PDA

View Full Version : Eric Warfield???


doomy3
11-13-2005, 02:12 PM
So, where are the people talking about how great Warfield is this week. I still contend that he is not a good corner at all, and was easily the weak spot in this defense today. Everyone last week wanted to talk about the 11 tackles he made and say he played a good game, when he was constantly tackling his man who had just made a catch on him! And obviously he got smoked today.

Deberg_1990
11-13-2005, 02:14 PM
Please.....he wasnt perfect...but we didnt lose this game today because of the defense.

ArrowheadHawk
11-13-2005, 02:14 PM
2 catches for 14 pts he single handedly lost this game for us

MGRS13
11-13-2005, 02:15 PM
The Bills made two plays today, thats it....we lost because we made zero!

Deberg_1990
11-13-2005, 02:16 PM
The Bills made two plays today, thats it....we lost because we made zero!

Exactly! How many teams win games by scoring 3 points?? Dont blame the defense today.

JBucc
11-13-2005, 02:17 PM
The second one was good coverage just a perfect throw, the first TD however he completely misjudged when he could have had an int. After what Washington did he should've been in there.

doomy3
11-13-2005, 02:18 PM
Please.....he wasnt perfect...but we didnt lose this game today because of the defense.

"he wasn't perfect"...are you kidding me. He looked like he hadn't ever played corner before on that first TD. Then it happened again! If this was Dexter McCleon on those plays, he would be crucified on this board.

DonJaun
11-13-2005, 02:19 PM
Warfield needs to take a hike and take Mccleon with him. They both suck!

Wallcrawler
11-13-2005, 02:20 PM
Youre just looking for something to piss and moan about.

On both TDs, Warfield was right there. He had just about as good of coverage as you could get. Sadly enough, the ball was just put right where it had to be.


You people are making it out to be like Warfield wasnt even in the same area code as the receiver when the score took place.

Furthermore, if someone told you before the game took place that the Buffalo Bills would only score 14 points the entire game, youd probably take that with a big smile on your face.

The OFFENSE lost this game. They racked up yards, but just a FG for points. The line allowed Green to be abolutely brutalized today. 6 sacks, 14 hurries, 11 knockdowns, gimme a break.


If you cant put up more than 14 f'in points on offense, you have ZERO right to bitch when your defense only gives up 2 scores. Quite frankly, the Chiefs dont deserve to win if they cant muster up more than 3 points.

That wont win you a high school game.

jjjayb
11-13-2005, 02:20 PM
:rolleyes:
Get a clue. The first TD was bad coverage. The 2nd one was covered perfectly. Only problem was the ball was thrown absolutely perfectly. NOBODY in the league could have stopped that catch without inteference. One bad play in a whole game is a HELL of a lot better than what McCleon has ever shown us.

Cave Johnson
11-13-2005, 02:20 PM
2 catches for 14 pts he single handedly lost this game for us

Whoa with the hyberbole. Warfield had perfect coverage on the 2nd TD, Losman' pass was just better. He missed the jam on the 1st TD and couldn't catch up. The pass blocking of the o-line is much, much more to blame for this loss.

Shag
11-13-2005, 02:20 PM
2 catches for 14 pts he single handedly lost this game for us

Riiiiight...

Those 4 turnovers had nothing to do with the outcome...

Extra Point
11-13-2005, 02:23 PM
EW was too late looking back for the ball, and jumped before he should have, on the first TD. The second TD was just plain good.

Where was the free safety on those bombs?

Valiant
11-13-2005, 02:23 PM
Youre just looking for something to piss and moan about.

On both TDs, Warfield was right there. He had just about as good of coverage as you could get. Sadly enough, the ball was just put right where it had to be.


You people are making it out to be like Warfield wasnt even in the same area code as the receiver when the score took place.

Furthermore, if someone told you before the game took place that the Buffalo Bills would only score 14 points the entire game, youd probably take that with a big smile on your face.

The OFFENSE lost this game. They racked up yards, but just a FG for points. The line allowed Green to be abolutely brutalized today. 6 sacks, 14 hurries, 11 knockdowns, gimme a break.


If you cant put up more than 14 f'in points on offense, you have ZERO right to bitch when your defense only gives up 2 scores. Quite frankly, the Chiefs dont deserve to win if they cant muster up more than 3 points.

That wont win you a high school game.


That first TD was bad bad bad coverage.. He jumped 3yards to soon, if he kept on running he would have broken it up... But that is soley not the only reason we lost... This was a team loss today, everything went wrong..

doomy3
11-13-2005, 02:25 PM
obviously the offense sucked today. THere are many other threads about that. I am not saying that the defense lost the game today, but how can people justify Warfield getting beat like that? I agree, we deserved to lose that game today based on how badly the offense played. But, take away those two plays, and we still win the game 3-0. How do you argue with that. Heck if Tynes makes those 2 field goals, we still lose because of the horrible coverage on the first TD. I will give you the second one, that was pretty good coverage, but bottom line is Lee Evans owned Warfield on those 2 plays.

jjjayb
11-13-2005, 02:29 PM
I am not saying that the defense lost the game today, but how can people justify Warfield getting beat like that?


He only got beat on one play. The first TD. The 2nd play he was on his guy like glue. The ball was thrown absolutely perfectly. NOBODY IN THIS LEAGUE WOULD HAVE BROKEN UP THAT PLAY.

If McCleon was out there it would have been 10 catches for 150 yards. Jeez. I'll take one bad coverage anyday.

Here's a quarter: $.25 Buy yourself a frigging clue.

DonJaun
11-13-2005, 02:30 PM
obviously the offense sucked today. THere are many other threads about that. I am not saying that the defense lost the game today, but how can people justify Warfield getting beat like that? I agree, we deserved to lose that game today based on how badly the offense played. But, take away those two plays, and we still win the game 3-0. How do you argue with that. Heck if Tynes makes those 2 field goals, we still lose because of the horrible coverage on the first TD. I will give you the second one, that was pretty good coverage, but bottom line is Lee Evans owned Warfield on those 2 plays.
Well said! Every time this happends people start sounding like Dick . They make every excuse in the world how it wasnt Warfield. Ok grant it. It wasnt Warfield that lost the game it was the Offence that was piss poor. But Tell me how Warfield helped!

Wallcrawler
11-13-2005, 02:43 PM
obviously the offense sucked today. THere are many other threads about that. I am not saying that the defense lost the game today,

Then why bitch about it if you know the defense didnt lose us the game?


but how can people justify Warfield getting beat like that?

He missed the jam on the first td, and almost made up for it. The second td, noone would have broken that up. The ball was thrown perfectly.

I agree, we deserved to lose that game today based on how badly the offense played. But, take away those two plays, and we still win the game 3-0. How do you argue with that.

I argue with that, Mr. Clairvoyant, because none of us knows what would have happened on Buffalo's plays had Warfield broke up those passes into the endzone. The game goes in a completely different direction if they dont score on those 2 plays. You dont have any idea what they would have called, or how it would have worked. Games are never about one play, or two plays.

Hell, the next play could have been a handoff to McGahee and he busts it for a TD and youre bitching and moaning about someone else missing a tackle.

Get over it. Warfield played all right today. Now, if Buffalo racked up 28 or so points, and all of it on Warfield, I could maybe see your point. The defense held them to 14 points. A rare sight for Chiefs fans.

If you have to bitch about something, do it about the offensive line who just must have had something against Trent Green today, because they sacrificed him to the Buffalo defense.



Heck if Tynes makes those 2 field goals, we still lose because of the horrible coverage on the first TD. I will give you the second one, that was pretty good coverage, but bottom line is Lee Evans owned Warfield on those 2 plays.

Whatever. First you say the second was pretty good coverage and youll give that to me, but then turn around and contradict yourself by saying that Warfield got owned on both plays.

Which is it?

Pull your head out of your ass, think about it, and then when you decide, then maybe post again.

You might also consider the 4 turnovers, and 6 sacks allowed by the offense before you ride Warfield for giving up two close touchdowns. Youre directing your negativity in the wrong direction right now.

In the past, if the defense only gave up 14 points, thats a win for the Chiefs. The offense lost this game, not Eric Warfield and the defense.

Rain Man
11-13-2005, 02:59 PM
Warfield played fine today. He mistimed his leap on the first touchdown, which he wouldn't have done if he wasn't a drunk who was suspended the first four games. On the second touchdown, his coverage was great, but the pass was absolutely perfect. No CB in the league could have prevented that pass.

Hydrae
11-13-2005, 03:08 PM
Here's a quarter: $.25 Buy yourself a frigging clue.


Here's a buck, I'd like 4 clues please. I know a few people that I would like to give these to for Christmas.

Extra Point
11-13-2005, 03:10 PM
I don't prefer having a clue. That's what gives me something to post about.....

shaneo69
11-13-2005, 03:16 PM
I'm sorry, but he didn't have perfect coverage on the 2nd TD. Perfect coverage would've prevented the TD. It was a good throw, but perfect coverage knocks that ball down.

Detoxing
11-13-2005, 03:18 PM
obviously the offense sucked today. THere are many other threads about that. I am not saying that the defense lost the game today, but how can people justify Warfield getting beat like that? I agree, we deserved to lose that game today based on how badly the offense played. But, take away those two plays, and we still win the game 3-0. How do you argue with that. Heck if Tynes makes those 2 field goals, we still lose because of the horrible coverage on the first TD. I will give you the second one, that was pretty good coverage, but bottom line is Lee Evans owned Warfield on those 2 plays.

OMG warfield suck so bad! OMG the sky is falling! shut your face, Warfield was there, maybe the first one he coulda done a better job, but the second one was text book coverage. Warfield does not suck, you just wanna bitch. Your bitching was heard, now find another player to pick on and blame the season on.

doomy3
11-13-2005, 03:19 PM
I'm sorry, but he didn't have perfect coverage on the 2nd TD. Perfect coverage would've prevented the TD. It was a good throw, but perfect coverage knocks that ball down.


uh-oh. You must not know what you are talking about because NO ONE can say one negative word about the defense or a mediocre player on that defense today because the offense sucked. You better get a clue too based on most of the responses to this thread :rolleyes:

doomy3
11-13-2005, 03:19 PM
OMG warfield suck so bad! OMG the sky is falling! shut your face, Warfield was there, maybe the first one he coulda done a better job, but the second one was text book coverage. Warfield does not suck, you just wanna bitch. Your bitching was heard, now find another player to pick on and blame the season on.


lol. That isn't even worth responding to

Rain Man
11-13-2005, 03:22 PM
I'm sorry, but he didn't have perfect coverage on the 2nd TD. Perfect coverage would've prevented the TD. It was a good throw, but perfect coverage knocks that ball down.


Come on. You think that it's possible to knock down every single pass? You don't think it's ever possible for a QB to throw a ball where a CB can't get to it?

Fruit Ninja
11-13-2005, 03:25 PM
Doesnt matter who was covering on that 2nd td pass. warfield couldnt have had better coverage.

wolfpack0735
11-13-2005, 03:25 PM
i thought warfields coverage on the 2nd td was good. the big ? is were was the safety on it or the 1st one? both were long throws and warfield had no help deep.

shaneo69
11-13-2005, 03:27 PM
Come on. You think that it's possible to knock down every single pass? You don't think it's ever possible for a QB to throw a ball where a CB can't get to it?

Yeah, but jmo.

Deberg_1990
11-13-2005, 03:29 PM
If this was last years Defense playing today, we would have lost today 35-3. Losman would have thrown for about 3 TD's and McGahee would have ran for about 150 yards

doomy3
11-13-2005, 03:33 PM
If this was last years Defense playing today, we would have lost today 35-3. Losman would have thrown for about 3 TD's and McGahee would have ran for about 150 yards


Can't argue with you there. As a whole, the defense played very well today. No doubt about it, they are much improved over last year.

Phobia
11-13-2005, 03:34 PM
I knew this thread was coming. I thought Warfield had tight coverage. Both touchdowns were excellent throws. You can't cover a WR any better without a flag in this league.