Through six games, the Chiefs are the worst defense ever measured in yards allowed

[Shag]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ense-is-great/

Through six games, the Chiefs are the worst defense ever measured in yards allowed. They’ve yielded 2,809 yards, or 468.2 per game, and are on pace for 7,491 yards allowed over the full season. That would smash the record set by the 2012 Saints, the only team in history to give up more than 7,000 yards. No team that’s allowed even 6,600 yards in a season has ever finished with a winning record.

[MMXcalibur]

What’s incredibly sad is that Reid thinks this defense could be even WORSE if we kicked Sutton to the curb. That’s the only explanation I can find in why he still has a job here.

Between the MULTIPLE playoff collapses, the years worth of shitty defense, and now the HISTORICALLY bad defense out there this season.....

...HOW DOES THIS GUY STILL HAVE A JOB?!?

[SuperBowl4]

Originally Posted by KCtotheSB

What’s incredibly sad is that Reid thinks this defense could be even WORSE if we kicked Sutton to the curb. That’s the only explanation I can find in why he still has a job here.

Between the MULTIPLE playoff collapses, the years worth of shitty defense, and now the HISTORICALLY bad defense out there this season.....

...HOW DOES THIS GUY STILL HAVE A JOB?!?

SUTTON has a job because the offense is AWESOME!!! The only problem I see with the offense is them settling for field goals instead of just going for touchdowns. With a defense as bad as SUTTONS Andy and Eric just have to go for it on fourth downs regardless of where the ball is except for inside our own 40

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by KCtotheSB

Between the MULTIPLE playoff collapses, the years worth of shitty defense, and now the HISTORICALLY bad defense out there this season.....

Here's the problem.

The defense hasn't been bad for "years". It's been really bad for 1 year.

Sutton was gifted Houston, Berry, and Poe and the defense carried the team for the better part of 4 seasons.

Andy and Veach are looking at it much the same way I and many others did - when Bob had great personnel, the defense was very good. The openly said in the offseason that Bob wasn't the problem, it was the players. The players are still bad so they aren't going to blame Bob.

Nevermind the fact that part of the reason the players are bad right now is BECAUSE of Sutton.

[bobbything]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

The defense last night forced a punt. They got a strip sack. They got a turnover on downs and they forced 4 field goal tries, not counting the final one.

That is way ahead of the 2003 KC no-punt playoff game vs Indy.

When the current defense has a game where they allow a TD on every possession, get back to me.

First, the defense did not force a punt. Second, as I've mentioned in numerous other threads, the only thing people tend to point to is that ONE GAME in the playoffs. Yes, it was an abortion and historically bad, but that defense, as a whole, was nowhere near as bad as this defense. Go back and look at the numbers.

Edit: If people want to point to points given up vs. yards given up, that is essentially what this year's team should shoot for. 19th and 29th, respectively, with 37 turnovers 2003. That's the ceiling for this team. In fact, last year's defense was closer to 2003 than this year's defense is.

[ChiTown]

Our Defensive personnel is shit, but Bob Sutton accentuates the shit we see on the field. It's beyond ****ing ridiculous that this fool still has a job at 1 Arrowhead Drive.

[Direckshun]

This is out of context, statistically. In a few of our early games, we shot up to early leads and just hit cruise control while the other time racked up garbage time stats.

The other two games were against two all time offenses in Pitt and New England.

So, while we are bad, the idea that we are the worst defense in history is laughable.

[ChiTown]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

This is out of context, statistically. In a few of our early games, we shot up to early leads and just hit cruise control while the other time racked up garbage time stats.

The other two games were against two all time offenses in Pitt and New England.

So, while we are bad, the idea that we are the worst defense in history is laughable.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by ChiTown

Our Defensive personnel is shit, but Bob Sutton accentuates the shit we see on the field. It's beyond ****ing ridiculous that this fool still has a job at 1 Arrowhead Drive.

Just remember, it took a first round playoff LOSS to get GRob fired.

[bobbything]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

This is out of context, statistically. In a few of our early games, we shot up to early leads and just hit cruise control while the other time racked up garbage time stats.

The other two games were against two all time offenses in Pitt and New England.

So, while we are bad, the idea that we are the worst defense in history is laughable.

7th and 6th in points/yards, 4th and 14th in points/yards. Those are "all-time" offenses? They're good but, all-time?

The only games where we got early leads and cruised to victory were the SF and Jax games (both at home). All the other games were still plenty iffy in the 4th quarter (even if we were ahead). And kudos to the defense for getting the stops when needed, but I think anyone could see this NE game coming a mile away. It was just a matter of time.

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan View Post
... they forced 4 field goal tries, not counting the final one.

Originally Posted by JoeyChuckles

Any reason specifically that last field goal doesn't count?

The first four field goal tries, the Pats were trying to score TDs and got held to a field goal try. On the last score, they were no longer trying to score a TD, they were running out the clock. So our defense didn't "hold" them to a TD try.

As Gronk was being tackled, I turned to my brother and said it would have been better to have let him get the TD. We would have 45 seconds to try and come back and tie the game with a TD instead of having them kicking a field goal on the final play.

But regardless, in the Indy game, KC forced one field goal. All the other possessions by Indy resulted in TDs. Think about that one. So until we give up a TD on every single possession, the defense is not worse than 2003.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Just remember, it took a first round playoff LOSS to get GRob fired.

How many will it take Sutton?

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

How many will it take Sutton?

Alex Smith provided plenty of cover for Sutton in the last 2. That won't happen this time.

[bobbything]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

But regardless, in the Indy game, KC forced one field goal. All the other possessions by Indy resulted in TDs. Think about that one. So until we give up a TD on every single possession, the defense is not worse than 2003.

Just out of curiosity, why do you only point to this one game? Would you claim that the 2008 defense was better than 2003 using the same argument?

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by bobbything

First, the defense did not force a punt. Second, as I've mentioned in numerous other threads, the only thing people tend to point to is that ONE GAME in the playoffs. Yes, it was an abortion and historically bad, but that defense, as a whole, was nowhere near as bad as this defense. Go back and look at the numbers.

Edit: If people want to point to points given up vs. yards given up, that is essentially what this year's team should shoot for. 19th and 29th, respectively, with 37 turnovers 2003. That's the ceiling for this team. In fact, last year's defense was closer to 2003 than this year's defense is.

My bad on the punt. After KC's punt, I thought welp, it is no longer a no-punt game forgetting it was only on one side.

It is a bit hard to compare eras. Everything favors the offense so much more and the stats reflect that. For the no punt Indy game, the combined score was fairly low.

But I stand by the statement that our defense had some stops and did enough to give our offense a chance to win it.

The strip sack and stopping them on fourth down was a big deal. If the 2003 defense had managed to do that, KC most likely would have won that game.

If the 2003 defense had forced a couple more filed goal tries, that could have also been the difference. And again, that was back when the rules were friendlier to defenses then than they are now.

And it may be only ONE GAME, but playoffs are one and done. We are likely to see Brady again.

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by bobbything

Just out of curiosity, why do you only point to this one game? Would you claim that the 2008 defense was better than 2003 using the same argument?

Fair enough. But I focus on this game when people say our current D is worse than 2003. It was bad all year. And it couldn't make a single stop (outside of one field goal attempt) when it mattered most. In the playoffs.

If we play Brady again and get a strip sack and stop them for four field goal tries in the playoffs... I would take that over 2003.

Do we focus on all the regular seasons wins in the 90's and early 2000's, or, when it matters, the playoff losses.