Thank you Defense!

**kenny1937** · 11-12-2006, 04:56 PM

Yes we got beat 13-10, but if it hadn't been for the Defense, we would have been beaten 51 to 10, and if it hadn't been for the heads up play of defensive back Jerod Allen, the "offense?" wouldn't have scored 7, so giving credit where credit is due, Thanks defense for showing up, we would have won the game if the offense hadn't all stayed on the airplane sleeping, but please show up against the Faders, hopefully the real offense will also show up and we will :hammer: the Faders!

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-)

:pint:

**Chiefster** · 11-12-2006, 09:15 PM

kenny1937 wrote:
Yes we got beat 13-10, but if it hadn't been for the Defense, we would have been beaten 51 to 10, and if it hadn't been for the heads up play of defensive back Jerod Allen, the "offense?" wouldn't have scored 7, so giving credit where credit is due, Thanks defense for showing up, we would have won the game if the offense hadn't all stayed on the airplane sleeping, but please show up against the Faders, hopefully the real offense will also show up and we will :hammer: the Faders!

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-)

:pint:

Yep; the defense kept us in the game, which makes since now that our defense is strong - our offense stinks up the place. Tony G was about our only offensive threat.

**Guru** · 11-14-2006, 12:00 AM

Chiefster wrote:

kenny1937 wrote:
Yes we got beat 13-10, but if it hadn't been for the Defense, we would have been beaten 51 to 10, and if it hadn't been for the heads up play of defensive back Jerod Allen, the "offense?" wouldn't have scored 7, so giving credit where credit is due, Thanks defense for showing up, we would have won the game if the offense hadn't all stayed on the airplane sleeping, but please show up against the Faders, hopefully the real offense will also show up and we will :hammer: the Faders!

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-)

:pint:

Yep; the defense kept us in the game, which makes since now that our defense is strong - our offense stinks up the place. Tony G was about our only offensive threat.

Well, our NO-line had a lot to do with that too. Miami's D is good but there is no excuse for LJ not getting more yards. We have to fix this problem. A rookie lineman can't be much worse all things considered.

**Chiefster** · 11-14-2006, 01:48 AM

Guru wrote:

Well, our NO-line had a lot to do with that too. Miami's D is good but there is no excuse for LJ not getting more yards. We have to fix this problem. A rookie lineman can't be much worse all things considered.

Yep!

**chief31** · 11-15-2006, 02:56 PM

Well, in the first half, the defense was, nearly, as bad as the offense. They did manage to get it together though. And, kept us in the game. And, as has already been pointed out, Kyle Turley played sickeningly. Huard was under constant pressure from that side of the line. And, as a result, Huard was unable to get things done offensively. Albeit, the Dolphins' defense did play a terrific game, Sunday. However, I know that Huard would have moved the ball alot more, had Sampson been able to play the RT position.

In addition, the defense was unable to stop the Dolphins' offense at the end of the game, to give the offense one last chance.

**kenny1937** · 11-16-2006, 02:27 AM

Exactly chief31, success starts with the line play, I hope that Coach Edwards finds the solution befor putting Trent back in there under the gun.

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-)

:pint:

**Chiefster** · 11-16-2006, 08:31 PM

chief31 wrote:
Well, in the first half, the defense was, nearly, as bad as the offense. They did manage to get it together though. And, kept us in the game. And, as has already been pointed out, Kyle Turley played sickeningly. Huard was under constant pressure from that side of the line. And, as a result, Huard was unable to get things done offensively. Albeit, the Dolphins' defense did play a terrific game, Sunday. However, I know that Huard would have moved the ball alot more, had Sampson been able to play the RT position.

In addition, the defense was unable to stop the Dolphins' offense at the end of the game, to give the offense one last chance.

Well the offenses inability to convert even one first down for much of the first half had much to do with that. The defense was spent towards the end of the game.

**kenny1937** · 11-17-2006, 12:51 AM

Yes, sadly that is one of the realities of that game, all the three and outs wore down the defense, I am surprised that they still did as well as they did in the fourth quarter of that game. The bottom line is that the defense played their offense all through the game, while our offense rested on the bench, in fact they shouldn't have had to take a shower, they weren't on the field long enough to work up a sweat!

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-)

:pint:

**Chiefster** · 11-17-2006, 10:34 PM

kenny1937 wrote:
Yes, sadly that is one of the realities of that game, all the three and outs wore down the defense, I am surprised that they still did as well as they did in the fourth quarter of that game. The bottom line is that the defense played their offense all through the game, while our offense rested on the bench, in fact they shouldn't have had to take a shower, they weren't on the field long enough to work up a sweat!

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-)

:pint:

I'm not sure why they even bothered to make the trip up there.

**kenny1937** · 11-18-2006, 02:38 AM

Great point Chiefster, they spent more energy suiting up than they did on the field, with the exception of Tony G, who made great plays when they used him.

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-)

:pint: