Chiefs Alone at the Bottom of the AFC West
by Chris Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 6:00 AM CDT
in 2008 Campaign
92 comments
And the bottom of the AFC, and possibly even the bottom of the NFL.
I compare this loss to last year's second loss to Denver on December 9th. We were dealt a demoralizing blow by a division rival who isn't even good. No use suffering too much over this loss so let's jump right in. DJ has his take on the game coming up in just a bit so make sure you check back.
Lack of a Strategy
There was little to no organized plan by the Kansas City Chiefs coaching staff going into this game. The schizophrenic offensive attack of recent practice squad member Marques Hagans, Damon Huard, a completely unprepared Tyler Thigpen and an uninspired Larry Johnson was a complete dud for the Chiefs on Sunday.
The need to get Jamaal Charles the ball more, which Herm Edwards mentioned earlier this week, was completely ignored. Charles was handed the ball three times and caught only one pass. I'm still at a loss for an explanation for this.
Along with getting Jamaal Charles the ball more, how about getting it to Larry Johnson a few more times than twelve for the entire game? I'm puzzled by this one.
Dwayne Bowe, who caught six passes for 90 yards, was far and away the most productive player on the field. Tony Gonzalez caught a touchdown and five passes but never really factored into the "rhythm" of the offense. There was no varied attack employed really at any point during the game. Again, poor planning in my opinion.
Finally, Marques Hagans' entrance and play during the game felt weird. Is this a Herm Edwards offense? It felt like Herm was trying to show how off how experimental he can be but he never pulled it off.
Too invested in the youth movement
I have repeatedly mentioned in the previous weeks my extreme skepticism of Tyler Thigpen's ability to play quarterback in the NFL. That skepticism was confirmed yesterday as a confused Thigpen passed for 151 yards (14/33) and one interception. The major issue I had with that move was that Thigpen was completely unprepared for yesterday's game, much like the Chiefs' offensive strategy. I know he's the third string quarterback but at the very least you need that player to know the nuances of the position and read defenses. Thigpen did none of that yesterday and should have, really should have had at least two interceptions, if not more.
The problem with experimenting so heavily with the quarterback is that position is one of the few if not the only positions that can negatively affect the rest of the entire team. Again, I know that the Chiefs' hand was forced into playing Thigpen but I am making the argument that his roster spot alone is a serious personnel mistake. He shouldn't have been in there in the first place.
Savage Inactive
So, how do you like B.J. Sams? Dantrell Savage was inactive and since I haven't heard any other reason to suggest why he was, it seems like the Chiefs are starting to prefer B.J. Sams in the kick return game. Who knows, Savage could be active next week and Sams could sit. Whoever plays, the Chiefs special teams attack is boring. We will fight bad field position all year long and it will hurt us every game.
Rush defense has become a major problem
See, the Oakland Raiders actually watched the last few Chiefs games it appears and found out that if you want to, your team can run all over this defense.
The Raiders dominated, completely dominated the line of scrimmage. Oakland topped 300 yards rushing on 47 attempts. Check out the balance of this attack, which likely would have been worse if Justin Fargas had not left the game with an injury early in the first half.
The final numbers for Oakland were Darren McFadden (164 yards); Michael Bush (90 yards); and Justin Fargas (43 yards). Talk about letting anyone and everyone run over your defense.
Let's take a quick look back at how teams have fared on the ground against our defense, starting with Week 1 of the 2007 season.
Turk McBride was injured yesterday and walked off the field under his own power. I haven't heard anything on him but I do know that the backups at defensive end are weak. Alfonso Boone is an alright replacement but I had a hint of a feeling that McBride was on the path to exciting things this season. I hope he's back soon.
You can't say much more than it was a total failure by all parties when a team gives up 300 yards rushing.
Special teams led by Pollard
Two fumble recoveries and a knack for almost blocking many a punt has made Bernard Pollard the player on special teams. Pollard also chased down a speeding Darren McFadden to make a last ditch tackle and forced a fumble out of bounds. Unfortunately, the Chiefs' offense went three and out after the first recovery and then Thigpen threw an INT on the second possession after the fumble recovery.
Bright spots
Dwayne Bowe made those of you who bad mouthed his talent last week look bad this week. 45 of Bowe's 90 yards receiving came on the team's only scoring drive. His 30-yard catch down the sideline in the 4th quarter was the catch of the NFL season, without question.
If I'm going to rag on the rush defense I might as well point out that the Chiefs defense held the Raiders passing attack to 55 yards. Although I suspect this was about 25% effort by our guys and 75% because the Raiders' passing offense is worse than ours.
Should rebuilding be this painful?
No, it should not be. To a certain degree you can blame this loss on the inexperience at many key positions but I believe that most of the blame for this loss is on the coaching staff. As I've mentioned before, what was the plan of attack on offense? Why weren't there adjustments made to stop the Raiders' rushing attack? 233 of their rushing yards came in the second half.
Last week, when Brodie Croyle was injured, I finally found myself admitting that he likely wasn't the quarterback of the future in Kansas City. It had taken a long time for me to do that in face of a lot of evidence to the contrary and I'm nearing that point with Herm Edwards. I need to see some improvement and not total breakdowns. Herm needs to stop repeating the same mistakes everyone always says he makes.
The Basement
The Raiders suck and we suck even more. NFL teams have shown in the past how quickly they can turn things around but I'm skeptical with this group.
More so than any other feeling, I'm confused by yesterday's loss. What were the objectives on offense and defense to stop the Raiders? What were the conversations happening between the coaching staff? Why are there seemingly no logical explanations for a lot of what happened yesterday?
0 recs |
92 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Rushing Defense
You can’t say much more than it was a total failure by all parties when a team gives up 300 yards rushing.
It’s actually worse than that…we gave up 300 yards rushing to a team that has a QB that can’t effectively pass. So there was no reason not to stack the box against this team on almost every play. If we can’t stop a team from rushing for 300 yards when they don’t have much of an aeriel attack, you’ve got to question who is out there that we can stop. So far we got beat by a Patriots team that lost Tom Brady (who was the linchpin to their entire offense last year) and a Raiders team that looked to be the easiest opponent on our schedule. Who is out there that we do have a shot at beating?
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 7:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
No one really
It sucks feeling like we did late last season, only this is the second game of the year.
Same level of talent on both this team and the ’07 team.
by Chris Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 7:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My Buddy, The Die-Hard Chiefs Fan
Agreed with me and for the first time in his life said he’s rooting for the Chiefs to go 0-16 this year so that everyone running the team will get fired. If you knew him and how he is about sports, you’d find that kind of comment shocking because he’s never held a position of complete futility with the Chiefs or any other team he roots for (I’m definitely the pessimist betwee us). He’s now at the point where he’s convinced that the only way things get better is if the Chiefs lose every game because it’s the only way Peterson gets fired.
During the game he was also convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that Herm was lying about Damon Huard having an injury severe enough to keep him out of the game. Huard’s postgame comments about it being his neck, not his head, that were sore make me think that he’s probably right. I think Herm actually played Thigpen because he wanted to play Thigpen, not because Huard was injured at all and that he’s finding excuses for keeping him out there.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 7:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe now
People will realize you can’t throw anyone back there and still expect their offensive counterparts to have a shot at developing or getting better.
Play Huard or another somewhat competent veteran. Thigpen, though not necessarily his fault, will make this team go backwards. Quickly.
by Joel Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 8:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
It took me a while to come around to your position but I have to say I agree now.
by Chris Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 8:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Quarterback isn't like guard or RB
Where you can play a guy with little talent and still have a shot at moving the offense.
by Joel Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 8:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True
The QB isn’t the only important player on offense, but everything on offense keys off of that position so if you’re terrible there you’re pretty much screwed everywhere else.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 9:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm willing to agree
so long as that when Huard turns in as miserable a performance as the rest of these guys, you two will stop banging the drum on him. If he’s mediocre, fine, but if he turns in another Damon Huard special (124 yd, 1 TD, 2 INTs), I want to hear the same criticism for him and calls for us to bring in, oh, I don’t know, Quincy Carter. Sure, let’s try him. Can’t get any worse.
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In a game of Xs and Os
We were the Ohs!
We didn’t look like we were even playing football. We were the other guys wearing yellow bibs that teams practice against.
You know Miami last year, that’s us this year.
Blame my wife!
by sir eccles on Sep 15, 2008 7:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Raider passing attack
I was at the game. This may have been the worst display of quarterback play I’ve ever seen. I heard at one point that Rich Gannon was actually pleading with Thigpen on CBS’ coverage.
17 attempts – 55 yds. Not gonna cut it in the NFL. Wait – they rushed for 300 yds. This just doesn’t make sense. I hate to drum up speculation but do we miss Ron Edwards in the middle? From Chris’ graph the rush defense got worse as Tank started playing more last year. Just a trend I see but it is an emotional conclusion. Dorsey had a few tackles but without seeing the game film I can’t tell what was wrong. Maybe the linebackers?
by dkugler838 on Sep 15, 2008 7:56 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I have not seen
a worse performance by a Chiefs quarterback since…ever?
by Chris Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 7:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's because
We complained about our 49er backup QBs in the 90s but at the very least they were veterans. They may have sucked but at least they knew the offense. I saw Thigpen and the receivers simply not on the same page which is UNACCEPTABLE in the NFL. Maybe one time, but three, four, five missed plays because of miscommunication?!
by Joel Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 8:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm trying to come to terms...
with being the worst team in the NFL. Over the years I’ve been a fan of some bad teams, but before yesterday, I never felt that my team was the worst.
by HIV 2 Elway on Sep 15, 2008 8:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Rams
are in a similar position. It’s a battle between us two, in my opinion.
by Joel Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 9:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, The Rams Reek
That defense of theirs is horrible, and who would have thought that an Al Saunders offense could be this bad?
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A couple of telling moments
occurred during the post game. Herm, was asked if they had to make any adjustments in the game plan to fit what was going on there on the field. Herm stated that the game plan was pretty much set before hand and there was no adjustment (I am paraphrasing). The second occurred when Len Dawson was interviewing Herm Edwards following the game. Herm was going through his usual litany of excuses for what went wrong and was pointing the finger of blame in many directions. Very matter of factly, Dawson suddenly said to Herm Edwards, “You have to fix it!” What does that tell you?
by G.L. on Sep 15, 2008 8:46 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Herm has got to go!!!
I agree that we have O line, QB and other problems. But this team is not without talent. Marty Schottenhiemer wins 8 games with this team. Herm inherited a 10-6 team and in three years has coached them up to be the worst team in the NFL. I thought Oakland was the worst team in the NFL, but after yesterday, there can be no doubt.
I say, bring back Marty!!!!
by atlchiefsfan on Sep 15, 2008 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love Len Dawson
and his love of the Chiefs. He is getting pissed off that the team is being led by an inept ring of circus clowns.
Seems like our game plan was to be directionless and flounder like fish out of water. I didn’t even sit in my seat for half of the game I was so disgusted. Arrowhead was not even close to full yesterday, and the fans were out of the game from the beginning. The Chiefs never did anything to get them back in it.
have you seen my baseball?
by IISaiNtII on Sep 15, 2008 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Len is part of KC's tradition. He's a legend here.
And he has always seemed to question Herm. He says the same thing I talk a lot about, which is having a balanced offense. Well, we’re balanced, at least. We suck at running and passing equally.
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think they have more upside...
at least they have an NFL proven QB. Not to mention the advantage they have from not having Herm at the helm. Then again, we have the Governors Cup!
by HIV 2 Elway on Sep 15, 2008 9:18 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Renaming the Governors cup
It is now officially the “Toilet Bowl”
Blame my wife!
by sir eccles on Sep 15, 2008 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just note that the other teams that turn around fast
have never been the Chiefs. And they aren’t likely to join that club any time soon
by sm7600 on Sep 15, 2008 9:38 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately
I think you’re right.
by Chris Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 9:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's Because Of The GM
The GM is the quarterback of the management (actually, it’s even more important)…everything else keys off of that position. Why do the Chiefs never turn anything around quickly? Because we haven’t ever had a GM who was capable of turning around a team quickly. It’s not a curse on the Chiefs, it’s a problem with the management at the top and that’s what needs to change for us to get better.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do the Chiefs never turn anything around quickly?
I do agree with you with that it is the GM’s fault. Its the safe way to play or as Carl would say, “STAND PAT.” So nothing gets addressed until next year, and when it does its mediocre at best.
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
UC
we get it. “Fire Peterson.” You have the thread. There’s no reason to constantly hammer in something that’s unlikely to happen until December, if even then. I’d update a weekly “Fire Peterson” FanPost, but the post game threads should be for looking at where this roster and coaching staff is at. I understand Peterson’s at the top of it, and I don’t disagree (though I’m not willing to say he’s always been terrible; we’ve been one of the better teams overall in the league, turning out at least teams you could respect even in down years, before Herm showed up), but let’s keep the focus. Your point is pretty obvious through the seven threads you’ve hammered Peterson on. Not that I blame you.
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's A Point To My Hammering
It’s that we simply can’t trust any of the fixes this team makes until that change at the top is made. Seriously, just about any non-scrub QB we bring in is going to want a contract of multiple years, because we’re dealing from a position of desperation (and every agent is going to realize this). Any trade we try to pull off is going to require us to drastically overpay in draft picks. And until we find a fix, the development of the entire team is going to stall.
My point is, any arguments we make about how the Chiefs can improve are moot until the man at the top gets switched out because there’s nothing we can trust the team to do to fix it until he’s gone.
But your point is taken and I’m done beating that dead horse…for now.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you
It’s that we simply can’t trust any of the fixes this team makes until that change at the top is made.
A rock and a hard place is how I would describe it now. I thought last year was rock bottom?
by Joel Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Something I Learned In The Army
No matter how bad a situation may seem, there’s always room for it to get worse.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But that's reality
And right now, I hate reality.
by Joel Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My Advice
Is to drink heavily.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I keep hoping I'll wake up
and we won’t be stuck in this situation for another year, but I really think we might. I’m terrified we’re going to end up like the Lions. Blindly facing an inept regime for years.
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again
That’s why I’m beating the dead horse. Detroit’s biggest problem is that they won’t get rid of the guy who’s causing their problems. I suspect it’s because Matt Millen has photos of someone in the owner’s family blowing a goat.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 8:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A glimmer of hope smashed.
I was watching the Fox pre-game show on Sunday and they asked how the worst team in the NFL, I cringed for a few seconds waiting for the inevitable reference to KC, but they only mentioned the Raiders, Rams, and I think Miami, but no KC. I thought WOW, not mentioned in the bottom of the cesspool. I made the mistake of getting a little hope. The last score I saw was 6-0( I didn’t get the game as usual), I though ok don’t panic. I had to leave for a meeting, and came back turned on my TV and just shook my head. I have been a chiefs fan for 12 years (i’m only 27) and for the first time I have thoughts of going with another team. I agree with ucrawford’s friend, we need to go 0-16. The organization needs to be purged. Our 3 biggest issues are still the same, can’t stop the run, can’t block on the line(which means no running game, and one scared QB), and do not have a quality NFL QB. We don’t even have a QB that would start on any of the top 100 DIV I teams. When is something going to happen, that’s what is driving me nuts, it’s like we aren’t doing anything about it, no passion no drive, just doing the best we can, which at this point sucks. If KC isn’t mentioned in the bottom of the NFL cesspool next week, it’s only because the announcers forgot they were an NFL team.
by bamakcfan on Sep 15, 2008 9:43 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
i have a question
is the fact taht the recievers are now having to adapt to a thigpen run ‘offense’ (lol), do you think that they will have lost any tiny bit of momentum or chemistry that had been established with croyle and huard?
in short, will this set us even further back with croyle who is already on the hot seat?
and am i the only who thinks that croyle will miraculously heal up in a little faster than a month after yesterday? then again im not sure the coaching staff cares enough to expedite the healing process in the name of a win.
Naming my son Brodie Damon
by troy145 on Sep 15, 2008 9:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Who knows
I think this is what some of the Huard “supporters” were talking about when we wanted him over Thigpen. You can’t just throw anyone back there.
by Joel Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i absolutely agree huard shouldve been in over thigpen. i actually think martin wouldve been an improvement over thiggy and think that if we’re just gonna kill ourselves we may as well see what ingle has so we can go ahead and cut thigpen.
theres a lot of things that need to happen on this team and i think the first place to start, at least on the field, is o line.
lol i was about to say what order we need to prioritize things but we need so much at every single position that its like… whats the point.
Well, Im used to this, as I grew up a Browns/KC fan, and cleveland used to be exactly where we are now.
….actualy… i wonder what tim couch is doing these days…
Naming my son Brodie Damon
by troy145 on Sep 15, 2008 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
we’ll see how far the receivers grow with Huard. Again, sure, let’s trot his useless ass out there, it’s less useless than the others, but it’s not going to help.
Honestly, our offense is a lost cause.
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he's certainly better than thiggy will ever ever be
croyle has potential still. i believe that. i dont thnk he’s as bad as everyone for some reason wants to make him out to be talent wise.
i mean, are we honestly so desperate for good news that instead of a win, we’re looking to groom our third stringer into a subpar second stringer? wow.
Naming my son Brodie Damon
by troy145 on Sep 15, 2008 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Schottenheimer predicted this game
that the Chiefs would lose to Oakland.
Why did Croyle get the nod over Huard? Because Huard did not have any velocity on his passes, they were thrown around by the wind today. Like the pass when Charles was matched up with the LB, the ball just seemed limp in the air.
If the coaches did keep Huard out over Thigpen it maybe simply because Huard’s arm is as limp as Gumby’s
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 10:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
no no no
huard got a… uh…. um… concussion?
Naming my son Brodie Damon
by troy145 on Sep 15, 2008 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
According To Huard
He dinged up his neck, not his head. Then he refused to answer any questions about whether or not he could have gone back in.
Frankly, I seriously suspect that Herm Edwards was just looking for an excuse to yank Huard and put in Thigpen (and justify keeping him in), so I also suspect that the injury was overblown by the coaching staff to cover for the fact that Herm basically threw the game with Thigpen and Hagans at QB.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
theres no doubt that it was rehtodded
im really anxious to see when croyle gets back in. at least then its kinda like…. maybe something miraculous will happen. with everything else, its just abysmal. either its like huard has the team going but he’ll probably die of old age in the nex year or two and theres no way thiggy will ever be anything.
and were obviously not going to go get a qb *or oline any time soon.
Naming my son Brodie Damon
by troy145 on Sep 15, 2008 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
UC
come now. I know you’re a Huard guy, but let’s not go too far. Huard’s also been an injury risk over the last year. Who’s not at his age with our offensive line? Edwards would have wanted to do anything to avoid the shutout, even turning to Huard. If he’s dinged, he’s dinged, and maybe we should look at Huard’s injury rate since becoming a starter before we annoint him as our salvation. I’m done with Thigpen like the rest, and if we don’t make a signing, sure, toss in Huard, but it’s not like Huard is getting Rich Gannoned here. And he’s NOT Rich Gannon. Rich Gannon couldn’t throw long but at least he could throw intermediate.
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again, I'm Not A "Huard" Guy
I’m a Chiefs guy…and no, I don’t believe that Herm is interested in productivity over youth. I think he played Thigpen because he wanted to play Thigpen, and I think he’s honestly such an incompetent offensive coach that he doesn’t realize that a QB as bad as Thigpen will destroy the development of the rest of the team. And I believe he was deliberately overstating that injury to Huard to cover his ass.
Simply put, I don’t trust Herm Edwards’ decision making, his competence or his honesty as a head coach. I think his approach is “youth at all costs” and he has no clue how to develop that youth.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We need a veteran QB to play as our 2nd string...
Preferably a QB who has a more lively arm. I think its not only time to put Thigpin back with the other 3rd stringers, but to find a veteran QB willing to take the back up role when, and if Brodie returns to the field.
The positives that came out of this game (only a sliver at that), was that Brodie was not as bad as we had initially thought. The O-line has MAJOR issues on pass protecting, and that any QB playing back there is bound to be put on the injury list. Also, the glaring disparity of arm strength of Brodie over Huard was made extremely clear today in Arrowhead.
But 300 yard on the ground from our D? Damn! that is inexcusable, reminds me of the days of Robinson as our Def. Coordinator. All offense and no Def., except now we have no offense to compliment our no Def.
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 10:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Cut Huard already, his passes are as slow as US Postal services 1st class mail.
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 10:17 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Based Off Of What?
Four pass attempts and a better performance than his backup could put up? If this game showed anything it’s that Huard is the only QB on this team that belongs back there on game day.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Huard gave us the best chance to win Sunday, until...
I saw how his passes seem to float, or just die out. There were times in the Patriot game that Huards passes seem to take forever in the air. Even in the quick throws in the flat to Webb (Pat’s game) the passes were slow, and the tackles were made soon after the reception was made. Or the pass to Charles(Raiders game) when Charles looked covered at first then seem to gain a step over the LB, the pass just seem to drop.
If you’re throwing the ball on a quick slant Huards passes are sufficient, but if your making some of the more difficult throws downfield Huard has some serious limitations.
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Four Passes
Anyone can have four bad pass attempts in a game…it’s not a large enough sample size to determine anyone’s ability to run an offense. Thigpen, on the other hand, had plenty of attempts to demonstrate he shouldn’t be running anyone’s offense.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Huard threw more passes
they would be as inept as the other four previous that he threw. Experience is what he has not arm strength. This is the NFL even the worst teams are made up of the best football players in the country.
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Croyle's Got A Strong Arm
And he sucks. Thigpen too. In fact, Thigpen and his strong arm were worse yesterday than Huard and would have been much, much worse had the Oakland defense been able to catch the ball.
I’ve got no problem with replacing Huard because I agree he’s not that good…just not if it means throwing a young QB with a strong arm and no ability to play out there because he’s “not Damon Huard” and not if it means overpaying for some stop-gap to come in here.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too early to tell...
Brodie might stink it up yea, but lets just give it a little more time before we completely give up on him. Thigpin on the other hand has a LOOOOONNNGGG way to go before he’s ready to be even a quality backup. Too many mistakes…too many! But he he did score….and convert on the 2 pt conversion….so there’s still hope….maybe just alittle.
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and I don't believe that Thigpin is the solution either
at this stage of the season for us to look for another QB is just a matter of desperation, but after two games it doesn’t look very good to think otherwise. Our commitment to Brodie is still another 3 weeks away. Dude, I’m starting to think that the lack of interest on Simms might bit us big. Carl get that rope ready if your wrong again!
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
cut huard
before you get someone to replace him and thiggy? suicide, becuase at this rate ALL of our qb’s will see significant playing time this year.
our oline is crap.
i honestly believe that o line needs to be our number one off season priority. cleveland did it, and look what happened to them. And believe me, if we think we have little faith in Brodie, imagine having to throw your faith in a guy who couldn’t even beat out Charlie Batch (now 3rd string for seattle, behind a WR)
good olines make average QBs look above average, so i say we pull out a decent QB from FA or trade, but not an early draft pick.
Naming my son Brodie Damon
by troy145 on Sep 15, 2008 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We need a veteran QB to come in not another
no name rookie QB to be worked out by the team, before you consider cutting Huard.
Huard does give a chance to compete because of his experience, but he seriously hampers what we can do with the ball offensively. His variety of passes are limited. If you play the short intermediate passes you can defense his play, and I know the coaches know this thats why he isn’t playing more.
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll say it.
Sage Rosenfels.
Schaub’s healthy right now. They have two guys on, and Sage is a veteran who’s not ancient, can throw downfield, and has played well for the Texans. Not a superstar, but I challenge anyone (and that means UC and primetime who think everyone sucks but Huard) to tell me that he’s not better than the dreck we’re spliling onto the field.
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great
How much would he cost us?
Because if it’s anything higher than a 3rd rounder he’s not worth it.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rosenfels
I’m not opposed to bringing him in and I do agree that he’s better than what we have now…just not better enough to justify anything higher than a 3rd rounder considering how many big holes we have to fill on this team in 2009.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about we trade them LJ?
Take the Cap hit, get a quarterback, they need a running back, we don’t need LJ. Trade LJ for Rosenfels, a fourth rounder in 2009 and a fourth rounder in 2010.
*Note, please be aware that my cap knowledge is severely limited due to my regular work as an NBA blogger. The NFL cap is like Chinese law compared to the “eh, you’re over the cap? Pay some extra dough for being over” of the NBA. Makes trades so much easier. Also hyperinflates salaries to ridiculous degrees.
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 6:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Salary Cap
It’s not too tough. Here’s the basics.
NFL contracts are basically broken down into two things…game bonuses (the salary you get paid for playing each week) and the roster bonus (guaranteed money you get up front). The game bonus isn’t guaranteed. So if a player is making, say, $160,000 a year in game bonuses and only plays in 2 games, he gets $20,000 and that’s all that counts against the salary cap for the team that year. Roster bonuses are fully guaranteed and the money is counted against the salary cap every year of the contract. If, for example, someone gets a 6 year deal with $6 million in guaranteed money, that money counts against the cap $1 million per year. If that player is then cut partway through the contract (we’ll say after two years in) the remainder is counted against the salary cap of the year following the player’s release ($4 million). Apparently some of this can be deferred to a second year (I’m not exactly sure how this works) but with the cap disappearing in 2010 the bonus money can’t be deferred after 2009 unless a new collective bargaining agreement is signed.
So with Larry Johnson, he got roughly $12.5 million in guaranteed money over 6 years, so that’ll be a little over $2 million per in bonuses per year as a guaranteed cap hit. He’s taken $2 million of that off the books already and he’s in the 2nd year of the deal now so if we trade him this year we’ll be taking a cap hit next year for $8 million plus a prorated portion of this year’s $2 million (for the time remaining after we trade him) which should bring it to around a $9 million hit we’d get next year for a player not on our roster. Also, the first three years of his contract (game salary) are guaranteed, so I’m not sure how that would count against us (but I believe it would). Cap-wise it would be a very difficult hit to take…particularly if we also end up releasing Napolean Harris (5 years, $1 million per in bonuses remaining on his contract). A couple of bad contracts like that will eat up cap space very quickly.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 8:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Straw Man
Not a superstar, but I challenge anyone (and that means UC and primetime who think everyone sucks but Huard) to tell me that he’s not better than the dreck we’re spliling onto the field.
And I’d appreciate you not misrepresenting my position again. I put a lot of effort into formulating my positions, I take the time to explain myself and I try to hear other people out. And it’s starting to piss me off when you come up with the same inaccurate straw man argument over and over again to dismiss what I’m saying. Neither Primetime nor I have ever said that Huard is a great QB…only that he’s the best of our current options, and we shouldn’t have to spell that position out for you again because we’ve already said it often enough.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Totally agree!
I forgot all about Rosenfels. He is a far better option than what we have, but he also has a better receiving corp in Houston, so that may have made him look better. Frankly, what do we have to lose besides another 14 regular season games and our sanity? I think he would be worth a 5th round pick to find out.
by TheQ on Sep 15, 2008 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Draft
The only solution that may happen quicky is us drafting another QB. No more veterans, no more Croyle or Huard. We have to find a QB in the draft. We are goin to be bad for awhile regardless, and it kills me.
by huskerchief on Sep 15, 2008 10:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
how you can come to that conclusion
KILLS me.
WHO is in this draft class that is going to be a sure thing in the NFL?
go straight down the line. the last few years all the big college names have come out and sucked pro, minues a few like cutler, who was a relative sleeper. drafting QBs is a crap shoot. we need oline
Naming my son Brodie Damon
by troy145 on Sep 15, 2008 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Anyone young QB we stick back there isn’t going to last long unless we shore up the foundation of this team…the line. There’s a reason why teams that develop good o-lines can survive with average (or below average) QBs playing behind them…the ability to open running lanes or to protect the QB on pass plays can cover for a lot of deficiencies in that QB’s game.
Look at Branden Albert, for example, he’s a rookie and already he’s starting to look like one of our better linemen on the field. It’s not coincidental that he was grabbed with a high draft pick. On the other hand, look at the problem areas on our o-line…it’s guys like McIntosh, and Niswanger and Adrian Jones or whoever else. It’s not a coincidence that these guys were low draft picks or dudes picked up off waivers or in dump trades. Don’t get me wrong, I think we do need to find a QB in the draft, but until we build a good line most QBs we bring in are probably going to fail.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pro-Bowl Brian Waters was not even drafted by
the Cowboys when they released him. I like Niswanger he might have a chance to develop into another Waters for us, but your right about Jones and McIntosh we need to replace them as soon as possible.
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And The Odds Of Finding Another Brian Waters Are Slim
When teams start assuming that the longshots are the rule and not the exception, those teams are headed for disaster. You’ll see teams get a lot further by building their o-lines around first day draft picks than off the waiver wire.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True, chances are better with 1st day selections, but nothing is absolute.
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alright guys its been entertaining,
gonna be starting work in a few hours, its 2:44 am in the middle of the Pacific ocean.
Shoot ….Raiders got lucky again, and we accidentally lost the game. Still had a chance in the end though.. Go Chiefs….!
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Draft
I know what your sayin and it is a crap shoot but how long have we been average or bad at QB? Forever it seems, but yes the Oline is a priority. Dont you think we should have drafted a QB in this class?
by huskerchief on Sep 15, 2008 10:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Not this draft
Too many holes to fill and we were tied to Brodie.
by Chris Thorman on Sep 15, 2008 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
which at the time was fair
and again, im still not convinced Brodie doesn’t have the TALENT. he may well be too frail but theres got be a reason a lot of good players seem excited about him. or theyre just lying, which honestly wouldnt surprise me. plus i think he’s just shown flashes.
Naming my son Brodie Damon
by troy145 on Sep 15, 2008 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The thing is
I said this in the offseason and everyone shouted me down.
Drafting Linemen is not as risky as QB, but it’s still risky. Too many draft picks don’t work out, and we needed immediate improvement. Plus, playing with a bad O-line is going to breed bad habits in our young guys. We need to go out and spend money on linemen. We could have made a move on Faneca, but we didn’t. We need to make immediate improvements, and that means signing free agents. I feel like our O-Line is too big of a hole to climb out of with the draft and we’ll just keep slipping down the sides.
Interesting note: The biggest rift between Edwards and Peterson is supposedly Herm’s insistence on drafting over free agents, which Peterson ceded to this season. Just pointing it out.
If you want to have great players, you’ve got to pay them money. Not necessarily THE BIGGEST CONTRACT IN CHIEFS HISTORY, but a lot of dough.
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 6:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
O-Linemen
Yes, offensive linemen carry risk in a draft. QBs carry risk in a draft. But QBs that don’t have an offensive line to protect them carry the most risk in a draft, so I think what a lot of people have been trying to say is that they’d rather draft a line first, then have a drafted QB coming in behind a competent line rather than drafting a QB to get killed and then trying to piece together a line around him after he’s already getting beaten down.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 15, 2008 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get that.
But can we sustain three years of this?
Can we?
by Ridiculous Matt on Sep 15, 2008 10:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't Really Have A Choice
Unless we get a QB who can come in and start immediately, QBs from the draft usually take time to develop. And whoever we play behind that line is going to get killed. We’re probably best off bringing in a decent vet QB next year, drafting linemen with the higher picks, and looking for a decent QB prospect in the mid to low rounds.
After we’ve fired our current GM and head coach, that is…because they couldn’t pick a good QB prospect if their lives depended on it.
Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.
by UCrawford on Sep 16, 2008 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Draft Middle Linebacker
Rey Maualaga, did you see his INT for a touchdown against #5 ranked Ohio St. Buckeyes?
by aPacificChief on Sep 15, 2008 11:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thats the Problem
We shouldnt have been tied to Croyle. The Packers drafted Brohm and and were tied to Rogers for three years.
by huskerchief on Sep 15, 2008 11:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Premature Post
we are tied with the Chargers at the bottom of the AFC West.
by PVChiefsfan on Sep 15, 2008 12:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
that might technically be true
but…
come on
Naming my son Brodie Damon
by troy145 on Sep 15, 2008 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually thought
before the season started, that the Raiders had spent enough money in the off-season to be good for a year or two – before the season, given Denver’s breakdown in 2007, I picked our division to line up like this
Raiders
Chargers
Broncos
Chiefs
It looks like I was wrong on 3 out of 4 =) (unless the Chargers finish 2nd to the Donkeys)
by PVChiefsfan on Sep 15, 2008 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look at the stats
Yes a W is a W and an L is an L, but one GLARING stat to consider is PF, PA, and Net Points, SD is at -3 and we are at -22, big gap there, its only a matter of time before they get back on track.
by bamakcfan on Sep 15, 2008 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Herm and Carl Show
When Herm was hired by Carl it was a huge mistake. He took the Jets and turned them into a horrible team and has done the same with Kansas City. It is a sad day when the Raiders can come in to Kansas City and with a second string running back run all over the defense. There have been so many bad decisions made by Carl and Herm…..getting rid of Jarad Allen so they could pick up Glenn Dorsey, signing Larry Johnson to a huge contract and then letting him slip to being a mediocre back at best. And putting Brodie Croyle as quarterback. The only thing the Chiefs have gotten better at is raising ticket prices and not selling out games!
by Kkrzycki on Sep 15, 2008 6:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Chiefs need a complete overhaul
This team has done nothing to improve itself.We have a poor coaching staff and the whole group should be replaced including Carl Peterson,as long as he is in charge you will never see a change in KC’s performance.Chiefs have become a huge disappointment year after year and still the price to see them goes through the roof.I myself would never pay to see them now,why would I,I can see them lose at home for free.Im a fan and I know that it may not seem like it but really when is enough ,enough.Support your local teams? Sure,Speak you mind?Always.Face it Chiefs are a disappointment enjoy the loss in Atlanta you know can’t beat the Raiders honestly do you think they can beat Atlanta?don’t think so not with the way they are playing.
by KC WHO? on Sep 15, 2008 9:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Will They?
I’ve been a Chiefs fan since I was five (my family is full of Chiefs fans) and the past thirteen years (I’m eighteen) have been difficult. Although I don’t really remember most things, or knew a lot about football until I turned about thirteen; what I’ve witnessed over the past two years have been a travesty.
Most of my family has been calling for Peterson’s head for years, even before all of this BS. I didn’t think much about it since recently. I always figured it came down to the players, not the management. WRONG! WRONG!!!! Now I want Peterson’s head to be delivered to a sell-out crowd in Arrowhead, where KC Wolf will body slam it, and once-and-for all end the Peterson era.
I know two games aren’t a very good measure of a team’s season, but losing to the Raiders in Arrowhead is unacceptable. I could deal with a 1-15 season, just so long as that 1 would be from beating the Raiders. The mistakes and idiocy of the past are finally biting us in our all ready well bitten rears.
The Chiefs have become the worst team in the NFL, and not a lot is being done by the Chiefs management. They’re content to hike up prices for games, and sell out crowds (not gonna happen much more) for mediocre seasons and sad football playing.
Let’s say the Chiefs go 0-16, God forbid that happens, but let’s say that they do. What will happen? Will King Carl finally be dethroned? Maybe. Maybe not. Lamar Hunt may finally rest in peace if his son does the right thing and fires both Peterson and Edwards. How Peterson kept his position all these years, I’ll never know. If they do go, the rebuilding. The long, long, long overdue rebuilding of this team into an NFL Dynasty may finally begin.
I’ve play football (I’m a Varsity TE) and I know how important a QB is for your offense. An offensive line serves two purposes: 1) Protect the QB; 2) Open holes for the running back. If your offensive line can’t do that, you can’t succeed with any QB, nomatter what.
Rebuilding is a good idea, but this isn’t it. Rebuilding would not be scrapping the few high notes of this team, and throwing a bunch of rookies onto the starting lineup. Rebuilding is not tossing away Jared Allen, a defensive player who showed more passion and energy than Herm Edwards ever did, despite the game situation. Not even trying to win is not rebuilding. What this is, is hoping this team will get better as they get older, instead of trying to be competitive.
Chiefs fans, this is gonna be a long season, so until the Chiefs organization as a whole begins to try, and I mean try to the point where it will nearly kill them try. This team is gonna be the “Toilet Bowl” of the NFL for years to come, and until Lamar Hunt’s son begins purging the managment and coaching staff of the idiots it’s flooded with, this team is gonna suck. Get used to it, people. It’s gonna be an 0-16 season, and I pray to almighty God that it will be the final straw that gives the long overdue boot to Carl Peterson, and Herm Edwards.
by JFOX2109 on Sep 18, 2008 2:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
