PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Why have the Chiefs have looked better the past 3 weeks as opposed to the first 2?


Deberg_1990
10-09-2011, 05:25 PM
Quality of opponents?
The lockout threw the team out of whack?
The team being devistated with star player injuries all at once?



Whats your take?

Mr. Arrowhead
10-09-2011, 05:26 PM
I really think because Haley did a piss poor job of getting them ready in training camp

O.city
10-09-2011, 05:29 PM
I think the training camp plus the injuries. We kinda ran into a buzz saw those first two weeks also as Buff. and The Lions are showing to be pretty good teams.

FringeNC
10-09-2011, 05:29 PM
Cassel has played like an NFL QB the last 2 games. I have no answer as to why he has looked so much better. I'm not counting on it continuing, but we are not a bad team when we get legit QB play.

jd1020
10-09-2011, 05:29 PM
Chiefs stepped up against a team in their division and the last 2 weeks have been played against inefficient offenses.

That's my take.

kstater
10-09-2011, 05:29 PM
Yes

Okie_Apparition
10-09-2011, 05:29 PM
Buffalo was far better than most expected. The rest is like last year, with injuries

FAX
10-09-2011, 05:29 PM
On account of the fact that we played better than them other dudes.

Plus, we have Matt Cassel delivering strikes and badass speeches.

FAX

O.city
10-09-2011, 05:30 PM
For all the crap he takes, Cassel has played pretty damn well the last two and a half weeks.

Iconic
10-09-2011, 05:30 PM
Playcalling.

Smed1065
10-09-2011, 05:31 PM
They were never in the race for Luck.

Actually, last week Todd said you are not an Iownian.

I hate MC but also can relate because I get bored with jobs 1 year later or less.

Chocolate Hog
10-09-2011, 05:31 PM
Because they have played 2 of the worst teams in the league?

Deberg_1990
10-09-2011, 05:31 PM
Buffalo was far better than most expected.

Indeed. and not that it matters much but the Lions definately ran up the score on us.

Rausch
10-09-2011, 05:31 PM
Playcalling.

DIE IN FIRE!

Extra Point
10-09-2011, 05:33 PM
Zorn. Jim Zorn.

He got Haley to simmer down.

Mr_Tomahawk
10-09-2011, 05:33 PM
Really? :banghead:

The two teams we beat have a combined record of 1-9.


I think that should answer all questions why we have been more successful the last two weeks...

</post>
10-09-2011, 05:33 PM
1. Quarterback play
2. Quality of Opponents
3. Quantity of injuries

Pablo
10-09-2011, 05:33 PM
Vikings are garbage. Colts are garbage. Chargers always underachieve.

We've just done enough to stay competitive/win in these games. I wouldn't say we've played particularly well in any of them.

tredadda
10-09-2011, 05:33 PM
Quality of teams. Just look at the record. The exception is SD whose record is not exactly reflective of how they have played. They are also benefitting from playing a weak early schedule because they usually start slow.

jd1020
10-09-2011, 05:33 PM
Indeed. and not that it matters much but the Lions definately ran up the score on us.

Check your feelings at the door. It's really simple, if you don't like the other team scoring stop them.

Smed1065
10-09-2011, 05:34 PM
Really? :banghead:

The two teams we beat have a combined record of 1-9.


I think that should answer all questions why we have been more successful the last two weeks...

Shit last year that was good.............I must be high.

Iconic
10-09-2011, 05:35 PM
DIE IN FIRE!

I'd say the same thing to Bill Muir but I don't believe you can die twice.:hmmm:

Pawnmower
10-09-2011, 05:35 PM
hmm

1) we didn't have any of our key players blow an ACL

2) the two teams we beat also pretty much suck ass

3) the guys that replaced our injured starters are starting to gain a little experience

4) we didn't have more any of our key players blow an ACL

5) we didn;t have any of our key players blow an ACL

6) the teams we played kinda sucked

tredadda
10-09-2011, 05:35 PM
Shit last year that was good.............

Yes because we had alot of teams of that caliber on the schedule. This year not so much.

Okie_Apparition
10-09-2011, 05:36 PM
Zorn. Jim Zorn.

He got Haley to simmer down.

Every week an announcer says Haley is loosing it. Either the camera never catches it or they're full of shit

splatbass
10-09-2011, 05:40 PM
Zorn. Jim Zorn.

He got Haley to simmer down.

