you are right! and that's why we would have beenup 17-14 instead of tied. Do you even read what I write? I said it was an ididotic decision no matter who amde it and I would have said so even if we scored the TD, the risk was not worth the reward in that situation. I don't recall specific games but i am sure I've said it numerous times, when I am watching games I get a little irrational.
We have to be careful. This morning, Herm is a genius-slash-defensive-guru-slash-master motivator. 41-0 blowouts against the 49ers will do that. In another week, he'll have slunked back down into the position of crazy-talk-eedyot-slash-punt-happy-fool-slash-media-manipulator. All my life's a circle, and so forth. . . .
He's 1-2 but he's lost to 2 of the best teams in the league in week 1 vs. cincy they lost their starting QB and in week 2 they took Den to OT. KC is pretty good and getting better and people criticize the O(forgetting they lost their 2 best OL and great blocking FB AND are missing thbeir starting QB) but what about the D? The D is giving up 11 PPG and gave up 23 to Cincy but cincy is avreraging 25 in their other 3 games, they gave up 9 to Denver an Denver is averaging 14 in their other 2 games, they gave up ZERO to SF and SF is averaging 24 in their other 3 games. Herm gets all the blame for the O and no credit for the D? that sounds like the last 5 years whenever we had success it was the players or coordinators and when we struggled it was all Herm.
I'd say no, he shouldn't get credit for the D. Gunther Cunningham's defense is the only thing on that team that didn't change from last year to this. And, I don't see Herm taking all that much blame for the offense. It took him all of ONE WEEK to throw Mike Solari under the bus, and he continues to reinforce the notion that Solari is the problem with quotes about how he's, "slowly learning how to call plays," and how he's "growing into the position of coordinator." If you step back and think about that for a second, junc, you should find that part galling.
So he doesn't get any credit for the defense which had the same coordinator the last 2 years before he got there and they gave up 24 PPG the last 2 years and now are giving up 11 yet he gets the blame for the offense which has 2 new OT's, a new FB, a new OC and a new QB? I don't follow them at all O I don't know what is going on over there so i can't comment on that since I don't have enough info.
let's not forget that an impotent offense can also make a D look alot better then it is. we have a textbook example of that very close to home from last year to this year with the Jets.
I'll save you time. Huddle 'round and I'll tell you all a tale about the NEW Kansas City Chefs. Essentially, it's the same as the OLD Kansas City Chefs, except that one of its all-world offensive linemen retired, and suddenly the discussion turned from dreams of Superbowl, to questions of rebuilding. This was before they'd even played a game. Mike Solari? He's been with the team for the last decade, so he's playing with the same terminology and personnel as last year. Gunther Cunningham? He installed the current defense a year ago, after Vermiel threw Greg Robinson under the bus in a tearful (what else) presser. The only substantive thing that has changed in Kansas City -excluding injuries - is philosophy. The Chiefs went from from trying to score right here, right now, over and over again, to: That's not Mike Solari. That's Herm. And yet, when criticism about the offense flies, Herm tells everyone that Solari is learning. That literally makes me angry to read.
It's 3 games, 2 against woeful offenses and the other they were blown out of the water in the first half.
3rd: Last year teams would get a little consrevaitve w/ us b/c they knew we couldn't beat them and they didn't want to chane TOs to allow us to stay in or steal a game. That's not the case w/ KC this year. last year our D gave up 970 more yards than our offense gained but this year for KC the Chiefs have outgained their opponents by 179. Last year we averaged 26:37 TOP compard to our opponents at 33:23 while KC has 31:45 for them and 28:15 for their opponents. We have up over 2 TDs a game while KC is giving up less than a TD a game.
What part of 3 games don't you understand? Especially when they just had a game as lopsided as the one they just played. It's ridiculous to compare 3 games worth of stats to an entire season.
I enjoy junc vs. 3rdand15 battles more than any other. We need to get a couple more games under our belt and revisit this when there's more material.
They lost 2 starting OL including one of the best LTs in the game, they lost their pro-bowl blocking FB, they lost their OC and they lost their starting QB. Gunther was brought back TWO years ago so the D wasn't good last year or 2 years but all of a sudden are good this year? The Chiefs don't have the ability to score all over the place w/ all their losses from the offseason and early this season. They have tried the quick score approach and it ahsn't worked, it's hurt their D. there's nothing wrong w/ keeping your D off the field. So you are saying you'd rather KC keep trying to do what they've been doing which hasn't resulted in a playoff win since Montana was the QB? -Cincy ios averaging 25 in their other 3 gams, they allowed 23. -Den is averging 14 PPg in their other 2 games and KC held them to 9(6 in regulation). -SF is averaging 24 in their other 3 games and were held to ZERO.
I love the debates but I wish we'd just move forward, I don't care if KC goes 1-15. it won't change the good job Herm did when he was here. I hate commenting on him now but I have tos top the nonsense from spreading. if herm goes for it on 4th and G from 3 like mangini did he'd get skewered but Mangini is getting credit for his idiotic decision. In 2001 in a game we WOn Herm was blasted for going for it on 4th and inches at the NO 40 which would have sealed the game but we were stopped. That was a better gamble than Sunday and we WON the game and he was still blasted but mangini makes an idiotic decision and we lose partly b/c of it he is applauded for it.
Yeah, there really isn't much to go on here. Usually I can count on some wild off the cuff editorializing from junc to fire things up but how many times can you reply to the PPG averages of teams 4 weeks into the season?
Hmmm. . . . 41-0. Something must be amiss. Sounds more like the pre-Herm Chiefs to me. And my point is that nothing, with the possible exception of Ty Law, has changed on that defense. And this notion of changing philosophy to keep the offense on the field with long, sustained drives is just plain kookoobananas. Kansas City had the number ONE offense last year, and was THIRD in time of possession. There's a logical disconnect here. You can score lots of points AND have a strong defense - except in Herm's world.
That was a bit fluky, they only had 300 yards total offense and they got 4 TOs. One of the scores was on STs, another was set up by a fumble recovery at the SF 25, another set up by an INT at the SF 34. It wasn't like it was an offensive explosion that got them 41. but yet w/ almost the same D they are now allowing just 11 PPG. is it magic? same players, same coordinator and now half the points allowed. Why doesn't he get any credit?
A fair question. I can't tell you why that is. What I CAN tell you is that it isn't because of Herm's stated philosophy of "the best defense is a bad offense." If it were, time of possession and rushing yards would be up, not down.
Yes, it's called the magic of a small sample size(with a blowout thrown in for good measure). The Bears also know this spell which is why their 26th ranked offense(16.25 PPG) is #3 this year with 29 PPG so far.
