View Full Version : "Injury to Bennett Retarded Team's Rushing Attack"

12-20-2000, 07:24 AM
This is the headline on KCChiefs.com today.

Give me a break!


12-20-2000, 07:29 AM
I agree with the last 4 words. Having Donnell Bennett as your rushing attack is pretty retarded.

It looks I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue!

Mark M
12-20-2000, 07:36 AM
You beat me to it!!

RBbC is what "retarded" the Chiefs rushing attack. We saw what can happen when you feed one back the ball for 20 or more carries...production.

The organization to saying it was all because of Bennett's injury should make us all very, very nervous. If they can't see the problem now, what makes us think they will fix it in the future?

~~Getting worried . . . <P>

12-20-2000, 12:50 PM
The timing of this post to the KCChiefs.com website really makes me nervous too. Here we come off of the best rushing performance of the season by going primarily with one back, and they're putting out this crap.

Again I say,

Give me a break!


12-20-2000, 12:57 PM
Wasn't Bennett supposed to be the FB in front of TRich early this season, but then he got injured and they went back to RBbC? So without a viable FB to put in front of TRich he had to be moved back to FB. At least that is how I remember them explaining it early this season.

Bob Dole
12-20-2000, 12:59 PM
Bob Dole didn't have a problem with Bennett at FB in the 2-back set. They had him as the lone back in the 1-back set, though, and that was worthless.

12-20-2000, 01:09 PM
Really folks, can't you see the point?

You say that RBbC retarded the rushing attack, and you're right!

You say having Bennett in the rushing game retarded the rushing attack, partially right!

Coming out of TC, the plan was TRich feature back, Bennett starting FB. Bennett get injured, coaches insert domes into abyss, pull out Personel groupings(should read RBbC), and the rushing attack vanishes.

Bennett comes back, sucks SH!T, gets hurt again. Only this time, somebody finally got a fricking clue and kept TRich as feature back. In 2 games, 40 carries, 245 yds, 6.1 avg/rush, 11 rec, 69 yds, 1 TD, 2 VICTORIES!!

So the point is at least in part valid. Had Bennett not been injured and TRich gets 15-20 touches per game, good chance the ground game is at least respectable. BUT, had the coaches not been so fricking ignorant to fall back on RBbC once Bennett WAS injured, we wouldn't be having this discussion.


[b]FINALLY they gave TRich the Ball!!! And whadaya know!

12-20-2000, 01:12 PM
cory, you got it...the coaches were to ignorant to see the need to keep TRich as the feature back...Bennett or no Bennett...I'm sure Kimble would have been okay with moving back to FB meaning a starting position...

I've said this about 50 times in the last couple of weeks and I even sent a letter to Carl and Gun saying the same thing...if they'd had stuck with one back, TRich, Cloud, Anders from day one...we'd be in the playoffs...


"The word "genius" isn't applicable in football. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein."
-Joe Theisman, NFL football quarterback and sports analyst

12-20-2000, 01:39 PM
And to think of the games we could have won this year make sick to the fact that this is the reason! Wasted year, could have been no worse than 12-4 for the year than pray'n for 8-8 .