What Time Does My Team Draft?

Late. Your team's first round draft pick will be late. Attempting a return to normalcy, I'll be watching the first round with a couple of friends. Which, on the East Coast, means an eight pm start time (that's when the draft starts, tbd on the wings and beer).

Fans of the hapless Jaguars and Jets need not concern themselves with this issue, but as a Chiefs fan, my wait will be long. How late must I put off sleep to immediately learn of a personnel decision to complain of the following month? If my calculations are correct (a rarity), 1:10 in the morning. Brutal.

While the draft is slated to start at 8:00 pm, the question is whether that's the official time Jacksonville goes on the clock or if we're subjected to the pomp and circumstance of Draft Day first. Teams are allowed 10 minutes to make their picks in round one, and universally utilize their entire time allotment (the first couple picks being the potential exception). So assuming Jacksonville submits their pick at 8:10 in the evening (Eastern), and we roll every ten minutes after, we get to learn the next rookie to win a Super Bowl (calling it) a full five hours from then. 

Sorry work, but my ability to be in on time Friday, April 30 is a hard maybe.

Pick	Team	Pick Due By
1	Jacksonville Jaguars	20:10
2	New York Jets	20:20
3	San Francisco 49ers (from HOU through MIA)	20:30
4	Atlanta Falcons	20:40
5	Cincinnati Bengals	20:50
6	Miami Dolphins (from PHI)	21:00
7	Detroit Lions	21:10
8	Carolina Panthers	21:20
9	Denver Broncos	21:30
10	Dallas Cowboys	21:40
11	New York Giants	21:50
12	Philadelphia Eagles (from SF through MIA)	22:00
13	Los Angeles Chargers	22:10
14	Minnesota Vikings	22:20
15	New England Patriots	22:30
16	Arizona Cardinals	22:40
17	Las Vegas Raiders	22:50
18	Miami Dolphins	23:00
19	Washington Football Team	23:10
20	Chicago Bears	23:20
21	Indianapolis Colts	23:30
22	Tennessee Titans	23:40
23	New York Jets (from SEA)	23:50
24	Pittsburgh Steelers	0:00
25	Jacksonville Jaguars (from LAR)	0:10
26	Cleveland Browns	0:20
27	Baltimore Ravens	0:30
28	New Orleans Saints	0:40
29	Green Bay Packers	0:50
30	Buffalo Bills	1:00
31	Kansas City Chiefs	1:10
32	Tampa Bay Buccaneers	1:20

The NFL Still Can't Get Scheduling Right

The Kansas City Chiefs 2015 schedule was released last night (the opponents have been known for some time, but not the dates). Some excitement awaits: a Thursday night home game against Denver (who has NFL Network and wants to let me use it?), Monday Night Football at Green Bay, and a Sunday night game at San Diego. Plus the London game against Detroit (which I still plan on making my first visit to Europe to see). Oh, and the Thursday night game against Denver is the home opener to boot.

Two issues. The first is that the bye (November 8) immediately follows the London trip, as it should. And it falls at an appropriate time - halfway through the season. That's fine, but it's still a load of bull that other teams have their bye in September. All byes should take place after a team has played 7-10 games. Does the NFL lose revenue because it has fewer games to show during these weeks? Possibly. But that's when teams need the time off before the playoff push, not after week four when injuries haven't had as much time to pile up. It just makes sense. From a team's perspective.

The second issue is that the final three games of the season are: at Baltimore, CLEVELAND, OAKLAND. The final game is fine. In fact, that's the way it should be - Kansas City/Oakland and San Diego/Denver to end every season. But where are the Bolts and Broncos? While very plausible that the Chiefs could be jockeying with the Ravens and Browns for a wildcard spot, I guarantee the greater intrigue would reside in a season-ending round robin against the other division opponents. Going into the last three games, the majority of divisions should have three (or even four) teams still in the playoff mix assuming they must still all play each other. That should be the goal for every division, and its disappointing the NFL doesn't make it a higher priority.

What Happens If Our OTHER Running Back Goes Down?

Cranking out some ideas for my first article featured in Arrowhead Addict. I'm excited about working with the idea of 'who's more indispensable' going forward - it wrangles with the strategic balance of roster building in weighing who provides not just the most value to the team, but also the most net value (i.e., but for that player's presence, what is the team able to achieve?). 

Jamaal Charles is the best running back the Chiefs have. I could recite his accomplishments and drone on about how I believe he will come back from last year's injury just fine, but there's no use in preaching to the choir here. What you may not be ready to hear is that Charles not only fails to carry the title of "most indispensable to the team," he's not even the most indispensable at his position; Peyton Hillis's presence is more important to our success this year.

To avoid being immediately suspended from ever writing again, let me qualify that paragraph by saying I'm not merely judging what a player brings to the table - I'm also evaluating how readily their talents can be replaced. A 1,600 yard season for Charles and 1,000 yard season for Hillis are reasonable expectations. But without Hillis, we have no change-of-pace bruiser. Currently on the roster at fullback are Shane Bannon, who spent his rookie year in 2011 on the practice squad, and Taylor Gentry, an undrafted rookie out of North Carolina State. Unless one of these guys exceeds expectations during training camp, there is no reliable replacement to run between the tackles and provide burly backfield pass protection if Hillis goes down.

Last year Jackie Battle led the team in rushing while Thomas Jones ranked third. They're never coming back. Dexter McCluster caught 46 receptions and was second on the team in rushing while averaging 4.5 yards/carry in 2011. McCluster is also 5'8", 170 lbs. He's a serviceable substitute for Charles, but not Hillis. He's an exciting player who may not deliver Pro Bowl talent, but can provide  backup if needed to move in from wide receiver. Additionally, with the glut of receivers the Chiefs suddenly find themselves blessed with, moving McCluster back into the backfield wouldn't be that damaging to the receiving corps - we should still have a solid set of receivers plus Moeaki at TE. Cyrus Gray also intrigues me, and provides about the same size as Charles.

There is no doubt in my mind that Charles's contributions will be greater than Hillis's this year. Yet in the event of some unforeseen event depriving us of this extraordinary backfield duo, I'm gritting my teeth and professing a preference for keeping Hillis. Besides, we'll need a bruiser in January to run out the clock as Peyton Manning watches the time wind down to zero to record our first playoff win in far too long. 

So whaddaya think Addicts, is there enough talent on the roster to compensate for another year without Jamaal Charles? Or should I stop writing and just go back to reading Arrowhead Addict from the sidelines?

How Close was ‘Close?’

The AFC West was hands down the most unexceptional division in the NFL last year, with three teams going 8-8 and the Chiefs dragging tail at 7-9. Such density of mediocrity suggests even the last-place team was a bounce or two away from winning not just the West, but landing among the playoff elite (and no, one inexplicable win against the Steelers did not make Tebow’s Donkeys elite). Yet even though KC was close enough to be in play for a division title entering the last week of the season, to say we were close to good is a serious reach.

Although the Chiefs embarrassed themselves during more than one blow out, the overall scoring defense was actually better than average – it’s the offense that failed us week in and week out. For reference, within the division, only San Diego ended the season scoring more points than their opponents.

Team	Points For	NFL Rank	Points Against	NFL Rank	+/-	NFL Rank
Denver	19.3	25	24.4	24	-5.1	25
Kansas City	13.3	31	21.1	12	-7.8	29
Oakland	22.4	16	27.1	29	-4.7	23
San Diego	25.4	5(t)	23.6	22	1.8	11

Aside from a 28-0 blowout of the Raiders, the largest margin of victory the Kansas City enjoyed in 2011 was an ugly 10-3 win over Chicago. Losses included 7-41 (Bills), 3-48 (Lions), 3-31 (Dolphins), 3-34 (Patriots), and 10-37 (Jets). (The Jets game particularly sticks in my craw as my Christmas present to my father was a ticket to the delightful experience of watching the Chiefs gain four net yards in the first half.) Although we finished 7-9, the club played more like a 6-10 or 5-11 team.

So what does being close to winning a bad division portend for the future? Relying on no statistical basis whatsoever, I believe the return of Eric Berry, Jammal Charles, and Tony Moeaki allows us to score/prevent exactly one touchdown per Sunday, requiring free agent pickups and the draft to bridge the remaining gap that puts KC in positive net scoring territory. It’s likely that replacing Barry Richardson single-handedly gives us that bump. The more the Hillis acquisition is dissected, the better it looks. The wide receiver situation is looking exciting. And the potential pairing of Dallas Clark and Moeaki would literally give Cassel more options than he’s capable of checking down.

It’s tempting to worry that all the optimistic conjecture heading into this season is a little overdone; last season, after all, was a few mediocre wins and some very, very bad losses. Has any team ever made the playoffs after suffering so many 30+ point losses the season before?  I believe this year’s team is a playoff team, but going from 7-9 to 10-6 would be much more than a mere three game improvement – and hopefully compared to the Rams turnaround of 1999. 

Undefeated: Nothing to Show, Nothing to Lose

I find myself aimlessly wandering the streets at night, lost and confused in a brave new world I do not understand. My Wildcats remain undefeated entering the month of October, and are receiving votes in both AP and Coach's polls. Even more rare, my Chiefs are the sole undefeated team remaining in the NFL. (I've honestly forgotten what it's like to root for a team and have them emerge victorious.) Both have huge match-ups coming, each being in the unique situation of having little to lose but much to gain.

Kansas State doesn't have a lot to hang their hat on, with successes to-date being adequate. They beat a much different UCLA team than Texas lost to (literally, due to injuries), should've got beat at home against UCF, and took out Iowa State by a single score. Missouri State.

Kansas City finds itself in an equally questionable esteem. Squeakers against their first opponents, no victories over a winning team, and the undefeated stat is misleading b/c they're really only 3-0; receiving a bye this weekend didn't hurt their road to owning the league's only unblemished record.

This is the discourse surrounding each team, and is almost interchangeable (lame passing game, no real great defense personnel upgrades, wily yet unproven coaching staffs that may have outlived their luck…) Yet this weekend provides extraordinary opportunity for both to establish legitimacy. If Kansas State loses to Nebraska on Thursday, the entire nation will pause for five seconds before declaring 'we knew they were posers,' and flipping the channel. But if they win, a victory over UN would likely vault them into the top 20 (I'd say a ten point win lands them at #17). A loss wouldn't be met with surprise, but a win would be viewed credibly and carry staying power because of the accompanying 5-0 record.

Kansas City needn't worry about poll standings, but I'd still like to see them get a bit more respect on the national level. Problem is, they still haven't earned it. Beat the Colts on Sunday, and they'll get theirs. Not only will the West seem very winnable, but success is indicative of the ability to achieve success. Playoffs.

Both contests remain heady tasks, and the underdogs from Kansas won't be favored for a reason. Win, however, and something special is a possibility for both.