Kansas City Chiefs - How far will they go?

[TroyF]

I probably should make this a poll, but I hate polls so you'll just have to discuss.

This team is fascinating to me. The only team I can compare them to would be the 1984 Denver Broncos. The returns, stunning comebacks, and sometimes just flat out luck is amazing.

They currently have the 28th ranked defense in the NFL when it comes to just yardage. I decided to go back over the past 13 NFL seasons and see how many teams made the big game with defenses that poor. Here are the results:

Only four teams made the Super Bowl with defenses that finished 20th or lower in the NFL sinse 1990. The 1991 and 1993 Bills, the 1996 Chargers and the 2001 Patriots. Only one of those teams won the Super Bowl.

I decided to check further. Going back to 1990, 14 teams have posted 10+ win seasons with a defense that finished 20th in the league or worse. Only four made their conference championship game. (all four won the Super Bowl) Of the other ten teams, 6 were "upset" in the first playoff game they played.

From what I can see here, the Chiefs had better find a way to control the yardage. They've played two quality offenses who could run and throw the ball and have been lit up for over 450 yards by each. I just don't think they can hold up winning games the way they are currently winning them. If they find a way to tighten up their defense just enough to hit mediocre, they are the Super Bowl favorites.

As of now I think Denver, Indy, Tennessee and Miami are all better football teams than the unbeaten Chiefs.

TroyF

[Franklinnoble]

Originally posted by TroyF


As of now I think Denver, Indy, Tennessee and Miami are all better football teams than the unbeaten Chiefs.



I assume you're only listing AFC teams? And I don't know if Denver or Miami are really better than KC.

In the NFC, I like the Vikings right now, and Tampa Bay is still a big threat, if they get healthy. Nobody else in the conference is really "elite."

[Butter]

Inside the mind of TroyF:
As of now I think Denver is the best team in the history of the world!!!!

[TroyF]

Originally posted by Franklinnoble
I assume you're only listing AFC teams? And I don't know if Denver or Miami are really better than KC.

In the NFC, I like the Vikings right now, and Tampa Bay is still a big threat, if they get healthy. Nobody else in the conference is really "elite."

Yep, only AFC teams.

I don't like Miami's offense right now, but their defense is better and given the choice I'll take a strong defense everytime.

This Bronco team has the best defense I've seen a Bronco team have in 20 years. These guys are superior to the Super Bowl defense we put out there. You really have to look for an area of weakness on this team. Here are their current ranks:

Offense: Overall #8, Rushing #3, Passing #21, Points Per Game: 5th.

Defense: Overall 2nd, Rushing 11th, Passing 5th, Points Per Game 3rd, Sacks 2nd.

Plummer could go into the tank and the defense could implode, but there aren't any signs either will happen at the moment. This team went into KC and outgained the Chiefs by almost 150 yards. I'm not going to take away the Chiefs victory in that game, but I'll take the team with the 150 yard advantage anyday of the week.

troyF

[TroyF]

DOLA,

No, Denver isn't the best team in the history of the world. They'll get beat this weekend in Minnesota by a better team.

I didn't figure them to be Super Bowl contenders when the year started. I think they are right up near the top of the list now.

TroyF

[Butter]

I was just kidding. But KC has always had a suspect defense. It's always been the factor holding them back. Well, that and lack of a running game the last few years which Priest Holmes has helped shore up. Even when they had Derrick Thomas and Neil Smith, they still could get lit up on a bad day.

So, to sum up:
Denver: Very good team, but beatable on any given Sunday.
KC: Explosive offense and special teams, not good D.
Indianapolis: Explosive offense that sometimes decides not to show up.
Miami: Jay Fiedler?!?!?
Tennessee: Seem to always have problems in "big" games.

Now, at this point, I'll take Tennessee and KC. But any of the 5 are legitimate AFC contenders.

[Cringer]

Originally posted by TroyF
DOLA,

No, Denver isn't the best team in the history of the world. They'll get beat this weekend in Minnesota by a better team.

I didn't figure them to be Super Bowl contenders when the year started. I think they are right up near the top of the list now.

TroyF

Please let Denver beat the Vikes.........i still want to have hope of the Packers winning the division for a little while longer.........

And at this point i think a Colt-Chiefs match-up is interesting, as they appear to be similar teams as far as top notch offenses and questionable defenses....to see that as an AFC championship game in the dome in Indy where no weather can mess with things, that would be fun.

[TroyF]

Originally posted by Cringer
Please let Denver beat the Vikes.........i still want to have hope of the Packers winning the division for a little while longer.........

And at this point i think a Colt-Chiefs match-up is interesting, as they appear to be similar teams as far as top notch offenses and questionable defenses....to see that as an AFC championship game in the dome in Indy where no weather can mess with things, that would be fun.

Even if Denver does beat the Vikes, the Packers will have to start playing better AND win in the dome to come out on top in the division.

I still think Minnesota wins the division. After a one week wavering, I still don't think the Packers will win 10 games.

TroyF

[sabotai]

I think KC will win their division over Denver, but probably only by a game or two. Both will end up with great records, so it'll be a great race to watch, but I think KC pulls it off. (That's what I think right now. In two weeks, KC could put up mediocre performances and Denver could dominate, switching my prediciton. Right now, though, it just seems liek luck is on their side, and sometimes that's all it takes) But, I don't think they make it to the Super Bowl. They're still behind Tennessee, Indy or Miami as my pick to make it to the big game.

Say what you will about Fiedler, he is what most Super Bowl QB's have been, decent passers who do not lose football games (with the help of a great RB).

[FishFan]

Some one from New Jersey giving Fiedler some props? Wow! I love the fact that people keep bashing this guy even though all he's done in the last three years is win football games. He has more heart than any other quarterback in the league.

As for the KC Chiefs, they'll lose in the first round of playoffs, at best.

[Darkiller]

I would guess that they will choke in the Playoffs...as they regularly do.
Although their offense can score anytime and is so close to the Rams' 99 one that one has to wonder if that won't be just enough to lead them all they way.

[TroyF]

Originally posted by Darkiller
I would guess that they will choke in the Playoffs...as they regularly do.
Although their offense can score anytime and is so close to the Rams' 99 one that one has to wonder if that won't be just enough to lead them all they way.

That's just it, this offense isn't even in the same league as the 1999 Rams.

The '99 Rams averaged over 414 yards a game. This years Chiefs are slightly above 350. Even if we go back to last year, they weren't the best offense in the league. The Rams averaged more per pass attempt, more per average run, completed a higher percentage of their passes.

Beyond that, the Rams offense in '99 was all set up by going down the field and then killing you with Faulk. The Chiefs offense is setup the other way around.

They are still a damned explosive offens and can put up a lot of points on anybody any given Sunday. They aren't the class of the league like the '99 Rams though. Cases could be made the Denver, Indy, Minnesota and Tennessee all have equally solid offenses. (if you take away defensive and special teams TD's, all of the above rank above KC in total points)

It's my personal opinion KC will lose early in the playoffs not because they will choke, but because they aren't as great as people think they are to begin with.

One thing is for sure, it's going to be a blast watching to see what happens. They will keep things interesting. I love my Direct TV Sunday Ticket. :)

TroyF

[Scarecrow]

Kansas City Schedule
Oct 20 @Oakland (2-4)
Oct 26 Buffalo (3-3)
Week 9 BYE
Nov 9 Cleveland (3-3)
Nov 16 @Cincinnati (1-4)
Nov 23 Oakland (2-4)
Nov 30 @San Diego (0-5)
Dec 7 @Denver (5-1)
Dec 14 Detroit (1-4)
Dec 20 @Minnesota (5-0)
Dec 28 Chicago (1-4)
Combined: 23-32 (.410)

Denver Schedule
Oct 19 @Minnesota (5-0)
Oct 26 @Baltimore (3-2)
Nov 3 New England (4-2)
Week 10 BYE
Nov 16 San Diego (0-5)
Nov 23 Chicago (1-4)
Nov 30 @Oakland (2-4)
Dec 7 Kansas City (6-0)
Dec 14 Cleveland (3-3)
Dec 21 @Indianapolis (5-1)
Dec 28 @Green Bay (3-3) - The Frozen Tundra!
Combined: 32-24 (.570)


Nice schedule for the Chiefs to start off 12-0 and finish with a 14-2 record. That means the road to the Super Bowl is going through Arrowhead.

[Cringer]

Originally posted by TroyF
Even if Denver does beat the Vikes, the Packers will have to start playing better AND win in the dome to come out on top in the division.

I still think Minnesota wins the division. After a one week wavering, I still don't think the Packers will win 10 games.

TroyF

:( i said "hope." can't you let me have atleast that? :p

And ya, i always mark the Metrodome game down as a loss at the seasons begining.....atleast Oakland looks easier then i thought they would be....but we still have to play AT Tampa, have Denver at home, play AT(i think its at) the Rams......so we got some tuff ones left....ones where history says we lose those ones....

[TroyF]

Originally posted by Scarecrow
Kansas City Schedule
Oct 20 @Oakland (2-4)
Oct 26 Buffalo (3-3)
Week 9 BYE
Nov 9 Cleveland (3-3)
Nov 16 @Cincinnati (1-4)
Nov 23 Oakland (2-4)
Nov 30 @San Diego (0-5)
Dec 7 @Denver (5-1)
Dec 14 Detroit (1-4)
Dec 20 @Minnesota (5-0)
Dec 28 Chicago (1-4)
Combined: 23-32 (.410)

Denver Schedule
Oct 19 @Minnesota (5-0)
Oct 26 @Baltimore (3-2)
Nov 3 New England (4-2)
Week 10 BYE
Nov 16 San Diego (0-5)
Nov 23 Chicago (1-4)
Nov 30 @Oakland (2-4)
Dec 7 Kansas City (6-0)
Dec 14 Cleveland (3-3)
Dec 21 @Indianapolis (5-1)
Dec 28 @Green Bay (3-3) - The Frozen Tundra!
Combined: 32-24 (.570)


Nice schedule for the Chiefs to start off 12-0 and finish with a 14-2 record. That means the road to the Super Bowl is going through Arrowhead.

They won't start off 12-0. They won't finish with a 14-2 record. Even if they somehow accomplish that feat, so what? Denver beat em in Arrowhead in 1997 on their way to the Super Bowl. Denver beat them last year at Arrowhead and Denver outplayed them last Sunday at Arrowhead.

That's the problem with having a defense as poor as the Chiefs. You can get beat by anyone at anytime. They'll likely go 12-4 and win the division because of the breaks they had with the start. They won't be a truly scary team until that defense gets clicking or fixed (depending on your perspective) They'll just be a good team. That's terrific and makes them contenders. It doesn't seperate them from any of the other good teams.

TroyF

[Scarecrow]

Here are some comparisons:

Pittsburgh
KC: 41-20
DEN: 17-10

San Diego
KC: 27-14
DEN: 37-13

Head To Head
KC 24 - DEN 23

So far the Chiefs have done what it takes to win the game they're playing. They beat Pittsburgh with a strong running game, Baltimore with a strong defensive game, Denver with a strong special teams game, and Green Bay with a strong passing game. Each game, so far, they have had one facet of the team do well, while another did 'not so well'. But the fact is, they've won all their games so far.

But you're right, Denver (as well as Indy, Miami, Tennessee, New England, Buffalo, and Cleveland) is a better team than the Chiefs. I guess I just wasn't watching all these games through orange colored glasses. ;)

[TroyF]

Originally posted by Scarecrow
Here are some comparisons:

Pittsburgh
KC: 41-20
DEN: 17-10

San Diego
KC: 27-14
DEN: 37-13

Head To Head
KC 24 - DEN 23

So far the Chiefs have done what it takes to win the game they're playing. They beat Pittsburgh with a strong running game, Baltimore with a strong defensive game, Denver with a strong special teams game, and Green Bay with a strong passing game. Each game, so far, they have had one facet of the team do well, while another did 'not so well'. But the fact is, they've won all their games so far.

But you're right, Denver (as well as Indy, Miami, Tennessee, New England, Buffalo, and Cleveland) is a better team than the Chiefs. I guess I just wasn't watching all these games through orange colored glasses. ;)

It's nice you pointed out in your head to head the Denver played a backup QB in the Pittsburgh game and held the Steelers to 215 total yards (compared to the 380 they got against the Chiefs)

I give them credit for their wins. I even said if they get the defense fixed, they'll be the Super Bowl favorites. Fact is, they don't have it fixed. This isn't a much different team than last year's group that finished 8-8. The long TD returns are the seperating factor in that.

Do you think the long returns happen all year? Do you think they happen in a big playoff game?

If you do, you have every right to think the Chiefs will win the Super Bowl. I have my doubts. I look at these guys like I looked at the Ohio State football team this year. They're living on a prayer. Finding ways to win and shutting the critics up while doing it. Yet they are also getting consistently outgained and are relying on rare plays a little too much. I think it'll bite em.

We'll see. :)

TroyF

[SFL Cat]

All, I know is that I keep picking against them at my office pool, and I keep regretting it on Monday.

[ice4277]

I think that, while not as talented offensively as Vermeil's last Super Bowl team, the Rams, they do have that explosive ability, as we saw in the final quarter against the Packers. I think on their day they can no doubt beat anybody in the league, but I also think there will be a couple times this season when they crash and burn pretty spectacularly. At this point I would say the Broncos are probably the team with the best shot to knock them off, be it playoffs or regular season. I also think Indy has a very good shot, but after that there is really very little to choose from in the conference in terms of top teams. Could the Chiefs go 14-2 the rest of the way, as Scarecrow believes? I wouldn't be too surprised if they did. But then I wouldn't be too surprised if they lost their first playoff game, either. And as Troy said, they live and die off of big plays, and that cannot carry you through a season. However, in the game against Green Bay, Hall was pretty quiet, so I guess this shows that they can win tough games on the road against quality opposition. We will know more about this team come the end of November.

[the_meanstrosity]

People talk about how poor the Chiefs' defense is, but they forget one of the most important factors...takeaways. KC is +9.

TroyF, having been a Denver fan even you must know former Broncos defensive coordinator Greg Robinson employs an aggressive scheme that relies on turnovers. As another poster stated, KC has never had a good defense, but they've had a knack for getting turnovers. That's what Robinson is shooting for. His unit will give up yardage and gamble for the big plays. Thus far, it's been successful.

Will Robinson's defense bite KC in the butt? Eventually, yes. You can't expect to get a big play when you need them as KC has done.

As for KC's offense, I agree they aren't as good as the Rams' offense in '99. Morton, Kennison, Hall, and Boerigter are solid receivers, but none of them are consistent threats like Bruce or Holt in St. Louis. Gonzalez is finally getting healthy and I think you'll see more of him as the year progresses. He was dinged up in the early weeks and finally made some strides last week against Green Bay.

I don't believe Denver is better. I think they are equal in terms of pro's and con's. Denver's defense is better, but KC's special teams are better. The offenses are close. The key to the Denver - KC matchup later in the year is health. Can Portis stay healthy? Plummer? Holmes? Gonzalez?

Just because one team is good now doesn't mean they will be good later in the year. Injuries are a huge factor in the NFL.

[daedalus]

Question . . . I haven't seen the Chiefs play but based on Holmes' numbers previously, I can only assume they do run a fair amount. Would it be possible that their running (thus, time of possession) could sort of carry or cover up for a suspect defense somehow?

[TroyF]

I know Greg Robinson well. :)

I also understand the turnover differential. There is no doubt that is important. It's a big reason KC is where they are right now. As you said above, however, the problem is relying on a big play all the time.

When you get to the playoffs, you will face better teams who won't be turning the ball over. Part of Denver's success when Robinson was the DC was keeping teams off the field. Davis and Elway simply held onto the ball for long stretches at a time. It allowed Denver to beat teams who did rely on the turnover. (they won at KC and at Pittsburgh in '97) I don't know that KC has that capability.

As for the special teams comment, I think it depends on what area of special teams you are talking about. Jason Elam probably hits that field goal in OT for example. I think he's clearly a better long range kicker than Morten. Elam is currently 13/14 on the year and I'd take him over Mort if I had a choice.

Return game? Not even a contest, the Chiefs blow Denver away there.

