How many games will the Chiefs win PYMWYMI

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by OregonNiner87:
Alex's Pace: 352/584 60.3% 3828 yd 28 TD 8 INT

That's a very good TD to Int ratio but the rest is pedestrian. Wins are obviously the most important though.

Correct--28 TDs to 8 INTs isn't pedestiran. The rest is typical WCO numbers for a QB. But you are most correct about wins...they trump everything.

Edit: The WCO relies on limiting turn overs. Walsh considered a short pass to be just as reliable as a hand-off so QBs will tend to have fewer YPA.

In Joe Montana's best year rating wise (102.9 , he averaged 226 yds/game, 28 TDs 10 INTs...and won the SB.

After 25 years of passing inflation, those stats, in 2013, would 142, 350yds/game, 43 TD's, 10 INTs* and 10 SB's.

* Don't ask me why.

No. Those numbers are NOT answered by rule changes. In that same year, Dan Marino averaged 317 yds/game, had 48 TDs 17 INTs, and lost the SB to Joe's paltry WCO team.

Originally posted by KoolBeans:
Sean McGrath was asked this question.

Describe Alex Smith.

"Alex is a great quarterback. He spreads the ball out and as a tight end, you're looking for a guy that does that, because you get the pill a little bit more. He goes through his progressions and the great thing about Alex is, he's going to hit the open guy, no matter who it is. From what I've seen, he doesn't have a specific target, before the play is already called; he's going to make his reads and he's going to throw to the open man."

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/article-2/Sean-McGrath-The-Man-Behind-the-Beard/847632af-c3ce-429d-ae77-b5a82d345f62

wonder what we would have to trade to get him back? lol

Originally posted by valrod33:

Originally posted by vaden:
Alex leads all QBs in rushing attempts

He is better at being Colin Kaepernick than Colin is

He's doing it closer to what Aaron Rodgers was doing in 2011. Defense covered everyone downfield, he takes the open lane for 8-10 yards. I think he didn't do a lot of it with us because we don't have a good receiver core like the Chiefs --- Bowe, McCluster, Avery, and even Charles. I would name Fasano as the TE to go along with that -- but it's actually McGrath the 3rd TE, for right now

Defense just don't expect Smith to run with the ball like they do with Kaep, so Smith can some what surprise them because they don't deem it as a threat. But if he continued to gash them, they will start to pay attention and he may not be able to do it as much.

Originally posted by dj43:
No. Those numbers are NOT answered by rule changes. In that same year, Dan Marino averaged 317 yds/game, had 48 TDs 17 INTs, and lost the SB to Joe's paltry WCO team.

Except Marino and Fouts were the exceptions to the rule. The Niners were a top 10 passing team just about every year under Montana. We were not anymore run balanced then the average team.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by dj43:
No. Those numbers are NOT answered by rule changes. In that same year, Dan Marino averaged 317 yds/game, had 48 TDs 17 INTs, and lost the SB to Joe's paltry WCO team.

Except Marino and Fouts were the exceptions to the rule. The Niners were a top 10 passing team just about every year under Montana. We were not anymore run balanced then the average team.

The point was that you COULD put up big passing numbers in 1984 if you chose to play that way. The WCO was/is a system that holds onto the ball, wears out the other team's defense and keeps the defense fresh to do its thing. The TOP is just as important as personnel is to having a "good" defense. In short, WCO is very defense-friendly...for their own defense.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by dj43:
No. Those numbers are NOT answered by rule changes. In that same year, Dan Marino averaged 317 yds/game, had 48 TDs 17 INTs, and lost the SB to Joe's paltry WCO team.

Except Marino and Fouts were the exceptions to the rule. The Niners were a top 10 passing team just about every year under Montana. We were not anymore run balanced then the average team.

I think part of that is the scoring efficiency. Playing from a1-2 score ahead of the other team. Where as Marino and Fouts were mostly about their offensive team that tries to outscore the opponents rather than concentrating on playing better defense to go along with their offense. Niners tend to beat them to the punch to go up early in scores, than just methodical ball control passing and running, along with a good defense.

Smith and the Chiefs may not jump out on top early in the game, but they do play ball control passing and running mix. Once they are up 1-2 scores going into the 4th, it's another 9 minutes scoring drive to take total control of the TOP and the game.

Similar WCO style offense that doesn't need to amass 300+ passing yards a game. The purpose is to take scores and TOP away from the other team.

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by KoolBeans:
Sean McGrath was asked this question.

Describe Alex Smith.

"Alex is a great quarterback. He spreads the ball out and as a tight end, you're looking for a guy that does that, because you get the pill a little bit more. He goes through his progressions and the great thing about Alex is, he's going to hit the open guy, no matter who it is. From what I've seen, he doesn't have a specific target, before the play is already called; he's going to make his reads and he's going to throw to the open man."

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/article-2/Sean-McGrath-The-Man-Behind-the-Beard/847632af-c3ce-429d-ae77-b5a82d345f62

wonder what we would have to trade to get him back? lol

I honestly think our coaches aren't the best at bringing out the best in our players. Alex is doing some things under Reid that I wish our coaches would have done with him. I've always thought he had the tools and mind to be great in this league. He's looking like that kid from Utah that was going to light up the NFL. It's pretty clear now that he just never had the right coaches around him to bring out the best in him.

Originally posted by qnnhan7:
Smith and the Chiefs may not jump out on top early in the game, but they do play ball control passing and running mix. Once they are up 1-2 scores going into the 4th, it's another 9 minutes scoring drive to take total control of the TOP and the game.

They either play well with a lead or come back well when behind...not sure there are any other possibilities. In both cases they are winning...which is what counts. Those 9 minute drives are heaven sent for the defense and that's why I've always concluded that Smith helps the defense as much as the defense helps him.

Originally posted by dj43:
The point was that you COULD put up big passing numbers in 1984 if you chose to play that way. The WCO was/is a system that holds onto the ball, wears out the other team's defense and keeps the defense fresh to do its thing. The TOP is just as important as personnel is to having a "good" defense. In short, WCO is very defense-friendly...for their own defense.

If you had Dan Marino you could.

Not totally in disagreement but a solid run game with big passing plays will work as well. See Pittsburgh and their 2 Super Bowl rings.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by qnnhan7:
Smith and the Chiefs may not jump out on top early in the game, but they do play ball control passing and running mix. Once they are up 1-2 scores going into the 4th, it's another 9 minutes scoring drive to take total control of the TOP and the game.

They either play well with a lead or come back well when behind...not sure there are any other possibilities. In both cases they are winning...which is what counts. Those 9 minute drives are heaven sent for the defense and that's why I've always concluded that Smith helps the defense as much as the defense helps him.

Well, lets put it another way, they stay competitive going into the 4th. Then they put up a 9min scoring drive (3pts or a TD) . Now the other team has about 5-6 mins to respond. And in reality, it's only about 3-4 min because the Chiefs gets the ball back in between. I'm thinking in terms of 2 scoring drives for the other team to get a win in this situation.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by dj43:
No. Those numbers are NOT answered by rule changes. In that same year, Dan Marino averaged 317 yds/game, had 48 TDs 17 INTs, and lost the SB to Joe's paltry WCO team.

Except Marino and Fouts were the exceptions to the rule. The Niners were a top 10 passing team just about every year under Montana. We were not anymore run balanced then the average team.

The point was that you COULD put up big passing numbers in 1984 if you chose to play that way. The WCO was/is a system that holds onto the ball, wears out the other team's defense and keeps the defense fresh to do its thing. The TOP is just as important as personnel is to having a "good" defense. In short, WCO is very defense-friendly...for their own defense.

Huh? The Joe Montana was a top passer during those years. You are assuming Walsh would have never adjusted to this era and would have still kept that run-pass ratio. Back then, teams that had better QB's had better passing numbers. Joe Montana was one of those QB's which was why 49ers always was a top passing team. They just weren't crazy with it as they are now due to the new rules and 3-5 set WR's.

Walsh wouldn't have kept the same balance and the passing would have been more explosive. Harbaugh had direct contact and conversations with Walsh. Harbaugh has that balance mentality but it is still adjusted to today's game.

A coach plays to the strength of this QB. Alex's strength is not to be a dynamic passer.

Originally posted by qnnhan7:
On hindsight we can look back: If you are a HC going into a 2-14 team like Andy Reid, someone offers you a qb that will shore up the most important position in football, to let you concentrate on the other aspect of implementing your newly installed offense at a cost of 2 - 2nd rounder. That's actually a pretty good deal for Andy Reid. I thought we could only get a 4th, maybe a high 3rd for Smith, myself...

...and that would so stupid, seeing how Smith is now

I think even Smith's contract is on a cheap side for a starting qb and playing like he is. So that's also cap friendly for the Chiefs.

It was also Smith's luck that Reid happened to be fired by his team, and hired by a team that only needed a QB (no need for serious rebuilding.) It was much better than going to places like Jacksonville.

What I found strange was the Vikings never tried to trade for Smith.

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2013/9/28/4778778/alex-smith-breakdown-easy-throw-kansas-city-chiefs-philadelphia-eagles-game

Originally posted by fastforward:

Originally posted by qnnhan7:
On hindsight we can look back: If you are a HC going into a 2-14 team like Andy Reid, someone offers you a qb that will shore up the most important position in football, to let you concentrate on the other aspect of implementing your newly installed offense at a cost of 2 - 2nd rounder. That's actually a pretty good deal for Andy Reid. I thought we could only get a 4th, maybe a high 3rd for Smith, myself...

...and that would so stupid, seeing how Smith is now

I think even Smith's contract is on a cheap side for a starting qb and playing like he is. So that's also cap friendly for the Chiefs.

It was also Smith's luck that Reid happened to be fired by his team, and hired by a team that only needed a QB (no need for serious rebuilding.) It was much better than going to places like Jacksonville.

What I found strange was the Vikings never tried to trade for Smith.

Vikings have Singletary on the team...

i really hope alex smith writes a book when he retires. i think it would be a pretty interesting read to get his thoughts on all the situations hes been put in