PDA

View Full Version : Cassel CAN play well



AussieChiefsFan
03-15-2012, 06:05 AM
Obviously he isn't a Brees or Rodgers but IMHO he CAN play well if the pieces are around him. Take 2010 for instance. Charles playing well with another RB to lighten the load helped us get ahead in games and then Cassel in turn played better. In 2012 with an arising Defense with the return of Eric Berry, an improving offense with Bowe, Moeaki, Breasten, balwdin and any FA acquisitions (Clark?), and obviously Charles and Hillis we can play well and get Cassel playing better too.

Now im not saying Cassel SHOULD/MUST be the starter but It's not looking like we're getting Manning and RH3 is out of the question. So I'm looking at the bright side and the fact that Cassel CAN play well if the team around him does so too.

:bananen_smilies046:

texaschief
03-15-2012, 06:08 AM
I'd like to see Cassel play without Haley screaming at him and running him into the ground every other play. Although, Daboll is the second coming of Todd Haley and loves to run his QBs into the ground too... just ask Colt McCoy.

Haley was toxic... and I'm starting to believe it wasn't just him.

okikcfan
03-15-2012, 12:10 PM
I'd like to see Cassel play without Haley screaming at him and running him into the ground every other play. Although, Daboll is the second coming of Todd Haley and loves to run his QBs into the ground too... just ask Colt McCoy.

Haley was toxic... and I'm starting to believe it wasn't just him.

Not that I do not agree but just interested in what you mean by it wasn't just him?

Jrudi
03-15-2012, 12:14 PM
Obviously he isn't a Brees or Rodgers but IMHO he CAN play well if the pieces are around him. Take 2010 for instance. Charles playing well with another RB to lighten the load helped us get ahead in games and then Cassel in turn played better. In 2012 with an arising Defense with the return of Eric Berry, an improving offense with Bowe, Moeaki, Breasten, balwdin and any FA acquisitions (Clark?), and obviously Charles and Hillis we can play well and get Cassel playing better too.

Now im not saying Cassel SHOULD/MUST be the starter but It's not looking like we're getting Manning and RH3 is out of the question. So I'm looking at the bright side and the fact that Cassel CAN play well if the team around him does so too.

:bananen_smilies046:

Was wondering why we haven't heard any word about where he might be going?? I would think he would be a highly sought after TE...

I would much rather have him than Boss who is coming in for a visit.

Hayvern
03-15-2012, 01:57 PM
The problem with Cassel is that he is not that guy that will be able to win a game for you. If you are down going into the fourth quarter, he is not going to be able to drive you down the field and win on a consistent basis. We need a guy that can do that.

While Cassel will not make any bad mistakes and may not lose a game for you, he is not going to win many for you either. The Chiefs are again going to be a run first team, and while we all may like that, a run first team does not score a lot of points.

This is going to be the problem.

dbolan
03-15-2012, 02:03 PM
Hey Vern....Know what I mean? lol

I agree with your post...

Jrudi
03-15-2012, 02:03 PM
My thing with Cassel is that He IS our best option compared to what is available right now...

I've moved on from Manning coming here, and I don't necessarily think Matt Flynn is an instant upgrade over Cassel right now.

That being said, I do think there are things we can try to do now that will help us after Cassel is gone, I still think Stanzi is the plan as of now, but after Manning lands somewhere we could re-visit possible options

but AS OF NOW there is no-one available that I would rather have than Cassel

dbolan
03-15-2012, 02:05 PM
My thing with Cassel is that He IS our best option compared to what is available right now...

I've moved on from Manning coming here, and I don't necessarily think Matt Flynn is an instant upgrade over Cassel right now.

That being said, I do think there are things we can try to do now that will help us after Cassel is gone, I still think Stanzi is the plan as of now, but after Manning lands somewhere we could re-visit possible options

but AS OF NOW there is no-one available that I would rather have than Cassel

You are correct about nothing being available now...

Paperbag Face
03-15-2012, 02:07 PM
Although, Daboll is the second coming of Todd Haley and loves to run his QBs into the ground too... just ask Colt McCoy.
Sick of this.

Chad Pennington and Matt More both had good things to say about Daboll.

McCoy is a pansy, and is close to losing his job in Cleveland.

texaschief
03-15-2012, 02:19 PM
Not that I do not agree but just interested in what you mean by it wasn't just him?

The "toxicity" doesn't seem exclusive to Haley... it could go higher in the organization.

azchiefsfan
03-15-2012, 02:23 PM
The problem with Cassel is that he is not that guy that will be able to win a game for you. If you are down going into the fourth quarter, he is not going to be able to drive you down the field and win on a consistent basis. We need a guy that can do that.

While Cassel will not make any bad mistakes and may not lose a game for you, he is not going to win many for you either. The Chiefs are again going to be a run first team, and while we all may like that, a run first team does not score a lot of points.

This is going to be the problem.

I think he proved he can the second game against San Diego. It was 2 Matt Cassel led drives that won the game. The desperation throw that led to an inteception and O/T is on him, but those 2 drives were as good as any, by any QB in the league. SO I will respectfully disagree.

OPLookn
03-15-2012, 02:37 PM
I think he proved he can the second game against San Diego. It was 2 Matt Cassel led drives that won the game. The desperation throw that led to an inteception and O/T is on him, but those 2 drives were as good as any, by any QB in the league. SO I will respectfully disagree.

It was also the fumble by Rivers that saved that game. I think that's the one you're talking about. Regardless the words our QB making a desperation throw and INT which put us into O/T doesn't really leave any room for disagreement. So I'm going to have to agree with Hayvern in this instance.

matthewschiefs
03-15-2012, 06:28 PM
No, unless our schedule is Indy, TB and Cle our first three games our fans will soon see what a bum he really is

Once again you want to ignore the good things that Cassel has done and only point to the bad.

2008 Pats go 10-5 with Cassel in the AFC east. Teams they beat include the Cards (who went to the superbowl that year) Dolphins (won the AFC east that year) Both by more then 20 points.

2009 moved to the Chiefs took a 2-14 team to 4-12 including beating the defending Superbowl champs Steelers and winning at Mile high keeping the donkeys out of the playoffs.

2010 Went to the Pro bowl. Threw 27tds to 7ints. Beating the Chargers in the opener at arrowhead Lead the Chiefs to there first AFC west title since 2003. Yes they played the NFC west witch is a weak divison but weather you like it or not this still counts. Why? Because the WHOLE AFC WEST PLAYED THEM. The chiefs went 4-0 everyone eles went 2-2 That's what won the divison. The Chiefs won games they should have others didn't Matt Cassel was a part of that.


2011 A step backwards yes. But take away your offenses MVP and tell me a offense that wouldn't struggle. Not to mention the question about how things where run with the head coach. Can you say that Matt Cassel was the reason the offense struggled. I don't think so. It was many different factors that came into play.

When looking at a Qb you can't just say look at the bad throw out the good. Matt Cassel has done some good things he has done some things that made us want to bang our heads against the wall. But if you look the spot he came into the team that he took over I think Matt Cassel has done more good then many qbs would.

jason1981
03-15-2012, 06:37 PM
cassel is just a a decent qb nkt bar but good either. he has happy feet. amd the times i seen haley yelling at him i was glad to see it cuz cassel was sucking and he would throw the ball away after like one second and gave up on the play when he had no pressure on him at all. i woukd have rsther stuck with orton cuz he has a quicker release.

TopekaRoy
03-15-2012, 07:26 PM
This is why I feel Cassel will always keep us at a 7-9 record. Once you have a solid schedule with legit teams he struggles.
Overall he will play well against the crummy teams and do mediocre to horrible against good teams. Happened over thte course of the 2010 and 2011 season.
Well, and this is just something to consider here. In 2010, we didn't have Breaston and Baldwin to take some of the pressure off of Bowe. In 2011, we didn't have Jamaal Charles to help our run game. In neither year did we have a good offensive line.

This year, if everything goes according to plan, we should have all three of those things. Plus, we won't have Haley messing things up, and hopefully Daboll will have a better game plan than we have had in the past.

I don't know if all of these things will make a difference or not, but they could be enough of a factor to give Cassel more of an edge against the better teams.

I think with all of these things Cassel could be good enough to get the job done, especially with our defense keeping the opponents score down, and him not feeling pressured to throw 4 TD passes to win the game.

We won't know for sure until several weeks into the season.

TopekaRoy
03-15-2012, 07:50 PM
I can see your point, but to be fair he did have breaston (and to a lesser extent baldwin) this past year ...

Right, but no Charles and a weak O-line. Hopefully we can get everything he needs around him at the same time!

Hopefully ...

Sick Dog
03-15-2012, 08:12 PM
Bottom line and everyone can agree he will have enough weapons this year that this is it for him with the Chiefs and the league as a starter anyway...

matthewschiefs
03-15-2012, 09:48 PM
Matt I like you. But these are the facts. He usually will check down to 1 receiver and then throw to the flats.

I said before he does well against crummy teams and poorly against good teams. I am acknowledging the good and bad here.

In 2010 a combined 67 rating against teams with .500 teams and over (2-4 record)

100 rating for below .500 teams (8-2 record)

Do you see why he had such a good year? The majority of his games were against bad teams.

Pretty much the same thing in 2011, and will be in 12

63.8 rating against teams that are .500 or above


93.7 rating 2011 rating against teams below .500.



This is why I feel Cassel will always keep us at a 7-9 record. Once you have a solid schedule with legit teams he struggles.
Overall he will play well against the crummy teams and do mediocre to horrible against good teams. Happened over thte course of the 2010 and 2011 season.


So all of that is on Matt Cassel. It can't possibley have anything to do with the parts around him? He came into a 2-14 football team. Chances are when you come into that your not going to have a lot to work on. Matt Cassel is not the reason that we lost all the games that we have in the past 3 season. He is a Part of it. He is also a part of why we have won games and a part of why this team was able to win 10 games in 2010.

Is Matt Cassel a great HOF QB? The answer to that is no. Would I be unhappy if we were able to get a upgrade to him no i wouldn't. But you can do FAR worse then Matt Cassel. See Tyler Palko.

Chiefster
03-15-2012, 09:58 PM
It's a team sport; every player within the team stepping onto the field has their part in each win and loss.

#58ChiefsFan
03-15-2012, 10:18 PM
Bottom line and everyone can agree he will have enough weapons this year that this is it for him with the Chiefs and the league as a starter anyway...

I remember something similar to this being said last year too. We were all set up to prove ourselves against a tough schedule and well, yeah...

Bottom line is unless/until Matt can stand behind a rock solid line he will struggle. That's on Pioli, who has "taken responsibility", the weakness has been identified but if we get sloppy seconds for our o-line it doesn't matter if we choose an all star supporting cast.

chief31
03-15-2012, 10:37 PM
If a QB barely played for his first five seasons, and was leaving his second NFL team, then went 11-3 with a 98.3 QB Rating, only to fall to below .500, with a QB Rating of 77.5, would that be a player you would be looking to throw away?

I hope not. That player was Len Dawson, who led The Chiefs to their only Super Bowl championship.

Give a QB some consistency. It's the only way to know how good he can be for ya.

And being in a big hurry to get rid of a guy who has shown great promise, in limited, less than favorable conditions, is pretty short-sighted.

Tom Brady was a pretty pedestrian QB for his first several years. And, had that team not done so well, even with a generic QB, fans would have drummed him out of town.

Matt Cassel has looked pretty good for most of his time on the field.

chief31
03-15-2012, 11:06 PM
Enough with the excuses. But yes Palko is much much worse than cassel

That's a joke too, right?

I have never talked with anybody with more excuses than you. But you make excuses for success.

matthewschiefs
03-15-2012, 11:19 PM
Enough with the excuses. But yes Palko is much much worse than cassel

Yes because saying all the good games hes played should be thrown out is perfectly legit. :lol:


The fact is no matter how much you don't want to admit it is that a QB needs parts around him. Cassel did not have much in 09. In 2010 When Charles really broke out he did pretty darn well. I know I know you want me to just ignore that because that doesn't fit your opinion but I won't. We can win the divison and make the playoffs with Cassel that is a FACT. We have done it before.

chief31
03-15-2012, 11:27 PM
But they didnt, he stepped in and won a super bowl in his first year of playing. I cant believe what I am reading. He won 3 super bowls in his first 4 years and was always top 10 in yards and rating during every full season season and having the best postseason rating in 2004 when he won his third ring. He led the pats to a last minute drive which enabled venetari (botched that spelling) to kick a fg and win the SB IN HIS FIRST YEAR. You must be out of your mind

Just like Matt Cassel did in two of his first three seasons?

