Mellinger Minutes: Chiefs >> Broncos, a prediction, college football and so much more

By Sam Mellinger

Updated October 31, 2018 5:45 PM

The Chiefs beat the Broncos again, and maybe this is the type of thing that interests only me, but that’s their seventh straight win over Denver immediately after a streak of seven losses.

The last time the Broncos beat the Chiefs was Sept. 17, 2015. Peyton Manning started for the Broncos. Jamaal Charles started for the Chiefs.

Barring a playoff game, it will be at least 10 more months before these teams play again. An incomplete list of things that have happened since the last time the Broncos beat the Chiefs:

The Broncos won the Super Bowl, changed coaches, changed quarterbacks three times, and bottomed out (?) at 5-11 last season.
The Chiefs lost one playoff game without giving up a touchdown at home, another after leading 21-3 at home, changed quarterbacks, and now have one of the league’s best teams despite a defense that simply cannot stop the run.
The Royals won the World Series, lost most of the best players from that team, bottomed out (?) with 104 losses last season and now appear to have at least the raw parts of the next window.
Gary Pinkel was diagnosed with cancer, Mizzou rocked by student protests, Kim Anderson fired, Michael Porter Jr. signed and injured, Jontay Porter signed and injured.
Kansas has won a total of six football games (fewer than the number of times the Chiefs have beat the Broncos!), made one Final Four, and defended itself in the wake of an FBI investigation.
Bill Snyder was diagnosed with cancer, the AD replaced, Bruce Weber has gone from pariah to coach of the No. 12 preseason team in the country, and Snyder has gone from untouchable to many fans wanting him replaced.
Also, if I was into pop culture enough, I could probably give you a good paragraph here.

Life moves fast, as they say.

This week’s eating recommendation is the chicken salad sandwich at Brookside Poultry Company, and the reading recommendation is Eve Peyser on the power (good and bad) of Twitter.

I want to pause here for a special mention. Ian Cummings, Glenn Rice, and Tony Rizzo led a magnificent project on a Kansas City serial killer who just kept getting away with it. This is one of the best pieces of journalism in the history of The Star, and I hope you make time for it.

Please give me a follow on Facebook and Twitter, and as always, thanks for your help and thanks for reading.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Halfway through the season, we'll give you a mulligan and let you revise your 8-8 prediction</p>— kwsimpson23 (@kwsimpson23) <a href="https://twitter.com/kwsimpson23/status/1056922255916232706?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

And they say twitter is just a cesspool.

You guys know I like my #math, so I’m going to use game-by-game projections from FiveThirtyEight to guide us here.

The Chiefs’ over-under in Vegas was 8 1/2. The nerds at FiveThirtyEight now have them projected for 13, and the Super Bowl favorite at 19 percent. In Vegas, the Rams are the Super Bowl favorite (8/5) with the Chiefs next in line (5/1), followed by New England (6/1), New Orleans (8/1), Minnesota (12/1) and the Chargers (14/1).

Anyway, you asked for a game-by-game projection.

Sunday, Nov. 4, at Cleveland, 84 percent. The Browns are hard to figure. They once lost 45-42 and won 12-9 in consecutive weeks and now will have that same “screw that let’s play above our heads for the new interim coach because we really hated that last guy” energy that, well, this is awkward but that the 2011 Chiefs once used to beat the 13-0 Packers after Todd Haley was replaced with Romeo Crennel. So, a loss this weekend is absolutely possible. But unlikely. Prediction: win, 8-1.

Sunday, Nov. 11, Cardinals at home, 88 percent. What can I say about this game that Mike Gundy has not said about Twitter:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Mike Gundy has a message about Twitter criticism: <a href="https://t.co/kOBzr9xaWM">pic.twitter.com/kOBzr9xaWM</a></p>— ESPN CollegeFootball (@ESPNCFB) <a href="https://twitter.com/ESPNCFB/status/1056588160745070592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 28, 2018</a></blockquote>

Prediction: win, 9-1.

Monday, Nov. 19, Rams in Mexico City, 52 percent. One of the most anticipated games of the season, and that’s league wide. The Chiefs offense has performed slightly better than the Rams, but the difference is essentially negligible. The Rams defense is waaaayyyy better, but the Chiefs’ recent improvement is worth noting, and they’ll have an advantage with special teams. My way-too-early hunch is that the Chiefs will hold up well, but that Todd Gurley will end up the difference. Prediction: loss, 9-2.

Sunday, Dec. 2, at Oakland, 80 percent. The Raiders are a steaming hot mess. People will talk about this being a trap game, but that’s a thing that doesn’t actually exist. Prediction: win, 10-2.

Sunday, Dec. 9, Ravens at home, 72 percent. The Rams game is the jewel, but I’m looking forward to this one nearly as much. The Ravens have the best defense in football, and it’s not particularly close. First in points, first in yards, first in yards per pass. They had 11 dang sacks two weeks ago against the Titans. I think the Chiefs will win, because the Ravens don’t force enough turnovers and won’t be able to score enough, but I’m fascinated to see how they defend the Chiefs. Prediction: win, 11-2.

Thursday, Dec. 13, Chargers at home, 72 percent. The Chargers are playing really well, and that number feels a little high, but I’m out on the Chargers until they stop being the Chargers — lots of promise, lots of talent, lots of doing just enough to lose in big moments. Prediction: win, 12-2.

Sunday, Dec. 23, at Seahawks, 53 percent. I’m surprised that the nerds’ projections give the Chiefs essentially the same chance of beating the Rams and Seahawks, and a little disappointed because I wanted this pick to deviate from what you’d expect. This just feels like the loss people won’t see coming. The Seahawks aren’t great, but Russell Wilson is, and that’s a really tough place to play. Prediction: loss, 12-3.

Sunday, Dec. 30, Raiders at home, 90 percent. WHAT PART OF THE RAIDERS ARE A MESS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND. Prediction: win, 13-3.

So, there it is. Me and the computers agree.

Although, if you made me choose between more than 13 or fewer, I’d take the over. I really do think the defense is getting better. We’ll talk more about that soon.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Do you think that what Pat is doing is sustainable? If not, what does regression actually look like for this kid? (Yes I realize I call him kid while only three years older)</p>— Peter Yadrich (@peterwhygolf) <a href="https://twitter.com/peterwhygolf/status/1056916499032666112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

My experience with this entire season has basically been a mental battle between believing in the limits of what I think is possible and believing in what is actually happening in reality.

I always believed Patrick Mahomes would be this good.

I simply did not think it was possible that he’d be this good this quickly.

Halfway through the season he is on pace for 5,052 yards, 52 touchdowns, and 12 interceptions, while completing 65.6 percent of his passes and averaging 8.9 yards per attempt.

QBR hasn’t really taken off as a stat, but he’s at 85.3, which is better than anyone in the history of the stat since 2007. The complete list of quarterbacks who’ve been better than 85.3:

Tom Brady in 2007, when the Patriots went 18-1 and he threw for 50 touchdowns with eight interceptions.

Peyton Manning in 2006, when the Colts won the Super Bowl.

That’s the entire list.

So my answer depends on what you mean by sustainable. If we’re being obnoxiously strict with this, no, I do not think he’ll finish the season with those numbers, basically because that would mean his first season as a starting quarterback was as good or better than any season of any starting quarterback.

But if we’re talking more about the spirit of the question, yes, absolutely, I believe this is sustainable. I believe that his production will be MVP-level this year, next, and as long as he continues to put in the work and be surrounded by so many advantages.

There will be dips, for sure, but you asked a question here about what regression looks like and I’m not sure it doesn’t look like what we saw on Sunday — nothing spectacular, some opportunities left on the field particularly late, and he still throws for 303 yards, four touchdowns and one interception.

That is an absurd paragraph to write, but I wrote it, and now I’ve read it again three times and I still believe it’s true.

He’s struggled three times: against Jacksonville, the first half at New England, and the first half at Denver.

There are explanations we can grab here. Jacksonville and Denver are stacked with talent, and New England’s coach is probably the greatest defensive mind in football history. Mahomes plays with emotion and innocence, so it’s reasonable to think he was overamped for his first Monday night game at Denver and the league’s biggest regular season platform on a Sunday night in Foxborough.

All of that is true, and so is this: the Chiefs scored 97 points in those three games, with Mahomes throwing for 969 yards and five touchdowns. Mahomes is the only player to go for 300 yards against the Broncos, and he’s done it twice. He’s the first quarterback under 25 to throw four touchdowns against the Patriots, and the only one of any age to score 31 points in the second half where the phones don’t work.

The Jaguars were so shook after seeing Mahomes that here are some things they said afterward:

“The road to the Super Bowl is probably gonna come through here.”

“We got drug out there — straight drug.”

“That was probably the best offense in the NFL.”

“He reminds me a lot of Aaron Rodgers.”

“I’ve never seen a team do that to us consistently, and they had their way with us all game.”

“We just know we got our butts kicked today.”

One more time, because it’s worth repeating: this was after Mahomes’ worst game of the season.

He’ll have some struggles, because at some point, they all do, even Rodgers, even Brady.

But he’s a star, and eight games in, I need to be convinced why he won’t win MVPs and Super Bowls.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Sam, you need to talk me down. Dee Ford is having a career year, and if Houston and Berry can work back in...you gotta talk some sense into me here. I’m a human, with a fragile heart that’s been broken too many times. Give it to me straight.</p>— Adam Booman (@AdamNewman913) <a href="https://twitter.com/AdamNewman913/status/1056913700609818624?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

Well, let’s be real: a 48-46 playoff loss is absolutely on the table, and lord help this corner of the internet if the kid is injured.

They have what is effectively a half-game lead over the Patriots for home field advantage in the playoffs, which is among the most crucial things to watch over the second half.

Assuming general health, that’s the one factor that could determine whether the Chiefs are more likely to make the Super Bowl or add to a franchise history of postseason letdowns.

But I do think that some of what the defense is doing is replicable, and perhaps even improvable.

The health of Justin Houston and Eric Berry are the most obvious factors here*, but not the only ones. Breeland Speaks is so much better than the beginning of the season. Steven Nelson is covering like a representative No. 1 corner. The tackling has improved. The pass rush is more consistent.

* And, yes, I absolutely believe they can and should be cautious with those guys considering the record and schedule. That’s a luxury the Chiefs should take advantage of. Work those guys back slowly. Use the extra day of rest between the Cardinals and Rams games, use the bye week after the Rams, use the crappy Cardinals and/or Raiders to get reps.

There are some real things going on here. Dorian O’Daniel is not a three-down linebacker — or, at least, the Chiefs don’t believe he is right now — but his strength of covering running backs in passing downs fits nicely with one of the defense’s biggest weaknesses.

I know I keep bringing this up, both in the paper and on the Border Patrol, but the standards are different now. The defense does not have to be great, or even good or, actually, even mediocre. It just needs to be average by 2018 NFL standards, which is sort of like saying you just want your toddler to not throw up at the dinner table.

There are a lot of things to fix. Way too many miscommunications, way too much inability to stop the run, and way too little margin for error to ever feel comfortable.

But the offense makes the defense better, particularly the pass rush.

I keep saying this, but the goal should be five stops a game: some combination of punts or turnovers.

Do that, and the Chiefs should be unbeatable. Even four in a game would give the Chiefs a significant advantage.

Now, the part that nobody is talking about is that the run defense is what ended their most recent season, and the run defense is, actually, even worse statistically. They are dead last in yardage (5.2 per carry) and the advanced metrics at Pro Football Focus and Football Outsiders.

The most puzzling part of opponents’ game plans against the Chiefs is that nobody has been able to fully exploit this. I get that the Chiefs’ offense is so good it talks opponents into taking chances, but if it was me, I’d run the ball 30 times, minimum.

Think about this: the Chiefs have the worst run defense, but 15 teams have faced more run attempts and only the Bengals have faced more pass attempts.

Royce Freeman’s injury limited what the Broncos could do on Sunday, but I still thought they let that balance get away from them. I’m curious if we see teams like the Chargers and Rams exploit this a little better, particularly since it cuts Mahomes’ opportunities and (theoretically) is less risky for turnovers.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">How bout the effort by Speaks to get this fumble? How would you grade the rookie class overall at the midseason mark? <a href="https://t.co/cmDXV9NTGq">pic.twitter.com/cmDXV9NTGq</a></p>— Alexander LeRoy (@alhenton) <a href="https://twitter.com/alhenton/status/1056912508924162048?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

Nobody on the roster has improved more than Speaks from beginning to now. There was a time he appeared essentially unplayable, just getting beat like drum with remarkable consistency.

