Week 7 proved Oilerman right

[Downtown]

8 minutes ago, scine09 said:

Agreed.  At the same time the NFC is 19-14 against the AFC.

AFC is suspect this year. 

[scine09]

11 minutes ago, Downtown said:

AFC is suspect this year. 

The AFC is deeper than the NFC but maybe not as top heavy. 

[Bongo59]

1 hour ago, Alcibiades said:

The Steelers? Damn....some of you secretly hate the Titans

JJ Watt can wreck this OL easy.  TN never runs well on their front due to Heyward

[Bongo59]

TN is not a good west coast team = SF has a running QB too

[Jamalisms]

Hopefully the Titans don't choke against the Colts but, if they do, I call dibs on the "Week 8 proved Oilerman wrong" thread.

[Face]

7 hours ago, IowaOiler said:

 

I personally thought the Chiefs game would be close.  I thought our defense would struggle against Mahommes, and that the offense would do what it does every week...run until we have to pass, and then we would watch Tanny get the game competitive, at which point we would run again. 

 

That didn't happen.  We passed to start the game, let the Chiefs shut down Henry as much as is possible, while taking advantage of having a good QB and WRs.  I was shocked.

 

That said, I also knew Vrabel would use the prevent offense in the second half, which he did.  If the Chiefs weren't such a mess right now, that may have come back to haunt us.

 

The Bills games is the one solid victory so far.  This week is a big game because despite Indy not being great, they are better coached and really need a victory...and we are due for a Vrabel special where we play like dog shit against an inferior opponent.

One solid victory?  OK Iowa. First off, beating Seattle in Seattle is always a huge win, especially with the horrific calls that went against us.  And the Colts win is certainly looking more impressive now.
 

LOL at trying to minimize the win over KC. We utterly destroyed them, despite all the injuries in the secondary. Your whole narrative has been how bad this defense is & they went out & murdered KC. The pass rush was devastating. Do you realize how difficult it is to hold KC to a FG?

 

And I’m sure you’re going to say how the Chiefs are a shell of themselves but Id look at the numbers first. Sure, they haven’t looked quite like themselves this year but they were still averaging 31 points a game coming into yesterday & scored a TD on 41% of their drives, well more then the next best team. PFF had them ranked as the 2be best offense so far this year. What we did to them was as impressive a performance as you’ll ever see from a defense.

[Jamalisms]

Always with the PFF.

 

I don't get it.

[EatADaK]

Common fucking sense says KC is a good offense.Their D is just ass and Mahomes makes critical mistakes aka turnovers..

[IsntLifeFunny]

7 hours ago, IowaOiler said:

 

I personally thought the Chiefs game would be close.  I thought our defense would struggle against Mahommes, and that the offense would do what it does every week...run until we have to pass, and then we would watch Tanny get the game competitive, at which point we would run again. 

 

That didn't happen.  We passed to start the game, let the Chiefs shut down Henry as much as is possible, while taking advantage of having a good QB and WRs.  I was shocked.

 

That said, I also knew Vrabel would use the prevent offense in the second half, which he did.  If the Chiefs weren't such a mess right now, that may have come back to haunt us.

 

The Bills games is the one solid victory so far.  This week is a big game because despite Indy not being great, they are better coached and really need a victory...and we are due for a Vrabel special where we play like dog shit against an inferior opponent.

The Chiefs drove and kicked a FG to start the second half. We drove the field and had a 28 yard pass to AJ. We passed on 2nd and 2 and 3rd and 2. Tannehill threw a pic.  The notion we weren’t aggressive is incorrect.
 

After that we held the Chiefs to a missed FG going into the 4th up 24 and then we went conservative. Don’t get your agenda mixed up with facts. 

[IowaOiler]

1 hour ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

The Chiefs drove and kicked a FG to start the second half. We drove the field and had a 28 yard pass to AJ. We passed on 2nd and 2 and 3rd and 2. Tannehill threw a pic.  The notion we weren’t aggressive is incorrect.
 

After that we held the Chiefs to a missed FG going into the 4th up 24 and then we went conservative. Don’t get your agenda mixed up with facts. 

 

I know what happened, but thanks for the refresher.  The fact is, on our first drive of the second half, we ran Henry 4 of the first 5 plays of the drive.  I would call that fairly conservative, and the real funny part is that the Chiefs new it was coming.  They knew Vrabel would get conservative, and that's exactly what happened.  At that point, however, we opened it up and let Tannehill do what worked, throwing the ball and moving us down the field...until the INT.  From then on, I assume we agree it was overly conservative.

[Bongo59]

I thought the OC in the second half was uber conservative.  

[IsntLifeFunny]

3 minutes ago, IowaOiler said:

 

I know what happened, but thanks for the refresher.  The fact is, on our first drive of the second half, we ran Henry 4 of the first 5 plays of the drive.  I would call that fairly conservative, and the real funny part is that the Chiefs new it was coming.  They knew Vrabel would get conservative, and that's exactly what happened.  At that point, however, we opened it up and let Tannehill do what worked, throwing the ball and moving us down the field...until the INT.  From then on, I assume we agree it was overly conservative.

It wasn’t overly conservative. They were up 24 points after the missed FG. There was no need to be aggressive at that point. 

[rns90]

8 minutes ago, IowaOiler said:

 

I know what happened, but thanks for the refresher.  The fact is, on our first drive of the second half, we ran Henry 4 of the first 5 plays of the drive.  I would call that fairly conservative, and the real funny part is that the Chiefs new it was coming.  They knew Vrabel would get conservative, and that's exactly what happened.  At that point, however, we opened it up and let Tannehill do what worked, throwing the ball and moving us down the field...until the INT.  From then on, I assume we agree it was overly conservative.

To me it's the obvious first down runs (after they got up 14-0) that bother me less than the total amount of run plays.  And they basically became less balanced on conflicted downs and more or less became predictable and obvious, which puts Tannehill and the offense in difficult 2nd and 3rd downs.  I had less of an issue with the 3rd quarter drive.

[IowaOiler]

7 minutes ago, rns90 said:

To me it's the obvious first down runs (after they got up 14-0) that bother me less than the total amount of run plays.  And they basically became less balanced on conflicted downs and more or less became predictable and obvious, which puts Tannehill and the offense in difficult 2nd and 3rd downs.  I had less of an issue with the 3rd quarter drive.

 

My guess is they came out hoping the KC defense would back off and give Henry more space since we were gashing them with the passing game.  KC came out knowing the Vrabel would go conservative, so stayed with the game-plan of stopping the run.  After the first 4 runs were ineffective, we began throwing again and moved the ball well. 

 

Then it was overly conservative, which worked (like not using timeouts against Buffalo).  It worked, so nobody wants to complain, but I just don't see a championship coach easing off like that.  Hell, we know BB doesn't.

[woolfolksunclesuncle]

13 hours ago, code said:

I still vacillate on Robinson.

 

Not as well as I do.....homewrecker.

 

 

 

Also, I wish @CMJ was here to see Code publicly fellating Oman....