PDA

View Full Version : When you play to lose


the Talking Can
09-17-2006, 06:58 PM
...you lose.

Anyone who claims they didn't know we were going to lose in the 2nd half - deep down in your bones - is a LIAR.

run, run, 5 yard slant, punt
run, run, 5 yard out, punt
run, run, 5 yard slant, punt
run, run, 5 yard out, punt
run, run, 5 yard slant, punt
run, run, 5 yard out, punt
game over, loss
pretend we care about moral victories after all these years...rinse, wash...

As the Steelers showed, even with a back up QB you have to take some shots and TRY to win.

The BEST performance by a Chiefs D since DT died...sacrificed for Herm's blood lust for punting and losing.

WE SHOULD HAVE WON. But winning is too risky for Herm.

another weekend ruined....

Mecca
09-17-2006, 07:00 PM
Ugh......Damon Huard was playing. We have no QB no LT, you wanna call a regular gameplan? It won't work period, that was an extremely well played game just to come that close to winning in these circumstances.

I'm really ****in tired of these threads, if they had done this with Green in fine bitch. It's Damon Huard what were you expecting the same offense?

Fruit Ninja
09-17-2006, 07:00 PM
Give us Pittsburg's o line and i am all for it

Fruit Ninja
09-17-2006, 07:02 PM
Ugh......Damon Huard was playing. We have no QB no LT, you wanna call a regular gameplan? It won't work period, that was an extremely well played game just to come that close to winning in these circumstances.

I'm really ****in tired of these threads, if they had done this with Green in fine bitch. It's Damon Huard what were you expecting the same offense?
Obviously he was. People cant freaking figure out that our Tackles suck, we cannot run the Coryell Offense. They had no real choice but to play how they did if they wanted to stay in the game. We would have been dow to Dee Brown at QB if we had a regular game plan.

milkman
09-17-2006, 07:08 PM
Ugh......Damon Huard was playing. We have no QB no LT, you wanna call a regular gameplan? It won't work period, that was an extremely well played game just to come that close to winning in these circumstances.

I'm really ****in tired of these threads, if they had done this with Green in fine bitch. It's Damon Huard what were you expecting the same offense?

I agree, without Trent and with our deficiencies at tackle, we can't expect to run the same offense.

We can't expect it when Green gets back.

But if the Chiefs had mixed in some play action passing on first down, they could have given the Donkeys something to think about besides LJ.

They don't have to be deep throws.

Jus something to mix it and help the running game.

Mecca
09-17-2006, 07:10 PM
I agree, without Trent and with our deficiencies at tackle, we can't expect to run the same offense.

We can't expect it when Green gets back.

But if the Chiefs had mixed in some play action passing on first down, they could have given the Donkeys something to think about besides LJ.

They don't have to be deep throws.

Jus something to mix it and help the running game.

I'll agree with you that's a very rationale assement that makes sense. I'm just getting tired of people who can't seem to realize we have gaping holes in this offense right now, we can't run the same offense anymore it just won't work.

the Talking Can
09-17-2006, 07:10 PM
Ugh......Damon Huard was playing. We have no QB no LT, you wanna call a regular gameplan? It won't work period, that was an extremely well played game just to come that close to winning in these circumstances.

I'm really ****in tired of these threads, if they had done this with Green in fine bitch. It's Damon Huard what were you expecting the same offense?

Where did I say we should have called our regular game plan? Could you provide that quote? Or maybe actually read a post before responding to it?

I said we had to take some shots in the 2nd half.

We were the better team. Even with Huard we deserved to win.

We didn't lose because of Huard we lost because Herm didn't trust our players. Victory was there for the taking....Denver took it.

I'll get over it...but it was a huge waste.

blueballs
09-17-2006, 07:15 PM
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playbyplay/NFL_20060917_KC@DEN

wolfpack0735
09-17-2006, 07:22 PM
since we are bound and determind to play ultra-conservitive on offnese,we should start croyle. it dosnt take much to hand the ball off and throw 5 yard passes. give the rookie playing time.

Raiderhader
09-17-2006, 07:23 PM
I'll agree with you that's a very rationale assement that makes sense. I'm just getting tired of people who can't seem to realize we have gaping holes in this offense right now, we can't run the same offense anymore it just won't work.



And I'm getting tired of you assuming that people are calling for the regular offense. What milkman posted is all that I have seen asked for. You are just too dense to pick it up, or too contrary to care.

ChiefsFanatic
09-17-2006, 07:23 PM
...you lose.

Anyone who claims they didn't know we were going to lose in the 2nd half - deep down in your bones - is a LIAR.

run, run, 5 yard slant, punt
run, run, 5 yard out, punt
run, run, 5 yard slant, punt
run, run, 5 yard out, punt
run, run, 5 yard slant, punt
run, run, 5 yard out, punt
game over, loss
pretend we care about moral victories after all these years...rinse, wash...

As the Steelers showed, even with a back up QB you have to take some shots and TRY to win.

The BEST performance by a Chiefs D since DT died...sacrificed for Herm's blood lust for punting and losing.

WE SHOULD HAVE WON. But winning is too risky for Herm.

another weekend ruined....


If you have a backup QB on your team that can only run 30% of your offense, why is he on your team?

Short Leash Hootie
09-17-2006, 07:25 PM
some of you need to learn the game of football.

The only ****ing chance we had to win the game, was doing exactly what we did today, eat clock, run the ball, use our punter, win the field position battle, and win the turnover battle. We did all but one, albeit the most important one, but taking Denver into OT AT Denver while missing your pro bowl QB isn't easy to do.

Seriously people, get a FRIGGIN' clue.

Mecca
09-17-2006, 07:25 PM
And I'm getting tired of you assuming that people are calling for the regular offense. What milkman posted is all that I have seen asked for. You are just too dense to pick it up, or too contrary to care.

You apparently missed some of the other posts.......

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-17-2006, 07:28 PM
You apparently missed some of the other posts.......

Bullshit. I've said the same thing multiple times and have been stuck with "We don't have the tackles, we don't have the tackles!!" when i have said multiple times that all i was looking for was for us to run PA with EXTRA BLOCKERS on 1st and 2nd down. That's all I wanted, for f*ck's sake.

the Talking Can
09-17-2006, 07:28 PM
you have to take some chances...2-3 times you have to go deep and see what happens...you can't just assume you will fail, which is what Herm did...

I thought Huard was great...the D was great....the OL was better...but we were afraid to risk winning...Herm was his own worst enemy...he was THIS close to being a ****ing hero....

dirk digler
09-17-2006, 07:32 PM
you have to take some chances...2-3 times you have to go deep and see what happens...you can't just assume you will fail, which is what Herm did...

I thought Huard was great...the D was great....the OL was better...but we were afraid to risk winning...Herm was his own worst enemy...he was THIS close to being a ****ing hero....

Yep I have to agree.

Raiderhader
09-17-2006, 07:32 PM
If you have a backup QB on your team that can only run 30% of your offense, why is he on your team?



Because if he had the ability to run an entire offense he'd be a starter some place else.

ChiefsFanatic
09-17-2006, 07:48 PM
some of you need to learn the game of football.

The only ****ing chance we had to win the game, was doing exactly what we did today, eat clock, run the ball, use our punter, win the field position battle, and win the turnover battle. We did all but one, albeit the most important one, but taking Denver into OT AT Denver while missing your pro bowl QB isn't easy to do.

Seriously people, get a FRIGGIN' clue.

People who think like that should be on the coaching staff..................ummmm wait, they already are. Do you think the 3rd and 4th receiver can get away with only being able to run a third of our plays? How about the backup RB only knowing a third of the plays?

Why is it OK for a backup QB to only be able to run a third of our plays? If he can't run OUR offense, instead of HIS offense, then he should not be on the team.

Short Leash Hootie
09-17-2006, 07:49 PM
People who think like that should be on the coaching staff..................ummmm wait, they already are. Do you think the 3rd and 4th receiver can get away with only being able to run a third of our plays? How about the backup RB only knowing a third of the plays?

Why is it OK for a backup QB to only be able to run a third of our plays? If he can't run OUR offense, instead of HIS offense, then he should not be on the team.

This just in...

THERE'S A ****ING REASON HE'S A BACKUP QB AND NOT PEYTON FRIGGIN' MANNING.

He knows our offense, I can guarantee you that...but he doesn't have the pocket awareness or the intagibles of OUR PRO BOWL STARTING QUARTERBACK.

Rausch
09-17-2006, 07:52 PM
This is exactly why the Steelers will never win a super bowl...

ChiefsFanatic
09-17-2006, 07:52 PM
This just in...

THERE'S A ****ING REASON HE'S A BACKUP QB AND NOT PEYTON FRIGGIN' MANNING.

He knows our offense, I can guarantee you that...but he doesn't have the pocket awareness or the intagibles of OUR PRO BOWL STARTING QUARTERBACK.

Well, then you didn't do any bitching about Jordan Black last week, huh? Because if you are a backup, there is a reason you are a backup, and therefore it is OK for you to suck.

the Talking Can
09-17-2006, 07:55 PM
This is exactly why the Steelers will never win a super bowl...

actually, the Steelers prove my point....they took risks and were rewarded for it...Cowher learned....Herm hasn't....yet

Short Leash Hootie
09-17-2006, 07:55 PM
Well, then you didn't do any bitching about Jordan Black last week, huh? Because if you are a backup, there is a reason you are a backup, and therefore it is OK for you to suck.
I think there's a bit of a difference in responsibilities between a backup OL and a backup QB.

Mosbonian
09-17-2006, 07:56 PM
This just in...

THERE'S A ****ING REASON HE'S A BACKUP QB AND NOT PEYTON FRIGGIN' MANNING.

He knows our offense, I can guarantee you that...but he doesn't have the pocket awareness or the intagibles of OUR PRO BOWL STARTING QUARTERBACK.

OK...he's a backup QB......we got it.

Did you see all the great QB's that he was a back-up to? Might have been nice had he learned something from all those great QB's.....all he has done is be sufficient enough to hold a clipboard on the sideline.

To use the words in this thread....I'm getting tired of all the threads making Huard out to be the answer to our problems here. Anyone pleased with the performance of our QB needs to learn football.

mmaddog
*******

Short Leash Hootie
09-17-2006, 07:59 PM
OK...he's a backup QB......we got it.

Did you see all the great QB's that he was a back-up to? Might have been nice had he learned something from all those great QB's.....all he has done is be sufficient enough to hold a clipboard on the sideline.

To use the words in this thread....I'm getting tired of all the threads making Huard out to be the answer to our problems here. Anyone pleased with the performance of our QB needs to learn football.

mmaddog
*******

Wow.

You couldn't be anymore wrong.

Short Leash Hootie
09-17-2006, 08:01 PM
Once again...

Huard = backup QB (third string a year ago)

No one expected the guy to play like he played today. He just ensured himself a nice little raise from someone next year.

Mosbonian
09-17-2006, 08:02 PM
Wow.

You couldn't be anymore wrong.

Interesting....I was thinking the same thing about your comments...

mmaddog
*******

Mosbonian
09-17-2006, 08:02 PM
Once again...

Huard = backup QB (third string a year ago)

No one expected the guy to play like he played today. He just ensured himself a nice little raise from someone next year.

Seems like you have some pretty low expectations...

mmaddog
*******

Rausch
09-17-2006, 08:05 PM
OK...he's a backup QB......we got it.

Did you see all the great QB's that he was a back-up to? Might have been nice had he learned something from all those great QB's.....all he has done is be sufficient enough to hold a clipboard on the sideline.

To use the words in this thread....I'm getting tired of all the threads making Huard out to be the answer to our problems here. Anyone pleased with the performance of our QB needs to learn football.

mmaddog
*******

And then dip a hammer in broken glass and jalapeno juice and repeatedly beat themselves in the scrotum until they lose consciousness...

InvisibleCloudBein
09-17-2006, 08:11 PM
Since when is Trent Green some amazing QB that wins games by himself? Pro-Bowl? Jake plummer was a pro-bowler last year, so excuse me if I don't think one probowl in many years makes you a great QB. Green is a decent DB, but Huard was over 70% in completions and didn't make any huge mistakes. One turnover. The Chiefs would likely lost this game even if Green was healthy.

Face it, the Chiefs will never never never never win in Invesco. 0-6 and this was the closest to a win by far, because the gameplan was conservative and low risk, and the defense was excellent against a pretty crappy Denver offense.

Short Leash Hootie
09-17-2006, 08:15 PM
Since when is Trent Green some amazing QB that wins games by himself? Pro-Bowl? Jake plummer was a pro-bowler last year, so excuse me if I don't think one probowl in many years makes you a great QB. Green is a decent DB, but Huard was over 70% in completions and didn't make any huge mistakes. One turnover. The Chiefs would likely lost this game even if Green was healthy.

Face it, the Chiefs will never never never never win in Invesco. 0-6 and this was the closest to a win by far, because the gameplan was conservative and low risk, and the defense was excellent against a pretty crappy Denver offense.


2003 ring a bell!? Little Dante Hall!?

Rausch
09-17-2006, 08:16 PM
Since when is Trent Green some amazing QB that wins games by himself? Pro-Bowl? Jake plummer was a pro-bowler last year, so excuse me if I don't think one probowl in many years makes you a great QB. Green is a decent DB, but Huard was over 70% in completions and didn't make any huge mistakes. One turnover.

I'll say a prayer for you. It probably won't do much good because I'm not real tight with the creator, but at this point there's nothing to lose...

4th and Long
09-17-2006, 08:18 PM
The Chiefs would likely lost this game even if Green was healthy.
Disagree. Green knows the offense inside and out, in his sleep. The play selections would have been a bit different. BTW, if you think Green is average, you must not know anything about him.
Circa Last Year.

Trent became only the 3rd quarterback in the history of the NFL to have four straight seasons at 90.0 passing efficiency or above.

Most consecutive years, QB rating of 90.0 or higher

8 - Steve Young, 1991-1998
4 - Trent Green, 2002-2005
4 - Brett Farve, 1994-1997
3 - Joe Montana, 1983-1985
3 - Dan Fouts, 1981-1983
3 - Kurt Warner, 1999-2001
3 - Rich Gannon, 2000-2002
3 - Peyton Manning, 2003-2005

InvisibleCloudBein
09-17-2006, 08:37 PM
I don't think he's average. by decent, I mean not elite but above average. He hasn't usually had great games in Denver , and he didn't look that good last week before the cheap shot ended his day. I'm saying Huard played a very credible road game and didn't lose this game for the chiefs.

They could have won the game with Huard, which is more than we could say 2001-05, when every loss was 7+ and several were blowouts.

ChiTown
09-17-2006, 08:43 PM
And then dip a hammer in broken glass and jalapeno juice and repeatedly beat themselves in the scrotum until they lose consciousness...


:LOL: