JOE POSNANSKI

NEW ORLEANS — In the moments after the loss, Dick Vermeil walked around the Kansas City Chiefs locker room and hugged every player he could find. Yes, this was it. The big hug. The season was over. And everybody in the place knew it.

The Chiefs' season ended in the Superdome in their ninth game.

“I feel,” Chiefs tight end Tony Gonzalez said, “like I'm in a bad dream.”

Oh, it's no dream. Dreams don't have this many penalties. The Chiefs came to New Orleans with the season on the line. They faced the first in a long line of must-win games. They decided to beat the Christmas rush and lose immediately.

They did not just lose, either. No, they collapsed in front of a “sellout” crowd that, by my count, numbered about 1,293. The Chiefs committed 12 penalties, they turned over the ball four times, and they seemed to forget that Joe Horn no longer plays for the Chiefs.

They lost to a Saints team that really, really tried to lose the game first.

On the bright side, the gumbo was excellent.

“It's almost like we're finding ways to lose,” Chiefs quarterback Trent Green said.

Almost? No. It is exactly that. These Chiefs find ways to lose. Then, everybody knew the facts. The big question was: Why? Why did this Chiefs season, which began with bold Super Bowl dreams, expire in the Big Easy before Thanksgiving? Nobody had any answers to that riddle in the locker room on Sunday.

No, there were only hugs, a little pent-up frustration, some very fast dressing and an occasional dreamer talking about winning the last seven games to sneak into the playoffs.

Even Vermeil wasn't dreaming that big.

“The playoffs are over,” he said. He tried to qualify it later. But he got it right the first time. The Chiefs are 3-6, and they're not even a good 3-6. They have lost to Carolina, Houston, Tampa Bay and now New Orleans. Playoffs? Not exactly.

So, why did it happen? Well, the way it goes with losing football teams, the reason changes week to week. They lost to Carolina because they couldn't stop a backup running back, and they lost to Houston because of a ridiculous interception at the goal line, and they lost to Jacksonville because they could not pick up a key first down, and they lost to Tampa Bay because of a missed block and bad throw and a defense that made Brian Griese look like his dad.

Yes, it's hard to keep up.

Sunday, everyone expected the key to be how the Chiefs responded without their best player, Priest Holmes. At first glance, it looks as if they responded very well. Holmes' replacement, Derrick Blaylock, ran for 186 yards — a number Holmes has topped only once in his Chiefs career. Blaylock sliced through the Saints defense. The Chiefs racked up 497 yards of offense. That's good. The obvious problems were turnovers, penalties (including three personal fouls) a terrible timeout and poor defense.

“Even Priest, as great a player as he is, couldn't have changed that,” Chiefs fullback Tony Richardson said.

Well, actually, I disagree. I think Holmes' absence was the big factor, and I'll tell you why: The Chiefs scored only 20 points against the worst defense in the NFL. That simply would not have happened with Holmes in the game.

I'll give you an example: In the first quarter, the Chiefs had six chances from inside the Saints 10 — count 'em, six chances — to score a touchdown that would have given Kansas City a 14-0 lead. Score a touchdown there, and the game just might be over. The Chiefs did not score there. They settled for the field goal. The whole game changed.

The Chiefs would have scored the touchdown had Holmes been in the game.

How do I know? Because Priest Holmes is the greatest touchdown scorer in NFL history. For some reason, people take this for granted. To me, his record-setting 27 touchdowns last season should have been covered like the Mark McGwire/Barry Bonds home run chase (or at least Ichiro's hit chase). But, for some reason, nobody cares about touchdown records, and Holmes' incredible achievement was pretty much ignored.

Sunday, you could see why Holmes' ability to score touchdowns (he has 66 of them in the last two and a half seasons) should be cherished. It's hard to score touchdowns, even against bad defenses. The Chiefs only managed two touchdowns Sunday.

Yes, Blaylock was terrific. But it was just a different offense without Holmes. It was an offense that could move up and down the field. But it was not an offense that scored.

Of course, that's just my opinion. If you want a different reason why the Chiefs lost, well, you certainly do not have to go with the Priest Holmes theory. There are dozens of reasons to choose from. You could argue that they lost because every time a quarterback pump-fakes, the Chiefs safeties bite harder than a Greg Norman pitching wedge. You could argue that Johnnie Morton's fumble and pratfall were the big plays. There was that timeout the Chiefs wasted in the fourth quarter when they did not have enough defenders on the field (not that it made a difference; New Orleans scored on the next play even though by then the Chiefs had the full complement of 11).

Then you could argue that since the Chiefs are the most-penalized team in the conference, since their defense is every bit as bad as it was the last two seasons, since their offense suddenly has turnover problems and Dante Hall has not scored a touchdown and that Kansas City has been outscored 60-20 in the fourth quarter of their six losses, well, you could argue the Chiefs are just not a very good football team.

And maybe that's why the season is already over.