View Full Version : Will the Cassel crumble?

09-01-2009, 03:37 PM
As an obsessive fan of the NFL, I think it's time to take out some trash. The garbage I'm referring to is that which has been spewing from the mouths of analysts, fantasy gurus, and self-proclaimed prognosticators across the country regarding Kansas City's offseason acquisition at quarterback, Matt Cassel. As the 2009 NFL season draws nearer, many are saying that Cassel is overrated-- or will be a flop in Kansas City because he had so much talent around him last year in New England. I understand that to say the Chiefs have a much weaker offensive line than the Patriots would still be a gross understatement. I also understand that KC does not possess the wealth of experience and talent that the Pats do at receiver, either. I understand that the groundwork is certainly laid for Cassel to struggle with the Chiefs in the 2009 NFL season. You'd have to be blind not to see it.

However, the jury still has to be out on Cassel, himself. There is simply not enough evidence to make a case for Cassel as an NFL starter yet, one way or the other. Matt had a good season last year with an excellent organization/team and yes, will probably struggle some this year. Cassel is on a weaker team now with less support at receiver and a shoddy offensive line. It's obvious to a brain-dead donkey that he probably won't enjoy the same success as last year now that he's with the Chiefs. Does that mean that Cassel himself sucks or lacks the talent to start at the pro level? That determination simply cannot be made with no basis for comparison. If Cassel had the opportunity to be New England's starter again this season a case could most certainly be made on wether he is a one-year-wonder or not. As it stands, unless he single-handedly throws games away and makes repeated mistakes that can be directly attributed to him, people will need to see Cassel play for at least two seasons with the Chiefs in order to get a fair evaluation of his ability to lead a team as the starter. To try and evaluate him based on last year to this year would largely be comparing the Chiefs to the Patriots. It's apples and oranges.

Yet many respected and otherwise intelligent members of the media seem quick to jump on this bandwagon that Cassel is a no-good, overrated fluke simply because he got to throw the ball to Randy Moss and Wes Welker. (Michael Fabiano even went as far as labeling Cassel the next Rob Johnson in a segment he did on NFL.com.) So, having good receivers makes you a lousy quarterback? Really? That has to be one of the dumbest arguments of opinion I've ever heard. By that same logic, Joe Montana was simply horrific because he got to throw to the greatest receiver in NFL history, Jerry Rice. Peyton Manning is just an overrated slouch because he had Harrison, Wayne, and Stokely? I'm also guessing that Santonio Holmes threw last year's superbowl-winning TD pass to himself...

It's no secret that great receivers will make their quarterback look better. Football is a team sport, after all. However, this idea that a guy's talent level will significantly decrease or that his fundamentals and mechanics will erode simply because he becomes part of a weaker roster is entirely ludicrous and asinine to be quite blunt about it. Physically and mentally, Matt Cassel is still the same guy he was a year ago. He's still the Matt Cassel that backed-up collegiate superstars at USC. Solid starter or career backup? There is simply not enough data yet to even remotely determine Cassel's future successes or shortcomings with any accuracy. Anybody that tries to tell you otherwise is either lying to you or is just talking out of that space between the back pockets of their pants.

09-01-2009, 03:48 PM

Great article dude! Agreed 100%!

09-01-2009, 04:34 PM
When the Chiefs first made the trade in Feb I was more excited for the pick up of Mike Vrable. I thought that he would give the team something that they had been lacking over the past few years once the descison was made for the Chiefs to go young. That being Vetran leadership. As the preseason started and i actualy saw Cassel play i began to get excited about haveing him under center. His first game was so so if you look at the numbers that he had. But you got to rember he had some drops. Just like the recivers dont throw the ball to themselfs the QBs cant catch the ball for the recivers themselfs. So you cant put all that on Matt Cassle. I do rember when the Trade was annoced hereing people in the media saying things like the chiefs have a franchise qb. I was thinking how can you say that. He had only played one year and that is not enough time to say hes a franchise QB. I like what i have seen from Cassel so far. He seems to be accruate throwing that ball and hes able to move with his legs when he gets in trouble. And lets be honest with the oline that the chiefs currently have he will have to do that alot. I went into the offseason hopeing that the Chiefs gave thigpen a chance to be the starter of the team. Now haveing seen Cassel I think hes the better qb of the two. He is more accurate. Thigpen has times that he will overthrow WIDE OPEN recivers. He has also shown that he can put points on the board. The Jury is still out on Thigpen as much as it is on Cassel. The one bright side about this is that there are pleanty of teams that wish they had the Chiefs qb sitiuation. Denver is haveing to reley on Kyle orton and they tried to get Cassel. If you think that St louis is happy with there QB sitiuation I would say i am not so sure. Cassel might fail in Kc but he might turn out to be the next Tom Brady. WHO KNOWS i guess we will find out in the next couple of seasons. GO CHIEFS

09-01-2009, 06:21 PM
spot on guys..WTG

09-09-2009, 05:34 PM
I def agree with matthews... soooo glad we don't have Denver's QB situation...

09-10-2009, 05:15 AM
Well, as you stated, Moefoe, the jury is still out on Cassel.

But when the jury is out, guesses will be made.

And the possibility of his mechanics and know-how being diminished, just because he is on a poor team, is real.

If his abilities require at least 3.4 seconds to execute, and the new team takes 3.8 seconds to get recievers open, while only allowing 2.9 second of protection, then the mechanics will have to change.

Maybe he can do that, and maybe the new team will allow more time and get receivers open quicker. He looked good in limited action during the preseason.

But, if all of that is unknown, then that kinda puts him under the same microscope that a rookie would be under. And most of them don't work out. So guessing that he won't be able to play without The Pats' offense is gonna be in line with the odds.

Obviously, as Chiefs fans, we would like to see him succeed, and many even post bold predicitions of success.

Is the only difference here, that we like that prediction better? :D

09-11-2009, 11:28 PM
Obviously, he will need to alter his game from last year due to lack of protection/time in the pocket. I was mainly talkin about ppl who are so quick to label him a bust or one year wonder, talkin smack like he's completely forgot what a football looks like since signing with us.