Preseason Evaluation: Game 4 and The Right 53
#1
Posted 09 September 2010 - 12:13 AM

Senior Editor/Featured Writer for Home Of The Chiefs, unabashed Herb Taylor supporter, and moderate alcoholic.
#2
Posted 09 September 2010 - 06:43 AM

#3
Posted 09 September 2010 - 09:08 AM
Crennel is more conservative than Pendergast or Gunther were as DC's. He takes risks, but they're calculated and hard to predict.
Gunther and Pendergast were easy to predict. Was it 3rd and long? Here comes the 6-7 man blitz. Spotted blitzes are a QB's wet dream. Surprise blitzes are his worst nightmare.
#4
Posted 09 September 2010 - 10:13 AM
I know that really doesn't pertain to your article but wanted to say it anyway.

Sig made by BrooklynChiefsFan
ATTENTION: Will the Woman who left her 11 kids at the practice field please pick them up? They are beating the RAIDERS by two touchdowns!
From the movie-Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang-"Thanks for watching our movie and to all those people in the Midwest sorry we said F#C% so much!"
#5
Posted 09 September 2010 - 12:30 PM
GO CHIEFS!!

#6
Posted 09 September 2010 - 05:15 PM
Chi-town_Chief, on 09 September 2010 - 12:30 PM, said:
GO CHIEFS!!
I haven't been given very many good reasons to write positive articles, but at heart I'm really an optimistic person.

Senior Editor/Featured Writer for Home Of The Chiefs, unabashed Herb Taylor supporter, and moderate alcoholic.
#7
Posted 10 September 2010 - 10:11 AM
With the Marty Chiefs, as you say, it was Derek Thomas' presense that helped to establish the chiefs defensive identity.
With Crennel's defenses in New England, it was Lawyer Milloy, followed by Rodney Harrison, that allowed Crennel to establish that identity.
Those guys provided the play on the back end that allowed Crennel to be creative on the front end, and over the last two preseason games, we've seen Eric Berry really start to show what he brings to this defense, and Crennel is using Berry's presense to become more creative on the front end.
Berry is going to make his rookie mistakes, but his impact is going to be far greater than I expected it to be.
#8
Posted 10 September 2010 - 11:21 AM
nathanKent, on 09 September 2010 - 05:15 PM, said:
I always have been with the Chiefs. Pretty much my whole life up until Herm I felt the Chiefs would win every game they played. Unfortunately, that optimism has been soured, but I'm starting to get it back again. I see that you are as well. I just hope people aren't disappointed too much if this team only wins 6 or 7 games, because to me that is a nice step in the right direction. Who knows, maybe we get lucky and beat a couple teams that are better than us, whether it be due to injury to a key player, or a lucky fumble or call. I'll take em however they come, and I TRULY believe we can beat San Diego on Monday. Something I haven't felt in several years.
#9
Posted 10 September 2010 - 11:36 AM
Soda Popinski, on 10 September 2010 - 11:21 AM, said:
I really like the Berry pick in the first round this year, and I think that Dexter McCluster will be a big time playmaker for the short term.
Beyond that, I can't say that I like what Pioli has done since taking the helm, and don't really have the same optimism that many people are feeling now.
But then, I haven't much liked what the team has done overall since the early 70s.
I liked the Marv Levy hiring and feel like he got a raw deal after a strike shortened season.
But at the end of the day, I haven't felt like we've fielded a real contender at any time since about '72.
The 90s Chiefs, with Marty on the reins, were never more than a pretender, though Joe almost overcame Martyocrity.
And the Vermeil Chiefs were a joke.
Until Pioli addresses the O-Line, NT and ILB, not to mention QB, with real solutions rather than band-aids, we won't be headed in the right direction.
Even with Berry and legitimate coordinators , this team doesn't look like one that can win more than 5 games to me.
#10
Posted 10 September 2010 - 12:07 PM
milkman, on 10 September 2010 - 11:36 AM, said:
Beyond that, I can't say that I like what Pioli has done since taking the helm, and don't really have the same optimism that many people are feeling now.
But then, I haven't much liked what the team has done overall since the early 70s.
I liked the Marv Levy hiring and feel like he got a raw deal after a strike shortened season.
But at the end of the day, I haven't felt like we've fielded a real contender at any time since about '72.
The 90s Chiefs, with Marty on the reins, were never more than a pretender, though Joe almost overcame Martyocrity.
And the Vermeil Chiefs were a joke.
Until Pioli addresses the O-Line, NT and ILB, not to mention QB, with real solutions rather than band-aids, we won't be headed in the right direction.
Even with Berry and legitimate coordinators , this team doesn't look like one that can win more than 5 games to me.
Vermeil's Chiefs could have won the Super Bowl if they had anything besides a disaster for a defense. Even an average defense could have brought the trophy here. I don't see that team as a joke. Herm's Chiefs were a joke. I'll take 13-3 and 10-6 over anything we've had since.
#11
Posted 10 September 2010 - 12:20 PM
Soda Popinski, on 10 September 2010 - 12:07 PM, said:
The fact is, Dick's teams had no defense, and that is exactly what made them a joke.
You win in today's NFL with QB and defense.
#12
Posted 10 September 2010 - 01:45 PM
milkman, on 10 September 2010 - 12:20 PM, said:
You win in today's NFL with QB and defense.
I still believe we could have won in 2005 with that team, had we not had to face Peyton Manning. But yeah that defense was a travesty. Shame really.
#13
Posted 10 September 2010 - 04:05 PM
nathanKent, on 09 September 2010 - 05:15 PM, said:
Well, it helps when you've actually got anything to be excited about, and not just a 'hey, we didn't get destroyed by the Ravens in the opener' kind of thing.
Chiefs Kingdom is kind of running high right now. If they actually win this game, I expect to be relevant to the playoff picture. If not, and the team loses some of the fan support, this could be another tough one.

signature by bone
#14
Posted 10 September 2010 - 06:21 PM
milkman, on 10 September 2010 - 10:11 AM, said:
With the Marty Chiefs, as you say, it was Derek Thomas' presense that helped to establish the chiefs defensive identity.
With Crennel's defenses in New England, it was Lawyer Milloy, followed by Rodney Harrison, that allowed Crennel to establish that identity.
Those guys provided the play on the back end that allowed Crennel to be creative on the front end, and over the last two preseason games, we've seen Eric Berry really start to show what he brings to this defense, and Crennel is using Berry's presense to become more creative on the front end.
Berry is going to make his rookie mistakes, but his impact is going to be far greater than I expected it to be.
I won't argue with any of that.
Soda Popinski, on 10 September 2010 - 01:45 PM, said:
We could have won 2003 were it not for Kawika Mitchell.

Senior Editor/Featured Writer for Home Of The Chiefs, unabashed Herb Taylor supporter, and moderate alcoholic.
#15
Posted 10 September 2010 - 08:14 PM
Soda Popinski, on 10 September 2010 - 01:45 PM, said:
I think 2005 was a better team, and I think we could've done what the Steelers did that year... take the last seed and parlay it into a Super Bowl victory. But we lost the tiebreaker at 10-6.

Homer: [reading] "Project Arcturus couldn't have succeeded without you. This will get you a little closer to that dream of yours. It's not the Dallas Cowboys, but it's a start. Drop me a line if you're on the East Coast, Hank Scorpio." Aw, the Denver Broncos!
Marge: I think owning the Denver Broncos is pretty good.
Homer: Yeah, yeah.
Marge: Well, explain to me why it isn't.
Homer: [sighs] You just don't understand football, Marge.
Check out the voices of the Home of the Chiefs at http://www.homeofthechiefs.com! Updated daily!
#16
Posted 11 September 2010 - 07:25 AM
NOLA, on 10 September 2010 - 08:14 PM, said:
I think 2005 was a better team, and I think we could've done what the Steelers did that year... take the last seed and parlay it into a Super Bowl victory. But we lost the tiebreaker at 10-6.
All b/c Larry Johnson refused to block Scott Fujita.
sig by yours truly
#17
#18
Posted 11 September 2010 - 02:23 PM
The_Jonas, on 11 September 2010 - 09:58 AM, said:
That game was 100% determined by the officials and not the players. I hate when that happens.
Very true. The late hit call on Toomer the first time led to no one on the Chiefs tackling Barber in the second half. The BS flag on Parker didn't help much either. He went from like 7 yards in one half to over 200 by the end of the game. Those two NFC East games really killed us that year. The freakin blown game vs. the Eagles was also a debacle of epic proportions.
sig by yours truly
#19
Posted 11 September 2010 - 05:04 PM
BrooklynChiefsFan, on 11 September 2010 - 02:23 PM, said:

Homer: [reading] "Project Arcturus couldn't have succeeded without you. This will get you a little closer to that dream of yours. It's not the Dallas Cowboys, but it's a start. Drop me a line if you're on the East Coast, Hank Scorpio." Aw, the Denver Broncos!
Marge: I think owning the Denver Broncos is pretty good.
Homer: Yeah, yeah.
Marge: Well, explain to me why it isn't.
Homer: [sighs] You just don't understand football, Marge.
Check out the voices of the Home of the Chiefs at http://www.homeofthechiefs.com! Updated daily!
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users













