Hell, I'd argue that our top option isn't the TE either. It just happens to have worked out that way through the first two games. But I'd be willing to bet that it won't finish that way. Bowe will be our leading receiver when it's said and done, barring injury.
A TE having a great game is a great thing. I'm very glad Moeaki is stepping up. But the fact that Moeaki was targeted 10 times and the rest of our receivers/RBs were targeted 18 is a troubling sign.
The 2006 Colts won the SB with the 32nd rank run defense. If our run defense were 32nd ranked right now, would you think that's OK, because a lot of teams have different styles of winning? Probably not. It's the same thing.
Matt Cassel has a 55.6 passer rating. He's targeting Moeaki more than everyone else. That isn't a coincidence. It's a symptom that we need to get our QB or our WRs to step up. We're not winning games because of our passing offense right now. We're winning in spite of it.
How is that second quote is supposed to be wonderful things about the Chiefs, when you are really saying it is a terrible sign. To me that is a contratidction and either just an incorrect statement or a lie. If I am truly reading that wrong, I am afraid I will never get it because there it is in black and white... You are just missing a big BUT..
To answer your question.
I think we were one and done with TG for a couple reasons. A our defesne sucked and could not force a punt under Greg Robinson. It had nothing to do with the offense, except for maybe a fumble by Priest Holmes on the five as he slowed down thinking he had a TD. I guess you could blame J. Morton for a dropped pass, but no punts... Seriously..
I also think the last time we went to the play offs, we lucked in and had no business being there, regardless of what Herman says. There was no facet of this team capable of playing in the playoffs except maybe the running game. It was an average team that lucked into the play offs and the one and done was deserving.
Under Herm Edwards your theory is accurate as it was TG who did just enough to get us in the play offs. Under DV, your theory is total BS... As I said there is more variables to a team losing in the play off than who is the leading receiver.
Regardless of were Moose did or didn't play, I don't care. I just remember being at a Dallas Chiefs game in Dallas and recall him playing TE. I hate the cowpies and so you got me. He is a FB, which I did post by the way as TE/FB... The point of the argument started when you said it was never a good sign when your TE is the leading receiver, when you yourself pointed out two seasons in which the Chiefs made the play off when TG was the leading receiver. Those were winning seasons.. you are wrong and didn't prove anything to me other than I don't know Cowpie football. Good for you...
It's not that a TE is targeted more that decides on how far a team goes in a season. It's how good the team is.
I do agree that our WRs HAVE TO step upp. But I don't think that it's a terrible thing to have a TE lead a team in catches. I think its a real good sign seeing that he's a rookie. If he can keep up his current pace he will be a good weapon for the team for years to come.
The following TEs were the main receiver for their team in the 2000s.
Kellen Winslow (on Bucs)
Only Sharpe on the 2000 Ravens (not exactly a passing team) went anywhere. Forget SB. I'm just talking about winning a playoff game.
And here's the thing. All of those are great TEs. And the teams were lucky to have them. But each team followed one of two paths: (1) they improved when they got a real WR, whether Austin on the Cowboys (won playoff game), Jackson on the Chargers (AFC Championship), and Crabtree on the 49ers; or (2) they imploded and had to rebuild; or (3) they finished at the bottom of the league in 2009 (Bucs, Seahawks, Raiders).
I don't know what you all are looking for here, but it's about as black and white as things get.
It doesn't really matter who the leading receiver is. But it does help dramatically when you have at least 1 "star" or "threat" receiver. It takes the opposing teams concentration off the other receivers.
Everyone is putting a lot of the lack of offense on the shoulders of Cassel right now which I can see why with the numbers he's put up.
In my opinion, it has to do with many other things as well as Cassel.
1. Receivers not getting open
2. Receivers dropping passes
3. Play calling
4. Putting Cassel in long yardage situations on 3rd down
5. Not calling pass plays enough to let Cassel get in a comfort zone
6. Running game not being really effective
All these things are going to contribute to Cassel not doing well either and that doesn't help his situation in helping him become a better QB.
The Chiefs will have to wait til the end of the season to really evaluate Cassel and look at his performance.
But it looks to me like the Chiefs are doing a great job at moving them in the right direction. Maybe they're concentrating more on defense than offense. After all, defense wins championships!