While not typically a habitual worrier, I must admit to some concern that the Chiefs have not elected to bring in a veteran backup QB (like the Jets using Mark Brunell to backup and mentor dirty Sanchez). I can only think of a few reasons why they would elect to not do this.
First, perhaps there just aren't any available established veteran QB's out there that understand they are past their prime and are comfortable with their new role in life. I'd love to have Dante Culpepper available for the next time Cassel goes down but if he doesn't understand he's a backup QB then you can't fit a square peg in a round hole.
Secondly, maybe the Chiefs are just opting to avoid any type of QB controversy and I can respect that. Cassel is very much still developing as a QB and you don't want to even generate the perception that you have doubts in him.
Third and most cynically, maybe they know they're not serious contenders at this point for a superbowl title so they aren't ready to shell out the cash for contingencies. This would seem to fit with their FA tactics in that they aren't shelling out the cash for the more recognized "top shelf" available players because they aren't really planning to make their push this year.
Originally when they brought #7 in I was less than elated. Watching him play that first year though I changed my mind on him. He has two things you can't coach or teach. He's competitive and he's tough, those two things are at the top of my priorities list for any player. I still have to think though that if the Chiefs front officer really expected them to be in contention for a superbowl title then they would cover all bases and plan for all situations, i.e., sign a vet QB, drop Palko and develop Stanzi.