Ten Wild Predictions for the 2001 Chiefs - Page 3

KCJohnny · 05-27-2001, 03:40 PM

Well, its the off season and not much is happening, so might as well stir up some controversy with my wild, highly subjective speculations.
1. Trent Green will be leading the NFL in every passing category except TDs when (God forbid) he gets injured (not necessarily his knee). Todd Collins comes in and picks up right where Trent left off leading the Chiefs to their second consecutive 4,000+ yd season.
2. KC will set a franchise record for TD passes ALLOWED (current record: 25).
3. Donnie Edwards will barely miss being named the AFC Defensive player of the year due to the team's middle-of-the-pack overall defensive ranking. He will win the AFC defensive player of the week no less than twice.
4. Rich Gannon goes down scrambling early in the season as KC sweeps Gruden.
5. Jamar Threatt (currently in NFLE) will emerge as a huge star in the KC interior defensive line.
6. By week 10, Dick Vermiel will be feeling the heated scrutiny of the KC fan base/media reporting. He will keep his cool and his job.
7. Chiefs will be swept by Denver (Gosh, that hurts). Shanny rejoicing now that Gun is gone (Shanny 0-4 vs. Gun). Typical score: Donx 41, Chiefs 36.
8. Bubby retires during camp.
9. Al Saunders looks like, well, a rookie offensive coordinator for the whole month of September, but gets on track due to the suddenly emergent rushing attack, led by...

10. ...an extremely productive RBbC led by Tony Richardson, but featuring EVERY RB in the stable (not my idea! It's History at work!).

KCJ
Blind, deceived homer

keg in kc · 06-01-2001, 08:05 AM

Well done, Jim!!

I can't say I argue with any one of those predictions except for 500 points - that's setting the bar pretty d@mn high!

I especially like the last one, "I do not dread facing any team at any time during the season, and that is the best thing of all!"

Couldn't have said it better myself ;)

KCJohnny · 06-01-2001, 02:08 PM

Jim,
Great to hear from you again.
We have completely switched roles (almost). Your predictions sound as homeristic as anything I've ever prognosticated. 500 points? Never been done before. I think the 400 barrier was cracked only twice and both times in the 1960s. The closest thing the modern Chiefs have shown is the 1999 Chiefs racking up a stellar 390 points (77 by defense and speacial teams). The Chiefs had 6,000 yards this year, so that is doable.
I think you are WAY too optimistic about the Chiefs defense. I see the opposite, BTW. And the '01 Chiefs having 59 sacks???? (You said 5 more than this year). I doubt it, especially without Chester collapsing the middle of the pocket setting up the DEs.

Nevertheless, I hope your predictions are true!

CalInjun,
I'll not argue with you about Karl Malone. He rose from the dirt rural poverty of Louisianna as one of 9 kids whose father comitted suicide to become the NBA's 2nd all-time leading scorer. He is a selfless giver to dozens of charities and a devoted father of 6. He is no god, but he's one heckuva ball player and a decent human being in my book.

KCJ:cool:

keg in kc · 06-01-2001, 02:25 PM

Yeah, Johnny, 500 points is an awful high mark to aim for - that's over 30 a game.

One I'd like to add:

The 2001 Chiefs defense will give up at least 200 less rushing yards over the course of the season, dropping them closer to 100 yards/game, if not below.

BTW, the 2000 Chiefs fell short of 6,000 yards. I'd warrent that to the poor rushing offense, since KC was ahead of only Atlanta, Arizona, Carolina, Cleveland, New England and San Diego in rushing yards.

Hopefully that statistic will be improved upon in 2001...

Concerning the defense, the only problem I see is with the cornerbacks, but that's a big one. We'll be fine on the D-line, especially if Williams can recover. The linebackers will be solid with Bush returning to form and we have a very good pair of safties. But the cornerbacks...

Good d-line play could help with that, but only time will tell, however. In any case, other than who the starting corners will be, I'm not the least bit concerned with the defense because I honestly believe that we have some solid talent.

Logical · 06-01-2001, 04:27 PM

Folks 500 was the result of bad math on my part I was shooting for an average of 27 points per game and made the mistake of doing the math in my head.

The number realistically that I think is possible is 425, I am revising my post to that number.

Thanks for pointing out the unrealistic number.

keg in kc · 06-01-2001, 05:17 PM

425 is still a bold prediction, Jim. 27 per game is a heck o' lotta scoring. Our highly touted (*cough*) offense of last season could only muster 355 points, or about 22 per game.

Still, though, if memory serves, we also only scored more than 20 points twice in the last 8 games, so we were might well have been on pace for that after the first half of the season. Maybe it's not so far-fetched after all.

Looking at the games, I'd say things are pretty favorable schedule-wise for scoring a lot of points. We have only two home games in December, both against teams weak against the pass, and the other two games are in relatively warm locales (warm compared to KC...). We get potential chilly games, like Seattle, Washington, Denver and the Jets out of the way by the second week in November. And for the "well, you can't throw in Arrowhead in December" naysayers, well, HOGWASH!! Elvis, if memory serves, threw for over 300 yards last December in the Carolina game, and it was neither warm nor favorable in terms of wind (I was there...).

So, maybe it can be done...

However, for that to happen, the offense would have to be running on all cylindars for all 16 games and that's a tall order for any team.

TEX · 06-02-2001, 12:05 AM

keg,

"Bush returning to form"

WHAT makes you think this? Has he given any indication that he will? Are you banking on the theory that since his family problems are settled that he will play? Maybe he was the benefactor of playing with Junior and co. all those years. He is at best a "supporter" and IMHO will not make a significant contribution this year.

TEX · 06-02-2001, 12:07 AM

Johnny,
I'm glad to see that you're NOT spouting your "usual" 12-4 prediction again this year!:cool:

**Rausch** · 06-02-2001, 12:14 AM

I'd say 9-7...

Everything ISN'T as rosy as anyone ever describes it. Injuries happen. Upsets happen. The toughest division in the NFL has finally happened to the AFC West.

We are rebuilding. All I ask is that Green and Holmes show the talent on the field they have been proclaimed to have off of it. We finish 7-9 but our offense is the killer DV/CP describe I'll be happy. It means DV is half way there in year 1. I can deal with that.

But if our 31 year old 1st rounder and our rb cast off both tank, I don't know if I can hold back the disgust and anguish...

:(

KCJohnny · 06-02-2001, 08:21 AM

My gut feeling tells me that by November, this team will be looking more and more like the Kansas City Chiefs of '93-97. Which is to say, the foundation of the offense will be the rushing attack, and the overall focus will balance out with more committment to improving the defense. Just a feeling. All you people hoping for Rams West will get a pocket full of thrills in the warm September sun, but Al Saunders will remember his 10 years on the Chiefs sideline kicking butt with rushing and defense and field position. Maybe I'm wrong.

12-4? Possible. But the schedule is just too dang tough. 8-8 with a lot of close games. The problem is, there won't be a '93-97 Chiefs defense on the other side of that potent offense.

Kyle, the Chiefs may have fallen a few yards short of 6,000, but it wasn't many.

Jim, I see the Chiefs getting about 24 ppg, still a great O, but amassing about 360-385 points while giving up about 340.

KCJ

keg in kc · 06-02-2001, 08:48 AM

Just a gut feeling about Bush returning to form. Like any gut feeling it's a 50/50 proposition...

milkman · 06-02-2001, 08:57 AM

This from John,
All you people hoping for Rams West will get a pocket full of thrills in the warm September sun, but Al Saunders will remember his 10 years on the Chiefs sideline kicking butt with rushing and defense and field position. Maybe I'm wrong.

My gut feeling is that even if he's wrong for all to see, he'll come up with stats to prove he's right.

KCJohnny · 06-02-2001, 12:32 PM

What's wrong with stats to back up an opinion?
Opinion is the fuel driving this BB, men.
KCJ

milkman · 06-02-2001, 12:57 PM

Nothing is [I]wrong[/I] with using stats to support your opinion.
However, you wield stats like a club and use it to constantly hit us over the head.
Our ground game was only marginal in '99.
Our offense was something less than stellar in '00.
You, of course, can produce stats to tell me otherwise.
I don't care about stats. I base my opinion on what I see on the field.
That club is starting to make me dizzy, though. Evey time I see it, my eyes get blurry.

Gaz · 06-02-2001, 01:11 PM

There is nothing wrong with statistics, provided you realize that they are not reality, nor do they even reflect reality accurately. Statistics is a tool for comparing apples and oranges by throwing out a portion of the defining characteristics.

That is the problem with statistics. By carefully choosing the parameters and filters, you can "prove" almost anything. You can even make a case that Jimmy Raye was a good OC, even though anyone watching the games would know that is false.

xoxo~
Gaz
Has a small place in his toolbox for statistical analysis.

Zebedee DuBois · 06-02-2001, 01:19 PM

Dr. Bunsen Honeydew??
:D

Well he is an all around man of science!

Beaker
(err.. Zeb)

05-27-2001, 03:40 PM
KCJohnny Blind, deceived homer Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Maryland, USA Casino cash: $10004900	Ten Wild Predictions for the 2001 Chiefs Well, its the off season and not much is happening, so might as well stir up some controversy with my wild, highly subjective speculations. 1. Trent Green will be leading the NFL in every passing category except TDs when (God forbid) he gets injured (not necessarily his knee). Todd Collins comes in and picks up right where Trent left off leading the Chiefs to their second consecutive 4,000+ yd season. 2. KC will set a franchise record for TD passes ALLOWED (current record: 25). 3. Donnie Edwards will barely miss being named the AFC Defensive player of the year due to the team's middle-of-the-pack overall defensive ranking. He will win the AFC defensive player of the week no less than twice. 4. Rich Gannon goes down scrambling early in the season as KC sweeps Gruden. 5. Jamar Threatt (currently in NFLE) will emerge as a huge star in the KC interior defensive line. 6. By week 10, Dick Vermiel will be feeling the heated scrutiny of the KC fan base/media reporting. He will keep his cool and his job. 7. Chiefs will be swept by Denver (Gosh, that hurts). Shanny rejoicing now that Gun is gone (Shanny 0-4 vs. Gun). Typical score: Donx 41, Chiefs 36. 8. Bubby retires during camp. 9. Al Saunders looks like, well, a rookie offensive coordinator for the whole month of September, but gets on track due to the suddenly emergent rushing attack, led by... 10. ...an extremely productive RBbC led by Tony Richardson, but featuring EVERY RB in the stable (not my idea! It's History at work!). KCJ Blind, deceived homer
Posts: 6,347

06-01-2001, 08:05 AM	#31
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	Well done, Jim!! I can't say I argue with any one of those predictions except for 500 points - that's setting the bar pretty d@mn high! I especially like the last one, "I do not dread facing any team at any time during the season, and that is the best thing of all!" Couldn't have said it better myself ;)
Posts: 58,682

06-01-2001, 02:08 PM	#32
KCJohnny Blind, deceived homer Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Maryland, USA Casino cash: $10004900	Jim, Great to hear from you again. We have completely switched roles (almost). Your predictions sound as homeristic as anything I've ever prognosticated. 500 points? Never been done before. I think the 400 barrier was cracked only twice and both times in the 1960s. The closest thing the modern Chiefs have shown is the 1999 Chiefs racking up a stellar 390 points (77 by defense and speacial teams). The Chiefs had 6,000 yards this year, so that is doable. I think you are WAY too optimistic about the Chiefs defense. I see the opposite, BTW. And the '01 Chiefs having 59 sacks???? (You said 5 more than this year). I doubt it, especially without Chester collapsing the middle of the pocket setting up the DEs. Nevertheless, I hope your predictions are true! CalInjun, I'll not argue with you about Karl Malone. He rose from the dirt rural poverty of Louisianna as one of 9 kids whose father comitted suicide to become the NBA's 2nd all-time leading scorer. He is a selfless giver to dozens of charities and a devoted father of 6. He is no god, but he's one heckuva ball player and a decent human being in my book. KCJ:cool:
Posts: 6,347

06-01-2001, 02:25 PM	#33
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	Yeah, Johnny, 500 points is an awful high mark to aim for - that's over 30 a game. One I'd like to add: The 2001 Chiefs defense will give up at least 200 less rushing yards over the course of the season, dropping them closer to 100 yards/game, if not below. BTW, the 2000 Chiefs fell short of 6,000 yards. I'd warrent that to the poor rushing offense, since KC was ahead of only Atlanta, Arizona, Carolina, Cleveland, New England and San Diego in rushing yards. Hopefully that statistic will be improved upon in 2001... Concerning the defense, the only problem I see is with the cornerbacks, but that's a big one. We'll be fine on the D-line, especially if Williams can recover. The linebackers will be solid with Bush returning to form and we have a very good pair of safties. But the cornerbacks... Good d-line play could help with that, but only time will tell, however. In any case, other than who the starting corners will be, I'm not the least bit concerned with the defense because I honestly believe that we have some solid talent.
Posts: 58,682

06-01-2001, 04:27 PM	#34
Logical Screw U if U can't take a joke Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	Folks 500 was the result of bad math on my part I was shooting for an average of 27 points per game and made the mistake of doing the math in my head. The number realistically that I think is possible is 425, I am revising my post to that number. Thanks for pointing out the unrealistic number. Last edited by Logical; 06-01-2001 at 04:30 PM..
Posts: 31,579

06-01-2001, 05:17 PM	#35
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	425 is still a bold prediction, Jim. 27 per game is a heck o' lotta scoring. Our highly touted (cough) offense of last season could only muster 355 points, or about 22 per game. Still, though, if memory serves, we also only scored more than 20 points twice in the last 8 games, so we were might well have been on pace for that after the first half of the season. Maybe it's not so far-fetched after all. Looking at the games, I'd say things are pretty favorable schedule-wise for scoring a lot of points. We have only two home games in December, both against teams weak against the pass, and the other two games are in relatively warm locales (warm compared to KC...). We get potential chilly games, like Seattle, Washington, Denver and the Jets out of the way by the second week in November. And for the "well, you can't throw in Arrowhead in December" naysayers, well, HOGWASH!! Elvis, if memory serves, threw for over 300 yards last December in the Carolina game, and it was neither warm nor favorable in terms of wind (I was there...). So, maybe it can be done... However, for that to happen, the offense would have to be running on all cylindars for all 16 games and that's a tall order for any team.
Posts: 58,682

06-02-2001, 12:05 AM	#36
TEX Out Gunning CP's Fandom Police Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Laguna Beach, CA Casino cash: $1993127	keg, "Bush returning to form" WHAT makes you think this? Has he given any indication that he will? Are you banking on the theory that since his family problems are settled that he will play? Maybe he was the benefactor of playing with Junior and co. all those years. He is at best a "supporter" and IMHO will not make a significant contribution this year.
Posts: 34,774

06-02-2001, 12:07 AM	#37
TEX Out Gunning CP's Fandom Police Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Laguna Beach, CA Casino cash: $1993127	Johnny, I'm glad to see that you're NOT spouting your "usual" 12-4 prediction again this year!:cool:
Posts: 34,774

06-02-2001, 08:21 AM	#39
KCJohnny Blind, deceived homer Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Maryland, USA Casino cash: $10004900	My gut feeling tells me that by November, this team will be looking more and more like the Kansas City Chiefs of '93-97. Which is to say, the foundation of the offense will be the rushing attack, and the overall focus will balance out with more committment to improving the defense. Just a feeling. All you people hoping for Rams West will get a pocket full of thrills in the warm September sun, but Al Saunders will remember his 10 years on the Chiefs sideline kicking butt with rushing and defense and field position. Maybe I'm wrong. 12-4? Possible. But the schedule is just too dang tough. 8-8 with a lot of close games. The problem is, there won't be a '93-97 Chiefs defense on the other side of that potent offense. Kyle, the Chiefs may have fallen a few yards short of 6,000, but it wasn't many. Jim, I see the Chiefs getting about 24 ppg, still a great O, but amassing about 360-385 points while giving up about 340. KCJ
Posts: 6,347

06-02-2001, 08:48 AM	#40
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	Just a gut feeling about Bush returning to form. Like any gut feeling it's a 50/50 proposition...
Posts: 58,682

06-02-2001, 08:57 AM	#41
milkman Dumbass! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Leading the Marty bashing Casino cash: $10029395	My gut feeling. This from John, All you people hoping for Rams West will get a pocket full of thrills in the warm September sun, but Al Saunders will remember his 10 years on the Chiefs sideline kicking butt with rushing and defense and field position. Maybe I'm wrong. My gut feeling is that even if he's wrong for all to see, he'll come up with stats to prove he's right. __________________
Posts: 70,769

06-02-2001, 12:32 PM	#42
KCJohnny Blind, deceived homer Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Maryland, USA Casino cash: $10004900	What's wrong with stats to back up an opinion? Opinion is the fuel driving this BB, men. KCJ
Posts: 6,347

06-02-2001, 12:57 PM	#43
milkman Dumbass! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Leading the Marty bashing Casino cash: $10029395	Nothing is [I]wrong[/I] with using stats to support your opinion. However, you wield stats like a club and use it to constantly hit us over the head. Our ground game was only marginal in '99. Our offense was something less than stellar in '00. You, of course, can produce stats to tell me otherwise. I don't care about stats. I base my opinion on what I see on the field. That club is starting to make me dizzy, though. Evey time I see it, my eyes get blurry. __________________
Posts: 70,769

06-02-2001, 01:11 PM	#44
Gaz Defense Homer Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Rancho Gaz Casino cash: $10010793	Statmongers need not read. There is nothing wrong with statistics, provided you realize that they are not reality, nor do they even reflect reality accurately. Statistics is a tool for comparing apples and oranges by throwing out a portion of the defining characteristics. That is the problem with statistics. By carefully choosing the parameters and filters, you can "prove" almost anything. You can even make a case that Jimmy Raye was a good OC, even though anyone watching the games would know that is false. xoxo~ Gaz Has a small place in his toolbox for statistical analysis.
Posts: 5,911

06-02-2001, 01:19 PM	#45
Zebedee DuBois Veteran Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: floating in a tin can Casino cash: $1535199	Gaz ! Dr. Bunsen Honeydew?? :D Well he is an all around man of science! Beaker (err.. Zeb) __________________ What am I even doing here?
Posts: 3,780