Chiefs/Pats

**Chiefs4life24** · 01-10-2016, 12:04 AM

Were underdogs and game time is Saturday, at 4:20 eastern

**matthewschiefs** · 01-14-2016, 01:09 AM

Originally Posted by Eydugstr

We're defending the Broncos with the laziness of their O-line ?? Granted, the first thought that ran through my mind after seeing this is "How lazy can the Donks O-line get..." looks like it's a broken play (reversed for a good reason by CJ Anderson) followed up by some really poor tackling by Indy (they keep hitting him high; It took how many players before the Indy light bulb kicked on and someone got him (barely) by his ankles. The only ones I see giving up are the two left side WR's who simply a) rarely block and b) Weren't expecting CJ to reverse his direction. The O-line is still moving to the right and the one that does stop is probably the only one that saw CJ change his direction.

I guess it's pretty much 2 guys on the line that I can say IMO gave up on the play #78 and I think it's 74 they both turn see the runner is in trouble and stand there. 78 does run a couple of steps like their WR thomas does but it's not much of an effort IMO.

That's at least what I see on the play. It is kind of strange that we are debating a donkey play from last postseason LOL

**Chiefs4life24** · 01-14-2016, 01:15 AM

I remember reading Manning had rib injuries after that game but it shouldn't have kept him out

**doobs_05** · 01-14-2016, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by brdempsey69

Yes, it is. First, you post that stupid pic in this thread about "conspiracy tin hat" & now you are going to turn around and suggest that the Donkeys conspired to quit and give up in a playoff game knowing what was at stake? Like it or not, that isn't plausible, at all & that tin hat is fitting only on your head and nobody else.

The Donkeys were simply outplayed & outcoached starting in the 2nd QTR of that game -- that's the reality, not a person's opinion. It wasn't a case of the Donkeys quitting. It's interesting that Donkeys fans always play some type of excuse card when the Donkeys get beaten (like the fake injury regarding Manning in their loss to the Chiefs in mid-November). They had no excuse for losing to Indy in that game. The Colts caught fire in the 2nd QTR of that game and the Donks simply couldn't put out that fire.

Demps, I have said Colts probably out played them through the 3rd quarter and then in the 4th Denver gave up. Giving up is not an excuses, it's looks really bad for Denver fans to say your team gave up. They were getting beat and gave up even with the game still winnable.

I'm not trying to defend Denver nor am I trying to make them out to be the worst thing in football. I have also said elite qbs that are big marketing for the nfl will get more calls, but I honestly don't feel the nfl will rig an entire playoffs to get their one goal.

**doobs_05** · 01-14-2016, 12:02 PM

We know the chiefs want to get pressure on Brady, the run game should not be a factor (unless the third string back is a stud), who do the chiefs put more focus on, gronk or Edelman?

**Frankenchief** · 01-14-2016, 01:37 PM

Edelman is a sharper knife against a D like our IMO.

**ctchiefsfan** · 01-14-2016, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by doobs_05

I have also said elite qbs that are big marketing for the nfl will get more calls, but I honestly don't feel the nfl will rig an entire playoffs to get their one goal.

On that I agree with you. I don't doubt that the NFL has certain "storylines" that they would like to see because they believe it would be "good for business". Manning winning another Super Bowl with a "miraculous injury comeback" in the playoffs would be one such example. Another would be the small town Chiefs winning the Super Bowl after recovering from 1-5 with one of their better players coming back from cancer. And it's not hard to see a few more scenarios that the NFL would consider "good for business".

And yes...I can easily see the NFL dropping a few hints to the zebras that there are certain results that they (the NFL) would prefer to see over certain other results. And that could easily lead to some "missed calls" and some questionable calls being made.

But I agree that the NFL is not going to go so far as to actually "fix" games. But yes, I DO believe that the NFL "gives a little helping hand" here and there to try to encourage the outcomes that they (the NFL) see as being "best for business".

**brdempsey69** · 01-14-2016, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by doobs_05

Demps, I have said Colts probably out played them through the 3rd quarter and then in the 4th Denver gave up. Giving up is not an excuses, it's looks really bad for Denver fans to say your team gave up. They were getting beat and gave up even with the game still winnable.

I'm not trying to defend Denver nor am I trying to make them out to be the worst thing in football. I have also said elite qbs that are big marketing for the nfl will get more calls, but I honestly don't feel the nfl will rig an entire playoffs to get their one goal.

What else would you call what happened in '97 and '98 other than "rigging"? If you read the articles that I provided a couple of pages back, one can easily see a league official named Henderson trying to say the Donks diverted funds from 1996-1998 because of needing 100 mill for the new stadium, but what Henderson doesn't tell you, is that is impossible by the true time-line showing the approval of funding a new stadium (Nov. 3 1998) and when its actual construction began (August 1999). What that means is that the Donkeys weren't on the hook for one single thin dime regarding stadium funding going into any of those seasons from 1996-1998

So, as the true facts show, the league knew about the Donks cheating the cap, and tried to cover it up.

Originally Posted by doobs_05

I'm not trying to defend Denver........

Many of your posts suggest otherwise.

**Minds of Reason** · 01-14-2016, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by doobs_05

We know the chiefs want to get pressure on Brady, the run game should not be a factor (unless the third string back is a stud), who do the chiefs put more focus on, gronk or Edelman?

That's the thing though... ugh, Danny Amendola and Julian Edelman are like prime Wes Welkers... BOTH actually, and more dangerous after the catch.. Danny has to be accounted for too... they know how to read defenses and find holes within a matter of seconds.. a hat needs to be on them each time and WRAP up because they will get their catches.. they are that crafty, quick and gifted of route runners with excellent hands... I'd say mix the coverage up and DON'T play vanilla vs those 3.. gronk, amendola and Edelman

**brdempsey69** · 01-14-2016, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by Minds of Reason

That's the thing though... ugh, Danny Amendola and Julian Edelman are like prime Wes Welkers... BOTH actually, and more dangerous after the catch.. Danny has to be accounted for too... they know how to read defenses and find holes within a matter of seconds.. a hat needs to be on them each time and WRAP up because they will get their catches.. they are that crafty, quick and gifted of route runners with excellent hands... I'd say mix the coverage up and DON'T play vanilla vs those 3.. gronk, amendola and Edelman

To me, the best Defense, is to a have a Chiefs Offense that continually moves the ball and scores points and keeps Brady and company on the sideline.

**Eydugstr** · 01-14-2016, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by brdempsey69

To me, the best Defense, is to a have a Chiefs Offense that continually moves the ball and scores points and keeps Brady and company on the sideline.

It's not been talked about a lot - but this is where our rushing game could really pay off. Especially when you consider the field conditions the weather forecasters have been talking about for Saturday (40 degrees and rain).