"Sure they have Kyle Orton now, but he sucks. He wasn't good enough to beat out Tim Tebow, he wasn't good enough to not be traded for Jay Cutler, and he isn't good enough to not be shipped out somewhere else when Matt Cassel is healthy. Orton is basically Curtis Painter with a neckbeard." Tim Tebow has his team one game out of playoffs, and the playoff bound Bears fell apart without Cutler. "Last time we faced the Chefs, they beat us 28-0, yeah. It was embarrassing. It was Kyle Boller's big chance and he blew it, throwing three interceptions. It was Carson Palmer's first day on the job, and being totally unprepared he also threw three interceptions. Two of the aforementioned six interceptions were returned for touchdowns. So really, the Raider defense only gave up 14 points to the Chefs, while the Raider offense also gave up 14 points." Palmer has thrown a pick in 5 of his last 7 starts. Including three to Denver and four to Green Bay, but you know he was just getting comfortable. Nevermind that Orton facing the same Packers defense in his first start for a new team threw for 300+ and no picks, but he sucks and the Raiders will be willed to victory by their stud QB. As far as his points logic goes, in actuality even giving back the defensive points the Chiefs would still win 14-0. "The defense is meh and needs a new coach, but while they were playing a proper scheme last week (that is, during the first three quarters) they only gave up 14 points to a very good Lions offense" So are you going to get a new coach by tomorrow? I don't see how the defense needing a new coach works in your favor. But hey, he "properly" gave the Lions the game in the second half. "The Chefs barely beat the Packers last week during a game in which the Pack could do absolutely nothing and punted the ball an absurd number of times." And this works against the Chiefs how? "First, Kyle Orton sucks and we already beat him this year. Secondly, Romeo Crennel sucks and isn't an upgrade over Todd Haley. He sucked in Cleveland and he will suck in KC." Right, point: Crennel will always suck because he sucked as a HC in his first try. Counterpoint: Bill Bellichik. Also, having beat Orton in Denver earlier in the season probably doesn't have as much bearing on Orton playing in Kansas City right? By his logic, we should not play the game and just say "Oakland sucks we blew them out this season." It's just impossible to escape that kind of logic "The Chefs were probably just so happy last week to not have to play for Todd Haley anymore that they decided to win. They will come back to earth this week and play to their actual talent level, which is "suck"." Which directly contradicts his statement that Crennel is not an upgrade over Todd Haley. If the team was "deciding" not to win under Haley, anyone is an upgrade right? "Raiders win, 27-17." I could see us losing, sweeping an opponent is astronomically hard in the NFL. His reasoning for it is just insane. How does this guy get a frequent front page post?