My take on the game...
 

The Raiders seemed to play with more confidence. They also had a much better running game than the Chiefs. The return by the Raiders at the end of the game turned the momentum of the game to the Raiders. You have to keep the Raiders inside their own 40-yd. line on the return. The Chiefs outplayed the Raiders the whole game and lose on poor special-teams play. That includes the missed FG by Peterson. I think the Chiefs can still win 10 games this year, but this was a hard loss to take when you are up by 11 pts. in the second half.

All is not lost!
 

Okay, we lost our opener!
Tough one? yes, but all is not lost. The chiefs only have 4 games ( basically scrimages ) under thier belts going into a game against a team that has played a couple of years in a program. The Chiefs will melt together and settle down as a awsome team in this new scheme. The special teams play needs work, but now they can address what thier problem is and cure it. The team is neither in the gutter or the season lost. Coach V. will make the adjustments needed to tune his team into the flesh eating pirahnanas it looks like they can be. To avenge Arrowhead we must collect scalps at oakharlum. I'll bet next week we'll see a much different situation.

A loss doesn't tarnish faith, if it did the stadium would have been empty!

My problem is not losing to the Raiders...

I said myself that if we keep it within 7 pts I'd be happy.

I am happy.



With the defense. Overjoyed actually.

Our offense was soooooooooo pathetic that I almost think Girlbac could have done better. Green was given a LOT of time on a LOT of plays and he still wasn't impressive other than his last drive.

Offensively an F....

But for the defense to play so admirably with soo many questions they get a week one A....

Game one, so this offense may come together yet. I'm willing to give it time. But they still underperformed and our back up center is a slob. He can't even snap the ball correctly.

Hopefully Robinson can keep up the good work and Saunders can work out the bugs in the system.

New coach, new QB, new coordinators...same old Chiefs. When will the Chiefs learn how to win a big game at home after outplaying the other team for most of the game? This loss could have very well cost the Chiefs a shot at the playoffs in 2001.

The Chiefs just don't seem to have the talent level of teams like the Raiders, Broncos, Titans, Colts, etc. Only one pass was caught by a WR in the game if my info is correct. Do the Chiefs know they are playing in the NFL?

I figured it would take a couple of games for the offense to gel together. I thought the defense played pretty good except for the fourth quarter. Hoping the Chiefs kicks Seattles butt next week.

What was the Raiders' record in Jon Gruden's first year? Did he turn the Raiders around in a week?

Holmes has 7 rushes for 21 yds...Richardson has 6 rushes for 3 yds. Holmes and Richardson must have 10 rushes each per game at a minimum for the Chiefs to be effective. The gameplan had much to be desired. The Chiefs must establish a running game with Holmes and Richardson.

I'll agree the offense needs to improve. With the addition of all the new players I expected better results, but it make take a little time to get the system down. I think Priest Holmes will be fine when our line starts opening a few holes for him.

I see where Vermiel said he was not a miracle worker after the game on Sunday. It did not take a miracle to win the game...just some basic offense and special teams' play. Nobody touched the Raider return man on the kickoff until he got near midfield. That is ridiculous. Apparently, the Chiefs took a nap on the play. Like I said before...new coach, new QB, new coordinators... but same old results. The Chiefs' players stand around too much and look for the other guy to make plays. This seems to happen in all 3 phases of the game. Don't just stand there...DO something!

There are two things I noticed about the defense...the interior D-line is porous and the CBs can be beat somewhat easily. Good luck against the Seahawks.

This, most definitely, is <b>not</b> the "same old Chiefs." The results were the same, but it ends at that.

Re: My take on the game...
 

Hmmmmm......

427 - 254 Total net yards
100 - 35 Net Yards rushing
327 - 219 Net Yards Passing
37:57 - 22:03 Time Of Possession

Lemme go check some other stuff........

