Jump to content

Raiders v Chiefs


kingseanjohn

Recommended Posts

This will be a defining game for the season. Chiefs lost the first one. If they lose again they are TWO games behind the Raiders - because the first tiebreaker are the head-to-head games. I don't think the Chiefs will be able to recover from such deficit - and at 6-7 with three games to go they probably would be out of Wild Card contention as well:

  • AFC South has TWO 8W teams already now: JAX and TEN.
  • In AFC North Baltimore stands at 7-5 with games against CLE and IND coming up.

It's a slightly different situation next week against SD, as the Chiefs won the first one against them.

Didn't check on the next level tie-breakers within AFC West, it's first things first now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, big_palooka said:

This is pretty much feels like the loser in this one season is over. 

KC's offense came back to life last Sunday, if they play like that... Oakland won't be able to keep up. 

Raiders have looked better the last 2 weeks, but largely playing 2 poor offenses.

Well, the Chiefs have been really creative to lose games over the past 7 weeks .. whenever the O showed up the D took it upon themselves to lose ... or the other way round.

Reid built a reputation on his creativity ... but this one is not necessarily what we need right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just killed your own idea without realizing it and proving what most of us are saying.

The average NFL player only last 4 seasons.   So you want to give up 3 guys who’s careers with be 10+ years for 5 early picks.  Well with the average we would be getting 2.5 players that will have good careers.  So we’re right back where we started....  

You’re also saying we need to do something drastic..  which in turns makes our offense terrible.  “If” those players turn out great,  do we need to get drastic and trade them to improve the offense afterwards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, samsel23 said:

You just killed your own idea without realizing it and proving what most of us are saying.

The average NFL player only last 4 seasons.   So you want to give up 3 guys who’s careers with be 10+ years for 5 early picks.  Well with the average we would be getting 2.5 players that will have good careers.  So we’re right back where we started....  

You’re also saying we need to do something drastic..  which in turns makes our offense terrible.  “If” those players turn out great,  do we need to get drastic and trade them to improve the offense afterwards?

Wrong thread Samsel ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, KC_Guy said:

Chiefs inactives:

I wonder what's wrong with Ehinger. He looked good last year ... and this year: Inactive even when Morse is out. So it's Witzmann at LG and Fulton at C I assume.

Cooper will be playing, I wonder if he'll be more of a decoy though.

 

Raiders declared QB Connor Cook, CB David Amerson, OL Jon Feliciano, LB Cory James, DE Jihad Ward, OT Jylan Ware, and WR Isaac Whitney inactive for Week 14 against the Chiefs.

No surprises in this group. Cook remains behind Derek Carr and E.J. Manuel on the depth chart. The Cowboys wanted to draft Cook over Dak Prescott last year, but "settled" for Prescott when the Raiders got to Cook first.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...