More recently — generally beginning with the Jaguars game — he’s held up much better, with flashes of promise. The sack against the Broncos was a really nice play, winning with his hands and leaning into the tackle to turn the corner and get to Case Keenum.

I mean, let’s be honest. Keenum has to get rid of that ball. But Speaks beat his man.

Fumble recoveries have a lot to do with luck, so I don’t want to make too much of that, but the awareness and reaction is promising.

This is also the part where a mention of Speaks means a mention of Tanoh Kpassagnon, who made the best play of his young career:

The blend of preparation (to recognize the play), strength (to shed the blocker) and athleticism (to make the tackle) is rather tantalizing.

Kpassagnon has been more impressive in his snaps than Speaks has been in his, and has only played in more snaps than Speaks once — 18-16 at Denver.

For the season, Speaks has played 315 snaps and Kpassagnon 84. This is a thing, with some fans wondering if the Chiefs are playing Speaks because he’s A Veach Guy and Kpassagnon was drafted by John Dorsey.

I don’t know that there is none of that, but I do believe that’s not all of it. Speaks has a better skill set against the run and is generally a better tackler.

I’d like to see more of Kpassagnon, but he’s also had a year and a half in the system to show the coaches who he is. Particularly with Speaks’ rapid improvement, I’m not sure this is something to crush them over.

All that said, the most puzzling part of this is I believe Kpassagnon’s future is on the edge and Speaks’ in the middle. Would make sense to push those two paths a bit more, particularly with Kpassagnon making some nice plays, but I’m just a dumb sports writer.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A list?! If the Chiefs put one of their second round picks "on the block", who are the top 5 players you would think could be afforded with that and could help the Chiefs in the playoffs?</p>— MJ Masterson (@Jaymaul4) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jaymaul4/status/1056919991851851778?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

I’m not sure what the compensation would have to be. There are too many factors that go into that, including individual needs and a team’s willingness to move.

Also, here’s the only disclaimer that matters: I don’t believe the Chiefs will make a trade. That’s what I’ve been hearing since Earl Thomas’ leg broke, and it’s a point that’s been reinforced to me in recent days.

But, whatever. Let’s make a dang list.

1. Ha Ha Clinton-Dix, S, Packers. He’s been rumored to be a trade candidate and is exactly what the Chiefs need: a centerfielder safety.

2. Landon Collins, S, Giants. Basically the same as Clinton-Dix. The Giants are ripping apart the roster, so it’s worth a call.

3. Tre Boston, S, Cardinals. Fits the profile.

4. Blake Martinez, LB, Packers. If they’re willing to listen on Clinton-Dix, maybe they’re willing to listen on a young linebacker with some coverage skills. I’m just throwing stuff at the wall at this point, but you asked for five.

5. Ryan Kelly, C, Colts. Long as we’re throwing stuff at the wall, a center with another year on his contract might be a fit for a team that’s been playing its third-string center and whose starter is both injured and a pending free agent.

One more time: I’ll be very surprised if there’s a trade. If something happens, it will have developed very late, and it will mean the Chiefs sacrificing some of their plan to add defensive line and cornerback help with their first three picks next year.

But, if nothing else, these types of things are a starting point for what the team might try to do this offseason.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Good things happen when Dorian O’Daniel is on the field. Aside from being arguably their best tackler, he can cover backs out of the back field. Why is Bob Sutton seemingly adverse to giving him more snaps?</p>— Teddy Gilmore (@teddy_gilmore) <a href="https://twitter.com/teddy_gilmore/status/1056918370350587904?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

This question will conclude the football nerd portion of our time suck, but there are a couple things to highlight here:

O’Daniel was intriguing out of the draft, a seemingly good fit for what Sutton wants to do, and has been relatively impressive in his 63 snaps this season.
His greatest strength, at least at the moment, is covering and tackling running backs in the passing game. That happens to line up with one of the defense’s greatest weaknesses.
He has played more lately — all but 10 of his snaps are in the last two games. Most of that has been because of injuries, but still. They’re using him more.
I shouldn’t have saved this one for last because it’s the most important, but doing it like this lets me hit the ejector button on this bullet point format so let’s just start a new and clean paragraph.

Inserting O’Daniel is not a simple plug-and-play trade. The Chiefs do not see him as a three-down linebacker, and playing him as such would require changing some of how they play defense. He’s a sub package guy, and there’s value in that, but it means going back to a system closer to what they did last year, a season that ended with the front office blowing it up.

He’s really vulnerable against the run, for instance, and we saw that in the Denver game, including on this play:

That’s why the Chiefs have tried to play him in pass downs only — according to Pro Football Focus 49 of his 63 snaps have been against the pass.

So, that’s the pickle. He can help solve one of the defense’s biggest weaknesses (coverage of backs in passing plays) but would amplify the defense’s single biggest weakness (tackling backs in running plays).

Maybe you make the case that if they’re that bad now, how much worse could they be with O’Daniel, and perhaps we’ll get to that point. But right now, it’s completely logical to try to keep him off the field against runs.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">What will the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Royals?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Royals</a> look to do this offseason?</p>— Alexander LeRoy (@alhenton) <a href="https://twitter.com/alhenton/status/1056920503120809986?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

Not much, you guys, and deservedly so.

The pieces for an interesting — let’s not say “good” yet — and young team are already in-house and under contract:

Whit Merrifield, 2B

Adalberto Mondesi, SS

Jorge Soler, DH

Ryan O’Hearn, 1B

Sal Perez, C

Alex Gordon, LF

Jorge Bonifacio, RF

Hunter Dozier, 3B

Brett Phillips or Brian Goodwin, CF

You can pick this apart. O’Hearn hit 12 homers in 149 at bats but he doesn’t have the prospect pedigree you’d traditionally bet on. There are plenty of examples of guys outplaying their minor league projections — Merrifield is one of the best in recent baseball history — but penciling him in as the cleanup hitter is optimistic.

There’s a lot to be encouraged about with Hunter Dozier, and I do believe he hit into some bad luck, but he’s also 27 years old and slashed .229/.278/.395 in his only full big league season.

This lineup also has questions in need of answers with Soler (next-level power, but he’ll be 27 in February and his career high is 12 home runs), Bonifacio (unproductive after his suspension) and center field (are either of those guys everyday studs?).

And that assumes that Mondesi is a star, that Perez’s body will hold up, that they can find a replacement for Gordon when his contract is up, and we haven’t even talked about the pitching.

So the point here is not that the Royals have a turnkey roster, and that all or even most of this roster will be around when and if they next spray the clubhouse with champagne.

But, particularly with a directive to shave payroll, the logical move is to see how many of the answers are already in the organization — remember, Khalil Lee and others lurk in the minor leagues — before making significant moves from the outside.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Has Barry Odom reached the point of no return? Sure feels like it </p>— AJ (@AJTrueSon) <a href="https://twitter.com/AJTrueSon/status/1056915129160421376?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

That was a bad, bad, rotten, awful, terrible, bad, horrendous, bad loss on Saturday. You have probably read Vahe’s column, but if not, it’s recommended.

The quote from Odom that sticks:

“I’m devastated for our football team, and this will be one that we live with forever.”

The loss to South Carolina was bad enough, a series of self-created challenges and lack of fortitude against adversity, but with a win against Kentucky you could use some revisionist history and call it a learning moment.

That doesn’t work when there is no learning, when there is no progress. Mizzou is losing these games by the thinnest of margins — literally one play against Kentucky, and realistically about the same against South Carolina.

But that’s the point in football, that a lot of games are won on a single play, and Mizzou has consistently been the team that loses on a single play.

There are few places in the world where perception matters more than in college sports. That’s why universities spend so much time and money building palatial practice and weight facilities, why 50-year-old men wear mullets, and why NFL coaches pridefully mock “Facespace” and “Tweeter” while you see college coaches use the mediums like teenagers.

And right now, the perception has turned on Odom in a very real and meaningful way.

Opportunities don’t last forever, and he’s a defensive head coach who was gifted a fourth year from a star quarterback and is now 3-4 against FBS competition. Without a win next week at Florida — Mizzou opened as a six-point underdog — Odom will continue to wear the criticism that his Power 5 wins have been mostly against losing programs.

This all looks different if Mizzou finishes with wins over Vandy, at Tennessee and against Arkansas. That would make for 7-5 (assuming a loss at Florida) and be another year where Odom showed he could keep a roster together through adversity.

But that act is wearing thin, and at some point, Odom is going to have to do more than the bare minimum.

All of these things can be true at once.

I believe that if KU beats K-State in two weeks it will be very difficult to fire Beaty. He would have won four games, including two in the conference. The last coach to do either of those things at Kansas is Mark Mangino.

I wrote about this at the time, but this was always the problem with firing Sheahon Zenger but keeping David Beaty.

By doing it this way — including the timing, in May — chancellor Douglas Girod essentially kneecapped the program for a year. Because everyone expects Beaty to be fired.

KU has one commitment for next year. One. K-State has eight, and everyone else in the league has at least 16. This is a major problem, and you can’t isolate it to one cause, but firing the AD and replacing him with a man whose primary qualification is his ability to hire football coaches is about as clear a signal as possible that you plan on firing the coach you already have.

So, now you face the possibility of either keeping a coach you don’t want, or firing him after the program’s best — least terrible? — season in a decade.

Kansas football has a lot going against it, but its own decisions have often been the biggest killer.

If the NCAA wanted to punish Kansas, it could use the playbook that came from the North Carolina fake class investigation, and before we go on I want to make a clear point:

The only college sports scandals in recent years that I’ve thought deserved serious punishment have happened at UNC, Michigan State, Baylor, and Penn State.

But even with an eventual all-clear from the NCAA, North Carolina basketball took what you might call a long and soft punishment of living under the cloud. Brandon Ingram openly admitted he likely would have gone to UNC if not for the investigation. UNC went from regularly fielding one of the country’s best classes to No. 70 in the first year of the investigation.

Now, with that in the past, UNC is again loading up on top recruits.

That’s the extent of the punishment I can see for Kansas, but even that seems like a stretch.

Because from what’s been made public so far, the FBI and by extension NCAA do not have the goods.

They have some code word text messages from Bill Self, and a wire tapped conversation in which assistant Kurtis Townsend expresses openness to a recruit’s desire for cash and housing.

The text messages prove nothing, and coaches will point out (privately) that Townsend could have just been trying to keep the conversation going. Besides, the recruit went to Duke, so if you’re going to investigate you better be up for getting all up into Mike Krzyzewski’s business.

Maybe something similar could happen with Kansas, but I doubt it.

I’ve been consistent on this, somehow to the chagrin of both Kansas fans and Kansas haters, but the NCAA needs to decide what it wants to be.

It can try to continue this charade of amateurism, which by the NCAA’s definition includes assistant coaches with seven-figure salaries and facilities that in many cases are literally better than the NFL.

Or, it can try to inject some honesty into an enterprise that a lot of us love despite the enterprise.

Because the status quo is unsustainable. At some point, enough people will realize that.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Full-ride scholarships to the school of your kids' choices if you're right:<br>who goes further in the playoffs, Chiefs or Sporting KC? (and what schools would you hope your kids choose, keeping in mind admission requirements and how smart you think they'll be?)</p>— Cory Anderson (@CoryMeBadd) <a href="https://twitter.com/CoryMeBadd/status/1056949992336826370?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

It’s a hell of a question.

My hunch at the moment is that Sporting will lose in the MLS Cup. This is the best team they’ve had since the 2013 champs, and the best attack they’ve had, ever. They’ll have home field advantage, though in the MLS that still means playing the first leg on the road.

But they’re healthy, completely in form, and playing the style Peter Vermes has been pushing toward for years — perhaps most notably with the Dom Dwyer sale last year.

If they get that far, Sporting would likely play the MLS Cup on the road — at Atlanta FC or the Red Bulls — and at that point my bet would be with the home team.

So, now you’re asking me if I think the Chiefs will win the Super Bowl.

And they can!

But there’s so much that can go wrong, including injuries, obviously, but also the run defense being further exposed or the pass rush drying up or the line being unable to protect or more Chiefs things happening in January.

So my bet would be on Sporting.

As far as the school goes, our kids are pretty different. The older one is pretty smart, and really into numbers and building. Engineer’s brain. He also hates the summer, and loves the winter, because he’s my son and he gets hot easily so I’m predicting he’d end up somewhere like Purdue.

