Good gone bad or bad got lucky?

Gaz · 10-18-2004, 12:57 PM

I am wondering about the general perception of the 1-4 Chiefs.

xoxo~
Gaz
Looking for the POV.

NewChief · 10-18-2004, 12:57 PM

God hates the Chiefs.

Chan93lx50 · 10-18-2004, 01:07 PM

God has dumbed so much shit on the chiefs this year, we have the stadium of arrowhead full of it!

ROYC75 · 10-18-2004, 01:08 PM

Good gone bad that had an easy schedule last year.

The injuries sucked, but mostly we haven't played well at all ! It's more us not playing well than it is anybody defending us.

Gaz · 10-18-2004, 01:16 PM

You could make a pretty good case that the 2003 Chiefs were a lucky team that rode some amazing kick returns and a soft schedule into the playoffs where they were destroyed. If that is the case, then the 2003 Chiefs are the same team with a new [but equally porous] Defensive scheme [although the run D is looking good].

No one wants to believe that his team is crap, but we have gone from a great Offense, poor Defense and great Special Teams to a mediocre Offense, poor Defense and poor Special Teams.

Can injuries, bad luck, poor coaching decisions, so forth, truly account for that disparity?

I do not have much difficulty in believing that injuries hurt our Offense a lot. The poor playcalling [IMO] could be a result of Saunders trying to compensate for a complete and utter lack of WRs [although you have to give it up for Morton’s last couple of games].

But what happened to the running game? Tait was supposed to be the weakest OLineman. Does his loss explain the OL sieve we saw yesterday? Since Holmes has had very good games, I cannot credit that explanation.

Did the loss of Boerigter and Beisel make that much difference to our Special Teams? I know they were very good STers, but the drop in ST play seems too drastic to be attributable to [2] players.

Did we see the real Chiefs last season or are we seeing them this season?

xoxo~
Gaz
Bothered, bewitched and bewildered.

**Bob Dole** · 10-18-2004, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewChief

God hates the Chiefs.

That's just silly.

Why would the team's GM hate his own team?

jcroft · 10-18-2004, 01:45 PM

I think it's probably a bit of both. The Chiefs did ride some serious luck and a soft schedule last year, but they were still a very good team. They don't seem to be as good a team this year, particularly on offense (I'd say the defense is better, if only marginally so). Beyond that, they've been unlucky, which is never in the recipie of a championship team. There's been some poor coaching this year, to be sure. The team needs to own that one, though. In your poll, you group poor coaching in with bad luck and injuries (and I'd add questionable calls, too). Luck, refs, and injuries are mostly out of your control. Coaching is not. Vermeil and staff need to own that mistake, and fix it. Like yesterday.

Taco John · 10-18-2004, 01:46 PM

Pretty much the same team, right? Looks like a case of the easy schedule turning into a hard one...

jcroft · 10-18-2004, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

Pretty much the same team, right? Looks like a case of the easy schedule turning into a hard one...

I never really bought that "pretty much the same team" thing.

- Welbourne instead of Tait.
- Until yesterday, we never had the same starting receivers as last year.
- Different MLB
- Different starting D-Linemen
- A number of differences on ST.

It's a similar team, but for most games, 4-7 positions have been different than last year. I'd say that's on par with the typicaly year-to-year turnover in the NFL.

Cormac · 10-18-2004, 01:57 PM

The Chiefs were 13-3 last year whether they were lucky or not. Give them credit. They still did it. I figured the tougher schedule would make 10-6 an equally big achievement this year. That's still possible. But barely. However, what is missing from the team this year, compared to last year is a little luck and a little grit and determination.

Luck
Injuries have hit this season. Not the serious kind compared to some teams, but way moreso than last season. And more than we can afford given our depth at key positions like WR and LB.

Grit and Determination
Counting the last 3 games, our D is much better than it was the second half of last season. And we have still blown THREE 4th quarter leads in 4 losses. We can't the critical 1st down on offense, and that's been shooting us in the foot. That comes down to a sense of urgency, or tweaking the playcalling, or committing stupid penalties. Either way, the team has to play EVERY week from here to the end of the season the way they played in Baltimore. They had game-faces on that day, and it was an obvious difference from the other 4 games. JMO.

It's hard to take these losses this season because of our high expectations, and the performances that some players are putting up. Eric Warfield is playing like a top 5 corner. He has been awesome all year. Scott Fujita continues to improve, but he was slowed by injury yesterday. Lionel Dalton has been a find. All of these things are going well, and we're only 1-4. It sucks because this is a good team gone bad

KC Jones · 10-18-2004, 01:58 PM

bad team?

good team?

Both really. A team with some amazing good strengths and some amazingly bad weaknesses. Making us overall a very average team. Give us an easy schedule and a few nice breaks and we'll go 13-3. Give us a really tough schedule and some bad breaks? We'll end up 7-9 or worse.

Cormac · 10-18-2004, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcroft

I never really bought that "pretty much the same team" thing.

Good point. I forget exactly, but I think there were 15 different players on the roster at the beginning of this season compared to last season. Not always at key positions, but I thought that was a lot.

**the Talking Can** · 10-18-2004, 02:02 PM

bad team....we're just like the Royals, half a season of success hiding the fact that we were never really very good...

10-18-2004, 02:25 PM

A good team suffering from bad luck, poor coaching, injuries, so forth.A bad team that rode an easy schedule and some good luck last season

How can I possibly choose between these two? Save 2 adjectives, they mean the same thing.

keg in kc · 10-18-2004, 02:31 PM

I think it's something else: a good team that bought too much into into its own hype. It seems in these games like we expect to win, not in the sense of confidence but rather having this attitude that wins'll just be handed to us on a silver platter. We're entitled to wins; we don't have to to strive and struggle and claw like any other team. We're soft, and apparently won't do whatever it takes.

In other words, I think we've been out-fought. That's why I believe this team, which should by all rights be 4-1 right now, is where it is.

But hey, all we have to do now is win 9 of our final 11. Piece of cake, right?

Right?

View Poll Results: What is your view of the Chiefs?
A good team suffering from bad luck, poor coaching, injuries, so forth.	17	58.62%
A bad team that rode an easy schedule and some good luck last season.	9	31.03%
Bite me, Gaz, I am busy scourging myself.	3	10.34%
Voters: 29. You may not vote on this poll

10-18-2004, 12:57 PM
Gaz Defense Homer Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Rancho Gaz Casino cash: $10010793	Good gone bad or bad got lucky? I am wondering about the general perception of the 1-4 Chiefs. xoxo~ Gaz Looking for the POV.
Posts: 5,911

10-18-2004, 12:57 PM	#2
NewChief In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Fayetteville, AR Casino cash: $9730204	God hates the Chiefs. __________________ In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican. - H. L. Mencken
Posts: 21,758

10-18-2004, 01:07 PM	#3
Chan93lx50 Veteran Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Cedar Rapids, IA Casino cash: $10004900	God has dumbed so much shit on the chiefs this year, we have the stadium of arrowhead full of it! __________________
Posts: 1,847

10-18-2004, 01:08 PM	#4
ROYC75 Time For Your Wake Up Call !!! Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Barn Yard Casino cash: $5689400	Good gone bad that had an easy schedule last year. The injuries sucked, but mostly we haven't played well at all ! It's more us not playing well than it is anybody defending us. __________________ Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends and I think I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it. John Lennon
Posts: 36,984

10-18-2004, 01:16 PM	#5
Gaz Defense Homer Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Rancho Gaz Casino cash: $10010793	Who are we, anyway? You could make a pretty good case that the 2003 Chiefs were a lucky team that rode some amazing kick returns and a soft schedule into the playoffs where they were destroyed. If that is the case, then the 2003 Chiefs are the same team with a new [but equally porous] Defensive scheme [although the run D is looking good]. No one wants to believe that his team is crap, but we have gone from a great Offense, poor Defense and great Special Teams to a mediocre Offense, poor Defense and poor Special Teams. Can injuries, bad luck, poor coaching decisions, so forth, truly account for that disparity? I do not have much difficulty in believing that injuries hurt our Offense a lot. The poor playcalling [IMO] could be a result of Saunders trying to compensate for a complete and utter lack of WRs [although you have to give it up for Morton’s last couple of games]. But what happened to the running game? Tait was supposed to be the weakest OLineman. Does his loss explain the OL sieve we saw yesterday? Since Holmes has had very good games, I cannot credit that explanation. Did the loss of Boerigter and Beisel make that much difference to our Special Teams? I know they were very good STers, but the drop in ST play seems too drastic to be attributable to [2] players. Did we see the real Chiefs last season or are we seeing them this season? xoxo~ Gaz Bothered, bewitched and bewildered.
Posts: 5,911

