2004 NFL Draft

I guess I have to explain this one more time.

How about you check out the first 8 games of the season for Chiefs. Their defense led the league in turnovers and pretty much blew out everyone they faced outside of the Broncos at home (a game they should have lost if not for the X-Factor), but in the 2nd half of the season, it was to be found out that Greg Robinson was throwing more into his defensive schemes, and was confusing the players. The talent is there (we still need a shutdown CB, something we didn\'t address, as I said before), but the scheme was downright confusing. There\'s a reaosn why he got fired form Denver even after winning a Super Bowl, and there\'s a reason that he left after a 13-3 season -- his Defensive Scheme was too confusing.

Gunther Cunningham is the anti-Greg Robinson. As Eric Hicks said when Gunther was signed to lead the defense "Greg tries to get a game of chess going, whereas Gunther wants to start a barfight." A bit of a difference, I\'d say.

Yes, the Chiefs were damn good on offense, but not really when it counted. Johnnie Morton dropped several crucial passes in clutch situations, often abruptly ending drives. That became well documented in the game against the Colts, where he dropped a 3rd down pass looking up the field tryin\' to get more yards after the 1st down, so the Chiefs had to kick a Field Goal. Andersen missed the field goal, and the Chiefs never got within less than a Touchdown for the rest of the game.

Johnnie Morton, again, is worthless, and needs to be replaced. The Chiefs did not address that, and I feel that they needed to upgrade there Offensively. Can you comprehend that?

The Chiefs do need a shutdown corner, which is why I said that the Chiefs were one or two players away from being a championship caliber team. You just went on to randomly assume that I meant Defense, whereas that\'s not what I was only talking about.

Oh, and I love you, too, Di ;-)

See Yuz.

Yes Di, I can feel the man love!

Hey James, we\'ll give ya Toomer for Holmes.  I hear you have another 1st round quality RB anyway

Yeah Larry Johnson is just as good right?  lol Chiefs are not too great in the draft it seems.

We\'ll give ya Stokley and James for Priest and Gonzo

Gonzo should be expendable since you got another TE right?

Originally posted by ROL Jamas
How about you check out the first 8 games of the season for Chiefs. Their defense led the league in turnovers and pretty much blew out everyone they faced outside of the Broncos at home (a game they should have lost if not for the X-Factor), but in the 2nd half of the season, it was to be found out that Greg Robinson was throwing more into his defensive schemes, and was confusing the players.

I guess I have to explain why you are wrong, again.

Those first 8 games were against some of the worst offenses in the league. When the Chiefs came up against a decent offense in the first half of the season they were saved on the strength of their own offense.

You can\'t brag about "blowing out" San Diego, Pittsburgh, Houston, Baltimore, Denver, Green Bay, Oakland, and Buffalo. Teams, w/ the exception of Denver and Green Bay, who had some of the worst offenses in the league last year.

In fact, the only really good offense the Chiefs played last year was Minnesota and they lost bad.

Um, I\'d have to disagree with that.  If you look at the offensive ranks in all the league of these teams, they are 14, 22, 21, 31, 7, 4, 25, 30, which isn\'t so awful itself, but if you look more closely, even that is very misleading.  

Buffalo was ranked 30th, for example.  However, up until that Cheifs game, they had scored 20 ppg.  Against Houston they help Carr to the fewest yards he had before getting hurt.  Pittsburgh put up two touchdowns more on Baltimore the game before.  Really, they weren\'t bad at all, and I would expect better from them.  Let\'s not forget, the Rams had a bad D too when they won the Super Bowl.  The question isn\'t whether their D will win it for them, it\'s whether it\'s good enough to not lose it for the offense.

And as for their O saving them, since when is Trent Green having under 130 yards passing, and Holmes having under 100 rushing a sign of a game where your offense saved you (against Denver)?

Originally posted by shockwaves
Um, I\'d have to disagree with that.  If you look at the offensive ranks in all the league of these teams, they are 14, 22, 21, 31, 7, 4, 25, 30, which isn\'t so awful itself, but if you look more closely, even that is very misleading.

So one other team, besides the two I already mentioned, was not ranked in the bottom half of the league in offense(still very close) and that isn\'t bad?

Originally posted by shockwaves
Buffalo was ranked 30th, for example.  However, up until that Cheifs game, they had scored 20 ppg.  Against Houston they help Carr to the fewest yards he had before getting hurt.  Pittsburgh put up two touchdowns more on Baltimore the game before.  Really, they weren\'t bad at all, and I would expect better from them.  Let\'s not forget, the Rams had a bad D too when they won the Super Bowl.  The question isn\'t whether their D will win it for them, it\'s whether it\'s good enough to not lose it for the offense.

• Buffalo had 20 ppg because they lit up a zoned out New England and a newly gelling defense in Jacksonville(weeks 1-2). With those two erroneous games aside the Bills are at 13 ppg, which is damn close to where they ended up at the end of the season.
• Carr averaged 151 ypg on the entire season. 167 yards against the Chiefs isn\'t exactly groundbreaking.
• I\'ve got nothing on the Steelers/Ravens game; but I still stand by the fact that the Steelers were not a respected offense in the league last year.

I totally agree about the D needing to be good enough to not lose it for them. Personally, I don\'t think they are. If you look at the schedule the Chiefs really didn\'t play anyone worth mentioning besides the Broncos. We\'ll see what they are made of when they play a schedule that wasn\'t made for an 8-8 squad. The Chiefs/Broncos benefitted from a weak division more than ANY team in the league.

Originally posted by shockwaves
And as for their O saving them, since when is Trent Green having under 130 yards passing, and Holmes having under 100 rushing a sign of a game where your offense saved you (against Denver)?

True, I was wrong about that. That game was more a case of Special Teams stepping up.

Still, One thing is certain, they DEFINATELY did not win that game on the strength of their defense.

Originally posted by Black Samurai
Carr averaged 151 ypg on the entire season. 167 yards against the Chiefs isn\'t exactly groundbreaking.
 

That\'s a number that\'s very much deflated due to injury.  Carr averaged 217 ypg in his 4 games against teams other than the Chiefs (Miami, NO, Jax, Tenn, not awful D\'s) before he got hurt.  After that, 7 more games are averaged into his stats, but only 3 of those were games in which Carr played the whole game.  One was the game he was injured, and then there were games of 62 yards on 9 attempts, 12 on 4, and 25 on 5 averaged in there when he was playing hurt and just taking snaps at the end of games.  That 151 ypg stat is very misleading and definitely an inaccurate representation of what he did.



With Buffalo, even if you discount the game against the Pats, their loses where they were held to low point totals were against teams like Miami and Philly, some of the best D\'s in the NFL.  They also went over twenty 3 times in 6 games discounting the Pats game, 4 in 7 if you include it.  Either way, the Chiefs D held them to three points, which is the lowest the offense scored all year up until their final game.  Still pretty impressive if you ask me, no matter how you look at it.

The fact is, I\'m not arguing that the Chiefs were an amazing defense last year.  I know they weren\'t.  However, I am saying that there were clear signs that there is some talent to work with their, if it is applied right.  You discounted the 31 points Buffalo put up on the Pats in week 1 based on the system they were running.  The system was changed, and the Pats played like a great D.  Why is that not possible as well for a team like the Chiefs?

Originally posted by shockwaves
You discounted the 31 points Buffalo put up on the Pats in week 1 based on the system they were running.  The system was changed, and the Pats played like a great D.  Why is that not possible as well for a team like the Chiefs?

No, I discounted it because the Pats were zoned out(as in on another planet) after losing their defensive captain 3-4 days before the game.

Still, I see what you are saying about the Chiefs. They may have the tools; but they have yet to show anything. I just think the last of their problems is an offensive player.

Originally posted by Black Samurai
No, I discounted it because the Pats were zoned out(as in on another planet) after losing their defensive captain 3-4 days before the game.

Still, I see what you are saying about the Chiefs. They may have the tools; but they have yet to show anything. I just think the last of their problems is an offensive player.

Ha, sorry, misunderstood.  

And as for where their needs are, most teams have needs to fill in multiple places.  However, a solid WR is a lot harder to acquire through trades or through free agency than a solid DB.  Thus, when a player like Woods is still available, and it is clear that an upgrade is needed at WR, at least to me, you have to take him.