The younger one is smart, too, but he’s kind of wild and to be honest at the moment the only school I can imagine him at is Arizona State. The kid’s going to be a partier, you guys.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The chiefs are 8-0 at the coin flip this year. What kind of scouting goes into picking heads or tails? Who is the coin flip quality control coach? How will teams adjust to this success and is it sustainable? It's a copy cat league, will others try to replicate?</p>— Andrew Corrao (@penguinxcrossin) <a href="https://twitter.com/penguinxcrossin/status/1056919391546363904?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

Patrick Mahomes has given the team a new confidence. He doesn’t check down to heads every time. He’ll go tails when he feels like it or, and this is what really separates the great from the good, he’ll be thinking tails when the official shows him the coin but change his mind to heads depending on what he sees. That’s just instinct. Can’t coach it.

The other thing that we have to keep in mind is that Andy Reid has been doing this a long time. He’s seen a LOT of coin flips in his day, so that experience really helps. You’re absolutely right that it’s a copy cat league, and we’re already seeing some teams try to mimic the Chiefs’ innovative approach, but it just doesn’t work the same if you don’t have speed on the outside and versatile playmakers over the middle.

Fun fact: the Chiefs also won all four of their coin flips in the preseason.

The odds of winning 12 coin flips in a row: 0.02441 percent.

This is a cliche comparison, but the odds of a person being struck by lightning sometime in their life are literally higher.

College football is the hardest thing for me to get to, particularly when the Chiefs are good and/or interesting.

Because when the Chiefs are good and/or interesting, it can feel like the only thing that matters, or at least the one thing the most people want to read about. So, that tends to take over the weekends — both in coverage and time.

Coverage, because the stories centered on the weekend are typically going to be about the Chiefs.

And time, because it can be hard to get to a college game on Saturday and a Chiefs game on Sunday.

This part of it is just logistics. You mentioned the South Carolina game. The way Mizzou’s schedule laid out, that really felt like a big moment either way, so we wanted to make every effort to be there.

Vahe had gone to the Georgia game the week before, and Blair to Purdue the week before that. Columbia, SC is not really close to a major airport, so with the Chiefs playing a noon game against the Jaguars the next day I flew to Atlanta Friday night, drove about three hours to the game, then three hours back to Atlanta for an early morning flight to be able to catch the Chiefs game.

I was grateful for the early kickoff, particularly after the weather delay.

I’m well aware that other people have actual problems, and that traveling to watch football is something I won’t ever complain about, but you can see the challenges here.

We kicked around the idea of doing Mizzou-Florida this weekend, but then getting to Cleveland for a noon Chiefs kickoff becomes really difficult. We thought about doing Mizzou-Alabama a few weeks ago, but the chances of that being a game worth a column combined with the difficulty of getting to Foxborough the next day wiped that out.

I’m only going through Mizzou’s schedule because that’s the one you asked about. K-State would be a similar story. So would Kansas, if there was enough interest.

The goal for me in the fall is to provide the absolute best Chiefs coverage possible. It’s the one thing that Mizzou, K-State, and KU fans are interested in. That means podcasts, and silly columns on Dustin Colquitt’s lack of work, and more in-depth reporting on Patrick Mahomes’ background, and game columns whenever and wherever they play.

After that, the second priority during the fall is college football. When a local team is particularly good or interesting, we’ll make every effort to staff as many games as possible with a columnist.

For the games we can’t get to, we always have a talented beat writer or two, and as far as I know, we’re the only local media outlet to have reporters living in those college towns with their professional lives centered on covering those teams.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">For our friend Derek Wolfe-<br>Name the top 3 cities you loathe having to work at</p>— Tyler Watterson (@thebiggszone) <a href="https://twitter.com/thebiggszone/status/1056919336202293250?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

A list?

A list!

1. Boston. Honestly, this list should only be one city deep. There is only one road trip I truly don’t like, and lately, it seems like it’s been every freaking year. Boston has the convenience of LA but without the beaches, the prices of New York without the New York, and the weather of Chicago without bars that stay open past like midnight. It takes about an hour — that’s not an exaggeration — to get from the plane to the car rental center, and you have to rent a car, because they built the football stadium about an hour from Boston, and that’s an hour without traffic, which is sort of like talking about a Snickers bar without the calories, because the phrase “without traffic” does not exist in Boston and sure as hell does not exist on the way to Foxborough. Truly, it’s the worst. If I was Derek Wolfe this is the part where I’d say the only thing I like is the clam chowder and lobster rolls. Everything else can go kick rocks.

2. Surprise, Ariz. Again, this list should really only be one city long. Spring training is one of my favorite trips of the year. I’m a sucker for the optimism of the time, and it’s always great to escape for a week or so in February and March for perfect weather and baseball. But as a place to stay, Surprise is pretty terrible.

As Rustin Dodd puts it, “it’s all chain restaurants and urgent care facilities.”

As Kyle Zimmer once put it, “there’s only so many times you can go to Wal-Mart.

3. Las Vegas. And I haven’t even worked there yet! I might be the only person who covers the NFL and is bummed the Raiders are moving from Oakland, but here I am. My sister and her family are in Oakland, so that’s most of it, but it’s also a good place — gorgeous parks for hiking, great food, San Francisco just across the bridge. I’m not much of a gambler, not much of a Vegas guy, and am already a little annoyed about the Southwest flight to Vegas for an NFL weekend.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Is the Paw Patrol funded by some crazy tax law in Adventure Bay, or is there some crazy anonymous billionaire that's funding them?</p>— McEwans15 (@McEwans15) <a href="https://twitter.com/McEwans15/status/1056976394125828098?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

Paw Patrol is funded by suckers like you and me, who spend way too much money on plastic toys because of a truly diabolical run of product placement and advertisements. Need a new bulldozer, Rubble? Maybe one with wifi and satellite radio? Cool, the Mellingers just bought two more rescue boats.

I will say this, though. Our oldest had a buddy over yesterday, and they had a Paw Patrol party that sounded as fun as anything I experienced in college.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">How do you keep the Minutes so professional? <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/makesfartnoise?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#makesfartnoise</a></p>— Jon Geitz (@therealjongeitz) <a href="https://twitter.com/therealjongeitz/status/1056913132705202176?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote>

The best part of that was the transcript included the description — *makes fart noise.*

So, I don’t know if you’re really asking about this or not, but this weekly time suck has changed over the years, the same as I’ve changed over the years.

But it’s always been part of an actual plan, whether it’s appeared that way or not. When I got this job, my boss asked what kind of columnist I wanted to be. I should have asked him to clarify what he meant, but I assumed he wondered if I saw myself as more of The Take Guy, or The Feature Guy, or The Funny Guy, or whatever.

I thought a lot about the question. Did I want the theme of my stuff to be fan-centric, or to hold the powerful accountable? Did I want to tell stories, or use metrics to analyze? Did I want to be personal, or more traditional? Did I want to spill emotion into the keyboard, or keep a sterile distance?

The truth was I wanted to be some of all of that, at different moments, but that if I had to simplify my approach to this job in a short sentence it would be this:

I want to be the sports columnist I’d want in Kansas City if I had a real job.

This silly little weekly exercise was started based partly on curiosity (if anyone would read it), humility (the need for you to tell me what you’re interested in), fear (that I couldn’t think of anything good on my own), ambition (I didn’t know of anyone else doing it regularly at the time) and other emotions that I’m forgetting at the moment.

But I always wanted this to be different than the columns. This has always been more personal, less focused on one thing, with more silliness and hopefully a conversational feel.

Some of the stuff I’ve gotten away with has surprised me, if I’m being totally honest, and I have to thank my bosses for believing I’m not going to embarrass them (not all the time anyway).

Some of the stuff we’ve talked about here has surprised me too, if I’m being totally honest, and I have to thank you guys for being interested and engaged enough to push me forward.

Sometimes we hit familiar themes — we’ve talked about the Royals offseason on here before — but I do hope there’s enough variety and thought and information in here to be worth your time.

This job has been a thrill for me, both professionally and personally. I don’t think I’ll do it forever, but I know that if and when I’m doing something else I will miss parts of this job fiercely.

Chief among what I’ll miss is this dumb weekly conversation, where we’ve talked about everything from quarterbacks to tacos, from baseball strategy to cartoons, and from college scandals to essentially every major event of my life — getting married, buying a house, two sons born and losing my mom.

I started this job wanting to be the sports columnist I’d want if I had a real job, and now that I’m in it I realize one of the best parts is that I have the readers I’d be desperately jealous of if I was a sports columnist anywhere else.

This week, I’m particularly grateful for the opportunity for a friend who this week begins the career path he’s always wanted. It can be a scary thing to start something brand new at a certain age, but he’s bold, a great person, and I can’t wait to see him in his element.

This story was originally published October 30, 2018 at 11:18 AM.

Sports Pass is your ticket to Kansas City sports

#ReadLocal