PDA

View Full Version : Who thinks the Chiefs can win 10 games this season?


kcfan
08-11-2001, 09:24 AM
I have a real feeling that this team will shock the NFL. I look at the roster and see alot of new people but there still are several veterans on the roster. I think the defense will be greatly improved mainly through style of play. The big question will be the offense. The biggest problem could be health, seems to be one so far. If the starters stay on the field then success will rely on how fast Green can get in sync with the receivers. i'm condident the running game will be solid.

There's been alot of talk about WR speed. I personally believe technique is more important. If Saunders sticks to his words of "You can't fit a square peg in a round hole" then we will be o.k. If he tries to turn our players into the Rams instead of using their strengths to our advantage then we are in trouble. Sticking to his words could bring us a 10 win season.

bishop_74
08-11-2001, 09:28 AM
All I can say is that we have coaches now that can properly utilize our talent with out being predictable. That gives us about a 75% better chance of winning more games this year than last if you ask me.

It's amazing how inaffective running up and down the field all day without scoring touchdowns is.

Fat Elvis
08-11-2001, 09:31 AM
Originally posted by bishop_74

It's amazing how inaffective running up and down the field all day without scoring touchdowns is.

It worked for the Ravens last year. Why aren't more teams trying to copy their recipe for success:D

Nelson Muntz
08-11-2001, 09:33 AM
Because the ravens had a bad *** defense and could afford to run the ball all the time. its a hell of a lot easier to run the ball when your defense gives up 5 points a game, or whatever the ravens gave up last year

chief52
08-11-2001, 09:47 AM
I agree with B_Caudle's earlier post on another thread. Chiefs will probably fall between 10-6 and 6-10. Pretty broad, but pretty hard to tell anymore at this time IMO.

Recker24
08-11-2001, 10:09 AM
I personally believe that 10-6 and a playoff birth is a VERY good possibility this season. Our schedule on paper is tough, but a couple players go down here and there, and those teams don't look so tough anymore. We didn't have a cakewalk last year either and ended with a 7-9 record. But, my biggest thing that sticks in the back of mind about KC's success this season is.....TRENT GREEN IS DUE. Every person deserves a break, and Trent Green is owed a big one. This is the chance of a lifetime for him, and I don't think he will let us down.

Busters Dad
08-11-2001, 10:29 AM
I think a 10-6 season is within reach, no facts to back me up, just a gut feeling, but I am just as big as homer as the chaplain is.
I hope this is the beginning of a new era in Chiefs football, and God knows I've seen it all:D

NaptownChief
08-11-2001, 10:35 AM
I truly believe 10-6 and possibly 11-5 with a division title will happen...I think the Raiders are vastly overrated and very old and the Donks, well they are still the Donks which means we will probably sweep them again.

KCJohnny
08-11-2001, 11:23 AM
Of course the Chiefs can win 10. They can win 14.
Will they?
It all depends on how the rest of the AFC West goes. The Chiefs open with Oakland. That will be a very telling game. This version of the Chiefs will be more explosive, but nowhere near as tough physically. Head-to-head divisional games will be the prime determinant, and right now, the Chiefs have just as good a shot at the AFC West crown as any of the other 4 teams.

Watch out for the Bolts. Not kidding.

KCJ
Hey Buster's Dad: nothing wrong with being a homer!:D

NaptownChief
08-11-2001, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by KCJohnny
but nowhere near as tough physically


KCJ,

You might be right about this but at this point without seeing them play a game there is no way I could make such a statement....

Just curious, who do you think we lost that will make us no where near as tough as last year?

KCJohnny
08-11-2001, 11:41 AM
The toughness I was referring to was the smash mouth attitude of the '99 Chiefs. There was SOOOO much attitude there, I loved it.
Also, the whole "we're gonna rip yer heads off and stuff 'em down yer neck" attitude from Gun and Marty hasn't been mentioned. I hope it IS there. The dang Donx D never impressed me as all that physical, so we'll see what Robinson brings to KC.

The new Chiefs will be plenty tough with the two TE sets.

This is all just my bombastic homer opinion. Means nothing.

KCJ
Putting all my hopes in Mike Maslowski...

NaptownChief
08-11-2001, 11:44 AM
I am likewise hoping that Maz wins the starting job away from Patton...He brings a high revving intensity that rubs off on all those around him...He is a difference maker just from the style he brings...

RedandGold
08-11-2001, 11:46 AM
Offensively, we might not be as "tough" physically, but we will be much more difficult to defend. With Ricks and Gonzalez in a two TE set, we can do a number of things that other teams in the NFL simply cannot do. I also like the move to a more athletic OL where we can actually pull for a change rather than simply run it up the gut.

