PDA

View Full Version : Into The Belly Of The Beast


Count Alex's Losses
09-15-2006, 03:54 PM
http://chiefs.scout.com/2/568710.html

By Clayton Wendler
Warpaint Illustrated Columnist
Posted Sep 15, 2006

You could not have accurately predicted the Bengals game if you had tried.

Imagine someone told you before last Sunday that the Chiefs would hold the Bengals to 236 yards of total offense, keep Carson Palmer and Chad Johnson out of the endzone and hold Rudi Johnson to 3.4 yards per carry. Meanwhile, the Chiefs would gain 289 yards of total offense and hold the ball for almost 32 minutes.

You would have taken that, right? I know I would have.

But thatís the NFL. Itís ridiculously hard to predict what happens week to week. Even the experts get it wrong. Bang! ran a cartoon last week about how Chris Berman, Tom Jackson and all the other talking heads at ESPN were way off in their 2005 season predictions.

How many aberrations does week one contain? Everyone remembers the 31-0 stomping the Patriots took at the hands of the Bills to start 2003. New England went on to win the Super Bowl.

How about last week? Bears wide receiver Bernard Berrian caught a 49-yard touchdown pass. Think heíll haul in many more of those this year?

The Seattle Seahawks scored nine points. Nine! Against the Detroit Lions! This is a complete shot in the dark, but Iím predicting the Seahawks will rebound and rank among the leaders in scoring offense again.

Brett Favre threw two interceptions on Sunday (OK, bad example). The Oakland Raiders were shut out Ė uh, nevermind.

Anyway, the point is, that week one is always full of aberrations.

Whoís to say that week two canít contain a few?

The Chiefs are going to need one. They havenít beaten the Broncos in Denver since 2000.

Invesco Field has literally been a house of horrors. In 2003, Clinton Portis ran for 218 yards and five touchdowns.

In 2004, the Chiefs let a midget run for 156 yards and three scores.

And last year? Last year, the Chiefs were flat-out dominated. The Broncos didnít even need Vaseline.

So, yeah, the Chiefs havenít been able to win in Denver. Theyíve barely been able to show up. And with Damon Huard starting at quarterback this time, most of you probably figure the Chiefs have no chance to win this football game.

But the tide has to turn sometime. Paris Hilton and Tom Cruise will eventually be ignored by Americans (and return to their home planet). Gas prices will eventually return to normal. And yes, the Kansas City Chiefs will eventually win a game in Denver.

The Chiefs dominated the Oakland Raiders for years at Arrowhead (and away from it) during the 1990ís. But eventually, the Raiders won a game in Kansas City, even when the odds were against them. I donít think I need to remind Chiefs fans of that game.

So I say, yes, the Chiefs CAN win in Denver. And hereís why.

1. Larry Johnson has never started a game in Denver. Heís ripped the Broncos twice at Arrowhead. What difference does it make where the game is played? Give Johnson the ball, and let him pound that defense into glue.

2. This is the best defense weíve had in Kansas City since 1997. The Bengals couldnít move the ball against Gunther Cunninghamís unit last week without the no-huddle. And whatís more, I watched a Rams defense with mediocre talent dominate Jake Plummer and the Broncos last week. Thereís no doubt in my mind that the Chiefs coaching staff is capable of duplicating St. Louisí gameplan, and thereís no doubt in my mind that the Chiefs have the talent to execute it. And letís be honest. Plummer isnít going to bust out the no-huddle offense on Sunday.

So there you have it. On the strength of the best running back in the NFL and a solid defense, the Chiefs are capable of beating the Denver Broncos this week.

As for the rest of the season, I have only one desire: Donít wear the white jerseys at home again. Ever.

Donger
09-15-2006, 04:06 PM
Nice article, GoChiefs.

el borracho
09-15-2006, 04:12 PM
I'm pretty sure the Bengals could have scored more if they had felt like they needed to. They let up big time after holding us to 3 measly points through three quarters and destroying our QB and our game plan.

The Dude Abides
09-15-2006, 04:12 PM
Yes, very nice. All white jerseys shuld be wore at ALL away games, however.

SNR
09-15-2006, 04:22 PM
Great article. My only suggestion is you give yourself a cooler pen name like Barnacleez McBadass or something

Count Alex's Losses
09-15-2006, 04:23 PM
Great article. My only suggestion is you give yourself a cooler pen name like Barnacleez McBadass or something

That's highly unprofessional.

I'll consider it.

SNR
09-15-2006, 04:25 PM
That's highly unprofessional.

I'll consider it.Well, you have to start somewhere in the brainstorming process.

redngold85
09-15-2006, 04:26 PM
optimistic...optimism is a good thing, right?...I haven't had any w/ the Chiefs, sorry...Herm Edwards......

BigChiefFan
09-15-2006, 04:26 PM
Good read. Keep up the good work.

redngold85
09-15-2006, 04:27 PM
Well, you have to start somewhere in the brainstorming process.

not really a reply to your post...just wanted to say your avatar is great...

banyon
09-15-2006, 04:32 PM
Invesco Field has literally been a house of horrors.

Did they teach you to misuse the word "literally" this grotesquely in WPI writing school?

Count Alex's Losses
09-15-2006, 04:33 PM
I didn't misuse it. Are you saying you weren't horrified by Portis and Q?

Donger
09-15-2006, 04:35 PM
Did they teach you to misuse the word "literally" this grotesquely in WPI writing school?

While you're technically correct (no, it is not a literal house of horrors), it is not a misuse in common language. In this case, it is pure hyperbole intended to gain emphasis.

rad
09-15-2006, 04:42 PM
While you're technically correct (no, it is not a literal house of horrors), it is not a misuse in common language. In this case, it is pure hyperbole intended to gain emphasis.

Why do you always have to ruin it with facts?

Fish
09-15-2006, 04:47 PM
That's highly unprofessional.

Like calling professional athletes midgets?

StcChief
09-15-2006, 04:48 PM
Good read.

Let's hope our D can step up. Jake 'The Fake' can be exposed again.

LJ can have 150 yd 2 TDs
We can controll them in their house.

runnercyclist
09-15-2006, 04:48 PM
I'm pretty sure the Bengals could have scored more if they had felt like they needed to. They let up big time after holding us to 3 measly points through three quarters and destroying our QB and our game plan.


truedat

banyon
09-15-2006, 04:57 PM
While you're technically correct (no, it is not a literal house of horrors), it is not a misuse in common language. In this case, it is pure hyperbole intended to gain emphasis.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, while trying hard to be permissive, puts its finger on the problem. If we accept the sloppier use, then the word acquires two meanings--"factually true, precise" and "in an exaggerated, hyperbolic sense." Unfortunately, those are roughly each other's opposite. So careful writers will probably avoid both.

link (http://www.robertfulford.com/literally.html)

bogie
09-15-2006, 05:00 PM
"In 2004, the Chiefs let a midget run for 156 yards and three scores." Is this PC? Does it matter? Not to me, but I'm not a midget.

bogie
09-15-2006, 05:02 PM
By the way good article. Thanks for sharing.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-15-2006, 05:05 PM
You only have two reasons why the Chiefs can win in Denver. If you can only come up with two, we are in trouble.

Donger
09-15-2006, 05:09 PM
link (http://www.robertfulford.com/literally.html)

Yeah, that's pretty much what I said.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-15-2006, 05:13 PM
I had to bust your balls, since you are, well, you.

http://chiefs.scout.com/2/568710.html

By Clayton WendlerWith a name like this, no wonder you're a virgin.
Warpaint Illustrated Columnist
Posted Sep 15, 2006

You could not have accurately predicted the Bengals game if you had tried. There is no need for 'had' in this sentence.

This part of the intro is fairly cliched but it works. Just be sure to diversify your style in the future. Imagine someone told you before last Sunday that the Chiefs would hold the Bengals to 236 yards of total offense, keep Carson Palmer and Chad Johnson out of the endzone, and hold Rudi Johnson to 3.4 yards per carry. Meanwhile, the Chiefs would gain 289 yards of total offense and hold the ball for almost 32 minutes.

You would have taken that, right? I know I would have. Wouldn't that be jumping to conclusions, especially given that we don't know the stats for the turnover battle, and that we were 100 yards under our normal average?

But thatís the NFL. Itís ridiculously hard work on your adjectives here. 'Ridiculously hard' is a little too junior high to predict what happens week to week. Even the experts get it wrong. Bang! ran a cartoon last week about how Chris Berman, Tom Jackson and all the other talking heads at ESPN were way off in their 2005 season predictions.

How many aberrations does week one contain? Everyone remembers the 31-0 stomping the Patriots took at the hands of the Bills to start 2003. New England went on to win the Super Bowl.

How about last week? Bears wide receiver Bernard Berrian caught a 49-yard touchdown pass. Think heíll haul in many more of those this year?Go with a stronger and even stranger piece of evidence here, like the fact that J.P. Losman helped the Bills cover on the road.

The Seattle Seahawks scored nine points. Nine! Against the Detroit Lions! It has been said that you get to use 3 exclamation points in your life. I hope you hold onto the last one for a good cause. This is a complete shot in the dark, but Iím predicting the Seahawks will rebound and rank among the leaders in scoring offense again.

Brett Favre threw two interceptions on Sunday (OK, bad example). The Oakland Raiders were shut out Ė uh, nevermind.

Anyway, the point is, that week one is always full of aberrationsDepartment of Redundancy Department .

Whoís to say that week two canít contain a few?

The Chiefs are going to need one. They havenít beaten the Broncos in Denver since 2000.

Invesco Field has literally been a house of horrors. In 2003, Clinton Portis ran for 218 yards and five touchdowns.

In 2004, the Chiefs let a midget run for 156 yards and three scores.

And last year? Last year, the Chiefs were flat-out dominated. The Broncos didnít even need VaselineI'm sure your audience will love this. .

So, yeah, the Chiefs havenít been able to win in Denver. Theyíve barely been able to show up. And with Damon Huard starting at quarterback this time, most of you probably figure the Chiefs have no chance to win this football game.

But the tide has to turn sometime. Paris Hilton and Tom Cruise will eventually be ignored by Americans (and return to their home planet). Gas prices will eventually return to normal. And yes, the Kansas City Chiefs will eventually win a game in Denver.Crazy logic here

The Chiefs dominated the Oakland Raiders for years at Arrowhead (and away from it) during the 1990ís. But eventually, the Raiders won a game in Kansas City, even when the odds were against them. I donít think I need to remind Chiefs fans of that game.

So I say, yes, the Chiefs CAN win in Denver. And hereís why:

1. Larry Johnson has never started a game in Denver. Heís ripped the Broncos twice at Arrowhead. What difference does it make where the game is played? Give Johnson the ball, and let him pound that defense into glue.

2. This is the best defense weíve had in Kansas City since 1997. The Bengals couldnít move the ball against Gunther Cunninghamís unit last week without the no-huddle. And whatís more, I watched a Rams defense with mediocre talent dominate Jake Plummer and the Broncos last week. Thereís no doubt in my mind that the Chiefs coaching staff is capable of duplicating St. Louisí gameplan, and thereís no doubt in my mind that the Chiefs have the talent to execute it. And letís be honest. Plummer isnít going to bust out the no-huddle offense on Sunday.

So there you have it. On the strength of the best running back in the NFL and a solid defense, the Chiefs are capable of beating the Denver Broncos this week.

As for the rest of the season, I have only one desire: Donít wear the white jerseys at home again. Ever.

Count Alex's Losses
09-15-2006, 05:16 PM
Now you've pissed me off.

Donger
09-15-2006, 05:20 PM
I had to bust your balls, since you are, well, you.

ROFL

"Hey! Because it's you!!"