Author Topic: CHIEFS  (Read 1599531 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline jtksu

  • definitely not a racist piece of shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3673
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #275 on: November 22, 2010, 09:46:40 AM »
While we're discussing people's LFBIQ:  Kitton Mittens, would you know please describe a prevent defense?

Offline kitten_mittons

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 4592
  • Clawing at your furnitures.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #276 on: November 24, 2010, 07:43:18 AM »
While we're discussing people's LFBIQ:  Kitton Mittens, would you know please describe a prevent defense?

To assist you with your LFBIQ problem you seem to be asking me to help you with, I will gladly explain it for you.

Prevent defense uses 7 or more defensive backs to prevent a "big play" when a "big play" is needed by the other team.  The Chiefs weren't getting back in the game no matter what, so Denver didn't play a prevent.  They played soft coverage and kept the receivers in front of them.  Denver played a 3-4 the majority of the game.  There you go, dumbass.

Offline jtksu

  • definitely not a racist piece of shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3673
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #277 on: November 24, 2010, 11:41:24 AM »
No, that is not correct.  As I assumed, you have no idea what a prevent defense is.  Better luck next time.

Offline kitten_mittons

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 4592
  • Clawing at your furnitures.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #278 on: November 24, 2010, 11:48:21 AM »
No, that is not correct.  As I assumed, you have no idea what a prevent defense is.  Better luck next time.

I know exactly what a prevent defense is, and since Denver didn't play the 2nd half with 7 DB's, then they weren't playing a prevent.  Maybe you should explain what a prevent is, so that way the NFL coaches will know how to run it, since apparently you know and they don't.

Online PandaXpanda

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226
  • "is it too soon after 9/11 to be wearing pleats?"
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #279 on: November 28, 2010, 04:19:53 PM »
special teams hasn't done us any favors today but overall we're lookin' pretty good. cassel's run.  :love:
aren't you glad it wasn't you? - g.h.

Offline AppleJack

  • AppleJack
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6337
  • How are you doing today?
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #280 on: November 28, 2010, 04:29:33 PM »
D-Bowe  :love:
When one person, for whatever reason, has a chance to lead an exceptional life, he has no right to keep it to himself.

Offline jtksu

  • definitely not a racist piece of shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3673
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #281 on: November 28, 2010, 04:34:37 PM »
KC is up 14.  The rest of these yds are meaningless as I know Seattle has thei back-ups in and are playing a very soft zone.  Not a prevent defense but a very soft zone.

Online PandaXpanda

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226
  • "is it too soon after 9/11 to be wearing pleats?"
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #282 on: November 28, 2010, 05:44:26 PM »
aren't you glad it wasn't you? - g.h.

Offline EllToPay

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5174
  • Typical EMAW
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #283 on: November 28, 2010, 06:13:49 PM »
Who are the idiot fucks that were bashing Cassel again?

Online PandaXpanda

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226
  • "is it too soon after 9/11 to be wearing pleats?"
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #284 on: November 28, 2010, 06:24:49 PM »
7-4 is feeling pretty good right now.  :gocho:
aren't you glad it wasn't you? - g.h.

Online PandaXpanda

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226
  • "is it too soon after 9/11 to be wearing pleats?"
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #285 on: November 28, 2010, 06:27:02 PM »
Who are the idiot fucks that were bashing Cassel again?

22-4  :love:
aren't you glad it wasn't you? - g.h.

Offline jtksu

  • definitely not a racist piece of shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3673
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #286 on: November 28, 2010, 06:56:53 PM »
TV dude said Cassel has the 2nd best passer rating since week six.  MEANINGLESS YARDS!!!!!

Offline WillieWatanabe

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 19321
  • We'll always have Salt Lake
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #287 on: November 28, 2010, 06:57:35 PM »
Cassel = POS
Sometimes I think of the Book of Job and how God likes to really eff with people.
- chunkles

Offline PowercatPat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4427
  • #BID
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #288 on: November 28, 2010, 07:30:48 PM »
McCluster is such a FP, TC, etc. He's been listed as a game time decision for like 4 weeks now. He practiced fully on Friday and I think he's fine. The dude needs to grow a pair.

