The Chargers are preseason champs once again!

[carcosa]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...rs/1681106001/

Relevant portion:

Los Angeles Chargers (12-4): If they can finally stave off the injury bug — Bosa, TE Hunter Henry and LB Denzel Perryman have their fingers crossed — the Bolts have as much talent as any team, particularly at the skill positions. They're also battle-tested — let's be honest, they basically play in front of a hostile crowd every week — capable of winning in any environment, to include a Super Bowl audience in South Florida on Feb. 2. (And wouldn't it be kinda nice to see Philip Rivers join 2004 draft mates Eli Manning and Ben Roethlisberger on the championship dais?)

Kansas City Chiefs (11-5): Will an overhauled defense jell quickly? Can league MVP Patrick Mahomes possibly approach the mind-boggling production he managed in his first year as a starter? Are the off-field distractions at an end with the NFL choosing not to suspend WR Tyreek Hill? Lots of questions, though K.C. is equipped to provide correct answers between the lines. Early tests as AFC West champs open with three of four on the road.

He also has the Colts beating the Chiefs in the wild card round.

If you ask me, this Nate Davis guy is a real dipshit dumbass!!!!!!

[Hammock Parties]

i really hope this bullshit continues all the way up until week 17 so i can make a die hard video featuring hans rivers getting thrown off the top of arrowhead

[FAX]

Strange logic in this thread.

I understand the notion that an improved Chiefs defense will diminish demand for more Chiefs scores. That makes sense ... in a way.

On the other hand, a 75-yard, 1-play drive for a touchdown takes less than 40 seconds off the clock.

Therefore, I think the idea is; score early, let your improved defense smash the enemy QB, put the offense back on the field and, "Oh look! It's Tyreek running wide the hell open again 60 yards downfield! Should I take the RB in the flat? Nah."

FAX

[New World Order]

Originally Posted by Hog's Gone Fishin

If you guys have paid attention, Belichick is building a solid running game to benefit Brady in his old age.

The Chiefs have prioritized building a run defense this offseason. The only team we need to focus on beating is NE.

I just hope we are also putting emphasis on penaltys. Getting rid of Nelson and Ford was a step in the right direction as well as making Cam Erving a backup.

Which is why I'm bummed about our Mike linebacker situation

I hope Ragland, or whomever is in the middle will play better under Spags.

[FAX]

Originally Posted by New World Order

Which is why I'm bummed about our Mike linebacker situation

I hope Ragland, or whomever is in the middle will play better under Spags.

I relate to your hopes, Mr. New World Order. I, too, am an optimist.

However, Ragland couldn't play better under the Templar King.

He is what he is.

FAX

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by FAX

Strange logic in this thread.

I understand the notion that an improved Chiefs defense will diminish demand for more Chiefs scores. That makes sense ... in a way.

On the other hand, a 75-yard, 1-play drive for a touchdown takes less than 40 seconds off the clock.

Therefore, I think the idea is; score early, let your improved defense smash the enemy QB, put the offense back on the field and, "Oh look! It's Tyreek running wide the hell open again 60 yards downfield! Should I take the RB in the flat? Nah."

FAX

I think we'll streak out to huge leads and then use the running game to eat clock. Coupled with a capable defense I think it's just smart situational football. Why risk Mahomes' health with a three TD lead in the fourth quarter when you have complete control of the game? Why show every wrinkle if you can hold some back for next week?

I think he threw 50 TD's largely because 1)at least the first part of the season, teams decided to force Mahomes to beat them. he did. and 2) Our defense was so weak they couldn't stop shit, so we had to score as much as possible. and of course 3) Mahomes is so ****ing awesome he could.

Point 3 is still in order. Point one is not, and we certainly hope point 2 is not.

I don't think you can expect him to throw 50 every year. And I think if he does, it's because the defense has not improved enough. It shouldn't be NECESSARY, is my point.

[Mile High Mania]

Originally Posted by New World Order

Yeah I think he's going to be in the 40/4k yards category. Our scoring average will drop slightly

Hopefully fewer heart attack games.

I would say that's a realistic stat line, maybe a few higher.

Last year, he had two 6 TD games (Rams and Steelers).
In 9 games, he threw 3 or fewer TDs (only 1 with zero).
And, he had 5 games where he threw 4 TDs.

So, he averaged 3.1 TDs a game which is a stellar pace and I figure he'll stay near that pace, but if he "only" threw 40-44 TDs, it's still an incredible stat.

[Halfcan]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

I didn't say we wouldn't have ANY shootouts; I said fewer.

Of course, the other guys get paid too; and we'll see some quality offenses. I just think our defense won't be the 2018 "Red Carpet" defense.

If your defense can shut down the opponent when they're forced to go one dimensional, you can run the clock out with your rushing attack. It's not Martyball if you're up three scores. Why would you risk getting Patrick killed taking unnecessary hits?

A more balanced team will probably mean fewer shoot-outs. It's not rocket science.

I think we'll have more rushing TD's than last year, too.

I see where you are going with this but it still does not make much sense. We tried this strategy with Mahomes first start in Denver- and what happened- we had to put him back in for a game-winning drive.

We had huge leads against San Fran and the Steelers last year only to watch them evaporate. It is not the 80's- you can't just sit on a lead for an entire half. Any time Andy has let up on the gas since he has been here- it has cost us- so hopefully he has learned his lesson.

You come out and kick their ass and keep kicking their ass for 4 straight quarters. Run that score up to 50 if they can't stop it. Getting up a couple of scores and then trying to run every down to milk the clock is a disaster waiting to happen.

[FAX]

Originally Posted by Halfcan

I see where you are going with this but it still does not make much sense. We tried this strategy with Mahomes first start in Denver- and what happened- we had to put him back in for a game-winning drive.

We had huge leads against San Fran and the Steelers last year only to watch them evaporate. It is not the 80's- you can't just sit on a lead for an entire half. Any time Andy has let up on the gas since he has been here- it has cost us- so hopefully he has learned his lesson.

You come out and kick their ass and keep kicking their ass for 4 straight quarters. Run that score up to 50 if they can't stop it. Getting up a couple of scores and then trying to run every down to milk the clock is a disaster waiting to happen.

That's pretty much how I see it, Mr. Halfcan.

New league. New rules.

You just don't sit on a 2-score lead anymore. Those days are sidelined.

FAX

[smithandrew051]

Here’s my favorite Chargers stat:

Matt Cassell and Tim Tebow have each won the AFC West more recently than Philip Rivers.

[KChiefs1]

Originally Posted by FAX

That's pretty much how I see it, Mr. Halfcan.



New league. New rules.



You just don't sit on a 2-score lead anymore. Those days are sidelined.



FAX

Never take your foot off the gas. Score 60 every game.