PDA

View Full Version : After attending yesterday's game I believe this defense is no better than last years


Logical
10-17-2005, 06:56 PM
Pass protection pathetic.

Teams with fast runningbacks who can get outside still torch us.

Not nearly enough pressure, better yesterday against a pathetic Redskins 0-line but still bad.


Worse yet our offense is dying. We cannot run to the right side at all, there is no pass protection worthy of mentioning, and we were not even that good running to the left.

No playoff wins this year I am afraid.

It was still great to be at the game, I am just dissapointed with the team we are fielding.

mlyonsd
10-17-2005, 06:58 PM
They sure tend to play the same way.

If Jared Allen isn't in the game yesterday the Chiefs lose.

carlos3652
10-17-2005, 06:58 PM
VLAD IS ALIVE !!!!!ONEELEVEN1111

Coach
10-17-2005, 06:59 PM
Well, glad to see you made it back safely Vlad.

I disagree on the pathetic Redskins' O-line. Samuels and Jansen are their tackles. I think they both are pretty solid.

I'll agree on the offense deal. It's not as explosive as it used to be in the past.

Deberg_1990
10-17-2005, 07:03 PM
I believe the run defense is a little better with better tackling. The Pass defense will never be outstanding until they get more of a push up front, even with Warfield instead of McSuckon.

Ive said it many times. with a DV coached team, we will never win with Defense. Its just not his bag or his philosophy. He wants to win with Offense. The thing is, the offense is just not humming at 100% right now for whatever reason. Age? O-Line? WR's who cant get open?? If the Offense isnt scoring 3-4 TD's a game, this team simply wont win many games or will struggle in tight contests to win like yesterdays game.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 07:05 PM
I agree on the pass D, but our run D is much improved. We did an excellent job against Portis. 77 yards in 21 carries.

How can you not be excited about Jared Allen? The Skins O-Line is pretty good, you are wrong there.

petegz28
10-17-2005, 07:14 PM
Well, glad to see you made it back safely Vlad.

I disagree on the pathetic Redskins' O-line. Samuels and Jansen are their tackles. I think they both are pretty solid.

I'll agree on the offense deal. It's not as explosive as it used to be in the past.


No kidding! Both of their tackles were pro-bowlers. Allen ate them both up.

Coach
10-17-2005, 07:20 PM
The real problem in this D, in my opinion, is a few.

1. McPasson. Need to say more?

2. Pass-rush, especially in the middle. Browning and Dalton are medicore at best. However, they both are very solid in the run D. The end's are getting around, just the push up front is the problem.

3. Covering the flat/containing the bootlegs. There were quite a few of those FB's or HB's that were wide open on the flats that someone is blowing their assignment or something.

Taco John
10-17-2005, 07:27 PM
I agree on the pass D, but our run D is much improved. We did an excellent job against Portis. 77 yards in 21 carries.

How can you not be excited about Jared Allen? The Skins O-Line is pretty good, you are wrong there.



Wow. I'm totally shocked. You're not usually this absolutely wrong. The Redskins oline is terrible, save two players. Portis has suffered because of it, and is lucky to break 100 yards in any given week because of it. My best friend is a Redskins fan, and we speak weekly. He's going to laugh when I let him know some Chiefs fan was praising their defense for handling the Redskins tough offensive line...

Logical
10-17-2005, 07:28 PM
I agree on the pass D, but our run D is much improved. We did an excellent job against Portis. 77 yards in 21 carries.

How can you not be excited about Jared Allen? The Skins O-Line is pretty good, you are wrong there.I did not say the entire run defense was bad, please re-read my thread post.

Jared Allen was here and exciting last year.

petegz28
10-17-2005, 07:29 PM
The real problem in this D, in my opinion, is a few.

1. McPasson. Need to say more?

2. Pass-rush, especially in the middle. Browning and Dalton are medicore at best. However, they both are very solid in the run D. The end's are getting around, just the push up front is the problem.

3. Covering the flat/containing the bootlegs. There were quite a few of those FB's or HB's that were wide open on the flats that someone is blowing their assignment or something.


I agree except on 3. Unfortunately with the DLien we have we are forced to either cover up tight and play the short routes and flats or drop back a full Cover 2 which seems we do an awful lot.

Our middle is playing good run-d and below average pass-D I think.

Mcleon got burnt on a slant in a way warfiled would't and that is getting shoved off the ball.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 07:29 PM
Wow. I'm totally shocked. You're not usually this absolutely wrong. The Redskins oline is terrible, save two players. Portis has suffered because of it, and is lucky to break 100 yards in any given week because of it. My best friend is a Redskins fan, and we speak weekly. He's going to laugh when I let him know some Chiefs fan was praising their defense for handling the Redskins tough offensive line...

I'm just talking about Jansen and Samuels. They are far from dirt.

petegz28
10-17-2005, 07:31 PM
Wow. I'm totally shocked. You're not usually this absolutely wrong. The Redskins oline is terrible, save two players. Portis has suffered because of it, and is lucky to break 100 yards in any given week because of it. My best friend is a Redskins fan, and we speak weekly. He's going to laugh when I let him know some Chiefs fan was praising their defense for handling the Redskins tough offensive line...


They almost beat Dencer in Denver and I am very impressed with Denver's defense. That have a good line with a good scrambling QB. Their interior O-Line is weak but still handed our interior D-Line. Allen beat pro-bowlers. I never hear Roaf blame the guy next to him for getting burnt. So why should I use that excuse for another team?

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 07:32 PM
Portis has two 100-yard games this year and another 90 yard game. We held him well under his season average of 4.5 yards a carry.

keg in kc
10-17-2005, 07:42 PM
Don't get too focused on the yardage. Don't ignore it, either, but don't get tunnel-vision and ignore everything else. For example, last year's defense doesn't force three fumbles, return one for a touchdown, or tip the final pass of the game at the goalline (that one in particular - Woods or Wesley in '04 would whiff on that, or not even be in position to make the play). We simply didn't have players in place capable of making those kind of plays a year ago, including Allen, even if he did contribute as a rookie. And, yesterday at least, that much of an improvement, no matter how you want to rate it, was enough to win.

That was the second time in this young season that plays by the defense have gotten the Chiefs a win when the offense wasn't up to the challenge. It wasn't a "build a big lead early" kind of game, it was a street fight. Not the kind of game we've often won with Vermeil. It's good to see.

We'll see how they progress over the remainder of the year. I think that, unlike past years, we have the potential for improvement, in addition to the capability for making the kind of big plays that can win games. Like yesterday.

DTLB58
10-17-2005, 07:54 PM
I don't like what I see scheme wise from our pass D and our two tackles are worthless for a pass rush up the middle but.....

