T1B

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 6:51 pm**

RevLimiter wrote:You can call me ALL the names you want to Goobs

FAT FUCKING RETARD generally works for me.

You only get two NFC teams a year at Arrowhead, and if you look at the past 10 years it hasn’t exactly been the cream of the crop. This is probably the best NFC team to visit KC since the 2001 Eagles. You should see a similar result.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:26 pm**

RevLimiter wrote:You can call me ALL the names you want to Goobs, but NO WAY IN HELL will the Packers get out of Arrowhead with a win this weekend. NFC teams just don't win here, PERIOD.

Eagles went in there 2 years ago and came back from 17 points and beat your Quiefs... McNabb was playing with a sports hernia at the time too. So shove your home field advantage bullshit.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:08 pm**

jiminphilly wrote:
RevLimiter wrote:You can call me ALL the names you want to Goobs, but NO WAY IN HELL will the Packers get out of Arrowhead with a win this weekend. NFC teams just don't win here, PERIOD.
Eagles went in there 2 years ago and came back from 17 points and beat your Quiefs... McNabb was playing with a sports hernia at the time too. So shove your home field advantage bullshit.

We also had a defense in 2005 that folded like a cheap tent- trust me, it was more a case of them SUCKING than it was McNabb. That ISN'T the case this season.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:11 pm**

Ankle-Biting Loser wrote:FAT FUCKING RETARD generally works for me.

Fair enough....then ANKLE-BITING LOSER describing you works for ME.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:27 pm**

RevLimiter wrote:
jiminphilly wrote:
RevLimiter wrote:You can call me ALL the names you want to Goobs, but NO WAY IN HELL will the Packers get out of Arrowhead with a win this weekend. NFC teams just don't win here, PERIOD.
Eagles went in there 2 years ago and came back from 17 points and beat your Quiefs... McNabb was playing with a sports hernia at the time too. So shove your home field advantage bullshit.
We also had a defense in 2005 that folded like a cheap tent- trust me, it was more a case of them SUCKING than it was McNabb. That ISN'T the case this season.

So NFC teams do win there, is what you're saying. Look for it to happen again on Sunday.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:56 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:
RevLimiter wrote:
jiminphilly wrote: Eagles went in there 2 years ago and came back from 17 points and beat your Quiefs... McNabb was playing with a sports hernia at the time too. So shove your home field advantage bullshit.
We also had a defense in 2005 that folded like a cheap tent- trust me, it was more a case of them SUCKING than it was McNabb. That ISN'T the case this season.
So NFC teams do win there, is what you're saying. Look for it to happen again on Sunday.

Nope, ain't gonna happen. As I said before, Favre has lost to the Chiefs before with teams FAR superior to the one he's bringing here on Sunday. In fact, he got his ass handed to him here in 96 and last time I checked that Packer team won it all.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:04 pm**

KC Scott wrote:Chiefs have done pretty well stopping the run

So well in fact, they they've almost cracked the top half of NFL rushing defenses... almost.

Chefsfan is a funny motherfucker. Is there anywhere else besides KC where "below average" substitutes for "pretty well"?

Classic.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:21 pm**

Dinsdale wrote:
KC Scott wrote:Chiefs have done pretty well stopping the run

So well in fact, they they've almost cracked the top half of NFL rushing defenses... almost.

Chefsfan is a funny motherfucker. Is there anywhere else besides KC where "below average" substitutes for "pretty well"?

Classic.

Chiefs are 11 in total defense - stats out front should have told ya:

Nice Page stretching URL, Scott... HH

As for rhe rushing D:

10 New Orleans Saints 7 23.1 162 189 27.0 687 3.6 98.1 4 37 36 19.0 2 0 3
11 Green Bay Packers 7 17.1 120 180 25.7 689 3.8 98.4 2 55 32 17.8 3 1 4
12 New York Giants 8 19.9 159 195 24.4 798 4.1 99.8 6 67T 37 19.0 5 1 8
13 Indianapolis Colts 7 14.6 102 185 26.4 752 4.1 107.4 5 32 52 28.1 2 0 3
13 Seattle Seahawks 7 15.4 108 189 27.0 752 4.0 107.4 5 45 37 19.6 5 1 3
15 Arizona Cardinals 7 22.4 157 183 26.1 759 4.1 108.4 6 75 41 22.4 5 1 3
15 Jacksonville Jaguars 7 15.7 110 180 25.7 759 4.2 108.4 6 42 42 23.3 4 1 1
17 Kansas City Chiefs 7 16.1 113 190 27.1 761 4.0 108.7 3 52T 40 21.1 2 1 3