Right. Because Zorn was so much better as a head coach. :rolleyes:

BigMeatballDave
10-09-2011, 05:40 PM
Bills and Lions are very good.

Rausch
10-09-2011, 05:41 PM
I'd say the same thing to Bill Muir but I don't believe you can die twice.:hmmm:

I'm willing to test the theory...

</post>
10-09-2011, 05:43 PM
Bills and Lions are very good.

Bills are beginning to remind me of a lesser version of the 2003 Chiefs.

Smed1065
10-09-2011, 05:45 PM
We should have drafted Sanchez. He is a great kicker.

trndobrd
10-09-2011, 05:53 PM
Quality of opponents?
The lockout threw the team out of whack?
The team being devistated with star player injuries all at once?



Whats your take?


Quality of opponent and necessity to retool after the loss of Charles and Berry.

The more important question is if the Chiefs can build on two wins going into the bye week and get this starting lame 1st quarter BS fixed.

Molitoth
10-09-2011, 05:55 PM
It seems as if Cassel has been reading chiefsplanet about the hate towards the checkdown and he's rediscovered his balls.

Deberg_1990
10-09-2011, 05:56 PM
starting lame 1st quarter BS fixed.

Its been a pattern now for 3 years with Haley and Cassel.

stevieray
10-09-2011, 05:59 PM
..because it's football.

the game will always be bigger than perceived absolutes, players or stats.

anything can happen...and usually does.

BigRock
10-09-2011, 06:00 PM
I thought they looked good against Detroit until a few minutes before halftime when Cassel started turning it over. The QB causing 37 turnovers doesn't mean the rest of the team didn't show up.

crispystl420
10-09-2011, 06:03 PM
Bills are beginning to remind me of a lesser version of the 2003 Chiefs.

In what manner?

crispystl420
10-09-2011, 06:05 PM
I thought they looked good against Detroit until a few minutes before halftime when Cassel started turning it over. The QB causing 37 turnovers doesn't mean the rest of the team didn't show up.

Yeah I did too. Then we just imploded after Cassel started turning it over.

CoMoChief
10-09-2011, 06:13 PM
Quality of the opponent (or lack there of)

Playcalling

Cassel not shitting his pants....He played great today. But even a blind squirrel can find a nut at times.

Rausch
10-09-2011, 06:15 PM
Of course it'd be too much to ask for Denver to win.

It'd make both the Luck-ers and the Winners happy...

RINGLEADER
10-09-2011, 06:50 PM
If you're looking for a "reason" and you want to believe Haley, the big problem was the loss of Eric Berry whom he claimed was the engine that made the defense go. That, combined with no one having faith in Cassel (thereby retarding our offense for it's own good) are probably the big reasons.

I want to see Cassel do this against a couple of good teams before I get too excited...

Pasta Giant Meatball
10-09-2011, 06:52 PM
Not turning it over 6 times a game is the answer.

'Hamas' Jenkins
10-09-2011, 06:54 PM
..because it's football.

the game will always be bigger than perceived absolutes, players or stats.

anything can happen...and usually does.

Circular reasoning is circular.

Bones
10-09-2011, 07:06 PM
Shit last year that was good.............I must be high.


No, I'm high. You're just a fucking dumbass.

Do you ever say anything that makes sense?

JFC.

Marcellus
10-09-2011, 07:11 PM
1. Quarterback play
2. Quality of Opponents
3. Quantity of injuries

4. No turnovers.


We could have beat the almighty SD Chargers without dumbass turnovers.

Guru
10-09-2011, 07:11 PM
We have played shitty teams since the first two weeks. Yes, San Diego was shitty the week we played them. I think the downward spiral begins now.

Rausch
10-09-2011, 07:12 PM
We have played shitty teams since the first two weeks. Yes, San Diego was shitty the week we played them. I think the downward spiral begins now.

Well, yeah.

Now is when we play teams that both won last year AND are winning now...

Pasta Giant Meatball
10-09-2011, 07:14 PM
San Diego was "shitty" because Hali about raped Rivers many a time.

Guru
10-09-2011, 07:18 PM
Well, yeah.

Now is when we play teams that both won last year AND are winning now...

I just want people to be realistic and not start thinking we are going to win a bunch of games based on beating two horrible teams.

milkman
10-09-2011, 07:42 PM
I just want people to be realistic and not start thinking we are going to win a bunch of games based on beating two horrible teams.

I want to win the lottery.

I like my chances better than yours.

Dayze
10-09-2011, 07:59 PM
turnovers, and QB play primarily IMO.

