Did the NFL force Alex Smith to throw into double coverage in the end zone?

And yet they were right there, positioned to do just that UNTIL the AWEFUL INT in the endzone. That was a 14-point swing and the ball game. :shake:

No...but completely ignoring glaring holding calls led to Winston having a clean pocket all day and an amazing 3rd down success rate. He was getting hit the most out of any QB prior to this game...they were the worst in the NFL.

Explain this?

The video clips I posted in this thread, were holding calls in a "normal" game.....if they are officiating by the rules.

The Chiefs are down two out of three down linemen and Poe didn't practice all week although he played. DJ didn't practice all week and then played and Peters whom leads the league in INTs was out. Then Dee Ford who leads the league in sacks went out. It was Houston's first game back and he's not near even 90%. And the truth be told we've missed Mauga against the run all year and are at the 3rd player down the depth chart at that position. Hate to use injuries as an excuse but damn this D is decimated.

It's not an excuse because it was a factor. All those guys being out certainly mattered. Even with that, the defense managed to hold the Bucs to 19 points at home and that should have been enough if the offense would have done its job when they were in position to do so.

no. That was a shit decision. Doesn't really alter the point of the game, in general.

What sucks is Hill should have scored on that bomb, but that throw was prett6 bad...then came the ill fated pick.

i agree. It's ironic, really.

People have been screaming over Smith not taking risks.. particularly throwing into the EZ.

Had he drove them crazy with another sack, and therefore FG ending drive... things really look different.

So sometimes, NOT making the risky throws is? c'mon.. say it with me... :p

Until someone shows me otherwise, I contend that Smith had a dude about to light him up (coming from the LG/C or simply left of him).. and the throw didn't get all of the juice intended.

As it was, I remember worrying as the ball was in the air that QB contact was going to make it a fluttering INT duck... which is why I so remember the pressure.

Shit decision by Reid. They said it was a set play.

The Chiefs just lost a game in the same fashion they generally prefer to win one.

TB's offense owned the clock, kept the ball and stayed on the field. The FGs and a fumbled mesh kept the game close, but the Bucs offense was much better than the Chiefs defense yesterday.

Houston was a non-factor and when with Zombo and the corpse of Hali on the field, they got no pressure at all. The defense absolutely played a big part in that loss.

Until their last drive of the game when they were trying to milk the clock, the Bucs made it into Chiefs territory on EVERY SINGLE POSSESSION. And even that drive went all the way to their own 49. I'm sorry, but that's damn near as bad as the zero punt game. I've never seen anything like that. Because of the Bucs ability to keep the Chiefs defense on the field, the offense got a whopping SEVEN drives. Seven.

Sorry, but that's a huge failure by the D. For everyone that is saying "well they only gave up 19 points!" isn't that a similar argument to 'well he just wins games'? The defensive performance was pitiful and for a team that relies on complementary football, the D simply didn't get the job done.

Now the offense could've definitely been better and I'll never understand that play call from Reid. I just don't get what he saw that made him think that passing over the middle inside the 5 was smart. It's just way too congested for that to be a good idea. And if you're going to punt from the 36, why the hell aren't you trying a short play to improve your chance at the FG? Why are you dialing up a deep ball when you need 4-5 yards to get into FG range? Oh, and why when you do choose to run the ball are you running behind your worst guard at their best player? His offensive gameplan just never seemed to make sense at all.

Eh, I'm sure this has all been said already but it's pretty ridiculous to say that Smith is why they lost this game - they lost this game because the whole team played like shit. Perhaps injuries finally ran them down and in the end you can only play poor football and win for so long. And frankly, they weren't going to win out anyway so if this game teaches them something that they can use to better themselves going forward, it's for the best. But shit man, they have got to play better than they played yesterday because that whole team failed in just about every form and fashion.

Nope.

They scored on that drive; it was when Smith ran it in. In the scheme of things, that ball being underthrown didn't matter (and with as open as he was, you absolutely cannot risk an overthrow there so I won't bag on him too hard there).

The pick drive had Kelce's long catch in it and that was actually a pretty nice play. Kelce just couldn't quite keep himself in bounds down the sideline.

What sucks is that at the 5 yard line, Andy Reid dialed up another one of those ****ing single read plays that neuters his offenses ability to adjust to how the defense handles the play. Smith had one place to go with that ball - a completely congested middle. He should've fired it out the back and lived to fight another day but it was still an absolute garbage play call.

wow. How can ANY pass play be "set" regardless of post-snap coverage???? :eek:

The Chiefs had 5 plays inside the 10 on the first drive and Alex INT drive. We ran the ball with Ware once and picked up 4 yards.

It's mind bogglingly stupid that Andy puts the game in Alex's hands so much. I don't give a shit if Andy likes to pass. If we have the ball inside the 5 it's time for Spencer ****ing Ware.

twice but yes, you are right. Why we didn't run him more is a big ?