever. But I feel like SD doesn't have any signifigant edges that being caught offguard would penalize anyways... onto WSH at home, after your bye, he's not Norv but its still a tough trip after a bye. I suppose you could make a case against DEN late. But they'd have to be so far ahead with 3 games left. I think the AFC will be competetive enough with 3 powerhouses and 1 HFA. MIA is winnable, can't argue that, but CIN and NYG late in the year are tough. Your schedule is signifigantly more difficult this year than last. But who knows.

 

You're totally entitled to your opinion, but you haven't dealt with anything I've said in this thread. Your responses have amounted to "they're going to lose games...."

[BJORN 679]

Look on the plus side. You are the Eagles home opener. We'll see if the streak is broken or not by your very own Chargers. :grinno:

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/22098477/chargers-will-win-super-bowl-xlviii-according-to-eagles-schedule

 

If anyone is going to break that streak...its the Chargers.

[BJORN 679]

Bill Williamson has predicted us finishing at 6-10, third in the AFC West. They have the Chiefs at 8-8, in second.

 

Bill's prediction

 

Right now, the bandwagon is pretty low on the Chargers....

[KempBolt 498]

Williamson doesn't like us? My confidence is at an all time high.