Mikie2times

I’m a little concerned the prize for winning the division might be Houston. It would almost seem like playing away at Pittsburgh would be favorable to that outcome

Pats HC knows

https://fb.watch/D-8-Uh9EH7/?mibextid=wwXIfr&fs=e So good

I can’t make sense out of it. I mean, New England was out of the bye so I imagine they had some wrinkles. But it’s not just this game and we are straight up dominating second half’s. The rush is getting home, lots of three and outs, no running game. Some of the best defense in the McD era. First half is literally the complete opposite.

We are playing at a level in the 2nd half that would make us the best defense in football over the last 5 games. In the same period we have allowed 92 1st half points, which would be among the worst in football. This trend only seems to be growing more noticeable. Pretty wild variance in performance by the defense.

We have never been outside the Top 5 with Allen, with three different guys and various talent levels. For me the debate ends when I consider how he would use an elite weapon outside. I don’t think he would lean into that. Which I think is something you need to do well to be an elite Coordinator. So much of this is Allen hiding warts. Hands down we go 0-2 the last two weeks if it wasn’t for only Allen TD’s. The laser to Knox this week, multiple scores last week. At the end of the day I see the potential for this offense with the right pieces to overwhelm the league and be virtually unstoppable. So I ask myself would he be the guy to try and orchestrate that and I think it’s a no for me.

Drought era had plenty of rosters stronger than this one, they just never had a QB

Holy F the rumor is it’s him. Talk about home run if it’s true.

Well for starters we are favorites on the road Sunday vs one of the top seeds. We were -5.5 point on the road vs Houston. Mind you, before they got hot and with a back up QB, but at most we are even money in that game. It's possible we would be +1 vs Denver, but I would even expect that to go to even before kick. It's just the reality man. I'm saying what the odds will be because I'm into that. If you agree or not is another story. I largely agree. But with that it's not easy to win 3 in a row to get to the Super Bowl with largely 50/50 outcomes. Even three 60% outcomes is a 22% likelihood. So it's a long road, even if the worst we see is a toss up.

+

On one hand you use injuries to absolve us under all sorts of hypotheticals but on the other you can't even acknowledge that if treated equally we would have lost in the Wild Card at home vs Miami. You can't possibly hold both views in a logical way. I understand what happened in the Miami game, but again, you apply what you want to fit your view. Our KC games were were largely dominated statistically by them, but yes, it was very close. Same with Miami but the other way. In the end the issue I have with this thought process is what you're displaying in your responses. It is very one sided and doesn't consider the implications of injuries vs us or in any other situations. It's simply a hypothetical "we would have won if" which then only gets applied to us and nobody else. Which is why I said the results have to mean something.

So we would have beat Miami with Tua starting when we won 34-31? How would of a home loss in the wild card to Miami changed your outlook?

Two years in a row we played competitive games in the Wild Card round vs Miami and Pittsburgh who didn't even have a starting QB. I hear the Bengals divisional game in this mix, meanwhile they had the entire OL out. Rice hasn't played for KC in either of the last two playoff games. I know people who discuss this are trying to point out the nuance of the situations, but eventually the results really do need to rule the day. Injuries go both ways and on top of it this regime has a propensity to invest in players with that type of history. A lot of the guys who are out now have been out more times than I can count.

Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis