donkhater
11-08-2004, 08:03 AM
http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2004/11/08/an_outcome_they_could_not_afford/
GRETZ: An Outcome They Could Not Afford
Nov 08, 2004, 6:19:18 AM by Bob Gretz
TAMPA – It was the kind of disaster the Chiefs just could not afford at this juncture of the 2004 season.
There will be a lot of words in the coming days about how the Chiefs are still breathing in the AFC, how they can still make something of their season over the final eight games. All of that is true and it beats giving up.
But it’s hard to believe any of it will happen.
The Chiefs are 3-5 after their loss to Tampa Bay. They need to get to 11-5, 10-6 at the minimum to make the post-season tournament. That means playing the second half of the season unbeaten, or with just one loss. Dick Vermeil said after the game that he believed his team could do just that, because they won nine games in a row last year.
But the 2004 Chiefs are not the 2003 Chiefs. They’ve proven that for the last eight weeks. They’ve not shown the ability to win three games in a row. Why should we believe they could win eight straight, or even seven games in the second half? The ‘04 Chiefs lack the mental toughness necessary to pull off that kind of task.
OK, so what is mental toughness? There are a lot of different terms that can be used to describe the same thing. I’m not talking about character; this Chiefs team dripping with players of high character. It’s not about dedication and work ethic; you won’t find a group of NFL players in one stadium who have worked harder in the last 10 months to make something of this season.
Mental toughness is the ability to function at the highest level of performance when the stakes are the highest. When your team cannot afford another loss in the season, how do your players react? Do they raise their level of performance to the point they don’t make silly mental mistakes, where they are so schooled and prepared in the fundamentals that they can overcome whatever deficiencies in talent they may have?
That’s mental toughness and the ‘04 Chiefs do not have it. Some players do, and they display it every game. But as a collective group, they come up lacking. They’ve showed that at various times this season, but it was readily apparent against the Buccaneers. Examples? Here are a few.
On Wednesday the Chiefs coaching staff showed the offense tape of the Tampa Bay defense with a special emphasis on the Bucs ability to knock loose the football. They’ve been doing it for years and are among the best in the league at creating turnovers. On Saturday morning, before leaving for Tampa, the offensive staff made this point the players again.
A team with mental toughness takes that information and makes sure that under every circumstance, they have ball security. They spend all week practicing it, thinking about it, reminding themselves about securing the ball.
In the first quarter, at the end of a long pass play and run by Eddie Kennison, with the end zone 10 yards ahead of him, with a two-touchdown lead at the Chiefs fingertips in the first quarter, disaster struck. Kennison allowed the ball to be punched out of his hands. I say “allow” because he had not secured the ball. He admitted after the game, that he should have had better ball security. It rolled into the end zone, where it was picked up by the Bucs and returned 29 yards. No touchdown, no field goal, and then Tampa went down the field and scored a touchdown to give them a 14-7 lead. It was a 14-point swing of momentum. Remember, the Chiefs lost by three points.
A defense with mental toughness does not allow a receiver on a first-and-goal play at the three-yard line to go uncovered. The Chiefs did that in the second quarter, when tight end Ken Dilger split out left and no defensive player picked him up. Eric Warfield saw him there, but covered the slot receiver. Jerome Woods moved to that side of the formation, looked at Dilger, but made no move to cover him. It was like Warfield and Woods either couldn’t see Dilger, or refused to acknowledge his existence. But Brian Griese saw Dilger and threw an easy touchdown pass to the tight end. It was inexcusable, especially when the mistakes were made by veteran players; guys who have been schooled and know better. At the least, they could have called a timeout. Instead, it was a Tampa Bay touchdown, in a game the Chiefs lost by three points.
In the first half, the Chiefs held Michael Pittman to nine yards rushing. On the second offensive play of the third quarter, Pittman runs 78 yards through the Chiefs for a score. Why? A linebacker didn’t fill the play the way he was taught and a cornerback did not provide the support as was designed in the defense. Pittman scored a touchdown in a game the Chiefs lost by three points.
With the season on the line, on the Chiefs final offensive play of the game, how does a three-man pass rush beat a five-man Chiefs offensive line? That should never happen, in any game, but most especially one where the Chiefs lost by three points.
It’s not like Kennison, Warfield, Woods and the others don’t want to win; in many cases they are probably trying to do too much in hopes of getting a victory. It’s just an unfortunate fact of the 2004 season that the Chiefs biggest opponent has been themselves. It’s become their profile. They showed it against Houston, against Jacksonville, against Tampa Bay. It has become their profile.
Not beating themselves: that’s a sign of a team with mental toughness. The Chiefs have shown us nothing to make us believe they can correct that in the season’s final eight games.
