PDA

View Full Version : Summary for the AFC West


Electric
07-09-2005, 09:42 PM
AFC West
Denver Broncos
This is a team that has not met expectations the past few years, even though the Broncos scored 381 points in each of the past two seasons and made the playoffs each time. In 2004, Denver ranked fifth in the league in total offense and fourth in defense. Jake Plummer needs to cut down on interceptions (20 in '04). Former first-rounder Ashley Lelie gained 20.1 yards per catch last season, and Jerry Rice now is his teammate. This team was active in the offseason. It traded for All-Pro punter Todd Sauerbrun and defensive lineman Gerard Warren, and it signed defensive end Courtney Brown, who was the No. 1 overall selection in the 2000 NFL Draft. Denver's first three picks in the 2005 draft were defensive backs.

Kansas City Chiefs
This team gained the most yards on offense in the league last season -- even more than Indianapolis - but it was the only club in the top 10 in total offense that failed to make the playoffs. The Chiefs outscored their opponents 483-435 last season, but also ended up with a minus-9 turnover ratio. They traded for cornerback Patrick Surtain and defensive end Carlos Hall, and signed safety Sammy Knight and linebacker Kendrick Bell to help improve a defense that wound up ranked No. 31 last season. First-round selection Derrick Johnson, a linebacker from Texas, should also help. Kansas City got a big break with its schedule -- New England and Philadelphia have to play at Arrowhead. With Dick Vermeil on the sidelines and Carl Peterson in the front office, this is an extremely well-run franchise.

Oakland Raiders
The Raiders did a great job in the offseason, trading for Randy Moss and signing running back LaMont Jordan. Oakland also has a very good, young offensive line. But the Raiders gave up 442 points and 30 passing TDs in 2004, and wound up ranked 30th overall on defense. The three defensive players they drafted on Day 1 should help. They will travel to the East Coast four times this season, including the season opener at New England and at Philadelphia in Week 3. It would not surprise me to see the Raiders win the AFC West or finish fourth. They should be involved in lots of high-scoring games.

San Diego Chargers
The Chargers will return all 22 starters from the 2004 team. The 2003 Chargers went 4-12 and had a minus-11 turnover ratio. The 2004 team went 12-4, was plus-15 in turnovers and outscored the 2003 team by 133 points. Due to injury, LaDainian Tomlinson's numbers were down from 2003, but in my estimation he is the most complete player in the NFL -- and he's only 26 years old. Drew Brees is coming off a breakthrough season in which he had 27 touchdown passes against seven interceptions, and a 104.8 passer rating. Antonio Gates set an NFL record for tight ends last season with 13 touchdown catches. San Diego's biggest loss from last season might be offensive line coach Hudson Houck, who went to Miami. However, the Chargers still have Cam Cameron (offense) and Wade Phillips (defense), who are among the best coordinators in the NFL. Not only will the Chargers play a first-place schedule, but six of their games will be played at 1 p.m. ET (that's 10 a.m. on the West Coast), and four of those games will be played on the East Coast (New England, Philadelphia, the Jets and Washington). The other two will be played in two of the loudest stadiums in the NFL -- Kansas City and Indianapolis. On the field, San Diego's biggest challenge will be to improve against the pass -- only Kansas City gave up more passing yards last season. The Chargers' first two draft picks last April were defensive linemen -- Shawne Merriman and Luis Castillo.

Chiefs Pantalones
07-09-2005, 09:44 PM
Did you write this yourself? Or is this from a magazine?

Ugly Duck
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
Preseason Power Rankings from nationally recognized football guru's:

4. Oakland Raiderz
- Obviously you can see that while Randy Moss is a problem in the locker room, he makes people better. With Moss and Jerry Porter catching bombs from Kerry Collins, LaMont Jordan will be beating up defenses on the inside. The Raiderz defense will need to come up big this year, but as long as they hold teams under 30 points they will win games.

11. Kansas City Chiefs
- Seeing the Chiefs this high may surprise some, but their off-season was quietly among the best in the league. The offense will be powerful again, maybe for the last season too. Trent Green is getting older and they are relying on Freddie Mitchell to make plays for them. Priest Holmes and Larry Johnson make a dynamic duo in the backfield and bringing in Carlos Hall, Kendrell Bell, Derrick Johnson, Patrick Surtain and Sammy Knight on defense could make them a serious Super Bowl contender.

