Chiefs Sitting in the Basement of the NFL After Week 1
by Chris Thorman on Sep 16, 2009 9:00 AM CDT
in 2009 Campaign
30 comments
Yes, I know it's early to be talking about where the Kansas City Chiefs rank relative to the rest of the NFL. But, I'm going to track these stats and we'll have some nice line graphs later in the season, sort of like what Joel did this morning.
The results are in and they are not good. As I'm sure you can imagine, the Chiefs rank at the bottom or near the bottom of many offensive and defensive categories.
Our lone bright spot? Tied for first in Red Zone conversion percentage! Yes!
After the jump, I put down some various stats and where the Chiefs rank, plus a little blurb from me on that stat.
Offense
Yards/Game (30th)
The Chiefs' 188 yards of offense against the Ravens only beat out the Texans (183 yards) and the Panthers (169).
Yards per play (26th)
Some good teams are behind the Chiefs in this category, which makes me discount it's importance. Philly, Green Bay for example rank below the Chiefs and we know they're better than we are. The Chiefs' 4.27 yards per play is less than half of the #1 ranking Dallas' 8.88 yard per play average.
Rushing yards (31st)
Yep, no hiding this one. Somehow, the 49ers only rushed for 21 yards, sparing the Chiefs the embarrassment of yet again sitting in the basement for rushing yards.
Passing yards (26th)
Despite a 116 QB rating, Brodie Croyle wasn't able to produce a relatively high amount of passing yards. And you're never going to get a lot of yards from Croyle. His career high in passing yards is 217.
First Downs/Game (30th)
Yeah, keep an eye on this one. The Chiefs had trouble making first downs last year, along with converting third downs. Those are definitely two stats that go hand in hand. Only the Broncos have fewer first downs than the Chiefs' 11. The first down leader? Baltimore of course with 32!
3rd Down % (30th)
The Chiefs converted 2/10 3rd downs last week. That's good enough to put you in company with the Lions, Panthers and Rams.
Red Zone % (T-1st)
Six teams including the Chiefs have scored on all of their trips to the Red Zone. To show you how wacky this stat can be, the Chiefs and Ravens have both scored on 100% of their Red Zone trips on Sunday.
Points/Game (T-10th)
Despite these crappy offensive numbers, we really should be rejoicing that the Chiefs were able to score 24 points on Sunday.
Defense
Yards allowed (31st)
How do you give up 501 yards on defense and not be ranked last in the league? The Lions. The Detroit Lions. As a Chiefs fan, I definitely want to thank the Lions for being so terrible right when we are.
Rushing yards allowed (31st)
The Chiefs gave up 198 yards on the ground last week. Cleveland gave up 225 rushing yards to Adrian Peterson and the Minnesota Vikings. The Vikings' opponent each week may end up being the worst run defense of the league that week.
Passing yards allowed (28th)
Giving up 303 passing yards isn't terrible - when you don't give up nearly 200 yards on the ground.
Sacks per pass attempt (27th)
We're definitely watching sacks closely this year. 2.33% of the time the Chiefs sacked Joe Flacco, which I know sound weird after only one game.
First downs/game (32nd)
32 first downs allowed on Sunday. 32nd in the rankings. Man, the more I look back at the Raven game the worse I think it was for the Chiefs.
3rd down % allowed (30th)
You see that stat above with 32 first downs? That's because the Ravens converted nearly 60% of their third downs. Convert third downs, move the ball down the field, score points....You gotta be good at 3rd down conversion.
Points allowed (T-30th)
I know we've beaten this to death over the weekend and this week but one more time: As much as you want to think the Chiefs have improved on defense, they still gave up 38 points and 501 yards to the Ravens. I know stats don't tell the entire story but spin those numbers for me please.
0 recs |
30 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
These numbers really look bad...
Sure it’s week 1, but damn. We made the Ravens look like the 98 Rams.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 9:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Spin
The Blocked Punt: lost offensive possesion
INT Return to the 6: lost offensive possesion
Chris I dont know if you play Madden, but when I throw a INT, its almost in my benefit to allow the CPU to score on the INT Return.
Because if I dont, the CPU (If they are a good team, and have been moving the ball downfield all-day) giving them two offensive possessions with 80 yards of stats to accumulate on their way to a touchdown each possession doesn’t help my defensive stats.
That to me justifies the stats and T.O.P. But it doesnt justify the loss…. (Here I go)
When your Offense gets you back on the field with the lead. YOU HAVE TO GET OFF THE FIELD!!!
Haley told the offense to run it again. When someone said the defense already knows the play he responded, "So what, make it work."
by Jay Cotton on Sep 16, 2009 9:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Prozac?
These stats (I know theyre only week 1, but still) are about to make start looking for a quack. All of this offseason Ive been thinking “If our offense can just compete, our D can seal the deal”.
Jumping the gun? Most likely. However it still leaves my stomach feeling like I was a college kid who just chugged a bottle of $6 Tequilla.
by Chiefsovermywife on Sep 16, 2009 9:39 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
College or not
You tell me where you can get a $6 bottle of tequila, my friend!
by Joel Thorman on Sep 16, 2009 9:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha...
Touche
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you know the right place, you can get 2 bottles of Boones Farm for $6
by chiefsandcigars on Sep 16, 2009 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fuzzy Navel like a mofo!!
Penn State to Kansas City...Always a winning combination.
by YNinja on Sep 16, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
HA "Chiefsovermywife" - CLASSIC handle man lol
by chiefnyc on Sep 16, 2009 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hahaha.... i love the handle too
except my gf isn’t getting a ring until the Chiefs do.
For justice we must go to Don Pioli
by Sudden on Sep 16, 2009 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Week 1 looked like it was week 18,
a continuation of last year. Offense scores late. We are in the game. Defense can’t get a stop when we must have it. Then the offense can’t score one last time.
How many games ended just that way last year? A bad team that nearly squeaked out a win against a good one?
I really hope the offseason changes actually develop into improvements on the field. One game does not a season make, but damn.
by NJ Chiefs Fan on Sep 16, 2009 9:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yards per play
4.27 ypp is possibly the most important stat to watch. Anything over 3.5 is acceptable and it means you can move the ball enough to get 1st downs and control the clock. The lower it is, typically, the better your run game. The higher it is, the more you’re passing. Obviously there’s exceptions to that, but for “at-a-glance” purposes, that’s how to look at it.
If we can keep it at 4 or better, we’re going to score points every game. We just can’t keep giving up 500 yards to the other team.
by IISaiNtII on Sep 16, 2009 9:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
acceptable?
4.27 was good for 26th in the league, not really my idea of acceptable.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
4.26 per play
is perfectly acceptable. If you need 10 yards to get a first down, 3.5 yards per play will get you there in 3 downs.
by IISaiNtII on Sep 16, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They just can't make mistakes...
obviously. Not much negative yardage can come into play, and certainly no 1 yard short of the moving the chains situations like we saw last Sunday.
by IISaiNtII on Sep 16, 2009 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
3.5 would have been...most likely...last in the league week 1
You can’t tell me that’s acceptable. Not buying it.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You theory is completely off...
is perfectly acceptable. If you need 10 yards to get a first down, 3.5 yards per play will get you there in 3 downs.
Sure if EVERY play went for 3.5 yards…no more no less…then yes you would score on every drive……
But factor in a 20 yard pass here…and 15 yard run there…and the average is still 3.5? That would equal a lot of punts. Think about it.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
More evidence...
Pittsburgh gave up just 3.9 yards per play, which was a 0.5 yard difference from the second ranked Eagles. Only 19 total touchdowns were scored against Dick LeBeau’s squad.
Last year Pitt gave up a league low 3.9 years per play….meaning no team in the league gave up less yards per play….completly unacceptable by your theory because that would means teams got first downs all day long by getting 3.9 yards per play. NO your theory of “anything over 3.5 yards on offence is acceptable” is complete hog wash, sorry.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
We weren’t moving the ball at all, then you put in that long 50 yard play and that made the stats look better.
Herm is gone things are better with that one move!!
by bringbacktheglory on Sep 16, 2009 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also...
This link shows teams YYP last year…..guess what? 4.0 YYP was the league WORST. (Bengals) So to say that EVERY team was “completly acceptable” in YYP is ludacris.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Average last year was 5.3 YYP...so 3.5 is not acceptable. sorry for the rant.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not a theory
it’s simple math.
You’re rebuttal using Pittsburgh as an example means that according to your train of thought, Pittsburgh should have went undefeated because they help opponents to <4 ypp.
Every play isn’t going to be 3-4 yards, that’s why it’s an AVERAGE. When you have lots of negative plays, and a few large plays, that’s going to skew the results to look better than they probably were, as bbtg said already about Bradley’s 50 yard catch.
by IISaiNtII on Sep 16, 2009 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If 3.5 is "perfectly acceptable" and LAST in the league was 4.0
Are you saying that EVERY team was more than “perfectly acceptable”
Common man, hell no.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a league of parity
so you tell me.
by IISaiNtII on Sep 16, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not to mention it's week 1
and we played against arguably the toughest defense in the NFL.
by IISaiNtII on Sep 16, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha once again if no team last year got less than 4.0 YYP...
then 3.5 YYP is not acceptable.
5.3 was average YYP last year…what part of that don’t you get?
3.5 YYP is far from acceptable. Period.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The highest ypp was by the Saints
at 6.3 yyp. The lowest was 4.0 by the Bengals.
Yeah, the disparity there isn’t huge. The Saints had 63 more offensive plays last season than the Bengals did. So to tell me that Parity doesn’t exist is faulty logic.
by IISaiNtII on Sep 16, 2009 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
one important stat
that’s not there is turnover ratio: i think we were 8th at +1. that’s gonna be really important if were gonna be able to hang at all w/ better teams
by E.C. on Sep 16, 2009 9:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Game plan?
New here, first post, feel free to flame me on this, but..
I think there were major issues with the game plan against the Ravens. Have we not seen Cam Cameron offenses before? I think as much as we have faced him, we should have expected the screen passes and the passing routes that make average receivers look good.
I also think we played right into the Ravens hands with the basic offensive game plan. We should of had the advantage, with the Ravens not knowing what to expect on offense. We should have taken advantage of Charles speed on the outside. But instead, it seemed we ran between the tackles right into the Ravens strength. I think the stats prove this and we were very fortunate to be in the game at all.
by BarryS on Sep 16, 2009 10:40 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I gotta agree 100%
The Chiefs were out-coached…among other things.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Sep 16, 2009 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Has Haley faced Cameron before?
or more importantly, Pendergast? That’s beside the point anyway, because Al Saunders was hired as an offensive consultant in their offseason, so I expect Baltimore to be much improved on offense, and they’re showing that already from how they manhandled the Chiefs. Chiefs got a couple lucky breaks on defense, but overall couldn’t help themselves.
by IISaiNtII on Sep 16, 2009 10:50 AM CDT up 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.