KCChiefsFan88
10-09-2011, 08:49 PM
Two reasons...

Minnesota (0-3 at the time)
Indy (0-4 at the time)

FAX
10-09-2011, 08:55 PM
Two reasons...

Minnesota (0-3 at the time)
Indy (0-4 at the time)

And we gave 'em another "0" to put in their little pansy basket so they can carry their little pansy basket around the Maypole Of Abject Failure as we continue our journey to ascend all the way to the heights of accomplishment where we will strip the edible panties off the Nether Regions Of Greatness.

FAX

LVNHACK
10-09-2011, 10:02 PM
No, I'm high. You're just a ****ing dumbass.

Do you ever say anything that makes sense?

JFC.

The ignore feature is your friend....;)

evenfall
10-09-2011, 10:08 PM
I think this team is about as good as they were last year, if you discount for injuries. Buffalo and Detroit are good teams. We almost beat SD. MN and IND are bad teams so we beat them. This is an 8-8 team without the key injuries, probably 10-6, 11-5 if it had a top third QB

Count Alex's Losses
10-09-2011, 10:11 PM
Just think of the Colts and Vikings as this year's NFC West stick-head-in-the-sand delusion.

chiefzilla1501
10-09-2011, 10:20 PM
So... None of this has to do with breaston getting looks?
Massive improvements from Tyson Jackson?
Houston starting to get a little pressure opposite Hali?
The run blocking starting to look very sharp?
Succop actually making early kicks?
The chiefs finally playing with fire and energy?
The chiefs increasing battles involvement?
The chiefs finally finding the right way to win without Charles?
Terrific halftime adjustments?
Adjusting to a new offense?

Doesn't matter how good or bad the teams we played are. There's no way you can look at the last 3 games and say the chiefs haven't improved. The chiefs' performance against the chargers leads me to believe that if we replayed Detroit tomorrow, we'd probably lose but in much less embarrassing fashion.

BoneKrusher
10-10-2011, 06:23 AM
Not turning it over 6 times a game is the answer.

This^

King_Chief_Fan
10-10-2011, 06:48 AM
So... None of this has to do with breaston getting looks?
Massive improvements from Tyson Jackson?
Houston starting to get a little pressure opposite Hali?
The run blocking starting to look very sharp?
Succop actually making early kicks?
The chiefs finally playing with fire and energy?
The chiefs increasing battles involvement?
The chiefs finally finding the right way to win without Charles?
Terrific halftime adjustments?
Adjusting to a new offense?

Doesn't matter how good or bad the teams we played are. There's no way you can look at the last 3 games and say the chiefs haven't improved. The chiefs' performance against the chargers leads me to believe that if we replayed Detroit tomorrow, we'd probably lose but in much less embarrassing fashion.

thumbs up

fantrax
10-10-2011, 06:58 AM
Games three and four looked nothing like games one and two. Over the last two weeks, the Chiefs have improved in nearly every statistical category. Points scored, total yards, passing yards, first downs, giveaways, yards allowed, first downs allowed, sacks…you name it and the Chiefs have likely improved the numbers from the first two games to the last two games.

fantrax

the Talking Can
10-10-2011, 07:31 AM
1. Quarterback play
2. Quality of Opponents
3. Quantity of injuries

this

Fritz88
10-10-2011, 07:38 AM
So... None of this has to do with breaston getting looks?
Massive improvements from Tyson Jackson?
Houston starting to get a little pressure opposite Hali?
The run blocking starting to look very sharp?
Succop actually making early kicks?
The chiefs finally playing with fire and energy?
The chiefs increasing battles involvement?
The chiefs finally finding the right way to win without Charles?
Terrific halftime adjustments?
Adjusting to a new offense?

Doesn't matter how good or bad the teams we played are. There's no way you can look at the last 3 games and say the chiefs haven't improved. The chiefs' performance against the chargers leads me to believe that if we replayed Detroit tomorrow, we'd probably lose but in much less embarrassing fashion.

Just like you get exposed against decent teams, you still get to flash your muscles againt shitty teams. That doesn't mean you are good.
Posted via Mobile Device

bsp4444
10-10-2011, 07:43 AM
I didn't get to see the game, was Tyson Jackson decent for a second consecutive week?

Chiefnj2
10-10-2011, 08:19 AM
They look better because the opposition isn't as good. When the playcalling opens up a bit, they play better.

BoneKrusher
10-10-2011, 08:29 AM
They look better because the opposition isn't as good. When the playcalling opens up a bit, they play better.
yep, just like last years schedule.

Guru
10-10-2011, 09:08 AM
I want to win the lottery.

I like my chances better than yours.

I like your chances too since I don't play the lottery at all. Of course, I save more money by not playing too.:D

bovandy
10-10-2011, 09:16 AM
I think it's a little from column A, a little from column B. The opponents the last two weeks are 1-9 right now. Clearly we're playing poor opponents. We also gave the Chargers all they could handle and that team is rolling right now.

I think the team is better than what we saw in the first two games by a wide margin. It seems like they are finding their footing. Are they good enough to make some noise the rest of the way? The jury is still very much out

splatbass
10-10-2011, 10:09 AM
Just like you get exposed against decent teams, you still get to flash your muscles againt shitty teams. That doesn't mean you are good.
Posted via Mobile Device

It does mean you are a step better than the shitty teams and won't be getting Luck. So it's time for people to accept it and get off the S4L bandwagon.

TEX
10-10-2011, 10:25 AM
Haven't read the whole thread so sorry if this has ben mentioned earlier - IMO, the Chiefs were so illprepared to start the season that their first 2-3 games were unientionally used as preseason. I think the dramatic turnaround in play is because the preseason "plan" was bad and it set them back. I had a feeling the Chiefs would come out of the gate flat for several weeks and be playing catch-up the rest of the season. Stated it several times and was flamed by several "plan supporters" for that opinion. Just my take...

chiefzilla1501
10-10-2011, 10:57 AM
They look better because the opposition isn't as good. When the playcalling opens up a bit, they play better.

They were very close to beating a good chargers team. And the colts are not a bad team. The past two weeks, they lost late in the 4th to the steeper and the bucs. Their record shouldn't erase he fact that thats still a conpetitive football team.

Chiefnj2
10-10-2011, 11:00 AM
The past two weeks, they lost late in the 4th to the steeper and the bucs. Their record shouldn't erase he fact that thats still a conpetitive football team.

They are winless. You are what your record says you are. Bad teams lose.

FringeNC
10-10-2011, 11:02 AM
They were very close to beating a good chargers team. And the colts are not a bad team. The past two weeks, they lost late in the 4th to the steeper and the bucs. Their record shouldn't erase he fact that thats still a conpetitive football team.

We were very close to getting blown out in the first half of the San Diego game also. It is not hard to talk about why the Chiefs are playing better. It's simply ONE thing. We have been effective passing the football the last 2.5 games. You don't win in today's NFL if you can't pass. In fact, you get blown out. Is our new found ability to pass the ball a mirage? Who really knows, but whether we can pass for 250 yards per game the rest of the year will determine our record.

Mr. Laz
10-10-2011, 11:18 AM
D. All of the above

slow start because of Haley, injuries and relative performance to the opponent we faced.

We are looking at 3 to 5 winnable games the rest of the year? Miami and who knows what will happen against divisional teams. We can beat Denver,Miami and San Diego can lay an egg any time. Faiders should be losses but who knows.

2 to 5 wins this season?

7 Oct 23 KC @ OAK
8 Oct 31 SD @ KC
9 Nov 06 MIA @ KC
10 Nov 13 DEN @ KC
11 Nov 21 KC @ NE
12 Nov 27 PIT @ KC
13 Dec 04 KC @ CHI
14 Dec 11 KC @ NYJ
15 Dec 18 GB @ KC
16 Dec 24 OAK @ KC
17 Jan 01 KC @ DEN

4th and Long
10-10-2011, 11:21 AM
Why have the Chiefs have looked better the past 3 weeks as opposed to the first 2?
If memory serves, last week we played the Girl Scouts and yesterday we played the Brownies.

4th and Long
10-10-2011, 11:23 AM
Faiders should be losses but who knows.
The ghost of Al Davis is coming to visit you, Ebenezer.

chiefzilla1501
10-10-2011, 11:32 AM
We were very close to getting blown out in the first half of the San Diego game also. It is not hard to talk about why the Chiefs are playing better. It's simply ONE thing. We have been effective passing the football the last 2.5 games. You don't win in today's NFL if you can't pass. In fact, you get blown out. Is our new found ability to pass the ball a mirage? Who really knows, but whether we can pass for 250 yards per game the rest of the year will determine our record.

Yeah, I agree. And no, I don't think Cassel's good enough to keep winning games for us at this rate. But some people want to ignore that we've improved. Our receivers are significantly better. Our pass rush has improved drastically with Houston in the lineup. Our D-line is playing terrific right now. And our O-line continues to improve in their run blocking, particularly Albert and Asamoah.

This is a much better team than our fans give them credit for. Again, I don't think it's unreasonably to think we can even get as high as 6 or 7 wins.

jd1020
10-10-2011, 11:35 AM
Yeah, I agree. And no, I don't think Cassel's good enough to keep winning games for us at this rate. But some people want to ignore that we've improved. Our receivers are significantly better. Our pass rush has improved drastically with Houston in the lineup. Our D-line is playing terrific right now. And our O-line continues to improve in their run blocking, particularly Albert and Asamoah.

This is a much better team than our fans give them credit for. Again, I don't think it's unreasonably to think we can even get as high as 6 or 7 wins.

Houston barely rushes the passer. Watch the games pimp. He didn't even start yesterday. He's soon to wind up on the inactive list and party at Stanzi's house.

chiefzilla1501
10-10-2011, 11:36 AM
They are winless. You are what your record says you are. Bad teams lose.

That's a ton of bullshit. Didn't we all say the Chiefs were bad last year despite their record? It's convenient that we change our minds to conveniently fit our argument.

The Colts were extremely competitive against the Steelers and the Bucs. That means that they can hang with the big boys, which means that they should be able to beat bad teams pretty handily. I think they're this year's version of last year's Bills--they won't win a lot of games, but they'll make a lot of games very close.

chiefzilla1501
10-10-2011, 11:39 AM
Houston barely rushes the passer. Watch the games pimp. He didn't even start yesterday. He's soon to wind up on the inactive list and party at Stanzi's house.

Yesterday, they didn't play him much, but that seemed to be more of a situational thing. Houston's going to be a liability in coverage and it seemed like the Chiefs wanted the better coverage guy, which is Studebaker. In the snaps I've seen him, he seems to at least contain his side of the rush, which I think has helped Tamba out quite a bit.

Chiefnj2
10-10-2011, 11:41 AM
That's a ton of bullshit. Didn't we all say the Chiefs were bad last year despite their record? It's convenient that we change our minds to conveniently fit our argument.

The Colts were extremely competitive against the Steelers and the Bucs. That means that they can hang with the big boys, which means that they should be able to beat bad teams pretty handily. I think they're this year's version of last year's Bills--they won't win a lot of games, but they'll make a lot of games very close.

They aren't a good team. I seriously doubt you watched a minute of the game after claiming the pass rush is greatly improved with Houston in the lineup. KC didn't have a single sack yesterday and Painter didn't get touched very often.

jd1020
10-10-2011, 11:42 AM
Yesterday, they didn't play him much, but that seemed to be more of a situational thing. Houston's going to be a liability in coverage and it seemed like the Chiefs wanted the better coverage guy, which is Studebaker. In the snaps I've seen him, he seems to at least contain his side of the rush, which I think has helped Tamba out quite a bit.

How does containing the rush help Tamba rush the passer?

bobbything
10-10-2011, 11:48 AM
Unprepared due to the way Haley ran TC
Injuries to Charles, Moeaki, and Berry
Underestimated the Bills and Lions
Conservative play-calling
Matt Cassel/poor D-line play

In that order. We're winning now because...

O-line/D-line is playing well
More aggressive on offense
Cassel isn't sucking
The teams we've played are bad
They're hitting a better stride after taking the 4 preseason games off

In that order.

chiefzilla1501
10-10-2011, 12:14 PM
How does containing the rush help Tamba rush the passer?

Sorry. I meant containing the edge. I don't know how many times last year I watched Tamba get close to a QB, but the QB had lots of space to shuffle around in the pocket. I feel like the past few games, we're not seeing nearly as much of that. Yesterday, we didn't really put a ton of pressure on Painter and that seemed to be by Romeo's design. But the previous two games, we got a ton of pressure on Rivers and McNabb.

jd1020
10-10-2011, 12:18 PM
Sorry. I meant containing the edge. I don't know how many times last year I watched Tamba get close to a QB, but the QB had lots of space to shuffle around in the pocket. I feel like the past few games, we're not seeing nearly as much of that. Yesterday, we didn't really put a ton of pressure on Painter and that seemed to be by Romeo's design. But the previous two games, we got a ton of pressure on Rivers and McNabb.

And none of the pressure on Rivers/McNabb was due to Houston.