PDA

View Full Version : Toughest AFC team for the Chiefs to beat in 2005 Predicitons Poll


Herzig
08-10-2005, 07:28 AM
What team will be the toughest for the Chiefs and the rest of the AFC in 2005? Back up your vote with your opinions.

Here's a good article showing key additions to all teams from NFL.com

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8670431

Tinlar
08-10-2005, 07:29 AM
I'd say.. the Chiefs... they kicked our asses every time we played last year.

Herzig
08-10-2005, 07:36 AM
I'd say.. the Chiefs... they kicked our asses every time we played last year.True.

I'm going with the much improved Baltimore Ravens. Their defense is scary(Samari Rolle, Ed Reed, Ray Lewis,Tommy Polley, Dan Cody) and they've improved their offense with Derrick Mason, drafting WR Clayton(Oklahoma) + Heap and Jamal Lewis. The BIG question mark is Kyle Boller.

" Baltimore: The Ravens made key free-agency acquisitions on both sides of the ball. Wide receiver Derrick Mason, formerly of Tennessee, should have a major impact after ranking second in the AFC in receptions last season. His knack for consistently finding openings in coverage should be a huge plus for quarterback Kyle Boller, who doesn't quite have the accuracy to consistently connect with receivers in tight places. Keydrick Vincent, formerly of Pittsburgh, is the new starter at right guard. His forte is blocking for the run, and he also is versatile enough to step in at tackle in a pinch.

Tommy Polley, formerly of St. Louis, will start at weak-side linebacker. New defensive coordinator Rex Ryan will make plenty of use of Polley's considerable athleticism in a scheme whose fronts will alternate from a 4-3 to a 3-4 to a 4-6, and, therefore, requires flexible athletes. But Polley needs to become more of a consistent playmaker. Samari Rolle, also a former Titan, has the skills to be an effective, shut-down cornerback who can come up with big plays, but can he stay healthy? Rolle sat out four games last year with a knee injury that would require surgery, and the Kansas City Chiefs reportedly passed on signing him because of concerns about his health.

The draft also figures to provide significant help from a pair of former Oklahoma teammates -- first-rounder Mark Clayton at receiver and second-rounder Dan Cody at linebacker. Clayton has a veteran-like understanding of coverages and, like Mason, does a good job of finding openings. He is extremely quick and picks up plenty of yards after the catch. Cody has been impressive in offseason drills and should have no problem making the transition from defensive end to outside linebacker. His strong pass-rush skills should allow him to receive a good deal of playing time, if not a starting job. "

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8673422

Crush
08-10-2005, 07:38 AM
Patriots


I would have went with the Ravens with that D, but Boller still has to prove that he can step it up.

milkman
08-10-2005, 07:40 AM
I went with Pittsburg, because of their physical ground attck, and the question mark that our D-Line remains.

If Sims doesn't step up, it could be a very long day for the D.

cadmonkey
08-10-2005, 07:42 AM
You really can't vote against the Defending Champs

Herzig
08-10-2005, 07:45 AM
Patriots


I would have went with the Ravens with that D, but Boller still has to prove that he can step it up.

I would have voted that way too, but I think they've lost too many people(Teddy Bruschi, Ty Law, both offensive and defensive coordinators). Plus, no team has ever won 3 Super Bowls in a row(I hope they don't do it). I just don't think they will be as "hungry" this coming year with all the success they've had even though they have the best coach in the league.

alpha_omega
08-10-2005, 07:49 AM
Gotta go with the Patriots. Until somebody proves otherwise, they are still the best in the AFC.

Amnorix
08-10-2005, 07:50 AM
Self-serving, but I'll go with the two time defending NFL champion that has lost 4 games in 2 years and hast he QB with the highest win percentage of any QB in NFL history with over [40] games started...

Maybe it's just me. :D



[note, I think "40 games started" is the right number, it's something like that anyway].

Herzig
08-10-2005, 07:51 AM
You really can't vote against the Defending Champs

I know that's the "popular" and easy pick here, but there are several reasons I didn't.

I think the Chiefs will be right in the thick of things if they stay healthy this year, but the poll would have been slanted with KC in it.

Herzig
08-10-2005, 07:55 AM
I went with Pittsburg, because of their physical ground attck, and the question mark that our D-Line remains.

If Sims doesn't step up, it could be a very long day for the D.

True, but they've lost Plaxico Burress, Kendrell Bell, and Hines Ward is holding out last I heard. I think Roethlisberger has a sophomore slump this year. Duce Staley is banged up right now too. Their new TE they drafted(Heath Miller) out of Virginia will be a sleeper this year. This kid is pretty good...I watched a few of his college games and he's impressive.

Herzig
08-10-2005, 08:01 AM
Self-serving, but I'll go with the two time defending NFL champion that has lost 4 games in 2 years and hast he QB with the highest win percentage of any QB in NFL history with over [40] games started...

Maybe it's just me. :D



[note, I think "40 games started" is the right number, it's something like that anyway].

Slurp Slurp...
:p

dirk digler
08-10-2005, 08:03 AM
Patriots just because they are the defending champs.

C-Mac
08-10-2005, 08:05 AM
If you take into account that none of the teams listed could actually stop this offense, and that the real reason that the Chiefs lost any games was because of defense.
Then if this years defense does what it should, its truly scary.
It could be like the Falcon game.......all season long.

That being said....the Pats are still king.

Lzen
08-10-2005, 08:06 AM
I voted Colts. But it's really hard to judge right now. Some teams are gonna fall off this year. I didn't vote Pats because I think they're gonna be one of those teams that falls back down to Earth a bit this year due to their losses of personnel and coordinators.

COchief
08-10-2005, 08:07 AM
Patty-cakes, no one seems to be able to figure out that defense.

C-Mac
08-10-2005, 08:10 AM
I voted Colts. But it's really hard to judge right now. Some teams are gonna fall off this year. I didn't vote Pats because I think they're gonna be one of those teams that falls back down to Earth a bit this year due to their losses of personnel and coordinators.

No doubt that the Colts and Pats would be my top two, but the offense just about had their way with both of them.
Against the Pats there were no Holmes, Johnson.

Herzig
08-10-2005, 08:14 AM
Patty-cakes, no one seems to be able to figure out that defense.

Yeah, but without Ty Law, Teddy Bruschi, and their Defensive Coorinator Romeo Crennel...I don't think they will be quite as dominating as they were...even with the addition of Duane Starks...but they will be good no doubt.

Nightfyre
08-10-2005, 08:15 AM
I've got to go Ravens. The loss of the Pats coordinators will hurt them. But the Ravens have that Rocksolid defense and to be frank, I think the two new receivers plus the go-to-guy (heap) will help Boller to flourish this year. The Ravens are poised for a Super Bowl run.

The Patriots won last year. This is a new year, and as far as I can tell, the Ravens are the team to beat on paper.

cadmonkey
08-10-2005, 08:36 AM
I know that's the "popular" and easy pick here, but there are several reasons I didn't.

It the popular vote because they rarely lose. I would say a tough game is against a team that is tough to beat. Until they can be beat on a consistant basis, they are the toughest team on everyone's schedule.

True, they may not be all that hungry because they won two straight, but what makes you think they are not hungry to make history to be the first team to win three straight? I would be pretty hungry to do that.

Also, the "loss" of Ty Law isn't a reason to doubt us. We lost one game last year with out him. Our DB's are proven and will not be weaker without him.

True Weiss and Krennel leaving will be a little bit tough to over come, but the players know the system. Brady is expeirenced and can run the game fine.

Bruschi being out is a definate bad thing, but reports are saying the Colvin is back to playing at the level he was at before he got hurt, Vrabel is coming off his best year and Chad Brown is an experienced All-Pro LB. BB brings out the best in his LB's and I don't see this year being any different. Plus Tedy will still be on the side lines coaching.

Plus, Beissel has something to prove!!!!!!! :p

Herzig
08-10-2005, 08:37 AM
I've got to go Ravens. The loss of the Pats coordinators will hurt them. But the Ravens have that Rocksolid defense and to be frank, I think the two new receivers plus the go-to-guy (heap) will help Boller to flourish this year. The Ravens are poised for a Super Bowl run.

The Patriots won last year. This is a new year, and as far as I can tell, the Ravens are the team to beat on paper.

Looks like you and I are the only ones that agree on this one :thumb:

I think Boller's biggest problem is that he's really only had Heap to throw to since he's been a rookie.

Saulbadguy
08-10-2005, 08:39 AM
Colts.

Herzig
08-10-2005, 08:42 AM
It the popular vote because they rarely lose. I would say a tough game is against a team that is tough to beat. Until they can be beat on a consistant basis, they are the toughest team on everyone's schedule.

