Chiefs v Bears this weekend.

[Chavez]

Whatever. Both have flawed offenses, but the Bears have more talent across the board, a way better defense, and Lovie is a better coach than the inexplicably overrated Edwards.

 

Bears in a dismantling.

[loaf]

That is very true. However, this year Archuleta was already starting at SS and Brown had been moved to FS. So while what you say is 100% accurate there is a new approach this year in the backfield. The results will be clear this game, for sure.

yer outta yer mind. Archuleta is lost back there as he has for the last 3 seasons.

[CD6405]

I'm starting KC's defense this weekend, Rex loves to throw INTs, and Benson looks timid. I start any defense playing the Bears.

[i_am_the_swammi]

I guess there aren't many gamblers here, but beware...Vegas is taking in hoards of Chicago money, and Vegas doesn't lose too often.

 

My take:

 

The Chiefs lost last week looking rather anemic on offense, and were vicitmized by a solid day from a Pro Bowl WR (Johnson), and a fairly nice debut from a former Pro Bowl RB in Ahman Green. It was no shock the Chiefs lost big in their opener on the road.

 

However, I think the Bears will continue to struggle mightily on offense. Benson is a complete and utter bust, and will continue to be so this week as the Chiefs will load the box and put the ball in Grossman's hands. And that's never a good thing.

 

And this is a quasi-letdown game for the Bears, after playing a marquee match-up last week. On the other side, Edwards knows he doesn't want to start the year 0-2, and will have his team well-prepared for this game.

 

I still like the Bears to win, but 16-7, 17-10, 13-6 looks about right.

 

Take the Chiefs and the 12 points.

[TheShiznit]

I guess there aren't many gamblers here, but beware...Vegas is taking in hoards of Chicago money, and Vegas doesn't lose too often.

 

My take:

 

The Chiefs lost last week looking rather anemic on offense, and were vicitmized by a solid day from a Pro Bowl WR (Johnson), and a fairly nice debut from a former Pro Bowl RB in Ahman Green. It was no shock the Chiefs lost big in their opener on the road.

 

However, I think the Bears will continue to struggle mightily on offense. Benson is a complete and utter bust, and will continue to be so this week as the Chiefs will load the box and put the ball in Grossman's hands. And that's never a good thing.

 

And this is a quasi-letdown game for the Bears, after playing a marquee match-up last week. On the other side, Edwards knows he doesn't want to start the year 0-2, and will have his team well-prepared for this game.

 

I still like the Bears to win, but 16-7, 17-10, 13-6 looks about right.

 

Take the Chiefs and the 12 points.

 

LOL...Bears 31 Chiefs 12. This is a good game to own the kicker for the KC Chiefs. The don't see the endzone and the second play from scrimmage, for the Bears, will be a 65 yard TD pass to Bernard Berrian.

Edited September 15, 2007 by TheShiznit

[Chavez]

I guess there aren't many gamblers here, but beware...Vegas is taking in hoards of Chicago money, and Vegas doesn't lose too often.

I don't think you know how the spread works.

[CowboysDiehard]

I don't think you know how the spread works.

 

You are correct, sir. The line will move accordingly and Vegas will collect their vig. I paid enough of it going 4-1 out there last week Screw you niners on monday...although you did pick up the fourth leg of my super teaser to make that game a wash....

 

 

Sigh...can't wait to go again next year...

[i_am_the_swammi]

I don't think you know how the spread works.

 

Uh, think again...

 

people are loading up on Chicago -12....but the line is staying put at -12...why is that?

 

go the other way....

[i_am_the_swammi]

The line will move accordingly and Vegas will collect their vig.

 

You think moving this line a point tomorrow or Sunday will move action back toward the Chiefs to even things out? You are insane.

 

It opened Monday at -12, and has stayed there all week while gobs of Chicago money has come in...why do you think that is?

[Scorcher]

KC will draw more people to HBO than they will to the stands. Chicago will beat them with their Defense, although this wiil probably be one of Chicago's "better" offensive games. Or maybe one of their offensive better games.

[CowboysDiehard]

So, I guess you're standing in Caesar's looking at the board? It's a LOT different there than it is in USA Today.

[CowboysDiehard]

Not only that, I will tell you the board isn't right either....I had TX at -5 over TCU at TI on the board. The ticket they gave me was -8.

[CowboysDiehard]

Anyway...g'nite

[Bananaman]

You must be kidding!!! The Bears have more motivation then anyone. They just played a horrible game in San Diego and are looking for revenge. Not to mention, this is the first game at home since a Super Bowl Season last year and the crowd is going to be nuts. KC is doomed and will get man handled all over the field. My predicition is that they gain less than 150 total yards as an offense.

[raoul duke]

The Bears' offense stinks: Grossman, Muhammad, and Benson? 12 points is enough to make me rethink any line.

[Jumbie]

Look, the Bears played the toughest game of their schedule, on the road, in week one. SD didn't blow them out. In fact, it took Maynard's punt hitting one of Fox's wires to change the momentum of the game. (Maynard's punt hit an overhead cable that Fox uses for its aerial cameras...the punt fell about 25 yards short, hit an up man in the shoulder...ball to SD with a short field...SD scores its first TD.)

 

Since then, Chico has called Rex a head case and some twit has called Benson soft.

 

Let's see...a pissed off Bears team at home against the Queefs? I'll take the Bears.

 

I also have a feeling that Sunday is going to be the Devin Hester show. Turner took major crap this week for not getting Hester involved in the SD game.

[Chief Dick]

OK, here's my diatribe about Herm Edwards:

 

Herm Edwards is just another in a line of "good", but not "great" head coaches. Just like his predecessors, he will have the team right around .500 on a consistent basis. One year maybe 8-8, maybe a 9-7 or 10-6 occassionally, and at no worst a 7-9 or 6-10. And in todays NFL, the line between 7-9 and 10-6 is pretty small: you need to remain healthy and have a few breaks bounce your way.

 

I think I can speak for most Chiefs fans when I say the crux of the Chief's problems lies with Carl Peterson. Carl is basically a moneymaker: this is mandated by the Hunt family to keep people in the seats and make money. And the way you keep people in the seats in today's NFL is to play it safe. You hire middle of the road Head Coaches, you sign older veteran quarterbacks, and you have a roster that will always be in the upper third in age.

 

In other words, YOU DON'T REBUILD. And you don't take chances. And this is where the Chiefs are today. Carl has done his job very well. He has made the Hunt's tons of money. But he is a below average general manager. A great CEO, just not a really good personnel man.

 

What happens from here? I have a bad feeling Clark Hunt is going to run this team like his dad did. I don't see him taking a lot of chances with this team. I think we will consistently be around the .500 makr as we have been for the last 20 years, and we may catch lightning in a bottle one of these times.

 

How do I feel about it? My perspective may be a little different. When I was growing up the Chiefs were awful. And I mean awful. So it's hard for me to be upset about a team that is pretty consistent, and does give you a chance to win every year. But I'm frustrated, as are most Chiefs fans. And in today's NFL, the rebuilding process is so quick, that you can take 2 years to rebuild and in year 3 be ready to make a push.

 

In reality, the Chiefs need to at least leave Carl as CEO and President and hire a GM to handle the football operations, but Carl is such a dick that I don't see this happening. They should let Carl resign gracefully and start over. We shall see.

Edited September 15, 2007 by Chief Dick

[LooGie]

Whatever. Both have flawed offenses, but the Bears have more talent across the board, a way better defense, and Lovie is a better coach than the inexplicably overrated Edwards.

 

Bears in a dismantling.

Easy tonto. The bears do not have more talent. LJ vs Benson? Fail. Grossman vs Any qb? Fail. Gonzalez vs Desmond (or any one of your TEs)? Fail. O-line? Fail.

 

Chi has a better DEF and a better WR core. Gonzo might not play as well as your TEs, but that is because he hasn't been used properly in 3 years. And your WRs may be better, but the best way to get them the ball would be to mail it to them, instead of have Grossman throw it.

 

Lovie is a much better coach imo (Herm is one of the worst, I think) and while CHI does not have more talent, they are used in a better way, with better coaching, and with that DEF, all the talent in the world, (especially mis-used talent) won't matter.

I like CHI big this week. Really big. But as far as talent, CHI dont cut it.

