PDA

View Full Version : NY vs KC game


Insideop
08-18-2006, 12:42 AM
I watched part of the 2nd half of the Giants/Chiefs game tonight just to see what both teams (NY because we play them later in the year and KC to see if they have improved since we beat them) looked like. I'm not sure how all this adds up, since it's early in preseason, but if I were a coach or fan in KC, I'd be concerned. Maybe Herm has a plan or something. If he does, I think he better hurry up and get it implemented because they looked terrible again!

The Giants on the other hand, well, dare I say it, they kinda looked like the Texans on offense with 154 yds rushing and over 300 yds total offense. Granted, Eli was better (11 of 14, 80 yds, 1td) than Carr or Sage, and that's to be expected since he has been coached/played in their system for about 2yrs now. The end result is both teams won pretty handily.

What does this all mean? Maybe nothing since it's only preseason. Or, maybe it means the Chiefs are really bad. I don't know. Or maybe, just maybe, the Texans are going to be as good as some on this MB think they are! 10 and 6, 11 and 5, maybe 12 and 4! Help me y'all! I'm trying to stay grounded!

Just some food for thought (or maybe wishful thinking) on my 100th post!

:gotexans1

GP
08-18-2006, 01:10 AM
I've been chatting with posters at chiefshuddle.com and there are about 2 or 3 posters who are seeing the light, and the rest are replying with the "It's just preseason" remark or the "Preseason games are meaningless" retort.

Looks a LOT like our message board looked this time last year WHEN YOURS TRULY stated, much to the ire of 95% of these posters, that we were going to be the laughing stock of the NFL.

Preseason games ARE important because it builds momentum toward the regular season. Herm is slowly killing the Chiefs, just as someone slips a little bit of arsenic in grandma's cereal every day...Herm just kills teams. It's what he does. he DOES have personality, though, and in the end...that's what got him the job. He'll be with Dom some day, coordinating someone else's defense.

Preseason games are not meaningless...it's the same with end-of-the-season games right before the playoffs. Look at the Colts...they stunk at the end of the season, and they continued their bad play in the playoffs. Saying preseason games are meaningless is like shooting up a dozen hits of morphine when the CAUSE of the pain needs to be addressed.

Hervoyel
08-18-2006, 01:31 AM
Sometimes it is "just preseason" so I'd be careful in drawing too many conclusions from anything you see during the preseason. Preseason games aren't meaningless but they mean different things to different teams and it's almost impossible to say what they mean as they're happening. After the team has hit the regular season and played a few games then you can sometimes draw conclusions from what you saw in the preseason but even then it's not a sure thing.

As for last years preseason giving you a Miss Cleo look into the Texans future I was one of those who thought the team was heading for it's first .500 or better season.

When it didn't happen I didn't look back at the preseason and say: "Doh! I should have looked at how they did in the preseason! What was I thinking?"

Instead I looked at the last 6-7 games of 2004 and said "Doh! I should have looked at how they played in the second half of last season! What was I thinking?"

Herm Edwards isn't one of my favorite coaches. I'm not convinced he can ever win it all or even get to the big show but saying that he's slowly killing the Chiefs after he's coached two preseason games is comical.

HJam72
08-18-2006, 01:41 AM
Preseason games are meaningless. :) :tease:

GP
08-18-2006, 01:42 AM
Sometimes it is "just preseason" so I'd be careful in drawing too many conclusions from anything you see during the preseason. Preseason games aren't meaningless but they mean different things to different teams and it's almost impossible to say what they mean as they're happening. After the team has hit the regular season and played a few games then you can sometimes draw conclusions from what you saw in the preseason but even then it's not a sure thing.

As for last years preseason giving you a Miss Cleo look into the Texans future I was one of those who thought the team was heading for it's first .500 or better season.

When it didn't happen I didn't look back at the preseason and say: "Doh! I should have looked at how they did in the preseason! What was I thinking?"

Instead I looked at the last 6-7 games of 2004 and said "Doh! I should have looked at how they played in the second half of last season! What was I thinking?"

Herm Edwards isn't one of my favorite coaches. I'm not convinced he can ever win it all or even get to the big show but saying that he's slowly killing the Chiefs after he's coached two preseason games is comical.

You seriously watched our preseason games last year and just wrote that off as meaningless? Wow. I want to play YOU in fantasy football. Sarcasm aside, I think people tend to WANT to believe that bad preseason performance is not an indicator of things to come. I am of the belief that you play how you practice, and Kubiak is the same way: There's no tolerance for a mindset that says "These games are acceptable to lose, and these are not." That's a poverty mindset, if you ask me...to say, "Oh well, better luck next time. Glad THAT one didn't count!"

I am less of a stats guy and more of a gut instinct guy. And what I see from the Chiefs is, dare I say, about the same as what I saw with the Texans this same time last year: Un-inspired play, anchored by a running game that was the team's saving grace because the passing game was awful. When people shut down LJ, they have in effect shut down the entire offense. When teams shut down DD, which an injury contributed toward, then they had in effect limited us to one dimension of attack. That Chiefs team is in bad shape.

