Rich Baldinger says Romeo Crennel's D looked confused.

[googlegoogle]

He said that mistakes in covering Todd Heap were ours and that Crennel's system wasn't flexible. Derrick Johnson and E.Berry weren't working together and instead just bumping into each other. In one replay they showed Heap not even getting touched because of confusion.

Romeo's reputation tarnished a little?

[WebGem]

Hopefully tarnished enough to keep him away from another HC job so he stays here.

[ForeverChiefs58]

I think anyone/everyone who saw the playcalling and Cassel's decision making was confused as hell.

[alpha_omega]

Pfft, that's it, we weren't outplayed...we were just confused.

[ChiefGator]

Stupid. Wonder why he didn't say, "Chiefs defensive players become confused by Ravens offensive sets, despite first year defensive coordinator's fairly vanilla defensive schemes"

Rubbage piece. Of course we looked confused, they consistently had problems covering the middle of the field. We looked outplayed and out-talented as well.

[KCJohnny]

An offense that is on the field just 18 minutes may be part of the problem... just sayin'.

[beach tribe]

After the game Todd Heap was asked what was the key to his success or something to the like, and he said, "We saw that they were playing the same coverage over, and over so we kept attacking it the same way" and i thought, yeah, that's what it looked like to me.

[KCUnited]

He killed the defense on his tape breakdown on Metro Sports. He killed the offense too. He would show the confusion between the LB's (Johnson, Belcher, Vrabel) and the safeties (Berry, McGraw). He showed how McGraw would have Heap and Johnson would have Rice and when the ball was snapped they would run into each other and Heap would come free. The crux of what he was saying is that good players break away from the coaches scheme when they see something that isn't working and go to the sideline and tell coach why they did what they did.

He said the scheme wasn't working but none of the players on the field made any adjustments on their own.

[KCJohnny]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

He killed the defense on his tape breakdown on Metro Sports. He killed the offense too. He would show the confusion between the LB's (Johnson, Belcher, Vrabel) and the safeties (Berry, McGraw). He showed how McGraw would have Heap and Johnson would have Rice and when the ball was snapped they would run into each other and Heap would come free. The crux of what he was saying is that good players break away from the coaches scheme when they see something that isn't working and go to the sideline and tell coach why they did what they did.

He said the scheme wasn't working but none of the players on the field made any adjustments on their own.

Baldy usually knows what he's talking about. But its tough to lay this game on the defense when we had 8 1st downs and 18 minutes TOP and 5 TOs.

[KCUnited]

Originally Posted by KCJohnny

Baldy usually knows what he's talking about. But its tough to lay this game on the defense when we had 8 1st downs and 18 minutes TOP and 5 TOs.

He wasn't laying the loss on the defense, he was simply pointing out obvious breakdowns in the scheme. He broke down the defficiencies on offense as well, like the 4 & 1. he exposed Weigman's improper technique and the fact that Pope didn't even know who he supposed to be blocking. We sucked on both sides of the ball equally.

[KCJohnny]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

He wasn't laying the loss on the defense, he was simply pointing out obvious breakdowns in the scheme. He broke down the defficiencies on offense as well, like the 4 & 1. he exposed Weigman's improper technique and the fact that Pope didn't even know who he supposed to be blocking. We sucked on both sides of the ball equally.

Aside from the free pass KC gave Heap, I though the Chiefs' D played respectably considering the O held the ball just 18 minutes...

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by KCJohnny

An offense that is on the field just 18 minutes may be part of the problem... just sayin'.

That would be a valid comment if the defense hadn't started the game by allowing two 10-plus play drives by Baltimore. And then closed the half by allowing a third.

Those three first half drives combined to take up 16 minutes in time of possession. The defense couldn't get itself off the field. Flacco had nearly 200 yards passing at halftime.

Sorry, but that's not on the offense.

The turnovers certainly helped turn the game after halftime, but Baltimore's offense had their way from the opening gun.

Total team loss. Bad on offense. Bad on defense.

[The Bad Guy]

At halftime, this D gave up 10 points. In the 2nd half, they were constantly put in bad spots and gave up 20 more.

This loss had far more to do with the offense.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Our O definitely helped to making our D look bad. I was impressed with our D to tell you the truth but the Ravens were sure getting their 3rd down conversions. 42 minutes is too long to keep your D on the field.

[KCJohnny]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

That would be a valid comment if the defense hadn't started the game by allowing two 10-plus play drives by Baltimore. And then closed the half by allowing a third.

Those three first half drives combined to take up 16 minutes in time of possession. The defense couldn't get itself off the field. Flacco had nearly 200 yards passing at halftime.

Sorry, but that's not on the offense.

The turnovers certainly helped turn the game after halftime, but Baltimore's offense had their way from the opening gun.

Total team loss. Bad on offense. Bad on defense.

That would be plausible but for the fact that the score was 10-7 at halftime. The Chiefs had the ball just 10 minutes in the first half. Baltimore cannot conduct long drives while KC has the ball.