PDA

View Full Version : Best fit for Matt Flyn according to NFL Network



AussieChiefsFan
03-02-2012, 02:54 AM
According to NFL Network Miami is the best fit for Flyn. If they sign him, we get a better shot at Manning due to Miami also being a contender for him.

matthewschiefs
03-02-2012, 02:57 AM
I am thinking that Manning will be signed before free agency starts. He will be able to sign because he will be cut from anther team. I don't see him being on the market for more then a couple of days. There's going to be many teams lined up to try to get him. I think we are going to be one. If Flynn does hit the market and the Packers don't franchise him then he's going to get a ton of offers from the teams that don't end up with Peyton. I would much rather having Peyton myself. Flynn just has not proven he be a good starter for a whole season.

AussieChiefsFan
03-02-2012, 03:00 AM
I am thinking that Manning will be signed before free agency starts. He will be able to sign because he will be cut from anther team. I don't see him being on the market for more then a couple of days. There's going to be many teams lined up to try to get him. I think we are going to be one. If Flynn does hit the market and the Packers don't franchise him then he's going to get a ton of offers from the teams that don't end up with Peyton. I would much rather having Peyton myself. Flynn just has not proven he be a good starter for a whole season.I agree. Manning will go very quick. I hope FLyn goes before him though is 1 team is out of the way. Miami WOULD be good, because they ARE in the hunt for manning

TecmoNightmare
03-02-2012, 07:48 AM
I would see Flynn in Miami before Manning, since Philbin went there, who was offensive coordinator in Green Bay.

AussieChiefsFan
03-02-2012, 08:11 AM
I would see Flynn in Miami before Manning, since Philbin went there, who was offensive coordinator in Green Bay.

Hope this happens. :bananen_smilies046:

chiefnut
03-02-2012, 09:36 AM
has anyone considered the colts sign flynn and trade their pick

okikcfan
03-02-2012, 09:41 AM
Has anyone considered signing Flynn and not taking Manning?

OPLookn
03-02-2012, 11:56 AM
has anyone considered the colts sign flynn and trade their pick

Wow, had NOT thought about that. That was like watching the movie The Matrix for the first time when you wrapped your head around the idea that humans were the battery powering the machines. Sorry for ruining the movie for anyone...then again if you haven't watched it by now...

At any rate. I don't think this is as big of a thing for the Colts to try to do. The Colts have their pick and from everything I've read or heard most teams would be perfectly happy with the other guy not picked with the first. So I don't think they'd really have much interest. This year I think the second pick is the pick that every team wants.

KCCF
03-02-2012, 12:51 PM
Has anyone considered signing Flynn and not taking Manning?


Lol you want another cassel experiment? Hows that worked for us.

Jrudi
03-02-2012, 01:45 PM
I am thinking that Manning will be signed before free agency starts. He will be able to sign because he will be cut from anther team. I don't see him being on the market for more then a couple of days. There's going to be many teams lined up to try to get him. I think we are going to be one. If Flynn does hit the market and the Packers don't franchise him then he's going to get a ton of offers from the teams that don't end up with Peyton. I would much rather having Peyton myself. Flynn just has not proven he be a good starter for a whole season.

It could happen, but that is expecting a lot. There's only 4 days between the day Manning is due his money, and Free agency beginning. There's a ton that goes into contract negotiations, and it's a lot to do in 4 days considering the travel Manning will have to do.

I think he takes his time with this decision. He want's to be sure that he is making the right decision because he knows this will be his last chance to cement his name as one of the best, and make another super bowl run. He will cover all his basis before a decision, I think it's at least 1.5-2 weeks before we hear who he signs with.

Three7s
03-02-2012, 01:50 PM
Lol you want another cassel experiment? Hows that worked for us.
Some people on this forum seem to think it's worked great!

TecmoNightmare
03-02-2012, 01:50 PM
has anyone considered the colts sign flynn and trade their pick

Cannot see it happening cause Irsay is so dead set on Luck coming out as the real deal.

I's wrong of me, but the way he's pretty much screwing Manning over, I wouldn't feel bad if everything went wrong for the Colts after wasting an entire season to get that #1 pick and blaming it all on the absence of a quarterback. But then again, I have never liked the Colts, just liked Peyton because he's a southern boy.

matthewschiefs
03-02-2012, 02:05 PM
It could happen, but that is expecting a lot. There's only 4 days between the day Manning is due his money, and Free agency beginning. There's a ton that goes into contract negotiations, and it's a lot to do in 4 days considering the travel Manning will have to do.

I think he takes his time with this decision. He want's to be sure that he is making the right decision because he knows this will be his last chance to cement his name as one of the best, and make another super bowl run. He will cover all his basis before a decision, I think it's at least 1.5-2 weeks before we hear who he signs with.

That's true it will be a lot of work. But I think alot of that work is already going. Even though he's not yet been cut it's no secret that it's going to happen. NFL teams no that. I think theres already some talk with the agent going on.

okikcfan
03-02-2012, 02:15 PM
Lol you want another cassel experiment? Hows that worked for us.

Really? And Peyton Manning would be what? A sure thing? A free ticket to the Superbowl? Who's to know until these players play what could really happen. Flynn could come here and be an outstanding QB where as Manning could come here and be no better than Cassel. Manning would be here 1, 2, 3 years at the most, Then we can start all over where as Flynn could be here awhile as long as he's better than Cassel. I would rather have a long term fix to build on. Manning is not it even if he can play.....

OPLookn
03-02-2012, 02:47 PM
Some people on this forum seem to think it's worked great!

If they think it's so great why are we talking about getting a new starting QB or trading up for our QBotF? As I've said in other posts I'm not trying to be a d*ck I seriously would like to know their thoughts on the subject. Or if you're referring to yourself jump in and provide some insights.

:bananen_smilies046:

okikcfan
03-02-2012, 04:00 PM
If they think it's so great why are we talking about getting a new starting QB or trading up for our QBotF? As I've said in other posts I'm not trying to be a d*ck I seriously would like to know their thoughts on the subject. Or if you're referring to yourself jump in and provide some insights.

:bananen_smilies046:

BaaaBAM! :lol:

Three7s
03-02-2012, 04:53 PM
If they think it's so great why are we talking about getting a new starting QB or trading up for our QBotF? As I've said in other posts I'm not trying to be a d*ck I seriously would like to know their thoughts on the subject. Or if you're referring to yourself jump in and provide some insights.

:bananen_smilies046:
Yeah, I'm only known as one of the bigger "Cassel haters" on the forum currently. If you've been active over the past few months, it'd be pretty easy to know who the Cassel supporters are.

OPLookn
03-02-2012, 05:03 PM
Yeah, I'm only known as one of the bigger "Cassel haters" on the forum currently. If you've been active over the past few months, it'd be pretty easy to know who the Cassel supporters are.

Actually the Cassel supporters have been pretty quiet lately. It's kinda suprizing actually. Either they're supporting the Manning trade or haven't really jumped on the "let's keep Cassel" wagon. I didn't think you were a Cassel supporter but I don't really pay that much attention to who likes who and which people they feel need to go.

okikcfan
03-02-2012, 05:20 PM
I'm not a Cassel hater, I just think we need to do better at QB and don't feel he or Orton are the one's for the job. Manning if he can play well then yea I'd take him but he would not be my choice. I would rather have a long term QB, Stanzi? flynn? RG3? I don't know but I feel we need to do some thing. We need to improve at the QB to get to where we want to go.

KCCF
03-02-2012, 05:25 PM
Really? And Peyton Manning would be what? A sure thing? A free ticket to the Superbowl? Who's to know until these players play what could really happen. Flynn could come here and be an outstanding QB where as Manning could come here and be no better than Cassel. Manning would be here 1, 2, 3 years at the most, Then we can start all over where as Flynn could be here awhile as long as he's better than Cassel. I would rather have a long term fix to build on. Manning is not it even if he can play.....

Flynn is cassel with less games started basically. You are willing to bet on a guy who we've seen literallly 1 time, and you are willing to get Flynn? Haha you are a joke. I'm no cassel supporter and I think we need a new qb, but that's not someone I'm willing to bet on.

jap1
03-02-2012, 05:44 PM
I will come out and say I am a Cassel supporter. I dont think he is the greatest QB, but I dont think that he is nearly as bad as most people make him out to be. I think he is good enough to take our team at least deep into the playoffs, and to lead this team LONG TERM (next 5-6 years). A healthy Manning would only serve us for 2 years MAYBE 3. I am not on board with the Manning idea until I am convinced that Manning can accuratley throw the ball with velocity (which would require me seeing video of it to be convinced).

Did Cassel have a bad year? Yes. Has he had the best opportunities to succeed? No. He has had more than 1 different offensive coordinator every year he has been here (2 his first year). Last year was the lockout, and who knows what Haley had his hands mixed into. From what it sounds like, Haley was screwing with things all over the place. To me, the offensive mindset changed completely once Haley was out of the mix. Unfortunately, Cassel was already injured by that time. I think he looked great the year before, when Weiss was O. C. I think Cassel was a good leader in the past, and was able to get the team to rally around him. In 2 minute drills against various teams, he seemed to do quite well in my opinion.

I think with better playcalling OR OL blocking and we will see a vastly improved offense. Improve the OL AND the playcalling and we will be dominating on offense. Both in the passing game with Cassel AND on the ground.

I have been quiet about supporting Cassel lately, because honestly, no one wants to hear it and everyone seems dead set on moving away from it. That and more people are interested in talking about other players/issues.

Is he better than Manning? Until I hear clear confirmation that Manning is capable of throwing deep passes and with good velocity, then yes, Id rather have Cassel.

Is Cassel better than Flynn? I honestly dont know, and would rather go with someone who knows our players and has been a leader on this team in the past, than someone completely new.

Is Cassel better than Orton? I think they are about the same. Each has his strengths and weaknesses, but overall I think it is a wash. Orton cant get it done in the red zone as well as Cassel has with our players.

Is Cassel better than Campbell, Henne, any other FAs out there? Yes. Id take Cassel over these guys easily.

Is Cassel better than RG3/Luck/Tannehill/Weeden/other rookie? Yes. Maybe in 3-4 years, that answer will be different, but when was the last time a rookie QB took his team to the playoffs, let alone Superbowl? I think Cassel has a better chance to make us competitive in the playoffs NOW.

OPLookn
03-02-2012, 05:59 PM
I will come out and say I am a Cassel supporter. I dont think he is the greatest QB, but I dont think that he is nearly as bad as most people make him out to be. I think he is good enough to take our team at least deep into the playoffs, and to lead this team LONG TERM (next 5-6 years). A healthy Manning would only serve us for 2 years MAYBE 3. I am not on board with the Manning idea until I am convinced that Manning can accuratley throw the ball with velocity (which would require me seeing video of it to be convinced).

Did Cassel have a bad year? Yes. Has he had the best opportunities to succeed? No. He has had more than 1 different offensive coordinator every year he has been here (2 his first year). Last year was the lockout, and who knows what Haley had his hands mixed into. From what it sounds like, Haley was screwing with things all over the place. To me, the offensive mindset changed completely once Haley was out of the mix. Unfortunately, Cassel was already injured by that time. I think he looked great the year before, when Weiss was O. C. I think Cassel was a good leader in the past, and was able to get the team to rally around him. In 2 minute drills against various teams, he seemed to do quite well in my opinion.

I think with better playcalling OR OL blocking and we will see a vastly improved offense. Improve the OL AND the playcalling and we will be dominating on offense. Both in the passing game with Cassel AND on the ground.

I have been quiet about supporting Cassel lately, because honestly, no one wants to hear it and everyone seems dead set on moving away from it. That and more people are interested in talking about other players/issues.

Is he better than Manning? Until I hear clear confirmation that Manning is capable of throwing deep passes and with good velocity, then yes, Id rather have Cassel.

Is Cassel better than Flynn? I honestly dont know, and would rather go with someone who knows our players and has been a leader on this team in the past, than someone completely new.

Is Cassel better than Orton? I think they are about the same. Each has his strengths and weaknesses, but overall I think it is a wash. Orton cant get it done in the red zone as well as Cassel has with our players.

Is Cassel better than Campbell, Henne, any other FAs out there? Yes. Id take Cassel over these guys easily.

Is Cassel better than RG3/Luck/Tannehill/Weeden/other rookie? Yes. Maybe in 3-4 years, that answer will be different, but when was the last time a rookie QB took his team to the playoffs, let alone Superbowl? I think Cassel has a better chance to make us competitive in the playoffs NOW.

Playoffs
2011
Andy Dalton (a full season) TJ Yates had to play for about 4 or 5 games I think and then they got into the playoffs. Cincy (Dalton) got beat by the Texans (Yates) and then got beat by the Ravens next week.

2009
Mark Sanchez - beat the Bengals and Chargers and then lost to the Colts in the AFC championship game

2008
Joe Flacco - beat the Dolphins and Titans and then lost to the Steelers in the AFC championship game.

2004
Ben Roethlisberger - made it to the AFC championship game and then got stomped by the Pats

Super Bowl QB
Kurt Warner - he played in the arena league and over in Europe but his first year in the NFL he took the Rams to the super bowl and won.

With the right QB we can make it to the AFC championship game but according to history we can't seem to move past that. I think this answers your question, yes QB's can come out of the gate as rookies and be a huge success.

matthewschiefs
03-02-2012, 06:00 PM
I will come out and say I am a Cassel supporter. I dont think he is the greatest QB, but I dont think that he is nearly as bad as most people make him out to be. I think he is good enough to take our team at least deep into the playoffs, and to lead this team LONG TERM (next 5-6 years). A healthy Manning would only serve us for 2 years MAYBE 3. I am not on board with the Manning idea until I am convinced that Manning can accuratley throw the ball with velocity (which would require me seeing video of it to be convinced).

Did Cassel have a bad year? Yes. Has he had the best opportunities to succeed? No. He has had more than 1 different offensive coordinator every year he has been here (2 his first year). Last year was the lockout, and who knows what Haley had his hands mixed into. From what it sounds like, Haley was screwing with things all over the place. To me, the offensive mindset changed completely once Haley was out of the mix. Unfortunately, Cassel was already injured by that time. I think he looked great the year before, when Weiss was O. C. I think Cassel was a good leader in the past, and was able to get the team to rally around him. In 2 minute drills against various teams, he seemed to do quite well in my opinion.

I think with better playcalling OR OL blocking and we will see a vastly improved offense. Improve the OL AND the playcalling and we will be dominating on offense. Both in the passing game with Cassel AND on the ground.

I have been quiet about supporting Cassel lately, because honestly, no one wants to hear it and everyone seems dead set on moving away from it. That and more people are interested in talking about other players/issues.

Is he better than Manning? Until I hear clear confirmation that Manning is capable of throwing deep passes and with good velocity, then yes, Id rather have Cassel.

Is Cassel better than Flynn? I honestly dont know, and would rather go with someone who knows our players and has been a leader on this team in the past, than someone completely new.

Is Cassel better than Orton? I think they are about the same. Each has his strengths and weaknesses, but overall I think it is a wash. Orton cant get it done in the red zone as well as Cassel has with our players.

Is Cassel better than Campbell, Henne, any other FAs out there? Yes. Id take Cassel over these guys easily.

Is Cassel better than RG3/Luck/Tannehill/Weeden/other rookie? Yes. Maybe in 3-4 years, that answer will be different, but when was the last time a rookie QB took his team to the playoffs, let alone Superbowl? I think Cassel has a better chance to make us competitive in the playoffs NOW.


I agree with most of what you said. I'm not one that is opposed that Matt Cassel as the QB. I just want to see someone brought in that's going to push him. It will make Matt Fight harder to keep the starting job and I think that will make him a better player. I was one that wanted to see what Palko could do at one point last year. There's that old saying be careful what you wish for you might get it I think that's clearly a case of it. We saw the offense when Cassel was not out there. Something that I also think is a factor on what we have seen from Cassel is the Haley factor. How much was Haley a part of the reasons that maybe Cassel was not doing well. We saw Orton do pretty well when Haley was let go but we never really saw Orton in there with Haley as the head coach.

IF and it's a BIG IF Peyton is healthy and can prove it to teams then I think it's a must grab. If he's healthy I don't think there's much question on if he's better then Cassel I think he has proven that. This team is much closer to competing for a championship then they have been in YEARS AND YEARS. Peyton with the running game we have and the group of WRs we have would be a big PLUS in bosting our chances. I here talk comparing this to when Montana was brought in and I really don't think that the Chiefs were in the same postion they are now. We have a MUCH better group of WRS then we had then. Peyton would have more to work with on the offensive side of the ball. I think that if healthy we should grab him. It would give us the best chance to win the super bowl in the next couple of years. But I do think we should make sure he's healthy and can do the same things that he has done before we bring him in.

jap1
03-02-2012, 06:30 PM
Playoffs
2011
Andy Dalton (a full season) TJ Yates had to play for about 4 or 5 games I think and then they got into the playoffs. Cincy (Dalton) got beat by the Texans (Yates) and then got beat by the Ravens next week.

2009
Mark Sanchez - beat the Bengals and Chargers and then lost to the Colts in the AFC championship game

2008
Joe Flacco - beat the Dolphins and Titans and then lost to the Steelers in the AFC championship game.

2004
Ben Roethlisberger - made it to the AFC championship game and then got stomped by the Pats

Super Bowl QB
Kurt Warner - he played in the arena league and over in Europe but his first year in the NFL he took the Rams to the super bowl and won.

With the right QB we can make it to the AFC championship game but according to history we can't seem to move past that. I think this answers your question, yes QB's can come out of the gate as rookies and be a huge success.

I stand corrected about the history of rookie QBs in the playoffs ...:bananen_smilies046:

However, I am still not super comfortable with even Luck or Griffin being given the helms to this team right away ... even if we addressed the RT and LG spots in free agency.

jap1
03-02-2012, 06:37 PM
I agree with most of what you said. I'm not one that is opposed that Matt Cassel as the QB. I just want to see someone brought in that's going to push him. It will make Matt Fight harder to keep the starting job and I think that will make him a better player. I was one that wanted to see what Palko could do at one point last year. There's that old saying be careful what you wish for you might get it I think that's clearly a case of it. We saw the offense when Cassel was not out there. Something that I also think is a factor on what we have seen from Cassel is the Haley factor. How much was Haley a part of the reasons that maybe Cassel was not doing well. We saw Orton do pretty well when Haley was let go but we never really saw Orton in there with Haley as the head coach.

IF and it's a BIG IF Peyton is healthy and can prove it to teams then I think it's a must grab. If he's healthy I don't think there's much question on if he's better then Cassel I think he has proven that. This team is much closer to competing for a championship then they have been in YEARS AND YEARS. Peyton with the running game we have and the group of WRs we have would be a big PLUS in bosting our chances. I here talk comparing this to when Montana was brought in and I really don't think that the Chiefs were in the same postion they are now. We have a MUCH better group of WRS then we had then. Peyton would have more to work with on the offensive side of the ball. I think that if healthy we should grab him. It would give us the best chance to win the super bowl in the next couple of years. But I do think we should make sure he's healthy and can do the same things that he has done before we bring him in.

I agree that Peyton Manning of 2010 is an improvement over Cassel. He is an improvement over almost everyone in the league except for maybe Brady, Brees and Rodgers. But, without knowing he is healthy, I would rather have the devil I know than the devil I dont know.

Could we have some competition behind Cassel? Yes, Im all for it. Bring in Orton, Campbell, Henne, Quinn, Leinert (supposedly going to be cut pretty soon), etc but tell them right now they are the back-up and they have to win the starting job. I think you need to decide by mid-way through the preseason who the starting QB is (that may even be too late) so that they can get the right number of reps with the 1st team and everyone can learn each other's nuiances. Plus if they are serious about developing Stanzi, they need to have a clear delineation of #1 gets 60% of the reps, #2 gets 25-30%, and #3 gets 10-15%. Stanzi will need some time with the 1st teamers if you are serious about teaching him real game speed and reads. If you wait until the season starts to declare a started, or you change midway through the season, then you are already behind the powercurve compared to the other teams and you have problems. Hopefully Crennel knows this from experience.

(BTW, I think it would be funny if we brought in Leinert as the backup for Cassel. Kinda revenge for Cassel from his days at USC!)

KCCF
03-02-2012, 06:48 PM
Gonna go ahead and.apologize for "you're a joke." Everyone has their opinions lol.

TopekaRoy
03-02-2012, 07:13 PM
It could happen, but that is expecting a lot. There's only 4 days between the day Manning is due his money, and Free agency beginning. There's a ton that goes into contract negotiations, and it's a lot to do in 4 days considering the travel Manning will have to do.

I think he takes his time with this decision. He want's to be sure that he is making the right decision because he knows this will be his last chance to cement his name as one of the best, and make another super bowl run. He will cover all his basis before a decision, I think it's at least 1.5-2 weeks before we hear who he signs with.

Do you foresee "The Decision: NFL Edition?"

"I'm taking my talents to ..."

chief31
03-02-2012, 08:14 PM
If they think it's so great why are we talking about getting a new starting QB or trading up for our QBotF? As I've said in other posts I'm not trying to be a d*ck I seriously would like to know their thoughts on the subject. Or if you're referring to yourself jump in and provide some insights.

:bananen_smilies046:


Because it's Peyton Manning. I like Matt Cassel's chances, should he get a couple of seasons in the same offense. But seriously, it's Peyton Manning.

As for the rookie thing, those who are interested in that are those who dislike the combination of Cassel and Stanzi for the future.

I can't help but think that you had to have known the answer to that, without asking.

But where have you seen anybody saying that Matt Cassel is "so great"?

It seems that the Cassel support has been very even-handed, while the dissenters have been rather emotional, and often irrational about their evaluations.

Like the comment above, with "how has that worked out?"

Actually, that has worked out pretty well.

4-12....2-14....4-12....10-6....7-9.

Take into account the in-season massive overhaul of talent in 2011, and it is undeniable that the team has made a massive turnaround since Cassel came here.

But the sarcasm, with the "lol", is to insinuate that we are somehow a laughable team because of the addition of Matt Cassel.

Again, one side is pretty reasonable about it, while many from the other side lack any form of realism.

chief31
03-02-2012, 08:23 PM
Flynn is cassel with less games started basically. You are willing to bet on a guy who we've seen literallly 1 time, and you are willing to get Flynn? Haha you are a joke. I'm no cassel supporter and I think we need a new qb, but that's not someone I'm willing to bet on.

Far better to gamble with zero games of experience, isn't it?

And Flynn has started two games, not one, while he has actually played in 34 games, having thrown 132 passes (equivalent to 3-5 starts.)

Three7s
03-02-2012, 09:07 PM
Because it's Peyton Manning. I like Matt Cassel's chances, should he get a couple of seasons in the same offense. But seriously, it's Peyton Manning.

As for the rookie thing, those who are interested in that are those who dislike the combination of Cassel and Stanzi for the future.

I can't help but think that you had to have known the answer to that, without asking.

But where have you seen anybody saying that Matt Cassel is "so great"?

It seems that the Cassel support has been very even-handed, while the dissenters have been rather emotional, and often irrational about their evaluations.

Like the comment above, with "how has that worked out?"

Actually, that has worked out pretty well.

4-12....2-14....4-12....10-6....7-9.

Take into account the in-season massive overhaul of talent in 2011, and it is undeniable that the team has made a massive turnaround since Cassel came here.

But the sarcasm, with the "lol", is to insinuate that we are somehow a laughable team because of the addition of Matt Cassel.

Again, one side is pretty reasonable about it, while many from the other side lack any form of realism.

Get rid of Jamaal Charles and Eric Berry in 2010 and see how good we are. Oh wait, we found out this past year. This IS a laughable team because of Matt Cassel because he is RUINING a chance at a Super Bowl. This is a passing league. You can't just run the ball and expect to win. Running the ball and playing defense will get you 7-9 to 11-5. I'm sick of mediocrity.

jap1
03-02-2012, 10:29 PM
Get rid of Jamaal Charles and Eric Berry in 2010 and see how good we are. Oh wait, we found out this past year. This IS a laughable team because of Matt Cassel because he is RUINING a chance at a Super Bowl. This is a passing league. You can't just run the ball and expect to win. Running the ball and playing defense will get you 7-9 to 11-5. I'm sick of mediocrity.

In the same way that you think it is laughable because of Matt Cassel, others (myself included) think it is laughable that he alone is "RUINING" our chance of a Superbowl. He is more than one piece in the machine that is the team, and he isnt the reason we didnt win the Superbowl last year. We have a few more things that need improving and are a year or two away from Superbowl contention in my opinion (with or withour Cassel). I dont think he is "holding us back" anymore than any other QB that is CURRENTLY available and healthy would be holding us back. That includes rookies. And yes, I did say healthy because I truly dont believe Manning is healthy. If he was, all he had to do is release a video of himself throwing a few 30-40 yard bombs and that would shut up all of the detractors.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. :bananen_smilies046:

Three7s
03-03-2012, 03:15 PM
In the same way that you think it is laughable because of Matt Cassel, others (myself included) think it is laughable that he alone is "RUINING" our chance of a Superbowl. He is more than one piece in the machine that is the team, and he isnt the reason we didnt win the Superbowl last year. We have a few more things that need improving and are a year or two away from Superbowl contention in my opinion (with or withour Cassel). I dont think he is "holding us back" anymore than any other QB that is CURRENTLY available and healthy would be holding us back. That includes rookies. And yes, I did say healthy because I truly dont believe Manning is healthy. If he was, all he had to do is release a video of himself throwing a few 30-40 yard bombs and that would shut up all of the detractors.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. :bananen_smilies046:
Tell that to Tom Brady. He got one of the worst defenses and an average arsenal of weapons to the Super Bowl.

(yes Gronk and Welker are great, but you can't tell me they have much more than that)

jap1
03-03-2012, 06:16 PM
Tell that to Tom Brady. He got one of the worst defenses and an average arsenal of weapons to the Super Bowl.

(yes Gronk and Welker are great, but you can't tell me they have much more than that)

Like I said ... any QB that is currently available. If Tom Brady, Brees, Rodgers were available, I would say grab them because they are better than Cassel. But, there isn't anyone better than Cassel available, IMO.

chief31
03-03-2012, 06:28 PM
Get rid of Jamaal Charles and Eric Berry in 2010 and see how good we are. Oh wait, we found out this past year. This IS a laughable team because of Matt Cassel because he is RUINING a chance at a Super Bowl. This is a passing league. You can't just run the ball and expect to win. Running the ball and playing defense will get you 7-9 to 11-5. I'm sick of mediocrity.

Sick of mediocrity?

So you prefer the way this team was the three years prior?

Hard to figure how you could be a Royals fan then.

:lol:


Tell that to Tom Brady. He got one of the worst defenses and an average arsenal of weapons to the Super Bowl.

