Can some one explain this to me:
"Because there exists a QB who became a worse player after his best season, therefor anyone who had a season comparable to that player's best season must be a bad player."
That's what I'm hearing over and over. Matt Cassel had a good season and then he sucked. We all know that. Why does that have to do with anything else? Does every personnel guy who studies game film have to go, "Wait. This guy had a season who's numbers are comparable to this Matt Cassel guy's numbers from his best season. Hold on. That must mean that this guy is going to become a bad player." Huh? What? Why would Dorsey or Reid care one bit about what happened to one specific guy who has nothing to do with their 2013 KC Chiefs? So this particular guy we're talking about happens to have been a Chief. How does that mean he has some magical ability to rub off his lack of mojo onto some one else any more than anyone else? Why not cherry pick some QB who then went on to be a better player? Who cares about Matt Cassel!