Our biggest change from 2000 will be on defense. This is where we will most definitely be more tough physically. That soft zone crap that we saw last season was the absolute opposite of what Chiefs fans live for. You can dog Robinson all you want, but he will have us crushing QBs all day long. (Look for a PB bid for both Hicks and Clemons).

No one in the West really knows what to expect from the Chiefs and their revamped play on both sides of the ball. Personally, I feel that this will work to our advantage.

As long as we can stay healthy, I think that 10 wins is within our reach.

htismaqe
08-11-2001, 12:13 PM
The toughness I was referring to was the smash mouth attitude of the '99 Chiefs. There was SOOOO much attitude there, I loved it.

Sorry, I have to stop laughing. What a crock of ****. There was so much attitude here, sure, but Rison and McGlockton aren't the kind of attitude a team needs.

Also, the whole "we're gonna rip yer heads off and stuff 'em down yer neck" attitude from Gun and Marty hasn't been mentioned. I hope it IS there. The dang Donx D never impressed me as all that physical, so we'll see what Robinson brings to KC.

What the hell? What can someone say to a statement like this? It's absolutely ridiculous. Gun's attitude got this team ripped apart. The players couldn't stand him.

Personally, I hope NONE of Gun or Marty's "attitude" remains in this team...

Tomahawk 11
08-11-2001, 01:31 PM
I'll back em up for 10 games!! Hell yes!! You gotta believe man!! You just gotta believe. I am nervous about the survival of TG's knee, but I think they can get the job done. GO CHIEFS!:cool:

hawaiianboy
08-11-2001, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by jl80
I truly believe 10-6 and possibly 11-5 with a division title will happen...I think the Raiders are vastly overrated and very old and the Donks, well they are still the Donks which means we will probably sweep them again.


Hmm... I remember some dunce that called himself the Naptown Chief making this exact same statement last year.....

Of course I haven't heard from him since his self imposed header off a bridge turned him into fish food.....

Nelson Muntz
08-11-2001, 02:20 PM
I think the division will come down to the Chiefs and the raiders. I don't think seattle and san diego will do much this year, and then the broncos signed good ol chet. wonder how many offsides penalties he'll have this year. maybe dan williams won't have any this year since he won't have anyone to compete with...lol.

htismaqe
08-11-2001, 02:31 PM
HB,

That was totally uncalled for... :D

keg in kc
08-11-2001, 02:34 PM
I think we "can" win 10 games, but I don't know if we "will". I'll need to see the preseason playout before I make any predictions.

KCJ, I'm wondering why you like San Diego so much. They added Marcellus Wiley, which is all well and good, but the problem is they addressed a strength, not a weakness. Their secondary (Alex Moulden, Ryan McNeil, Rogers Beckett and Rodney Harrison) is pathetic and they'll be exploited through the air at will once again in 2001. They still have the worst offensive line in the AFC. Doug Flutie doesn't have anyone to throw the ball to. There's no Eric Moulds in San Diego, and Jeff Graham, Curtis Conway and Tim Dwight (I like Dwight, btw, but the WR position in SD is still weak) don't exactly strike fear into the hearts of opposing defenses. The best receiver in San Diego, Freddie Jones, had hernia surgery on August first and will be out until at least mid-September. LaDanian Tomlinson is a hold-out and has missed the first 20+ practices of training camp.

NaptownChief
08-11-2001, 02:48 PM
Flyin',

If I stick with that opinion I will eventually be correct...Gannon, Rice and Brown surely can't produce into their fifties....which is this year isn't it?

KCJohnny
08-11-2001, 03:03 PM
Kyle,
I hope you are right about the Bolts. They scare the heck outta me.
They just signed Norv Turner to run that offense with Doug Flutie to QB, who doesn't need much of a supporting cast. They already had a good run defense, but the O just couldn't move the chains or control the clock, so the Bolts D was deadon its feet by November.
The main reason I fear the Bolts is because of the bizarre new world of parity that makes 1-15 teams instant playoff contenders. That may not sound rational, but it sure has been happening a lot lately.

KCJ
Hoping the AFC West has a few gimmee games for KC...:eek:

NaptownChief
08-11-2001, 03:05 PM
No Ray Crockett poster yet...

Did you finally take down your Larry Brown poster this offseason?

KCJohnny
08-11-2001, 03:10 PM
Parker,
The Chiefs ran the ball in '99 over 30x against the AFC's two best run defenses in back to back games (Bolts and Ravens) and did not get a big avg per carry. However, on SHEER ATTITUDE, they won those two games 34-0 and 35-8.

