Offensive Incompetance - Its a fact! - Page 2

svuba · 11-15-2004, 11:20 AM

I moved this from another Thread, so sorry if you saw it on the Defense thread first.

Chiefs Offensive Performance Yesterday:
511 yards ....... 20 points
178 yards per TD - - Running around in circles?
The field is only 100 Yards long.

The colts Today had 398 Total Yards & 49 Points.
56 yards per TD. - - Efficiency & Execution

The Chiefs are structured similar to the Colts (High Power Offense - Low power Defense.) In order to be successful the Chiefs Must stop squandering Opportunities.

We are not the 85 Bears People....... Expecting the Defense win games for us has once again proven to be a foolish notion. This Defense is Not going to hold many teams Under 20 Points, so the Offense Must score MORE than 20 every game to have a chance to Win.

EXPECTING the Defense to hold teams to 19 Points While the Pro-Bowl Laden Offense Runs around like Girls for 511 yard & scores 20 points is ridiculous.

The offense has squandered WAY too many opportunities this year, and consistently plays DOWN to level of competition.

Just for fun I calculated the "Offensive Efficiency" in Yards Gained per Touchdown for all of the winning teams this week:

NO = 96
Cincinati =130
Arizona = 70
Pittsburg = 87
Baltimore = 91
Jags = 126
Atlanta = 94
STL = 140
Panthers = 67
Chicago = 64
Green Bay = 91
NE = 103

KC = 178

So No team that won this week squandered more opportunities than the Chiefs. Which means regardless of the Defensive performance this week no NFL team was able to throw that many opportunities away & still be victorious.

Clint in Wichita · 11-15-2004, 12:53 PM

The defense is still the single largest on-field problem for the Chiefs. To lay blame on the offense is ridiculous.

The defense is so pathetic that if the offense has an average day, KC has virtually no chance of winning...yet people will still blame the offense for not being able to compensate for Gunther's new "Mongoloid Defense".

It would unfair to ask the offenses of the '00 Rams or the '89 49ers to make up such a deficiency. It cannot be done by any offense on a regular basis, and it's even more unlikely in postseason play.

The offense shouldn't be blamed for being unable to carry the defense; the defense should be blamed for wasting the small window of opportunity this team has. Not only has the window been wasted, but it now has drool on it as well.

The players and ****her deserve little blame, IMO. ****her has been trying to perform brain surgery with oven mitts on. At least 8 of his 11 defensive starters have no business starting for any NFL team, and you could make a reasonable argument that every single defensive starter should be replaced, save Dalton. Allen has been a nice surprise, but for some reason he hasn't become a full-time player...I guess ****her is hoping Holliday still has a surprise or two up his sleeve.

Anyway, you can't blame reeruns for being reeruned, and you can't blame ****her for being unable to perform a miracle with said reeruns. The blame for this incredibly obvious lack of talent falls squarely on the front office, namely Peterson.

What's that? Are you bringing up Holliday, Barber, and McCleon again, Carl? Here's a clue: They all suck ass, BIG TIME, and have since BEFORE you brought them to KC. An optimist would've described them as journeymen at best at the time of their signing (well, a reasonable optimist, anyway).

Carl, most of the scouting department, and Dick Vermeil should be fired. DV is now hovering around .500 during his tenure in KC. That's about like Gunther during his tenure, except that Gunther didn't have Holmes, Green, etc. Vermiel has been impressive at building half a team. Great.

This KC defense over the last 2 years may not have been the absolute worst on paper (maybe), but on the field, it is the worst I have ever seen. Period. This offense, while imperfect like every other offense in history, is among the greatest ever assembled.

If the '85 Bears had lost the Super Bowl 6-3, would you seriously blame their defense for being unable to make up for the poor offense?!

picasso · 11-15-2004, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj

My last chance to attempt to explain this.

1. It is a fact that the defense isn't that good.
2. It is a fact that there is not much talent on defense.
3. It is a fact that the offense has a lot of talent and can play very well at times.
4. Because of 1-3 (above) the offense must carry the defense.
5. Because of 1-3 (above) the offense must capitalize whenever the defense happens to make good plays.
6. When the offense fumbles the ball inside the red zone, can't punch it in on 6 attempts from inside the 10, goes 3 and out after a nice defensive INT, can't get out of bounds to kick a field goal, throws INTs in the redzone and gives up sacks on 3 man rushes, the TEAM IS NOT GOING TO WIN.

Exactly!!

MichaelH · 11-15-2004, 12:57 PM

Who's ****her?

Clint in Wichita · 11-15-2004, 12:58 PM

Quote:

The Chiefs are structured similar to the Colts (High Power Offense - Low power Defense.)

Actually, the Chiefs have very little in common with the Colts, including offensively.

Chiefnj · 11-15-2004, 01:02 PM

Whether you agree with it or not, the plan was for the defense to improve a bit and the offense would be able to carry the team the rest of the way. Remember all the talk about how if the Colts just would have punted once the Chiefs would have won?

By bringing in a new DC and resigning the career day folk, the plan for this year was to bring about marginal improvement and let the offense continue to carry the team.

Clint in Wichita · 11-15-2004, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj

My last chance to attempt to explain this.

1. It is a fact that the defense isn't that good.
2. It is a fact that there is not much talent on defense.
3. It is a fact that the offense has a lot of talent and can play very well at times.
4. Because of 1-3 (above) the offense must carry the defense.
5. Because of 1-3 (above) the offense must capitalize whenever the defense happens to make good plays.
6. When the offense fumbles the ball inside the red zone, can't punch it in on 6 attempts from inside the 10, goes 3 and out after a nice defensive INT, can't get out of bounds to kick a field goal, throws INTs in the redzone and gives up sacks on 3 man rushes, the TEAM IS NOT GOING TO WIN.

Every one of these facts proves that the defense is the problem.

1-3 - Obviously true

4 - True, but also proof the the defense is the problem. No offense or defense should have to carry their counterparts to the extent that the Chiefs' offense is asked to week in, week out.

5 - Once again, true, but no offense should be forced to score after every single "good play", because those good plays are so friggin rare. Ridiculous.

6 - Any decent offense or defense should be able to bail out the team occaisionally. It is a team sport, after all.

How many times in the last 2 years has the defense bailed this team out?

Gaz · 11-15-2004, 01:06 PM

Chiefnj-

Yes, that was the plan.

xoxo~
Gaz
Watching another plan come unraveled.

picasso · 11-15-2004, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clint in Wichita

Actually, the Chiefs have very little in common with the Colts, including offensively.

Peyton calls a lot of his own plays. Trent only is able to do that in a 2 minute offense. Only successful when he is falling down. KC relies on a script (that works mind you) and then after that it seems like they throw it to the wind. Probably because they don't have a defensive script based on scenarios. Hell I don't know. It makes me ill thinking about it.

Clint in Wichita · 11-15-2004, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj

Whether you agree with it or not, the plan was for the defense to improve a bit and the offense would be able to carry the team the rest of the way. Remember all the talk about how if the Colts just would have punted once the Chiefs would have won?

By bringing in a new DC and resigning the career day folk, the plan for this year was to bring about marginal improvement and let the offense continue to carry the team.

That's a chickenshit plan on Peterson's part. No balls whatsoever.

Every team should aspire to be #1 in every statistical category. Shouldn't GMs always aim high?

It's never a good sign when the GM makes plans for being "middle of the road".

Gaz · 11-15-2004, 01:10 PM

Clint-

You are starting from what could have been in some alternate universe.

Chiefnj, Svuba and I are talking about what actually is.

Yes, in a better world, we would have a good Defense and the Offense would not be expected to carry the load. But this is not that better world. This is the real world where the Chiefs Defense stinks and the onus to win games is squarely on the Offense.

You don’t like it. I don’t like it. But there it is.

xoxo~
Gaz
Regularly abused by the real world.

svuba · 11-15-2004, 01:10 PM

To sum up the season:

I Hoped for more from the Defense.

I Expected more from the Offense.

Red Dawg · 11-15-2004, 01:13 PM

The offense has done it's job in every game for the most part. Yes there have been fumbles and a few int's but still we have gotten in the end zone alot. The defense done very liitle to help win games except give the offense a little rest. They did not help in Denver, Carolina, Texans, Tampa, NO, and got ran over in Jax the last 2 minutes. They helped some in the Colts game,at least for a half of it, but thye offense played damn near perfect that game. Balt and Atlanta was the only game they helped if you ask me.

Gaz · 11-15-2004, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svuba

To sum up the season:

I Hoped for more from the Defense.

I Expected more from the Offense.

An accurate summation of my situation as well.

xoxo~
Gaz
Hopes to grow back his hair, expects to end up bald.

KingPriest2 · 11-15-2004, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svuba

I moved this from another Thread, so sorry if you saw it on the Defense thread first.

Chiefs Offensive Performance Yesterday:
511 yards ....... 20 points
178 yards per TD - - Running around in circles?
The field is only 100 Yards long.

The colts Today had 398 Total Yards & 49 Points.
56 yards per TD. - - Efficiency & Execution

The Chiefs are structured similar to the Colts (High Power Offense - Low power Defense.) In order to be successful the Chiefs Must stop squandering Opportunities.

We are not the 85 Bears People....... Expecting the Defense win games for us has once again proven to be a foolish notion. This Defense is Not going to hold many teams Under 20 Points, so the Offense Must score MORE than 20 every game to have a chance to Win.

EXPECTING the Defense to hold teams to 19 Points While the Pro-Bowl Laden Offense Runs around like Girls for 511 yard & scores 20 points is ridiculous.

The offense has squandered WAY too many opportunities this year, and consistently plays DOWN to level of competition.

Just for fun I calculated the "Offensive Efficiency" in Yards Gained per Touchdown for all of the winning teams this week:

NO = 96
Cincinati =130
Arizona = 70
Pittsburg = 87
Baltimore = 91
Jags = 126
Atlanta = 94
STL = 140
Panthers = 67
Chicago = 64
Green Bay = 91
NE = 103

KC = 178

So No team that won this week squandered more opportunities than the Chiefs. Which means regardless of the Defensive performance this week no NFL team was able to throw that many opportunities away & still be victorious.

Actually the Colts O scored 35 points not 49. Their D scored 14.

Also in your stats are you counting in Int returns, KR and Pr returns?

stevieray · 11-15-2004, 01:16 PM

Third down conversion yesterday was 2/8?

Fourth qtr scoring.

Turnovers.

11-15-2004, 11:20 AM
svuba Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Concord, California, USA Casino cash: $10004900	Offensive Incompetance - Its a fact! I moved this from another Thread, so sorry if you saw it on the Defense thread first. Chiefs Offensive Performance Yesterday: 511 yards ....... 20 points 178 yards per TD - - Running around in circles? The field is only 100 Yards long. The colts Today had 398 Total Yards & 49 Points. 56 yards per TD. - - Efficiency & Execution The Chiefs are structured similar to the Colts (High Power Offense - Low power Defense.) In order to be successful the Chiefs Must stop squandering Opportunities. We are not the 85 Bears People....... Expecting the Defense win games for us has once again proven to be a foolish notion. This Defense is Not going to hold many teams Under 20 Points, so the Offense Must score MORE than 20 every game to have a chance to Win. EXPECTING the Defense to hold teams to 19 Points While the Pro-Bowl Laden Offense Runs around like Girls for 511 yard & scores 20 points is ridiculous. The offense has squandered WAY too many opportunities this year, and consistently plays DOWN to level of competition. Just for fun I calculated the "Offensive Efficiency" in Yards Gained per Touchdown for all of the winning teams this week: NO = 96 Cincinati =130 Arizona = 70 Pittsburg = 87 Baltimore = 91 Jags = 126 Atlanta = 94 STL = 140 Panthers = 67 Chicago = 64 Green Bay = 91 NE = 103 KC = 178 So No team that won this week squandered more opportunities than the Chiefs. Which means regardless of the Defensive performance this week no NFL team was able to throw that many opportunities away & still be victorious.
Posts: 442

11-15-2004, 12:53 PM	#16
Clint in Wichita Veteran Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	The defense is still the single largest on-field problem for the Chiefs. To lay blame on the offense is ridiculous. The defense is so pathetic that if the offense has an average day, KC has virtually no chance of winning...yet people will still blame the offense for not being able to compensate for Gunther's new "Mongoloid Defense". It would unfair to ask the offenses of the '00 Rams or the '89 49ers to make up such a deficiency. It cannot be done by any offense on a regular basis, and it's even more unlikely in postseason play. The offense shouldn't be blamed for being unable to carry the defense; the defense should be blamed for wasting the small window of opportunity this team has. Not only has the window been wasted, but it now has drool on it as well. The players and **her deserve little blame, IMO. *her has been trying to perform brain surgery with oven mitts on. At least 8 of his 11 defensive starters have no business starting for any* NFL team, and you could make a reasonable argument that every single defensive starter should be replaced, save Dalton. Allen has been a nice surprise, but for some reason he hasn't become a full-time player...I guess **her is hoping Holliday still has a surprise or two up his sleeve. Anyway, you can't blame reeruns for being reeruned, and you can't blame *her for being unable to perform a miracle with said reeruns. The blame for this incredibly obvious lack of talent falls squarely on the front office, namely Peterson. What's that? Are you bringing up Holliday, Barber, and McCleon again, Carl? Here's a clue: They all suck ass, BIG TIME, and have since BEFORE you brought them to KC. An optimist would've described them as journeymen at best at the time of their signing (well, a reasonable* optimist, anyway). Carl, most of the scouting department, and Dick Vermeil should be fired. DV is now hovering around .500 during his tenure in KC. That's about like Gunther during his tenure, except that Gunther didn't have Holmes, Green, etc. Vermiel has been impressive at building half a team. Great. This KC defense over the last 2 years may not have been the absolute worst on paper (maybe), but on the field, it is the worst I have ever seen. Period. This offense, while imperfect like every other offense in history, is among the greatest ever assembled. If the '85 Bears had lost the Super Bowl 6-3, would you seriously blame their defense for being unable to make up for the poor offense?!
Posts: 4,458

11-15-2004, 12:57 PM	#18
MichaelH Go Chiefs! Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Gastonia, North Carolina Casino cash: $9312006	Who's ****her?
Posts: 3,187

11-15-2004, 01:02 PM	#20
Chiefnj MVP Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Willis, Harris and Davis. Casino cash: $10004900	Whether you agree with it or not, the plan was for the defense to improve a bit and the offense would be able to carry the team the rest of the way. Remember all the talk about how if the Colts just would have punted once the Chiefs would have won? By bringing in a new DC and resigning the career day folk, the plan for this year was to bring about marginal improvement and let the offense continue to carry the team.
Posts: 6,811

11-15-2004, 01:06 PM	#22
Gaz Defense Homer Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Rancho Gaz Casino cash: $10010793	No plan survives contact with the enemy... Chiefnj- Yes, that was the plan. xoxo~ Gaz Watching another plan come unraveled.
Posts: 5,911

11-15-2004, 01:10 PM	#25
Gaz Defense Homer Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Rancho Gaz Casino cash: $10010793	Are we playing What If again? Clint- You are starting from what could have been in some alternate universe. Chiefnj, Svuba and I are talking about what actually is. Yes, in a better world, we would have a good Defense and the Offense would not be expected to carry the load. But this is not that better world. This is the real world where the Chiefs Defense stinks and the onus to win games is squarely on the Offense. You don’t like it. I don’t like it. But there it is. xoxo~ Gaz Regularly abused by the real world.
Posts: 5,911

11-15-2004, 01:13 PM	#27
Red Dawg Going home eventually Join Date: Dec 2002 Casino cash: $4782858	The offense has done it's job in every game for the most part. Yes there have been fumbles and a few int's but still we have gotten in the end zone alot. The defense done very liitle to help win games except give the offense a little rest. They did not help in Denver, Carolina, Texans, Tampa, NO, and got ran over in Jax the last 2 minutes. They helped some in the Colts game,at least for a half of it, but thye offense played damn near perfect that game. Balt and Atlanta was the only game they helped if you ask me. __________________ If you're not first you're last!
Posts: 30,361

11-15-2004, 01:16 PM	#30
stevieray best in the biz Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Under Pressure Casino cash: $2615273	Third down conversion yesterday was 2/8? Fourth qtr scoring. Turnovers.
Posts: 71,171