So, the 2019 Chiefs...

[Nightime]

2 hours ago, Bearerofnews said:

Rivers had won his division as many times as KC has in the last 15 years. Since when does winning the division qualify a great qb?

When Mahomes does what Rivers has for 12 plus years, then you can claim he is a great qb. Having 1 great year does not make someone great. There is no edge there.

Your qb won 1 playoff game, same amount as Rivers last year. If not for a tie breaker, i doubt the 5th seed Chiefs would of beat Baltimore on the road. You are nowhere near pessimistic. You have been 1 of the 2 biggest homers of the Chiefs.  Also Rivers made it past the divisional round already.... sooo, there goes that weird argument. 

Rivers hasn’t made it past the divisional since 2007. Mahomes was in middle school.

 Mahomes already has more MVPs and division titles this decade. And KC already beat Baltimore in the regular season (unlike LAC) the playoffs would’ve been a bloodbath, not a 23-17 “hold on for dear life” game.

And traditionally I was pessimistic, but then Mahomes happened. Funny how much one player can change things for a franchise

Edited May 23, 2019 by Nightime

[Chiefs_5627]

[MrOaktown_56]

 

 

 

55 minutes ago, Nightime said:

Rivers hasn’t made it past the divisional since 2007. Mahomes was in middle school.

 Mahomes already has more MVPs and division titles this decade. And KC already beat Baltimore in the regular season (unlike LAC) the playoffs would’ve been a bloodbath, not a 23-17 “hold on for dear life” game.

And traditionally I was pessimistic, but then Mahomes happened. Funny how much one player can change things for a franchise

You're just setting yourself up...

Keep talking. It's clear no one else has a chance. The rest of the AFC west can't wait to be steamrolled again.

[Bolts223]

14 hours ago, Nightime said:

Chargers had a “more complete” roster in 2018 as well.

But who won the West and advanced farther in the playoffs? 

Chargers are always “Offseason Champs.”

I literally just debunked this. 2018 is the first season in YEARS where the Chargers were being picked to win the division. In 2017 it was the Raiders, in 2016 it was the Chiefs/Broncos, from 2012-2015 it was the Broncos. You have to go back to 2011 to find a season in which the Chargers were actually the popular pick to win the AFC West before the season.

The Chargers went 12-4 last year and ended up being a better team than people thought they would be. People were saying they would go like 10-6 and win a weak AFC West. Both of our teams exceeded expectations last year.

And stop getting all high and mighty about winning the division on a tiebreaker. We finished with the same record, split the series and we lost to the same team.

 

Edited May 23, 2019 by Bolts223

[Nightime]

1 minute ago, Bolts223 said:

I literally just debunked this. 2018 is the first season in YEARS where the Chargers were being picked to win the division. In 2017 it was the Raiders, in 2016 it was the Chiefs/Broncos, from 2012-2015 it was the Broncos. You have to go back to 2011 to find a season in which the Chargers were actually the popular pick to win the AFC West before the season.

The Chargers went 12-4 last year. If anything they did better than most people thought they would. People were saying they would go like 10-6 and win a weak AFC West. Both of our teams exceeded expectations last year.

 

 

Most people are referencing the 2017 Saturday showdown, where everyone seemed to be picking LAC due to momentum and roster. 

[Bolts223]

7 minutes ago, Nightime said:

Most people are referencing the 2017 Saturday showdown, where everyone seemed to be picking LAC due to momentum and roster. 

Ok that's fine. We crapped the bed in that game. I'll admit that. That was midseason, not the offseason like you specifically referenced.

Edited May 23, 2019 by Bolts223

[Bearerofnews]

3 hours ago, Nightime said:

Rivers hasn’t made it past the divisional since 2007. Mahomes was in middle school.

 Mahomes already has more MVPs and division titles this decade. And KC already beat Baltimore in the regular season (unlike LAC) the playoffs would’ve been a bloodbath, not a 23-17 “hold on for dear life” game.

And traditionally I was pessimistic, but then Mahomes happened. Funny how much one player can change things for a franchise

Mahomes won a single playoff game. There is nothing remotely elite about that. 1 year success is a fluke. When Mahomes can consistently be great like Rivers, ill take him seriously. Until then, he is exactly what it suggest.... a 1 year wonder. 

You barely beat Baltimore at home... in OT and needed your olinemen to recover a Mahomes fumble in OT to even hold on. Nothing suggest you would of won at Baltimore.... other than homerisim. I doubt you were even a Chiefs fan before Mahomes. 

I get KC fans havent known what great and elite qbs look like... so they are overly eager to have one and dont know how to act. But i assure you, it isnt 1 year.

Edited May 23, 2019 by Bearerofnews

[MrOaktown_56]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12

14 minutes ago, Bearerofnews said:

Mahomes won a single playoff game. There is nothing remotely elite about that. 1 year success is a fluke. When Mahomes can consistently be great like Rivers, ill take him seriously. Until then, he is exactly what it suggest.... a 1 year wonder. 

You barely beat Baltimore at home... in OT and needed your olinemen to recover a Mahomes fumble in OT to even hold on. Nothing suggest you would of won at Baltimore.... other than homerisim. I doubt you were even a Chiefs fan before Mahomes. 

I get KC fans havent known what great and elite qbs look like... so they are overly eager to have one and dont know how to act. But i assure you, it isnt 1 year.

He's not changing his mind... 

We'll see how this all plays out.

[Hunter2_1]

6 hours ago, Chiefs_5627 said:

Haha!

 

@SBLIII - Yeah, LAC is one of those teams that SHOULD worry us, with their squad and all-round talent, ridiculous DL etc. But through whatever reason (coaching prob) we don't ever lose to them. KC, on the other hand, you feel like they can beat us on a given day. Doesn't mean we are right, or that this means KC are better, it's just from our perspective - KC seems a bigger task. (Watch LAC destroy us now....lol) 

[Buckweath]

8 hours ago, Bolts223 said:

I literally just debunked this. 2018 is the first season in YEARS where the Chargers were being picked to win the division. In 2017 it was the Raiders, in 2016 it was the Chiefs/Broncos, from 2012-2015 it was the Broncos. You have to go back to 2011 to find a season in which the Chargers were actually the popular pick to win the AFC West before the season.

The Chargers went 12-4 last year and ended up being a better team than people thought they would be. People were saying they would go like 10-6 and win a weak AFC West. Both of our teams exceeded expectations last year.

And stop getting all high and mighty about winning the division on a tiebreaker. We finished with the same record, split the series and we lost to the same team.

 

The Chiefs did win the division on a tiebreaker but they always looked like the better team, with a much better points differential than the Chargers despite playing pretty much the same teams. The playoffs showed that too as the Chargers beat the Ravens as was mostly expected and then got crushed by the Pats like they didn't belong. Meanwhile, the Chiefs crushed the Colts and lost to the Pats on an offside and then coin toss. And before you say the Chargers were playing at Foxboro, well the Chiefs also played at Foxboro during the season and were close to a win. 

Expect more of the same this year but I see the Chiefs winning the division more handily this time.

I see the Chargers at 10-12 wins. I see the Chiefs at 12+ wins.

 

 

 

[Bolts223]

5 hours ago, Buckweath said:

The Chiefs did win the division on a tiebreaker but they always looked like the better team, with a much better points differential than the Chargers despite playing pretty much the same teams. The playoffs showed that too as the Chargers beat the Ravens as was mostly expected and then got crushed by the Pats like they didn't belong. Meanwhile, the Chiefs crushed the Colts and lost to the Pats on an offside and then coin toss. And before you say the Chargers were playing at Foxboro, well the Chiefs also played at Foxboro during the season and were close to a win. 

Expect more of the same this year but I see the Chiefs winning the division more handily this time.

I see the Chargers at 10-12 wins. I see the Chiefs at 12+ wins.

 

 

 

They not only were playing at Foxboro, they were playing at Foxboro in the playoffs in January where the Brady/Belichick Patriots are 22-3 and had 2 weeks to prepare for us. The fact that you played them close there in the regular season in October doesn't really mean that much.  The difference between your game and our game is that by the time your offense was able to get going in the second half it was only a 14 point game, for us it was a 28 point game. I really don't think it's that much of a stretch to say that if the Chiefs had to go into Foxboro for the playoffs that the Pats offense is able to put up more than the 14 they did in that first half. 

I think you're in for a bit of disappointment if you think the Chiefs are winning 12+ games this year. No fanbase that isn't the Patriots should really expect 12+ wins from their team in any given year. Especially when their team has as many glaring holes as the Chiefs do.

Edited May 23, 2019 by Bolts223

[FrantikRam]

On 5/22/2019 at 10:15 AM, Buckweath said:

Just in case you didn't know, the Chiefs put up 40 points and 450 yards on the Pats at Foxboro in October last year. But it's true that the Chiefs offense struggled badly in that first half of the playoffs game. They did score 31 points in the 2nd half though which is really a lot.

And then, ever heard of Sammy Watkins? Robinson and Hardman could do well this year too. Plus the RBs.

All in all, the Chiefs offense is definitly worse without Hill but not sure if by that much, especially that Hardman looks like he can be that deep threat.

 

 

They put up 40 with Hill. Then they put up 31 with Hill.

Hill was arguably the best offensive player (non-QB) in the league last year.

I've seen the Sammy Watkins experience up close - good luck. Hardman is a rookie, but sure he might be pretty good. As for RBs, again, they're okay.

Mahomes went from having the best supporting cast in the NFL (and one of the best ever) to average without Tyreek Hill.

You're not sure that the Chiefs offense will be worse off without their best weapon and the most dangerous guy in the NFL? Yikes.

[Buckweath]

1 hour ago, Bolts223 said:

They not only were playing at Foxboro, they were playing at Foxboro in the playoffs in January where the Brady/Belichick Patriots are 22-3 and had 2 weeks to prepare for us. The fact that you played them close there in the regular season in October doesn't really mean that much.  The difference between your game and our game is that by the time your offense was able to get going in the second half it was only a 14 point game, for us it was a 28 point game. I really don't think it's that much of a stretch to say that if the Chiefs had to go into Foxboro for the playoffs that the Pats offense is able to put up more than the 14 they did in that first half. 

I think you're in for a bit of disappointment if you think the Chiefs are winning 12+ games this year. No fanbase that isn't the Patriots should really expect 12+ wins from their team in any given year. Especially when their team has as many glaring holes as the Chiefs do.

Their only glaring hole right now is the CB position and a trade is coming up.

They have positions where they are just OK or decent but just like any other team in the league. 

 

All in all, again, they are about to field a powerhouse.

[Buckweath]

1 hour ago, FrantikRam said:

 

They put up 40 with Hill. Then they put up 31 with Hill.

Hill was arguably the best offensive player (non-QB) in the league last year.

I've seen the Sammy Watkins experience up close - good luck. Hardman is a rookie, but sure he might be pretty good. As for RBs, again, they're okay.

Mahomes went from having the best supporting cast in the NFL (and one of the best ever) to average without Tyreek Hill.

You're not sure that the Chiefs offense will be worse off without their best weapon and the most dangerous guy in the NFL? Yikes.

With or without Hill, you cannot expect the Chiefs to replicate last year's offensive output which was #3 in the history of the game. 

Just to give some perspective, the difference between the Chiefs' PPG and Pats' PPG (#4 in the league) last year was pretty much the same as the difference between the Pats' and a bottom 5 offense. I can tell some of you don't realize that.

So just to be clear, the Chiefs offense could take a clear step back from last year and still be clearly an elite offense.

If you read my post above, I did say that the offense without Hill is obviously a bit worse. Does the offense without Hill is much worse? I am not sure of that but it is certainly a possibility.

That offense goes as Mahomes and Reid go. The Oline should be similiar to last year. I feel good about the Chiefs offense without Hill but for sure I hate losing him.

It's a bit like the Steelers without Bell. People thought their offense would take a big hit but far from it.

We will have to see without Hill.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 23, 2019 by Buckweath

[Nightime]

Exactly

Mahomes was our best offensive player, and best player overall.

Why didn’t Tyreek drag Alex Smith to big numbers and playoff success? Because he’s not an MVP. Hill’s been here since 2016 and the offense averaged similar ppg to all other Reid Chiefs teams.

Mahomes makes KC an elite contender, not Hill. 

Edited May 24, 2019 by Nightime