Listen, I would argue that Jones made a couple of splash plays but Clark played a better game.

The long Jacobs run went right through Jones' hole. Several times, he was not controlling his gap.

Don't get it twisted, I'm not saying Jones isn't a great player. He does sometimes go for the big play and whiff, though.

Clark is more consistent on a play by play basis.

Glad to have them both.

Yeah I'd have to watch the game again to confirm, but there was a running play to the right side and I'm pretty sure it's Jones on roller skates. Just completely washed out.

Jones is a ****ing enigma. He's dominant at times but he takes plays off and I have questions about him being a team player. I might be the only one here who's hesitant to give him a big contract. I understand his value as an interior pass rusher, but I also understand his flaws. I can't remember ever being more torn on a player.

Honey Badger had an awful game. He was solely responsible for the Faders only TD.

I hope he gets his shit together- he looks like Hobo 2.0 out there.

Questioning Jones as a team player?? Dude could’ve sat out and enabled to be paid but what happened? He reported to training camp. No complaints nothing. So take this idk if Jones is a team player and turn it sideways and shove it straight up your candy ass!

He's just young. He hasn't built up the experience yet to be that consistent all-around pass-rusher/run defender that he probably will become in two or three years.

Heck, Clark's presence on the team just might be exactly what Jones needs to learn how to be a great professional football player.

I hope so.

Uh...so exactly like when the Jags were on their 3rd string LT and backup QB?

I think people for some reason think saying he hasn't lived up to expectations yet = he totally sucks which it doesn't. Clark doesn't suck at all. But for his expectations and his pay level, saying things like he's drawing penalties or he drawing double teams doesn't really do it for me. Very high expectations is the price you pay for signing 100mil contracts.

Jesus Christ that's not what people are saying.

He's exactly like Troy Polamalu. Except tinier, with skinny little legs and zero play-making ability.

Overreaction Planet

and all I'm saying is a two game stretch is nothing to judge on.

for comparison, I posted Mack's stats over the very same two games-and Clark is about the same.

Really?

Team defense is better.

People are complaining about Clark's individual impact.

What are people saying then?

why did I waste so many words trying to explain? This is really all there was to say.

This is a narrative that isn't going to go away, 610 is playing into it. They had Bill Maas on today and he basically went the route of "anyone defending him by saying he's being doubled and chipped that's just dumb, if you pay a guy this kind of money I don't care what the offense does he has to make plays or it's a bad deal"

Which then lead to 10 minutes of the hosts talking about how Clark sucks.

That they expected Clark to make more of an individual aspect given his 100M contract. It's that simple. You can discuss individual players without it being and indictment on the team overall.

Just like I can say Erving was a terrible run blocker yesterday without it meaning our offense overall was terrible.

People are just being overly defensive over any Frank Clark criticism.

Like I said, no one is saying that Clark sucks other than SNR and he walked that back. But you can talk about his performance in these two games.

I don't see anyone saying "It's only been 2 games, we can't discuss Mahomes performance yet". Not surprisingly you're only saying that about a player who hasn't been that good so far.

I judge Clark on his body of work. Not just the last two games. Last year, he was one of the best edge players in football, with stats comparable to Mack. He's still that guy. He just doesn't have a sack yet. if you watch him, play after play, you see what a good football player he is. He's absolutely one of the best players on that defense in both games. He just doesn't have the sack stats that make casual fans cream in their jeans.

I'm sure that will come as well.

IF you're judging him poorly on these two games, then you're a SACK STAT guy, in which you're looking at an edge player and saying, " well, if he was 15 sacks for the season, that means he ought to pretty much have one every game". That rarely happens. Sacks tend to come in bunches.

By the end of the season, everybody will be in agreement that Clark is a damned fine player and we're glad to have him.

well hes doubling Dee Fords production..he has 2 tackles ..Dee Ford has 1..

big improvement in the run defense...doubling Fords production!!@!!!!!

i dont give a **** if frank clark ever gets a sack he has already made a difference just by his attitude and his ability to set the edge. its not money what do i care what he is paid

Sacks AND QB hurries AND TFLs

He has one TFL. Against the Raiders. No sacks, no hurries. Against a Jags team with a backup OT.

Frank Clark the player doesn't suck, but... oh, I don't know. I kinda expected him to make more than a couple "underrated" big plays especially against Jacksonville. Like, where he directly disrupts the play. That's kinda what I thought we were getting when Seattle gouged the **** out of us and we paid him $100 million. Especially when he was going up against dudes who weren't exactly Willie Roaf.

:lame:

You missed his point he meant he freelances sometimes to the detriment of team defense. It leads to big plays on his part and also the opposite.

You can expect a sack, 3 TFL and 5 QB hurries every game but it isn't realistic. He's drawing the opposing teams attention and that's letting CJ or another DL have a dominant game. Now that CJ had a big game the other team will pay more attention to him and Clark will have a good game coming, or one of the other DL's. The quality is there on the d-line. Kinda like the offense. Watkins had a monster day at Jax so the Raiders took him away and DRob had a monster game. Baltimore has to decide now do they stress their coverage against, Watkins or DRob or Kelce. It will be the same against the D-line. Do you stress protection against FC or CJ. Forget about Nnadi and Okafor and they might just blow up big. It's about recognizing who the other team has decided to "take away" and making adjustments to take advantage of that. And I was happy to see the adjustments come in the 1st quarter against the Raiders instead of at halftime or never.

So basically you can't grade a game? This is the stupidest shit ever. And I'm sure you only say this about a player who's underwhelming. If he was playing well, your have no problem with people talking about him playing great do far this season.

re-watch both games and focus only on Clark. The amount of double teams and chips he draws is opening up rush lanes for everyone else. When teams decide to focus Jones instead, he will 'show up' more for the casual audience. Jags and Raiders also ran an obscene amount of 3 step game which is intended to take away the pass rush. Most 3rd and long situations, or deep pass plays, had 7 guys in protection. All-22 shows this, which is why a lot of film guys are not screaming 'Clark sucks'. There's just too many variables going on to say he flat out is terrible.

As long as he blows up in the playoffs I don't give a shit.

Play great when the lights are brightest. **** the mundane shitty regular season games.

Then actually grade the game... Just don't look at the box score and say he sucked. Those of us who actually watch football, and even re-watch the game and focus on players, realize he has been a valuable addition to the team. If Ford was still here they would have raped our C/D gap to that side.

You think Clark hasn't played a good game?

Is there a functional difference between, say, sniffing out a screen, hustling over, and dumping the RB for a loss and a sack?

There's not. Same result.

He's done that a few times already.

Your logic is circular.

You've said-you want to see Khalil Mack type numbers.

Well, I showed you how his numbers stack up pretty well against Mack last season. I also showed you how his numbers stack up against Mack THIS year, in these two games. Pretty much identical, with one sack vs. one INT being the only difference.

So stop trying to move the goalposts.

You and the other 'Frank Clark sucks' or 'Frank Clark isn't playing well' people are all seriously overreacting.

He has one tackle for loss. So how has he dumped the RB for a loss "a few times already"?

Dude.

Just stop.

He's ruined a few screens to his side. If one was a tackle for a loss, and another was a tackle for no gain, or a batted/tipped ball, whatever.

You're a child.

Watch the games. Where does the opposition have success? Running right. Where was Jacob's big run? Right through Jones' hole. Teams are literally running away from Clark and doubling and chipping him every play. He's owning the left side of line of scrimmage. Just stop it already.

So what you're saying is that he HASNT had a few of those already?

why don't you go away and let the adults talk?

You want Khalil Mack numbers, you literally have Khalil Mack numbers. Quit moving the goalposts.

I've shown you you're wrong. Now you're just being an ass.

You're the one who said he's stopped RBs a few times for a loss. When he hasn't.

2-0. Both road games. Two games into the season and the Frank Clark era in KC is settled?

I know you are, but what am I?

By the end of the season there are going to be a lot of you guys eating crow.

This guy is expected to be the 2nd best EDGE in the NFL according to what reporters said we thought of him and what we gave up for him in both draft capital and money. So far he's been above average. Not gonna cut it.

Well, he is the first pass rusher in NFL history to go 2 games without a sack.

Derrick Thomas had like 3 in every game.

Right?

I mean Khalil Mack has 6 tackles, 2 TFL, 1 sack and 1 forced fumble...

No stat here but he killed 3 guys...

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Chiefs are still working on their timing/execution of stunts, but Clark crashing inside is definitely something that causes problems. <a href="https://t.co/fVW2nZdiWz">pic.twitter.com/fVW2nZdiWz</a></p>&mdash; Seth Keysor (@RealMNchiefsfan) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealMNchiefsfan/status/1174294464321523712?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 18, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

No one is saying he's a bad player, but he hasn't made the type of impact multiple traded picks and 100M contract should demand. I expect that he has a impact game one of these days but so far he has been underwhelming. 2 games is all we have to judge off of so far so what's wrong with doing that?

So has everyone on under a brand new scheme, with a brand new DC, and 6 new starters...

They're not making 100M or cost both a first round and 2nd round pick.

*reads thread title*

No one? It's the premise of the thread.

'Frank Clark ****ing Sucks' isn't that ambiguous.

Read the rest of the read. He admitted he had been drinking when he wrote that and walked it back.

I went and watched every snap of the 1st half concentrating on Clark. He was very good. Good tfl on a screen, another run stop in the backfield but Jacobs fell forward of the line. He was chipped, doubled and even chipped and doubled on one play. Oakland spent most of the 1st half getting the ball out very fast - im not sure what more you could ask of him? He looked pretty good to me...

Oakland also seemed to run away from his side most of the 1st half. Im pretty comfortable in saying he'll get his "stats" soon.

Who the **** cares? We want a better overall team performance on defense. As long as that happens, it's worth every penny

Fantasy football imbeciles the industry has created

No way you can see that and say Frank Clark sucks. Come on Man!

I'm saying it's disappointing. Not that he sucks.

Let's say his production is about the same up until halfway through the season. 4 TFLs in 8 games, 0 sacks, 0 hurries. But a whole lot of the kind of plays where people say, "Well, if you just watched the games, you'd see he's facing chips and double teams constantly and making these heads up plays here and screens and stretches blah blah blah"

Is that good enough? For what we paid for him?

If Jacksonville and their dipshit offensive coordinator and backup tackles can stop him from making shit explode in the backfield by throwing everything but the kitchen sink at him and other teams decide to do the exact same thing, will you be satisfied with that?

If he finished the year with 0 sacks, is that good enough?

Yes, that's a difference making player, but guess what? I said the exact same shit about Justin Houston, because for a time even after he got paid, he was that kind of player. I even made those exact same arguments, saying, "you're not even watching the game" to people who bitched about the contract we gave him and how he didn't show up on the stat sheet.

Hell, many of these same people who are crowing, "HUHR IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT SACKS I KNO FOOTBALL!!!" were bitching about Justin Houston's production when, guess what... he actually WAS productive. No, not all, but some are.

I can already see people furiously typing away and calling this post a stupid hypothetical, but I actually mean it. Is that good enough? And if it isn't good enough, is it good enough for two games? No, not as a team. As an individual player.

You can say Frank Clark is a good player and still say, "He hasn't done what we needed him to do in these past couple games". Maybe he'll destroy the Ravens on Sunday. Great. Then whatever. I just think some people aren't actually watching the games like they claim they are and instead opting to parrot homer talking points that they heard other people bring up in this thread and other places.

If we give up sub 20 PPG, I doubt anyone should give a shit

I don't understand how it is that I can literally read your every thought on this board and not agree with one single thing you say.

If only Chiefsplanet held you to the same standard that you hold FC to.

Underwhelming, is how I would describe your posting style.

Good thing I'm not getting paid 100million dollars huh?


Who really thought when we got Clark the thing we'd be bragging about was his ability to get double teamed? I don't get why holding a player who makes as much as he does and cost as much as he did to acquire to a higher standard is such a foreign concept to you guys. If we give Mahomes the biggest contract ever and he suddenly starts playing like Alex Smith, would you say he's underwhelming or would you start bragging about how well he avoids turnovers and about his hidden touchdowns?

From PFF so take it for what it's worth

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Forgot to tweet this on Monday: LT Kolton Miller (<a href="https://twitter.com/kolton_miller?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@kolton_miller</a>) allowed just one quarterback pressure against KC, per <a href="https://twitter.com/PFF?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PFF</a>. No hits, no sacks allowed.<br><br>RDE Frank Clark rushed the passer 36 times vs OAK, and had zero sacks, zero hits, zero hurries.</p>&mdash; Scott Bair (@BairNBCS) <a href="https://twitter.com/BairNBCS/status/1174181602689200128?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 18, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Some of you are honestly delusional. You guys keep saying as long as the defense improves he's worth the cost. How exactly do we know this defensive improvement is attributed to FC or I dunno... the entire ****ing scheme change.

As it stands, no he's not worth the price. But it's a small sample size and he's got 14 games to prove it wrong so I won't crown him the king of suckage just yet.

Dude.

It's a TWO GAME sample size. yeah, I'd agree if we're midway through the year and he's got ZERO sacks and ZERO hurries and 4 TFL, then yeah, I'd be scratching my head.

That's not going to happen, unless he gets hurt.

What I and anyone else with eyes and a brain is telling you and King is that there's nothing wrong with his play and that the stats will come. The examples of good plays, the double teams, the excellent run defense are not meant to be the end-all. They're evidence that his play level is very high, and that there's nothing to be concerned about, the stats will come.

What we're saying is: Frank Clark's play looks like Frank Clark, and there's no reason to think he isn't going to put up numbers.

This was my purpose in putting up Mack's numbers through the same 2 games. It's an example of why freaking out over a 2 game sample size is stupid. This is exactly what I mean when I talk about the 'sack stat' guys. You don't extrapolate stats like that after two games. If he has a game with 5 sacks Sunday, does that mean he's on a pace for like 28 sacks this season? Do you see how stupid that is?

If it makes you feel like you've somehow won this asinine argument, then yeah, I'll agree with you that if after 8 games, he's got ZERO sacks, ZERO hurries, and 4 TFL then I will agree that we've overpaid for him to that point. Does that make you feel better? Can we move on now?

OR, SNR and King-

How about you put this in your pipe and smoke it:

In 1990, Derrick Thomas put up 20.0 sacks. Pretty amazing season, right?

OH BUT WAIT-7 of those sacks came in one game. So that means that he had less than one sack per game for the other 15 games.

So I guess he ****ing sucked, huh?

Do you see how dumb it is to try to project a season total after two games?

He looks fine, he looks like the same Frank Clark that put up 13 sacks last year and was a stud run defender. The numbers will come. Chill out.

I think the idea of getting the ball out fast is going to be a real difficult concept for these critics of Frank Clark to understand.

You might have to post some all-22 with stopwatches on the screen to explain the idea that QBs that throw right away are rarely sacked.

Frank Clark has 1 pressure this season according to PFR

https://www.pro-football-reference.c...e_advanced.htm

The guy Chris Meck keeps comparing him with leads the league with 15.

So are you drinking now or do you not have an excuse?

No one said it's all about sacks. It's really not that hard to read before you post. But he really hadn't made any impact plays. We're going to need him to be more than the guy who gets double teamed if we really want this defense to be good enough to beat Tom Brady. Like I've said a million times, when you give up what we did and give him the contract he got, expectations are going to be a lot higher than the average defensive player.

How do you feel about Aaron Donald? Best defensive player in the league?

This post is stupid and hypothetical...

What have I said thats wrong? When we traded for Clark and gave him that contract, were your expectations for him to be making impact plays or simply taking up double teams? If I told you he would face two backup tackles in our first two games and a backup QB in one of them, wouldn't you expect him to dominate at least of those games?

Context matters

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...&postcount=154

Your reading comprehension sucks.

Nothing you've posted there is what I'm saying at all. I've explained it, in plain english.

How about I tea-bag you and take pictures when Clark hits double digit sacks?

LMAO

Yes and so far he hasnt been living up to being the highest paid defensive contract in their 2 games either. I don't care how often he gets double teamed.

Well, it's certainly a good thing the season isn't two games long, now isn't it?

Your argument is stupid.

He better hit double digits sacks and he probably will. But he hasn't played well these past two games. I don't know why grading players on a game by game basis is so difficult for you guys to comprehend.

Ouch.

Yes it is. But he hasn't been great the past two games. Period.


Here's a question, do you think Mahomes has played well in the two games? Or can you not answer that either because a SeAsOn Is LoNgEr ThAn TwO GaMeS? Because I think he's played great so far. So if I can say Mahomes has played well so far, how come I can't say that Frank Clark hasn't played very well so far?

Because it's ****ing stupid.

You could say he had a bad game if:
He was getting blown off the ball
He missed multiple tackles
He cost the team with dumb penalties
he blew assignments

None of that is true, if you watch him. The stats you want to talk about will fluctuate from game to game, as I've illustrated, and you just choose to ignore.

Nobody is saying they expect 0 sacks and 0 pressures all ****ing season. What we're saying is, he is playing at a high level and those stats will take care of themselves, because he's too ****ing good for them not to. Just like Derrick Thomas had 7 sacks in one game and then less than a sack a game the rest of the year, which was his best year. You don't look at a 2 game sample and decide what a player is. That's ****ing stupid. Clark's body of work is that he's an elite DE, and he's playing like one, and the stats will all work out just fine.

If George Brett had a couple of games in which he went 0 for 4, it didn't mean he couldn't hit.

There's nothing wrong with Clark, just like there's nothing wrong with Aaron Donald. Those stats will fluctuate, and aren't full indicators of their impact on the game.

Jesus, how many different ways do you need to be shown?

Are you actually mentally handicapped?

He doesn't suck.

He hasn't made impact plays yet, which is what he's getting paid to do. Paid a lot.

This isn't hard

And that chart has Khalil Mack as the #169th best Defensive player according to those 'advanced metrics'.

Kendall Fuller, Thornhill, Breeland, and Hitchens are all better players so far.

Think the Bears want to trade us for one of our better players?

No, because that would be stupid.

Like this argument.

No...that chart doesn't. ROFL