You are correct, injuries will play a huge part. Denver is far deeper on the defensive line and could afford an injury there. Denver probably could afford the loss of Portis more than KC could handle losing Holmes. No question KC is in better shape if their QB goes down than Denver. If Plummer were to be gone for the year tomorrow, the Denver offense slumps to the bottom of the league in a hurry. KC may get worse, but their reliance on Holmes and the TE make it easier on a reserve QB. I think KC is also better prepared to lose an offensive lineman. (especially at tackle, where Foster is not ready to play yet)

Another team that can be in trouble is the Panthers. Despite their strong D, they are also being outgained most every game. Most of the teams making the Super Bowl have yardage differentials of +750. The only Super Bowl winner to be outgained on the year was the Patriots of 2001.

Lets test the theory a little bit in mid-season. :) According to the yardage theory, these .500 or above teams have the most likely chance of fading:

1) Carolina
2) Kansas City
3) New England
4) Green Bay
5) Baltimore

These sub .500 teams have the biggest chance of moving moving upward:

1) Jacksonville
2) NY Giants
3) Pittsburgh
4) San Francisco
5) Cincy (who is actually giving up 7 yards per game more than they are getting, but should be closer to .500 than they are)

Lets look at it over the next four or five weeks and see what transpires. I hadn't looked over the numbers before this (outside of KC), but it strikes me that I had doubts about all 5 teams at the top of the list and outside of Jacksonville, really liked the odds of the other four teams on the bottom list to turn it around. I'm interested to see how this plays out.

TroyF

[TroyF]

Originally posted by daedalus
Question . . . I haven't seen the Chiefs play but based on Holmes' numbers previously, I can only assume they do run a fair amount. Would it be possible that their running (thus, time of possession) could sort of carry or cover up for a suspect defense somehow?

No doubt about it, but usually a team that runs well with a suspect defense actually helps that defenses numbers. Not only are points being scored making other teams one dimensional, the other team has less time with the ball, so the overall defensive numbers improve.

A great example of this is the Raiders defense last year. They were an average defense that was covered up by an offense that kept the ball for 35 minutes a game. They ended up finishing 11th in the NFL. For my money, 18th ranked Dallas had a better defense last year, but was left out to dry by their horrible offense.

TroyF

[haji1]

I think KC's defense although not great is pretty solid. Holliday and Simms can pressure the QB, and they create turnovers. Not only interceptions, but they have force six fumles so far. One thing about their D is that they are on the field an awful lot because of the big plays of the offense and Dante Hall.

Trent Green can get the job done if Holmes is contained. Johnnie Morton and Gonzalez are good targets for him and Kennison gives him a home run threat. The line protects well and it can run block. Their favorable schedule may help them be a little fresher come playoff time. I say may, who knows in the NFL. They have showed so fat they can win on the road and at home. Morten hasn't hit any beyond 50 but is 3/4 between 40-49 yards, pretty good.

I like the Chiefs to do well this season in the AFC. I take TB and Carolina right now over them in the NFL, but Denver, Tennessee, and Indianapolis are right there. It may all come down to health. Can James return to full speed? How is Plummer and Portis? How much will losing Ian Gold for the season hurt? Can McNair make it throught the season?

One last thought: Running backs with injuries scare me this early in the season because it is difficult to recover with the week to week punishment. George is not the player he was, Portis has been dinged, James can never seem to get healthy, this puts a lot of pressure on their QB's to get the job done.

[the_meanstrosity]

TroyF,

KC could handle it without Holmes. They wouldn't be as dangerous, but I'll tell you this. Tony Richardson is a better back than Mike Anderson. Remember, KC went without Holmes late last season and beat a good Charger's team. Denver fans should remember Tony Richardson from the 2000 season when he dropped 156 yards rushing on them, lol. Plus Blaylock and 1st Round Pick Larry Johnson are quality backs as well.


Elam would have had trouble with the kick against Green Bay. The wind was blowing against Anderson's kick and thus he had to kick lower than he normally would have liked. Remember, Elam missed a 50 yarder against KC the week before. But I'll take Dante Hall over Jason Elam. 7 points is better than 3. Plus Morten Anderson is usually money from within 40 yards. That fits perfectly with what KC needs.

Agree with the QB comparison. Green going down is not as dangerous as Plummer going down. Collins and Jonathan Quinn are both capable QB's who you can plug in.

KC cannot lose Tony Gonzalez or anyone on the defense. The defense is still wafer thin with regards to talent. There's more than there was last year, but a couple of injuries on the defense could be detrimental to that squad.

Your yardage theory can be thrown out the window, in my opinion. Especially with regards to teams who play on a short field. Let's remember the key to football is to shorten the field. KC can do that with Dante Hall. Carolina with Rod Smart and Steve Smith. New England has Bethel Johnson and Troy Brown. Those teams you named are all playing on a short field due to their special teams. So their yardage will be skewed some what.

Also, turnovers can affect yardage numbers as well. KC and New England are in the top 5 for turnover ratio.

You can look at numbers anyway you want and make them look how you'd like them to. But based on KC's favorable schedule, I don't think they'll have any problem making it into the playoffs.

[TroyF]

I don't doubt they'll make the playoffs now. I do doubt they'll go far once they get there.

I like Tony Richardson, the problem is he won't catch nearly as many balls as Priest. He caught 58 one year, but he simply doesn't scare you the way Holmes does. Anderson and the Denver backs don't have that worry. Portis is catching more balls this year, but it isn't a staple of the offense.

A short field isn't only created by special teams. It can be created by a solid defense as well. KC has started 43 drives inside their 30 yard line this year. Denver has started 40 drives inside their 30. The field isn't exactly long for either team.

As for turnovers and special teams, that's exactly why I think the theory will work for most of the teams on the list: turnovers and return TD's aren't consistent. KC finished +16 in turnover differential last year. Dante Hall finished 5th in the league in punt returns. KC finished 8-8. This year things are going their way for now. Maybe they'll continue to go their way. I have problems believing that will happen, especially considering the defense is likely to get worse, not better. (the odds are they'll have injuries to the defense eventually) I theorize that it's kind of like one run games in baseball. You can give all sorts of reasons as to why you are good in one run games despite having a high ERA or a low OBP, when all the evidence really points to it being nothing more than chance. (that stat is a great way to predict what teams will surprise or dissapoint in baseball)

Understand, I'm more than willing to concede some points right now:

1) the season is only about 1/3 of the way through. Maybe their defense DOES improve, which makes them the team to beat in all of football.

2) "Dream" seasons occur on occasion. Sometimes, everything you do on the year turns to gold, and you win. The '84 Denver Broncos had no business finishing 13-3. They paid the price when the playoffs rolled around. The 2001 Patriots proved everyone wrong. (though they did slide the following year with essentially the same cast of players)

3) The Chiefs offense may improve. Holmes isn't running the ball effectively yet. Green didn't look comfortable until this week. If the offense improves, they'll start outgaining opponents provided the D doesn't slip up.

4) I could be 150% DEAD WRONG about this team and how this theory will play out.

5) I think 4 of the 5 teams in each of the columns sees a drastic change in its winning% by the end of the year.

TroyF

[TroyF]

DOLA,

Great discussion BTW. It's been fun getting the other viewpoints. I expected some Chiefs fans to start crying about a lack of respect. It's good reading actual opinions as to what is going on than reading people throwing a fit that their team is getting picked on. :)

TroyF

[Samdari]

The Chiefs defense is not that bad though Troy. I have always hated looking only at yardage, and calling teams the X-ranked defense based only on that. Its all about points, and so far the Chiefs are middle of the pack in points allowed per game. No one is going to confuse them with Baltimore or Tampa, but they have been keeping enough people out of the end zone to win games.

By the way, if only yards mattered, the #1 defense in the league is Pittsburgh. Anyone ready to call them the league's best defense?

[TroyF]

Originally posted by Samdari
The Chiefs defense is not that bad though Troy. I have always hated looking only at yardage, and calling teams the X-ranked defense based only on that. Its all about points, and so far the Chiefs are middle of the pack in points allowed per game. No one is going to confuse them with Baltimore or Tampa, but they have been keeping enough people out of the end zone to win games.

By the way, if only yards mattered, the #1 defense in the league is Pittsburgh. Anyone ready to call them the league's best defense?

They do matter to a point Samdari. If it didn't, why has only one team in 13 years won the Super Bowl while being outgained? Why have only four made it to the big game finishing lower than 20th in the stat? Why did most of the fourteen 10 win+ teams with a below average defense get knocked out before they even got to a championship game?

Fact is, they are giving up yards and getting away with it because they are getting a ton of long returns for TD's.

As for Pittsburgh, I wouldn't say they are the best in the NFL. They are clearly better than their points against numbers indicate. The offense is simply killing them. 10 times this year teams have either scored TD's on returns or scored on drives starting inside the Steeler 25 yard line. They've only given up 7 TD's on 70 yard+ drives. (about one drive a game, a little above average for the NFL)

Also, if we just went by points, the Jets would have a better defense than the Chiefs. That's actually one team the Chiefs defense is clearly better than.

TroyF

[Samdari]

Well, the Jets area way ahead of the Chiefs in yards/game too. In fact, by almost every statistical measure, the Jets outperform the Chiefs.

I did not say that yards did not matter, only that points mattered more. Compute the same statistics based on points allowed, and you will find it more important than yards. A huge problem with comparing the two is that there is probably correlation between points allowed and yards allowed.

And come on, is 20th really a good threshhold to use? Only teams finishing in the top 2/3 of the league in a category win the Super Bowl? I should think that applies to almost any statistic. The fact that a team ranked 20th could win the SB indicates that its not that important.

EDIT: The first paragragh should not be misinterpreted as an endorsement of the Jets D (although it has not been nearly as wretched as the offense). I merely want to illustrate how any statistic can be misinterpreted.

[Samdari]

Finding some problems with your stats Troy. I show the 2001 Pats as finishing 24th in yards allowed. Where did you get your data?

[cthomer5000]

Originally posted by TroyF
They won't start off 12-0. They won't finish with a 14-2 record. Even if they somehow accomplish that feat, so what? Denver beat em in Arrowhead in 1997 on their way to the Super Bowl. Denver beat them last year at Arrowhead and Denver outplayed them last Sunday at Arrowhead.

That's the problem with having a defense as poor as the Chiefs. You can get beat by anyone at anytime. They'll likely go 12-4 and win the division because of the breaks they had with the start. They won't be a truly scary team until that defense gets clicking or fixed (depending on your perspective) They'll just be a good team. That's terrific and makes them contenders. It doesn't seperate them from any of the other good teams.

TroyF

That's the problem with having a quarterback as poor as Jake Plummer. You can get beat by anyone at anytime.

[TroyF]

Originally posted by Samdari
Well, the Jets area way ahead of the Chiefs in yards/game too. In fact, by almost every statistical measure, the Jets outperform the Chiefs.

I did not say that yards did not matter, only that points mattered more. Compute the same statistics based on points allowed, and you will find it more important than yards. A huge problem with comparing the two is that there is probably correlation between points allowed and yards allowed.

And come on, is 20th really a good threshhold to use? Only teams finishing in the top 2/3 of the league in a category win the Super Bowl? I should think that applies to almost any statistic. The fact that a team ranked 20th could win the SB indicates that its not that important.

EDIT: The first paragragh should not be misinterpreted as an endorsement of the Jets D (although it has not been nearly as wretched as the offense). I merely want to illustrate how any statistic can be misinterpreted.

The reason I went with 20th and below was to find out how many teams in the lower third make it there. I also wanted to see if a high percentage of teams who won 10+ games while finishing with a defense in the lower third were likely to be upset early in the playoffs. I need to flesh it out further (like determining the playoff records for all 10+ win teams and comparing that to the % of the poor defensive teams) I'd also like to do the same for offense to see how a lower third offense does and compare it to the poor defensive teams. It might also be good to go back to 1980 so there is more data.

Alas, I only have so much time. :) Besides, I have not said my theory is proven. I've only given the data I've come up with so far. I think it warrants more of my time. I also think the Chiefs will be an extremely interesting team to watch down the stretch and into the playoffs. If my criticism of the team is unwarranted, a lot of Chief fans will be laughing all the way to a Super Bowl win.

At least the Pack continues to struggle. I'd hate to have them win 10 games and force me to create the website where everyone gets to throw virtual tomatoes at me. I won't make the same promise to Chief fans. . . and that should tell you I'm not sold on my own theory quite yet. :)

TroyF

[TroyF]

Originally posted by cthomer5000
That's the problem with having a quarterback as poor as Jake Plummer. You can get beat by anyone at anytime.