In two games this year (Raiders and Skins) at the end the opponents had the ball on offense and could have won or tied the game and our defense prevented that from happening.

In the first game our D dominated the Jets Offense.

We are 3-2 and our D had a lot to do with those 3 wins. It's not perfect, but if we can keep getting better every week........

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 07:57 PM
I am not so sure Taco's friend knows what he is talking about. Randy Thomas was a pro bowl alternate as well.

The Redskins pursued Thomas during the 2003 offseason when he was considered the best free agent offensive linemen in the NFL. In 2003, he did not miss a snap and week-in-and-week-out in shutting down the opposition--and he was named third alternate to the Pro Bowl.

Kclee
10-17-2005, 08:01 PM
I am not so sure Taco's friend knows what he is talking about. [/B]


That's why they are good friends. They see eye to eye on football related topics. :)

SLAG
10-17-2005, 09:34 PM
I think Allen Has Flourished under the GUN

C-Mac
10-17-2005, 09:36 PM
After attending yesterday's game I believe this defense is no better than last years
It was still great to be at the game, I am just dissapointed with the team we are fielding.

BURP!

Not to self...the defense won the game.

Mr. Kotter
10-17-2005, 09:40 PM
I agree on the pass D, but our run D is much improved. We did an excellent job against Portis. 77 yards in 21 carries.

How can you not be excited about Jared Allen? The Skins O-Line is pretty good, you are wrong there.

Damn, I hate having to agree with you. :shake:

Cochise
10-17-2005, 09:40 PM
Partially agree - to me we look better on average against the run although still prone to give up a big one sometimes.

Secondary not a lot better, although I think Surtain is debatably contributing in that teams throw away from his side. It could be that he's playing well, or that the other side is playing poorly, probably some of each. Knight's been a big plus though.

I have more faith in their ability to create a turnover or make a key stop, but on the average I don't think they have improved a whole lot.

KCWolfman
10-17-2005, 09:41 PM
I am not so sure Taco's friend knows what he is talking about. Randy Thomas was a pro bowl alternate as well.

The Redskins pursued Thomas during the 2003 offseason when he was considered the best free agent offensive linemen in the NFL. In 2003, he did not miss a snap and week-in-and-week-out in shutting down the opposition--and he was named third alternate to the Pro Bowl.
Good job, stat-man.

I agree, obviously his friend is uninformed.

WilliamTheIrish
10-17-2005, 09:52 PM
Took you this long to figure that out?

jettio
10-17-2005, 10:06 PM
The chiefs D has had about 5 killer shots every game this year.

They are playing so much better than last year it is not even close.

Wesley lit up Cartwright on the play before he fumbled.

The next time he got the ball he was looking for Wesley and set himself up to get popped by Hall and Allen.

Next thing you know Knight is headed the other way and his hustling teamates make sure that nobody gets him.

The effort and the willingness to punish the other team is there.

This year's D is way better than last year.

chiefsfan1963
10-17-2005, 10:06 PM
glad to see more people realize our O is going to win games for us not our D. Our D is slightly better, but could improve enough by the post season to stop teams 3 or 4 times during a game. If our O does its job then that should be enough. Right now our O has dropped out of the Top 5 in total offense. What everyone needs to worry about is not our D, ITS OUR O STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm hoping our O shakes off this COLD they've been having. Our O needs to be int he Top 3 if they have any chance this year of going anywhere!

wolfpack0735
10-17-2005, 10:09 PM
its funny how washingtons so called "H-BACK" seemed to get open all day, but our "h-back" hasn`t even caught a pass this year.maybe one thing is our linebackers forget to cover him out of the back field. maybe Gibbs knows how to use a h-back and AS dosent.

KCWolfman
10-17-2005, 10:11 PM
glad to see more people realize our O is going to win games for us not our D. Our D is slightly better, but could improve enough by the post season to stop teams 3 or 4 times during a game. If our O does its job then that should be enough. Right now our O has dropped out of the Top 5 in total offense. What everyone needs to worry about is not our D, ITS OUR O STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm hoping our O shakes off this COLD they've been having. Our O needs to be int he Top 3 if they have any chance this year of going anywhere!
A quarter of the season is not a cold, it is a deep infection at the least.

And it is obviously not just the absence and weak reappearance of Roaf. Even Shields was manhandled two and three weeks ago. Dropped passes, overthrown balls, and the inability to break from coverage in both zone and man to man is very disturbing after watching the recent previous seasons.

Valiant
10-17-2005, 10:12 PM
Wow. I'm totally shocked. You're not usually this absolutely wrong. The Redskins oline is terrible, save two players. Portis has suffered because of it, and is lucky to break 100 yards in any given week because of it. My best friend is a Redskins fan, and we speak weekly. He's going to laugh when I let him know some Chiefs fan was praising their defense for handling the Redskins tough offensive line...


Yeah that weak Skins offense sure didnt put up almost 450 yards agianst your vaunted Defense...

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 10:14 PM
its funny how washingtons so called "H-BACK" seemed to get open all day, but our "h-back" hasn`t even caught a pass this year.maybe one thing is our linebackers forget to cover him out of the back field. maybe Gibbs knows how to use a h-back and AS dosent.

Pretty much. Hell, we should be using Tony Gonzalez just like that. Our playcalling sucks.

Valiant
10-17-2005, 10:15 PM
I am not so sure Taco's friend knows what he is talking about. Randy Thomas was a pro bowl alternate as well.

The Redskins pursued Thomas during the 2003 offseason when he was considered the best free agent offensive linemen in the NFL. In 2003, he did not miss a snap and week-in-and-week-out in shutting down the opposition--and he was named third alternate to the Pro Bowl.


All taco does is deflect, you will never see him admit that his team got out lucky..

I mean they just destroyed SD and the skins at home..

Valiant
10-17-2005, 10:17 PM
glad to see more people realize our O is going to win games for us not our D. Our D is slightly better, but could improve enough by the post season to stop teams 3 or 4 times during a game. If our O does its job then that should be enough. Right now our O has dropped out of the Top 5 in total offense. What everyone needs to worry about is not our D, ITS OUR O STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm hoping our O shakes off this COLD they've been having. Our O needs to be int he Top 3 if they have any chance this year of going anywhere!


Can someone explain more about LJ losing his playbook in denver for me???

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 10:20 PM
Can someone explain more about LJ losing his playbook in denver for me???

There was an article in some KC rag about LJ's car getting broken into and they stole a bunch of crap, including his playbook.

It wasn't stolen in Denver.

beer bacon
10-17-2005, 10:28 PM
Wow. I'm totally shocked. You're not usually this absolutely wrong. The Redskins oline is terrible, save two players. Portis has suffered because of it, and is lucky to break 100 yards in any given week because of it. My best friend is a Redskins fan, and we speak weekly. He's going to laugh when I let him know some Chiefs fan was praising their defense for handling the Redskins tough offensive line...

Portis has 443 yards through five games this year.

KCWolfman
10-17-2005, 10:29 PM
Portis has 443 yards through five games this year.
He is lucky to have them... ;)

Gary
10-17-2005, 10:29 PM
No worries Vlad. Master Carl has the answers.
Pass protection pathetic.
Carl Solution: draft O-line rounds 1-3 until 2008.

Teams with fast runningbacks who can get outside still torch us.
Carl Solution: There are some pretty nifty safeties coming up in next year's draft that we could probably convert into LBs.

Not nearly enough pressure, better yesterday against a pathetic Redskins 0-line but still bad.
Carl Solution: pick up Hugh Douglas the next time he comes up in free agency.


Worse yet our offense is dying. We cannot run to the right side at all, there is no pass protection worthy of mentioning, and we were not even that good running to the left.
Carl Solution: Only run up the middle.


You see, Carl's got us on this 5 year plan. In another couple of years, I'm pretty confident we'll have a real shot:)

beer bacon
10-17-2005, 10:40 PM
I also fail to see how Vlad knows that fast RBs that can get outside torch us. The only RB that has torched us this year is Mike Anderson, and he is definately not an outside runner.

KC Jones
10-17-2005, 10:43 PM
I think the defense is improved, but the offense has taken a serious downturn. This is an average or maybe slightly better than average team. I believe our window has closed.

:(

beer bacon
10-17-2005, 10:45 PM
I say we should lose the rest of the games this season so we can get a good draft pick. There is no way we are going to recover from a 3-2 start :mad:

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 10:50 PM
I think the defense is improved, but the offense has taken a serious downturn. This is an average or maybe slightly better than average team. I believe our window has closed.

:(

Our offensive stats are similar to last year at this time.

KC Jones
10-17-2005, 11:00 PM
Our offensive stats are similar to last year at this time.

Statistics can be misleading - especially for a meaninglessly small sample size.

Our pass protection is brutal and our running blocking is a shadow of it's formal self. It all starts up front, and we're not doing much up there. I'm amazed we converted that 4th and inches on Sunday. We've been bad at short yardage lately and for our O-line that was almost a given in years past.

Getting the offense going when our O-line play is poor is very unlikely. I'd love to see it happen, but I'm doubtful.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 11:03 PM
Statistics can be misleading - especially for a meaninglessly small sample size.

Yup, and that's why you shouldn't be freaked out yet. In a few weeks no one is going to be worrying about our offense. We go through this EVERY YEAR, and it sucks, but people always overreact.

I'm amazed we converted that 4th and inches on Sunday. We've been bad at short yardage lately

We're 7 for 7 on fourth down this year.

bobbything
10-17-2005, 11:06 PM
Anyone who can't see that this defense has improved is blind. They're not a great defense by any stretch, but they're better than they were last year. However, that being said, I'm dumbfounded as to why Cunningham insists on limiting the corners to certain sides of the field. The Skins game could have been a 14-17 point victory had Surtain been allowed to limited Moss to a few fewer yards.

I think this will end up being the downfall of this team. The offense obviously has some consistency problems. Maybe they'll be fixed in the remaining weeks, but, right now, there's some holes. But, until we can match up our best corner with the opposing teams' best receiver, we're still going to give up 100 yards and a TD to that player.

To be honest, I don't give a sh*t about Warfields "off the field problems." I know it's coldhearted to say, but if he's our best option at the other CB spot, I say play him.

The offense will end up being good. Top 5 by the end of the season, in my prediction. They're too talented to drop off significantly. I liked watching Green audible during that first series. It seemed to be a little more cohesive. But, I don't anticipate Saunders/Vermiel allowing that.

Denver is for real. Plummer has apparently figured something out. I could go on about how they should have another loss under their belt but the reality is that they don't. And that's what makes a good team a good team. This race is going to come down to us and Denver. Oakland is finished and San Diego has a tough road ahead.

Win in Miami. Loss in SD. Win at home agains the Rai ders. Toss up at Buffalo. Destroy the Texans (they're awful). Win at home against the Pats. Win at home against the Broncos. Loss at Dallas. Loss at NY. Win at home against the Chargers and Cinci. Finishing with an 11-5/10-6 record. Need Denver to drop a few to win the division.

Playoffs is a crap shoot. No predictions here.

KC Jones
10-17-2005, 11:11 PM
Yup, and that's why you shouldn't be freaked out yet. In a few weeks no one is going to be worrying about our offense. We go through this EVERY YEAR, and it sucks, but people always overreact.


I'm not freaked out. Offensive performance measured by TDs and yards is one thing, which you're correct we've been slow to start in those categories in the past. Offensive breakdowns in terms of our O-line getting pushed around is something we've never seen before. Especially not for 5 games in a row. That's not a slow start, that's a bigger problem.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 11:12 PM
Denver is for real. Plummer has apparently figured something out.

Denver has been 5-1 or 6-2 four years in a row now. The same shit happens with them every year.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 11:13 PM
Offensive breakdowns in terms of our O-line getting pushed around is something we've never seen before. Especially not for 5 games in a row.

We haven't been pushed around 5 games in a row.

KC Jones
10-17-2005, 11:15 PM
We haven't been pushed around 5 games in a row.

sorry - 4. It's been a while since the Jets game.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 11:16 PM
sorry - 4. It's been a while since the Jets game.

Oakland didn't push us around either.

chiefsfan1963
10-17-2005, 11:28 PM
A quarter of the season is not a cold, it is a deep infection at the least.

And it is obviously not just the absence and weak reappearance of Roaf. Even Shields was manhandled two and three weeks ago. Dropped passes, overthrown balls, and the inability to break from coverage in both zone and man to man is very disturbing after watching the recent previous seasons.


agreed! just being nice about it.

chiefsfan1963
10-17-2005, 11:35 PM
Pretty much. Hell, we should be using Tony Gonzalez just like that. Our playcalling sucks.

quite frankly we all know TG needs to be used more, but I don't think it's possible the way opponents have finally realized our weakness at wideout. shut down the running game and take out TG then you pretty much shut us down offensively. Too bad Kris Wilson is not the secret weapon we thought he was going to be! Let's hope we figure this out b/c we need the O to step up b/c our D is not going to get us to postseason!

P.S. Thank God Boe made the team this year! Before that awesome 60 yd TD by Priest, Boe kept the drive alive by converting a 3rd & 11. I'm sorry but Parker is very inconsisent. Boe is clutch!

chiefsfan1963
10-17-2005, 11:43 PM
Anyone who can't see that this defense has improved is blind. They're not a great defense by any stretch, but they're better than they were last year. However, that being said, I'm dumbfounded as to why Cunningham insists on limiting the corners to certain sides of the field. The Skins game could have been a 14-17 point victory had Surtain been allowed to limited Moss to a few fewer yards.

I think this will end up being the downfall of this team. The offense obviously has some consistency problems. Maybe they'll be fixed in the remaining weeks, but, right now, there's some holes. But, until we can match up our best corner with the opposing teams' best receiver, we're still going to give up 100 yards and a TD to that player.

To be honest, I don't give a sh*t about Warfields "off the field problems." I know it's coldhearted to say, but if he's our best option at the other CB spot, I say play him.

The offense will end up being good. Top 5 by the end of the season, in my prediction. They're too talented to drop off significantly. I liked watching Green audible during that first series. It seemed to be a little more cohesive. But, I don't anticipate Saunders/Vermiel allowing that.

Denver is for real. Plummer has apparently figured something out. I could go on about how they should have another loss under their belt but the reality is that they don't. And that's what makes a good team a good team. This race is going to come down to us and Denver. Oakland is finished and San Diego has a tough road ahead.

Win in Miami. Loss in SD. Win at home agains the Rai ders. Toss up at Buffalo. Destroy the Texans (they're awful). Win at home against the Pats. Win at home against the Broncos. Loss at Dallas. Loss at NY. Win at home against the Chargers and Cinci. Finishing with an 11-5/10-6 record. Need Denver to drop a few to win the division.

Playoffs is a crap shoot. No predictions here.


I think your homerism is getting the better of you! I still would love for this to play out, but as I said before the season, we may have lost our window of opportunity the last 3 years by neglecting upgrades to our D too long. We can't short change this and expect miracles to happen w/i a season after bring in some aging vets to fill the holes. We have not been skillfull the last 5 years with developing young talent on both sides of the ball and it appears we're about to pay for our sins.

philfree
10-18-2005, 12:18 AM
I think our D is better against the run and it is really hitting. And then with over 13 minutes left in the game and with us going ahead 28-21 we didn't give up a score. No quick FGs and no TDs. And on that last Skins possession they held on every play or they wouldn't have crossed the 50 yard line. It was unreal that none of those were called. Shoulda been 30 yards backwards :shake:

As far as the O goes I'm gonna reserve judgement because we are just now getting everyone together on the O line. IMO DV was right with his concerns about our O line players and offensive vets only going once a day in practice during TC. We'll get Sampson back this week and Roaf will have a full game under his belt so maybe we'll show some improvement there.

This whole team is a work in progress right now IMO. If we go the way of improvement we'll compete for a playoff spot if we don't improve it's gonna be tough. Our Schedule isn't so brutal the rest of the way IMO. I'm far from throwing in the towel.

PhilFree:arrow:

KCWolfman
10-18-2005, 12:22 AM
Our offensive stats are similar to last year at this time.
We are down in every major category from five games in last year other than total points. However, that stat is misleading as points scored by offense this year is less than the first 5 games of last year:

Totals
................2004.....................2005
Rushing.......699........................637
Passing......1123......................1060
1st Downs....101.........................95
Net Yards.....1739....................1655
Time held.....158........................149.5
Total Points..105........................119

Averages
...............2004........................2005
Rushing........140........................128
Passing.........225........................212
1st Downs......20..........................19
3rd Down Eff...43%........................36% (this is glaring, IMO)
Net Yards........348.......................331
Time held.......31.75.......................29.9
Total Points....24............................21

Count Zarth
10-18-2005, 12:24 AM
Like I said, there is a slight dropoff, but nothing to get worked up over IMO.

If we don't improve in the next 5 games then I will admit there is a problem.

KCWolfman
10-18-2005, 12:26 AM
Like I said, there is a slight dropoff, but nothing to get worked up over IMO.

If we don't improve in the next 5 games then I will admit there is a problem.
If we were 10-6 last year, I wouldn't disagree with you. But slightly worse than a 7-9 team is not going to get us anywhere on offense.

Count Zarth
10-18-2005, 12:30 AM
If we were 10-6 last year, I wouldn't disagree with you. But slightly worse than a 7-9 team is not going to get us anywhere on offense.

I agree, but at the same time we are 3-2. When the offense gets going we will be even better.

keg in kc
10-18-2005, 12:47 AM
I think your homerism is getting the better of you! I still would love for this to play out, but as I said before the season, we may have lost our window of opportunity the last 3 years by neglecting upgrades to our D too long. We can't short change this and expect miracles to happen w/i a season after bring in some aging vets to fill the holes. We have not been skillfull the last 5 years with developing young talent on both sides of the ball and it appears we're about to pay for our sins.I'm coining a new phrase tonight.

You are what I am now calling a "Dark Homer". Because that's what you are. A dark homer. Point that "homerism" finger at whoever you want, but the truth you're as big a homer as anybody else, you just happen to be so jaded by...whatever it is that's jaded you that everything is always going to be bad. You're the homer who's always waiting for the other shoe to drop, because in your mind the other shoe has always dropped, and it always will drop. You're a dark homer, and there's no more rhyme or reason to your perpetual "sky is falling" than there is to the happy homers' "pollyanna". Make no mistake: you are a homer.

And while I know you'll never let something like, oh, I don't know...reality get in the way of a good rant, I'm not sure how exactly 30-year old Sammy Knight, 29-year old Patrick Surtain and 27-year old Kendrell Bell fall under the "aging veteran" label. Hell, if we can find a way to trick Gun into playing Warfield instead of Dexter "keep that drive alive" McCleon, the oldest starter on the field will be Browning, who’s only starting because Sims, who’s all of 25, is injured. Knight and Jelly are 30. Hicks, Surtain and Warfield are 29. Bell and Wesley are 27, Mitchell is 26, Allen and Johnson are both 23. Not a one of those guys shouldn’t have 2-3 more years at the top of their game left, and most of them are only going to get better. And that’s after losing two, and maybe three young guys to IR, in Battle and Fox (and Sims).

Aging.

philfree
10-18-2005, 12:56 AM
I'm coining a new phrase tonight.

You are what I am now calling a "Dark Homer". Because that's what you are. A dark homer. Point that "homerism" finger at whoever you want, but the truth you're as big a homer as anybody else, you just happen to be so jaded by...whatever it is that's jaded you that everything is always going to be bad. You're the homer who's always waiting for the other shoe to drop, because in your mind the other shoe has always dropped, and it always will drop. You're a dark homer, and there's no more rhyme or reason to your perpetual "sky is falling" than there is to the happy homers' "pollyanna". Make no mistake: you are a homer.

And while I know you'll never let something like, oh, I don't know...reality get in the way of a good rant, I'm not sure how exactly 30-year old Sammy Knight, 29-year old Patrick Surtain and 27-year old Kendrell Bell fall under the "aging veteran" label. Hell, if we can find a way to trick Gun into playing Warfield instead of Dexter "keep that drive alive" McCleon, the oldest starter on the field will be Browning, who’s only starting because Sims, who’s all of 25, is injured. Knight and Jelly are 30. Hicks, Surtain and Warfield are 29. Bell and Wesley are 27, Mitchell is 26, Allen and Johnson are both 23. Not a one of those guys shouldn’t have 2-3 more years at the top of their game left, and most of them are only going to get better. And that’s after losing two, and maybe three young guys to IR, in Battle and Fox (and Sims).

Aging.

1995, 1997, 2003...............Chiefs fans are like Red Sox fans before they finally won it all after nearly century of misses. Jaded could be understating it.

PhilFree:arrow:

picasso
10-18-2005, 12:56 AM
Denver has been 5-1 or 6-2 four years in a row now. The same shit happens with them every year.

Absolutely!!!
They choke and drown in their own bile after a while. All it takes is that one interception for Plummer to lose his frickin' balls, start flippin his own fans off, grows a full beard and turns into Plummit. The haven't even hit the injury bug yet this year besides Champ, but it will happen sooner or later.

keg in kc
10-18-2005, 01:00 AM
1995, 1997, 2003...............Chiefs fans are like Red Sox fans before they finally won it all after nearly century of misses. Jaded could be understating it.
I know the history. I also know that history has absolutely no bearing on the future. Just because something has happened before doesn't guarantee it'll happen again, nor does it mean there's a trend or a curse or destiny or anything. That's as true for the superbowl win as it is for the heartbreak of the 90's. Every year is a clean slate.

And my only point was that expecting the worst doesn't make someone any less of a homer than expecting the best.

Alphaman
10-18-2005, 06:32 AM
They sure tend to play the same way.

If Jared Allen isn't in the game yesterday the Chiefs lose.


I never understand statements like this one. You can just as easily say that if Santana Moss isn't in the game, the Redskins don't score any points. Or if Brunell isn't in the game...

Every team has a player that steps up huge in a win. If the Eagles didn't have McNabb we would have won that game.

Alphaman
10-18-2005, 06:39 AM
Pass protection pathetic.

Teams with fast runningbacks who can get outside still torch us.

Not nearly enough pressure, better yesterday against a pathetic Redskins 0-line but still bad.


Worse yet our offense is dying. We cannot run to the right side at all, there is no pass protection worthy of mentioning, and we were not even that good running to the left.

No playoff wins this year I am afraid.

It was still great to be at the game, I am just dissapointed with the team we are fielding.

In general, I agree with what you have said. HOWEVER, there is one HUGE difference about our defense. THEY ARE MORE PHYSICAL AND TACKLE WITH MORE FEROCITY than they have in several years.

Look at the number of fumbles they've caused this year (league leading 18). We've clearly got some work to do with our pass coverage (hopefully we'll see improvement with Warfield getting back in there), but this defense is not as soft as it used to be.

the Talking Can
10-18-2005, 06:47 AM
Don't get too focused on the yardage. Don't ignore it, either, but don't get tunnel-vision and ignore everything else. For example, last year's defense doesn't force three fumbles, return one for a touchdown, or tip the final pass of the game at the goalline (that one in particular - Woods or Wesley in '04 would whiff on that, or not even be in position to make the play). We simply didn't have players in place capable of making those kind of plays a year ago, including Allen, even if he did contribute as a rookie. And, yesterday at least, that much of an improvement, no matter how you want to rate it, was enough to win.

That was the second time in this young season that plays by the defense have gotten the Chiefs a win when the offense wasn't up to the challenge. It wasn't a "build a big lead early" kind of game, it was a street fight. Not the kind of game we've often won with Vermeil. It's good to see.

We'll see how they progress over the remainder of the year. I think that, unlike past years, we have the potential for improvement, in addition to the capability for making the kind of big plays that can win games. Like yesterday.

well darnit, when you put it that way...

the Talking Can
10-18-2005, 06:54 AM
there is one HUGE difference about our defense. THEY ARE MORE PHYSICAL AND TACKLE WITH MORE FEROCITY than they have in several years.



amen....we hit people and they go down...that is a big change..

mlyonsd
10-18-2005, 07:24 AM
I never understand statements like this one. You can just as easily say that if Santana Moss isn't in the game, the Redskins don't score any points. Or if Brunell isn't in the game...

Every team has a player that steps up huge in a win. If the Eagles didn't have McNabb we would have won that game.

We lost that game in every category but turnovers and final score. Everything else on paper was ugly. If Allen doesn't force those TO's the score easily could have looked like the Denver game.

Go ahead and kid yourself, I don't care. I suppose my realistic approach comes from being a Chiefs fan since before they won their first SB.

MOhillbilly
10-18-2005, 07:28 AM
The Redskins O is pathetic they should have never scored more than 10.

philfree
10-18-2005, 07:38 AM
We're 9th against the run in the NFL 5th in the AFC. Our front 7 is much better and had we not laid an egg in Denver we'd be top 5 in the NFL against the run. I'm not sure where we were last year after 5 games but good things will follow if we keep stuffing the run.


PhilFree:arrow:

tiptap
10-18-2005, 07:44 AM
I have been saying this since middle of last year. Our season will depend upon the play at offensive RT. We were average on offense with Roaf gone but we won't be the dominant offense without the ability to run to the right of formation. Teams now know we run to the left. It is straight up mano on mano running that way and because we have Roaf and Waters we can find some success. But if you want to cruise on offense you have to be able to run to the right as well. In addition you have to have good pass protection on the right side. Shields is not able to compensate for the lost RT production. So the rest of the season will depend upon how well Sampson plays. If he gives time for longer pass plays, if he can seal the corner so someone can pull (can Shields do that anymore because teams are locking up Weigman by putting a tackle on him so he is not able to pull). Teams are attacking the holes of the pulling lineman and catching the slow play by running down the RB before the play develops on the edge. Add to this that teams expect the run to go to the overload side of the formation and you get no surprise in the offense. We should add that Green is wonderfully accurate throwing between the hash marks but that he is average on getting the ball downfield to the outside. Teams are playing us forcing the plays to the outside and deep on passes and attacking the running plays to the outside by jumping the gaps.
On the defensive side of the ball we have improved. The statistics show that we are in the top 5 on run defense. But the pass defense doesn't get enough stops. Teams are finding the middle especially open. The lost of Sims has been huge in lost of a push up the middle. This team will not get that push this year. But I think you go ahead and have tighter coverage and accept that you are going to get burn sometimes. We have to find away to stop the slants and short passes to increase the number of change of possessions.

sedated
10-18-2005, 07:45 AM
Teams with fast runningbacks who can get outside still torch us.


Like Portis? Those 77 yards really torched us.

tiptap
10-18-2005, 07:48 AM
It suddenly occurs to me that we should steal the Bronco's plays of rolling out Green. I don't know if he is comfortable doing so but if you rolled him out to throw you give a different look and in shortening the field you negate his average delivery outside of hashmarks.

htismaqe
10-18-2005, 09:06 AM
I'm coining a new phrase tonight.

You are what I am now calling a "Dark Homer". Because that's what you are. A dark homer. Point that "homerism" finger at whoever you want, but the truth you're as big a homer as anybody else, you just happen to be so jaded by...whatever it is that's jaded you that everything is always going to be bad. You're the homer who's always waiting for the other shoe to drop, because in your mind the other shoe has always dropped, and it always will drop. You're a dark homer, and there's no more rhyme or reason to your perpetual "sky is falling" than there is to the happy homers' "pollyanna". Make no mistake: you are a homer.

And while I know you'll never let something like, oh, I don't know...reality get in the way of a good rant, I'm not sure how exactly 30-year old Sammy Knight, 29-year old Patrick Surtain and 27-year old Kendrell Bell fall under the "aging veteran" label. Hell, if we can find a way to trick Gun into playing Warfield instead of Dexter "keep that drive alive" McCleon, the oldest starter on the field will be Browning, who’s only starting because Sims, who’s all of 25, is injured. Knight and Jelly are 30. Hicks, Surtain and Warfield are 29. Bell and Wesley are 27, Mitchell is 26, Allen and Johnson are both 23. Not a one of those guys shouldn’t have 2-3 more years at the top of their game left, and most of them are only going to get better. And that’s after losing two, and maybe three young guys to IR, in Battle and Fox (and Sims).

Aging.

Doh!

ROFL

Hoover
10-18-2005, 09:14 AM
Can we sign Ross Verba?

htismaqe
10-18-2005, 09:18 AM
Can we sign Ross Verba?

Ross has been on KXNO here in DSM a couple of times in the last 2 months.

He's sitting at home and he's content. He wants a HUGE payday or he simply won't play.

At first I thought "why not?" but after listening to the interviews, I changed my tune.

jspchief
10-18-2005, 09:25 AM
At first I thought "why not?" but after listening to the interviews, I changed my tune.Agreed. Being a Hawkeye homer, I definately perked up to the idea of Verba coming to KC.

But the more I listen to his attitude, I don't want anything to do with him. He's screwed up in the head, and I think he might be cancer waiting to happen.

The Bad Guy
10-18-2005, 09:38 AM
They sure tend to play the same way.

If Jared Allen isn't in the game yesterday the Chiefs lose.

Holy hell almighty.

Is this what it has come down to?

If ____ player isn't in the game, the Chiefs lose?

If Santana Moss isn't on the Redskins, the Redskins lose by 28.

Mother of god. Be happy about a win and quit making EXCUSES for a victory.

Jared Allen IS on the Chiefs, and the Chiefs did win.

Some of you just can't enjoy a win.

The Bad Guy
10-18-2005, 09:42 AM
We lost that game in every category but turnovers and final score. Everything else on paper was ugly. If Allen doesn't force those TO's the score easily could have looked like the Denver game.

Go ahead and kid yourself, I don't care. I suppose my realistic approach comes from being a Chiefs fan since before they won their first SB.
Realistic?

You call your bullshit approach realistic?

How is it realistic to say.."take X player off a team and they lose today?"

Is that reality? No that is make believe.

I could care less if we lose every category but one every week and come away with a victory. The name of the game is scoring more points than your opponent and the Chiefs won the category that matters - the scoreboard.

And just in case you just started following the NFL, teams that force turnovers win games.

TEX
10-18-2005, 10:30 AM
In victory, one should not overlook the things that cause defeat. The CHIEFS won the game, but they are just an average team. The offense is not nearly as good as it once was (many reasons for this) and the _efense is not improved enough to make up for it.

IMO, The window has closed for this team as it is now. The CHIEFS are the 3rd best team in their division and will not make the playoffs this year. They will finish no better than 8-8. Just my take.

mlyonsd
10-18-2005, 10:45 AM
Realistic?

You call your bullshit approach realistic?

How is it realistic to say.."take X player off a team and they lose today?"

Is that reality? No that is make believe.

I could care less if we lose every category but one every week and come away with a victory. The name of the game is scoring more points than your opponent and the Chiefs won the category that matters - the scoreboard.

And just in case you just started following the NFL, teams that force turnovers win games.

Homerism at its finest.

I am willing to admit the defense is better than last year but the entire package isn't there. I'm not getting any younger so playoff wins are the only thing that count to me.

If they continue to play the way they did Sunday I can't see them making it to the playoffs. And, if they continue to play the way they did Sunday it will be interesting to see what week you figure it out.

Count Zarth
10-18-2005, 10:47 AM
The Redskins O is pathetic they should have never scored more than 10.

The Redskins also scored 20 and 19 points against Seattle and Denver.

The Bad Guy
10-18-2005, 10:58 AM
Homerism at its finest.

I am willing to admit the defense is better than last year but the entire package isn't there. I'm not getting any younger so playoff wins are the only thing that count to me.

If they continue to play the way they did Sunday I can't see them making it to the playoffs. And, if they continue to play the way they did Sunday it will be interesting to see what week you figure it out.

I'm a homer now? That's funny.

Of course the entire package isn't there. How many defenses can you name that are the entire package this year?

They gave up 21 points. Bottom line.

Besides an 80 yard screen pass to Moss, did the defense really play that poorly? No. Holding Portis to 71 yards is a pretty nice thing, don't you think?

I love how the sky is falling to all these people, but this defense stops the run and that's how you make it to the playoffs.

htismaqe
10-18-2005, 11:00 AM
Homerism at its finest.

I am willing to admit the defense is better than last year but the entire package isn't there. I'm not getting any younger so playoff wins are the only thing that count to me.

If they continue to play the way they did Sunday I can't see them making it to the playoffs. And, if they continue to play the way they did Sunday it will be interesting to see what week you figure it out.

Frank is not a homer. Sorry.

Brock
10-18-2005, 11:20 AM
The Redskins O is pathetic they should have never scored more than 10.

Uh....no.

Calcountry
10-18-2005, 11:21 AM
I agree except on 3. Unfortunately with the DLien we have we are forced to either cover up tight and play the short routes and flats or drop back a full Cover 2 which seems we do an awful lot.

Our middle is playing good run-d and below average pass-D I think.

Mcleon got burnt on a slant in a way warfiled would't and that is getting shoved off the ball.DLien? Is that something that the government puts on your team when it doesn't pay its defense bills?

Lzen
10-18-2005, 11:45 AM
The Redskins O is pathetic they should have never scored more than 10.

The Redskins O is ranked #7 in the NFL. They average 373 yards per game. We gave up (398 yards) a little more (25 yards more) than their average per game. Their O is actually not pathetic this year. And they've played some good defenses.

C-Mac
10-18-2005, 11:55 AM
The Redskins O is ranked #7 in the NFL. They average 373 yards per game. We gave up (398 yards) a little more (25 yards more) than their average per game. Their O is actually not pathetic this year. And they've played some good defenses.

Yes and I know this is wrong, but if you could just take back that one long catch and run.......it would have changed the tune significantly.

siberian khatru
10-18-2005, 11:56 AM
The Redskins O is ranked #7 in the NFL. They average 373 yards per game. We gave up (398 yards) a little more (25 yards more) than their average per game. Their O is actually not pathetic this year. And they've played some good defenses.

Yep. They dropped 447 yards and 2 fewer points on Denver the week before.

mlyonsd
10-18-2005, 11:56 AM
I'm a homer now? That's funny.

Of course the entire package isn't there. How many defenses can you name that are the entire package this year?

They gave up 21 points. Bottom line.

Besides an 80 yard screen pass to Moss, did the defense really play that poorly? No. Holding Portis to 71 yards is a pretty nice thing, don't you think?

I love how the sky is falling to all these people, but this defense stops the run and that's how you make it to the playoffs.

In yards given up per game the Chiefs are last in the AFC and 30th in the overall NFL.

In points given up per game they are 12th in the AFC and 21st overall.

And, I'm not saying the sky is falling. I'm talking about how they are playing right now. They have time to gel because they dodged bullets in the Oakland and Washington games.

True, stats are meaningless its just the score that counts. But if you tell me the defense is really playing as playoff contenders right now I'll stand by my homer comment.

siberian khatru
10-18-2005, 12:00 PM
But if you tell me the defense is really playing as playoff contenders right now I'll stand by my homer comment.

I don't think anyone is saying that. If they are, I think they're dead wrong.

The argument is the defense is better (so far) than last year's. As Parker is fond of saying, better than bad does not equal good.

I tend to agree that certain elements are improved, however modestly. The main argument here is that the D is moving, however gradually, in the right direction and the HOPE is that it keeps getting better and by playoff time, if we're there, it will be good enough.

chiefsfan1963
10-18-2005, 12:04 PM
I think our D is better against the run and it is really hitting. And then with over 13 minutes left in the game and with us going ahead 28-21 we didn't give up a score. No quick FGs and no TDs. And on that last Skins possession they held on every play or they wouldn't have crossed the 50 yard line. It was unreal that none of those were called. Shoulda been 30 yards backwards :shake:

As far as the O goes I'm gonna reserve judgement because we are just now getting everyone together on the O line. IMO DV was right with his concerns about our O line players and offensive vets only going once a day in practice during TC. We'll get Sampson back this week and Roaf will have a full game under his belt so maybe we'll show some improvement there.

This whole team is a work in progress right now IMO. If we go the way of improvement we'll compete for a playoff spot if we don't improve it's gonna be tough. Our Schedule isn't so brutal the rest of the way IMO. I'm far from throwing in the towel.

PhilFree:arrow:

No one is throwing in the towel right now, but talk to me after these next 2 games; we'll all know the answer then! Right now this team needs to surprise me with what they have been holding back these last 5 games! What they have shown is not playoff caliber stuff! It's time to bring it on. Winning both these Away Games will show me alot. It will also give us the best chance in winning the division. I believe we'll hold the tiebreaker by beating Miami. This is our Opportunity! Playoff teams take full advantage of this opportunity. We'll find out soon enough what type of team KC is.

chiefsfan1963
10-18-2005, 12:13 PM
I'm coining a new phrase tonight.

You are what I am now calling a "Dark Homer". Because that's what you are. A dark homer. Point that "homerism" finger at whoever you want, but the truth you're as big a homer as anybody else, you just happen to be so jaded by...whatever it is that's jaded you that everything is always going to be bad. You're the homer who's always waiting for the other shoe to drop, because in your mind the other shoe has always dropped, and it always will drop. You're a dark homer, and there's no more rhyme or reason to your perpetual "sky is falling" than there is to the happy homers' "pollyanna". Make no mistake: you are a homer.

And while I know you'll never let something like, oh, I don't know...reality get in the way of a good rant, I'm not sure how exactly 30-year old Sammy Knight, 29-year old Patrick Surtain and 27-year old Kendrell Bell fall under the "aging veteran" label. Hell, if we can find a way to trick Gun into playing Warfield instead of Dexter "keep that drive alive" McCleon, the oldest starter on the field will be Browning, who’s only starting because Sims, who’s all of 25, is injured. Knight and Jelly are 30. Hicks, Surtain and Warfield are 29. Bell and Wesley are 27, Mitchell is 26, Allen and Johnson are both 23. Not a one of those guys shouldn’t have 2-3 more years at the top of their game left, and most of them are only going to get better. And that’s after losing two, and maybe three young guys to IR, in Battle and Fox (and Sims).

Aging.


Keg- I can appreciate what you are saying about knight,bell, & surtain. They are not too old for us not to pick them up, but they are not our future either. It works for now, but it does not fix the problem of our track record of drafting and developing quality players these last 5 years. As far as me being a "Dark Homer", what can I say, it's your opinion your entitled to it.

TEX
10-18-2005, 12:15 PM
No one is throwing in the towel right now, but talk to me after these next 2 games; we'll all know the answer then! Right now this team needs to surprise me with what they have been holding back these last 5 games! What they have shown is not playoff caliber stuff! It's time to bring it on. Winning both these Away Games will show me alot. It will also give us the best chance in winning the division. I believe we'll hold the tiebreaker by beating Miami. This is our Opportunity! Playoff teams take full advantage of this opportunity. We'll find out soon enough what type of team KC is.

Some of us already know. IMO, we're pretenders and Miami and especially San Diego will set the record straight. We're not a bad team, we're just not a playoff team and in another 5-year-plan, that's not a good thing. I had hoped for so much more by the time year 5 came around. Oh well, it is what it is and their still my team.

chiefsfan1963
10-18-2005, 12:25 PM
Some of us already know. IMO, we're pretenders and Miami and especially San Diego will set the record straight. We're not a bad team, we're just not a playoff team and in another 5-year-plan, that's not a good thing. I had hoped for so much more by the time year 5 came around. Oh well, it is what it is and their still my team.


Right now, unfortunately, i can't disagree with you. My confidence will grow with a win in Miami and then San Diego! GO CHIEFS!!!!!!!!!

siberian khatru
10-18-2005, 12:26 PM
Some of us already know. IMO, we're pretenders and Miami and especially San Diego will set the record straight. We're not a bad team, we're just not a playoff team and in another 5-year-plan, that's not a good thing. I had hoped for so much more by the time year 5 came around. Oh well, it is what it is and their still my team.

I'm not an optimist either, but I am keeping an open mind. I'm not writing them off yet. I'm hoping it starts clicking, that Warfield contributes and that Gun gets his head out of his ass. I've seen veteran teams fart around for half a season or more and then take off at the right time.

I can give you dozens of reasons why this coaching staff and these players won't do that. But since I still watch the games, I have to believe that there's a chance it will come together. But I'm not gonna let my heart be broken if it doesn't.

keg in kc
10-18-2005, 12:41 PM
Winning both these Away Games will show me alot. Jesus, that's not asking for much. An win in Florida and a road win against the defending division champion? I suppose if we're "playoff calibre" we'll follow that road sweep by another road sweep against Buffalo and Houston? Hell, we should just win out and finish 14-2.

There's goals, and there's realistic goals. I guess if you're trying to set yourself up so you have something to bitch about, saying "we have to win all our road games or we suck" is a good place to start.

A playoff calibre team would split the next two, beat Oakland at home, split the two road games after that and go into the final 6 (4 of those at home) with a 6-4 record. Anything more than that is gravy.

We'll see what we do.

philfree
10-18-2005, 12:55 PM
No one is throwing in the towel right now, but talk to me after these next 2 games; we'll all know the answer then! Right now this team needs to surprise me with what they have been holding back these last 5 games! What they have shown is not playoff caliber stuff! It's time to bring it on. Winning both these Away Games will show me alot. It will also give us the best chance in winning the division. I believe we'll hold the tiebreaker by beating Miami. This is our Opportunity! Playoff teams take full advantage of this opportunity. We'll find out soon enough what type of team KC is.


I have a hard time breaking it down that way. I mean Denver lost to the Dolphins so does that mean their season is over?


PhilFree:arrow:
~Just wanted to sport his new Avi~

carlos3652
10-18-2005, 01:06 PM
Anyone else realize that 4 of the next 5 games are on the road... if we come out 6-4 we will be in great shape...

Brock
10-18-2005, 01:08 PM
Some of us already know. IMO, we're pretenders and Miami and especially San Diego will set the record straight. We're not a bad team, we're just not a playoff team and in another 5-year-plan, that's not a good thing. I had hoped for so much more by the time year 5 came around. Oh well, it is what it is and their still my team.

It must really suck to be you.

TEX
10-18-2005, 01:20 PM
It must really suck to be you.


It does really suck to be you - no "must" about it.

Brock
10-18-2005, 01:20 PM
It does really suck to be you - no "must" about it.

If you say so....

TEX
10-18-2005, 01:21 PM
Anyone else realize that 4 of the next 5 games are on the road... if we come out 6-4 we will be in great shape...

Yep. This stretch, NOT the first 4 was what I was concerned about when I first saw the schedule. Plus, they're all back-to-back situations. Not good at all.

TEX
10-18-2005, 01:22 PM
If you say so....

Well I was just borrowing your words. Now, if you think you're full of $hit or something, then you have a point. :hmmm:

philfree
10-18-2005, 01:36 PM
Yep. This stretch, NOT the first 4 was what I was concerned about when I first saw the schedule. Plus, they're all back-to-back situations. Not good at all.

10/23/05 at Miami Dolphins 12:00 PM CBS
10/30/05 at San Diego Chargers 3:05 PM CBS
11/06/05 Oakland Randy Moss and the Raiderz 12:00 PM CBS
11/13/05 at Buffalo Bills 12:00 PM CBS
11/20/05 at Houston Texans 7:30 PM ESPN+

Edited to further my opinion.

From GoChiefs on another thread-

San Diego -21st overall, 27th against the pass

Oakland -28th overall, 28th against the pass

Houston -29th overall, 19th against the pass, 31st against the run

Buffalo - 30th against the run



There are no gimmies in the NFL and it's always tough on the road but with the fact that none of the next five teams we play have a winnng record I like our chances to at least win three of them. If we win this week I like our chances to win four of the five. If we win the next two then that goes to all five. It starts with this Sundays Fish Fry though. It's a road test that we need to pass.


PhilFree:arrow:

chiefsfan1963
10-18-2005, 01:39 PM
Jesus, that's not asking for much. An win in Florida and a road win against the defending division champion? I suppose if we're "playoff calibre" we'll follow that road sweep by another road sweep against Buffalo and Houston? Hell, we should just win out and finish 14-2.

There's goals, and there's realistic goals. I guess if you're trying to set yourself up so you have something to bitch about, saying "we have to win all our road games or we suck" is a good place to start.

A playoff calibre team would split the next two, beat Oakland at home, split the two road games after that and go into the final 6 (4 of those at home) with a 6-4 record. Anything more than that is gravy.

We'll see what we do.

Keg- playoff teams have to step it up. Losing in Miami or SD will mean that winning the division will depend on Denver losing down the stretch. It will be out our hands! Losing to either Miami or SD will give the tiebreaker to Denver, and we would be vying for a wild card spot. We get to 6-4 that would mean we would have to win 4 of our last 6 for a 10-6 record. This will not be easy! I understand how your thinking and appreciate a different view on how events could play out. Winning our division is an important milestone for a playoff team, and we have that chance still. Our chances will be a lot less at 6-4 IMO.

htismaqe
10-18-2005, 01:44 PM
What would we do without 63 here to remind us that the team just isn't that good when they're winning?




Probably the same thing we do when the team is losing and he comes here to tell us all we shouldn't give up on this team...

chiefsfan1963
10-18-2005, 01:47 PM
What would we do without 63 here to remind us that the team just isn't that good when they're winning?




Probably the same thing we do when the team is losing and he comes here to tell us all we shouldn't give up on this team...

Thanks Htis! I like you too!