Chiefs Alex Smith did, does, and will always suck. - Page 704

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-16-2013, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler

I am one of them that is crucifying him. And I imagine that you along with the rest of us will be bitching about AS if he threw 2 INT's in the last 3 minutes while we were winning to end up losing the playoff game.

That's why I'm trying to avoid the "what if" game that everyone else wants to play - there are too many variables.

Does he play lights out for 55 minutes - putting up 36 points and giving the defense a 23 point lead, only to see them give it all back before he ever throws the INTs?

Or does he play poorly, miss some opportunities to put the game away, it stays tight, and then he throws a late INT?

Again, "good enough" is going to be interpreted differently by different people.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-16-2013, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

I disagree on the Denver at KC game.

This is what I mean.

Smith did nothing for 2 full quarters, but because we had a chance to win at the end, some people think that's good enough.

If he plays even average ball in Q2 and Q3, that game never comes down to the final possession.

beach tribe · 12-16-2013, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Again, people have different interpretations of "played well".

IMO, he didn't exactly play well for most of the first 8-9 games, yet we won them all - so I'm not sure why you find it unlikely to happen.

You said it's not too much to ask for a QB who won 11 games to win a PO game.
Said he has played like top 10 QB the last five weeks.

What is YOUR interpretation of played well cause it doesn't seem like you have a solid handle on it.

**BossChief** · 12-16-2013, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

It's only a double standard if I blame Alex for a loss that he didn't really play a part in.

Which I haven't done, nor have I for any other QB. I'm usually the guy standing up for the Romos and Ryans while the rest of the board blames them.

But again, it depends on your interpretation of "good enough".

IMO, Alex was good enough in the SD game. He wasn't in the Denver games.

Lets see how he plays and then debate it, instead of coming up with these hypothetical conditions.

PI completely disagree with you on his level of play against Denver at Arrowhead.

If it weren't for Avery and others dropping really good throws, Alex would have had over 400 yards passing and the outcome would be completely different.

I'm not one to use WR drops as an excuse, but Alex was playing at a high level that game.

DJ's left nut · 12-16-2013, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I'm not going to "label" him anything. I'm pointing out the double standard on this board.

People are already setting up conditions for a potential loss, when they refuse to do the same for any other QB.

My point is that, win or lose, it doesn't change who this guy is as a QB.

Sure, he may go out there and play a shit game - in which case we lose and he played a huge part of it. It doesn't mean he's a shitty QB, it means he's a slightly above average QB that had a bad game at a bad time.

If he has a great game and takes us to a win - he's not a better QB; he just played a great game.

So why are folks still eager to say that the playoff game will be dispositive of who the guy is as a QB? Tom Brady's playoff losses don't define who he is as a QB, nor do his wins - the guy's just a great QB. Same story with Brees, Rodgers, etc...

Mark Sanchez's playoff wins don't define who he is as a QB - he's a shitty QB. Same with Tim Tebow and Jake Delhomme.

Alex Smith is who he is. At this point we have to hope he goes out and plays a good game when we need him to, but in the end it doesn't really change who he is. He's a solid QB that is capable of playing good games and capable of playing bad ones. We just need to hope the bad ones don't come in the post-season.

**BossChief** · 12-16-2013, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

This is what I mean.

Smith did nothing for 2 full quarters, but because we had a chance to win at the end, some people think that's good enough.

If he plays even average ball in Q2 and Q3, that game never comes down to the final possession.

You need to go back and watch that time span without the emotion of the moment.

Alex was putting the ball on the money.

**dirk digler** · 12-16-2013, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

That's why I'm trying to avoid the "what if" game that everyone else wants to play - there are too many variables.

Does he play lights out for 55 minutes - putting up 36 points and giving the defense a 23 point lead, only to see them give it all back before he ever throws the INTs?

Or does he play poorly, miss some opportunities to put the game away, it stays tight, and then he throws a late INT?

Again, "good enough" is going to be interpreted differently by different people.

I understand. For me, I like to keep it simple. How does a player finish..that is all that matters.

O.city · 12-16-2013, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

This is what I mean.

Smith did nothing for 2 full quarters, but because we had a chance to win at the end, some people think that's good enough.

If he plays even average ball in Q2 and Q3, that game never comes down to the final possession.

I mean, isn't giving yourself a chance to win "good enough"?

He wasn't great, but we were a play from overtime.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-16-2013, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mschiefs1984

You may not have been saying that but there are a number who were.