I'm wasting my time trying to reason with you. You are prejudiced against Gun and that is that.

KCJ
Believes in toughness in the game of tackle football:mad:

BroncoFan
08-11-2001, 03:16 PM
uuuummmm, probably not. maybe 5

keg in kc
08-11-2001, 03:16 PM
John, while San Diego was, like usual, tough against the run last season, they gave up 3786 yards through the air and 33 passing TDs. They'll be no better this season; until they get a decent pair of CBs and another safety to go with Harrison, that team will be abused through the air, especially inside the division.

Flutie ain't in Buffalo anymore. Conway and Graham combined aren't as good as Moulds. His top weapons, Freddie Jones and Tomlinson, aren't in camp. He has what may be the worst offensive line in the entire NFL in front of him.

He's toast.

htismaqe
08-11-2001, 03:41 PM
Keg,

I think you're right about the Bolts. IF they had gotten a corner, and IF Tomlinson would have reported to camp, they might have been a 7-9/8-8 team. They're gonna struggle to get that now...

Johnny,

The Chiefs ran the ball in '99 over 30x against the AFC's two best run defenses in back to back games (Bolts and Ravens) and did not get a big avg per carry. However, on SHEER ATTITUDE, they won those two games 34-0 and 35-8.

Johnny, 99 Ravens=NO OFFENSE, 99 Chargers=NO OFFENSE.

They won those games because of great defensive intensity and causing turnovers, NOT running the ball up the gut. If they didn't get a "big avg per carry" it obviously wasn't a very smart thing to do. If you want, I'll go back and find the game notes and prove it to you.

I'm wasting my time trying to reason with you. You are prejudiced against Gun and that is that.

It's ironic you should say that, John. Because nothing I say could tarnish your golden image of Gunther. The sad thing for you is that other people agree with me...

KCJohnny
08-11-2001, 05:36 PM
Parker:
I am not denying that the Bolts/Ravens were bottom feeders on offense (after all, wasn't Priest Holmes the RB for Balt?;) ) but that doesn't explain that the Chiefs rolled up 69 points in those two games and the defense ddidn't score all of them.

You just don't hear what I am saying: the running game was used as a bludgeon on those two top run-stuffing defenses and it demoralized them both, even at 2.5-3.3 ypc.

KCJ
Not trying to insult the BBAdmin, just differing about the attitude of FOOTBALL TOUGHNESS

keg in kc
08-11-2001, 05:43 PM
Holmes only played 8 games in '99. I don't know if the Chiefs were one of those games, but the guy had 506 yards rushing (5.7 ypc) and 104 yards receiving (8.0 ypc) in those 8 games. That's about 75 yards per game in limited touches.

htismaqe
08-11-2001, 05:53 PM
I am not denying that the Bolts/Ravens were bottom feeders on offense (after all, wasn't Priest Holmes the RB for Balt? ) but that doesn't explain that the Chiefs rolled up 69 points in those two games and the defense ddidn't score all of them.

You just don't hear what I am saying: the running game was used as a bludgeon on those two top run-stuffing defenses and it demoralized them both, even at 2.5-3.3 ypc.

Johnny,

vs. the Ravens, we intercepted the ball 3 times and recovered 1 fumble. 2 of the interceptions were returned for touchdowns. We scored 2 more times on pass plays to Gonzales. We also recovered an onside kick.

vs. the Chargers, we intercepted the ball twice and recovered 2 fumbles, 1 of which was returned for a touchdown.

Attribute it to our piss poor rushing attack if you want, but the stats that you so often espouse say you are wrong. Sorry.

KCJohnny
08-11-2001, 09:22 PM
How are they wrong?
The Chiefs basically demoralized these teams by running the ball down their throats over and over gain, and then exploiting that ATTITUDE on play action.

Try to spell it any other way and its wrong.

It had a heckuva lot to do with attitude; and the attitude of TOUGHNESS that KC communicated was that we are gonna beat the living heck out of you and you are not going to stop us.
Now I hate to invoke this, but once again, this is crystal clear to people who have put on the pads and gone out there and played the game.

I salue the TOUGH KC defenses that made those two games such great blowouts (do I hear you praising Kurt?????) but the O had its share of TOP, 1st downs, and offensive points scored.

KCJ

htismaqe
08-11-2001, 09:48 PM
How are they wrong?
The Chiefs basically demoralized these teams by running the ball down their throats over and over gain, and then exploiting that ATTITUDE on play action.

They did it on defense, John, or was that not clear? I find it funny that you cite these two wins as "demoralizing" the other team. We were the team that, week in and week out, looked demoralized.

had a heckuva lot to do with attitude; and the attitude of TOUGHNESS that KC communicated was that we are gonna beat the living heck out of you and you are not going to stop us.

