And this is why people get pissy at the AS "defenders".

Blaming the blocking on that play?

I don't care if all 5 OLmen blew their block, Alex has to protect the ball.


Personally, I can live with the fumble and the throw to Gray.

It's the mistake of repeatedly calling for the snap with 10-15 seconds on the play clock in the 2nd half when you're trying to protect a lead that kills me. It's bad football from a guy that is praised for his smarts.

.

Beat me to it. If you want to pin something on AS, this is where it starts and ends, IMO.

Bad situational football from one of the smartest guys in the league.

Now that is a fair complaint. You would think though that if it were on Alex, Andy would be in his ear with "why the hell aren't you running the clock?"

Unfortunately, this team does not care one bit about clock management.

No team ever plays perfect games. Game was no different from the Arrowhead games against SD and Denver, really. Just doesn't make sense to argue that the offense is responsible because they didn't score a TD every drive, especially against a team like Indy who doesn't have a great offense.

Sure, had the offense played perfectly in the second half -- we all know the handful of plays -- we'd have won. But if the offense has to play perfectly to win, we're doomed. It's obvious to me at least, going forward, that we can't win until we can occasionally stop the pass.

Obviously neither of them were paying attention. Nor anyone else in the huddle, on the sideline or in the coaches box. I haven't watched the broadcast yet, not sure if it was mentioned there.

Meanwhile, in the stands, I'm freaking the **** out.

It falls on both of them.

The best defense really is a good offense. Had we scored one more TD after going up 38-10, we likely win the game. Had we gone on one extended drive in the 3rd or 4th quarter, we likely win the game. Had everything remained the same but we bled the play clock down to :01 before every snap, we likely win that game.

It's hard to say who's at fault for the clock management. I've heard a lot of people blame Reid for that, but here we have people blaming Smith for it, as well. Who the heck knows?

I think the idea is run the ball, burn the clock, but with your first and second string running backs out, that's kind of hard to do. All the injuries made for a tough situation.

Well, ultimately, the QB is responsible. He's the one calling for the snap.

However, when your QB is repeatedly going full reerun and calling for the snap with 13 on the clock when you're trying to hold a lead - someone should step up and make him aware - whether it be a coach or a fellow player.

Both of them, then.

OMFG you guys are arguing like a bunch of women in this thread (and many other too lol).

Bottom line, WE LOST. If we have Jamaal Charles, we do not lose, even with the defensive collapse, AS fumble, we do not lose. We would of had some semblence of a running game in the 2nd half, he would of caught that pass, or we would of at least had a TD instead of FG.

Alex proved he can play like a MOFo, and we can win with him as long as we have a competent D. He is our best option right now, and probably for a year or two more. He needs to get an extension, and I believe he will sign one. I can only imagine afer being cast out of SF, he has something to prove, and he knows going to a new team and a new system (after next season) is not going to do it. Im sure hes tired of new systems. I bet he wants to be a Chief for a long time. And I certianly hope he is.

I'm not so sure we put up 31 points in the first half with Charles. I'm not saying we wouldn't have, but having him in completely changes the game plan. The game would have been totally different..

I wish we could go back in time, keep Jamaal out for the first half like he was, then bring him back in for the second half. Holy balls, Indy's goose would have been cooked.