(yes Gronk and Welker are great, but you can't tell me they have much more than that)

Tom Brady? You mean the guy who won three Super Bowls while playing at an extremely Matt Cassel-like level?

You mean the guy who got has new offenses designed to what he does, instead of being forced to learn from scratch each year?

Ask him about what? How great it is to have consistency?

Let's ask Eli Manning that too. Or Drew Brees, or Ben Roethlisberger.

Let's just ask any old elite QB what it is like to be given so many years of consistency to get comfortable playing the position.

TopekaRoy
03-03-2012, 06:51 PM
Tom Brady? ... Ask him about what? How great it is to have consistency?

Let's ask Eli Manning that too. Or Drew Brees, or Ben Roethlisberger.

Let's just ask any old elite QB what it is like to be given so many years of consistency to get comfortable playing the position.

Wait a minute, here. Are you trying to tell us that having a new offensive coordinator year after year after year has a negative effect on a QB's performance?

Next, you'll be saying the whole offense is affected by the OC!

jap1
03-03-2012, 08:52 PM
Tell that to Tom Brady. He got one of the worst defenses and an average arsenal of weapons to the Super Bowl.

(yes Gronk and Welker are great, but you can't tell me they have much more than that)

By that logic, then, would you trade JC, DJ, Tamba, Berry, Dorsey, Carr, Rout, Flowers and Bowe to get Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, either Manning or Brees? If all you need is an elite QB, then why not sacrifice the rest of the team for that cause?

Three7s
03-03-2012, 10:35 PM
Wait a minute, here. Are you trying to tell us that having a new offensive coordinator year after year after year has a negative effect on a QB's performance?

Next, you'll be saying the whole offense is affected by the OC!
And again we go back to the OC thing again. I thought I covered that last time we had this discussion. An elite QB is the OC in most cases. I'll go over how it works again.

OC calls the play to the QB with a set of audibles based on the defense. After making play adjustments, the QB calls pass protection and hot routes if there is a blitz or something exploitable.

The OC's job when working with any elite QB is to simply devise a game-plan with the coaches, QB, and offensive players with important roles.

Three7s
03-03-2012, 10:37 PM
By that logic, then, would you trade JC, DJ, Tamba, Berry, Dorsey, Carr, Rout, Flowers and Bowe to get Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, either Manning or Brees? If all you need is an elite QB, then why not sacrifice the rest of the team for that cause?
Not really. Simply trying to point out that Brady can do a heck of a lot more than Cassel with much less help.

And also, bad and mediocre aren't much different to me. Relevancy when it comes to competing for the Super Bowl is all I care about.

As for being a Royals fan......beats the Cubs. :)

bricooper78
03-03-2012, 11:23 PM
You mean the guy who got has new offenses designed to what he does, instead of being forced to learn from scratch each year?

Ask him about what? How great it is to have consistency?

Let's just ask any old elite QB what it is like to be given so many years of consistency to get comfortable playing the position.

Agree 110%. Not that any of you nay-sayers care. :D

Think of it this way, every week when you go to work, they want it done differently. Kinda. The same basic job, but with different terminology, how many times do you call 1 thing, say a couch, for a week, then change and call it a sofa, then a davenport, then, maybe a foam block. Changing the job, while not really changing the job, just what you call everything.

Bad example maybe, but see how that could get a bit confusing?

As stated, I'll pee myself with glee if peyton came here, but I think Cassel is a victim here. Hailey is an overinflated ego in an a$$hole's packaging, we're so much better off just without him here!:chiefs:

OPLookn
03-04-2012, 01:29 AM
Sick of mediocrity?

So you prefer the way this team was the three years prior?

Hard to figure how you could be a Royals fan then.

:lol:


If we can't win a playoff game does it really matter if one year we were 2-14 and another year we went 10-6 but got blown out in the first playoff game? To me if you can't get deep into the playoffs it doesn't matter and that makes a team mediocre.



Tom Brady? You mean the guy who won three Super Bowls while playing at an extremely Matt Cassel-like level?

You mean the guy who got has new offenses designed to what he does, instead of being forced to learn from scratch each year?

Ask him about what? How great it is to have consistency?

Let's ask Eli Manning that too. Or Drew Brees, or Ben Roethlisberger.

Let's just ask any old elite QB what it is like to be given so many years of consistency to get comfortable playing the position.

I posted it earlier but there were 3 QB's that lead their teams to the AFC championship game as rookies. One of those is one that you've listed as elite. In Big Ben's first year he learned a whole new offense and how to play in this system.

I'm not saying that a QB has to get it in the first year but at some point the guy's going to have to start making decisions faster. Cassel has looked better, but he can look and do even more than this and he needs to if he's going to lead us deep in the playoffs. Which is another reason that Pioli has said he wants to bring in competition. Let's just hope he hits it out of the park and we see an elevated level of QB play.

matthewschiefs
03-04-2012, 01:41 AM
If we can't win a playoff game does it really matter if one year we were 2-14 and another year we went 10-6 but got blown out in the first playoff game? To me if you can't get deep into the playoffs it doesn't matter and that makes a team mediocre.



To me it depends on what situation the team is in before you can say that. If you look at us in 2010 we had A TON Of guys that had played 0 playoff games. Getting to play one although it didn't can help a team become better. It happens sometimes. A team learns from there playoff mistakes get to see what the pressure of the playoffs is like and becomes better because of it and the next time they are in they do better because they got that playoff game to teach them. You always want to win and go deep but sometime a playoff defeat can make you a better team going forward. It doesn't always happen but it can happen. With the insane nature of this past season I don't know if we can say if 2010s getting to the playoffs made us a better team. This year with a normal offseason I think we might be able to tell.

okikcfan
03-04-2012, 04:34 PM
We have not gotten past the first round since Montana. That should say something.

