KCRag Forum

No team would need to face realignment, they are all in the West and they would all be staying west. St Louis moving further west just helps the NFC west even more.

brewcrew1000 wrote:No team would need to face realignment, they are all in the West and they would all be staying west. St Louis moving further west just helps the NFC west even more.

If you have two teams in the same stadium and the same division it would give them both an extra "Home Game". Some think the Chiefs and Broncos would be opposed to that.

shinatoo wrote:

brewcrew1000 wrote:No team would need to face realignment, they are all in the West and they would all be staying west. St Louis moving further west just helps the NFC west even more.

If you have two teams in the same stadium and the same division it would give them both an extra "Home Game". Some think the Chiefs and Broncos would be opposed to that.

Agreed. That point was made by many when the Chargers/Raiders deal was announced.

I think St Louis is already a done deal so it makes the point moot anyway. What about when the Clippers and Lakers play 4/5 times a year? Doesn't seem like that makes a difference.

Different sport. 41 home games a season. Smaller crowds. Just a few of the differences.

The Chiefs have now won a playoff game within a few months of the Royals winning the World Series. Apparently I have moved to bizarro-world.

We are living in a special time.

grovester wrote:We are living in a special time.

I am hoping the times get even more special - although knocking Houston out of the playoffs twice in the same year is pretty special.

The official "Kansas City sports curse," is offically over. Some people blamed the curse on the shuttle cocks at Nelson-Atkins because they were installed in 1994 and it all when down hill (at least for the Chiefs) after that.

Even more remarkable that the drought from both teams ended within 3 months of each other.

Uhhhh, Royals playoff drought ended 16 months ago.

I meant World Series championship drought. That ended a little more than 2 months ago.

AllThingsKC wrote:I meant World Series championship drought. That ended a little more than 2 months ago.

But then you'd have to also be talking about the Super Bowl drought for the Chiefs... which hasn't ended yet. Like for like.

Not necessarily.

im2kull wrote:

im2kull wrote:It's like Matt Cassel all over again! Deja-vu!

mean wrote:Matt Cassel's career: 82 TD to 57 INT for 13,495 yards and 80.4 QB rating.

Alex Smith's career: 81 TD to 63 INT for 14,280 yards and 79.1 QB rating.

As I've stated before, we appear to be getting almost exactly the same guy we just booed at the all-star game.

It's not like this whole "Alex Smith sucks" thing is rocket science. We saw it from a mile away. Ditch him already. 10 years in the league and he's never once had a truly impressive season, or come close. Enough is enough. Most guys are beyond lucky to get 3 seasons to show their stuff!

Quoted for posterity.

They could have won that game, but they definitely didn't deserve to. Smith was not good. The defense was not good. Andy Reid was not good. Not going to win many games when the only thing going moderately well is your return game.

I wasn't excited to get Smith, but I've come around to thinking he is an adequate if not impressive passer. His complete lack of urgency late and inability to get through the first drive without blowing a pair of timeouts, however, was just... ugh. Spring training can't come soon enough.

im2kull wrote:

im2kull wrote:

im2kull wrote:It's like Matt Cassel all over again! Deja-vu!

mean wrote:Matt Cassel's career: 82 TD to 57 INT for 13,495 yards and 80.4 QB rating.

Alex Smith's career: 81 TD to 63 INT for 14,280 yards and 79.1 QB rating.

As I've stated before, we appear to be getting almost exactly the same guy we just booed at the all-star game.

It's not like this whole "Alex Smith sucks" thing is rocket science. We saw it from a mile away. Ditch him already. 10 years in the league and he's never once had a truly impressive season, or come close. Enough is enough. Most guys are beyond lucky to get 3 seasons to show their stuff!

Quoted for posterity.

Forget his whole career. Just look at his stats for his time as a Chief. QB ratings of 2013 - 89.1, 2014 - 93.4, 2015 - 95.4. TD's to INT 23 - 7, 18 - 6, 20 - 7.

Is he a great QB destined for the HOF? No, and never will be. But his QB rating was in the top 10 for the league in 2015.

So, a question to you is What "available" QB should the Chiefs sign as a free agent or pursue in a trade?

The first drive and the last drive were the killers.

Using 2 timeouts on the first drive is why they had to settle for an FG at the end of the half. Had to spike the ball to stop the clock.

Then there was no sense of urgency on the final drive.

Absolutely inexcusable clock management.

the better team certainly won the game; they were better coached with a better qb. that said, alex smith wasn't the reason we lost. aknowledgeableperson's stat about his qb rating being in the top 10 in the league this year points to the problem. what's the difference between this year and previous? he actually has a competent wide receiver to target. some great qb's can overcome not having legitimate weapons in the receiving game, but smith isn't great... he's merely good. the injury to maclin crippled our passing game, but reid apparently thought we should keep throwing over and over again. the offensive gameplan was one major reason we lost. knile davis with another fumble at an inopportune time didn't help either. no wonder he's been sitting on the bench all season.
the defensive gameplan was just as bad... probably worse. brady beat us in the exact same way that manning used to. he got rid of the ball after an average of like 2.2 seconds, yet time after time, our cornerbacks were giving their receivers 5-10 yards of cushion at the line of scrimmage. it also didn't help that we weren't able to get the interception that has fueled our defense in the second half of the season. we probably could've had two, and should've had at least one, but they didn't make the plays on the day.
and then there's the clock management. that was just embarrassing.

Alex Smith definitely wasn't the reason the Chiefs lost. He would have to have had a Brian Hoyer-circa-last-week type game to fairly say that. But he didn't play particularly well either, and neither did almost anybody else. It's like everyone picked the worst possible time to have a bad day, but that may simply be what happens when the other team is just better.

Kniles Davis fumble and couple missed interception opportunities were the difference. I thought we were equally matched to the Pats.