They did stop us, John, over and over we were stopped. That's why we didn't go to the playoffs in 99. 3 runs by Donnell Bennett and a punt = No playoffs. NOBODY, not sportswriters, opposing defenses, other coaches -- NOBODY thought we were tough. NOBODY respected our running game. For the last two years, we have been the laughing stock of the NFL. I'm glad you like that so much.

I salue the TOUGH KC defenses that made those two games such great blowouts

So it was the D? It wasn't our running game? Which is it Johnny?

John, I'm sorry. But the Chiefs since 98, and especially under Gunther were not tough. They were pathetic. 23-24 is not a winning record, or anything to be proud of...

California Injun
08-11-2001, 10:54 PM
If you throw in the pre-season wins they should collect 10.

Basically, a 10 win season is the same as saying "Do you think the Chiefs will make the play-offs on 2001"?

This would be a minor miracle given the wholesale changes in coaching philosophy, recent retirements, and a new QB/RB tandem.

A nice big can of Whup Arse in Week #1 would be a beautiful beginning though.

keg in kc
08-11-2001, 11:10 PM
How many wins we get depends entirely on how we get out of the gates. If we win some early season games, I believe we're a playoff team, because I don't believe we'll have a late season "letdown".

The first six games will set the tone, in my humble opinion:

1) Oakland at home. We must win this game. Good teams beat previous-year playoff teams at home. Bad teams don't. It's that simple.
2) Seattle on the road. I think this is a very winnable game, especially if Springs is on the shelf. But I'm not sure what to think about their offense yet.
3) NY Giants at home. Tough game, but winnable in my estimation. The Giants are tough against the run but soft enough against the pass to give us a shot. I don't expect much from their offense. Once again, a good team beats previous-year playoff teams at home, so this game will be an early-year measuring stick.
4) Washington on the road. I think Washington is a middle-of-the-pack team, much like us. This game could go either way, although continued injuries to the Redskins roster would obviusly tilt things in our favor.
5) Denver on the road. Probably a loss, but anything can happen. We've beaten them lately when they were clearly a better team...
6) Pittsburgh at home. Must win game against another middle-of-the-pack team.

I can't make any prediction other than this one:

If our record is 4-2 after those 6 games, I believe we'll be a playoff team. 3-3 or worse, and we're probably not. But honestly, I can't predict what our record will be at this point in time, because I really don't know how good/bad we actually are, and I'm not prone to make wild predictions...

I can't say much more than that at this point in time.

Hydrae
08-11-2001, 11:56 PM
I have nothing more to add to the last response from Kyle. I agree that the beginning of the season is key to the whole attitude (there is that word again!) of the team and will carry over for the rest of the season.

BTW, on the question of the Seahawk offense, Holmgren has not been happy with it so far from what I have been hearing. I would not be too surprised to see Dilfer start by the beginning of the season or very soon afterwards. I like Hasslebeck (I would have actually liked to see him here) but he has been very inconsistent during camp. Should be an interesting situation to watch.

Back to the point. I have to be realistic and say that no, I think we can expect more like a 8-8 season this year. It is just too much to expect that with the new coaches, new players etc to think we can make the playoffs this year. I think we will surprise some people and be very respectable but the playoffs will need to wait one more year.

Chiefs Pantalones
08-12-2001, 12:07 AM
Ding, Ding, Ding!

The end results...

Parker- 155

proctor- 0

CG

give it up, proc


ps. Why do you love mediocrity so much?

htismaqe
08-12-2001, 08:15 AM
cody,

I'm beginning to think KCJ would like it better if we were 5-11, as long as Gunther was still coach.

Keg,

If our record is 4-2 after those 6 games, I believe we'll be a playoff team

That's something you couldn't say under Gun. We'd fly out of the gate going 5-2 and then lose 5 games in a row. Hopefully, Vermeil will at least get some consistency out of the team.

Fat Elvis
08-12-2001, 09:01 AM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/images/football/nfl/players/chiefs/2801.jpg

Donnell "The Demoralizer" Bennett

htismaqe
08-12-2001, 09:24 AM
Good Lord, dude...that's funny...

milkman
08-12-2001, 10:08 AM
Fat,
That is funny!!!!
I nearly busted a gut!!!!

StLouisBob
08-12-2001, 10:18 AM
I think your biggest problem is the schedule you are stuck with. Your in a tough division, but also have a tough outside schedule especially for someone who was 7-9 last year.

If Green gets protection he will put up some points. Just ask the Defending National Conference Champs the Giants. Green estroyed them without Marshall Faulk.