PDA

View Full Version : Your fears for the 2005 NFL Season


Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 09:48 PM
In all honesty... let's go light on the sarcasm, what do you guys fear the most about this upcoming season?

My greatest fear is that KC actually fixed the defense. If that works out, then your team could really do some great things should the offense stay healthy. If KC's defense turns it around... this will be a feared team in the playoffs.

Ok, so what do you fear?

beer bacon
08-02-2005, 09:50 PM
I fear that we will be so good that we will bring down the wrath of our vengeful God. Thus causing ruination for the entire planet.

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 09:50 PM
Randy Moss. Tatum Bell. The Browncos shocking everyone.

SNR
08-02-2005, 09:50 PM
My own team imploding. Due to injuries, sucking, whatever.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 09:50 PM
I read that and at first glance read "urination" and thought WTF?

kcjayhawks5
08-02-2005, 09:51 PM
injuries

beer bacon
08-02-2005, 09:51 PM
I read that and at first glance read "urination" and thought WTF?

It is not our place to judge the perverted ways of God.

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 09:52 PM
I fear that Trent Green will get hurt. I think that we have young players in the fold that can adequately cover for anyone else we could lose (including guys like Gonzalez, Holmes, Roaf, Shields), but if Green goes down, our offense is done.

('course, this is true of any team...)

That's pretty much my only fear at this point. I'm sold on the defense, I don't have any fears on that side of the ball at this point.

My greatest fear for the Broncos is that Joke Plummer will get hurt. :D


I'll probably have some more thoughts on this kind of stuff tomorrow. I tend to be a worry-wart.

Bowser
08-02-2005, 09:54 PM
My biggest fear is our offense regressing for whatever reason.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 09:55 PM
My biggest fear is our offense regressing for whatever reason.

Are you concerned that Kennison is still the only proven (using that word loosely here) receiver on the offense?

WebGem
08-02-2005, 09:55 PM
Injuries. I don't really think Denver will be all that good. If they make the playoffs, that won't surprise me at all..I could see them going 10-6. But after that, I don't see them doing much. As for Oakland, that team is horrible. I will be shocked to see them win more than 6-7 games, and I wouldn't be totally surprised if they win 4-5. San Diego, I can see them doing really well in all honesty. If they go 13-3, I wouldn't be a bit surprised. I picked them as my preseason Super Bowl champion, but in all honesty I'd say they will lose the AFC Championship game. I'm one of the ones who don't think last year was a fluke. As far as the division goes I think KC and SD are the only two with a chance, but KC has a lot of risks and could very easily end up in last.

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 09:55 PM
Seriously, this guy scares me. If he stays healthy, 1500 yards and 10+ TDs, easily:

http://web.dailycamera.com/photos/1212bronc/2.jpg

WebGem
08-02-2005, 09:56 PM
My greatest fear for the Broncos is that Joke Plummer will get hurt.
ROFL

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 09:56 PM
Are you concerned that Kennison is still the only proven (using that word loosely here) receiver on the offense?

WIDE receiver, maybe. With Gonzalez and Priest, we have plenty of experienced targets.

WebGem
08-02-2005, 09:56 PM
Seriously, this guy scares me. If he stays healthy, 1500 yards and 10+ TDs, easily:

http://web.dailycamera.com/photos/1212bronc/2.jpg
I'm taking a gun to KC that weekend, and I am going to kill him. But, don't tell anybody.

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 09:57 PM
Are you concerned that Kennison is still the only proven (using that word loosely here) receiver on the offense?I think Holmes and Gonzalez are both pretty proven. If you're asking me if I'm concerned about our 4th receiving option/#2 WR, then, no, I'm not particularly concerned.

And I don't think you have to "use the word 'proven' loosely" with Kennison after three seasons over 50 catches and 800 yards receiving.

WebGem
08-02-2005, 09:59 PM
I think Holmes and Gonzalez are both pretty proven. If you're asking me if I'm concerned about our 4th receiving option/#2 WR, then, no, I'm not particularly concerned.

And I don't think you have to "use the word 'prove' loosely" with Kennison after three seasons over 50 catches and 800 yards receiving.
No, you don't have to. He's my favorite player on that offense for a reason.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:00 PM
My greatest fear for the Broncos is that Joke Plummer will get hurt. :D


That's a big fear for me, but for different reasons... there's nothing behind him worth a damn on the depth chart. Danny K just sucks, even with his new blonde hair... I guess Mauck is looking decent in camp, but they've got NOTHING of interest to me behind Plummer on the depth chart.

Plummer has his issues, but he's good in that offense.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:01 PM
I think Holmes and Gonzalez are both pretty proven. If you're asking me if I'm concerned about our 4th receiving option/#2 WR, then, no, I'm not particularly concerned.

And I don't think you have to "use the word 'proven' loosely" with Kennison after three seasons over 50 catches and 800 yards receiving.

Those aren't bad numbers for a #2 receiver... should something happen to Gonzo or Holmes... KC will have to rely more on the receivers. Right now, that's a scary proposition.

the Talking Can
08-02-2005, 10:02 PM
A. I fear that San Diego will be really good and Merriman will be a terror.

B. I fear that KC's OL finally falls apart.

C. I fear that KC's DL is exposed...BIG time.

D. I fear that next year CP hires Herm Edwards.

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:02 PM
Those aren't bad numbers for a #2 receiver... should something happen to Gonzo or Holmes... KC will have to rely more on the receivers. Right now, that's a scary proposition.

The same could be said for almost every other team in the NFL losing their #1 receiver. Including the Donks.

Bowser
08-02-2005, 10:03 PM
Are you concerned that Kennison is still the only proven (using that word loosely here) receiver on the offense?

Yes and no. The way I look at it is that I'm comparing our receiver situation to our '97 defense. That defense had a whole boatload of young guys start for it, and they performed at a very high level. I'm not saying that our receivers can be compared to what those guys (Woods, Tongue, Edwards, Browning) did for that defense, only that when given the chance, hopefully our guys can show what they can do. Kennison is really the third option in our offense, so I'm not terribly worried about it. I have high hopes for Samie Parker and Marc Boerigter. If those two can step up and fill the #2 and 3 spots, respectively, anyone else on top of those two who produce at receiver would just be a bonus.

Now, if Roaf, Shields, Green, or Gonzalez goes down for an extended period, I'll be worried.

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 10:03 PM
Plummer has his issues, but he's good in that offense.You might get lucky and he'll be 'servicable' but 'good' isn't in the cards with Plummer. He's got the bonehead gene.

Personally, I'm thrilled he's your QB. He's the kind of guy you (meaning the Broncos) have to coach and coordinate around with the "don't let him lose the game" mentality. I'd hate to see that on my squad, but I love seeing it on a rival.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:03 PM
I think the most critical player in that offense, now that LJ has proven to be a solid replacement for Holmes, is Gonzo. You guys lose Gonzo and I don't see another receiver (or TE) that can replace those reception totals or clutch catches.

Lose Gonzo... with that receiver corp and it's not good.

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 10:05 PM
Those aren't bad numbers for a #2 receiver... should something happen to Gonzo or Holmes... KC will have to rely more on the receivers. Right now, that's a scary proposition.It could be, but then again it might not be. You'll never know what guys like (Larry) Johnson, Parker and Wilson can do until they get the opportunity. I'm looking forward to seeing all of them on the field, with Gonzo and Holmes. I think that might be a scary proposition, and I don't mean for us.

All-in-all, though, after Green's health, the main concern for me right now is the offensive line. I think that's the real key to the offense.

the Talking Can
08-02-2005, 10:05 PM
I think the most critical player in that offense, now that LJ has proven to be a solid replacement for Holmes, is Gonzo. You guys lose Gonzo and I don't see another receiver (or TE) that can replace those reception totals or clutch catches.

Lose Gonzo... with that receiver corp and it's not good.

There are only two players we can't afford to lose:

1a. Trent
1b. Gonzo

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:07 PM
You might get lucky and he'll be 'servicable' but 'good' isn't in the cards with Plummer. He's got the bonehead gene.

Personally, I'm thrilled he's your QB. He's the kind of guy you (meaning the Broncos) have to coach and coordinate around with the "don't let him lose the game" mentality. I'd hate to see that on my squad, but I love seeing it on a rival.

The only thing not good about Plummer's game in 2004 were the INTs, and yes - it's a big piece to the puzzle. However, he's played much better than 'servicable.

Yes, it's insane to have a guy with the tenure of Plummer and still worry about his decision making, but... that's what we have and I think they will make the best of it.

Hopefully, he will be better at just taking the sack or throwing the freaking ball 30 feet in the air and out of bounds more often, rather than forcing a pass. That's all I ask... throw the damn thing away before you lob one over the Dline's head, allowing it to be tipped and caught by a LB or Safety.

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 10:08 PM
I think the most critical player in that offense, now that LJ has proven to be a solid replacement for Holmes, is Gonzo. You guys lose Gonzo and I don't see another receiver (or TE) that can replace those reception totals or clutch catches.

Lose Gonzo... with that receiver corp and it's not good.I actually hope Gonzalez's numbers fall off from last season. We need him catching 75-80 balls. 100 is too much.

He should be healthier heading into opening day than he has been for years, fwiw, now that he's finally had his foot operated on.

I'm really looking forward to seeing sets again with Gonzo and Wilson both split. I hated seeing Wilson go down last fall.

OldTownChief
08-02-2005, 10:09 PM
Those aren't bad numbers for a #2 receiver... should something happen to Gonzo or Holmes... KC will have to rely more on the receivers. Right now, that's a scary proposition.

KC's offence will do just fine. Wide outs may be a concern, but fear? No. I'm nowhere near a comfort level with the D yet and am still in the fear zone whenever I think of any opposing team with the ball.

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:09 PM
The only thing not good about Plummer's game in 2004 were the INTs

Wrong.

Garcia Bronco
08-02-2005, 10:10 PM
WIDE receiver, maybe. With Gonzalez and Priest, we have plenty of experienced targets.

I think the Parker kid will get some luv

the Talking Can
08-02-2005, 10:10 PM
I actually hope Gonzalez's numbers fall off from last season. We need him catching 75-80 balls. 100 is too much.

He should be healthier heading into opening day than he has been for years, fwiw, now that he's finally had his foot operated on.

I'm really looking forward to seeing sets again with Gonzo and Wilson both split. I hated seeing Wilson go down last fall.

he put up those numbers with a bad foot, which is amazing...but I agree, we need Trent to focus a little less on him..I hope Parker can open up the field...

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:10 PM
Wrong.

Care to expand on your insightful analysis?

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 10:11 PM
The only thing not good about Plummer's game in 2004 were the INTs, and yes - it's a big piece to the puzzle. However, he's played much better than 'servicable.

Yes, it's insane to have a guy with the tenure of Plummer and still worry about his decision making, but... that's what we have and I think they will make the best of it.

Hopefully, he will be better at just taking the sack or throwing the freaking ball 30 feet in the air and out of bounds more often, rather than forcing a pass. That's all I ask... throw the damn thing away before you lob one over the Dline's head, allowing it to be tipped and caught by a LB or Safety.That's exactly what I mean by servicable.

Now, I won't pretend that I watch your team more closeley than you do, but I have the impression that elements of the passing game have been held back because of Plummer, and his decision making. In my opinion, when you're having to tone down part of your offensive playbook because of a player, then he's not doing anything "good" for you. And I do understand tailoring your scheme around the players running it, but I don't think it's exactly the same thing.

Speaking of receivers, how do you feel about yours, just out of curiousity? I haven't really gotten into 'study other teams' mode yet.

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:11 PM
I think the Parker kid will get some luv

Wow, that's rep. I'm definitely excited about having him out there...he's got speed to burn, and flashed the best hands of any KC receiver since Rison last year.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:11 PM
I think the Parker kid will get some luv

I do as well, but as the 4th option... I question what he might rack up. Although, he should add another dimension, something Morton never really achieved.

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:12 PM
Care to expand on your insightful analysis?

How about his playoff game? That's a good example. There were also the TB and SD games where he just completely laid eggs.

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:13 PM
I do as well, but as the 4th option... I question what he might rack up. Although, he should add another dimension, something Morton never really achieved.

What you have to realize is the "4th option" on our offense could easily have 50 catches.

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 10:13 PM
I do as well, but as the 4th option... I question what he might rack up. Although, he should add another dimension, something Morton never really achieved.I tend to look at it this way: between Boerigter, Parker and Wilson, we ought to be able to at least match, if not exceed, Morton's production, and they each have strengths that can be utilized in specific circumstances.

OldTownChief
08-02-2005, 10:14 PM
How about his playoff game? That's a good example. There were also the TB and SD games where he just completely laid eggs.

And the flipping of the bird to his home crowd. NOT GOOD!!

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:15 PM
That's exactly what I mean by servicable.

Now, I won't pretend that I watch your team more closeley than you do, but I have the impression that elements of the passing game have been held back because of Plummer, and his decision making. In my opinion, when you're having to tone down part of your offensive playbook because of a player, then he's not doing anything "good" for you. And I do understand tailoring your scheme around the players running it, but I don't think it's exactly the same thing.

Speaking of receivers, how do you feel about yours, just out of curiousity? I haven't really gotten into 'study other teams' mode yet.

I dunno... I won't disagree that there likely plays that they don't implement because of Plummer. But, in 2004, they weren't afraid to let him stretch the field with Lelie. I think all of Lelie's TDs (7 total) were beyond 30 yards. 2004 was much more complex from a passing perspective than 2003.

Regarding the receivers, I like Rod and Ashley a lot. I think Rod will still lead in catches, but Lelie should lead in yardage and TDs. I think they'll be a nice 1-2 punch. I really think Watts has a huge future, if he can eliminate the drops, but his 2004 season wasn't that different from most rookie receivers. Putzier... I dunno, he should be good, but I'm not 100% sold on him yet. I hope to be proven wrong. Rice... maybe 2 catches a game... maybe. He's really an afterthought to me in regards to putting the team over the top.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:16 PM
How about his playoff game? That's a good example. There were also the TB and SD games where he just completely laid eggs.

Ok, so 3 bad games out of 17? Is that all you got?

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:17 PM
Ok, so 3 bad games out of 17? Is that all you got?

Those were examples. I can provide more, but I don't need to. I've made my point. Plummer has more problems with his game than just interceptions.

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 10:18 PM
MHM - you have any concerns with Smith's age? What's he now? 35? 36?

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:20 PM
Those were examples. I can provide more, but I don't need to. I've made my point. Plummer has more problems with his game than just interceptions.

Ah, ok... you win. :rolleyes:

PunkinDrublic
08-02-2005, 10:21 PM
The offensive line this is Roaf and Shields last year and I hope they can stay healthy. A lot of Priests biggest games have been when these guys just dominated the guy in front of them. The Chiefs have always been good at plugging up the line but losing either would spell trouble for the running game IMO.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:21 PM
MHM - you have any concerns with Smith's age? What's he now? 35? 36?

No. Rod is getting older, but he's dedicated and works out hard... he's smart and still has game. He's not the Rod of 97-2000, but he still has 70+ catches / 1,100 yards / 7-9 TDs in him. Add to that, guys like Lelie and Watts learning from him and hopefully improving on 2004 and I like the group.

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:23 PM
Ah, ok... you win. :rolleyes:

You need more? How about his boneheaded audible in SD that LED to the interception? How about his boneheaded decision to throw a lefty pass in Denver? What about the fact that his game completely falls apart when the other team gets up by a couple touchdowns?

Then there's the fact that he's got average accuracy, at best.

Yes, he definitely has more problems than just being interception prone. You're blind if you can't see them.

PunkinDrublic
08-02-2005, 10:23 PM
No. Rod is getting older, but he's dedicated and works out hard... he's smart and still has game. He's not the Rod of 97-2000, but he still has 70+ catches / 1,100 yards / 7-9 TDs in him. Add to that, guys like Lelie and Watts learning from him and hopefully improving on 2004 and I like the group.

That's one guy I won't miss when he retires Smith always seems to have big games against the Chiefs.

tk13
08-02-2005, 10:24 PM
Despite our apparent improvements, the fact that the first four games are against teams who can definitely beat us. We could play really well and tank the season early on, because Oakland and Denver are not going to be easy to beat on consecutive weeks on the road. The Jets and Philly are both playoff teams who I think are going to be very good this year, although Pennington being hurt would set the Jets back.

Unless Oakland beats us, they'll have to beat NE or Philly on the road to avoid going 0-3. Denver is going to have to take on both San Diego and KC in back to back weeks. San Diego is going to have games @ Denver and @ NE in the first four weeks. Between the AFC West teams and Super Bowl teams New England and Philly.....somebody somewhere is going to have a tough loss or two early that's going to cause a meltdown, there's just no way around it.

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 10:24 PM
guys like Lelie and Watts learning from him and hopefully improving on 2004 and I like the group.I don't think he'll contribute much on the field, but I don't think having Rice in will hurt in that regard, either.

One thing that I'm hoping isn't a concern this year is the ORT position. It sounds like Kevin Sampson may have it locked down. And even if (god forbid) Shields can't go, it sounds like Welbourn may be okay at RG, as well. It would be of real benefit to have the right side of the line strong again, after the problems we seemed to have sometimes last year.

stevieray
08-02-2005, 10:28 PM
I fear that the annual "invesco cheapshot that ends your season" continues.

keg in kc
08-02-2005, 10:29 PM
Unless Oakland beats us, they'll have to beat NE or Philly on the road to avoid going 0-3.I heard an Oakland talking head on the air yesterday (I think) and he was concerned about the possibility of the Raiders starting 0-5. Denver is going to have to take on both San Diego and KC in back to back weeks. San Diego is going to have games @ Denver and @ NE in the first four weeks. Between the AFC West teams and Super Bowl teams New England and Philly.....somebody somewhere is going to have a tough loss or two early that's going to cause a meltdown, there's just no way around it.That's why the schedule being tough for us doesn't bother me; it's tough for the entire division. I don't think we're going to see a 13-14 win team coming out of the west this year. 11-12 probably wins it again, but on the negative side, I doubt whoever wins it will be looking at a bye.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:29 PM
You need more? How about his boneheaded audible in SD that LED to the interception? How about his boneheaded decision to throw a lefty pass in Denver? What about the fact that his game completely falls apart when the other team gets up by a couple touchdowns?

Then there's the fact that he's got average accuracy, at best.

Yes, he definitely has more problems than just being interception prone. You're blind if you can't see them.

Foul... you've used the SD game twice. Also, I'm not blind... you're just retarded. You use his "left handed" pass as an example... that led to an Interception, correct? Yeah, and I said Interceptions were his issues... and that means, right handed, left handed...

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:31 PM
I don't think we're going to see a 13-14 win team coming out of the west this year. 11-12 probably wins it again, but on the negative side, I doubt whoever wins it will be looking at a bye.

Very true. And, yes the annual cheapshot that ends your season will continue...

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:32 PM
Foul... you've used the SD game twice. Also, I'm not blind... you're just retarded. You use his "left handed" pass as an example... that led to an Interception, correct? Yeah, and I said Interceptions were his issues... and that means, right handed, left handed...

The interception was a twofold blunder in my mind. The decision to throw the pass...and an example of his horrible accuracy.

And yes, I used the SD game twice...it's filled with great examples. That game was the piece de resistance of Plummer's ineptness.

Woodrow Call
08-02-2005, 10:35 PM
My main concern is losing the home opener with the Jets. If the Chiefs lose that game an 0-4 landslide is highly possible and the DV era will end in a loud thud.

Other concerns:

An injury to Green would be devastating.

Sammy Knight being a step slow.

Allen having a sophmore slump thus taking away the only threat the d-line has.

The black hole at the 2nd CB till Warfield gets back.

morphius
08-02-2005, 10:39 PM
Fears for the season, Chiefs injuries has to be number one. Other then that, Marty winning a playoff game...


...and its against us.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:42 PM
My main concern is losing the home opener with the Jets. If the Chiefs lose that game an 0-4 landslide is highly possible and the DV era will end in a loud thud.

Other concerns:

An injury to Green would be devastating.

Sammy Knight being a step slow.

Allen having a sophmore slump thus taking away the only threat the d-line has.

The black hole at the 2nd CB till Warfield gets back.

Wow ... it's been a while since I looked at the start of the season for KC.

Jets @ KC
@ Oakland
@ Denver
Philly @ KC
Bye week

Jets will be tough, but it's at KC ... hard to give KC a loss here.
@ Denver and @ Oakland (even with their defense) will be very tough
Philly... tough.

Walk out of there 3-1 and I'm scared. Walk out 2-2 and I'm still nervous.

tk13
08-02-2005, 10:46 PM
I heard an Oakland talking head on the air yesterday (I think) and he was concerned about the possibility of the Raiders starting 0-5. That's why the schedule being tough for us doesn't bother me; it's tough for the entire division. I don't think we're going to see a 13-14 win team coming out of the west this year. 11-12 probably wins it again, but on the negative side, I doubt whoever wins it will be looking at a bye.
Yeah, Oakland could have a rough start. The whole division really does look to have a tough schedule because we all get the division and Super Bowl teams, and early. The one team with the easiest start looks to be Denver. They start with a rebuilding Miami team on the road, get SD and KC, but at home, where they usually beat both teams. I think they could very easily be in 1st at the quarter pole, and quite possibly the halfway point. Now whether that gives them added confidence to finish strong and take the division, we'd have to see. Their brutal stretch is in the 2nd half (6 of last 9 on the road).... while everybody else seems to have an easier 2nd half, so maybe they'll start out hot and flop. We'll have to see though, Denver always seems just good enough to be in the mix.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:48 PM
Yeah, Oakland could have a rough start. The whole division really does look to have a tough schedule because we all get the division and Super Bowl teams, and early. The one team with the easiest start looks to be Denver. They start with a rebuilding Miami team on the road, get SD and KC, but at home, where they usually beat both teams. I think they could very easily be in 1st at the quarter pole, and quite possibly the halfway point. Now whether that gives them added confidence to finish strong and take the division, we'd have to see. Their brutal stretch is in the 2nd half (6 of last 9 on the road).... while everybody else seems to have an easier 2nd half, so maybe they'll start out hot and flop. We'll have to see though, Denver always seems just good enough to be in the mix.

Well, that's par for the course the last many years. Denver has done really well during the first 8 games... it's down the stretch that has cost them.

Woodrow Call
08-02-2005, 10:50 PM
Wow ... it's been a while since I looked at the start of the season for KC.

Jets @ KC
@ Oakland
@ Denver
Philly @ KC
Bye week

Jets will be tough, but it's at KC ... hard to give KC a loss here.
@ Denver and @ Oakland (even with their defense) will be very tough
Philly... tough.

Walk out of there 3-1 and I'm scared. Walk out 2-2 and I'm still nervous.

It is a very tough start but I like knowing right off what kind of a team the Chiefs have. Like you said eluded to anything 2-2 or better would make me extremely confident.

If by some great miracle the Chiefs win at Oak on Sunday Night football and follow it up with a win on Monday Night at Denver, the division could possibly be wrapped up by October. That would be sweet.

the Talking Can
08-02-2005, 10:51 PM
My main concern is losing the home opener with the Jets.

Me too...we can not start with a loss at home. But, the Jets have problems too...I'm not convinced Pennington will be 100% as his surgery was more serious than the team originally let on.

And without him at 100% the Jets are very vulnerable. Boy, if Bell gets a clean shot at him....mmmm....

Plus, the second half of our season is theoretically easier...as long as we're 2-2 I'm not panicking.

tk13
08-02-2005, 10:52 PM
Well, that's par for the course the last many years. Denver has done really well during the first 8 games... it's down the stretch that has cost them.
I think the pieces are in place for a good start... all your toughest 1st half games... San Diego, KC, New England, Philly.... you get all of them at home. You have to pay the piper later on though, December games @ Arrowhead and @ Buffalo, and your last two home games are against Baltimore and Oakland, the Ravens always seem to have your number and Oakland knocked you guys off in the snow last year, so who knows....

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:54 PM
Well, that's par for the course the last many years. Denver has done really well during the first 8 games... it's down the stretch that has cost them.

Hey, as long as KC wins 13 games and secures a first round bye... I'm happy.

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:55 PM
Hey, as long as KC wins 13 games and secures a first round bye... I'm happy.

I hate you.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:55 PM
Me too...we can not start with a loss at home. But, the Jets have problems too...I'm not convinced Pennington will be 100% as his surgery was more serious than the team originally let on.

And without him at 100% the Jets are very vulnerable. Boy, if Bell gets a clean shot at him....mmmm....

Plus, the second half of our season is theoretically easier...as long as we're 2-2 I'm not panicking.

Pennington is a concern at this point, but (and laugh if you like) they do have Fiedler backing him up. Fiedler has had success and is very servicable as a backup in that offense.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:56 PM
I think the pieces are in place for a good start... all your toughest 1st half games... San Diego, KC, New England, Philly.... you get all of them at home. You have to pay the piper later on though, December games @ Arrowhead and @ Buffalo, and your last two home games are against Baltimore and Oakland, the Ravens always seem to have your number and Oakland knocked you guys off in the snow last year, so who knows....

Yeah, the schedule is like Fear #5 with me... I don't like that stretch run at the end.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:57 PM
I hate you.

Greatness... we're on the same page.

stevieray
08-02-2005, 10:58 PM
Hey, as long as KC wins 13 games and secures a first round bye... I'm happy.


13-3.... with our schedule...with those first four games and five of six on the road after the bye...playing six of last years eight playoff teams?

I'll take it.

the Talking Can
08-02-2005, 10:59 PM
Pennington is a concern at this point, but (and laugh if you like) they do have Fiedler backing him up. Fiedler has had success and is very servicable as a backup in that offense.

Fiedler is terrible. Last time he played in Arrowhead we destroyed him.

That guys more mistake prone than Plummber.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 10:59 PM
13-3.... with our schedule...with those first four games and five of six on the road after the bye...playing six of last years eight playoff teams?

I'll take it.

There has to be a bye included with those 13 wins... history favors my agenda.

Chiefs Pantalones
08-02-2005, 10:59 PM
The thing I can't get with Plummer is that he had a 61% completion percentage outside the pocket, and the majority of his INTs came outside the pocket, and outside of the pocket is supposed to be his strength?

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 10:59 PM
Fiedler is terrible. Last time he played in Arrowhead we destroyed him.

That guys more mistake prone than Plummber.

Forget their offense...I think their D is going to take a nosedive.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 11:00 PM
Fiedler is terrible. Last time he played in Arrowhead we destroyed him.

That guys more mistake prone than Plummber.

Fiedler is a terrible starter, but he has good value as a backup. Plus, what you guys did to him previously with another team is pointless.

HemiEd
08-02-2005, 11:01 PM
I think the most critical player in that offense, now that LJ has proven to be a solid replacement for Holmes, is Gonzo. You guys lose Gonzo and I don't see another receiver (or TE) that can replace those reception totals or clutch catches.

Lose Gonzo... with that receiver corp and it's not good.


Kris Wilson is going to shock you.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 11:01 PM
The thing I can't get with Plummer is that he had a 61% completion percentage outside the pocket, and the majority of his INTs came outside the pocket, and outside of the pocket is supposed to be his strength?

Stop trying to figure out Plummer it will drive you mad... I just accept it and hope for the best. There's no method to the madness.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 11:03 PM
Kris Wilson is going to shock you.

Jeb Putzier is going to rock you.

(bum, bum, bum ... bum, bum, bum)

He will, he will rock you. (guitar solo)

the Talking Can
08-02-2005, 11:03 PM
Fiedler is a terrible starter, but he has good value as a backup. Plus, what you guys did to him previously with another team is pointless.

What's pointless is suggesting we'd have to worry about Fiedler.

The guy is terrible.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 11:06 PM
What's pointless is suggesting we'd have to worry about Fiedler.

The guy is terrible.

I'm not suggesting that he strikes fear into anyone's heart... but, he can play with talent around him. And, with this post, we have #15,000.

Fittingly, in a reply to Talking Can...


(the crowd goes wild)

stevieray
08-02-2005, 11:14 PM
I'm not suggesting that he strikes fear into anyone's heart... but, he can play with talent around him. And, with this post, we have #15,000.

Fittingly, in a reply to Talking Can...


(the crowd goes wild)

you are only saying all this because we play him, if he was still with miami, i'd bet you'd be echoing TC's view regarding your opener.

HemiEd
08-02-2005, 11:17 PM
There has to be a bye included with those 13 wins... history favors my agenda.
nlm nlm nlm

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 11:18 PM
you are only saying all this because we play him, if he was still with miami, i'd bet you'd be echoing TC's view regarding your opener.

You're right... it's not like Denver plays the Jets on November 20th or anything. I'll completely change my tune on the 19th. Of all the things that I could have picked out from the schedule, I chose Fiedler...

:rolleyes:

I believe I said he was a terrible starter... that doesn't mean he's a bad option for a freaking backup.

HemiEd
08-02-2005, 11:19 PM
Jeb Putzier is going to rock you.

(bum, bum, bum ... bum, bum, bum)

He will, he will rock you. (guitar solo)


ROFL congrats on 15K!

Lbedrock1
08-02-2005, 11:21 PM
My biggest fear about the season is Trent Green goes down.

ROYC75
08-02-2005, 11:22 PM
Injuries......... just like any other season.

stevieray
08-02-2005, 11:22 PM
You're right... it's not like Denver plays the Jets on November 20th or anything. I'll completely change my tune on the 19th. Of all the things that I could have picked out from the schedule, I chose Fiedler...

:rolleyes:

I believe I said he was a terrible starter... that doesn't mean he's a bad option for a freaking backup.

I didn't know you played the jets....because unless someone posts it, I usaually don't go looking for your schedule. :rolleyes:

Count Alex's Losses
08-02-2005, 11:24 PM
My biggest fear about the season is Trent Green goes down.

Really, you shouldn't worry. He has a herd of bison protecting him. Even when he takes a good shot, he bounces back up.

stevieray
08-02-2005, 11:25 PM
you guys better stop talking about injuries.

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 11:28 PM
I don't know you played the jets....because unless someone posts it, I usaually don't go looking for your schedule. :rolleyes:

I wouldn't think that you would proactively seek out Denver information... but, it's common knowledge that divisional teams play only 2 games against uncommon opponents. And, prior to throwing out why you thought I was stating that about Fielder... I figured you should at least click a link or two to see if Denver also played the Jets.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: and a finger snap

stevieray
08-02-2005, 11:48 PM
I wouldn't think that you would proactively seek out Denver information... but, it's common knowledge that divisional teams play only 2 games against uncommon opponents. And, prior to throwing out why you thought I was stating that about Fielder... I figured you should at least click a link or two to see if Denver also played the Jets.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: and a finger snap

"should" at least click on a link about the invescos? thanks, dad... :)

so, if he starts against you, are you worried?

Rausch
08-02-2005, 11:50 PM
I fear Surtain being injured...

Mile High Mania
08-02-2005, 11:59 PM
"should" at least click on a link about the invescos? thanks, dad... :)

so, if he starts against you, are you worried?

I'm a lot more concerned with him than Quincy or one of the 20 other spare backups in the league. Fiedler isn't a guy that's going to lead a team to victory, but with the right supporting cast ... like he'll have in NY... he can be a fine caretaker of the offense during a short span of games.

Hell, I'd like to have him over Danny Freaking Kannell.

Rausch
08-03-2005, 12:00 AM
Hell, I'd like to have him over Danny Freaking Kannell.

I'd call it a push...

KS Smitty
08-03-2005, 12:03 AM
In all honesty... let's go light on the sarcasm, what do you guys fear the most about this upcoming season?

My greatest fear is that KC actually fixed the defense. If that works out, then your team could really do some great things should the offense stay healthy. If KC's defense turns it around... this will be a feared team in the playoffs.

Ok, so what do you fear?

My greatest fear is that the Defense DOESN'T turn it around... I really think the O-line and backfield will do fine, BUT the DEFENSE has to prevent the opposing teams fron scoring in order for the Chiefs to make the playoffs (and ultimately the superbowl).

:p :cuss: :banghead: and (ultimately) :p :p :p

Mile High Mania
08-03-2005, 12:07 AM
I'd call it a push...

Well, 2 years ago I saw what Danny couldn't do... esp in that game that was SOOOOOOOO winnable against the Patriots. I'd give Fiedler the nod over Danny in a heartbeat.

Tribal Warfare
08-03-2005, 01:58 AM
I fear that KC's WR corps in a whole will be below average to mediocre, and the possiblity that the Chargers could be a Juggernaut.

C-Mac
08-03-2005, 02:24 AM
I fear that we will be so good that we will bring down the wrath of our vengeful God. Thus causing ruination for the entire planet.

ROFL

C-Mac
08-03-2005, 02:38 AM
"Beer not.....lest ye be afraid." -General Corona

"Nuttin to fear.....but spillin yer beer" -Sir Mick Earrlobe

Pants
08-03-2005, 02:56 AM
I have a real sinking feeling when I think about the possibility of us losing the 1st 4. I want to push that thought out of my head, but it won't go away...

Wallcrawler
08-03-2005, 06:26 AM
Injury fears go with any season, so that is a given, for any team.


My main concern is that Dick Vermiel will somehow undermine the improvement of the defense through his blind loyalty to players who dont have the talent to keep their starting jobs, and keeping the coaches who also dont have the skills needed to get our players to the level that they needed to be.


Vermiel knows shit about defense. The entire world knows it. But for some reason, he still thinks it best to call the shots on who starts on defense, and who coaches the defense, instead of leaving it to Gunther Cunningham. Examples here are Eric Hicks as a starter who is all but invisible on gameday, and saying that it will be hard to put Eric Warfield back into the starting lineup after his suspension. If he truly is entertaining that asinine notion, the Chiefs' players are going to not only be battling opposing teams, but also the stupidity of their head coach, and its only going to make it tougher to mount a superbowl run. How you can think that not playing your best players on Sunday is a good idea is quite out of my comprehension, and I question his mental capacity at his age.

And as for coaches, Peter Giunta has had the great pleasure of coaching one of the league's worst secondaries for the past few years. The guy never could get Bartee to learn to just turn his head and look for the ball. If he just lets Surtain and Knight go out there and do things the way they know how they should be done, the Chiefs will be better in the secondary. However, if Giunta thinks that he needs Surtain and Knight to learn how to play pass defense the KC way, then we're screwed. I dont think Giunta could coach an ape on how to cover his ass with both hands, much less coach a player on how to cover an NFL receiver.



Another concern would be the Washington Redskins syndrome. We add all this great talent, and it looks great on paper, but it just doesnt come together on the field. With the very plausible idea of big coaching problems concerning the defense, this is a real possibility.


Thats about it. I think that the offense in KC is going to put up great numbers again this year. Will they lead the league in offense again? I dont know, but Id be pretty safe in saying that they will be top 5, which is good enough.

Basicly it all rests with the defense, and has for the past 3 years. If the defense could just stop the other team from putting up 4 touchdowns a game, the Chiefs would be nearly unstoppable. Its sad when you average 33 points a game and not only miss the playoffs, but have a losing record as well.

The main concern for me is turning the defense around. If they fail to do that, then this season is going to be no different than the previous ones we have seen, with the Chiefs giving up points just as fast as they score them.

StcChief
08-03-2005, 06:46 AM
Losing Green for more than one game.

He really make it go....

Hoover
08-03-2005, 09:18 AM
My fear is the defense does so well, that Gun gets a second chance at HC....

King_Chief_Fan
08-03-2005, 09:22 AM
Injury fears go with any season, so that is a given, for any team.


My main concern is that Dick Vermiel will somehow undermine the improvement of the defense through his blind loyalty to players who dont have the talent to keep their starting jobs, and keeping the coaches who also dont have the skills needed to get our players to the level that they needed to be.


Vermiel knows shit about defense. The entire world knows it. But for some reason, he still thinks it best to call the shots on who starts on defense, and who coaches the defense, instead of leaving it to Gunther Cunningham. Examples here are Eric Hicks as a starter who is all but invisible on gameday, and saying that it will be hard to put Eric Warfield back into the starting lineup after his suspension. If he truly is entertaining that asinine notion, the Chiefs' players are going to not only be battling opposing teams, but also the stupidity of their head coach, and its only going to make it tougher to mount a superbowl run. How you can think that not playing your best players on Sunday is a good idea is quite out of my comprehension, and I question his mental capacity at his age.

And as for coaches, Peter Giunta has had the great pleasure of coaching one of the league's worst secondaries for the past few years. The guy never could get Bartee to learn to just turn his head and look for the ball. If he just lets Surtain and Knight go out there and do things the way they know how they should be done, the Chiefs will be better in the secondary. However, if Giunta thinks that he needs Surtain and Knight to learn how to play pass defense the KC way, then we're screwed. I dont think Giunta could coach an ape on how to cover his ass with both hands, much less coach a player on how to cover an NFL receiver.



yup..........and this causes me to fear that DV might be back after this year.

ChiTown
08-03-2005, 09:25 AM
Health of our OL - mainly Shields and Roaf. Let's face it, no matter how much our D has improved, we're still going to need a highly productive Offense. If those two aren't healthy, I think we are in some serious trouble.

Let me also add, that I fear a season ending injury to Green as well. He's been amazingly healthy since his arrival to KC. I hope his good fortune continues.

Raiderhader
08-03-2005, 09:36 AM
Injury fears go with any season, so that is a given, for any team.


My main concern is that Dick Vermiel will somehow undermine the improvement of the defense through his blind loyalty to players who dont have the talent to keep their starting jobs, and keeping the coaches who also dont have the skills needed to get our players to the level that they needed to be.


Vermiel knows shit about defense. The entire world knows it. But for some reason, he still thinks it best to call the shots on who starts on defense, and who coaches the defense, instead of leaving it to Gunther Cunningham. Examples here are Eric Hicks as a starter who is all but invisible on gameday, and saying that it will be hard to put Eric Warfield back into the starting lineup after his suspension. If he truly is entertaining that asinine notion, the Chiefs' players are going to not only be battling opposing teams, but also the stupidity of their head coach, and its only going to make it tougher to mount a superbowl run. How you can think that not playing your best players on Sunday is a good idea is quite out of my comprehension, and I question his mental capacity at his age.

And as for coaches, Peter Giunta has had the great pleasure of coaching one of the league's worst secondaries for the past few years. The guy never could get Bartee to learn to just turn his head and look for the ball. If he just lets Surtain and Knight go out there and do things the way they know how they should be done, the Chiefs will be better in the secondary. However, if Giunta thinks that he needs Surtain and Knight to learn how to play pass defense the KC way, then we're screwed. I dont think Giunta could coach an ape on how to cover his ass with both hands, much less coach a player on how to cover an NFL receiver.



Another concern would be the Washington Redskins syndrome. We add all this great talent, and it looks great on paper, but it just doesnt come together on the field. With the very plausible idea of big coaching problems concerning the defense, this is a real possibility.


Thats about it. I think that the offense in KC is going to put up great numbers again this year. Will they lead the league in offense again? I dont know, but Id be pretty safe in saying that they will be top 5, which is good enough.

Basicly it all rests with the defense, and has for the past 3 years. If the defense could just stop the other team from putting up 4 touchdowns a game, the Chiefs would be nearly unstoppable. Its sad when you average 33 points a game and not only miss the playoffs, but have a losing record as well.

The main concern for me is turning the defense around. If they fail to do that, then this season is going to be no different than the previous ones we have seen, with the Chiefs giving up points just as fast as they score them.


I fear reading posts like this through out the season.

milkman
08-03-2005, 09:41 AM
Me too...we can not start with a loss at home. But, the Jets have problems too...I'm not convinced Pennington will be 100% as his surgery was more serious than the team originally let on.

And without him at 100% the Jets are very vulnerable. Boy, if Bell gets a clean shot at him....mmmm....

Plus, the second half of our season is theoretically easier...as long as we're 2-2 I'm not panicking.

Let's also remember that the Jets have a new OC (a much needed change) and are implemeting a new offensive system, so they won't be hitting on all cylinders at the start of the season.

ptlyon
08-03-2005, 09:42 AM
Let's also remember that the Jets have a new OC (a much needed change) and are implemeting a new offensive system, so they won't be hitting on all cylinders at the start of the season.

Milk - our D will be?

stevieray
08-03-2005, 09:45 AM
Milk - our D will be?

I think the chances are greater, the new players aren't rookies, sans DJ, and for most, it's year two, with gunther's hands finally untied (as far as getting on their ass)

milkman
08-03-2005, 09:53 AM
I fear that KC's WR corps in a whole will be below average to mediocre, and the possiblity that the Chargers could be a Juggernaut.

I don't have any concerns about the WR corps.
I believe that we'll have the best group that we've seen in years.

The Chargers could very well win the division.
They do have a pretty talented group of players, but a lot will depend on whether Gates can repeat the same kind of season he had last year, or if that was just a fluke.

And Brees season will be affected by how Gates performs.
If Gates can't replicate his '04 performance, Brees could very well revert to his earlier level of performance.

Raiderhader
08-03-2005, 09:55 AM
I don't have any concerns about the WR corps.
I believe that we'll have the best group that we've seen in years.

The Chargers could very well win the division.
They do have a pretty talented group of players, but a lot will depend on whether Gates can repeat the same kind of season he had last year, or if that was just a fluke.

And Brees season will be affected by how Gates performs.
If Gates can't replicate his '04 performance, Brees could very well revert to his earlier level of performance.


I clearly have been out of touch for some time.... Rivers is not getting the nod as starter?

milkman
08-03-2005, 09:59 AM
Milk - our D will be?

No.
But the fact that the Jets O will not be places less pressure on our D to be clicking on all cylinders at the start.

It usually takes an offense longer to gel in a new system than for a D.
The fact that the Chiefs are in their 2nd year in the system, and are just adding pieces that will need to gel together with the others already in place would suggest that our D should be just a little further along.

milkman
08-03-2005, 10:01 AM
I clearly have been out of touch for some time.... Rivers is not getting the nod as starter?

No.

Raiderhader
08-03-2005, 10:02 AM
No.


Damn.

TRR
08-03-2005, 10:04 AM
I fear injuries. Injuries derailed KC last season in my opinion. Boe, Wilson, Priest, Welbourn, Mitchell, Horn, Morton, Woods, McCleon, and Beisel all missed significant time last season. The injury bug really bit KC hard.

milkman
08-03-2005, 10:06 AM
Health of our OL - mainly Shields and Roaf. Let's face it, no matter how much our D has improved, we're still going to need a highly productive Offense. If those two aren't healthy, I think we are in some serious trouble.

Let me also add, that I fear a season ending injury to Green as well. He's been amazingly healthy since his arrival to KC. I hope his good fortune continues.

I really feel comfortable with our depth at these 2 positions.

After seeing Black play so well last season, I think he'll be able to step right in and handle the LT position should Roaf go down.

And while Wellbourne isn't Shields, he is a legitimate NFL starter at G.

milkman
08-03-2005, 10:13 AM
My biggest concerns.

1. Keeping Green healthy.
We don't really know what Collins is capable of, since he's hardly seen the field in 8 years.
Even if he is a quality QB, it would likely take 2-3 games to knock off 8 years of rust.

2. That no one on the D-Line steps up and becomes a legitimate force, thereby allowing RBs to get into the 2nd level untouched, wearing down the LBs and secondary, making the vulnerable late in games.

Gaz
08-03-2005, 10:35 AM
Defensive line.

xoxo~
Gaz
Hoping Sims wakes up this season.

htismaqe
08-03-2005, 10:50 AM
My biggest fears:

1. Injuries
2. Injuries
3. Injuries

Rain Man
08-03-2005, 11:02 AM
My biggest fears about the Chiefs:

1. The defensive tackles will continue to be a high-cost, low-output unit, and we'll give up big gains up the middle all year.

2. Injuries at WR. We have no depth there, and only one proven starter.

3. God forbid anything should happen to Trent.

My biggest fears about our division opponents.

1. Marty always puts good teams together. I fear that he'll keep doing that. We can't win the Super Bowl if we don't make the playoffs.

2. Tatum Bell. I hope he's not as good as he looked the few times I saw him last season.

3. To be honest, I don't fear much about the Rai ders this year. Maybe my fear, then, is that I'll be surprised by them.

Chiefnj
08-03-2005, 11:12 AM
1. Injuries.
2. WR's stepping it up.
3. Right CB.

Divisional fears:

1. Chargers - none. I expect them to play very well during the regular season and collapse in the playoffs. The Chiefs will need to sweep San Diego to win the division.

2. Denver - I'm hoping they don't score any Dalton's on their DL.

3. Raiders - I think Collins is a better QB than people realize. I'm hoping their D doesn't gel in its 2nd year.

MOhillbilly
08-03-2005, 12:19 PM
the D being good a few games and terrible then good one game then terrible.
the WR sucking.
Trent gettin hurt.
Priest gettin hurt.
Not enough depth on the O-line.
the front 4 on D sucking.
FA playing half assed.
No momentum in Oct or at the start.
DV stayin on after this year.
Lamar Hunt dies.
Oakland and Denver beats us both games.
Oakland,Denver or SD win the Super Bowl.
I cant get the games at home.
H5N1 hits before the season is over.

Mr. Laz
08-03-2005, 12:30 PM
1. injuries
.
.
.
5. our defensive tackles
.
.
.
.
10. Mitchell at MLB




far and away injuries the biggest fear