10-18-2004, 01:45 PM	#7
jcroft Thread-Stopper Extrodinaire Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Seattle, WA Casino cash: $10004900	I think it's probably a bit of both. The Chiefs did ride some serious luck and a soft schedule last year, but they were still a very good team. They don't seem to be as good a team this year, particularly on offense (I'd say the defense is better, if only marginally so). Beyond that, they've been unlucky, which is never in the recipie of a championship team. There's been some poor coaching this year, to be sure. The team needs to own that one, though. In your poll, you group poor coaching in with bad luck and injuries (and I'd add questionable calls, too). Luck, refs, and injuries are mostly out of your control. Coaching is not. Vermeil and staff need to own that mistake, and fix it. Like yesterday. __________________ Jeff Croft jeffcroft.com
Posts: 2,150

10-18-2004, 01:46 PM	#8
Taco John Sapere Aude Join Date: Jun 2001 Casino cash: $3507937	Pretty much the same team, right? Looks like a case of the easy schedule turning into a hard one... __________________ Ehyeh asher ehyeh. Donger's Razor: "The most establishment-friendly explanation that gives leftist and neocon politicians the most amount of cover is the only possible explanation, even when gaping holes and leaps of logic are required to get there."
Posts: 77,978

10-18-2004, 01:57 PM	#10
Cormac Haley sceptic.... Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: waiting it out....... Casino cash: $10004900	The Chiefs were 13-3 last year whether they were lucky or not. Give them credit. They still did it. I figured the tougher schedule would make 10-6 an equally big achievement this year. That's still possible. But barely. However, what is missing from the team this year, compared to last year is a little luck and a little grit and determination. Luck Injuries have hit this season. Not the serious kind compared to some teams, but way moreso than last season. And more than we can afford given our depth at key positions like WR and LB. Grit and Determination Counting the last 3 games, our D is much better than it was the second half of last season. And we have still blown THREE 4th quarter leads in 4 losses. We can't the critical 1st down on offense, and that's been shooting us in the foot. That comes down to a sense of urgency, or tweaking the playcalling, or committing stupid penalties. Either way, the team has to play EVERY week from here to the end of the season the way they played in Baltimore. They had game-faces on that day, and it was an obvious difference from the other 4 games. JMO. It's hard to take these losses this season because of our high expectations, and the performances that some players are putting up. Eric Warfield is playing like a top 5 corner. He has been awesome all year. Scott Fujita continues to improve, but he was slowed by injury yesterday. Lionel Dalton has been a find. All of these things are going well, and we're only 1-4. It sucks because this is a good team gone bad
Posts: 2,406

10-18-2004, 01:58 PM	#11
KC Jones Genious Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Colorado Casino cash: $10012761	bad team? good team? Both really. A team with some amazing good strengths and some amazingly bad weaknesses. Making us overall a very average team. Give us an easy schedule and a few nice breaks and we'll go 13-3. Give us a really tough schedule and some bad breaks? We'll end up 7-9 or worse. __________________ re-sign: to sign again resign: to withdraw from employment
Posts: 5,366

10-18-2004, 02:02 PM	#13
the Talking Can Supporter Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: street Casino cash: $10022208	bad team....we're just like the Royals, half a season of success hiding the fact that we were never really very good... __________________ Clark Hunt: "Thank god for the Dominican pool boy"
Posts: 51,585

10-18-2004, 02:25 PM	#14
Phobia Guest Casino cash: $	A good team suffering from bad luck, poor coaching, injuries, so forth.A bad team that rode an easy schedule and some good luck last season How can I possibly choose between these two? Save 2 adjectives, they mean the same thing.
Posts: n/a

10-18-2004, 02:31 PM	#15
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	I think it's something else: a good team that bought too much into into its own hype. It seems in these games like we expect to win, not in the sense of confidence but rather having this attitude that wins'll just be handed to us on a silver platter. We're entitled to wins; we don't have to to strive and struggle and claw like any other team. We're soft, and apparently won't do whatever it takes. In other words, I think we've been out-fought. That's why I believe this team, which should by all rights be 4-1 right now, is where it is. But hey, all we have to do now is win 9 of our final 11. Piece of cake, right? Right?
Posts: 58,682