True, they may not be all that hungry because they won two straight, but what makes you think they are not hungry to make history to be the first team to win three straight? I would be pretty hungry to do that.

Also, the "loss" of Ty Law isn't a reason to doubt us. We lost one game last year with out him. Our DB's are proven and will not be weaker without him.

True Weiss and Krennel leaving will be a little bit tough to over come, but the players know the system. Brady is expeirenced and can run the game fine.

Bruschi being out is a definate bad thing, but reports are saying the Colvin is back to playing at the level he was at before he got hurt, Vrabel is coming off his best year and Chad Brown is an experienced All-Pro LB. BB brings out the best in his LB's and I don't see this year being any different. Plus Tedy will still be on the side lines coaching.

Plus, Beissel has something to prove!!!!!!! :p

Oh..I think they'll be good...just not as good as they were. Definitely playoff bound...I just have some serious doubts about them making it to this year's Super Bowl...plus 2(really all 3) Super Bowls they've won have been very tight, close games...

cadmonkey
08-10-2005, 08:52 AM
Oh..I think they'll be good...just not as good as they were. Definitely playoff bound...I just have some serious doubts about them making it to this year's Super Bowl...plus 2(really all 3) Super Bowls they've won have been very tight, close games...


Superbowls shouldn't be blow outs. If the Super Bowl is a blowout the team that lost shouldn't have been there. The two best teams make for a great game.

Patriots shouldn't have been there in '85

Broncos shouldn't have been there in '87 vs. the 49ers

Bills should nave been there ever!

You don't need to blow a team out to beat them. All you have to do is be leading when the final whistle blows.

Herzig
08-10-2005, 08:56 AM
Superbowls shouldn't be blow outs. If the Super Bowl is a blowout the team that lost shouldn't have been there. The two best teams make for a great game.

Patriots shouldn't have been there in '85

Broncos shouldn't have been there in '87 vs. the 49ers

Bills should nave been there ever!

You don't need to blow a team out to beat them. All you have to do is be leading when the final whistle blows.

Oh, I've loved those games as oppossed to the blowout games of the 80's...all I'm saying is that they were very close to being beaten 2-3 of those superbowls...I think they are beatable..especially this coming year...but that's just my opinion regarding they changes they've had.

ROYC75
08-10-2005, 08:59 AM
Ravens ......... That defense scares the snot out of me. Defense wins championships, don't believe me, ask Indy, they haven't won it yet.

I too think it's time for Boller ( who is a ? mark ) to step up now with more weapons around him. With a healthy Lewis in the backfield, Billick will have more weapons to tinker with. Baltimore has a cupcake schedule to boot... a very real possible 14-2 schedule. Should be good for HF advantage in the playoffs.

It's hard to go against the Patty Cakes, but I think there time has passed and the rest of the league will surpass them.

Indy will be in the thick of things as well.........

KC is your other divisonal winner ...........

San Diego and Jets are the WC teams......

Herzig
08-10-2005, 09:08 AM
Can someone tell me how the Colts have "fixed" their defense this year?

SNR
08-10-2005, 09:26 AM
AFC North:
Browns? No. Bengals? Maybe. Steelers? Lost a lot, might do something. Ravens are the winner on paper here.

AFC South:
Jags? No. Titans? No. Texans? Maybe a wildcard. Colts will win and then lose in the playoffs again.

AFC East:
Phins no. Bills no. Jets no. Pats yes.

AFC West:
Ahh... a real division. Raiturds no. Chargers, Donks, and Chiefs will be very tough to tell. I predict:

Pats, Chiefs, Ravens, Colts to win divisions.

Either San Diego/Denver for the 5th spot, and (surprise!) the Texans as the last team in the playoffs

Chief Faithful
08-10-2005, 09:31 AM
New England is the easy pick, but I picked San Diego.

The Chargers always play their best game against the Chiefs. If doesn't matter what their record is they are tough to beat.

Wile_E_Coyote
08-10-2005, 09:39 AM
toughest for the Chiefs to beat? not gonna be popular, Broncos at Mile High

Herzig
08-10-2005, 09:41 AM
Can someone tell me how the Colts have "fixed" their defense this year?

Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

From the article in the topic post..

Indianapolis: Like the Titans, the Colts are relying almost exclusively on their draft to address areas of need. And no area is in greater need of help than cornerback, which the Colts addressed with their first two picks -- Marlin Jackson of Michigan and Kelvin Hayden of Illinois. Jackson has good size and athleticism and has the inside track to start at right cornerback, provided he can keep youthful mistakes to a minimum during camp. Hayden also has good size, but his game requires more polish before he is ready to step into a regular role in the secondary.