13. San Diego Chargers
- If they can repeat their Cinderella season of 2004, I will be impressed. Drew Brees is playing for a long-term deal and he knows it this time around. The offensive line is still made up of no-name players, but they did a good enough job last season. The wide receivers must step up for the entire 16 games this year if the Chargers hope to make another playoff run.

24. Denver Broncos
- Any time Jake Plummer has the ball, there is a chance for greatness or a boneheaded play. The running game will be successful, as always, but the receiving core is old and the youngsters must step up to take over. The defense is full of has-beens on the line, but the linebackers are very good and very athletic. They will carry this team.

http://www.nfldraftblitz.com/powerrankings.htm

Bowser
07-10-2005, 01:01 AM
Raiduhs at #4? They must think Moss is going to play both ways on Sundays.

Ugly Duck
07-10-2005, 01:03 AM
Raiduhs at #4? They must think Moss is going to play both ways on Sundays.Maybe its cuz the Chiefs are so dang old. Hot DANG!!... them Chiefs is so OLD!!!

Bowser
07-10-2005, 01:06 AM
Maybe its cuz the Chiefs are so dang old. Hot DANG!!... them Chiefs is so OLD!!!

Please. Your defense eats at Luby's every Tuesday and Thursday, but WE'RE the old ones?

Ugly Duck
07-10-2005, 01:16 AM
Please. Your defense eats at Luby's every Tuesday and Thursday, but WE'RE the old ones?Weren't the Chiefs the second-oldest team last season? I think you are #1 in age this time around. Raiderz are playing a lot of youngsters for the first time in a long time. Here's our 3rd WR, behind Porter and Randy Freakin' Moss:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v686/SoCal24/CurrySnowCatch.jpg

Nightfyre
07-10-2005, 01:17 AM
Maybe its cuz the Chiefs are so dang old. Hot DANG!!... them Chiefs is so OLD!!!
Not really, I believe we are well poised for the future. I mean the OLine is set except for Left tackle, our RB is set, our Receivers are set. We need a QB and a FB on the offensive side. On the defense, we have a very young team, particularly in the LB corps. Can't wait to see Kerry Collins excuses for his number of picks with porter and moss, btw.

Bowser
07-10-2005, 01:19 AM
Actually, I think that is correct. But you guys had the title for so long, it still just seems natural to say it.

You're receivers are going to be wicked this year. Too bad your O-Line isn't worth a crap! ;)

Nightfyre
07-10-2005, 01:22 AM
Actually, I think that is correct. But you guys had the title for so long, it still just seems natural to say it.

You're receivers are going to be wicked this year. Too bad your O-Line isn't worth a crap! ;)
They can talk about their receivers all they want while our defense rapes Collins in the backfield. Gun will eat their offense alive. Collins is suceptible to pressure and Guns' defense thrives on that.

Bowser
07-10-2005, 01:25 AM
They can talk about their receivers all they want while our defense rapes Collins in the backfield. Gun will eat their offense alive. Collins is suceptible to pressure and Guns' defense thrives on that.

You are correct, sir. Collins would be talked up more if he could be playing behind a top tier O-Line (but what QB wouldn't, right?), but he doesn't, so he's not.

Remember him doing his best deer in the headlights routine in the Super Bowl a few years back, when Baltimore was all over him?

Ugly Duck
07-10-2005, 01:30 AM
You're receivers are going to be wicked this year. Too bad your O-Line isn't worth a crap! ;)Don't getchur hopes up too high... the Oakland O-line will play better this season. Lamont Jordan and Randy Moss should give them a bit more breathing room than they had last year.

P.S. Dontcha love the body language of the Donkey LB in that pic above? He kinda has that look of disbelief, like he totally didn't expect Curry to go up and get that ball. Cracks me up!

Nightfyre
07-10-2005, 01:32 AM
Don't getchur hopes up too high... the Oakland O-line will play better this season. Lamont Jordan and Randy Moss should give them a bit more breathing room than they had last year.

P.S. Dontcha love the body language of the Donkey LB in that pic above? He kinda has that look of disbelief, like he totally didn't expect Curry to go up and get that ball. Cracks me up!
Hey, at least Collins doesnt throw offhanded passes.... :D

Bowser
07-10-2005, 01:35 AM
Don't getchur hopes up too high... the Oakland O-line will play better this season. Lamont Jordan and Randy Moss should give them a bit more breathing room than they had last year.

P.S. Dontcha love the body language of the Donkey LB in that pic above? He kinda has that look of disbelief, like he totally didn't expect Curry to go up and get that ball. Cracks me up!

I remember watching that game. Denver had it all but wrapped up at the end of the first half. Terrible snow made it look like it was going to be one of those boring run up the gut games, but it ended up being one of the most entertaining games I watched last year. Great win for you guys up there.

htismaqe
07-10-2005, 06:48 AM
Oakland #4? In the entire NFL?!?!?

ROFL ROFL ROFL

That's flat-out retarded.

Shag
07-10-2005, 08:42 AM
So, the 5-11 Raiders, last place in the AFC West are now the #4 team in the NFL? LOL!

They added Jordan and Moss, which are both great moves, improving their offense. They still have Collins behind a below average o-line. So, maybe they'll have a fairly good offense, but not likely to be better than the Chiefs, who have been a top 3 offense for the past 3 years, I believe. Edge: Chiefs.

On defense, Oakland lost both Buchanans, and Napoleon Harris. So, a bad defense gets worse. The Chiefs greatly improved their D this offseason, and I would be greatly surprised to see Oakland's D finish better than KC's. Edge: Chiefs

So, a 5-11 team in 2004. An improved, but unproven offense with a suspect QB. A depleted defense. #4 in the NFL? Ooookay. They're likely to be a poor man's version of the 2004 Chiefs, and highly unlikely to make the playoffs, IMHO...

Dr. Facebook Fever
07-10-2005, 08:54 AM
With Dick Vermeil on the sidelines and Carl Peterson in the front office, this is an extremely well-run franchise.


Just what Chiefs fans everywhere love to hear...


ROFL

RedThat
07-10-2005, 09:01 AM
[QUOTE=Electric] With Dick Vermeil on the sidelines and CARL PETERSON in the front office, this is an extremely well-run franchise.
QUOTE]

:LOL: :clap:

Sorry folks. Happened to notice this, and thought it was funny. Noticed how I edited the post? Just for the humour, Carl Peterson and extremely well-run franchise don't go together!

Fire Me Boy!
07-10-2005, 09:09 AM
They traded for cornerback Patrick Surtain and defensive end Carlos Hall, and signed safety Sammy Knight and linebacker Kendrick Bell to help improve a defense that wound up ranked No. 31 last season.
Man.... I don't know what we'd do without Kendrick... he's gonna rock! :(

RedNeckRaider
07-10-2005, 09:48 AM
I don't have a clue to who is going to do what this year. I am still some what stunned by last years worst to first Chargers. The one thing that cracks me up is the posts saying Oakland has a weak O-line in this thread.

Let me see Oakland gave up 30 sacks with a young unit that is only going to get better, while running a offense that threw the ball damn near every down. KC gave up 32 sacks with a aging O-line running a offense with a solid running game. Sorry that dog don't hunt.

I would think most would admit with Jordan Oakland has upgraded the running game. On defense they traded P-Buch who has the ego of Deion Sanders and the coverage skills of William Bartee. This is a position they are deep at. The D-line has a couple of players long in the tooth but also has some youth. The linebacker position is filled with unproven young players, with a couple of solid players in the mix.

The defense will play out of a 4-3 this year which is a much better fit. A running game will keep this unit off the field more often and better rested. As far as special teams Oakland is pretty solid. This said I have no Idea where this team will finish. They will however be much improved. And come on guys it ain't like you guys rolled over them last year.

htismaqe
07-10-2005, 10:25 AM
I don't have a clue to who is going to do what this year. I am still some what stunned by last years worst to first Chargers. The one thing that cracks me up is the posts saying Oakland has a weak O-line in this thread.

Let me see Oakland gave up 30 sacks with a young unit that is only going to get better, while running a offense that threw the ball damn near every down. KC gave up 32 sacks with a aging O-line running a offense with a solid running game. Sorry that dog don't hunt.

I would think most would admit with Jordan Oakland has upgraded the running game. On defense they traded P-Buch who has the ego of Deion Sanders and the coverage skills of William Bartee. This is a position they are deep at. The D-line has a couple of players long in the tooth but also has some youth. The linebacker position is filled with unproven young players, with a couple of solid players in the mix.

The defense will play out of a 4-3 this year which is a much better fit. A running game will keep this unit off the field more often and better rested. As far as special teams Oakland is pretty solid. This said I have no Idea where this team will finish. They will however be much improved. And come on guys it ain't like you guys rolled over them last year.

I think the biggest question about your offense is Jordan. He's looked pretty good in spot duty, but can he do it 25 carries a game for 16 games?

Ugly Duck
07-10-2005, 10:55 AM
A running game will keep this unit off the field more often and better rested.
Plus, defenses won't be able to stack up against Jordan cuz this guy will be stretching the field. Dang, he can catch the ball!

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2005/scorecard/07/08/truth.rumors.nfl/tx_moss.jpg

Ugly Duck
07-10-2005, 11:24 AM
So, a 5-11 team in 2004. An improved, but unproven offense...

So, a 7-9 team in 2004. An improved, but unproven defense...

OK... I'll give you this much. You did two (2) games better than us last year, and you did barely manage to nip us by one (1) point at Arrowhead.

KChiefs1
07-10-2005, 11:51 AM
Chiefs swept the Faiders last season correct?

All the Faiders added was Moss & Jordan right?

Faiders defense sux'd big-time last year(worse than the Chiefs) & added nothing to it right?

How is that team #4 in the NFL?

milkman
07-10-2005, 03:03 PM
If Randy Moss is so great, why haven't the Vikings, who have had as much talent on offense as the Rai ders, if not more, and a somewhat better D, been to the SB in a rather weak NFC?

Shag
07-10-2005, 04:10 PM
So, a 7-9 team in 2004. An improved, but unproven defense...


The difference is that the Chiefs scored more points than any other team in the league last year, and lost 6 of their 9 games by 7 points or less (several on last minute scores, allowed by the defense). Adding 5 new defensive starters to a team that was that close has the potential to make a big difference. They addressed their areas of most need, specifically addressing the problems of last year.

The Raiders improved their offense, but didn't address their area of most need, which is their defense.

The Chiefs making the playoffs (a 3 win improvement) is a lot more realistic than the Raiders being the #4 team in the NFL (probably a 7-8 win improvement).

Electric
07-10-2005, 04:53 PM
Did you write this yourself? Or is this from a magazine?

Nope, I'm not that decent of a writer. I actually found it on a different bb. They had the whole AFC but I thought the only pertinent information was for the AFC West. I copied it but not the link to the whole article.

This summation is no different than any one of the myriad of others that has completely different opinions of the offseason moves. I just put it here for informational purposes. I neither agree with it's conclusions nor disagree with them.

Electric
07-10-2005, 04:55 PM
Oakland #4? In the entire NFL?!?!?

ROFL ROFL ROFL

That's flat-out retarded.

Acutally someone that is challenged would make a better guestimate of the rankings.

Electric
07-10-2005, 04:57 PM
Plus, defenses won't be able to stack up against Jordan cuz this guy will be stretching the field. Dang, he can catch the ball!




Wasn't stickum outlawed?

arrowhead20
07-10-2005, 04:59 PM
as soon as Collins begins to throw interceptions, Moss will start in with the " you suck " comments thrown at nearly everyone, your defense wont stop anyone even with the change in scheme, the chiefs tried that last year changed a coach and no players and we got worse,
a scheme can only do so much but the players in the scheme make your defense.
frankly, id rather the chiefs stay under the radar, and come out guns blazin'
seems to work better that way for us.

Ugly Duck
07-11-2005, 12:19 AM
All the Faiders added was Moss & Jordan right?

Faiders defense sux'd big-time last year & added nothing to it right?
Not really. Chiefs definately addressed their D more than Oakland did this offseason. But Oakland did a few things on D, signed Derrick Burgess away from the Eagles:

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=450257

Moved Sapp back to DT where he belongs. Drafted defense. Signed nickleback Renaldo Hill from the cards. Signed ILB Jay Foreman from the Texans. The whole group is way more comfortable with the DC's scheme in the second season, and an actual run game should help them out as well. Both of our teams have shuffled around their defenses, only by taking the field will either of us know what we've got.

whoman69
07-11-2005, 12:06 PM
Oakland #4? In the entire NFL?!?!?

ROFL ROFL ROFL

That's flat-out retarded.
You got that right. What they forget is that the Raiders will be hard pressed to keep any team under 30 points.

I think Carl Pederson or Gretz must have written the piece in the intro about the Chiefs.

htismaqe
07-11-2005, 12:21 PM
Not really. Chiefs definately addressed their D more than Oakland did this offseason. But Oakland did a few things on D, signed Derrick Burgess away from the Eagles:

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=450257

Moved Sapp back to DT where he belongs. Drafted defense. Signed nickleback Renaldo Hill from the cards. Signed ILB Jay Foreman from the Texans. The whole group is way more comfortable with the DC's scheme in the second season, and an actual run game should help them out as well. Both of our teams have shuffled around their defenses, only by taking the field will either of us know what we've got.

I'm not sure how you can say that they're more comfortable in the scheme having a year under their belt when they won't be running the same 3-4 they spent that year in.

Foreman is a pretty good player. Burgess is a niche player at best. The first day of your draft, IMO, was HORRIBLE.

bobbything
07-11-2005, 12:25 PM
The Rai ders will be a better team. But, I don't see how they can jump up to #4. They're going to score tons o'points. But, as we've seen, that doesn't mean anything if you're up 30-28 and your opponent has the ball with 2 minutes left.

KC has a better shot at the playoffs, IMHO. Rai ders will go 8-8. KC, 11-5. Maybe 12-4.

Oakland kind of reminds me of KC back in 2000 when they passed the ball about 50 times per game. Lots of yards, points, etc. But, no balance. I think they finished 7-9 that year.

We'll see though.

htismaqe
07-11-2005, 12:26 PM
The Rai ders will be a better team. But, I don't see how they can jump up to #4. They're going to score tons o'points. But, as we've seen, that doesn't mean anything if you're up 30-28 and your opponent has the ball with 2 minutes left.

KC has a better shot at the playoffs, IMHO. Rai ders will go 8-8. KC, 11-5. Maybe 12-4.

Oakland kind of reminds me of KC back in 2000 when they passed the ball about 50 times per game. Lots of yards, points, etc. But, no balance. I think they finished 7-9 that year.

We'll see though.

We finished 6-10 that year.

bobbything
07-11-2005, 12:31 PM
We finished 6-10 that year.
No we didn't. I just looked it up. You're thinking of Vermeil's first season. I'm talking about Cunningham's last head coaching season. With Grbac and Co.

KCTitus
07-11-2005, 12:33 PM
Oakland Raiders... It would not surprise me to see the Raiders win the AFC West or finish fourth. They should be involved in lots of high-scoring games.

It's poorly worded but I think the author was saying he wouldnt be suprised to see Oakland win the division or bring up the rear of the division...

To me, that's genious (chiefsplanet spelling) cause it covers both spectrums.

htismaqe
07-11-2005, 12:49 PM
No we didn't. I just looked it up. You're thinking of Vermeil's first season. I'm talking about Cunningham's last head coaching season. With Grbac and Co.

Yeah, you're right.

whoman69
07-11-2005, 04:17 PM
The difference between us in 2000 and the Raiders now is the Chiefs had a better D. The Raiders D was nearly as atrocious as our own and they did next to nothing to fix it.

bobbything
07-11-2005, 04:23 PM
The difference between us in 2000 and the now is the Chiefs had a better D. The D was nearly as atrocious as our own and they did next to nothing to fix it.
I would agree. But, our D that year really was well below average. It was ranked 19th out of 31 in the leauge in points given up. Roughly 22 points per game. The Rai ders D is going to be worse than that, but, I just think the similaraties are striking:

Strong armed QB with minimal success
Good receivers
Unproven running backs
Offense centered around the pass
Below average defense

whoman69
07-11-2005, 04:34 PM
I would agree. But, our D that year really was well below average. It was ranked 19th out of 31 in the leauge in points given up. Roughly 22 points per game. The Rai ders D is going to be worse than that, but, I just think the similaraties are striking:

Strong armed QB with minimal success
Good receivers
Unproven running backs
Offense centered around the pass
Below average defense
Yes we were well below average. The Raiders should be atrocious. That doesn't add up to #4 team in the league.

bobbything
07-11-2005, 04:37 PM
That doesn't add up to #4 team in the league
Touche.

RedNeckRaider
07-13-2005, 06:30 AM
I think the biggest question about your offense is Jordan. He's looked pretty good in spot duty, but can he do it 25 carries a game for 16 games?
That is a good question, I like most think this kid will be fine and was held back by Curtis Martin. One never knows, I still remember Oakland getting Charlie Garner and KC getting Priest Holmes. At the time I was sure Garner was the better back. Well I missed on that one, but hope I am right this time.

Count Alex's Wins
07-13-2005, 10:23 AM
Yeah, you're right.

SHOCKING REVEAL! HTISMAQE ADMITS HE IS WRONG!