With the exception that both missed on yardage once (Cassel 19th in 2010 and Brady 22nd in 2001.)

And Brady had Bellichick instead of a brand new staff and a 2-14 team.

Bottom line is that he was far from some stellar gun slinger that you seem to expect, just as Matt Cassel has been.

And then, you can take into account that Brady had the luxury of having very few serious changes thrown at him in his early career.

But Brady probably does suffer Cassel's criticism if The Raiders don't fall victim to "The Tuck Rule".

He got to play, and grow, with his offense.

Give that Tom Brady the situation that Matt Cassel has had, and you are screaming to get rid of him too.

Tom Brady was nothing more than Matt Cassel with a better situation.

azchiefsfan
03-15-2012, 11:31 PM
By God! How dare you mention the offensive line! EVERYONE knows Brees, Brady or Rivers would have taken this team to 19-0 last year! You know, it never gets old. This offense was a ragged piece of shiite last year and any QB would have been decimated. The fact is he does not turn the ball over very often and he took a beating. But BY GOD!!! it's all Cassel's fault. I am gritting my teeth and seething to the point of rage. You Cassel haters are really starting to piss me off!

chief31
03-15-2012, 11:32 PM
I hit you with facts. You always say "But he didnt have jamaal charles so our game plan changed too much for cassel to have time to make adjustments" or "Give cassel more time to work with breaston and baldwin" You sir are the king of excuses. When someone isnt getting the job done they (and their fans) must take responsibility

Facts? What facts do you bring when 27/7 TD INT is brought up?

What about 10-6 division winners?

What about 11-5 as a rookie?

Matt Cassel has been a very good QB. I feel no need to make excuses for that.

You?

azchiefsfan
03-15-2012, 11:34 PM
p.s Go root for your man Orton with his new team. You'd fit in as Dallas has a bunch of bandwagoners anyway.

chief31
03-15-2012, 11:36 PM
I have said from the time i got here that cassel is MEDIOCRE. Against a solid schedule we will never get above that .500 humpwith him. Ok? That's what I have said. We did not have a solid schedule in 10, it was as easy as can be. I posted the facts earlier, a 100 combined rating and 8-2 record against below .500 teams and a 2-4 record with a rating of 67 with teams that are .500 and over. Those ARE THE FACTS. They arent my opinion. All I have said is that overall he struggles with good teams and plays very well against crummy teams. With or without charles, keep in mind those numbers are from 2010, not 11

Those facts are not excuse for 10-6, division winner, 27/7 TD/INT, and a 93.0 QB Rating?

Why does it sound that way?

AkChief49
03-15-2012, 11:37 PM
By God! How dare you mention the offensive line! EVERYONE knows Brees, Brady or Rivers would have taken this team to 19-0 last year! You know, it never gets old. This offense was a ragged piece of shiite last year and any QB would have been decimated. The fact is he does not turn the ball over very often and he took a beating. But BY GOD!!! it's all Cassel's fault. I am gritting my teeth and seething to the point of rage. You Cassel haters are really starting to piss me off!
easy big fella! no hatin' here just good ol spirited discussion. Put down the pistolas and have a cold one.:D

matthewschiefs
03-15-2012, 11:40 PM
I have said from the time i got here that cassel is MEDIOCRE. Against a solid schedule we will never get above that .500 humpwith him. Ok? That's what I have said. We did not have a solid schedule in 10, it was as easy as can be. I posted the facts earlier, a 100 combined rating and 8-2 record against below .500 teams and a 2-4 record with a rating of 67 with teams that are .500 and over. Those ARE THE FACTS. They arent my opinion. All I have said is that overall he struggles with good teams and plays very well against crummy teams. With or without charles, keep in mind those numbers are from 2010, not 11

Peyton Manning would have been a mediocre Qb by you. IF you were the colts gm you would have cut him and moved on. His first few seasons he struggled against the good teams to. His first few playoff games were not good at all. In fact in his 3rd playoff game his qb rateing was UNDER 40. So I guess he's mediocre to??????????????????

The colts stuck it out built better talent around Manning and they saw what he could do. We can do the same with Cassel. Not saying it will work out the same but you really can't expect a guy to come in with a team that went 2-14 and beat teams on his own. There's a reason they were 2-14. It took Manning a number of years to start doing well against the better teams. Cassel can start winning to.

AkChief49
03-15-2012, 11:46 PM
Tom Brady has been top 10 in passing and rating since 2002. He won 3 super bowls in his first 4 years. Matt Cassel in his first year as a starter with a VETERAN AND MATURE New England team who WENT 18-1 the previous year doesnt even end up winning the division. Brady won the super bowl. The same? I think not
But c'mon they went 11-5. How many times does 11-5 NOT get you in the playoffs at least? I rememeber when we went 10-6 (05) and missed the playoffs.

TopekaRoy
03-15-2012, 11:46 PM
Oh, MMO!

I thought we actually agreed on something at the end of page 2 in this thread: That Cassel could do better with the pieces that we expect to have around him, this year. You even said you "could see my point!" (I was so proud of you, man) And you are still arguing about this!

He's our quarterback, until we get somebody better. Get over it!

slc chief
03-15-2012, 11:48 PM
the biggest flaw of cassell is that he panics in the pocket.anyone who watches film on him should be able to see it.paranoia in the pocket can ruin a quarterback.just look at david carr. the kid had tons of talent coming out of college but the texans never protected him and ruined him forever.if the chiefs vamped their o-line and cassell was not panicking everytime he dropped back it could be a differant story.but some say the damage is already done it has already affected the way he plays the position damaged goods. we shall see i guess.they said the same about eli although i think eli is one tough qb

TopekaRoy
03-15-2012, 11:48 PM
I know Roy you're right. Help me man

:lol: Well, I got to admit one thing. You do stimulate discussion in this forum, you whacko! :D :bananen_smilies046:

chief31
03-15-2012, 11:48 PM
Tom Brady has been top 10 in passing and rating since 2002. He won 3 super bowls in his first 4 years. Matt Cassel in his first year as a starter with a VETERAN AND MATURE New England team who WENT 18-1 the previous year doesnt even end up winning the division. Brady won the super bowl. The same? I think not

More excuses for success?

Cassel had just as many wins in his rookie year as Brady did. In fact, his offense scored more points, he had more passing yards, and a higher QB Rating than Brady did in his rookie season.

Te team did better in Brady's rookie year. But Brady managed to do just about as well as Cassel.

If not for getting a WC berth at 11-5, while Cassel missed at 11-5, Cassel would have been given the opportunity to match what The Pats did in brady's rookie year.

TopekaRoy
03-15-2012, 11:51 PM
Cassel had just as many wins in his rookie year as Brady did. In fact, his offense scored more points, he had more passing yards, and a higher QB Rating than Brady did in his rookie season.


Wow! I did not know that! you get him, man!:yahoo:

chief31
03-15-2012, 11:52 PM
I just told you the facts

How are those facts, while constantly changing offenses and a loss of The NFLs best runner are not?

They sound so much like facts.

AkChief49
03-15-2012, 11:52 PM
Did you see the team he played with that year? They went 18-1 the year before
Yeah I know, alluding to Topeka's point

"I thought we actually agreed on something at the end of page 2 in this thread: That Cassel could do better with the pieces that we expect to have around him, this year. You even said you "could see my point!" (I was so proud of you, man) And you are still arguing about this!"

Our team was not very good when he got here. With the right pieces he's a good QB(I did not say great) A decent line and the running game back in swing, he's serviceable.

chief31
03-15-2012, 11:56 PM
Well Chief 31, your boy Matt Cassel will have the chance to prove all you can say he is capable of this year. Fair?

I don't expect him to light it up. I expect this will be his last year here, having never run the same offense twice.

However, if he does, and this team returns to be a success with Matt Cassel, I envision you pulling a "You are not the fathher" Maury moment and run off stage in tears, never to be heard from again, until you pick the next player to hate and swear that this time, you are 1,000,000% sure that HE IS THE FATHER!!!!

:lol:

TopekaRoy
03-15-2012, 11:57 PM
Let's just agree that his year is cassel's make or break for this franchise. If he sucks he leaves, if he succeeds he stays. Fair enough?

I think that's fair ... assuming we don't have the disastrous injuries we had last year, which seems unlikely.

But give him another chance.

And who knows, we still might upgrade the QB position this year.


Hey! It could happen!

chief31
03-15-2012, 11:59 PM
The whole post up above were numbers from the 2010 season with Charles

So, as if by miracle, facts that shed a negative light are pure fact, but facts that shed a positive light are not?

You were here for the 2011 season. I am sure you know that Charles really did sit our almost the entire season with an injury.

How does that fact get altered into something else?

matthewschiefs
03-15-2012, 11:59 PM
Please dont tell me you are comparing manning to cassel. Please. We already had chief31 compare Tom Brady and cassel. I like you matt, dont do the same

I am comparing there situations. I think we would both agree that Mannings been a darn good QB. He just like Cassel and many other darn good Qbs struggled against the better teams in the NFL while there team was building. They got better and the talent got better around them and the wins started comeing. Through 4 years (3 in kc 1 in New England) Matt Cassel has the same number of playoff wins as Peyton 0. Both had good moments and moments where they sruggled against good teams. If we get better talent around Cassel as we have since 09 and they don't all tear there ACLS Cassel can be a Qb that can help us win games.

matthewschiefs
03-16-2012, 12:03 AM
Let's just agree that his year is cassel's make or break for this franchise. If he sucks he leaves, if he succeeds he stays. Fair enough?


I think that's fair to say. Assumeing that we don't lose a couple of key parts to our team in the first couple of weeks then Cassel should have the weapons around him that we can see if he can be the one to get places with.

chief31
03-16-2012, 12:04 AM
lol, nah hey if he does well this year and we look good I will say Chief 31, you were right. I am 100% cassel. Ok?

Just judging from his past performances I feel like we need to go in a different direction. If he does play bad then he and Pioli will be gone after the 2013 season. I think pioli has decided he will either succeed with cassel or crash and burn

Unless we do just terrible, I don't think Pioli has to crash and burn with Cassel.

If it is evident that a QB upgrade would make the difference between mediocre, and serious contender, I don't think Pioli has to go.

But let's save that argument for later.

AkChief49
03-16-2012, 12:04 AM
Let's just agree that his year is cassel's make or break for this franchise. If he sucks he leaves, if he succeeds he stays. Fair enough?
Okay, as long as B.Richardson is not @ RT:D

AkChief49
03-16-2012, 12:10 AM
Looks like pioli doesnt mind if B rich plays RT
And THAT truly sucks. He's on record saying it's his fault for not having plan b's, backups etc. so what he does this FA is going to tell me/ all of us, a lot.

chief31
03-16-2012, 12:11 AM
The 2010 facts were shown. I didnt twist them in any direction, i simply stated that when he runs into competition he doesnt play well, which is the truth from judging by the facts. With or without charles. What does 2011 have to do with what we are talking about right now?

Facts being called excuses.

The fact that Charles, who nearly broke Jim Browns season best record for YPC, was removed from the offense, is somehow not a fact in your mind.

The fact that Matt Cassel has had a different play-caller every year of his career, is somehow, not a fact.

And those facts, just like the ones you bring in but do not call excuses, are used to judge.

You knew that.

chief31
03-16-2012, 12:20 AM
No those are all valid concerns, I never said they weren't. Chief, all I said is that cassel doesnt play well against good teams and that worries me. That makes me think how is he going to take us to the next level? But that's ok, now he has someone who was experienced in the NE system. So let's see what he can do

Well, now you are sounding reasonable.

But honestly, that is not all that you have said. I mean, your favorite past Chiefs player is Matt Cassel. :lol:

You have expressed a bit more than just a concern or two.

:D

chief31
03-16-2012, 12:27 AM
Haha, how about I change it to Tyler Palko, is that fair?

Well.... While you are there, there is another slot that one might consider changing, even if the screen name is stuck.:lol:

matthewschiefs
03-16-2012, 12:37 AM
Haha, how about I change it to Tyler Palko, is that fair?

I think we need to ban the name Tyler Palko from this site. Still having nightmares

chief31
03-16-2012, 12:44 AM
Done

Good call.

I'm not asking anybody to think that Cassel is awesome. I don't.

But rooting against him is not a good idea, in my opinion.

Repped.

AkChief49
03-16-2012, 01:33 AM
Palko would have been a good QB if he could of thrown the ball NOT TO THE OTHER TEAM
FYP:D

doobs_05
03-16-2012, 02:34 AM
I just don't see KC making a super bowl run with cassel as QB. Unless KC's D becomes a Top 5 D, i don't see cassel taking them anywhere except MAYBE past the first round

2010chiefs
03-16-2012, 02:41 AM
I don't see Cassel stepping his game up to the next level either. He had plenty of chances to prove last year if he can win big games for us and he crumbled when we needed it the most. If one more year is what it takes to prove he's not our QBOF then so be it. What choice do we have now. I'm a Chiefs fan all the way and hope he proves me wrong. What choice do I have. If it was up to me I would have prefered Orton though. Just like the fans that voted on ESPN Poll a few months ago.

AussieChiefsFan
03-16-2012, 03:01 AM
WOW just checked back and there's already 90 posts.

The problem with Cassel is that he is not that guy that will be able to win a game for you. If you are down going into the fourth quarter, he is not going to be able to drive you down the field and win on a consistent basis. We need a guy that can do that.

While Cassel will not make any bad mistakes and may not lose a game for you, he is not going to win many for you either. The Chiefs are again going to be a run first team, and while we all may like that, a run first team does not score a lot of points.

This is going to be the problem.
I agree, He's definitely not a clutch player, thats what I mean by him playing a lot better when the rest of the team is too/we're in front with score.

dbolan
03-16-2012, 12:59 PM
Hasselbeck would be an upgrade and if Manning goes to the Titans, he will be available.

Sick Dog
03-16-2012, 01:09 PM
I don't see Cassel stepping his game up to the next level either. He had plenty of chances to prove last year if he can win big games for us and he crumbled when we needed it the most. If one more year is what it takes to prove he's not our QBOF then so be it. What choice do we have now. I'm a Chiefs fan all the way and hope he proves me wrong. What choice do I have. If it was up to me I would have prefered Orton though. Just like the fans that voted on ESPN Poll a few months ago.

Last year was not a good year to judge him...Charles gone no Moeaki and Baldwin was not there until late plus the line was not so good...this year looks to tell a different story...

chief31
03-16-2012, 03:09 PM
Since we landed hillis and will primarily run 2 TE sets there really is no pressure on cassel. Pioli has taken the ball out of his hands to move the chains, all he has to do is make reads and smart throws. (I dont think I have seen him make too many reads, just checks down to 1 guy and then throws to the flats) I am still dreaming of getting hasselbeck though, its definitely a possibility i would say

That was the plan for 2011, was to build the offense around our dominant running game.

But, if they do not really improve our run-blocking, then our run game will be nothing more than whatever magic JC produces.

And, while a QB can definitely make up for a lesser running attack, it is far more difficult to run an offense that is designed for the running game, but has no running game.

That was the biggest deal with 2011, was that Haley made no secret that he planned to have the offense based off the success of the running game.

When the running game was lost for the season, we still kept trying to force a run-dominant offense, where there was no run dominance.

I think we would do far better with that, if those circumstances were this year, as McCluster is now more relaxed as a runner, to replace Charles.

But I really hope that we do not limit our offense to being so dependant upon a dominating rushing attack. Even with Charles, as we have been, our running game lacks consistency. When you need a yard, you want your running game to be able to pick it up, even when the defense is expecting it. Ours can not. Even Charles struggles when the whole defense is keying on him.

GarH
03-16-2012, 03:48 PM
I think if we can get Winston and DeCastro, we will see considerable improvement in Cassel. If he's not having to worry about the line breaking down all the time, he focus more on his game instead of whose going to hit him.

pojote
03-16-2012, 07:49 PM
We kept trying to run the football because haley with the rest of the coaching staff from 2010 knew we would be screwed if cassel starts throwing the ball. Sad but true. Everytime we were behind double digits in 10 and 11 we went to a passing gameplan and got absolutely hammered. (Detroit, baltimore, Oakland, Buffalo etc..)

Remember the playcalling of Charlie Weiss? Extremely conservative and so many third and 5 handoffs, I remember thinking "You have to atleast TRY to throw the football"

When you wrote that I remember the game at Denver, we were down 0-21 in first Q. Cassel threw for more than 400 yds 4 TD 0 INT. Cassel isn't the sole reason to lost those games.

chief31
03-16-2012, 07:59 PM
We kept trying to run the football because haley with the rest of the coaching staff from 2010 knew we would be screwed if cassel starts throwing the ball. Sad but true. Everytime we were behind double digits in 10 and 11 we went to a passing gameplan and got absolutely hammered. (Detroit, baltimore, Oakland, Buffalo etc..)

Remember the playcalling of Charlie Weiss? Extremely conservative and so many third and 5 handoffs, I remember thinking "You have to atleast TRY to throw the football"

How much logic repellent did you have to douse yourself with to come up with that one? :lol:

Seriously, The Chiefs were the #1 rushing team in The NFL in 2010. Seems pretty obvious that Haley and staff decided that was something worth designing an offense around, more than the concept that their Pro Bowl QB was so horrible that they were forced do everything possible to keep him from throwing the ball.

The problem was that that running game was based on the unique individual talents of a single player, and not on good run-blocking and play calling/design.

When Charles went down for the year, they were just too proud to admit that their design was not effective, so they just kept trying to prove it was.

Failure of an offensive design had a profound impact on the entire team.

AussieChiefsFan
03-16-2012, 08:19 PM
Last year was not a good year to judge him...Charles gone no Moeaki and Baldwin was not there until late plus the line was not so good...this year looks to tell a different story...

^^^^

chief31
03-16-2012, 08:32 PM
Chief if we had a capable quarterback we would of had no problem transitioning to a pass first team. As many posters say on this forum Cassel isnt a guy who is going to lead you down the field and keep you in games. He needs the running game and a lot of play action

No problem transition to a pass first offense, so long as the staff chooses to.

But redesigning the offense like that, mid-season, is not just pushing some button.

jap1
03-16-2012, 10:03 PM
We kept trying to run the football because haley with the rest of the coaching staff from 2010 knew we would be screwed if cassel starts throwing the ball. Sad but true. Everytime we were behind double digits in 10 and 11 we went to a passing gameplan and got absolutely hammered. (Detroit, baltimore, Oakland, Buffalo etc..)

Remember the playcalling of Charlie Weiss? Extremely conservative and so many third and 5 handoffs, I remember thinking "You have to atleast TRY to throw the football"

I also recall Cassel keeping us in a couple games and bringing us back from behind: San Diego twice - one for the win, Indy and I cannot remember if there were anymore and I dont care to look it up.

Three7s
03-16-2012, 11:16 PM
I also recall Cassel keeping us in a couple games and bringing us back from behind: San Diego twice - one for the win, Indy and I cannot remember if there were anymore and I dont care to look it up.
You could say Minnesota. Still doesn't debunk the argument that Cassel crumbles against good teams.

kcvet
03-17-2012, 05:06 PM
the big Chiefs said Cassel was going to have competition in camp this year. with Orton gone wonder who they have in mind now??? or were they just kidin" ???

TopekaRoy
03-17-2012, 05:14 PM
the big Chiefs said Cassel was going to have competition in camp this year. with Orton gone wonder who they have in mind now??? or were they just kidin" ???

There are still a lot of good QBs out there. I think everybody is waiting to see what Manning decides. Alex Smith, Tim Tebow and Matt Hasselback are all hanging in the balance. We are going to look at Brady Quinn and Matt Flynn hasn't signed yet (although he will probably go to the Dolphins). David Gerrard is still out there. Then there are some good prospects in the draft, although I would prefer a veteran QB. Cam Newton did pretty good as a rookie, so you never know.

I think things will move very quickly once Manning signs.