Three7s
03-04-2012, 10:36 PM
We have not gotten past the first round since Montana. That should say something.
Funny you mention Montana. He brought his system in from the 49ers and the Chiefs coaching staff used its terminology. Funny, I thought any QB would struggle with new coaching?

chief31
03-05-2012, 06:35 PM
Wait a minute, here. Are you trying to tell us that having a new offensive coordinator year after year after year has a negative effect on a QB's performance?

Next, you'll be saying the whole offense is affected by the OC!

No. I wouldn't dare say anything like that. :lol:


And again we go back to the OC thing again. I thought I covered that last time we had this discussion. An elite QB is the OC in most cases. I'll go over how it works again.

OC calls the play to the QB with a set of audibles based on the defense. After making play adjustments, the QB calls pass protection and hot routes if there is a blitz or something exploitable.

The OC's job when working with any elite QB is to simply devise a game-plan with the coaches, QB, and offensive players with important roles.

And all of those "elite" QBs becomes the OC after they have a couple of years of experience with the offense.

chief31
03-05-2012, 06:41 PM
If we can't win a playoff game does it really matter if one year we were 2-14 and another year we went 10-6 but got blown out in the first playoff game? To me if you can't get deep into the playoffs it doesn't matter and that makes a team mediocre.

Does it really matter? Of course it does. It's called improvement. And you will never be a champion without it.

It would be really foolish to expect a bad team to suddenly win a Super Bowl. You work your way to that level. That means you improve, and then you improve some more.

Bike
03-05-2012, 09:49 PM
Does it really matter? Of course it does. It's called improvement. And you will never be a champion without it.

It would be really foolish to expect a bad team to suddenly win a Super Bowl. You work your way to that level. That means you improve, and then you improve some more.
Keeping Cassel as our starting QB is not improving, or improving more. The man has no pocket presence and a noodle arm - a backup on any other team. This love affair with mediocrity really needs to stop.

Three7s
03-06-2012, 08:11 PM
Keeping Cassel as our starting QB is not improving, or improving more. The man has no pocket presence and a noodle arm - a backup on any other team. This love affair with mediocrity really needs to stop.
I wouldn't say that. I think he starts for the Seahawks. Jaguars, Redskins, and Browns. Only reason Jaguars are in there is because Gabbert was really bad this past season....

chief31
03-06-2012, 10:24 PM
Keeping Cassel as our starting QB is not improving, or improving more. The man has no pocket presence and a noodle arm - a backup on any other team. This love affair with mediocrity really needs to stop.

Same old nonsense.

He has been very good in two, of his three and a half seasons.

The other two consist of his first season with a team that had gone 2-12 the prior year, and a half season of trying to lead an offense designed around Jamaal Charles...without Jamaal Charles.

When you step back and look at what he has accomplished, he has a ton of potential.

Improving is what many NFL players do, year-to-year.

okikcfan
03-07-2012, 05:16 PM
Same old nonsense.

He has been very good in two, of his three and a half seasons.

The other two consist of his first season with a team that had gone 2-12 the prior year, and a half season of trying to lead an offense designed around Jamaal Charles...without Jamaal Charles.

When you step back and look at what he has accomplished, he has a ton of potential.

Improving is what many NFL players do, year-to-year.

You said it yourself there, he's 50/50..... Anyone can have a ton of potential, I just don't see the overall potential in Matt Cassel. Not that I can't be wrong, but I just don't see it.....

OPLookn
03-07-2012, 05:59 PM
You said it yourself there, he's 50/50..... Anyone can have a ton of potential, I just don't see the overall potential in Matt Cassel. Not that I can't be wrong, but I just don't see it.....

The first year Cassel was here we were horrible and had an offensive line that calling our line a sieve would be an insult to the sieve. Last year we had injuries, a new OC, new players, etc.

While I'm not a fan of Cassel and I don't think he's going to be the one to lead us to the promised land I can't agree with saying he was 50/50. Factoring in the years he's played, his age and how long he's got left (average retirement age for QB's) that he's not where we need him to be. I think that Cassel is a stop gap to our QBotF.

chief31
03-07-2012, 08:17 PM
For me, the biggest problem with having Matt Cassel as our #1 QB is that he will, again, be working in a different offense.

I agree that he is not where we need him to be, at this point. But I think the lion's share of the blame goes to Scott Pioli for the OC situation since they both arrived.

But, Matt Cassel still has several years in him. And, provided we don't go get Manning, he could very well fit right into the new offense, eliminating the bulk of the "learning curve". Even if he doesn't pick it up in a big hurry, he would likely be accustomed to the offense by year's end.

chiefnut
03-08-2012, 10:28 AM
cassel is a veteran and will be able to learn the offense. the question is if the offense will fit him....will it utilize his strenghts and minimize his weakness's??

70 chiefsfan70
03-08-2012, 11:38 AM
For me, the biggest problem with having Matt Cassel as our #1 QB is that he will, again, be working in a different offense.

I agree that he is not where we need him to be, at this point. But I think the lion's share of the blame goes to Scott Pioli for the OC situation since they both arrived.

But, Matt Cassel still has several years in him. And, provided we don't go get Manning, he could very well fit right into the new offense, eliminating the bulk of the "learning curve". Even if he doesn't pick it up in a big hurry, he would likely be accustomed to the offense by year's end.


