PDA

View Full Version : Ten Wild Predictions for the 2001 Chiefs


KCJohnny
05-27-2001, 04:40 PM
Well, its the off season and not much is happening, so might as well stir up some controversy with my wild, highly subjective speculations.
1. Trent Green will be leading the NFL in every passing category except TDs when (God forbid) he gets injured (not necessarily his knee). Todd Collins comes in and picks up right where Trent left off leading the Chiefs to their second consecutive 4,000+ yd season.
2. KC will set a franchise record for TD passes ALLOWED (current record: 25).
3. Donnie Edwards will barely miss being named the AFC Defensive player of the year due to the team's middle-of-the-pack overall defensive ranking. He will win the AFC defensive player of the week no less than twice.
4. Rich Gannon goes down scrambling early in the season as KC sweeps Gruden.
5. Jamar Threatt (currently in NFLE) will emerge as a huge star in the KC interior defensive line.
6. By week 10, Dick Vermiel will be feeling the heated scrutiny of the KC fan base/media reporting. He will keep his cool and his job.
7. Chiefs will be swept by Denver (Gosh, that hurts). Shanny rejoicing now that Gun is gone (Shanny 0-4 vs. Gun). Typical score: Donx 41, Chiefs 36.
8. Bubby retires during camp.
9. Al Saunders looks like, well, a rookie offensive coordinator for the whole month of September, but gets on track due to the suddenly emergent rushing attack, led by...


10. ...an extremely productive RBbC led by Tony Richardson, but featuring EVERY RB in the stable (not my idea! It's History at work!).

KCJ
Blind, deceived homer

Zebedee DuBois
05-27-2001, 04:54 PM
I love #4, but think #7 stinks.

We really have to turn that raiders streak around to the way God (undoubtedly a CHIEFS fan) intended.

KCJohnny
05-27-2001, 05:00 PM
Zeb:
I don't want ANYBODY hurt, but those are just some predictions based on Green's proclivity to being sacked (career: once every 10 attempts) and Gannon's risk taking with his 35 year old body.
Sweep the Raidas!
KCJ:eek:

JOhn
05-27-2001, 05:17 PM
#1 Just don't see it happening. If so I really don't see Todd doing anything except a Warren Moon impression.

#2 No WAY!! ( willing to bet on that one)

#3 Agree, He gets no respect.

#4 Agreed

#5 Don't know enough about him.

#6 Agree, anything less than 10-0 and he will be badgered.

#7 Nope it will be a split

#8 Doubt it. Purely rumor.

#9 Agreed but I think it will be more of the O learning curve.

#10 History??? Sorry but that was Gun/Marty history. Yes all backs will get some work, but NOTHING like the rotation we've seen in the past. And I think it will be Holmes leading the pack UNLESS he gets hurt.

old_geezer
05-27-2001, 05:38 PM
#1 No chance. Green's good but not that good.

#2 Good possibility. Our young DB's worry me.

#3 Good player, but I doubt if he's even voted to the Pro Bowl.Like John says, he gets no respect.

#4 Gannon is tough. I think he'll survive again.

#5 Who??

#6 A gimme.

#7 I'll go 1-1 not because I think it will happen but because your scenario is too painful.

#8 Wishfull thinking

#9 Learning curve of PASS-MINDED offense.

#10 Unless Holmes gets hurt, he will get the majority of carries.

Chiefs Pantalones
05-27-2001, 06:55 PM
Johnny,

Your amazing:rolleyes:

The Lakers prove my point that you have to change with the times (in all sports) to be successful, your Jazz are not/were not, trying to change or add more players to help them out.

Why wasn't Martyball successful? Wasn't able (stubborness and stupidity) to change with the times, it had to be his way or no way (thats sad)

CG

DV is the better HC, he has a Championship...and we all know that thats all that counts when you grade coaches

Warrior5
05-27-2001, 08:41 PM
Good to hear from you. Interesting prognostications...

1. Wishful thinking, but hope it happens (except for the Green injury).

2. Believeable...our secondary is suspect right now. I'll withhold judgment until after TC. If Robinson's D does "attack, attack, attack", resulting in numerous QB crushings and pressured throws, we may be pleasantly surpised.

3. Agreed, as long as he isn't dropping back into coverage 75% of the time.

4. Not hoping for Gannon to be injured, but if this prediction comes true, the season is a success in my book.

5. OK...anything that stuffs the run is good.

6. Agreed.

7. Ouch! I'd be willing to split with the Raiders to avoid this!

8. OK.

9. Not so sure. I give Saunders a bit more credit.

10. Disagree, but...if it works, I'll take it.

#7 would definitely suck...I respect the Raiders; just can't stand Al Davis. But I <B>loathe</B> the Donkeys from the top on down, as evidenced by my signature.

KCJohnny
05-27-2001, 09:28 PM
Warrior 5,
Great to hear from YOU, sir!
I think military analogies are worthy to be invoked here. Maybe you could identify for our civilian posters the skill and logistical (ie, blocking and tackling) support necessary to sustain the audacity and shock of an attack, attack, attack force. Basically, air power affects the battle, but ground power WINS it.
KCJ
82nd ABN DIV

KCJohnny
05-27-2001, 09:34 PM
Oh, and JOhn (welcome back, buddy!),
its not just Gun and Marty's history!
41 years of Chiefs history and only 1 RB has ever gotten more than 51% of the team's total rushing attempts: Okoye in '89 (under Marty, of ALL people!). The closest Hank Stram ever came to a 'featured' back was Mike Garrett in '68, who rushed 236 times (51% of the team's attempts). To put things in perspective, even Marv Levy succumbed to the spirit of RBbC: in 1978, the Chiefs rushed for over 2,900 yds (!) with no back gaining more than 483 yards. Vermiel is not immune to the spirit of RBbC and he is one injury away from employing it as well.

Cody:
I'll take Stockton and Malone 1000 times before taking Shaq and Kobe!
See ya in the HOF, baby!

KCJ

Warrior5
05-27-2001, 09:44 PM
Knock off the sir stuff; all die-hard Chiefs fans are of equal rank!
Since you mentioned it, I did give a typical COA (course of action) on the Star BB just before the Rams game last year. Specific analogies I used were:

Key Terrain = field position
IPB (intelligence preparation of the battlefield) = reading defensive and offensive sets, and analysis of the terrain and weather in deciding on a COA.
Deep Attack = primarily play-action pass deep.
Fixing = O-line and TE blocking to support...
Maneuver = moving the chains; rushing game.
Fire Support = passing game, KOs, and punts.

I <B>often</B> use football analogies to drive home concepts to the Majors attending CGSC here at Fort Leavenworth. Also, I begin each Friday class by announcing "It's Red Friday here in America's Heartland", and let the students wear the favorite team cap in class that day. Donkey fans wear caps at risk of their grades!

Any jumps lately?

KCJohnny
05-29-2001, 07:03 PM
Warrior 5:
Great COA!
That helps me see the battlefield better. Thanks!
I bet Jimmy Raye used you COAs in that whopping 54-point performance.

I have a jump tomorrow (Wednesday 30 May) at 1750 Time over Target on Sicily drop zone. I get thge distinct honor of being the #1 jumper (first out the door).

Skip Towne
05-29-2001, 07:33 PM
Hey, Johnny. 41 years of Chiefs history? They have only been in KC since '63. I get 38 years. You aren't counting the Dallas Texans are you?

Warrior5
05-29-2001, 08:55 PM
I can see you now...stepping forward after equipment check and yelling, "ALL OK, JUMPMASTER!". Then he points at you and yells, "STAND IN THE DOOR!"
Hope you had a great Memorial Day.

milkman
05-29-2001, 09:13 PM
Originally posted by KCJohnny


Cody:
I'll take Stockton and Malone 1000 times before taking Shaq and Kobe!
See ya in the HOF, baby!

KCJ

Geez,
You are truley in love with mediocraty.
And in this case, mediocraty as performed by two of the biggest cybaby, A-Holes in the NBA.

Rausch
05-30-2001, 12:13 AM
If for no other reason than being a Jazz fan, I'd take Mailman/Stockton over the Disfunctional duo...Kobe is an immature brat will millions, Shaq is subject to dilusions of grandeour(sp is horrendous), and they both hate each other.

Malone and Stockton are probably BOTH on viagra and old as the hills, but they are a team. They compliment each other and DON'T gripe and complain about who gets the glory.

They don't win championchips, but I'd rather be proud of my good but not great team than ashamed of my winner...

The Bad Guy
05-30-2001, 12:53 AM
Brad,

I would like to know how Kobe is immature.

At 22, he shows more poise than athletes who are in their 30s.

I would be even willing to say he is the most mature 22 year old professional athlete in sports.

He has a swagger about himself, but he knows what he wants, and speaks well beyond his years.

In the face of serious criticism all year, Kobe never once fired back at his critics, he just let his play during the playoffs speak. He could of taken shots at Phil Jackson for saying he rigged bball games in high school. He could of slammed the countless media figures who were making him sound like a bad guy.

But he didn't.

That's maturity.

The whole Shaq/Kobe feud was a minor issue, but it became a major issue due to the media. It was blown out of proportion completely.

I wouldn't say both players are great friends. But they respect eachother, and thats all you can ask out of a teammate.

I find it funny how you speak of maturity and then talk about your respect for Karl Malone.

I respect how long Malone has been able to play at a high level, and his ability but thats as far as it goes.

Malone for years has been the master of cheapshots, and dirty play. That is his trademark as much as that fadeaway 15 footer.

The reason Malone and Stockton never griped about who gets the glory is because both never had the ability of a Shaq or Kobe.

Stockton made his mark as a passer, and Malone made his mark with a medium range jumper and in the post.

Thats how they compliment eachother. Stockton is in essence the quarterback and Malone is the receiver. One has to get the ball to the other.

Shaq and Kobe are both prolific scorers in this league. Thats how they have made their reputation. You expect personality conflicts if you have been the go-to guy your whole life.

Thats the nature of competitive sports.

But now both players have found a way to co-exist and could become the most dominant playoff team in NBA history.

As a fan of the Lakers, I'm not ashamed of that.

Malone and Stockton have co-existed forever, and have never been good enough to get a ring. If I was a Jazz fan, that would give me a lot to be ashamed of. Having two of the top 50 players ever on your roster for the last 10+ years, and never have enough juice to win it all.

Rausch
05-30-2001, 01:04 AM
Has Malone lost his temper and acted like a fool?

Yep. Its a shame, but he has. I can't argue that, and it's a big black mark on an otherwise solid personal accomplishment career.

The great thing about Stockton is that he's like an offensive lineman, you know he's doing his job because you don't hear about him. Shooting the three and passing off to the main threat don't pull the media away from physically dominant guys like Kobe/Shaq...Won't happen.

Shaq has impressed me. He's acted as much a jerk as Malone at times, especially in Orlando. But he does seem to have matured greatly since the coach of the century arrived. Kobe has been labeled as immature by teammates and media both. His talent probably is the best in the game, but his ego might be holding him back. He has done an admirable job of keeping composure through this whole magnified media escipade, but I just can't fight the feeling this guy is biding time until Shaq either leaves or allows the young stud his limelight.


It's hard to argue with success, I just don't get the "feeling" from this team that the old Lakers or the earlier Bulls put off...Those at least felt like true teams in every way...

The Bad Guy
05-30-2001, 01:26 AM
Brad,

I would like to know how Kobe is immature.

At 22, he shows more poise than athletes who are in their 30s.

I would be even willing to say he is the most mature 22 year old professional athlete in sports.

He has a swagger about himself, but he knows what he wants, and speaks well beyond his years.

In the face of serious criticism all year, Kobe never once fired back at his critics, he just let his play during the playoffs speak. He could of taken shots at Phil Jackson for saying he rigged bball games in high school. He could of slammed the countless media figures who were making him sound like a bad guy.

But he didn't.

That's maturity.

The whole Shaq/Kobe feud was a minor issue, but it became a major issue due to the media. It was blown out of proportion completely.

I wouldn't say both players are great friends. But they respect eachother, and thats all you can ask out of a teammate.

I find it funny how you speak of maturity and then talk about your respect for Karl Malone.

I respect how long Malone has been able to play at a high level, and his ability but thats as far as it goes.

Malone for years has been the master of cheapshots, and dirty play. That is his trademark as much as that fadeaway 15 footer.

The reason Malone and Stockton never griped about who gets the glory is because both never had the ability of a Shaq or Kobe.

Stockton made his mark as a passer, and Malone made his mark with a medium range jumper and in the post.

Thats how they compliment eachother. Stockton is in essence the quarterback and Malone is the receiver. One has to get the ball to the other.

Shaq and Kobe are both prolific scorers in this league. Thats how they have made their reputation. You expect personality conflicts if you have been the go-to guy your whole life.

Thats the nature of competitive sports.

But now both players have found a way to co-exist and could become the most dominant playoff team in NBA history.

As a fan of the Lakers, I'm not ashamed of that.

Malone and Stockton have co-existed forever, and have never been good enough to get a ring. If I was a Jazz fan, that would give me a lot to be ashamed of. Having two of the top 50 players ever on your roster for the last 10+ years, and never have enough juice to win it all.

milkman
05-30-2001, 07:38 AM
Brad,

"It's hard to argue with success, I just don't get the "feeling" from this team that the old Lakers or the earlier Bulls put off...Those at least felt like true teams in every way..."

Until recently, I would have to agree with that thought. But the chemistry has changed. I think every team needs that one guy that all the players both like and respect to pull teams together and motivates teammates to submerge their egos for the good of the team.Ususally that player is the team's star. For Chicago, it was MJ. For those previous Lakers teams it was Magic.
For this team, for various reasons, that player is Derek Fisher. He is the heart and soul of the Lakers. It is no coincidence, that this team really came together, and started playing the way it is capable of when Derek Fisher returned to the lineup from an injury that kept him sidelined for the first 62 games.

KCJohnny
05-30-2001, 07:58 AM
I don't know how this discussion turned into the NBA, but bottom line for me is, you stick with your team and your guys, whether they win or not. For me, that's the Jazz and the Chiefs. Its great to win it all, but if we don't, I don't shift my loyalty to the latest winner or look for a bandwagon to jump on.
KCJ
Knees in the breeze today at 800 feet!
Airborne!

Chiefs Pantalones
05-30-2001, 10:29 PM
Karl and Stockton are great players...but they don't know how to win.

CG

they'll never win a ring

California Injun
05-31-2001, 12:27 AM
Karl Malone is the biggest a-hole in basketball.

How many times has he threatened to leave the Jazz because he wasn't getting his props?

He was the jerk that popped off about wanting Magic out of the league when he tested positive for HIV. He wasn't afraid of contracting the disease but wanted to eliminate the Lakers as a threat in the Western Conference.

He is constantly throwing elbows every time he posts up or grabs a board.

I loved the fact that MJ stole the ball from his balding butt in Game #6 at Utah in the closing moments.

I loved it even more when he bricked that 20 footer in Game #5 this year to give the Mavericks the series win.

Now this ingrate will hang around long enough to capture Kareem's All-Time scoring record in two years DESPITE the impossibility of the Jazz every sniffing the NBA Finals again.

Postmark this knucklehead "Return to Sender"!!!

KCJohnny
05-31-2001, 09:16 PM
I always appreciate in-depth analysis and heart felt opinions like "Karl Malone is the biggest a-hole in the NBA." That's intellectually stimulating.

You don't anything about Karl Malone or his humble beginnings or his personal life and struggles.

I really wish that we could stay on topic and at the very least refrain from drunken boorishness. That's just my preference.

Another prediction for the 2001 Chiefs: they'll attract just as many hollow, vapid, rude and intellectually stunted commentators online as Gunther's Chiefs.

KCJ

keg in kc
05-31-2001, 09:19 PM
If you're calling Gunther's Chiefs hollow, vapid, rude and intellectually stunted, I'd have to disagree with all but the rude and intellectually stunted part.

;)

keg in kc
05-31-2001, 09:23 PM
Hmm, and thinking about it, I guess "vapid" fits too.

So how dare you call the Gunther Chiefs "hollow"!!!

;)

Chiefs Pantalones
05-31-2001, 09:26 PM
LOL! Johnny! Why all the negativism (is that a word?)

I'll bet you'll feel pretty dumb if the Chiefs win a Championship with type of philosophy? Would you fold if the Chiefs won a title with this type of play or still stick to Proctor Ball? :D ;)

CG

just curious

KCJohnny
05-31-2001, 09:59 PM
A better question is will you still be handing me advice if the Chiefs finish 7-9, don't improve on the league's 5th best passing offense and 8th best O overall, and give up a franchise record 26+ TD passes?

KCJ
Landed safely on his airborne jump, thanks be to God!

California Injun
05-31-2001, 11:25 PM
KCJohnny,

Hmmm... I did not see you refute any of my points about your "humble" Karl Malone.

I guess it is better to attack the person making the points rather than offer a counterpoint to the opinions.

BTW, I think I saw Malone pulling up in his big rig last week at the Staples Center. Reports have it that he was late AGAIN on his "deliveries".

"Vapid" and "Hollow" would explain the number of Championship Rings on his fingers.

"Vapid" and "Hollow" would explain his ignorant comments about Magic Johnson and his HIV status.

"Vapid" and "Hollow" would accurately detail his threats to leave the Jazz every 2-3 years in his weak attempts to squeeze more dollars out of the Jazz organization.

The only thing that's "humble" about Malone is the pie he has been eating after coming up empty against the Mavericks. How do the Jazz lose a 2-0 series lead with this icon?

But let's watch Karl hang around and attempt to break Kareem's record while piddling around with a Jazz team that is past its prime.

At least Kareem was winning Championships at 40 while amassing his stats.

Logical
06-01-2001, 01:56 AM
Chiefs defense allows 21 or less passing TDs

Chiefs defense has 5 more sacks than last season

Chiefs defense produces 10 more turnovers than last season

Chiefs defense jells by midseason and allows an average of 14 points per game last 8 games

Offense has balance for the first time in three seasons and exceeds 6000 yards and 425 points (note original 500 points was math done in head error)

Chiefs have a 1200 yard rusher

Chiefs have 4 offensive and 1 defensive player make Pro Bowl

All fans will wonder what took so long to fire the three stooges after seeing the Chiefs with actual game plans each game and ability to adjust to the other team each game.

Fans wonder where this team that averages 20 points a game in first half came from, is it really the Chiefs playing agressive offensive football in the first half?

Fans actually enjoy seeing offense on the field on third down situations.

Fans are shocked when head coach says meaningful things without 30 to 40 uses of the word I per interview. Fans are also amazed when head coach actually performs on things he says prior to season, and games.

Fans are not ashamed of a single performance even in the losses.

Fans like and cheer the QB and admire his courage under fire, ability to make reads, ability to see all the receivers, and his on the field leadership.

Fans wonder what took this team so long to drop the ridiculous RBBC with situational Running Backs.

Opponents are shocked when they do not know what type of play will be run by the offensive personel on the field.

Opposing coaches do not out perform the Chiefs coaching staff every single game

By midseason sportswriters and broadcasters are interested in the Chiefs

I do not dread facing any team at any time during the season, and that is the best thing of all!

Saggysack
06-01-2001, 02:35 AM
Sorry Proctor but we got into this over at Pigskin and I still think the Millenium version of Gillmans running offense is based upon 1 RB being able to both run the football inside and outside as well as being able to catch balls equally as well. I'm afraid when and if you add a 2nd RB to the mix to split carries it makes the running game more of a focal point and advantage especially with the likes of Holmes and Richardson but it would deplete the advantages of a passing game that the offense will rely on to make the offense scheme effective.

keg in kc
06-01-2001, 09:05 AM
Well done, Jim!!

I can't say I argue with any one of those predictions except for 500 points - that's setting the bar pretty d@mn high!

I especially like the last one, "I do not dread facing any team at any time during the season, and that is the best thing of all!"

Couldn't have said it better myself ;)

KCJohnny
06-01-2001, 03:08 PM
Jim,
Great to hear from you again.
We have completely switched roles (almost). Your predictions sound as homeristic as anything I've ever prognosticated. 500 points? Never been done before. I think the 400 barrier was cracked only twice and both times in the 1960s. The closest thing the modern Chiefs have shown is the 1999 Chiefs racking up a stellar 390 points (77 by defense and speacial teams). The Chiefs had 6,000 yards this year, so that is doable.
I think you are WAY too optimistic about the Chiefs defense. I see the opposite, BTW. And the '01 Chiefs having 59 sacks???? (You said 5 more than this year). I doubt it, especially without Chester collapsing the middle of the pocket setting up the DEs.

Nevertheless, I hope your predictions are true!

CalInjun,
I'll not argue with you about Karl Malone. He rose from the dirt rural poverty of Louisianna as one of 9 kids whose father comitted suicide to become the NBA's 2nd all-time leading scorer. He is a selfless giver to dozens of charities and a devoted father of 6. He is no god, but he's one heckuva ball player and a decent human being in my book.

KCJ:cool:

keg in kc
06-01-2001, 03:25 PM
Yeah, Johnny, 500 points is an awful high mark to aim for - that's over 30 a game.

One I'd like to add:

The 2001 Chiefs defense will give up at least 200 less rushing yards over the course of the season, dropping them closer to 100 yards/game, if not below.

BTW, the 2000 Chiefs fell short of 6,000 yards. I'd warrent that to the poor rushing offense, since KC was ahead of only Atlanta, Arizona, Carolina, Cleveland, New England and San Diego in rushing yards.

Hopefully that statistic will be improved upon in 2001...

Concerning the defense, the only problem I see is with the cornerbacks, but that's a big one. We'll be fine on the D-line, especially if Williams can recover. The linebackers will be solid with Bush returning to form and we have a very good pair of safties. But the cornerbacks...

Good d-line play could help with that, but only time will tell, however. In any case, other than who the starting corners will be, I'm not the least bit concerned with the defense because I honestly believe that we have some solid talent.

Logical
06-01-2001, 05:27 PM
Folks 500 was the result of bad math on my part I was shooting for an average of 27 points per game and made the mistake of doing the math in my head.

The number realistically that I think is possible is 425, I am revising my post to that number.

Thanks for pointing out the unrealistic number.

keg in kc
06-01-2001, 06:17 PM
425 is still a bold prediction, Jim. 27 per game is a heck o' lotta scoring. Our highly touted (*cough*) offense of last season could only muster 355 points, or about 22 per game.

Still, though, if memory serves, we also only scored more than 20 points twice in the last 8 games, so we were might well have been on pace for that after the first half of the season. Maybe it's not so far-fetched after all.

Looking at the games, I'd say things are pretty favorable schedule-wise for scoring a lot of points. We have only two home games in December, both against teams weak against the pass, and the other two games are in relatively warm locales (warm compared to KC...). We get potential chilly games, like Seattle, Washington, Denver and the Jets out of the way by the second week in November. And for the "well, you can't throw in Arrowhead in December" naysayers, well, HOGWASH!! Elvis, if memory serves, threw for over 300 yards last December in the Carolina game, and it was neither warm nor favorable in terms of wind (I was there...).

So, maybe it can be done...

However, for that to happen, the offense would have to be running on all cylindars for all 16 games and that's a tall order for any team.

TEX
06-02-2001, 01:05 AM
keg,

"Bush returning to form"

WHAT makes you think this? Has he given any indication that he will? Are you banking on the theory that since his family problems are settled that he will play? Maybe he was the benefactor of playing with Junior and co. all those years. He is at best a "supporter" and IMHO will not make a significant contribution this year.

TEX
06-02-2001, 01:07 AM
Johnny,
I'm glad to see that you're NOT spouting your "usual" 12-4 prediction again this year!:cool:

Rausch
06-02-2001, 01:14 AM
I'd say 9-7...

Everything ISN'T as rosy as anyone ever describes it. Injuries happen. Upsets happen. The toughest division in the NFL has finally happened to the AFC West.


We are rebuilding. All I ask is that Green and Holmes show the talent on the field they have been proclaimed to have off of it. We finish 7-9 but our offense is the killer DV/CP describe I'll be happy. It means DV is half way there in year 1. I can deal with that.


But if our 31 year old 1st rounder and our rb cast off both tank, I don't know if I can hold back the disgust and anguish...

:(

KCJohnny
06-02-2001, 09:21 AM
My gut feeling tells me that by November, this team will be looking more and more like the Kansas City Chiefs of '93-97. Which is to say, the foundation of the offense will be the rushing attack, and the overall focus will balance out with more committment to improving the defense. Just a feeling. All you people hoping for Rams West will get a pocket full of thrills in the warm September sun, but Al Saunders will remember his 10 years on the Chiefs sideline kicking butt with rushing and defense and field position. Maybe I'm wrong.

12-4? Possible. But the schedule is just too dang tough. 8-8 with a lot of close games. The problem is, there won't be a '93-97 Chiefs defense on the other side of that potent offense.

Kyle, the Chiefs may have fallen a few yards short of 6,000, but it wasn't many.

Jim, I see the Chiefs getting about 24 ppg, still a great O, but amassing about 360-385 points while giving up about 340.

KCJ

keg in kc
06-02-2001, 09:48 AM
Just a gut feeling about Bush returning to form. Like any gut feeling it's a 50/50 proposition...

milkman
06-02-2001, 09:57 AM
This from John,
All you people hoping for Rams West will get a pocket full of thrills in the warm September sun, but Al Saunders will remember his 10 years on the Chiefs sideline kicking butt with rushing and defense and field position. Maybe I'm wrong.

My gut feeling is that even if he's wrong for all to see, he'll come up with stats to prove he's right.

KCJohnny
06-02-2001, 01:32 PM
What's wrong with stats to back up an opinion?
Opinion is the fuel driving this BB, men.
KCJ

milkman
06-02-2001, 01:57 PM
Nothing is wrong with using stats to support your opinion.
However, you wield stats like a club and use it to constantly hit us over the head.
Our ground game was only marginal in '99.
Our offense was something less than stellar in '00.
You, of course, can produce stats to tell me otherwise.
I don't care about stats. I base my opinion on what I see on the field.
That club is starting to make me dizzy, though. Evey time I see it, my eyes get blurry.

Gaz
06-02-2001, 02:11 PM
There is nothing wrong with statistics, provided you realize that they are not reality, nor do they even reflect reality accurately. Statistics is a tool for comparing apples and oranges by throwing out a portion of the defining characteristics.

That is the problem with statistics. By carefully choosing the parameters and filters, you can "prove" almost anything. You can even make a case that Jimmy Raye was a good OC, even though anyone watching the games would know that is false.

xoxo~
Gaz
Has a small place in his toolbox for statistical analysis.

Zebedee DuBois
06-02-2001, 02:19 PM
Dr. Bunsen Honeydew??
:D

Well he is an all around man of science!

Beaker
(err.. Zeb)

keg in kc
06-02-2001, 02:47 PM
Right on Gaz. Stats can prove anything, especially when you only choose to use a portion of them. They're also very misleading unless you use them with an eye on the individual games and even individual situations.

California Injun
06-02-2001, 08:31 PM
Here's a "stat"

The Chiefs have not made the post-season since 1997 and have not won a play-off game since the 28-20 win over Houston in 1993.

The only rotisserie I'm interested in is the one supporting my BBQ chicken over an open flame.

KCJohnny
06-02-2001, 09:33 PM
I could use the same arguments as you guys. I SAW Donnell Bennett creaming people in '99 fairly frequently, yet the stats showed him to be a middle-of-the-pack tailback. I SAW him run over the Raiders on the final day of the Chiefs '99 season yaet the stats say he gained about 84 yards. This thing works two ways, men.

Milkman, I apologize to you. I never intended to club anybody with stats. Please forgive me if I have bullied my points.

Finally, when your team is missing the post season, stats point to positive and hopeful signs of future progress and achievement. The other thing to keep in mind is, some of us have careers or financial limitations that keep us from seeing every game, and stats become the lifeline. I grew up as a boy literally computing the batting averages of the Orioles (as an 11 year old!) each night based on the boxscores in the paper because I could not see the games on TV. Just an old habit.

FWIW, Dick Vermiel is a HUGE believer in stats and used them extensively to build his columns for Realteam.com.

KCJ
Knows there is no stat for planting the enemy on his 4th point of contact (that's airborne lingo for butt).

California Injun
06-02-2001, 09:45 PM
Well then, I like the "stat" that Dick Vermeil has taken two different teams to the Super Bowl in his coaching career.

He helped revolutionize the offense schemes by using an attacking style that throws the ball to every available receiver.

He loves using a single back offense.

He replaced the Three Stooges.

But somehow these "stats" are blasphemous to certain Old School fans who are prediciting doom and gloom before the first ball is snapped.

Go figure.

KCJohnny
06-03-2001, 08:55 PM
I was going to let this thread die, but then I saw the parting shot about doom and gloom.
My 10 predictions are posted above for everyone to see. Hardly doom and gloom.
You decide.

It's the major sportswriters who are predicting the Chiefs will be bottom feeders. My prediction is posted above.

KCJ:confused:

California Injun
06-04-2001, 12:08 AM
I've decided....

DOOM and GLOOM

Green get injured.
Defense sets record for giving up over 25 TDs
Donnie gets screwed out of Pro Bowl because of bad defense.
Vermiel feeling media heat by week #10
Broncos will sweep Chiefs.
Chiefs sweep Raiders because Gannon is hurt.
We end up with the dreaded RBBC by seasons end.

7-8 predictions out of your 10 is negative.

Try hitting the spin cycle on your dryer instead of this thread.

KCTitus
06-04-2001, 10:30 AM
mmmm...cut and paste material. :)

KCJohnny
06-06-2001, 11:49 AM
Negative?
Depends on your perspective.

1. Positive. Chiefs lead league in passing. Collins performs.
2. Negative. What do you see that suggests otherwise?
3. Positive. Donnie is a star.
4. Positive. We sweep Raiders. How can that be negative????
5. Positive. Chiefs discover a new star right at home.
6. Neutral. Just what happens 'round here.
7. Negative. I calls 'em as I sees 'em.
8. Positive. Bubby has no future here.
9. Positive. Saunders struggles for 1 month, is on track for 3 months. How can that be negative?
10. Positive. Chiefs discover potent rushing attack. How can that be negative????

7 positives, 2 negatives, and one facts-of-life observation. Sorry, that's not exactly a negative read to me.
Ta ta!
KCJ
:cool:

keg in kc
06-06-2001, 12:03 PM
One thing I just remembered, Johnny. It's a minor point, really, but if I'm not mistaken (and I might be wrong about this...), Saunders was an offensive coordinator for a year with the Chargers prior to being head coach (in '84 and part of '85 maybe). Point being that while there may be struggles with the offense at the start of the season, I don't think it will be from a lack of experience on Saunder's part. The guy's been coaching in the NFL for 18 years...

KCJohnny
06-06-2001, 12:06 PM
Kyle:
I didn't say that Saunders would fail. I certainly laud his impressive (KCCHiefs) credentials.
I just speculated that with a new QB, a new system and some key new players (Weigeman, Holmes, Horne/Minnis, etc...) against some stout opponents (check the Chiefs' Sept schedule) that Saunders will look mortal.
KCJ

keg in kc
06-06-2001, 12:15 PM
Okay, I was only referring to your label of Saunders as a "rookie offensive coordinater" (which he may be, I could be wrong...).

I've said a number of times that the offense may take a few weeks to completely gel, that's just the way things are. Then again, they might come together completely during training camp. We should be able to tell in August how things will play out in September, and, frankly, I'm more worried about the defense than the offense. We have a higher level of talent to work with on the offensive side of the ball (IMHO) which should help to expedite the process...

It will be interesting to watch it all play out. I've never watched a training camp with as much scrutiny as I will this fall.

KCJohnny
06-06-2001, 04:28 PM
Kyle, I'm 95% sure that Al Saunders has been a positions coach for the past 12 years. Even if he has been a coordinator or an HC, its been a while.

As for training camp, I hope that the new O will come together. They's have about 5-6 quarters to play together before opening against the Raidas. I'll be VERY surprised if there aren't SOME growing pains.

KCJ