View Poll Results: Thig or Cassel

Voters
73. You may not vote on this poll
  • Thig

    26 35.62%
  • Cassell

    47 64.38%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40

Thread: Poll: Thig or cassell

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Oct 2007
    Location
    tucson
    Posts
    4,326
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 34
    Given: 0

    Default Poll: Thig or cassell


    0 Not allowed!
    Hey guy's who would you rather be the starter next year?? Thig or casell

  2. #21
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,149
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 31
    Given: 27

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    I voted for Cassel, because he is going to be forced in as the starter, regardless.

    Therefore, I pray that he does well enough to win the job. I have no choice but to hope that they guy we wanted lives up to the expectations.

    With Cassel here, and presumably the automatic starter, (Some farce of a QB competition will be announced) I'd rather see us get Thigpen traded away.

    We don't need two starting QBs. We do need two starting OTs, OGs, DEs, CBs, Safeties, and four starting LBs.

    I prefer to have the players on the field, than the best players on the sideline.

  3. #22
    Member Since
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    210
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    As much as I like Thigpen to at least start the season because he earned it last year, Pioli brought Cassel in for one reason. To play and to win. It will be a QB controversy only during the offseason. In the end Cassel will get it. But look to the bright side. If Cassel gets hurt we have a heck of a backup.

  4. #23
    Member Since
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,246
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 5
    Given: 1

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    You guys are all missing the point. Whether Cassel or Thigpen starts, this is probably the best QB situation we've had in years. Rather than let a kid who's completely unproven win a job over a guy who's getting old or whatever, now we have two young guys who have proven that they can at least PLAY in the NFL competing for a starting QB position. I'm for the guy that does the best job.
    C:\Users\Master Sin\Desktop\thumb_pl_180492.jpg

  5. #24
    Member Since
    Oct 2007
    Location
    tucson
    Posts
    4,326
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 34
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    You guy's this isn't about money kinda question.. Money aside who would you rather have start next year for the chiefs????????

  6. #25
    Member Since
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    548
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Cassel gets my vote for body of work over the course of one season over Thigpen...money and so forth put aside.

  7. #26
    Member Since
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    233
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    I voted for Cassel, because he is going to be forced in as the starter, regardless.

    Therefore, I pray that he does well enough to win the job. I have no choice but to hope that they guy we wanted lives up to the expectations.

    With Cassel here, and presumably the automatic starter, (Some farce of a QB competition will be announced) I'd rather see us get Thigpen traded away.

    We don't need two starting QBs. We do need two starting OTs, OGs, DEs, CBs, Safeties, and four starting LBs.

    I prefer to have the players on the field, than the best players on the sideline.

    When are you going to get it thru your head that its better to have 2 QB's than one? Why trade a backup? You want us to keep Brodie "Glass" Croyle backing up Cassell? And Thigpen was a starter because everyone else was broken. This does not make him a starter. He is still looked at by most of the leauge as a backup. The Chiefs havent named him the starter of a season yet. Cassel is also considered the league as a backup until he is a starter for a season. As for your other wants on the team, we do have starters there just not good ones.

  8. #27
    Member Since
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    233
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Yeah hopefully Haley can make him in to a great QB. All i have seen bad out of him is that he hold the football too long. He can take a hit though. 47 sacks tell me alot about how he is very druable. One more WR hopefully comes out of our crops now. Maybe Franklin can pull out the number 2 if we dont get anyone else.

  9. #28
    Member Since
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kansas City Missouri
    Posts
    3,814
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by KansasCityChris View Post
    We all witnessed what a great QB named Joe Montana can do with a team of half way decent players. We have a comperable team with Tony Gonzales, Larry Johnson, Duane Bowe, Franklin and now new QB Matt Cassell. We need to aquire some people to add to Brian Waters and Albert Brandon so that our new QB has protection. Our Defense isn't quite up to the same level as the team I am refering to but with decent coaching and guidance they will get there.I don't think that we are too far away from having a play off level team. Maybe 2 years.
    Who is Albert Brandon?
    <a href=http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/../../../../image.php?type=sigpic&userid=2553&dateline=1258934108 target=_blank>http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/.....ine=1258934108</a>

  10. #29
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,149
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 31
    Given: 27

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by warcrychief View Post
    When are you going to get it thru your head that its better to have 2 QB's than one? Why trade a backup? You want us to keep Brodie "Glass" Croyle backing up Cassell? And Thigpen was a starter because everyone else was broken. This does not make him a starter. He is still looked at by most of the leauge as a backup. The Chiefs havent named him the starter of a season yet. Cassel is also considered the league as a backup until he is a starter for a season. As for your other wants on the team, we do have starters there just not good ones.
    As soon as you figure out that it is better to have five O-linemen than it is to have two.

    In fact, it is better to have four o-linemen, and one QB, than it is to have three o-linemen and two QBs.

    The fact is that there really are other players on the field, than the QB.

    I know the camera always focuses on the QB. I can understand someone being fooled by that.

    The average fan only ever sees the QB, the WRs, the HB and occasionally the TE, because that is where the camera goes during the game.

    That's where the ball is at. And it is fun to watch the ball.

    But the defense has eleven players without the ball. (Most of the time.) And there is only one player with the ball, at a time, on offense.

    Believe it or not, those offensive players that don't have the ball make all the difference in the world.

    You certainly wouldn't enjoy the game for very long, if there were eleven defensive players going after the couple of guys who get the ball.

    For some reason, you seem to be under the impression that you can just use whatever players noone else really wanted to play the non-ball-carrying positions. As long as we get great ball-carriers.

    There is a reason that Brett Favre had some fantastic seasons, and some horrendous ones.

    He didn't just amazingly suck some years, and was the king of the world two seasons later.

    It's because QB play, more than any other position, in any of the major sports, is dependant on the play of his teammates.

    If you take a young Joe Montana and a young Peyton Manning, with no offensive line, I'll show you two lack-luster, very short, careers.

    On defense, you have eleven players on the field. On offense, eleven more.

    Which position you believe to be more important is irrelevant, as the importance advantage would only be slight, in any direction.

    Now, if you have one good player at the position you feel is most important, and three other positions with poor players, and you have a chance to add another good player, what position do you want to add a good player to?

    Obviously, as you continue to announce it, you prefer to get another good player to play the position that you already have a good guy at, and ignore the rest. (throw in whatever you can find there.)

    This boils down to you wanting your best players on the bench, while I want the best players on the field.





    Quote Originally Posted by KansasCityChris View Post
    We all witnessed what a great QB named Joe Montana can do with a team of half way decent players. We have a comperable team with Tony Gonzales, Larry Johnson, Duane Bowe, Franklin and now new QB Matt Cassell. We need to aquire some people to add to Brian Waters and Albert Brandon so that our new QB has protection. Our Defense isn't quite up to the same level as the team I am refering to but with decent coaching and guidance they will get there.I don't think that we are too far away from having a play off level team. Maybe 2 years.
    When Joe got here, we had one good component of the offense. We had an offensive line. We didn't have any receivers. But we did have a pretty good offensive line.

    In the current situation, we have a terrible offensive line.

    And...are you really suggesting that Cassel is of the same caliber as Joe Montana?

    Talk about your long-shots.

    Cassel has played well for one season. Montana had won four Super Bowls, and played for 13 fantastic seasons when he came here.

    To say that that comparison is a reach is extremely polite.

  11. #30
    Member Since
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Waxahachie, TX via Broken Arrow, OK via McLouth, KS
    Posts
    756
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    I dont want a 14 mil a year QB holding a clipboard unless he is injured. TBH, I think Cassell coming in to "compete" for a starting job is just being polite to Thigpen. Thig did a good job for us last year with what he had to work with. I think Pioli and Haley already have slated Cassell as starter.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. QB Controversy - Cassell or Thigpen
    By Coach in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 03-08-2009, 03:59 PM
  2. Matt Cassell to the Chiefs?
    By tenacious in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 02-06-2009, 03:18 PM
  3. Thank Chan, not Thig
    By jerhart in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-23-2008, 01:06 PM
  4. A poll on espn.com
    By anaeelbackwards in forum The Locker Room
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 03-07-2008, 05:01 AM
  5. a poll on nfl.com
    By anaeelbackwards in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-21-2007, 08:01 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •