PDA

View Full Version : Houston - KC game in retrospect


Malloy
08-18-2006, 04:29 AM
Checking out the game stats from the KC - NYG game is real scary. Until today I thought that our team were much better than last year and that we held KC to very few yards because of this. Ok, we ARE better, no doubt about that, but when watching the game stats from last nights KC-NYG game, I wonder whether we're "very good", or that KC is just "very bad"

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20060817_KC@NYG

KC had a total of 90 passing yards and ... 42 rushing yards. It almost looks like Houstons production last eyar ;)

Hervoyel
08-18-2006, 05:39 AM
I see what you're saying and I think it would be foolish to assume that the reason we beat KC like we did was that the Texans were just "that good" when you have evidence like this staring you in the face. One thing to think about though is that the Giants beat this team (good or bad, whatever the Chiefs are) 17-0.

If Anderson's touchdown last week isn't called back because of Lewis holding and if he doesn't fumble that punt and if Kris Brown makes that FG we're probably looking at (in my estimation) a 31-7 Texans win last week. The final score of 24-14 doesn't really show how much the Texans controlled that game.

One thing good teams do to bad teams is they beat them. If the Chiefs are just a bad team then the Texans took care of business like they should have. I don't honestly know if the Texans are a good team but I know that they were a bad team and that the Dom Capers version of the Texans didn't play like the guys I saw last week against KC.

Also keep in mind that their left tackle has retired, they have injury problems in several areas, and they had Printers playing all but the first series or so (I honestly don't remember) for them. He won't be on the final roster. The only other QB they had was Smoker who was just insurance. This week against the Giants Smoker actually played. That is not necessarily a good thing.

So if the Chiefs are still a good team then we beat them which is a good thing and if the Chiefs are a bad team, well we beat them like we are supposed to. I see this as a win/win for the Texans.

Malloy
08-18-2006, 05:53 AM
So if the Chiefs are still a good team then we beat them which is a good thing and if the Chiefs are a bad team, well we beat them like we are supposed to. I see this as a win/win for the Texans.

You have a point and I agree with you :)

wicked_wayz
08-18-2006, 06:43 AM
i don't nessarily think chiefs as being a bad team....remember its just preseason.....we don't know how good or bad the chiefs are until the actual season starts, where winning really counts....cause if i remember correctly the colts last season lost all their preseason games...and finish the regular season on top of the table

aj.
08-18-2006, 07:11 AM
But the Colts maintained the continuity of their star players, their coaching staff and their system from '04 to '05. They knew exactly what they had.

The Chiefs have a new coaching staff, an entirely new offensive philosophy, and they lost a couple guys who meant a lot to their offense. They kinda know what they should have but they have yet to prove it.

Apples and oranges comparison.

houstonhurricane
08-18-2006, 09:04 AM
But the Colts maintained the continuity of their star players, their coaching staff and their system from '04 to '05. They knew exactly what they had.

The Chiefs have a new coaching staff, an entirely new offensive philosophy, and they lost a couple guys who meant a lot to their offense. They kinda know what they should have but they have yet to prove it.

Apples and oranges comparison.

It is not apples and oranges...the Chiefs have played their starters for a few series - max. How the second, third and fourth stringers perform in a game has no bearing on how well a team will perform in the regular season. Thus, outside of first quarter statistics of late, the scores and stats are meaningless...

chuckm
08-18-2006, 09:06 AM
Michael Strahan had 1 tackle and no sacks ..... Does this mean he's a bust?

Demon
08-18-2006, 09:11 AM
... and it is this pre-season thing. Teams go 4-0 in pre-season and can begin the regular season 1-5. I don't think that will be the case as I definitely believe Kubiak is da man.

the wonger need food
08-18-2006, 09:16 AM
Michael Strahan had 1 tackle and no sacks ..... Does this mean he's a bust?

But unlike Mario, he was blowing up Kyle Turley.

I got the same feeling as Malloy after watching the 1st half, but there are just too many factors that weigh into these games to draw any conclusions. Football is like every other sport in the sense that it's all about matchups.

I do think that KC is trouble this year.

Runner
08-18-2006, 09:16 AM
Michael Strahan had 1 tackle and no sacks ..... Does this mean he's a bust?

No, that only applies to the home team. If he came here he'd be the greatest thing since sliced bread. Then, immediately after his first below average game he would be a career bust. Haven't you been paying attention? :rolleyes:

TexanFanInCC
08-18-2006, 09:22 AM
well i still think KC will be fine this year (unless herman edwards totally screws up the style of offense that made this team a powerhouse offense under vermil.) i dont think KC is very deep at all for an established franchise, hence the reason why our 2nd and 3rd string simply outplayed them. even if KC is a bad team this year, i still have optimism knowing that 1) we may have a team worse than us this yr, and 2) last yr we werent beating anybody, good or bad. its definitely a good thing to see us beat the teams were supposed to beat. i still think KC will be fine, but man are they going to miss vermil and roaf.

Bullpen Drew
08-18-2006, 09:23 AM
KC looked horrible last night...

LBC_Justin
08-18-2006, 10:51 AM
It is Preseason.

No one should get too high or too low about anything that happens in preseason. History repeatedly tells us one thing.....and that is preseason isn't the best time to evaluate how good(or bad) a team is. It is to evaluate the individual performances of the bottom 1/2 of the roster, a time to experiment. Many of the players who are certain to make the team don't even try. Most of the starters have one goal and it isn't winning, it is to not get hurt.

I wouldn't over analyze any thing that happens in preseason.

TransplantTexan1
08-18-2006, 10:55 AM
It is Preseason.

No one should get too high or too low about anything that happens in preseason. History repeatedly tells us one thing.....and that is preseason isn't the best time to evaluate how good(or bad) a team is. It is to evaluate the individual performances of the bottom 1/2 of the roster, a time to experiment. Many of the players who are certain to make the team don't even try. Most of the starters have one goal and it isn't winning, it is to not get hurt.

I wouldn't over analyze any thing that happens in preseason.

Very true. Well said.

Trapped
08-18-2006, 11:14 AM
KC have no depth at all. There Defense is suspect. THere first team got scored on first two posessions. and got scored on us 1/2 possessions.

They can move upfield on offense wit there starters. But not as good as last year.

But then again, this is preseason. I think Eli Manning will have some MVP votes this year.

Hookem Horns
08-18-2006, 11:19 AM
While KC didn't look great, the Giants are that good.

edo783
08-18-2006, 11:32 AM
Trapped hit the nail on the head IMO. KC has what looks to be very suspect depth and as we can attest to, that tends to come back to haunt you during the regular season. The other thing is that Herm doesn't seem to have much of a game plan and is just looking at folks. (sounds a bit familiar) One of the KC players remarked that "If we have a game plan or scheme, we better start implementing it, because we sure have not been using it". Can't remember were I saw that, but I think it was on Yahoo sports.

jdog
08-18-2006, 12:00 PM
Checking out the game stats from the KC - NYG game is real scary. Until today I thought that our team were much better than last year and that we held KC to very few yards because of this. Ok, we ARE better, no doubt about that, but when watching the game stats from last nights KC-NYG game, I wonder whether we're "very good", or that KC is just "very bad"

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20060817_KC@NYG

KC had a total of 90 passing yards and ... 42 rushing yards. It almost looks like Houstons production last eyar ;)

Well, everybody is expecting the Giants to be good this year.

jdog
08-18-2006, 12:03 PM
But unlike Mario, he was blowing up Kyle Turley.

I got the same feeling as Malloy after watching the 1st half, but there are just too many factors that weigh into these games to draw any conclusions. Football is like every other sport in the sense that it's all about matchups.

I do think that KC is trouble this year.

I don't know if you were saying this, but I think it's unfair to compare a rookie in his first game to Michael Strahan.

infantrycak
08-18-2006, 12:52 PM
Strahan had 1 tackle, no assists and no sacks. Somebody needs to tell the tired has been to hang up his cleats.

aj.
08-18-2006, 01:01 PM
well i still think KC will be fine this year (unless herman edwards totally screws up the style of offense that made this team a powerhouse offense under vermil.) .


That's my point. Herm has totally changed the offense. There is a transition issue with the Chiefs returning players and coaches that makes the Colts 0-4 preseason comparison apples and oranges. Believe it or not, there are things you can see in preseason that transcend to the regular season.

From media reports, Herm and Solari have had problems seeing eye to eye on philosophy. It may take them a while to ramp up and starting the regular season at home against Cincinnati and at Denver isn't easy.

Troy Aikman or Joe Buck said it last night -- something to the effect of "I know it's preseason, but the Chiefs need to start showing something (i.e., competency) on offense pretty soon."

William.carter
08-18-2006, 02:27 PM
Not sure if anyone has noticed this or not, but last night KC managed to rack up 3 sacks against the Giants and logged none against our o-line. That has to be considered a positive and a sign of progress. right??

The Pencil Neck
08-18-2006, 09:34 PM
Not sure if anyone has noticed this or not, but last night KC managed to rack up 3 sacks against the Giants and logged none against our o-line. That has to be considered a positive and a sign of progress. right??

It made me happy.

The Pencil Neck
08-18-2006, 09:37 PM
But unlike Mario, he was blowing up Kyle Turley.

<snip>

I do think that KC is trouble this year.

With Strahan vs. Turley, you've got a great vet against a vet trying to get back into some sort of semblance of shape and Turley was just overmatched. With Mario vs. Turley, you've got a rookie getting played by a vet who knows all the tricks and is able to take advantage of the inexperience. Mario will learn.

And, yeah, I think KC is in trouble this year, too. The loss of Saunders is going to kill them.