I don't think I've ever said otherwise, though Jake is playing some pretty good football right now. He's thrown 8 TD's and 0 INT's in his last 4 starts. He's completing 60%+ of his passes. I'm still waiting for him to fold up like an acordian, but he's played very well so far.

TroyF

[Aylmar]

Originally posted by Scarecrow
They beat Pittsburgh with a strong running game

Hmm...I don't agree with this assessment. Here's how KC beat the Steelers, in my mind:

1) A 100 yard return for a TD

2) An interception return for a TD

3) The Hall return back to the Pit 7 yard line, leading to a TD

4) The critical interception of Maddox in the end zone when the score was 34 - 20. At this point, the Steelers have just ended their last two offensive possessions by giving up the ball (and have given the Chiefs an extra seven points in the process).

Priest Holmes contributed a lot to the game, don't get me wrong, but until his 31-yard TD run at the end of the game, the Steelers had done a pretty good job on him (25-91...with two short little TD dives of four yards or less). I didn't watch the game thinking "If they could only stop Holmes...". I watched it thinking "Is there any other way that the Steelers can manage to give away points?"

Originally posted by Samdari
By the way, if only yards mattered, the #1 defense in the league is Pittsburgh. Anyone ready to call them the league's best defense?

Against the run? Absolutely. (Of course, I'm heavily biased). :)

[Samdari]

I am looking at defensive statistics of Super Bowl champs for the past X years (have not decided how far to go yet) and there is one thing that is absolutely jumps off the page:

The Bengals are quite often at the bottom of the list, whether sorted by points or yards allowed.

[Samdari]

Aylmar - I agree with you to an extent. Pittsburgh has fairly good numbers against the run. Is this a result of them being good at stopping it, or O-coordinators salivating at the thought of passing against them. If I'm a QB, I audible to a pass. Every time.

[Aylmar]

Originally posted by Samdari
Aylmar - I agree with you to an extent. Pittsburgh has fairly good numbers against the run. Is this a result of them being good at stopping it, or O-coordinators salivating at the thought of passing against them. If I'm a QB, I audible to a pass. Every time.

Good point, and I think last season, you'd have been right on in that audible. This season, however, the Steelers defend the pass much better. They've started mixing some Tampa Two into their standard Cover 3 schemes (mostly when they're in the nickel, but sometimes out of the base Okie) and it's doing a much better job of helping to shut things down through the air. Other than the embarrassment on national TV (thanks, Cleveland), of course. :)

Of course, I still think a lot of their improvement against the pass is due to a healthy Kendrell Bell....but the scheme hasn't hurt anything.

If anything, this move to more Cover 2 coverages has hurt their run defense, but they are still very good at lining up and stopping it. Just ask Clinton Portis. ;)

[Samdari]

Well, given my lack of knowledge on how to post a table, I will summarize.

The past 13 champs have averaged finishing 3.61th in points allowed, and 6.23rd in yards allowed. The worst PA finishes were 7th and 8th, oddly both by the Broncos in 97 & 98. I propose some sort of Denver area conspiracy theory to explain why this is and why Troy favors the yards approach. The worst ypg would be 24th by the 2001 NE Patriots (again, sorry if this does not jive with your data, I am curious why) who finished 6th in points allowed.

Only 2 of the 13 champs finished with better ranking in yards than points, one being Denver in 97, and the other being the 92 Cowboys.

Wow are the 2003 Steelers going to blow the doors off the correlation numbers, though. They are #1 in overall defense, #1 in defense vs the pass, and 15th in points allowed. I think the yardage numbers have less to do with Pitt stopping people, and more to do with Tommy giving the ball to the opponents so close to the goal line. Charlie Batch anyone?

[Aylmar]

Originally posted by Samdari
Wow are the 2003 Steelers going to blow the doors off the correlation numbers, though. They are #1 in overall defense, #1 in defense vs the pass, and 15th in points allowed. I think the yardage numbers have less to do with Pitt stopping people, and more to do with Tommy giving the ball to the opponents so close to the goal line. Charlie Batch anyone?

Actually I think that the points numbers have less to do with Pitt stopping people than with Tommy and the special teams giving the opposition short fields. :)