 

OK, here's my diatribe about Herm Edwards:

 

Herm Edwards is just another in a line of "good", but not "great" head coaches. Just like his predecessors, he will have the team right around .500 on a consistent basis. One year maybe 8-8, maybe a 9-7 or 10-6 occassionally, and at no worst a 7-9 or 6-10. And in todays NFL, the line between 7-9 and 10-6 is pretty small: you need to remain healthy and have a few breaks bounce your way.

<snip>

 

I just dont see how you can think he's "good, but not great". what has he done to warrant "good" status?

you said "And in todays NFL, the line between 7-9 and 10-6 is pretty small:" and that is exactly how i feel about it. And with Herm, i feel you will always lose those close ones, for no apparent reason. I'll be shocked if they go .500 this year. Utterly shocked, just like everyone would've been for NYJ before Mangini.

 

This is so intriguing to me. Every expert analyst on Sirius, ESPN, all of em, and all the huddlers, and football fans in general, never EVER question Herm. It's like he's invisible, and I'm the only one who sees it, and then I think "Loogie, you have to be wrong. These people know countless more than you, and they dont think Herm is all that bad". I even watched Hard Knocks, and I just couldn't do it. He's a terrible HC in my eyes, but nobody else thinks seems to think so. I do like KC, and hope they pwn that division every year, but, i just dont see it anymore.

[Ursa Majoris]

Easy tonto. The bears do not have more talent. LJ vs Benson? Fail. Grossman vs Any qb? Fail. Gonzalez vs Desmond (or any one of your TEs)? Fail. O-line? Fail.

 

Chi has a better DEF and a better WR core. Gonzo might not play as well as your TEs, but that is because he hasn't been used properly in 3 years. And your WRs may be better, but the best way to get them the ball would be to mail it to them, instead of have Grossman throw it.

Agree on LJ, disagree on Grossman - his problems are maddening inconsistency and fragile confidence. Gonzo might be more talented than Clark but a TE is usually only any use offensively when he's not blocking, which Gonzo will be all day. As for O-line, that's the knock on LJ this year and why so many shied away from drafting him. The Bears O-line might not have been great at SD but they do have the talent.

[Chavez]

Easy tonto. The bears do not have more talent. LJ vs Benson? Fail. Grossman vs Any qb? Fail. Gonzalez vs Desmond (or any one of your TEs)? Fail. O-line? Fail.

 

Chi has a better DEF and a better WR core. Gonzo might not play as well as your TEs, but that is because he hasn't been used properly in 3 years. And your WRs may be better, but the best way to get them the ball would be to mail it to them, instead of have Grossman throw it.

 

Lovie is a much better coach imo (Herm is one of the worst, I think) and while CHI does not have more talent, they are used in a better way, with better coaching, and with that DEF, all the talent in the world, (especially mis-used talent) won't matter.

I like CHI big this week. Really big. But as far as talent, CHI dont cut it.

 

I'd call OL a push. I'd call QB a push - as Ursa said, Grossman has ability, he is lacking a bit between the ears (as far as confidence and poise go).

 

And I will certainly agree that LJ and Gonzo are better than Benson and Clark. But it comes back to the bolded portion - Clark is used well. Gonzo will be blocking, thus making him a non-factor. LJ will once again be hammered into the line on a limited number of carries. Without any sort of threat of a passing game, Chi will stack the line and dare KC to throw; you can TRY that with Chi, but they showed last year that while their passing O may not be dominant game in and game out, it can certainly win games for them. I don't believe KC's offense can do the same.

 

 

And FYI, as far as "my" TEs and WRs, I'm rooting for a Chicago loss. I HOPE KC can win, but I hold as much faith in that as the hope someone is going to knock on my door and hand me a no-strings-attached check for $50,000.

[Chavez]

Every expert analyst on Sirius, ESPN, all of em, and all the huddlers, and football fans in general, never EVER question Herm. It's like he's invisible, and I'm the only one who sees it, and then I think "Loogie, you have to be wrong. These people know countless more than you, and they dont think Herm is all that bad". I even watched Hard Knocks, and I just couldn't do it. He's a terrible HC in my eyes, but nobody else thinks seems to think so.

You need to spend more time here.

 

I recall when KC was going to trade draft picks for Edwards, I was like So far as I was concerned, recently fired Packers HC Mike Sherman gave you the same value without having to surrender anything in trade.

 

I don't think Edwards is the "worst" coach, he just isn't anything special. As his career 50-53 record shows.

[cre8tiff]

I'd call OL a push. I'd call QB a push - as Ursa said, Grossman has ability, he is lacking a bit between the ears (as far as confidence and poise go).

 

And I will certainly agree that LJ and Gonzo are better than Benson and Clark. But it comes back to the bolded portion - Clark is used well. Gonzo will be blocking, thus making him a non-factor. LJ will once again be hammered into the line on a limited number of carries. Without any sort of threat of a passing game, Chi will stack the line and dare KC to throw; you can TRY that with Chi, but they showed last year that while their passing O may not be dominant game in and game out, it can certainly win games for them. I don't believe KC's offense can do the same.

And FYI, as far as "my" TEs and WRs, I'm rooting for a Chicago loss. I HOPE KC can win, but I hold as much faith in that as the hope someone is going to knock on my door and hand me a no-strings-attached check for $50,000.

 

 

I disagree.

 

LJ is a competent receiver out of the backfield. I bet you will see screens, slant and shovel passes all day. I doubt LJ will just be fed down the gut. If KC doesn't attack the outside, then Herm deserves the criticism he will undoubtably get.

[Dr. Love]

OK, here's my diatribe about Herm Edwards:

 

Herm Edwards is just another in a line of "good", but not "great" head coaches. Just like his predecessors, he will have the team right around .500 on a consistent basis. One year maybe 8-8, maybe a 9-7 or 10-6 occassionally, and at no worst a 7-9 or 6-10. And in todays NFL, the line between 7-9 and 10-6 is pretty small: you need to remain healthy and have a few breaks bounce your way.

 

I think I can speak for most Chiefs fans when I say the crux of the Chief's problems lies with Carl Peterson. Carl is basically a moneymaker: this is mandated by the Hunt family to keep people in the seats and make money. And the way you keep people in the seats in today's NFL is to play it safe. You hire middle of the road Head Coaches, you sign older veteran quarterbacks, and you have a roster that will always be in the upper third in age.

 

In other words, YOU DON'T REBUILD. And you don't take chances. And this is where the Chiefs are today. Carl has done his job very well. He has made the Hunt's tons of money. But he is a below average general manager. A great CEO, just not a really good personnel man.

 

What happens from here? I have a bad feeling Clark Hunt is going to run this team like his dad did. I don't see him taking a lot of chances with this team. I think we will consistently be around the .500 makr as we have been for the last 20 years, and we may catch lightning in a bottle one of these times.

 

How do I feel about it? My perspective may be a little different. When I was growing up the Chiefs were awful. And I mean awful. So it's hard for me to be upset about a team that is pretty consistent, and does give you a chance to win every year. But I'm frustrated, as are most Chiefs fans. And in today's NFL, the rebuilding process is so quick, that you can take 2 years to rebuild and in year 3 be ready to make a push.

 

In reality, the Chiefs need to at least leave Carl as CEO and President and hire a GM to handle the football operations, but Carl is such a dick that I don't see this happening. They should let Carl resign gracefully and start over. We shall see.

Be careful what you wish for. We Lions fans used to be sick of mediocrity, too. Now we salivate at the thought of it.

[Doc Holliday]

Be careful what you wish for. We Lions fans used to be sick of mediocrity, too. Now we salivate at the thought of it.

 

 

[Chavez]

LJ is a competent receiver out of the backfield. I bet you will see screens, slant and shovel passes all day. I doubt LJ will just be fed down the gut. If KC doesn't attack the outside, then Herm deserves the criticism he will undoubtably get.

LJ caught a whole 41 passes last year. That's just over 2.5 a game. You think that any coach with a lick of sense would attempt to stop running him into the ground and get him more balls in space - especially since his career 10 ypc avg means you are correct.

 

He had 7 catches last week, maybe that's the start of a trend. Ideally you'd like to see him up around 55-60 catches and down into the 350 carry range.

 

But I don't see that happening. Curtis Martin was also a decent receiver but had decreasing numbers of catches every year under Edwards, though his carries remained consistent.