Just look at the Charger game. People were like

"Alex just couldn't keep up"

"Rivers had a perfect game Alex didn't"

That's why you get people saying if Alex plays well they won't put a playoff loss on Alex. Alex has played well in a game the Chiefs lost and it was put on him by some

In fairness, those two comments are correct.

Yeah, we scored 38? points in that game, but we were also pretty shitty IIRC on 3rd down. 30% I think, while SD was near 50%.

So yeah, I can see why some would say those things. Personally, I think he played about as well as he's capable of in that game, so I can't blame him.

I can understand why others might blame him partially, however. Anyone blaming him completely is a moron, though.

**BossChief** · 12-16-2013, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

The drops his receivers had against Denver's were HUGE.

The pass to Jenkins was PERFECT and the LOS was the 31 and the pass was dropped on the other 30 yard line. That's 39 yards off the board.

Next pass (Fasanos concussion) LOS is the 33 and the pass was dropped at the 41. That's another 26 yards that were left on the field due to a drop.

That's 65 yards on just 2 throws.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

His very next throw goes right through the hands of Bowe that would have gone for 7 yards.

The next pass goes to Hemmingway for a decent gain.

The very next pass play is from the 30 yard line and Avery drops a beautiful pass at the 35 yard line. Another 35 yards off the board.

By my count, that's 107 yards on drops (not considering any yac, just where the drop happened).

The very next passing play (After Charles picks up a first on a 16 yard run) Alex goes right back to Avery again. LOS is the Denver 49 and the pass is near perfect and is dropped at the 34 yard line.

15 more yards.

The total is now up to 122.

I know there were more drops in this one, but FFS it sucks watching how bad these were on the DVR after seeing them live.

I don't know what else Alex could have done during that time span...

Messier · 12-16-2013, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

This is what I mean.

Smith did nothing for 2 full quarters, but because we had a chance to win at the end, some people think that's good enough.

If he plays even average ball in Q2 and Q3, that game never comes down to the final possession.

Did you watch that game? The drops. My god, the drops.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-16-2013, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beach tribe

You said it's not too much to ask for a QB who won 11 games to win a PO game.
Said he has played like top 10 QB the last five weeks.

What is YOUR interpretation of played well cause it doesn't seem like you have a solid handle on it.

Funny, my post said nothing about the last five weeks.

Might want to go back and re-read it.

**Bearcat** · 12-16-2013, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

My point is that, win or lose, it doesn't change who this guy is as a QB.

Sure, he may go out there and play a shit game - in which case we lose and he played a huge part of it. It doesn't mean he's a shitty QB, it means he's a slightly above average QB that had a bad game at a bad time.

If he has a great game and takes us to a win - he's not a better QB; he just played a great game.

So why are folks still eager to say that the playoff game will be dispositive of who the guy is as a QB? Tom Brady's playoff losses don't define who he is as a QB, nor do his wins - the guy's just a great QB. Same story with Brees, Rodgers, etc...

Mark Sanchez's playoff wins don't define who he is as a QB - he's a shitty QB. Same with Tim Tebow and Jake Delhomme.

Alex Smith is who he is. At this point we have to hope he goes out and plays a good game when we need him to, but in the end it doesn't really change who he is. He's a solid QB that is capable of playing good games and capable of playing bad ones. We just need to hope the bad ones don't come in the post-season.

Well, because everyone needs answers and they need them now. It's all black and white. Bets depend on it. People argue this shit for months and need to know if they won. And you think this has to do with football?!?

Seriously though, spot on... I was amused at the reactions to the losses. We've known what this team was and how Alex Smith fit at the end of September, or maybe sooner. We discussed for 2+ months that the team could win some games but probably couldn't beat the high scoring offenses, which was fine because 2-14, of course... then they lose a couple to a couple of high scoring offenses and suddenly everything has changed!

If people are tired of talking about Alex Smith now, just wait until the playoff game is over... either way, holy shit, this place is going to be really crazy.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-16-2013, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

PI completely disagree with you on his level of play against Denver at Arrowhead.

If it weren't for Avery and others dropping really good throws, Alex would have had over 400 yards passing and the outcome would be completely different.

I'm not one to use WR drops as an excuse, but Alex was playing at a high level that game.

IIRC, Duncan Idaho broke down each of those drives, and 3 of the 4 drops had no bearing on the score - we scored on the drives in question.

Messier · 12-16-2013, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

IIRC, Duncan Idaho broke down each of those drives, and 3 of the 4 drops had no bearing on the score - we scored on the drives in question.

No we didn't.

02-27-2013, 12:45 PM
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4700478	Alex Smith did, does, and will always suck. Last edited by Hammock Parties; 03-02-2013 at 09:39 PM..
Posts: 277,920