Offline Double D

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #289 on: November 28, 2010, 07:40:44 PM »
McCluster is such a FP, TC, etc. He's been listed as a game time decision for like 4 weeks now. He practiced fully on Friday and I think he's fine. The dude needs to grow a pair.

Didn't need him. Rather have him 100% for the divisional games.
"KU slams dudes."

Online PandaXpanda

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226
  • "is it too soon after 9/11 to be wearing pleats?"
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #290 on: November 28, 2010, 07:48:06 PM »
McCluster is such a FP, TC, etc. He's been listed as a game time decision for like 4 weeks now. He practiced fully on Friday and I think he's fine. The dude needs to grow a pair.

Didn't need him. Rather have him 100% for the divisional games.

now this is coming from len, so it should be taken w/ a grain of salt, but he said that dex wanted to play last week and today but haley wouldn't let him.  :dunno:
aren't you glad it wasn't you? - g.h.

Offline Pendergast

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1494
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #291 on: November 28, 2010, 10:36:07 PM »
Who are the idiot fucks that were bashing Cassel again?

Idiot eff present.

Doesn't take a genius to notice that Cassel is playing well, nor does it take a genius to see he was playing like dog crap in the beginning of the season.

He's completely shut me up for now.

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2542
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #292 on: November 28, 2010, 10:53:57 PM »
7-4 is feeling pretty good right now.  :gocho:

I don't think 7-4 has ever felt any worse. The Chiefs could very well finish 10-6 (or even 11-5) and not make the playoffs. The Chargers play their next three games at home and will be favored in all five of their games coming in. Their opponents consist of Oakland, Kansas City, San Francisco, @ Cincy and @ Denver. It's not inconceivable that they run the table and finish 11-5.

If the Chargers beat the Chiefs in San Diego—they'll be favored by 7 points—then they'll be in the driver's seat to win the division. If both teams finish tied (at 10-6 or 11-5), the Chargers own the tiebreaker.

That leaves a potential Wild Card berth for the Chiefs. Assume the Chiefs finish 11-5. Well, the Jets or Patriots (both are 9-2) will occupy one Wild Card spot, and the other will go to either the Steelers (8-3), Ravens (8-3) or Chiefs.

It's very likely that both the Ravens and Steelers will finish 11-5 or better. Both own tiebreakers over the Chiefs (better conference record.)

It sucks, but the road game at San Diego is must win.



Online PandaXpanda

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226
  • "is it too soon after 9/11 to be wearing pleats?"
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #293 on: November 28, 2010, 11:25:59 PM »
7-4 is feeling pretty good right now.  :gocho:

I don't think 7-4 has ever felt any worse. The Chiefs could very well finish 10-6 (or even 11-5) and not make the playoffs. The Chargers play their next three games at home and will be favored in all five of their games coming in. Their opponents consist of Oakland, Kansas City, San Francisco, @ Cincy and @ Denver. It's not inconceivable that they run the table and finish 11-5.

If the Chargers beat the Chiefs in San Diego—they'll be favored by 7 points—then they'll be in the driver's seat to win the division. If both teams finish tied (at 10-6 or 11-5), the Chargers own the tiebreaker.

That leaves a potential Wild Card berth for the Chiefs. Assume the Chiefs finish 11-5. Well, the Jets or Patriots (both are 9-2) will occupy one Wild Card spot, and the other will go to either the Steelers (8-3), Ravens (8-3) or Chiefs.

It's very likely that both the Ravens and Steelers will finish 11-5 or better. Both own tiebreakers over the Chiefs (better conference record.)

It sucks, but the road game at San Diego is must win.




i pretty much agree w/ all of this, i was just  trying to enjoy the moment. the chiefs have created a tough road to travel but, outside of sd, all the remaining games are very winnable. it will be tough to win in sd, sd is a ridiculous 2nd half of the season team. we better get healthy quick or rivers is going to absolutely shred us.
i know seattle isn't great but they play well at home so it felt good to take care of business on the road, esp. w/ so many key players out. this gives me little more hope for the rest of the year.  
cassel has improved a ton from last season and fits really well w/ kc's system. the way he and dbowe are connecting right now adds a much needed element to the team.
w/ a win in sd we can lose 1 of the remaining games and still make it, imo. a loss to sd and we're probably mumped.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2010, 11:30:32 PM by PandaXpanda »
aren't you glad it wasn't you? - g.h.

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2542
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #294 on: November 29, 2010, 12:02:49 AM »
No, you're right, it was a nice win. And I should probably enjoy it. But watching San Diego destroy the Colts tonight, on the road no less, just sucked all the life out of me and ruined the good vibes I had all afternoon. The Chiefs have historically struggled in San Diego, and rarely beat them twice in the same season. And now, with the Chargers firing on all cylinders, it's going to be damn near impossible to beat them on the road.

I've been rooting against the Steelers, Ravens, Patriots and Jets for about a month now. Had the Jets dropped even ONE of the four games they were lucky as hell to win, the Chiefs would have a chance to catch them for a Wild Card berth. The Jets still have to play Pittsburgh and New England, and will also have their hands full with Miami and an improving Buffalo team. Six or seven losses would have been conceivable if the Jets were 7-4 instead of 9-2. But that's hopeless now.

The Chiefs can still catch Pittsburgh or Baltimore, but it will be difficult. The good news is that Pittsburgh plays Baltimore on Monday Night Football next week, so with four games remaining, the Chiefs will be tied with one of those two teams at 8-4 (assuming the Chiefs beat the Broncos at Arrowhead as seven point favorites.)

My hope is that Pittsburgh beats Baltimore.

At 8-4, the Ravens finish with the following: @ Texans, Saints, @ Cleveland, Cincinnati.

I could see the Ravens losing two of those first three and finishing at 10-6. Of course, Baltimore would own the tiebreaker over the Chiefs if both teams finished with identical 10-6 records. But at least the Chiefs, who would be 8-5 following a possible San Diego loss, would control their own destiny, needing to beat St. Louis on the road, and Tennessee and Oakland at home to secure the Wild Card.

Offline EllToPay

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5174
  • Typical EMAW
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #295 on: November 29, 2010, 10:46:42 AM »
He's thrown for 450 yds, 4 TD's, and has thrown 0 picks in 50 attempts.

What the eff do you want from your QB when your team is unable to stop anybody, thus resulting in a non-existent running game?

Dumbass.

Must not have watched the first half.

fumble. sack.  fumble.  sack. pass at bowe's knees.

Careful, logic agitates this one.

watched the first half and every pass Cassel completed resulted in a great catch by a Chiefs receiver because Cassel can't throw the ball more than 2 feet off the ground  :lol:

:users:

Offline Saulbadguy

  • Administrator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 9940
  • what
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #296 on: November 29, 2010, 01:55:45 PM »
Yep..Chiefs will likely miss the playoffs :(

Chiefs will also struggle next year, and will be an improved team, but will most likely have a worse record.

Year after that though...watch out! :cool:
Where did you get that overnight bag?

Offline Jeffy

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1590
  • Hello Wilbur.
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #297 on: November 29, 2010, 04:44:13 PM »
Beating the Seahawks was very bad in the long run.

Offline j rake

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2542
    • View Profile
    • @j_rake
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #298 on: November 29, 2010, 05:39:56 PM »
Beating the Seahawks was very bad in the long run.


Offline Pendergast

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1494
    • View Profile
Re: CHIEFS
« Reply #299 on: November 29, 2010, 09:48:43 PM »
7-4 is feeling pretty good right now.  :gocho:

If the Chargers beat the Chiefs in San Diego—they'll be favored by 7 points—then they'll be in the driver's seat to win the division.


If the Chargers are favored by 7 points, the Chiefs will have lost to denver by 21+.  That's not going to happen.  More like 3 points.