KC blows out Detroit in KC. Detroit beats St Louis convincingly in St Louis. Detroit nearly beats Denver in Denver. Denver loses to Chicago at home. KC blows out Chicago in KC. Denver blows out KC in Denver. Minnesota blows out KC in Minnesota. Minnesota loses to Chicago. Minnesota loses to Arizona.
It's a jumble, yes?
So why are the Minnesota and Denver blowouts over KC considered indicative of the relative strengths, but KC's humiliation of Chicago and blowout of Detroit are generally considered flukes? Why does almost everyone think KC will lose in the first round?
They might, sure. But a rational view doesn't support that idea:
1) Look at all the records involved
2) Look at the offense/turnover stats involved
3) KC has allowed extremely few points in KC against playoff teams. KC has played Jamal Lewis fairly well. The excessive rush yards and blowouts all came away from Arrowhead. In just two games.
I think pretty much every team has had at least two bad toad games in the course of this season.
UPDATE: Road games. But since someone left a comment already, I feel I shouldn't just fix the typo. My apologies.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
Kansas City Chiefs
Comments (1)
bad toad!... (Below threshold)1. Posted by marc | December 31, 2003 10:36 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
bad toad!
1. Posted by marc | December 31, 2003 10:36 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on December 31, 2003 10:36