Just my two cents.
I don't recall any offsides or pass interference calls on the Chiefs.
And I don't think that was because the refs missed them. That improvement alone is worth what 2 or 3 more wins this year?
And I hate to say it but I have to agree with the fat man, the next meeting between these two teams is going to be great. The Chiefs will improve and the Raiders will be the same ole Raiders (didn't you just love that stupid personal).

I agree, Duck, the Chiefs did NOT outplay the Raiders yesterday.

Not even close.

KC's only real drive came very late in the game. KC really didnt deserve to win that game. They did too little too late.

GazThoughts, for anyone interested...
 

I have to agree with the fatman, what we saw from the Raiders (and I don't think there as good as hyped) was as good as the Raiders will be all year.
By the next game the Chiefs offense will have jelled and the defense will be even better.
Gannon won't get away with intentionally grounding the ball (that is if Gannon is still playing by then, he is going to get hit a lot this year).

Although I dont think it's been said yet, KC still got burned by the short passes to the backs out of the back field or the short TE route.

It was amazing how often this happened, I knew it was coming, so I must assume that the defense knew it was coming.

KC's D played well considering they tired at the end...they were on the field way too long. The Offense was in disarray. Green was overthrowing the receivers and the running game was non-existent. The passing game didnt show any crossing routes or any passes to the backs out of the back field.

If, and that's a BIG IF, Oakland is truly a SB contender, I guess Im pretty happy about KC's overall play. They played close and led a good portion of the game.

The loss to Oakland at home once again hurts, but it was not totally unexpected.

I can't believe no one has listed PLAY CALLING as a problem!

We never even <i>tried</i> to establish a running game. Our RBs (TRich and Holmes) <i>combined</i> for thirteen carries.

I know someone is going to say "well, the OLine takes the longest to gel..." - that may be true, but it does not mean you should <b>concede</b> that portion of your offensive attack!

All we heard during the offseason was "we're going to attack the D... if they stack the line, we'll light them up through the air, if they drop their safeties, we'll run the ball down their throats"

Well, I saw raider safeties playing deep - back trying to help on Gonzo and Alexander. I've seen comments re: Trent throwing into double/triple coverage - those second and third players were safeties. So where was the "we'll run the ball down their throats" portion of the O!?

This quote has me a little worried b/c it sounds a bit like denial.

From Vermeil's post game press conference via KCChiefs.com:
VERMEIL: "He was 16 for 37 and I know he's better than that. Their coverage was very good and we had a hard time shaking our receivers clean on certain things. Overall, I thought the pass protection was pretty good. For us to win, our receivers have to separate better and when they do separate make those plays. I don't know if it was (Green) as much as the Raider defense."

It wasn't all the receivers' fault. Maybe I'm not reading this right.

First off we have to improve our ST coverages, we allowed some great Field Position to the Radiers after scores. It is so much easier to stop a dink and dunk offese when they have to go the entire length of the field. Here the Raiders might have been advantaged by knowing our ST Coach a little too well.

Those two fumbled snaps killed us, it allowed Oakland to get good field position on one and on the other killed a drive that was in FG range. The same can be said about Peterson's missed FG. I'm hoping there was some first game jitters with Waters and he is able to concentrate more on it in the future and I don't expect to see it happen twice for the rest of the season. Peterson was a good kicker in Seatle, so I hope we don't see many more misses from him.

I said it yesterday, the attacking D was fun to watch and you can expect a D like that to give up a couple big plays. They were on the field way to long since the O was not able to pass or run the ball with any effectiveness. Might explain why they were less active later in the game.

Holmes started off bad, slipped on the first run and then droped a bullseye on the the run on the next play. Then later cost us a timeout late in the game, could have been used to stop the clock to allow for an attempted last drive. I don't expect another game this bad from him. TRich played okay out of the back field and had a great TD run, but as far as running he didn't do much either. We have to start spreading the D out, the old coaches never learned this, I hope these guys are able to.