GRETZ: An Outcome They Could Not Afford
Nov 08, 2004, 6:19:18 AM by Bob Gretz
TAMPA – It was the kind of disaster the Chiefs just could not afford at this juncture of the 2004 season.
There will be a lot of words in the coming days about how the Chiefs are still breathing in the AFC, how they can still make something of their season over the final eight games. All of that is true and it beats giving up.
But it’s hard to believe any of it will happen.
The Chiefs are 3-5 after their loss to Tampa Bay. They need to get to 11-5, 10-6 at the minimum to make the post-season tournament. That means playing the second half of the season unbeaten, or with just one loss. Dick Vermeil said after the game that he believed his team could do just that, because they won nine games in a row last year.
But the 2004 Chiefs are not the 2003 Chiefs. They’ve proven that for the last eight weeks. They’ve not shown the ability to win three games in a row. Why should we believe they could win eight straight, or even seven games in the second half? The ‘04 Chiefs lack the mental toughness necessary to pull off that kind of task.
OK, so what is mental toughness? There are a lot of different terms that can be used to describe the same thing. I’m not talking about character; this Chiefs team dripping with players of high character. It’s not about dedication and work ethic; you won’t find a group of NFL players in one stadium who have worked harder in the last 10 months to make something of this season.
Mental toughness is the ability to function at the highest level of performance when the stakes are the highest. When your team cannot afford another loss in the season, how do your players react? Do they raise their level of performance to the point they don’t make silly mental mistakes, where they are so schooled and prepared in the fundamentals that they can overcome whatever deficiencies in talent they may have?
That’s mental toughness and the ‘04 Chiefs do not have it. Some players do, and they display it every game. But as a collective group, they come up lacking. They’ve showed that at various times this season, but it was readily apparent against the Buccaneers. Examples? Here are a few.
On Wednesday the Chiefs coaching staff showed the offense tape of the Tampa Bay defense with a special emphasis on the Bucs ability to knock loose the football. They’ve been doing it for years and are among the best in the league at creating turnovers. On Saturday morning, before leaving for Tampa, the offensive staff made this point the players again.
A team with mental toughness takes that information and makes sure that under every circumstance, they have ball security. They spend all week practicing it, thinking about it, reminding themselves about securing the ball.
In the first quarter, at the end of a long pass play and run by Eddie Kennison, with the end zone 10 yards ahead of him, with a two-touchdown lead at the Chiefs fingertips in the first quarter, disaster struck. Kennison allowed the ball to be punched out of his hands. I say “allow” because he had not secured the ball. He admitted after the game, that he should have had better ball security. It rolled into the end zone, where it was picked up by the Bucs and returned 29 yards. No touchdown, no field goal, and then Tampa went down the field and scored a touchdown to give them a 14-7 lead. It was a 14-point swing of momentum. Remember, the Chiefs lost by three points.
A defense with mental toughness does not allow a receiver on a first-and-goal play at the three-yard line to go uncovered. The Chiefs did that in the second quarter, when tight end Ken Dilger split out left and no defensive player picked him up. Eric Warfield saw him there, but covered the slot receiver. Jerome Woods moved to that side of the formation, looked at Dilger, but made no move to cover him. It was like Warfield and Woods either couldn’t see Dilger, or refused to acknowledge his existence. But Brian Griese saw Dilger and threw an easy touchdown pass to the tight end. It was inexcusable, especially when the mistakes were made by veteran players; guys who have been schooled and know better. At the least, they could have called a timeout. Instead, it was a Tampa Bay touchdown, in a game the Chiefs lost by three points.
In the first half, the Chiefs held Michael Pittman to nine yards rushing. On the second offensive play of the third quarter, Pittman runs 78 yards through the Chiefs for a score. Why? A linebacker didn’t fill the play the way he was taught and a cornerback did not provide the support as was designed in the defense. Pittman scored a touchdown in a game the Chiefs lost by three points.
With the season on the line, on the Chiefs final offensive play of the game, how does a three-man pass rush beat a five-man Chiefs offensive line? That should never happen, in any game, but most especially one where the Chiefs lost by three points.
It’s not like Kennison, Warfield, Woods and the others don’t want to win; in many cases they are probably trying to do too much in hopes of getting a victory. It’s just an unfortunate fact of the 2004 season that the Chiefs biggest opponent has been themselves. It’s become their profile. They showed it against Houston, against Jacksonville, against Tampa Bay. It has become their profile.
Not beating themselves: that’s a sign of a team with mental toughness. The Chiefs have shown us nothing to make us believe they can correct that in the season’s final eight games.