I agree mostly,

Cassel may not win us a lot of games but the truth is he looses even less. With the defense we have this year (please sign Carr) and a must have run game, (I don't think we can rely on JC alone for this) we will win a lot of games. I could see the Chiefs drafting Trent Richardson for this reason if he is still there at the 11th spot. I hope we sign Nicks from the saints, as that would give us more options. I would rather have nicks than Carr if we had to choose.

I still think Manning is too much risk, and will cost too much. If he was 5 years younger it would be a different story.

dbolan
03-08-2012, 12:15 PM
Same old nonsense.

He has been very good in two, of his three and a half seasons.

The other two consist of his first season with a team that had gone 2-12 the prior year, and a half season of trying to lead an offense designed around Jamaal Charles...without Jamaal Charles.

When you step back and look at what he has accomplished, he has a ton of potential.

Improving is what many NFL players do, year-to-year.

The problem with that is sorry a$$ depth at the RB postion which in turn reflects the admitted mistake by Pioli of poor depth. The other issue is not being able to take what you have and reshape the gameplan but that is difficult without decent depth.

OPLookn
03-08-2012, 12:20 PM
The problem with that is sorry a$$ depth at the RB postion which in turn reflects the admitted mistake by Pioli of poor depth. The other issue is not being able to take what you have and reshape the gameplan but that is difficult without decent depth.

Thomas Jones, Jackie Battle and Dexter McCluster. All of these guys were backing up Charles and provided good depth. If you want to have a bunch of all star RB's then the Buffalo Bills are your team.

Bike
03-08-2012, 12:46 PM
Same old nonsense.

He has been very good in two, of his three and a half seasons.

The other two consist of his first season with a team that had gone 2-12 the prior year, and a half season of trying to lead an offense designed around Jamaal Charles...without Jamaal Charles.

When you step back and look at what he has accomplished, he has a ton of potential.

Improving is what many NFL players do, year-to-year.
What you call nonsense, I call sense. I've been watching the man for 3 years - every game - with my own eyes, and I can't see what you see. He holds on to the ball too long, doesn't look off recievers, panics in the pocket, makes poor decisions, and is not an accurate passer. He has heart, but that won't get you too far in the NFL. While you blame Cassel's mediocre performance on the absence of Charles, I blame it on Cassel himself. If he is our starter next year, I will support the guy. But we can do better - and should.

dbolan
03-08-2012, 01:51 PM
Thomas Jones, Jackie Battle and Dexter McCluster. All of these guys were backing up Charles and provided good depth. If you want to have a bunch of all star RB's then the Buffalo Bills are your team.

Not as a single individual. All of those guys combined made a triple threat runner, which is what Charles is.

Defense can key on what all of those backs would do whenever they were on the field. Not Charles.

I said nothing about having an ALL-Star backfield, I simply stated that the depth should fit the scheme or the scheme can change enough to compliment the back.

chief31
03-08-2012, 08:31 PM
What you call nonsense, I call sense. I've been watching the man for 3 years - every game - with my own eyes, and I can't see what you see. He holds on to the ball too long, doesn't look off recievers, panics in the pocket, makes poor decisions, and is not an accurate passer. He has heart, but that won't get you too far in the NFL. While you blame Cassel's mediocre performance on the absence of Charles, I blame it on Cassel himself. If he is our starter next year, I will support the guy. But we can do better - and should.

He does look off receivers, he panics in the pocket when the pocket collapses, He makes very few poor decisions, and is a very accurate passer.

What he does best though, is to overachieve.

He took a 2-14 team to a division crown in his second season here. He led The Patriots, without Tom Brady, to 11-5.

And he managed as many wins, in 11 games, as I expected in 16 games, with Charles. And he did not have Charles.

He exceeds expectations.

Ryfo18
03-08-2012, 08:45 PM
"Best fit for Matt Flynn according to NFL Network"

What's with all the same old Cassel talk?

bricooper78
03-08-2012, 09:59 PM
Flynn should end up in Miami, and Peyton can come play here!

I know I'm repeating but I don't care! LOL

Bike
03-08-2012, 10:33 PM
He does look off receivers, he panics in the pocket when the pocket collapses, He makes very few poor decisions, and is a very accurate passer.

What he does best though, is to overachieve.

He took a 2-14 team to a division crown in his second season here. He led The Patriots, without Tom Brady, to 11-5.

And he managed as many wins, in 11 games, as I expected in 16 games, with Charles. And he did not have Charles.

He exceeds expectations.
You certainly seem to like Cassel. We will have to agree to disagree on this one.

Bike
03-08-2012, 10:34 PM
Flynn should end up in Miami, and Peyton can come play here!

I know I'm repeating but I don't care! LOL
I'll take either one...

OPLookn
03-09-2012, 12:13 PM
What you call nonsense, I call sense. I've been watching the man for 3 years - every game - with my own eyes, and I can't see what you see. He holds on to the ball too long, doesn't look off recievers, panics in the pocket, makes poor decisions, and is not an accurate passer. He has heart, but that won't get you too far in the NFL. While you blame Cassel's mediocre performance on the absence of Charles, I blame it on Cassel himself. If he is our starter next year, I will support the guy. But we can do better - and should.

I haven't watched Cassel every game for 3 years but the games I have watched him he does everything you mentioned more often than not. When he's not getting pressure he's an accurate passer but any QB in the league can and should be that way when they can sit in a pocket and have a beer.

Oops...said beer, great now Canada's going to jump in on the convo.

:sFl_canada2: