If we can only take back a few plays...

by kc571 on Nov 29, 2009 7:10 PM CST

There are usually a few plays within a game, that define the game. Today's game, there were a lot of them.

Cassel's INT off of a DL. Why was he throwing the ball that low?
Charles going for the extra yards. Can't fault him that much. He's broken more yards than he's fumbled. That was a great drive that stalled right after that play. We would have gotten at least 3.
The fumble over Cassel's head. Why did Cassel take so long in scrambling the play before? He had the first down easily. He stopped to look backwards. Then he slides and gives up the first down. If he had gotten the first down, we would not have been in a shotgun.
Can Mark Bradley catch the ball anymore? He dropped a sure fire first down. He could have backed in the final few yards for it, but dropped the ball. Next play I think we lost the ball again.

I honestly think we were playing an ok game in the first half. Sure, we can't cover Gates. And we couldn't defend the long pass. But, I thought our running game and passing "attack" were better than they've been.

And lastly, where oh where did our blitzing go? Did we even touch Rivers today? How many times did you see their receiver in the middle of our soft zone?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.

Tweet Comment 7 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Man, I think Rivers had a clean jersey all game.

Man its just so annoying. Charles almost got 100 rush yards also. Nice return to the 50. Almost looked like he would break one. But nah…waste of time.

When you fail to prepare, you prepare to fail.

by NJChieffan16 on Nov 29, 2009 7:19 PM CST reply actions

Correct

Rivers wasn’t touched all game.

"I did not invent the wheel, I was the crooked spoke adjacent." - Aesop Rock

by John Gennaro on Nov 30, 2009 7:06 AM CST up reply actions

Oh and Clancy Pendergast is too conservative.

We may have blitzed, but I don’t remember seeing it.

When you fail to prepare, you prepare to fail.

by NJChieffan16 on Nov 29, 2009 7:20 PM CST reply actions

0 sacks and only 1 QB Hurry

Nobody sniffed Rivers all day.

by ChiefDJ on Nov 29, 2009 8:59 PM CST reply actions

If we can only take back a few plays ...

we still get creamed … just would be Chargers with longer drives and more yards of offense … no way we win the game, no way we’re IN the game … we got trounced, pure and simple, AND helped them trounce us in the process … had we “played better” on those few plays, we still get beat like little brother … not even a question

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!

by upamtn on Nov 30, 2009 10:45 AM CST reply actions

ups is back ... where you been my brother?

correct that we would still have gotten pounded. That much is fact. We might have had a more respectable first half but that’s about it.

by krayfish on Nov 30, 2009 11:24 AM CST reply actions

I'm with 571

the turnovers were generally fluke plays (deflected pass, hit as he threw, bad snap) or great defense (Charles was stripped while fighting for yards)

those turnovers directly accounted for 28 points, and the Chiefs lost by 29.

* "I doubt anyone will miss Connor Barth except UCrawford"
* the LB corps may become the biggest strength of the Chiefs in 2009
* The OL is NOT as bad as you think it is... give it time, and you'll see improvement this season
* Stats are for losers

by stagdsp on Nov 30, 2009 12:27 PM CST reply actions