Originally Posted by Satanic Goat (Post 8583252)

The Broncos were definitely paper tigers, and that's why their front office had the foresight to get Manning and dump Tebow.

Originally Posted by frazod (Post 8583237)

The problem with the 2010 Division win was that the division sucked and the schedule was ridiculously easy. They didn't beat a single good team (perhaps one "meh" team in eternally underperforming San Diego), and got curbstomped in the playoffs. Basically they were the 2007 Jayhawks, only Baltimore was waiting for them at the end and not the Chokies.

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 8583268)

we're playing the weakest schedule in the AFC West again this season.

Originally Posted by Satanic Goat (Post 8583226)

DUDE.

I keep telling you:

You can't look at last year's team as a legit 7-win team.

We got practically gifted five of those wins because we played Caleb Hanie, Tim Tebow, Donovan McNabb, Curtis Painter and Kyle Boller.

Hanie and Tebow threw up all of 3 points against us. Boller threw up 0.

Painter sucked for an entire scoreless half, paving the way for our "comeback." McNabb was McNabb.

Last year's Chiefs were a 4-12 team that ran into some really shitty quarterbacks. I would be shocked if we held 3 teams to 3 or fewer points this season.

Originally Posted by Satanic Goat (Post 8583255)

It only strengthens my point.

If there were no injuries at all in the NFL last year, we're probably still a 7-8 win team. Sure, we'd get better by having a couple of players back. So would other teams.

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 8582873)

I don't disagree with much except for the idea that the 2012 team can't possibly be appreciably better than the 2010 version. They're better at virtually every position on both lines (obviously in several cases because the same players are better players now than they were two years ago), they're much better at wide receiver, they're likely better at running back (even if Charles isn't the old Charles), they're better at linebacker both inside and out. They're either going to be equal or better at safety. The only positions on the entire roster that don't look to be improved are corner (where the starters are at the least adequate but the depth is questionable) and quarterback (which is unfortunately exactly the same).

And all of that, aside from the Poe pick, was the case before the draft. Which is why I actually liked that they drafted the way that they did, as opposed to making need picks/safe picks on players with less upside.

I think the team as a whole is built to win 10 or 11 games. The question is how many games the quarterback position will cost them. With someone appreciably better than Cassel behind center (say Manning) I think they'd actually be a playoff favorite. All this assuming the injury bug last year was an aberration and not a trend.

Unfortunately we're stuck with Cassel, and there isn't anybody on the bench who's going to come in and save us. Although at least it won't be Palko. Who by himself probably cost us several games last year.

Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 8583275)

Huh? Wha?:doh!:

Originally Posted by Satanic Goat (Post 8583299)

Try to keep up.

Let's say we get Charles, Berry and Moeaki healthy for an entire season and Cassel doesn't get hurt.

That's great.

That's basically the same team that got swept by the Raiders in 2010.

What makes you think they could beat a healthy Raiders team in 2011?

Originally Posted by Satanic Goat (Post 8583299)

Try to keep up.

Let's say we get Charles, Berry and Moeaki healthy for an entire season and Cassel doesn't get hurt.

That's great.

That's basically the same team that got swept by the Raiders in 2010.

What makes you think they could beat a healthy Raiders team in 2011?

Originally Posted by jspchief (Post 8583287)

One thing that seems to be escaping some people...

We have some serious "unknowns" coming into this season.

1. NT. Kelly Gregg may not be an all pro, but he was a steady veteran presence. The guy did his job. We are replacing him with a 100% unknown commodity, whether it be Powe or Poe. That could have a significant impact on our run D.

2. Center. Again, replacing a veteran with a 100% unknown. A lot of people just assume the guy we are putting at center is going to be an upgrade, but we really have no idea. The center often plays a pivotal role in recognizing blocking assignments, and we're putting in a guy that doesn't have that experience. There's also the issue of chemistry, which is always important on an O-line.


I'm not saying any of this makes us the 27th ranked team in the league. But there seems to be a lot of people ready to believe that this team is the best of the last 2 seasons, plus upgrades at every spot where we have someone new. The reality is we may or may not actually be better at those spots.

Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 8583310)

I am trying to keep up, seriously, but it is hard when you contradict yourself in the same thread. You said this team is not a 7 or 8 win team, then you said it is, which is it?
.

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 8583311)

We weren't exactly good at either of those spots anyway.
So I'm not sure there will be a HUGE dropoff at either position.

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 8583311)

We weren't exactly good at either of those spots anyway.
So I'm not sure there will be a HUGE dropoff at either position.