True that preseason games are techincally "meaningless," but I see a coach in Herm Edwards who left the Jets as that team began imploding and now he's taking over a Chiefs team that was well-managed by Al Saunders.

cbnjwill
08-18-2006, 03:07 AM
its preseason but in two games the chiefs have looked terrible. just curious if the chiefs performance this week has any of u guys rethinking how well the texans played last week, because their offense has really been bad these two games

Hervoyel
08-18-2006, 06:49 AM
You seriously watched our preseason games last year and just wrote that off as meaningless? Wow. I want to play YOU in fantasy football.

Yeah, as a matter of fact I did. Maybe it was the collective talent level in the first few years of our existence but I'd grown accustomed to watching our first team units play a series or two and then ignoring our "far less talented than the other side" second and third units get their butts handed to them.

Let's face it, you may feel like preseason games mean something and you may even be right but Dom Capers never seemed to make any effort whatsoever to win one of them. He was evaluating talent and taking notes and if the score happened to end up a winner for us then great but otherwise he never really cared much and neither did his team.

In what way did the 2005 preseason differ from the three that preceeded it?

It didn't. It looked exactly like 2002, 2003, and 2004. We mostly sucked in every game we played.

Sarcasm aside, I think people tend to WANT to believe that bad preseason performance is not an indicator of things to come.

That's probably because so many times a good preseason performance is also not an indicator of things to come. Sometimes coaches use preseason to try and instill a winning attitude in young teams. Often veteran teams make little effort to win preseason games and seem unaffected once the regular season gets here.

I am of the belief that you play how you practice, and Kubiak is the same way: There's no tolerance for a mindset that says "These games are acceptable to lose, and these are not." That's a poverty mindset, if you ask me...to say, "Oh well, better luck next time. Glad THAT one didn't count!"

That's a fine line. Obviously the game last week was acceptable to lose if winning meant that we had to put our first string offense and defense back in during the 4th quarter. No way anyone would do that.

I am less of a stats guy and more of a gut instinct guy. And what I see from the Chiefs is, dare I say, about the same as what I saw with the Texans this same time last year: Un-inspired play, anchored by a running game that was the team's saving grace because the passing game was awful. When people shut down LJ, they have in effect shut down the entire offense. When teams shut down DD, which an injury contributed toward, then they had in effect limited us to one dimension of attack. That Chiefs team is in bad shape.

True that preseason games are techincally "meaningless," but I see a coach in Herm Edwards who left the Jets as that team began imploding and now he's taking over a Chiefs team that was well-managed by Al Saunders.

I kind of think the Chiefs are on the decline right now too but I don't think Herm Edwards has much to do with it. I think he just happens to be coming to town as things start to come apart. I don't think they're going to completely crash but I think that with Vermiel, Holmes, and Roaf retiring they're about to do a mini-rebuild and honestly they weren't that good to begin with. You're not a stats guy but they were only 10-6 last year. 7-9 the year before. If they hadn't had Larry Johnson to fall back on they'd have been a 4-12 to 6-10 team last season.

TexanFanInCC
08-18-2006, 08:40 AM
In what way did the 2005 preseason differ from the three that preceeded it?

It didn't. It looked exactly like 2002, 2003, and 2004. We mostly sucked in every game we played.

well similar because the preseason records were roughly the same each preseason. however, despite record similarities, i knew that last preseason was different from the others because i saw the same old faults in the offense for each of the remaining 3 games of last preseason. carr looked pathetic and all together, it looked like a high school team could have moved the ball better. in the other preseasons, i saw glimpes that things were improving. i saw the offense have a good game, but the defense struggle, or maybe i would see the offense struggle and the defense play well. last preseason, the defect was moving the football, and there were not any games that made me believe that this team was going to be good. the other preseasons had some positives, and inconsistency to go along.

TexanSam
08-18-2006, 11:34 PM
well similar because the preseason records were roughly the same each preseason. however, despite record similarities, i knew that last preseason was different from the others because i saw the same old faults in the offense for each of the remaining 3 games of last preseason. carr looked pathetic and all together, it looked like a high school team could have moved the ball better. in the other preseasons, i saw glimpes that things were improving. i saw the offense have a good game, but the defense struggle, or maybe i would see the offense struggle and the defense play well. last preseason, the defect was moving the football, and there were not any games that made me believe that this team was going to be good. the other preseasons had some positives, and inconsistency to go along.

I agree. Last preseason we could not do squat. When Capers said David would do a quick three step drop and then when he said we'll go back to what we had been doing and all the different things he tried to change last season...what a nightmare. I just had the feeling last year that we were going to be bad after the preseason. If we had gone 2-2 in the preseason and actually looked like an NFL team, I could honestly say I didn't see it coming. But we didn't.