Originally Posted by Lzen:
By that same standard, playing the first 6 games against contenders (and several future HOF QBs) made them look worse than they truly are.
If we're discussing how the defense has looked against the Broncos and Browns and Cardinals, sure. They have looked OK at times.
If we're discussing how they've looked against the types of teams they'd need to beat in the playoffs, they've looked awful.
It's nice that we're about to fatten up our regular season record against the bottom of the league, but being able to beat up on the Cardinals doesn't mean much in the end. If it doesn't translate to postseason wins I don't care. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Eleazar:
If we're discussing how the defense has looked against the Broncos and Browns and Cardinals, sure. They have looked OK at times.
If we're discussing how they've looked against the types of teams they'd need to beat in the playoffs, they've looked awful.
It's nice that we're about to fatten up our regular season record against the bottom of the league, but being able to beat up on the Cardinals doesn't mean much in the end. If it doesn't translate to postseason wins I don't care.
Why can't you just acknowledge that it's averaging out. We faced the best offenses in the NFL and looked worse than we actually are. Then we faced some of the worst offenses in the NFL and looked better than we actually are. What the Chiefs defense is, is somewhere in the middle. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Eleazar:
If we're discussing how the defense has looked against the Broncos and Browns and Cardinals, sure. They have looked OK at times.
If we're discussing how they've looked against the types of teams they'd need to beat in the playoffs, they've looked awful.
It's nice that we're about to fatten up our regular season record against the bottom of the league, but being able to beat up on the Cardinals doesn't mean much in the end. If it doesn't translate to postseason wins I don't care.
How did Pitt, NE, and LAC do against KC's offense?
LAC have the best points per game defense of those 3 teams, they have played the Raiders twice already and gave up 6 and 10 points against them. They are 3.2pts per game on average better than KC on defense as of now.
Pitt and NE are .5pts per game on average better than KC. Look at who they have played.
The reality is there is no gap in defense between KC and the other contenders in the AFC.
Of course that also means all the contending teams need to play great on offense or they could get bounced. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Eleazar:
If we're discussing how the defense has looked against the Broncos and Browns and Cardinals, sure. They have looked OK at times.
If we're discussing how they've looked against the types of teams they'd need to beat in the playoffs, they've looked awful.
It's nice that we're about to fatten up our regular season record against the bottom of the league, but being able to beat up on the Cardinals doesn't mean much in the end. If it doesn't translate to postseason wins I don't care.
Ok, that's a fair point. By the same token, those teams' defenses haven't looked good against our offense. And I think it is imperative that we get HFA if we want to go on a run in the playoffs. This isn't the same old Alex Smith Chiefs. This team actually has a great shot to go far with Mahomes as long as the defense is middle of the pack. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
How did Pitt, NE, and LAC do against KC's offense?
LAC have the best points per game defense of those 3 teams, they have played the Raiders twice already and gave up 6 and 10 points against them. They are 3.2pts per game on average better than KC on defense as of now.
Pitt and NE are .5pts per game on average better than KC. Look at who they have played.
The reality is there is no gap in defense between KC and the other contenders in the AFC.
Of course that also means all the contending teams need to play great on offense or they could get bounced.
The thing I will give the Chiefs D as well as the Steeler d is that they can rush the passer. Give me a great offense and a defense that can rush the passer and I'll figure the rest out. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
The thing I will give the Chiefs D as well as the Steeler d is that they can rush the passer. Give me a great offense and a defense that can rush the passer and I'll figure the rest out.
A good officiating crew goes a long way too. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
The thing I will give the Chiefs D as well as the Steeler d is that they can rush the passer. Give me a great offense and a defense that can rush the passer and I'll figure the rest out.
It's cool that our defense managed to be good enough to beat the Steelers and all (if you can call giving up almost 500 yards 'good'), but Mahomes threw 6 TD passes in that game and we still won by less than a TD. Yeah, he could play another perfect game where he completes 85% of his passes and scores 40 points by himself, but you can't really bet on a performance like that happening again. Let alone every week for several weeks in the postseason. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Eleazar:
It's cool that our defense managed to be good enough to beat the Steelers and all (if you can call giving up almost 500 yards 'good'), but Mahomes threw 6 TD passes in that game and we still won by less than a TD. Yeah, he could play another perfect game where he completes 85% of his passes and scores 40 points by himself, but you can't really bet on a performance like that happening again. Let alone every week for several weeks in the postseason.