(to continue)

Green had some balls dropped, many of which killed drives. We found ourselves in third and long WAY to often, which makes it that much harder to get the ball out there. He did make some bad reads, as he did in preseason, that kind of worry me, especially those throws into tripple teams. I figure the coaching staff new what they were doing when we brought him in, so I have faith he can play better then yesterday.

Their kicking game was perfect, Hall never even had a chance to return anything except on the last drive but he was swarmed. I don't understand the squib kicks to Dunn, but only one of those hurt them. The Raiders DL got way to much penetration and blew up the run, maybe their DL is that good.

Overall I say we have a lot to work on, but I still have more faith in this group of coaches to fix the problems then I did the old group. Lets get our first win next week and see where we can go from there.

<i> don't understand the squib kicks to Dunn</i>

I do: Dunn has shown a propesnsity to fumble. The Oakland coaches did their homework... fortunately for us, he did not put the ball on the ground.

This is my take on the game

• The defense had an excellent game, but tired at the end
• The offense didn't get into a cohesive rhythm
• Trent Green and Minnis are keepers
• The WR's ran the wrong routes , because of the new system
• Doug Peterson choked, and the STs had critical blunders in the second half.

I agree... except our (hopefully soon to be ex-) kicker is TODD Peterson :p

hehehe

Are we talking about the "backup" tight end - Jason Dunn?

Ethelyn - why didn't Mikhael start? We saw a lot of Dunn early, no Ricks.

Ethelyn, I'm not sure how many plays Mikhael was in on, but most of the WRs did run the wrong routes.

I don' t think that DV ever perceived that Mikhael would start, and I guess it depends on the kinds of formations that they use as to when Mikhael plays. But I was utterly shocked, because he played on special teams also.

I know that in training camp, he blocked a kick, but I'm not so sure about anything else.

After further analyzing the game, I am convinced the Chiefs should have won the game. Yes, the Raiders are one of the top 5 teams in the AFC, but the Chiefs had the game in hand and lost it. I thought the defense played well for 3 qtrs and tired in the 4th qtr. The offense played poorly for the most part. There was no rushing game. The play calling was not that good. Special teams' play was bad again. The two fumbled snaps hurt a lot.

In spite of the Raider advantage in numbers on offense, I still thought the Chiefs had control of the game until the critical 4th qtr. Many are happy the Chiefs lost by only 3 pts., but I contend the Chiefs need to win games at home when leading by 11 pts. in the second half if they want to get to the playoffs. Vermiel has got to be upset and stunned by the Raider game. The players did not step up when the game was on the line, except for the TD pass to Minnis inside of 2 minutes to go in the game.

Re - tiring on D

What everyone's thought? I am convinced that Raiders have a good running attack and our performance there gives me confidence that we can [that is can] play good run D on most all the teams we face.

But was that the best passing attack we'll see? We made Gannon, Brown and Rice look pretty good in the second half. Will we hold our own against the greasy donkeys? Will the Colts rip a new one? Luckily, we don't face all of the passing powerhouses, NO, St.L., SF, GB, MN.

On the defense, what is the assessment of our pass D considering our opponents and when we meet them?

After watching the Raider game, the Chiefs may have a lot of trouble against any team that has a good passing game. The CBs on the Chiefs can be thrown against, especially when the Chiefs don't get much of a pass rush.

The key for the Chiefs will be to establish a running game...100+ yds. per game...and control the clock so the defense doesn't have to be on the field so much. They also need to rush the passer more effectively so the CBs don't have so much pressure on them. They also need to score at least 27 pts. per game.

I bet Vermiel thought he had the Raiders in check with an 11 pt. lead in the second half. His frustration level was probably very high after the game. Get used to it, Mr. Vermiel. Chiefs' fans have endured this frustration level for years.

Whether Marty, Gunther, or Vermiel...the Chiefs' problems on the field seem to be an ongoing thing. The Chiefs just cannot finish a "winnable" game. Is it talent level or lack of heart that is costing the Chiefs these games?