Chiefs Is this team going to be the 2002 Chiefs? - Page 5

bobbything · 08-07-2010, 01:01 PM

Listening to Bill Maas the other day, he went on and on about how good this offense is going to be, and how terrible the defense is. It got me thinking, this team seems to be eerily similar to the early years DV teams...

In 01, the team wasn't particularly good. We traded for Trent Green, who had a pretty horrible year. The defense sucked and the offense was pretty average. But, Priest Holmes emerged late and became the go-to guy.

The following year, the offense took a huge leap. Holmes and Green were both great, and we picked up castoff Kennison, who resurrected his career with KC. The defense still sucked and we finished 8-8.

Last year, we paid an arm and a leg for Cassel who wasn't very good. Charles emerged late as the go-to guy. We picked up castoff Chambers who looks to be resurrecting his career. And all reports out of camp are that the offense looks very, very potent, and our defense sucks.

There seem to be lots of similarities between these two teams. 8-8 again, and essentially a mirror of the 2002 season?

Red Brooklyn · 08-08-2010, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RustShack

The Chiefs didn't make a lot of changes on defense because a lot of the pieces are already there... It was our first year in the 3-4, its expected to be bad. Not to mention the fact who our DC was, everyone should have known what to expect.. I got bashed by the homers last year for saying he was a terrible hire. Not to mention the fact who our DL coach was, he had no business being with the team after how bad he did the previous few years for us.. not to mention the fact he knew nothing about 3-4 defense.

We have two very talented DE's entering their second year in the 3-4 defense... Our DC is one of the best DL coaches in the league, and his DL coach played almost his entire career on Crennel coached teams. Shaun Smith has been terrible in the 4-3 defense, but his two years with Crennel in the 3-4 he was dominate, and honestly should have went to the Pro Bowl one of those years.

Last year Hali was second in the NFL in QB pressures, and likely would have been up there in sacks if we had better DL play last year.. but I can't say that for sure. The talent is there for DJ, and hes finally working to earn a starting job and not to mention its a contract year, so odds are its finally going to be his breakout year. Vrabel is the needed veteran presence, but will hopefully be splitting a lot of time with promising young guns Sheffield, Studebaker, or anyone else who emerges. I personally like Belcher to be the other ILB, but Mays isn't bad at stopping the run either. If our DL can do its job though, the LB's will look good almost regardless of who it is.

As for the Secondary, Flowers and Carr are easily a top ten duo in the NFL. We now have Eric Berry. Hopefully our defense is good enough to mask the weakness at the other safety position, but our other rook emerging would be real nice. It will probably be McGraw, but like Vrabel hes that smart vet you need on the team even if they aren't the most talented.

So all in all our main two weaknesses are the starting spot next to Berry, an ILB next to DJ, possibly the OLB where Vrabel was last year, and NT which I believe Smith won't be a problem. Edwards isn't a terrible NT either, he just can't play all game all year like last year, hes more of a great backup NT. DL shouldn't be a problem at all though under Crennel, the talent is there. If the DL produces, the who defense will produce.

Incredibly optimistic. But I love it. I hope you're right.

**Rausch** · 08-08-2010, 09:08 AM

That 02-03 stretch was LOADED on the offensive line. The depth wasn't great but the front five might be top 15 all time.

Then you had TRich and Dunn (The 3rd OT) to throw in the mix as well...

**Rausch** · 08-08-2010, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbything

Good Lord, I don't know how that 2006 team got to 9-7. They were awful. I remember that a bad 49'ers team had to beat the Bronco's (which happened), and I think Pittsburgh had to beat Cinci (which happened), and something else...

There were three completely perfect things that had to happen for that team to get into the playoffs.

IIRC there were 4 teams that had to lose before the Denver (late) game AND Denver had to lose at home to a losing team.

It was the only miracle I've ever seen followed by an abortion...

**notorious** · 08-08-2010, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

IIRC there were 4 teams that had to lose before the Denver (late) game AND Denver had to lose at home to a losing team.

It was the only miracle I've ever seen followed by an abortion...

We were so excited when it happened.

The sad thing is that it probably bought Herm and Carl an extra year.........

Red Brooklyn · 08-08-2010, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notorious

We were so excited when it happened.

The sad thing is that it probably bought Herm and Carl an extra year.........

It was the ultimate sports example of 'careful what you wish for.'

milkman · 08-08-2010, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notorious

We were so excited when it happened.

The sad thing is that it probably bought Herm and Carl an extra year.........

I wouldn't call what I felt excitement.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 08-08-2010, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notorious

We were so excited when it happened.

The sad thing is that it probably bought Herm and Carl an extra year.........

Worth it, considering they gave us Charles, Flowers, Carr, Bowe and Albert.

**BigMeatballDave** · 08-08-2010, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

At the end of the day, Okung's Sac is right.

This O-Line hasn't really improved.

Waters is a shell.
Weigman is probably done.

O'Calligan is scrub, at best.

He's even right about Albert.
He does have to have an "epiphane" this year.

Where our opinions diverge is whether Albert will have that epiphane, and that Okung is going to be any better.

While I agree he's not wrong about this line, he was dead set against drafting a safety that high. Thats where I'm trying to bust his balls. Had we not drafted Albert 2 yrs ago, I'd be fine with Okung. Sac thinks its too early to take a safety that high. Berry is a difference maker. The is no such thing as drafting a one of those too high. (Unless its a kicker

)

**notorious** · 08-08-2010, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Brooklyn

It was the ultimate sports example of 'careful what you wish for.'

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

I wouldn't call what I felt excitement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Worth it, considering they gave us Charles, Flowers, Carr, Bowe and Albert.

I was pumped. It was nice to sneak in under miracle conditions due to a Bronco collapse against the worst team in the league AT HOME.

The worst part? We were set to play our Arch Playoff Nemesis in Indy with an excellent running game against the worst defense in the NFL. What happened? No first ****ing downs until the end of the 3rd.

So yes, Mr. Brooklyn, you are perfect in your statement.

.......****..........

**MahiMike** · 08-08-2010, 06:59 PM

Put me down for...

"I'll take it!"

milkman · 08-08-2010, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCD

While I agree he's not wrong about this line, he was dead set against drafting a safety that high. Thats where I'm trying to bust his balls. Had we not drafted Albert 2 yrs ago, I'd be fine with Okung. Sac thinks its too early to take a safety that high. Berry is a difference maker. The is no such thing as drafting a one of those too high. (Unless its a kicker

)

I think Berry is a playmaker that we simply could not pass on even though his impact will not be nearly as.....uh.....impactful.....until we get a difference maker up front.

milkman · 08-08-2010, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notorious

I was pumped. It was nice to sneak in under miracle conditions due to a Bronco collapse against the worst team in the league AT HOME.

The worst part? We were set to play our Arch Playoff Nemesis in Indy with an excellent running game against the worst defense in the NFL. What happened? No first ****ing downs until the end of the 3rd.

So yes, Mr. Brooklyn, you are perfect in your statement.

.......****..........

I expected to lose.

They sucked.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 08-08-2010, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

I expected to lose.

They sucked.

The sad part is, had the offense bothered to play even average that day, we have a chance.

The defense did their part - at least until they wore down in the 2nd half from being on the field all day.

I still can't get over the fact that Ty ****ing Law couldn't juke Manning on that INT. Shoulda been 6.

Coogs · 08-08-2010, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedThat

They have talent BUT I believe they still lack a foundation. They're still missing pieces at critical positions. For one, NT needs to be addressed, and the LBing corps is questionable. If a team is weak in those areas, no matter who your def coordinator is, you can't run a 3-4 efficiently.

Well, we have two of those #1 picks playing the LB spots in Hali and Johnson. And we have some role players that must fill the other spots within that unit.

Same on the front 3. Two top five picks bookending a NT. Franklin from the 49ers kind of came out of nowhere after 4 unspectaular seasons. Maybe the Chiefs can come up with someone in that same mold in Lokey.

Role players must step up. You can not have a whole defense of 1st round talent.

**BossChief** · 08-08-2010, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

The sad part is, had the offense bothered to play even average that day, we have a chance.

The defense did their part - at least until they wore down in the 2nd half from being on the field all day.

I still can't get over the fact that Ty ****ing Law couldn't juke Manning on that INT. Shoulda been 6.

and missing the chip shot seemingly deflated us. Not sure we ever recovered.

08-07-2010, 01:01 PM
bobbything Distributor of Pain Join Date: Nov 2004 Casino cash: $8914900	Is this team going to be the 2002 Chiefs? Listening to Bill Maas the other day, he went on and on about how good this offense is going to be, and how terrible the defense is. It got me thinking, this team seems to be eerily similar to the early years DV teams... In 01, the team wasn't particularly good. We traded for Trent Green, who had a pretty horrible year. The defense sucked and the offense was pretty average. But, Priest Holmes emerged late and became the go-to guy. The following year, the offense took a huge leap. Holmes and Green were both great, and we picked up castoff Kennison, who resurrected his career with KC. The defense still sucked and we finished 8-8. Last year, we paid an arm and a leg for Cassel who wasn't very good. Charles emerged late as the go-to guy. We picked up castoff Chambers who looks to be resurrecting his career. And all reports out of camp are that the offense looks very, very potent, and our defense sucks. There seem to be lots of similarities between these two teams. 8-8 again, and essentially a mirror of the 2002 season?
Posts: 3,435

08-08-2010, 06:59 PM	#70
MahiMike He's Mahomie! Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Jax, FL Casino cash: $10023443	Put me down for... "I'll take it!" __________________ 99.9%
Posts: 17,387