[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Yeah. Nice post.

Unlike all the other sheep around here, I don't think Brodie Croyle has proven jackshit. He hasn't proven in more than 6 games that he can "laser" a ball in the right place under pressure, he hasn't proven he can lead a team to victory and he hasn't proven that he's worth more than a pimple on my ****ing ass.

Herm Edwards conservative coaching is what kept the Chiefs in the game.

Though I'm sure that all you whiney ass dumb ****ing bitches would have liked it better if the Chiefs had lost 49-0.

This game is one of the more underrated arguments on this board...

Originally Posted by Bearcat, a long time ago

I'll give Herm the benefit of the doubt on every play through 3 quarters. After all, even with all the screens and bad playcalling, it's 10-10 and you have a little momentum with the TD.

They basically told Croyle at that point "good drive... pack it up, and we'll see if we can do it again next week".

I could care less about the W-L columns. It's about the decision making. Given that situation with more playmakers and a better OLine, I think Herm would do the same thing. Why do I think that? He SAID IT after the game when he said we were in a defensive game and were waiting for a play at the end.

Originally Posted by Bearcat, a long time ago

I'll take the first three quarters... even with all the stupid screens and whatever. If you want to say it kept us in the game, fine, I can deal with that.

But, give me back the two drives in the 4th quarter... especially the one at 14:53.

You drive, score a TD, force the Colts to punt... and then you hand off on first down (again), setting up a screen to Bowe (again), and it's 3rd and 12.

WHAT THE HELL? You JUST drove down the field.

So, you force them to punt again. Hand off (again), pass on 2nd down (again, but 7 yards). First down, hand off... 2nd down, why would Croyle get sacked? How the hell did the Colts know we were going to pass on 2nd and 15? 3rd & 18.

Game over.

Originally Posted by Bearcat, a long time ago

We drive down the field and score a touchdown. Force a punt. We fold up. Force a punt. We fold up.

Why is there faith that the philosophy will change when the talent changes, when Herm comes out and says "we were in a defensive game, we were looking for one play at the end"?

Some of you guys sound like it's our first year in the NFL. You all complain about respect and how we made the playoffs last year and how we are a game out of winning the AFC West... yet, we lose, and it's "we're rebuilding, it's a moral victory".

Which one is it?

Like you said, if the philosophy doesn't change when there's more talent, that'll be the time to really be disappointed. I just don't see why it would change. Croyle proves he can drive down the field for the TD, and you put the diapers back on? It was almost like it was practice... good week, Croyle, we'll come back out next week and see if we can do it again... oh wait, there's another quarter to play?

Originally Posted by Bearcat, a long time ago

I don't think it's about that for most people... I could care less about the loss as far as the standings. Herm made these sort of choices in big games with the Jets. He made the same decisions in our playoff loss last year, and he's making the same decisions now.

Why is he going to change now? When we have more talent, and we're tied in the 4th, he's going to punt before taking a chance, and give us the 50/50 chance of winning that we've had all year. It's always going to be about one big play. We'll win some games we shouldn't win, and lose some games we should win by 21.

It's hard to win 3 or 4 playoff games in a row like that, regardless of the talent on the field... because you know, playoff teams are usually pretty good, too.