That 10 yd. per game gap between 17 and 10 is a whole 10 yds -

It might help if you actually watched a game, as opposed to just padding your post totals

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:22 pm**

Dinsdale wrote:
KC Scott wrote:Chiefs have done pretty well stopping the run

So well in fact, they they've almost cracked the top half of NFL rushing defenses... almost.

Chefsfan is a funny motherfucker. Is there anywhere else besides KC where "below average" substitutes for "pretty well"?

Classic.

So what you're saying is that the Packers are going to run right over us?

Yep...you betcha!

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:27 pm**

Fuck, that's right...

you're a fucking retard.

OK, I guess I'll type slowly, so it's both easier for you to read, and easier to C&P on another board...

What transpired, since it didn't sink in the forst time, was that KC Scott said KC had done "pretty well" defending the run.

I pointed out that they had done no such thing, and were in fact below average.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:35 pm**

KC Scott wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:
KC Scott wrote:Chiefs have done pretty well stopping the run

So well in fact, they they've almost cracked the top half of NFL rushing defenses... almost.

Chefsfan is a funny motherfucker. Is there anywhere else besides KC where "below average" substitutes for "pretty well"?

Classic.
Chiefs are 11 in total defense - stats out front should have told ya

Dude -- are you TRYING to be fucking dumber than Paul?

Read the quote.

You claimed that KC had "done pretty well against the run."

I pointed out, CORRECTLY, that you were quite wrong, and statistically, they've done reasonably poorly against the run.

Ya'know, MOST of those sites with stats actually let you click on a column and sort by category... you should try it sometime... maybe BEFORE you post something in stark contrast to what the stats actually say.

KC Scott: The Chefs are pretty good against the run.

Me: Uhm, they're not even in the top half of NFL run defense.

KC Scott: Yeah, well... they're 11th in TOTAL defense.

Why don't you comment on how much the average racoon weighs in Tibet to strengthen your case?

Or do I really need to explain the difference between "total defense" and "rush defense" to you?

Dude, that wasn't quite up to par with "The Patriots are the best team of all-time, if you don't count all of those other teams before them"... but you're working on it.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:39 pm**

Bode Dinsdale.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:43 pm**

KC Scott wrote:Chiefs are 11 in total defense - stats out front should have told ya:

What does the big thread stretching URL out front say?

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:55 pm**

His URL isn't stretching the thread on my screen. Might be time to dump Foxfire.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 10:03 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:His URL isn't stretching the thread on my screen. Might be time to dump Foxfire.

Did you ever take my advice on how to configure IE against AP's av?

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 10:06 pm**

Dinsdale wrote: Why don't you comment on how much the average racoon weighs in Tibet to strengthen your case?

Ok, that made me chuckle. They probably don't even have racoons in Tibet.

Point taken Dins, the Chiefs are 17th against the run. Below average, yep. But they're trying to effectively control the clock by letting the other team get small chunks at time, while successfully keeping their yards per carry to a bare bones minimum.

I know that's really deep and complicated stuff, but please try to follow along. I'm sure Rumps could more adequately explain it.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:08 pm**

Is this the KC defense that gave up 101 yards to Cedric Benson? The same Cedric Benson who has rushed for 42, 46, 50, 64, 67, 46, and 50 yards?

Hardly elite.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:13 am**

No takers in the sig bet.....typical Quiefs Fan.....shit spewing, Myopic mother-fuckers.

See you Tuesday when I get back from Cabo!!

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:30 am**

You don't rate a sig bet, shit for brains.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:14 am**

Sorry, unlike you, I do have a life.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:20 am**

KC's run defense is ...... pretty average.
What their defense has done well is take the ball away.

If Green Bay takes care of the football they win this game.
If Favre (known for a wild streak) puts it on the ground -- or in Chef DB's hands -- the Pukers lose this game.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:22 am**

Good point, 'tart.

Turnovers will decide this game. Call me an Arrowhead homer, but that battle will no doubt go the Chiefs way.

Hey, it's a tough place to play. Everyone knows this, and expects it coming in, except for certain dumbfuck Mulefans (cough...Coods) who like to cite the law of averages.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:00 am**

KC wins this game

A shitty Bronco team would have beat the Packers last week if not for two fucked up situations…the fumble (at the 2 yard line caused by our own left guard) and the phantom holding call (that took the ball from the 2 yard line all the way back to the 45)

Trust me Cheese Heads the Chiefs are a much better home team than the Broncos.
Fuck that sucked saying that!

And when it’s all over Chef fan don’t start sucking each other’s dick cause the Packer aren’t that great either!

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:17 pm**

godzilla2002 wrote:A shitty Bronco team would have beat the Packers last week if not for two fucked up situations…!

Yes and twice Green Bay was inside the Denver 5 and settled for field goals. If they had punched it in both times, the score would have been 21-7 at the half.

And if your aunt had balls, you’d probably still fuck her.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:16 pm**

Dinsdale wrote: Or do I really need to explain the difference between "total defense" and "rush defense" to you?

Dins resorting to breaking down symantics? Gee..... color me shocked

So just for you Dins: The Chiefs have done pretty well stopping the run, compared to previous seasons, and overall their defense is considerably better than average, couple this with the fact the Packers are last in the league in rushing and it's my fervent belief the Chiefs will limit the yards gained via a handoff, pitch or other method used in tabulating rushing statistics, by the Green Bay team in the game to be played this Sunday in Arrowhead stadium, which is located in Kansas City, MO

Again, I took for granted that you might actually be a pro football fan with some knowledge of which you speak and with the ability to take the comment in the context in which it was intended. I beleive my revised response shall leave no further room for your misinterpretation of same.

mvscal wrote:
KC Scott wrote:That 10 yd. per game gap between 17 and 10 is a whole 10 yds -
Last time I check a whole ten yards yields a whole new set of downs which can completely change the course of a game.

Or it could be 1 yd in 10 different drives which, unless there were 10 first and goals from the one, really wouldn't make much difference

:pickle:

Really people - since we've all been doing this for 8+ yrs. aren't we beyond the point where we need to grasp at straws?

Prolly not, but here's to the continued optimism that we'll eventually evolve past our need to debate symantics and averages

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:43 pm**

KC Scott wrote:Really people - since we've all been doing this for 8+ yrs. aren't we beyond the point where we need to grasp at straws?

Prolly not, but here's to the continued optimism that we'll eventually evolve past our need to debate symantics and averages

Nope, it'll never happen....Dinshole and m2svcal are Exhibit 1A and 1B.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:04 pm**

KC Scott wrote: Really people - since we've all been doing this for 8+ yrs. aren't we beyond the point where we need to grasp at straws?

Prolly not, but here's to the continued optimism that we'll eventually evolve past our need to debate symantics and averages

Yeah, but can we still do spelling samck?

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:10 pm**

War Wagon wrote:
KC Scott wrote: Really people - since we've all been doing this for 8+ yrs. aren't we beyond the point where we need to grasp at straws?

Prolly not, but here's to the continued optimism that we'll eventually evolve past our need to debate symantics and averages
Yeah, but can we still do spelling samck?

You've really been impossible since you bought that Thesaurus

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 11:03 pm**

poptart wrote:The schedule maker is, as orc noted, KC's friend this week.
The game sets up poorly for Green Bay.

I see the Packers turning the ball over 2 or 3 times, giving the Chief offense a little jolt.

KC wins this game 20-17.

I see it this way as well, with the exception of the "destiny" factor that seems to be GB's forte, at least so far.

No fucking way should Denver have lost the game last week, yet they did.

GB was lucky to hold on against Washington, the week before, too.

GB and KC are by far my two favorite teams -- GB's always been my NFC team, and KC my AFC team. The last time they played (3 years ago, I think it was) at Lambeau, was a FANTASTIC game, with huge swings in momentum on both sides. KC came back, down 17, and ended up winning the game.

Both teams this year aren't as good on paper as the teams that played each other a few years ago. GB obvioulsy has a better offense, though it's been predicated on Favre's arm. The defenses are about even ... maybe a slight edge goes to Green Bay. But with KC at home, this should be a very intriguing game.

It wouldn't surprise me if it went into OT, unless Favre gets hurt.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2007 11:48 pm**

KC Scott wrote:
So just for you Dins: The Chiefs have done pretty well stopping the run, compared to previous seasons, and overall their defense is considerably better than average, couple this with the fact the Packers are last in the league in rushing and it's my fervent belief the Chiefs will limit the yards gained via a handoff, pitch or other method used in tabulating rushing statistics, by the Green Bay team in the game to be played this Sunday in Arrowhead stadium, which is located in Kansas City, MO

Again, I took for granted that you might actually be a pro football fan with some knowledge of which you speak and with the ability to take the comment in the context in which it was intended.

Oh, OK.

The "context" was that if the reader could infer the 5 line paragraph of qualifiers, the meaning should be obvious as to what you meant by "done pretty well AGAINST THE RUN," and it in fact meant "good overall"?

How very KC.

"17th? HA! That thar is pretty good... for us."

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:13 am**

I'll just put Dins down as liking the over

Let the record say that Truman is/was AWOL

What? We're not good enough for you?

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:17 pm**

Truman started a thread after the J'ville game calling for the firing of Herm and his entire staff.

Yeah, he's quiet right now.

He'll start barking again though if KC gets it's shit packed by the .... Packers.

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:29 pm**

The Chiefs have done pretty well stopping the run

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:43 pm**

Oh, I dunno Wags…

Goobs and Cos seem to be doing a fine job of kicking their own asses.
_______________

Read earlier this morning where Ty Law is looking to add a Brett Favre pick to his career stat totals. Short of ol' Brett jogging down the field and actually handing him the ball, Law must be counting on Favre to carom one of his patented fastballs off the back of a streaking Donald Driver's head into is trailing arms….

Which is one of the keys to this game: It is critical that the Chiefs mount some semblance of pass rush. Despite the homer-istic myopia of the Board's Cheesebrains and their idiot radio wags, the Pack will not be able to run the ball come Sunday. Brett's gonna hafta throw to win. Which means that the Chiefs are gonna hafta hit Favre early - and often – if they hope to win.

This accomplishes a couple of things: It protects KC's slower-than-RaiduhFan's-intellect corners from exposure and hopefully causes an impatient Favre to chuck balls into coverage. Tall order, since Favre has demonstrated in the past that he is comfortable attacking Herm's Tampa 2….

Other keys to a Chiefs victory are the same ones pounded by the talking heads and fans of each team week-in and week-out: Establish the running game early to control the game's tempo and set-up the play-action pass; and take care of the damn ball.

One other consideration: The Arrowhead Factor.

Arrowhead is no longer the House of Horrors it once was for visiting teams in the 90's, but the fans here can still bring the noise if so inspired. Just ask Carson Palmer. Tough ticket this week: The house will be at 79,002 capacity. Add a sun-spashed 75 degree November day and a coupla thousand cheeseheads to a fan-base that will be plied by copious amounts of "cheering fluid", and Arrowhead promises to deliver a rowdy atmosphere intimidating to any team.

Good game to watch leading in to Colts-Pats*

Chiefs 23
Pack 20

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2007 7:23 pm**

America's sweetheart got a little too cute at the end of the half and it cost his team 7 points...

GO CHIEFS!

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2007 7:41 pm**

KC Scott wrote:The Chiefs have done pretty well stopping the run

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2007 9:10 pm**

FUCK Damon Huard.

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2007 9:18 pm**

Thanks a pant load, Chiefs...

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2007 9:20 pm**

Props to your boys, PackerFan- the better team won today.

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2007 9:23 pm**

That was one helluva football game.

Too bad that dumbass Jeff Webb couldn't have kept his foot inbounds, as there was no reason whatsoever that he couldn't have done so, other than not knowing where the fuck he was on the field.

Oh, well. Props to Farve for making the circle of the league complete and Rack the Pack.

Again, great, exciting game.

T1B

Packers at Chiefs