Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
My only concern is injuries. Really, my only concern for the whole season, but especially Thursday, on a short week.
If Smith can't go, that's okay; I like Alegretti just fine.
McDuffie and Gay are a concern.
And Butker.
My only concern with Allegretti starting for a game or two is that we don’t have our cushion on the interior anymore. Now, the depth gets a little scary.
Smith may be fine, so it might not be a concern anyway.
I think Gay went back into the game almost immediately. Right?
McDuffie is the biggest concern. If the Chargers are without Allen, then I’d rest him if he’s at any risk of making it worse. [Reply]
I hate thursday night games so much lol isn't there some other money grab the NFL could have done like sending the rams to Germany or something [Reply]
Originally Posted by BlackOp:
One advantage KC has is they know what the Chargers do...not a lot has changed about them. They have had months to prepare for this early season quick turn around.
Conversely, Chiefs have 4 new WRs and a revamped running game....LA has essentially 2 1/2 days to watch what KC did vs. Arizona.
It took an uncharacteristic 4 KC turnovers...most of which happened in Charger territory and a late 4th down game saving bailout call for them to barely win last year.
Anyone who is somewhat honest... knows last years loss could have been a blow-out.
Chiefs lost that game more than the Chargers won it...without the 4th down flag, the game was over.
The chargers secondary in the fader game was pushed back for a large part of the game to negate the big play and they were succesful at doing so.
It will be interesting to see how they perform against a completely different Chiefs offense that emphasizes longer drivers by throwing in shorter distances.
They also applied plenty of pressure on Carr thanks in part to the attrocious fader offensive line.
Losing Allen is going to be huge for them. He is the motor of that offense. Without him, Herbert won't be as productive. Mike Williams was invisible in the game.
They struggled to score against a pathetic fader secondary.
We should win this game by double digits. It's a different Chiefs animal San Diego is facing. [Reply]
Im a little concerned. I think we win because were at home but I don't think we can take much away from the Arizona game. Not sure what that DC was thinking sending pressure on Mahomes over and over again. If there is a book out on Mahomes, its send everyone into coverage. Cincinnati did that.
The Chargers can get a good pass rush with 4 guys and not have to blitz. Brown didnt look great in this game either. Would be nice to see him step up and just own Bosa and the Chargers [Reply]
Originally Posted by smithandrew051:
One thing to keep in mind is that the Chargers shredded our defense last year twice, but never saw our real defense.
Jones was still playing DE in the first meeting and we didn’t have Ingram. I think Gay also missed that one.
Jones was out for the second game.
Gay missed the first one as did Ward. We had Hughes on Mike Williams and that didn’t work out so well… [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Im a little concerned. I think we win because were at home but I don't think we can take much away from the Arizona game. Not sure what that DC was thinking sending pressure on Mahomes over and over again. If there is a book out on Mahomes, its send everyone into coverage. Cincinnati did that.
Mahomes was just as effective when they didn’t blitz him as when they did. So stop finding reasons to be dismissive. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lzen:
I've seen at least a couple of people on here suggesting that the Derwin James can slow down Kelce.
The last time these 2 teams played, Kelce had 10 receptions for 191 yards (that's a 19.1 avg) and 2 TDs. Tell me, how is that limiting him?
Edit: Just looked up the game in KC last year out of curiosity and it shows that Kelce had 7 receptions for 104.
James was out the majority of that game. He only played 39% of the snaps and if you recall Kelce did most of his damage late and in OT when James wasn’t on the field. [Reply]