ROYC75
08-10-2005, 09:43 AM
Can someone tell me how the Colts have "fixed" their defense this year?


IMHO, Indy has not fixed it's defense, but they have ginslinger and dart catchers on offense, that's enough to keep them in the picture.

TEX
08-10-2005, 09:49 AM
The toughest game most every year is the cheating DONX game in Denver. Tough to win in that altitude. :shake:

StcChief
08-10-2005, 09:54 AM
Pats.

Tough to vote against Pats. Even though it's a home game. Hopefully we will be in good shape physically that day and the 12th man will step up.

J Diddy
08-10-2005, 09:59 AM
New England is the easy pick, but I picked San Diego.

The Chargers always play their best game against the Chiefs. If doesn't matter what their record is they are tough to beat.

I agree.

Looking at that list there is no one there who strikes fear in me. New England has lost too much this offseason, Colts still have no defense, Broncs went freaking delusional, Raiders are trying to immitate the Colts.
Dolphins might become a good team, but not in their first year with Saban.

I think the Chargers are an extremely well balanced team.

RedThat
08-10-2005, 10:01 AM
Good question. Tough one to answer as well. I say it comes down to 4 teams, I say New England, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and I throw Indy in there as well.

-Indy is good. But, till they get a defense, I don't see them as the toughest team to beat. Still though, having to face Peyton Manning on Sunday, leaves other teams with their hands full. Chief fans know that, Manning alone, makes Indy a pain in the arse.

-Pittsburgh's defense is the bomb. I love their defense, and think it is good enough to win a world championship. Their offense though, seems like it's not heading in the right direction. A lot of questions linger there. They lost Plaxico Burress. Hines Ward continues his holdout, and thats not helping them. Duce Staley is out indefinately. Will Bettis be adequate enough to carry a majority of the snaps? Is Roethelisberger the real deal? Or will he carry his poor post-season performance into the season? With Ward and Burress not there, who's he going to throw the ball to? The key for them, is, Ward needs to come back. Roethlisberger has to prove he can handle adversity, and bounce back and have a strong year again. Those 2 losses in the post-season didn't seem like it helped his confidence. Bettis is too old, and banged up to carry a majority of the snaps. Till Pittsburgh can find someone to replace Staley, for now, and have that guy split time with Bettis, their running game could be resolved. These are some of the issues they have to resolve, imo, just to bounce back and be competitive again. I'm unsure as to whether I'd place them as the toughest team to beat. I give em some love though because they did go 15-1, and it takes a damn good team to post a record like that.

-Baltimore looks really, really good. I like the moves they made in the off-season. No doubt, they have the best secondary in the NFL. Best back seven in the NFL. Heck, best defense in the NFL. Their offense is looking good. Mason, Clayton, and Heap provide Boller with some weapons. J.Lewis is one of the finest RBs in the NFL. The key to their success, is Kyle Boller. All he has to do is be solid. That's all. If he can do that, their is no doubt in my mind, they'll contend for a SB.

-New England. Well, they are the SB champs, so, I'm not gonna take anything away from them. Yeah they lost their coordinators(Weiss and Crennel), yeah they lost Bruschi. The main brain still remains, in Bellicheck.
I dont think Bruschi will be as big of a loss as people seem to think. They acquired a couple of good linebackers this year in Chad Brown and Monty Beisel. The depth there is strong. There was talks about Vrabel playing in the middle. Roman Phifer can don the middle as well, and their was talks about him going back to New England, not sure if they got him back. Im sure Bellicheck will find a way to utilize his linebackers effectively, and efficiently. The loss of Bruschi won't be noticed as much. This team still pretty much remains the same.

I'll narrow it down to either Baltimore or New England as the toughest teams to beat in the AFC. Those teams are the most complete. On a side note, Just the fact that New England has won 3 SB in the last 4 years, I still place them up there as one of the toughest to beat in the AFC. Till somebody else proves otherwise they are the team.

Andoverer
08-10-2005, 10:40 AM
Looking at the schedule and seeing who from the AFC we actually play and WHERE (barring post-season), at Denver and at SanDiego will be the toughest ones IMO. However I'm looking at the schedule and see we play at Miami and that game is a wee bit scary considering how awful we seem to play Florida teams in Florida. Haven't we played Miami at their place like a million times in a row now?