PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs More on Cassell/Vrabel Deal: Pats Turned Down #33 Pick from Lions


Pages : [1] 2 3

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:06 AM
The Boston Globe is now reporting that the Patriots turned down the 1st pick in the 2nd round (#33 overall), one pick higher than that obtained from the Chiefs, for Cassell straight up.

Lending further credence to the idea that the trade was done in part with an eye toward clearing cap space is the fact that the Lions offered the first pick of the second round (No. 33 overall) straight up for Cassel, according to an NFL source.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2009/03/02/sanders_has_room_to_grow/

Based on all available information, therefore, it appears to me that Belichick pulled the trigger with KC in order to:

1. not have to wait and take risks on whether he could clear the cap space. The Broncos failed to line up their ducks fast enough on the 3 way deal, and it would be somewhat dependent on Cutler reporting for duty in Tampa. The Patriots were not willing to wait.

2. The Patriots wanted to avoid paying Vrabel the $1M Roster bonus he was due in very early March, but didn't want to cut him and let him end up with either the Jets or that dickhead in Cleveland. Trading him to the Chiefs when they did allowed them to save the million, save the cap space, and send him to a team that they didn't dislike.

3. One slot isn't worth talking about, really, and sending Cassell, a good guy who overcame alot and did a good job for them last year, to the hinterlands of Detroit would not have been very nice. It wasn't worth it to move up from #34 to #33.

4. Pioli moved faster than everyone else, and was ready to do the deal. It may well be that by the time these other players got involved, KC and the Pats already had a verbal agreement in place. Given the risks of a 3 way falling apart, Cutler not reporting, and/or the Lions being the Lions, BB took the good deal that was on the table, and avoided the riks of being stuck with Cassell this year with NO cap room at all.

The Bad Guy
03-02-2009, 10:09 AM
If I'm Cutler, I'm doing everything I can to get to Tampa.

blueballs
03-02-2009, 10:10 AM
KC will give the Pats a deal
on some KC player in the near future

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:10 AM
So we coulda had Stafford?

J Diddy
03-02-2009, 10:18 AM
KC will give the Pats a deal
on some KC player in the near future


Damn, if we still had ryan sims.

:banghead:

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:19 AM
So we coulda had Stafford?

Sounds that way.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:20 AM
Sounds that way.

Great...Scott Pioli that's a strike right there.

Brock
03-02-2009, 10:22 AM
I'll bet at least part of it is that he likes Cassel.

veist
03-02-2009, 10:22 AM
I've seen it reported that the deal was done without condition of Cassel signing a new deal which would also make sense on why it was better than say Detroit's #33.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:22 AM
Great...Scott Pioli that's a strike right there.

The Lions tipped their hand, and we didn't take advantage.

Ugh.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:22 AM
So we coulda had Stafford?

pretty much

This just reinforces my opinion that people don't view Stafford\Sanchez as franchise QB's or at the very least alot people have doubts about the two.

doomy3
03-02-2009, 10:23 AM
pretty much

This just reinforces my opinion that people don't view Stafford\Sanchez as franchise QB's or at the very least alot people have doubts about the two.

Yep. Sounds like both the Lions and Chiefs feel this way. Or at least that Cassel is better than either.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:23 AM
pretty much

This just reinforces my opinion that people don't view Stafford\Sanchez as franchise QB's or at the very least alot people have doubts about the two.

Or, that a new regime is more worried about winning now rather than building a championship caliber football team.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:23 AM
pretty much

This just reinforces my opinion that people don't view Stafford\Sanchez as franchise QB's or at the very least alot people have doubts about the two.

And if they turn out to be great players Scott Pioli will be remembered as a dumbass that traded for Matt Cassell when he coulda had one of those QB's...

Lzen
03-02-2009, 10:24 AM
Great...Scott Pioli that's a strike right there.


There is another angle to look at in this instance. I think we should ask the question 'why were both of these teams so anxious to trade for Cassel instead of drafting Stafford or Sanchez?'

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:24 AM
The Lions tipped their hand, and we didn't take advantage.

Ugh.

Now we're gonna hear hey trust Pioli, I don't care who it is if they were gonna make that move giving us the choice of QB's and we still moved for Cassell I'm not happy I don't think Cassell will ever be a top notch QB.

Brock
03-02-2009, 10:25 AM
And if they turn out to be great players Scott Pioli will be remembered as a dumbass that traded for Matt Cassell when he coulda had one of those QB's...

On the other hand, the reverse seems likely too.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 10:25 AM
And if they turn out to be great players Scott Pioli will be remembered as a dumbass that traded for Matt Cassell when he coulda had one of those QB's...

What if all 3 of those QBs turn out to be great players?

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:25 AM
There is another angle to look at in this instance. I think we should ask the question 'why were both of these teams so anxious to trade for Cassel instead of drafting Stafford or Sanchez?'

Win now, asses in seats?

It's perceived as the "safe move" because he has NFL experience, when actually, he carries just as much risk as Stafford/Sanchez and is 5 years older.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:25 AM
There is another angle to look at in this instance. I think we should ask the question 'why were both of these teams so anxious to trade for Cassel instead of drafting Stafford or Sanchez?'

Cause they all wanna be the Dolphins, a quick short term turn around>long term success.

All these Parcells tree guys believe in the shit.

HemiEd
03-02-2009, 10:25 AM
Damn, if we still had ryan sims.

:banghead:

LJ

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:25 AM
Yep. Sounds like both the Lions and Chiefs feel this way. Or at least that Cassel is better than either.

Yep

Or, that a new regime is more worried about winning now rather than building a championship caliber football team.

I could see the Lions feeling that way I don't get the sense the Chiefs really care.

And if they turn out to be great players Scott Pioli will be remembered as a dumbass that traded for Matt Cassell when he coulda had one of those QB's...

True or they could look like geniuses.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:26 AM
What if all 3 of those QBs turn out to be great players?

Then we got fucked cause Cassell is 5 years older than they are, he's 7 years older than Stafford is.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:26 AM
What if all 3 of those QBs turn out to be great players?

Guess we'll have to wait and see who wins a SB first.

Stafford and Sanchez already have the edge based on age alone.

They'll both be still in their prime when Cassel is nearing retirement.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 10:26 AM
Win now, asses in seats?

It's perceived as the "safe move" because he has NFL experience, when actually, he carries just as much risk as Stafford/Sanchez and is 5 years older.

Either was was a risk. I was excited at the prospect of us finally drafting a franchise QB. But I knew that would be a risk. Either way is a risk. I am not unhappy with the trade.

ChiefsCountry
03-02-2009, 10:26 AM
It looks like we took a salary dump with Vrabel that is the only logical reason why Belichek didnt do any of these other deals.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:27 AM
Just think about that Matt Cassell is 7 years older than Stafford is.

doomy3
03-02-2009, 10:27 AM
And if they turn out to be great players Scott Pioli will be remembered as a dumbass that traded for Matt Cassell when he coulda had one of those QB's...

And if they turn out to be inferior to Matt Cassel, Scott Pioli will be remembered as a genious who got a young QB who was better than 2 guys who were picked in the first and we still kept our #3.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 10:28 AM
Then we got ****ed cause Cassell is 5 years older than they are, he's 7 years older than Stafford is.

Well, that depends on if you want to win sooner rather than later. Perhaps the Chiefs get to the SB in 2-3 years. Perhaps the team that picks Stafford or the team that picks Sanchez get to the SB, but not for another 5-6 years. It's all speculation at this point. I think it does no good to get mad about it now.

ChiefsCountry
03-02-2009, 10:28 AM
Guess we'll have to wait and see who wins a SB first.

Stafford and Sanchez already have the edge based on age alone.

They'll both be still in their prime when Cassel is nearing retirement.

If Detroit wins with Stafford and Schwartz I am going to be pissed so much.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:29 AM
Then we got fucked cause Cassell is 5 years older than they are, he's 7 years older than Stafford is.

I think Stafford now is a lock to be #1 even though Detroit wanted someone else.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:29 AM
I've seen it reported that the deal was done without condition of Cassel signing a new deal which would also make sense on why it was better than say Detroit's #33.

Right, because otherwise the Patriots would be stuck waiting until CAssell and his new team worked out a new contract -- and all the while the Pats are hard against the cap.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:29 AM
And if they turn out to be inferior to Matt Cassel, Scott Pioli will be remembered as a genious who got a young QB who was better than 2 guys who were picked in the first and we still kept our #3.

Sure but I'm going to say logically speaking does anyone here really think Cassell is a franchise QB or has franchise potential?

I agree with what Petro said he's at best Trent Green.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:29 AM
The Lions tipped their hand, and we didn't take advantage.

Ugh.

errr....who said that the CHIEFS knew this when they made the deal? Right -- nobody.

The Bad Guy
03-02-2009, 10:30 AM
Or, that a new regime is more worried about winning now rather than building a championship caliber football team.

So let me get this straight...

Drafting Stafford points to building a championship caliber team, but trading for Cassel just points to winning now and not "building"?

It's good to love the draft prospects, but this is a huge stretch.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:30 AM
Sure but I'm going to say logically speaking does anyone here really think Cassell is a franchise QB or has franchise potential?

I agree with what Petro said he's at best Trent Green.

But Trent Green could have won a Super Bowl if we had a defense. /Homers

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:30 AM
We made some jokes that the Lions would trade for Cassell and take the LT to go for the quick turnaround to not lose the base..

Jokes on us we're that team.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:30 AM
Or, that a new regime is more worried about winning now rather than building a championship caliber football team.

Yes, because Pioli has a long history of being short-term focused instead of trying to win championships.

:rolleyes:

doomy3
03-02-2009, 10:30 AM
Sure but I'm going to say logically speaking does anyone here really think Cassell is a franchise QB or has franchise potential?

I agree with what Petro said he's at best Trent Green.

Yeah, I think he has that potential. Every bit as much as Sanchez. And I like Stafford's upside, but he his very much boom or bust IMO.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:31 AM
So let me get this straight...

Drafting Stafford points to building a championship caliber team, but trading for Cassel just points to winning now and not "building"?

It's good to love the draft prospects, but this is a huge stretch.

Who has more upside?

Who is 5-7 years younger?

Who is more likely to be a true, franchise QB?

Cassel is not the answer to any of these 3 questions, IMO.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:31 AM
Win now, asses in seats?

It's perceived as the "safe move" because he has NFL experience, when actually, he carries just as much risk as Stafford/Sanchez and is 5 years older.

errr..there is definitely less risk. ALOT less risk.

His ceiling might not be as high, I dunno, but his floor sure as hell is alot less low.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:31 AM
Yes, because Pioli has a long history of being short-term focused instead of trying to win championships.

:rolleyes:

No offense here but all these Parcells guys do the exact same thing.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:32 AM
Sure but I'm going to say logically speaking does anyone here really think Cassell is a franchise QB or has franchise potential?

I agree with what Petro said he's at best Trent Green.

I was never a fan of his and I am leery of 1-year wonders.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:32 AM
errr..there is definitely less risk. ALOT less risk.

His ceiling might not be as high, I dunno, but his floor sure as hell is alot less low.

Matt Cassell isn't risky really?

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:33 AM
It looks like we took a salary dump with Vrabel that is the only logical reason why Belichek didnt do any of these other deals.

Might be. It sort of looks that way.

Of course, you guys can definitely USE Vrable more than we can. His leadership etc. is alo tmore needed on your team of young kids than our group of guys.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:34 AM
I could sit Matt Stafford on my bench for 5 years and he'd still be playing at a younger age than Cassell did.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:34 AM
Yes, because Pioli has a long history of being short-term focused instead of trying to win championships.

:rolleyes:

His history in NE means jack shit at this point.

He never was in a position to have to build a team from scratch.

The Patriots were missing some pieces to the puzzle.

We're missing over 40 pieces to a 53 piece puzzle, and the previous douchebag that was in charge lost the box.

The Bad Guy
03-02-2009, 10:34 AM
Who has more upside?

Who is 5-7 years younger?

Who is more likely to be a true, franchise QB?

Cassel is not the answer to any of these 3 questions, IMO.

I don't know what you saw in Stafford at Georgia, but never once did I watch him and think true franchise QB.

I could be totally wrong, but despite his big arm, he never, ever wowed me.

I'll revisit this after I watch how Cassel performs. Cassel has his risks, but Stafford is FAR from a slam dunk.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:35 AM
This is my thought this is what it's like to be a Chiefs fan, to know you could have had the top QB in the draft an elite prospect and then see your team decide to trade for Matt Cassell instead.

That's what it's like being a Chiefs fan.

The Bad Guy
03-02-2009, 10:35 AM
I could sit Matt Stafford on my bench for 5 years and he'd still be playing at a younger age than Cassell did.

What does this matter?

blueballs
03-02-2009, 10:35 AM
The Cassel trade wil also have to factor in
how the #3 pans out or the #34 or who was available
-it'll be twisted to fit

The Bad Guy
03-02-2009, 10:36 AM
This is my thought this is what it's like to be a Chiefs fan, to know you could have had the top QB in the draft an elite prospect and then see your team decide to trade for Matt Cassell instead.

That's what it's like being a Chiefs fan.

I would just love to know what you watched that gave you the feeling that Stafford is an elite QB.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:36 AM
No offense here but all these Parcells guys do the exact same thing.

No offense, but Parcells and Belichick have 5 Super Bowls between them. There's worse models to follow.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:37 AM
errr..there is definitely less risk. ALOT less risk.

His ceiling might not be as high, I dunno, but his floor sure as hell is alot less low.


Why?

Because he stepped in to the most prolific offense of the past 5 years, and started 15 games?

I just don't understand why people are gushing over this kid. He's not Tom Brady v.2. He's the beneficiary of solid coaching and surrounded by exceptional talent.

I'll be pleasantly surprised if he wins more than a few playoff games in his time here.

the Talking Can
03-02-2009, 10:37 AM
So we coulda had Stafford?

don't ever speak those words again

RedThat
03-02-2009, 10:37 AM
I'll bet at least part of it is that he likes Cassel.

Yeah. That, and he knows him well enough that he fits in well with a new system he is bringing here.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:38 AM
No offense, but Parcells and Belichick have 5 Super Bowls between them. There's worse models to follow.

Whens the last time Bill Parcells won a bowl?

And hey if we all could only luck into Tom Brady right?

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:38 AM
This is my thought this is what it's like to be a Chiefs fan, to know you could have had the top QB in the draft an elite prospect and then see your team decide to trade for Matt Cassell instead.

That's what it's like being a Chiefs fan.

You still have the #3 pick -- instead of an elite QB you should come out with an elite player at another position, and still have a very good QB.

What's the problem? Unless Stafford/Sanchez turns out to be the next Montana or whatever, it's not like you guys screwed the pooch.

And you should figure that the Chiefs, from where they were sitting, figured that they would NOT have a choice as to which of those they were getting. They had to figure the Lions getting the guy THEY wanted, and the Chiefs are stuck with whoever is left if they want to go QB.

eazyb81
03-02-2009, 10:38 AM
Yes, because Pioli has a long history of being short-term focused instead of trying to win championships.

:rolleyes:

Pushing an agenda does not help one think clearly.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:39 AM
Whens the last time Bill Parcells won a bowl?

And hey if we all could only luck into Tom Brady right?

You are weirdly bitter.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:39 AM
Why?

Because he stepped in to the most prolific offense of the past 5 years, and started 15 games?

I just don't understand why people are gushing over this kid. He's not Tom Brady v.2. He's the beneficiary of solid coaching and surrounded by exceptional talent.

I'll be pleasantly surprised if he wins more than a few playoff games in his time here.

I said before we had him and I stand by this there are numerous QB's that could have stepped into his spot and done the same thing or done it better.

He's not bringing those offensive players and that coaching staff with him.

JASONSAUTO
03-02-2009, 10:39 AM
Then we got fucked cause Cassell is 5 years older than they are, he's 7 years older than Stafford is.

it's 6 mecca 6

ChiefsCountry
03-02-2009, 10:39 AM
No offense, but Parcells and Belichick have 5 Super Bowls between them. There's worse models to follow.

Has Parcels ever won a playoff game without Belichick?

The Bad Guy
03-02-2009, 10:39 AM
Whens the last time Bill Parcells won a bowl?

And hey if we all could only luck into Tom Brady right?

All Parcells disciples have flaws, but Matt Stafford doesn't.

Got it.

Rooster
03-02-2009, 10:39 AM
Or, that a new regime is more worried about winning now rather than building a championship caliber football team.

:rolleyes: Give it a rest already.

The Bad Guy
03-02-2009, 10:40 AM
I said before we had him and I stand by this there are numerous QB's that could have stepped into his spot and done the same thing or done it better.

He's not bringing those offensive players and that coaching staff with him.

What happens if he's good?

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:40 AM
You still have the #3 pick -- instead of an elite QB you should come out with an elite player at another position, and still have a very good QB.

What's the problem? Unless Stafford/Sanchez turns out to be the next Montana or whatever, it's not like you guys screwed the pooch.

And you should figure that the Chiefs, from where they were sitting, figured that they would NOT have a choice as to which of those they were getting. They had to figure the Lions getting the guy THEY wanted, and the Chiefs are stuck with whoever is left if they want to go QB.

The QB was what we were in position to take the top of the draft is weak, if we come out of this with Matt Cassell and a ILB I'm going to be one pissed off fan.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:40 AM
I don't know what you saw in Stafford at Georgia, but never once did I watch him and think true franchise QB.

I could be totally wrong, but despite his big arm, he never, ever wowed me.

I'll revisit this after I watch how Cassel performs. Cassel has his risks, but Stafford is FAR from a slam dunk.

I'm not saying Stafford IS a slam-dunk, Frank.

They all carry risks, and one of Cassel's many risks is that he's already 27, so you've shortened your window already.

Like Mecca said, you could sit Stafford for FIVE years, and he's still be younger than Cassel is at this point. And NO ONE is going to sit Matthew Stafford for five years.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:41 AM
His history in NE means jack shit at this point.

He never was in a position to have to build a team from scratch.

The Patriots were missing some pieces to the puzzle.

We're missing over 40 pieces to a 53 piece puzzle, and the previous douchebag that was in charge lost the box.

I dont' disagree.

So the answer is to take some raw, unproven kid, throw absolutely banana money at him, and hope that he's not a bust behind an unproven line with little offensive talent around him. And that's especially true because if he IS a bust, you've lost YEARS off the development of your team.

Instead, you've got a very solid QB who has unknown upside potential, is still reasonably young, and the #3 pick to help develop more talent around him.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 10:41 AM
But Trent Green could have won a Super Bowl if we had a defense. /Homers

Why is that a homer argument. Let's see a better argument against this.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:42 AM
Whens the last time Bill Parcells won a bowl?

And hey if we all could only luck into Tom Brady right?

I'm not quite sure, was it before or after the most recent Chiefs playoff win? It's only a difference of a couple years either way, right?

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:42 AM
Stafford has better physical upside you can't deny that, he's started for 3 years in college...

We're trading for a 27 year old QB who's played 1 year of ball since high school, and that's less risky really?

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:42 AM
I'm not quite sure, was it before or after the most recent Chiefs playoff win? It's only a difference of a couple years either way, right?

Just winning a playoff game isn't going to make me jerkoff with joy.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:43 AM
:rolleyes: Give it a rest already.

If you don't like it, don't fucking read it.

Otherwise, this place is for voicing opinions, and I'm going to do so, regardless of what you and your smilies think.

Have a great day.

RedThat
03-02-2009, 10:43 AM
This is my thought this is what it's like to be a Chiefs fan, to know you could have had the top QB in the draft an elite prospect and then see your team decide to trade for Matt Cassell instead.

That's what it's like being a Chiefs fan.

Its not all about the talent,

its about finding the "right" players that fit in well with you're trying to build.

Finding the right players that know and understand the specific schemes you want to run.

Think about that for a second?

You have a new GM and a new HC who are bringing in a new system/scheme here. Im sure Pioli knows a thing or 2 well enough about Cassel to ensure that he's confident enough to decide that fits in well with what he's trying to build.

JASONSAUTO
03-02-2009, 10:43 AM
What happens if he's good?

some people will still find something wrong

The Bad Guy
03-02-2009, 10:43 AM
I'm not saying Stafford IS a slam-dunk, Frank.

They all carry risks, and one of Cassel's many risks is that he's already 27, so you've shortened your window already.

Like Mecca said, you could sit Stafford for FIVE years, and he's still be younger than Cassel is at this point. And NO ONE is going to sit Matthew Stafford for five years.

And I think the QB's age is undoubtedly decided on how much punishment he takes over the course of his career.

Being 27 to me isn't that big of a deal when he sat basically throughout his 4 years in college and 4 years in the pros.

eazyb81
03-02-2009, 10:44 AM
I'm not saying Stafford IS a slam-dunk, Frank.

They all carry risks, and one of Cassel's many risks is that he's already 27, so you've shortened your window already.

Like Mecca said, you could sit Stafford for FIVE years, and he's still be younger than Cassel is at this point. And NO ONE is going to sit Matthew Stafford for five years.

What does it matter if Stafford or Sanchez are 27, 21, or 5 years old if Pioli and Haley don't think either has what it takes to be a franchise QB in their system?

You could sit Matt Leinart for the next 5 years and he'd still be younger than Kurt Warner, but that doesn't mean shit - Warner is still the better QB.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:45 AM
Its not all about the talent,

its about finding the "right" players that fit in well with you're trying to build.

Finding the right players that know and understand the specific schemes you want to run.

Think about that for a second?

You have a new GM and a new HC who are bringing in a new system/scheme here. Im sure Pioli knows a thing or 2 well enough about Cassel to ensure that he's confident enough to decide that fits in well with what he's trying to build.

So you don't think this has anything to do with the typical Parcells tree approach of get a guy you're familiar with at QB right away so you can quickly turn your team into a 500 team?

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:45 AM
He's not bringing those offensive players and that coaching staff with him.

We will probably upgrade our players which is fairly obvious and maybe Haley will be better than McDaniels?

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:45 AM
Stafford has better physical upside you can't deny that, he's started for 3 years in college...

We're trading for a 27 year old QB who's played 1 year of ball since high school, and that's less risky really?

How many highly touted, top-of-the-draft QBs have had the same pedigree and yet flamed out in the NFL?

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:45 AM
I dont' disagree.

So the answer is to take some raw, unproven kid, throw absolutely banana money at him, and hope that he's not a bust behind an unproven line with little offensive talent around him. And that's especially true because if he IS a bust, you've lost YEARS off the development of your team.

That's exactly what we just did, but instead, chose a guy that will be 27 this season.

To say that Cassel is "solid" because he has 15 starts under his belt throwing to Moss and Welker is ridiculous.

BigChiefFan
03-02-2009, 10:46 AM
I think it boils down to Pioli trusting Cassell to be a franchise QB more than he trusts Sanchez to work out. I believe Stafford goes number one overall and Sanchez falls in the draft. We did the right thing.

DaWolf
03-02-2009, 10:46 AM
Just think about that Matt Cassell is 7 years older than Stafford is.

He's also got more maturity and NFL starting experience, and doesn't cost the No 3 overall pick. To me, Stafford is also not as accurate as I would like a QB to be. And that game against Florida bothers me, because that's as good of a college D as he's gonna face.

Matt Cassel may not be the franchise QB, but he has tasted NFL success and it only costs us a second rounder to find out. He also may fit in to Haley's offense better than the rookies did. Time will tell. And again, if the track record with the Pats is what we're going off of, Pioli isn't going to stop drafting QB's. He's going to look to bring in guys every year if he can who will compete and who may have a chance to excel in the system they are installing here. I truly could care less if we win a Super Bowl with a top prospect like Peyton Manning, or if we win the Super Bowl with a street QB like Kurt Warner, as long as we win the Super Bowl...

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:46 AM
What does it matter if Stafford or Sanchez are 27, 21, or 5 years old if Pioli and Haley don't think either has what it takes to be a franchise QB in their system?

You could sit Matt Leinart for the next 5 years and he'd still be younger than Kurt Warner, but that doesn't mean shit - Warner is still the better QB.

For that system..

Hey reverse argument, Matt Cassell couldn't beat out Matt Leinart.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:47 AM
Why is that a homer argument. Let's see a better argument against this.

no crap. We were a scoring machine if we would had a Top 10-15 D we would have won the SB IMHO.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:47 AM
How many highly touted, top-of-the-draft QBs have had the same pedigree and yet flamed out in the NFL?

Lets please not act like Cassell is a sure thing here....

I'd rather have the younger more gifted player in this situation.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-02-2009, 10:47 AM
So we coulda had Stafford?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ekQ_Ja02gTY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ekQ_Ja02gTY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

doomy3
03-02-2009, 10:47 AM
The QB was what we were in position to take the top of the draft is weak, if we come out of this with Matt Cassell and a ILB I'm going to be one pissed off fan.

hopefully pissed off enough that you will go away for awhile.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:47 AM
That's exactly what we just did, but instead, chose a guy that will be 27 this season.

To say that Cassel is "solid" because he has 15 starts under his belt throwing to Moss and Welker is ridiculous.

You've seen him in an NFL offense against NFL systems. THere is a hell of a lot less projection needed under those facts than taking what a kid does in college against a bunch of kids that will never even be invited to an NFL training camp, much less make a roster, much less see playing time, much less have a long and successful career.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:48 AM
hopefully pissed off enough that you will go away for awhile.

Cool, I could let you circle jerk about the "great" moves huh?

JASONSAUTO
03-02-2009, 10:48 AM
That's exactly what we just did, but instead, chose a guy that will be 27 this season.

To say that Cassel is "solid" because he has 15 starts under his belt throwing to Moss and Welker is ridiculous.

wonder why people act as though moss and welker were the only guys he threw to? he threw to them about 55% of the time.

eazyb81
03-02-2009, 10:48 AM
For that system..

Hey reverse argument, Matt Cassell couldn't beat out Matt Leinart.

Yes, for that system, the system that weighs down Pioli's hand due to the 3 rings he has on it. That system.

Sweet, Leinart beat out Cassel in college. Kurt Warner used to bag groceries. Big Ben played at Miami of Ohio. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. Montana was a 3rd round pick.....we can play this game all day.

Pedigree is not everything.

DaWolf
03-02-2009, 10:48 AM
That's exactly what we just did, but instead, chose a guy that will be 27 this season.

To say that Cassel is "solid" because he has 15 starts under his belt throwing to Moss and Welker is ridiculous.

You also get to either use that No 3 pick on another impact player to help your defense or offense, or trade it down for even more players.

To say any of these college QB's are solid because they get to throw against college defenses week in and week out and have never led an NFL team with veterans who expect success is just as ridiculous. So really, there's plusses and minuses either way...

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:48 AM
some people will still find something wrong

That's bullshit, and you know it, Jason.

I've said numerous times that I hope like hell I'm proven wrong on this, and will gladly be first in line to be served my heaping portion of crow the day Matt Cassel wins a Super Bowl for the Kansas City Chiefs.

Contrary to popular belief, I have no problem accepting and stating when I'm wrong.

Brock
03-02-2009, 10:49 AM
Might as well get over it.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:49 AM
Lets please not act like Cassell is a sure thing here....

I'd rather have the younger more gifted player in this situation.

NOt sure how you know the kids are "more gifted" as NFL players.

Not sure how you know the Lions wouldn't take the one you really wanted anyway.


But I agree, Cassell isn't a sure thing, but I think he's MORE of a sure thing than either kid is.

doomy3
03-02-2009, 10:49 AM
For that system..

Hey reverse argument, Matt Cassell couldn't beat out Matt Leinart.

And Sanchez couldn't beat out Booty, for the same reasons. Carrol.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:49 AM
I'd rather be wrong about this than right about it but I'm stating how I feel about it at this time.

JASONSAUTO
03-02-2009, 10:49 AM
For that system..

Hey reverse argument, Matt Cassell couldn't beat out Matt Leinart.

because of pete carroll, sanchez couldnt beat out booty. so fucking what

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 10:50 AM
wonder why people act as though moss and welker were the only guys he threw to? he threw to them about 55% of the time.

Yeah, but you don't have a Kevin Faulk either. :p

DeezNutz
03-02-2009, 10:50 AM
Might as well get over it.

Venting.

Best done with a cold one at this point, unfortunately.

ChiefsCountry
03-02-2009, 10:50 AM
How many highly touted, top-of-the-draft QBs have had the same pedigree and yet flamed out in the NFL?

Lets go back to 1993, what would have done if Parcells brought in Hosetler instead of drafting Bledsoe?

Demonpenz
03-02-2009, 10:50 AM
Sigh probably wasting enegy, but stafford is a huge risk, coming from a mostly spread O. We got cassel for peanuts so lets go with that. It takes a complete team to win a superbowl not just a qb. Pioli knows how cassell prepares and knows his make up. We got a good deal on it. I am ready to roll with it.

doomy3
03-02-2009, 10:51 AM
This age thing is funny. This guy is 26 years old. He is YOUNGER than Phillip Rivers and one year older than Jay Cutler, who are continually pimped on this board.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:51 AM
Might as well get over it.

I don't think that is going to happen anytime soon. Everytime Cassel fucks up the haters will be bashing him.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 10:51 AM
Venting.

Best done with a cold one at this point, unfortunately.

Not even venting in my case, because I'm not upset about it.

Just voicing an opinion.

What's done is done.

DaWolf
03-02-2009, 10:52 AM
Yeah, but you don't have a Kevin Faulk either. :p

Yet...

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:52 AM
This age thing is funny. This guy is 26 years old. He is YOUNGER than Phillip Rivers and one year older than Jay Cutler, who are continually pimped on this board.

Do you understand how many more games those guys have played than he is over the course of college and the NFL?

Chiefs Pantalones
03-02-2009, 10:52 AM
I heard the other day on the radio that a deal was agreed in principle and that's why the Pats didn't deal him to any of the other teams. The Pats are classy like that.

RustShack
03-02-2009, 10:52 AM
I'm surprised Mecca doesn't like us having a USC guy at QB :p

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:52 AM
I don't think that is going to happen anytime soon. Everytime Cassel fucks up the haters will be bashing him.

Look it'll be a few years but I don't think anyone around here is gonna be happy if we could have had Stafford and he becomes an elite player.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 10:52 AM
Stafford has better physical upside you can't deny that, he's started for 3 years in college...

We're trading for a 27 year old QB who's played 1 year of ball since high school, and that's less risky really?

Not a good argument. How many times have we seen players who are successful in college not do well in the NFL? There are many, many examples of this.

-We traded for a guy with 1 year of STARTING IN THE NFL experience. He had success and a pretty good QB rating, especially for a first year starter.

-The other guys have NO NFL experience.

Whether or not these guys turn out to be anything at all or nothing is irrelevant in this argument. Cassell is less of a risk due to having proved it at the NFL level. Period.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:53 AM
Do you understand how many more games those guys have played than he is over the course of college and the NFL?

Well right now Cassel has played more than Sanchez

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:53 AM
I'm surprised Mecca doesn't like us having a USC guy at QB :p

LOL, contrary to popular belief I don't care what schools guys go to when it comes to drafting and the pro teams they play for.

CupidStunt
03-02-2009, 10:53 AM
No one wants any part of Stafford. Someday these tools will realize that the 20-year-old kid is nothing, NOTHING but a big arm.

eazyb81
03-02-2009, 10:54 AM
Do you understand how many more games those guys have played than he is over the course of college and the NFL?

So how does that help your argument that Cassel has a low ceiling? He put up great numbers in his first season starting since high school.

Gee, imagine what he could do in a season where he actually has training camp to prepare as the #1 and get timing down with his wideouts.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:54 AM
Well right now Cassel has played more than Sanchez

If you're going back to college he hasn't...pretty scary huh?

DeezNutz
03-02-2009, 10:55 AM
Not even venting in my case, because I'm not upset about it.

Just voicing an opinion.

What's done is done.

I hear you.

Admittedly, I'm annoyed by the move, so I'm in the venting category.

Hope like hell that I'm wrong, though. And I won't shy away from facing the music when/if Cassel ends up kicking ass.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 10:55 AM
That's exactly what we just did, but instead, chose a guy that will be 27 this season.

To say that Cassel is "solid" because he has 15 starts under his belt throwing to Moss and Welker is ridiculous.

When the heck did Welker all of a sudden become a great receiver? :spock:

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:55 AM
Look it'll be a few years but I don't think anyone around here is gonna be happy if we could have had Stafford and he becomes an elite player.

No question.

But I am ready to get behind him and hope he does well I suggest others do the same.

JASONSAUTO
03-02-2009, 10:55 AM
That's bullshit, and you know it, Jason.

I've said numerous times that I hope like hell I'm proven wrong on this, and will gladly be first in line to be served my heaping portion of crow the day Matt Cassel wins a Super Bowl for the Kansas City Chiefs.

Contrary to popular belief, I have no problem accepting and stating when I'm wrong.

sorry that wasnt pointed at you, i feel that you would eat your crow if wrong on this, some others though...

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-02-2009, 10:56 AM
I dont' disagree.

So the answer is to take some raw, unproven kid, throw absolutely banana money at him, and hope that he's not a bust behind an unproven line with little offensive talent around him. And that's especially true because if he IS a bust, you've lost YEARS off the development of your team.

Instead, you've got a very solid QB who has unknown upside potential, is still reasonably young, and the #3 pick to help develop more talent around him.

Yay. A solid QB. The safe pick.

Where have I heard this before?

Same shit, different day.

Parcells goes to the Jets, gets a vet QB. Goes to Dallas, gets a vet QB. Goes to the Dolphins, gets a vet QB.

McDaniels goes to Denver, wants his vet QB.

There's more in-fucking between these guys than the performers on Brazzers.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:56 AM
When the heck did Welker all of a sudden become a great receiver? :spock:

When he went to New England and led the league in receptions?

Demonpenz
03-02-2009, 10:56 AM
I think welker is awesome because he is white like be

JASONSAUTO
03-02-2009, 10:56 AM
Yeah, but you don't have a Kevin Faulk either. :p

charles???

ChiefsCountry
03-02-2009, 10:56 AM
I hear you.

Admittedly, I'm annoyed by the move, so I'm in the venting category.

Hope like hell that I'm wrong, though. And I won't shy away from facing the music when/if Cassel ends up kicking ass.

Put me in this category.

ChiefRon
03-02-2009, 10:57 AM
The "quick turnaround" argument makes sense, especially if you consider Haley's comments (from Peter King's stupid MMQB article):

Now for the Kansas City angles. The Chiefs now should have their quarterback of the future, assuming new coach Todd Haley's as good a quarterback tutor as he appeared in Arizona the past couple of years. Haley, who worked with Belichick and Charlie Weis with the Jets a decade ago, told me over the weekend what has him thrilled is that the New England offense and the Kansas City offense have the same verbiage and playcalls. "So we won't have to take the time a new quarterback would normally have to take to get up to speed in a new system,'' Haley said. "He knows this system. And I've watched so much of him from last year. I see a player who's learned under a Hall of Fame quarterback in Tom Brady, and who's so mature for someone with only a year's experience.''

It makes sense for Kansas City to sign Cassel long-term, obviously, but I'm not sure the Chiefs will. Pioli, I'm sure, will remind Cassel (if he hasn't told him already) that Brady took less money to allow the team to build a great team around him. In other words, if Cassel doesn't want to be one of the two or three highest-paid quarterbacks in football, they could get a deal done. If he does want to be in that territory, I expect the Chiefs to make him play out this year at $14.65 million, then, if necessary, tag him next year at 110 percent of his pay this year. But it makes sense to make a deal for the future, so they don't have to be laying out $30 million over the next two years with no future certainty beyond that.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:57 AM
No question.

But I am ready to get behind him and hope he does well I suggest others do the same.

People wanna get behind things. people are also going to vent about things..

Either way the point of this is if Peterson had made this move it would not be received the same way it mostly has been received so far.

RedThat
03-02-2009, 10:57 AM
So you don't think this has anything to do with the typical Parcells tree approach of get a guy you're familiar with at QB right away so you can quickly turn your team into a 500 team?

I just think everytime a complete turnover change happens within an organization when a new regime takes place you're going to have a new change in attitude, philosophy and schemes. And as a result, this is a trend that leads to changes on your roster. New GMs and new coaches are gonna want to bring in there own set of guys who they're familiar with that would know and understand what there trying to do.

*You can use Pennington as an example yeah, but I like to think of Cassel better. Mainly because he's not old, he's 27, has a years worth of experience with potential upside and is familiar with the system that were gonna run here. I can't really say Im against that because there are a lot of positive signs there, where I could say KC chances of having themselves a solid QB became a lot easier. Whereas, you draft a rookie QB, all these things that I mentioned are completely thrown out the window.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 10:57 AM
If you're going back to college he hasn't...pretty scary huh?

Sure he has. Sanchez has played in 16-17 college games? Cassel has played in at least 20.

16 this year and he played in spot duty the last couple.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-02-2009, 10:57 AM
Stafford has better physical upside you can't deny that, he's started for 3 years in college...

We're trading for a 27 year old QB who's played 1 year of ball since high school, and that's less risky really?

Well, fortunately we have Moss, Welker, the Pats line, and the #6 rushing attack in the league to back him up here, and not Dwayne Bowe, Tony Gonzalez and the cast of Friday Night Lights.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 10:58 AM
I hear you.

Admittedly, I'm annoyed by the move, so I'm in the venting category.

Hope like hell that I'm wrong, though. And I won't shy away from facing the music when/if Cassel ends up kicking ass.

I think we're all in agreement on this no one wants the Chiefs to suck but we also aren't going to sit here and act like we love every move if we don't like them when they happen.

BigChiefFan
03-02-2009, 10:58 AM
Lets please not act like Cassell is a sure thing here....

I'd rather have the younger more gifted player in this situation.Ordinarily, I'd agree, but going into the season relying on Thigpen as the starter is a recipe for disaster, add to that, Stafford is probably gone as the
1st overall pick and I can't fault the move in the least. We helped address the position, with a player who I've become more and more impressed with, the more tape of him I watch. He's also learned from one of the best head coaches in football and a future HOF QB, and he still has major UPSIDE.

It's also been stated that the Cardinals and Patriots use the EXACT SAME VERBAGE for their playbook-Cassell will be AHEAD OF THE CURVE, add to that Pioli KNOWING who Cassell is and I think we made the absolute best move we could have.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:00 AM
Ordinarily, I'd agree, but going into the season relying on Thigpen as the starter is a recipe for disaster, add to that, Stafford is probably gone as the
1st overall pick and I can't fault the move in the least. We helped address the position, with a player who I've become more and more impressed with, the more tape of him I watch. He's also learned from one of the best head coaches in football and a future HOF QB, and he still has major UPSIDE.

It's also been stated that the Cardinals and Patriots use the EXACT SAME VERBAGE for their playbook-Cassell will be AHEAD OF THE CURVE, add to that Pioli KNOWING who Cassell is and I think we made the absolute best move we could have.

I thought the point of this thread was that the Lions were going to trade for Cassell which would make Stafford a lock to make it to our pick?

ChiefsCountry
03-02-2009, 11:00 AM
Sure he has. Sanchez has played in 16-17 college games? Cassel has played in at least 20.

16 this year and he played in spot duty the last couple.

Sanchez played 30 games if you are using mop up duty.

DeezNutz
03-02-2009, 11:01 AM
I think we're all in agreement on this no one wants the Chiefs to suck but we also aren't going to sit here and act like we love every move if we don't like them when they happen.

That's not how the spin happens on this board. We're QB at all costs, fuck defense, and generally terrible fans.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-02-2009, 11:01 AM
How the fuck was Stafford going to be the first pick when Detroit just traded 33 for Cassel and was going to extend him long-term?

Lzen
03-02-2009, 11:01 AM
Look it'll be a few years but I don't think anyone around here is gonna be happy if we could have had Stafford and he becomes an elite player.

I think you should stop living under the assumption that this is what will happen, Miss Cleo. Nobody knows for sure how this will all pan out.

ChiefRon
03-02-2009, 11:01 AM
Ordinarily, I'd agree, but going into the season relying on Thigpen as the starter is a recipe for disaster, add to that, Stafford is probably gone as the
1st overall pick and I can't fault the move in the least. We helped address the position, with a player who I've become more and more impressed with, the more tape of him I watch. He's also learned from one of the best head coaches in football and a future HOF QB, and he still has major UPSIDE.

It's also been stated that the Cardinals and Patriots use the EXACT SAME VERBAGE for their playbook-Cassell will be AHEAD OF THE CURVE, add to that Pioli KNOWING who Cassell is and I think we made the absolute best move we could have.

I wouldn't call it the "best" move yet, we made the most "comfortable" move in the eyes of Pioli/Haley.

Amnorix
03-02-2009, 11:03 AM
When the heck did Welker all of a sudden become a great receiver? :spock:

2 years of 100+ catches...

He's not Moss/Owens/Boldin but he's pretty damn good. How much more do you need than 100 catches 2 years in a row?

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 11:03 AM
People wanna get behind things. people are also going to vent about things..

Either way the point of this is if Peterson had made this move it would not be received the same way it mostly has been received so far.

I hear ya and you are definitely right about if Peterson had done this.

I am happy though that our head coach comes from the O side of the ball and we appear to have a pretty good staff on that side of the ball.

BigChiefFan
03-02-2009, 11:03 AM
I wouldn't call it the "best" move yet, we made the most "comfortable" move in the eyes of Pioli/Haley.Keep it in context, the best move we could have made given the circumstances. You can't tell me going into the season with Thigpen as the starter is a good course of action.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 11:03 AM
Sanchez played 30 games if you are using mop up duty.

I didn't know that thanks

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:04 AM
That's not how the spin happens on this board. We're QB at all costs, fuck defense, and generally terrible fans.

That's one of the things that really gets on my nerves, the how dare you question Pioli how dare you think you know more and yadda yadda shit gets old real fast.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 11:04 AM
When he went to New England and led the league in receptions?

Exactly. So you can argue about Cassell being a one year wonder but the same does not apply to Welker? :spock:

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-02-2009, 11:04 AM
I hear ya and you are definitely right about if Peterson had done this.

I am happy though that our head coach comes from the O side of the ball and we appear to have a pretty good staff on that side of the ball.

Pretty good, not Carl, and from the O side of the ball aren't good enough.

blueballs
03-02-2009, 11:04 AM
If Stafford and Sanchez go 1 and 2
will this deal look any better

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-02-2009, 11:05 AM
Exactly. So you can argue about Cassell being a one year wonder but the same does not apply to Welker? :spock:

2007+2008= more than one year.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:05 AM
Keep it in context, the best move we could have made given the circumstances. You can't tell me going into the season with Thigpen as the starter is a good course of action.

Well forgive me for not thinking about how good the Chiefs would be in 2009 as my top priority of the future of the team.

crazycoffey
03-02-2009, 11:06 AM
The QB was what we were in position to take the top of the draft is weak, if we come out of this with Matt Cassell and a ILB I'm going to be one pissed off fan.

that's just it, mecca - you are always just ONE pissed off FAN...

DeezNutz
03-02-2009, 11:06 AM
That's one of the things that really gets on my nerves, the how dare you question Pioli how dare you think you know more and yadda yadda shit gets old real fast.

It's the honeymoon period with the Pioli regime for sure.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 11:06 AM
Either way the point of this is if Peterson had made this move it would not be received the same way it mostly has been received so far.

That's a good point. I think people should really try to give Pioli a chance. Especially considering that he won those 3 SBs and all. :)

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:06 AM
that's just it, mecca - you are always just ONE pissed off FAN...

See Deez this is what you and I were talking about just a second ago.

Skip Towne
03-02-2009, 11:07 AM
hopefully pissed off enough that you will go away for awhile.

:LOL:

DeezNutz
03-02-2009, 11:07 AM
See Deez this is what you and I were talking about just a second ago.

You bear the brunt of a lot of this type of criticism. There's no doubt about that.

Combine that with the fact that you're a USC fan, and you find yourself in a lot of no-win situations.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:07 AM
That's a good point. I think people should really try to give Pioli a chance. Especially considering that he won those 3 SBs and all. :)

I don't care who's makin the moves I'm not a person to just go "oh he knows what he's doing" and sit back and jerk my cock to it like it's awesome with no questions.

I question everything if anyone asks me to do something I want to know why, I don't blindly follow anyone or anything in any venture.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 11:08 AM
It's the honeymoon period with the Pioli regime for sure.

Shouldn't they have a honeymoon phase before we start bashing them endlessly?

DaWolf
03-02-2009, 11:08 AM
How the **** was Stafford going to be the first pick when Detroit just traded 33 for Cassel and was going to extend him long-term?
Well you can also look at that as another team thinking it's not worth paying top 5 money to Stafford.

I wouldn't be shocked to see him slide on draft day...

Lzen
03-02-2009, 11:08 AM
I thought the point of this thread was that the Lions were going to trade for Cassell which would make Stafford a lock to make it to our pick?

I still have not seen any proof that the Chiefs even knew that the Lions would do that.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:08 AM
You bear the brunt of a lot of this type of criticism. There's no doubt about that.

Combine that with the fact that you're a USC fan, and you find yourself in a lot of no-win situations.

Questioning things and expecting reason is not a good thing to bring apparently.

But there are some other posters around here like me and we tend to get along.

BigChiefFan
03-02-2009, 11:09 AM
Well forgive me for not thinking about how good the Chiefs would be in 2009 as my top priority of the future of the team.

We'll forgive me, for not considering a 26 year old QB as a senior citizen and on his last legs in the NFL. Age isn't everything.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 11:10 AM
2 years of 100+ catches...

He's not Moss/Owens/Boldin but he's pretty damn good. How much more do you need than 100 catches 2 years in a row?

My mistake. I thought he was with the Dolphins the previous year and had average numbers.

DeezNutz
03-02-2009, 11:10 AM
Shouldn't they have a honeymoon phase before we start bashing them endlessly?

No.

I'm going to support the decisions and give them time to play out, just like I will with the Cassel move, but that doesn't mean that I'm not going to be heavily skeptical.

And voice displeasure if I see fit. Doesn't mean I'm right. But that's the point of this type of forum.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:11 AM
My mistake. I thought he was with the Dolphins the previous year and had average numbers.

He was the Dolphins leading receiver before being dealt to the Patriots.

DaWolf
03-02-2009, 11:12 AM
People wanna get behind things. people are also going to vent about things..

Either way the point of this is if Peterson had made this move it would not be received the same way it mostly has been received so far.

Carl would have hedged, Cassel would have wound up in Denver, Cutler winds up in Detroit, Denver gets a QB and an extra first rounder, Chiefs Planet would be in an uproar, Carl would state that he was just trying to drive up the price, and then he'd go ahead and draft the QB most likely to wind up a bust in this draft while the other one makes the HOF and Cassel goes to the Pro-Bowl in Denver and Cutler throws 25 INT's in Detroit...

crazycoffey
03-02-2009, 11:13 AM
See Deez this is what you and I were talking about just a second ago.

I know, I always just say the opposite of you, that's what I base my opinions on, whatever dude...

I liked getting stafford somehow, but not sold on Sanchez. I also don't see how this was a bad deal. That somehow we got a young QB full of promise that has actually stepped on the pro field, and made progress to boot, but that means scott/me and several other "true fans" don't really want to BUILD A TEAM! Does not compute, doesn't add up.

ChiefRon
03-02-2009, 11:14 AM
Keep it in context, the best move we could have made given the circumstances. You can't tell me going into the season with Thigpen as the starter is a good course of action.

I was referring to getting Cassel over drafting a young prospect. Thigpen wasn't an option.

So tell me: if Cassel puts up similar numbers this year (which is a huge stretch with our offensive talent) and Stafford or Sanchez get Rookie of the Year.

How will you feel then?

Lzen
03-02-2009, 11:14 AM
I don't care who's makin the moves I'm not a person to just go "oh he knows what he's doing" and sit back and jerk my cock to it like it's awesome with no questions.

I question everything if anyone asks me to do something I want to know why, I don't blindly follow anyone or anything in any venture.

I don't think most of us are that way either. I know I'm not. But I'm not gonna be Mr. negative right off the bat. I was slightly above luke warm when I first heard of the possibility of a trade for Cassel a few weeks ago. From the few things I have heard/read, I am now more positive about it. Do I know that it is a risk? Sure. But you and I both know that drafting Sanchez and/or Stafford is also a risk.

I understand that all those years with Carl made a lot of fans bitter. I have always been one to give something a chance rather than being Nancy Negative right off the bat if they do things with which I may not agree.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:15 AM
I know, I always just say the opposite of you, that's what I base my opinions on, whatever dude...

I liked getting stafford somehow, but not sold on Sanchez. I also don't see how this was a bad deal. That somehow we got a young QB full of promise that has actually stepped on the pro field, and made progress to boot, but that means scott/me and several other "true fans" don't really want to BUILD A TEAM! Does not compute, doesn't add up.

Do you even have any idea what we were talking about?

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 11:15 AM
No.

I'm going to support the decisions and give them time to play out, just like I will with the Cassel move, but that doesn't mean that I'm not going to be heavily skeptical.

And voice displeasure if I see fit. Doesn't mean I'm right. But that's the point of this type of forum.

I am mainly talking about giving them the benefit of the doubt and no one is suggesting not criticizing but some people around go off the deep end with their criticism's.

This team and organization as a whole was in total disarray so it is going to take some time to get this turned around. For me personally I am going to give them a couple of years and try to stay mostly positive.

ChiefRon
03-02-2009, 11:15 AM
Carl would have hedged, Cassel would have wound up in Denver, Cutler winds up in Detroit, Denver gets a QB and an extra first rounder, Chiefs Planet would be in an uproar, Carl would state that he was just trying to drive up the price, and then he'd go ahead and draft the QB most likely to wind up a bust in this draft while the other one makes the HOF and Cassel goes to the Pro-Bowl in Denver and Cutler throws 25 INT's in Detroit...

Sorry but Carl would not have taken a QB @3. You're kidding yourself if you think that.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:16 AM
I don't think most of us are that way either. I know I'm not. But I'm not gonna be Mr. negative right off the bat. I was slightly above luke warm when I first heard of the possibility of a trade for Cassel a few weeks ago. From the few things I have heard/read, I am now more positive about it. Do I know that it is a risk? Sure. But you and I both know that drafting Sanchez and/or Stafford is also a risk.

I understand that all those years with Carl made a lot of fans bitter. I have always been one to give something a chance rather than being Nancy Negative right off the bat if they do things with which I may not agree.

I have pretty strong opinions I can't just change my view of what I thought of Cassell because he's on the Chiefs now that would make me a hypocrite.

Chocolate Hog
03-02-2009, 11:16 AM
Great...Scott Pioli that's a strike right there.

Oh noez a strike on Pioli from some internet nerd. How many NFL executive awards have you won Mecca? If you know so much about scouting howcome you're not a scout?

JASONSAUTO
03-02-2009, 11:17 AM
I don't care who's makin the moves I'm not a person to just go "oh he knows what he's doing" and sit back and jerk my cock to it like it's awesome with no questions.

I question everything if anyone asks me to do something I want to know why, I don't blindly follow anyone or anything in any venture.

that explains why you are at where you are in life:thumb:

crazycoffey
03-02-2009, 11:17 AM
Questioning things and expecting reason is not a good thing to bring apparently.

But there are some other posters around here like me and we tend to get along.


If you were just questioning things it would be an entirely different conversation with you, mecca. You say this move sucks and all you do is look for reasons why it sucked;

stafford will be an elite QB
The lions wanted the trade so we could have had stafford
if we don't draft a QB in the top 5 we don't really want to win a SB/build a team
matt cassel is older than stafford

these aren't comments of reasoning and questions.

crazycoffey
03-02-2009, 11:18 AM
Do you even have any idea what we were talking about?

yes

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:18 AM
Oh noez a strike on Pioli from some internet nerd. How many NFL executive awards have you won Mecca? If you know so much about scouting howcome you're not a scout?

Once again Deez see what we were talking about?

This is a really tired thing to say cool idea for you, come up with an opinion of your own that isn't 'I trust the front office wank wank" and then you can speak with me.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 11:18 AM
I am mainly talking about giving them the benefit of the doubt and no one is suggesting not criticizing but some people around go off the deep end with their criticism's.

This team and organization as a whole was in total disarray so it is going to take some time to get this turned around. For me personally I am going to give them a couple of years and try to stay mostly positive.

Good post. I think it all boils down to this.

Let's give this a chance to be either a great move or a poor move before we criticize it. You don't like it? Fine. But let's try to not act as if you know 100% that this was the wrong move. If you know all the right moves, why aren't you a SB winning NFL GM?

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:20 AM
Great and no GM is going to be right every time either.

DeezNutz
03-02-2009, 11:20 AM
I am mainly talking about giving them the benefit of the doubt and no one is suggesting not criticizing but some people around go off the deep end with their criticism's.

This team and organization as a whole was in total disarray so it is going to take some time to get this turned around. For me personally I am going to give them a couple of years and try to stay mostly positive.

I would imagine all of the people who are voicing the most vehement criticisms will still be cheering on Sunday, and that's the bottom line.

I know, I know, playing for draft position and such, but years like last are (are should be) the exception and not the rule.

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:20 AM
I have pretty strong opinions I can't just change my view of what I thought of Cassell because he's on the Chiefs now that would make me a hypocrite.

This place is full of them...

Chocolate Hog
03-02-2009, 11:20 AM
Once again Deez see what we were talking about?

This is a really tired thing to say cool idea for you, come up with an opinion of your own that isn't 'I trust the front office wank wank" and then you can speak with me.

Hey cawk boy I said all along that both of these QB's weren't franchise Qb's and that we should trade for Cassel. I was the minority on here who wanted Cassel. Yea I trust the front office you can't argue with results.

Lzen
03-02-2009, 11:20 AM
Great and no GM is going to be right every time either.

No, but the really good ones are right more than they're wrong. ;)

BigRedChief
03-02-2009, 11:21 AM
Great...Scott Pioli that's a strike right there.
This deal is seen as so slanted in the Chiefs favor and one sided by the NFL that some are calling for an investigation. I would say that is not a negative strike. And if the Broncos and or TB was willing to give their 1st rounder we got him without giving up another mid 2nd rounder and 3rd rounder to land him.
And I bet that someone would have leaped over us to get Staford anyway.

DaWolf
03-02-2009, 11:22 AM
Sorry but Carl would not have taken a QB @3. You're kidding yourself if you think that.

I disagree. He came out and basically said a few years ago that he would have taken Joey Harrington had he gotten past Detroit (this was before Harrington went bust). I also think he would have taken Brady Quinn if Cleveland hadn't moved ahead of us to take him, from all the stories I read on that draft.

Ironically, I think the best shot this organization would have had to draft a QB round one would have been if Carl and Herm had been retained, because I think Herm was going to push for a rookie QB while Thigpen started this upcoming year.

Now that only works if Stafford fell to us, I hesitate to think that think Carl would have drafted Sanchez partly due to his UCLA bias...

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:22 AM
Hey cawk boy I said all along that both of these QB's weren't franchise Qb's and that we should trade for Cassel. I was the minority on here who wanted Cassel. Yea I trust the front office you can't argue with results.

Awesome comeback, the front office can agree with you that's fine...so what happens if they're wrong?

crazycoffey
03-02-2009, 11:22 AM
Once again Deez see what we were talking about?

This is a really tired thing to say cool idea for you, come up with an opinion of your own that isn't 'I trust the front office wank wank" and then you can speak with me.


the consummate victim angle is old too

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:23 AM
This place is full of them...

A ton of things can be said about me but one of them is that I'm consistent you don't see my spin my views in a 180.

BigChiefFan
03-02-2009, 11:24 AM
I was referring to getting Cassel over drafting a young prospect. Thigpen wasn't an option.

So tell me: if Cassel puts up similar numbers this year (which is a huge stretch with our offensive talent) and Stafford or Sanchez get Rookie of the Year.

How will you feel then?Sorry, but there is no guarantee we would have started a rookie, which means THIGPEN would have started.

Also, while I like Sanchez, I think he is better suited to the WCO. Why on Earth would we take a player that doesn't fit the scheme AND PAY top money, too, as well? I expect more out of my GM, than to throw a square peg in a round hole, which is what we would have been doing with Sanchez. Look for him to go to the 49ers or Panthers, where he stands a chance to excel.

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:24 AM
Hey cawk boy I said all along that both of these QB's weren't franchise Qb's and that we should trade for Cassel. I was the minority on here who wanted Cassel. Yea I trust the front office you can't argue with results.

What results?

Chocolate Hog
03-02-2009, 11:24 AM
Awesome comeback, the front office can agree with you that's fine...so what happens if they're wrong?

If Cassel sucks I'll admit I was wrong. If Cassel is good will you admit that you're wrong?

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:24 AM
the consummate victim angle is old too

Uh that's isn't' a victim angle it's a grow a fucking brain and come up with an original line angle

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:25 AM
And if they turn out to be great players Scott Pioli will be remembered as a dumbass that traded for Matt Cassell when he coulda had one of those QB's...
what if Cassel turns out to be a great player, too?

ChiefRon
03-02-2009, 11:25 AM
I disagree. He came out and basically said a few years ago that he would have taken Joey Harrington had he gotten past Detroit (this was before Harrington went bust). I also think he would have taken Brady Quinn if Cleveland hadn't moved ahead of us to take him, from all the stories I read on that draft.

Ironically, I think the best shot this organization would have had to draft a QB round one would have been if Carl and Herm had been retained, because I think Herm was going to push for a rookie QB while Thigpen started this upcoming year.

Now that only works if Stafford fell to us, I hesitate to think that think Carl would have drafted Sanchez partly due to his UCLA bias...

Maybe you're right, but Herm's comments at the end of the year seemed to me to indicate he was pulling for the guy and thought he could be the starter.

I seriously doubt they would've draft a QB that high.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:25 AM
If Cassel sucks I'll admit I was wrong. If Cassel is good will you admit that you're wrong?

Sure, I'd rather be wrong about this than right about it.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:25 AM
what if Cassel turns out to be a great player, too?

Are they all great players or just him?

Chocolate Hog
03-02-2009, 11:26 AM
What results?

Pioli you know the guy who won 3 supers bowls and won 2 NFL Executive Award of the Year.

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 11:26 AM
I would imagine all of the people who are voicing the most vehement criticisms will still be cheering on Sunday, and that's the bottom line.


I don't know about that

JASONSAUTO
03-02-2009, 11:26 AM
What results?

getting a guy for the #34 when MULTIPLE reports say much more was offered???

RUSH
03-02-2009, 11:27 AM
Wow we could have had a choice between Stafford and Sanchez plus our second round pick. I think I'm going to be sick

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:27 AM
Are they all great players or just him?

Sure, all of them...what does it matter?

They are all great players...Cassel is a franchise guy and they get an opportunity to add another franchise guy with the #3 pick...

Seriously...you are on record preferring Sanchez over Stafford, or at least think it's close...

We could definitely draft Sanchez at #3 but Pioli liked Cassel at #34...so why does it matter that Stafford might have been available?

Moot point. Cassel is our QB. Time for the drafturbators to get over it.

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:27 AM
Pioli you know the guy who won 3 supers bowls and won 2 NFL Executive Award of the Year.

Oh so that means everything he touches here in KC will turn to gold?

Lets give him a year or two before we start putting his name in the ring of fame...

Chocolate Hog
03-02-2009, 11:28 AM
Sure, I'd rather be wrong about this than right about it.

Atleast you're not cheering for him to get injured. Honestly you'd be a good guy to talk football with it just seems that you were so about Sanchez you'd go out of your way to bash people. This season will be alot of fun.

crazycoffey
03-02-2009, 11:28 AM
A ton of things can be said about me but one of them is that I'm consistent you don't see my spin my views in a 180.


christ, you are so obtuse. You are of course allowed to have your opinions. I'm skeptical about cassel too, but he has shown progress on the field and we got him and another starter for our second pick, it's a good trade regardless of my opinion of cassel. Does that mean I did a 180 on my opinion? Better question;

why do you have to put up 100 posts / day in every thread related to the draft-QB trades-the new defense, all spouting off how stupid every idea is apparently just because it's different than your opinion?

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:28 AM
Wow we could have had a choice between Stafford and Sanchez plus our second round pick. I think I'm going to be sick

I now we potentially get two franchise players instead of 1...

ChiefRon
03-02-2009, 11:29 AM
what if Cassel turns out to be a great player, too?

If Stafford or Sanchez light it up the first year, especially if one of them is Rookie of the Year, I'll be pissed.

Now if Cassel posts 100+ rating for the year, I won't be quite so pissed, but I'll still be wondering what the future would hold...

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 11:29 AM
Lets give him a year or two before we start putting his name in the ring of fame...

On the flip side let's give him a year or two before we bash his brains endlessly with criticism.

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:29 AM
Oh so that means everything he touches here in KC will turn to gold?

Lets give him a year or two before we start putting his name in the ring of fame...
ROFLROFLROFL

You knew the bitching wouldn't end with Carl and Herm with this guy...

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:29 AM
Atleast you're not cheering for him to get injured. Honestly you'd be a good guy to talk football with it just seems that you were so about Sanchez you'd go out of your way to bash people. This season will be alot of fun.

Now now I don't cheer for people to get injured, I voice my views about people sometimes I'm right sometimes I'm wrong.

I don't personally like this approach to building a team so I'm going to voice that.

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:30 AM
If Stafford or Sanchez light it up the first year, especially if one of them is Rookie of the Year, I'll be pissed.

Now if Cassel posts 100+ rating for the year, I won't be quite so pissed, but I'll still be wondering what the future would hold...

If Cassel puts up a 100+ rating for the year and you're even slightly pissed you're a fuggin' moron.

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:30 AM
Sure, all of them...what does it matter?

They are all great players...Cassel is a franchise guy and they get an opportunity to add another franchise guy with the #3 pick...

Seriously...you are on record preferring Sanchez over Stafford, or at least think it's close...

We could definitely draft Sanchez at #3 but Pioli liked Cassel at #34...so why does it matter that Stafford might have been available?

Moot point. Cassel is our QB. Time for the drafturbators to get over it.

I think Hootie just broke up with Huard.... Cassel is his new favorite flavor...

This is going to get :Lin: by the time this is over...

Gdaddy
03-02-2009, 11:30 AM
So does anyone think we try to lock up Cassel for a long term deal or do we make him play for a contract this season? I think he is a super star and will prove worthy of a long term deal. I wish we would lock him up now so we have more cap space, but making him play for a contract makes sense. There are 3 phenominal talents coming out this next year so if Cassel does blow it we could go after 1 of the 3. I do think Cassel is our future and I look forward to seeing him step in. Thiggy as back up is great, too.

What do we do for running back? If LJ gets booted out of town who do we use? We obviously cannot rely on Charles as every down back, we need a bruiser. We also need to strengthen our O line so Cassel isnt on his back the whole season.

I would still like to see us get Kalif Barnes and a stronger right tackle.

Any thoughts?

crazycoffey
03-02-2009, 11:30 AM
Oh so that means everything he touches here in KC will turn to gold?

Lets give him a year or two before we start putting his name in the ring of fame...


any chance he gets a year or two (or even an offseason under his belt) before he "strikes out"?

Chocolate Hog
03-02-2009, 11:30 AM
Oh so that means everything he touches here in KC will turn to gold?

Lets give him a year or two before we start putting his name in the ring of fame...

Thats not what I said though. The fact is when did our last GM ever make a value trade?

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:31 AM
I now we potentially get two franchise players instead of 1...

Who's this other mythical franchise player, this is kinda why this was the QB year the top 5 kinda sucks unless you were taking a QB or an OT...

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:32 AM
I think Hootie just broke up with Huard.... Cassel is his new favorite flavor...

This is going to get :Lin: by the time this is over...

Sorry dude...I don't like to find things to bitch about like you...I'm not a miserable person.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:32 AM
I think Hootie just broke up with Huard.... Cassel is his new favorite flavor...

This is going to get :Lin: by the time this is over...

Hootie just likes whoever plays for the Chiefs some fans are like that its fine.

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:32 AM
On the flip side let's give him a year or two before we bash his brains endlessly with criticism.

No need to bash him in, but we can question he changes... I agree going in another direction is fun, but when someone is going to hook my junk up to 220 volts, I might want to ask a question, instead of saying "Hey buddy, I trust everything your doing"

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:32 AM
If Cassel puts up a 100+ rating for the year and you're even slightly pissed you're a fuggin' moron.

If they all 3 were elite players you get screwed because Stafford is 6 years younger so you basically blew 6 years.

mlyonsd
03-02-2009, 11:32 AM
any chance he gets a year or two (or even an offseason under his belt) before he "strikes out"?

There might be some that don't give him one half. :D

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:33 AM
Thats not what I said though. The fact is when did our last GM ever make a value trade?

Priest Holmes? Roaf? Green (if your a stats guy)?

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:33 AM
Who's this other mythical franchise player, this is kinda why this was the QB year the top 5 kinda sucks unless you were taking a QB or an OT...

ok then why was everyone relieved when we gave the 34 for Cassel rather than swapping our 3 and 23?

I was on record saying I'd prefer the swap because of what you just pointed out...

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:33 AM
any chance he gets a year or two (or even an offseason under his belt) before he "strikes out"?

Sure why not?

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:33 AM
Hootie just likes whoever plays for the Chiefs some fans are like that its fine.

God forbid I root for my favorite team and their players.

munkey
03-02-2009, 11:33 AM
Who has more upside?

Who is more likely to be a true, franchise QB?

Cassel is not the answer to any of these questions, IMO.

How do you know? Just a hunch?

dirk digler
03-02-2009, 11:34 AM
No need to bash him in, but we can question he changes... I agree going in another direction is fun, but when someone is going to hook my junk up to 220 volts, I might want to ask a question, instead of saying "Hey buddy, I trust everything your doing"

I agree.

JASONSAUTO
03-02-2009, 11:34 AM
If they all 3 were elite players you get screwed because Stafford is 6 years younger so you basically blew 6 years.

now you said 7 earlier:D

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:34 AM
Sorry dude...I don't like to find things to bitch about like you...I'm not a miserable person.

Fair enough, your more on the levels of an obsessive/stalker type person....

Your love affair for all things Huard wont quickly be forgotten... Lets just hope you dont go that far with Cassel...

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:35 AM
ok then why was everyone relieved when we gave the 34 for Cassel rather than swapping our 3 and 23?

I was on record saying I'd prefer the swap because of what you just pointed out...

Because you'd still rather have the piece of 3 because maybe another team does think theres a franchise guy or really wants an OT or something like that.

OnTheWarpath58
03-02-2009, 11:36 AM
How do you know? Just a hunch?

Dude.

IN. MY. OPINION.

I've never claimed I KNOW these things to be true.

Dear God, people.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:36 AM
now you said 7 earlier:D

LOL, well my days run together sometimes I realized he was born in February and you said 6 and I was like oh yea he's um 21 now.

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:36 AM
If they all 3 were elite players you get screwed because Stafford is 6 years younger so you basically blew 6 years.

Not true...I'd say more like 3 years since Cassel and his experience + last year being a full time, successful starter probably puts him ahead of the curve on Stafford by about 3 years...

So I'll sacrifice those 3 years for a guy we get at #34 rather than a TOTAL, COMPLETE unknown at #3...and keeping the #3 to further add to the talent on our current roster.

Fact is...if they put Cassel in this draft he'd be right there with Sanchez in terms of who'd be drafted where...and we got him at #34.

It's a steal, Pioli expects Cassel to be our franchise QB, and now the drafturbators just need to move on and start yelling at everyone for wanting Monroe or Curry over Raji...

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:36 AM
Dude.

IN. MY. OPINION.

I've never claimed I KNOW these things to be true.

Dear God, people.

If you just knew I'd ask you why you were wasting your time here.

Chocolate Hog
03-02-2009, 11:37 AM
Priest Holmes? Roaf? Green (if your a stats guy)?

Trent Green was Vermiels guy the others you're right about. So the last time he got a valuable guy in Free Agency was 8 years ago? The Pats got valuable guys every off season. Do you guys think Pioli won't succeed?

Basileus777
03-02-2009, 11:37 AM
Well this thread has turned to shit.

And BTW, this doesn't necessarily mean that we could have drafted Stafford. For one thing, it seems Pioli made the offer/agreed to the deal before the Lions offered #33.

htismaqe
03-02-2009, 11:37 AM
ok then why was everyone relieved when we gave the 34 for Cassel rather than swapping our 3 and 23?

I was on record saying I'd prefer the swap because of what you just pointed out...

Because in a trade down scenario independent of acquiring a player like Cassel, you stand to get better value out of that pick.

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:37 AM
Fair enough, your more on the levels of an obsessive/stalker type person....

Your love affair for all things Huard wont quickly be forgotten... Lets just hope you dont go that far with Cassel...
If Cassel helps the Chiefs win games then I'll be in his corner...just like I was with Huard in 2006.

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:37 AM
I'm really tired of this term drafturbator if you suck at drafting your team will suck.

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:38 AM
Because you'd still rather have the piece of 3 because maybe another team does think theres a franchise guy or really wants an OT or something like that.

but according to the drafturbators, it's nearly impossible to trade out of a top 5 pick...

you guys like to contradict yourselves a lot

The_Doctor10
03-02-2009, 11:38 AM
Now we're gonna hear hey trust Pioli, I don't care who it is if they were gonna make that move giving us the choice of QB's and we still moved for Cassell I'm not happy I don't think Cassell will ever be a top notch QB.

But... but... HE WENT TO USC!!!!


How you can be more high on Mark Sanchez than Matt Cassel defies explanation. Sanchez, for his situation, had just as much 'talent' surrounding him as Cassel did. Answer me these:

Did Sanchez/Stafford get the New England Patriots and get the ultimate diva WR Randy Moss to buy into what he was trying to accomplish and view him as a leader?

Did Sanchez/Stafford not only convince a veteran-laden Patriot team to believe in him, he damn near led them into the playoffs while throwing for more yards than Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Ben Roethlisberger, and Eli Manning? (BTW, 4 Super Bowl Rings among that group...)

Did Sanchez/Stafford spend 4 years learning under Bill Belichick and Tom Brady?

Are Sanchez/Stafford going to cost less money?

Have Sanchez/Stafford PROVEN A DAMN THING?????

LOCOChief
03-02-2009, 11:38 AM
Nobody will have to second guess anything because Stafford and Sanchez SUCK ASS! I think it's funny to listen to their proponents around here as if they're better talent evaluators then Pioli.

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:39 AM
Trent Green was Vermiels guy the others you're right about. So the last time he got a valuable guy in Free Agency was 8 years ago? The Pats got valuable guys every off season. Do you guys think Pioli won't succeed?

I think Pioli will succeed, but one can still question the trade and not be labeled as a non true fan...

crazycoffey
03-02-2009, 11:39 AM
Dude.

IN. MY. OPINION.

I've never claimed I KNOW these things to be true.

Dear God, people.


don't let 'em get to you, You're no Mecca....

Reerun_KC
03-02-2009, 11:40 AM
Nobody will have to second guess anything because Stafford and Sanchez SUCK ASS! I think it's funny to listen to their proponents around here as if they're better talent evaluators then Pioli.

Funny to see you come here and KNOW that those guys suck ass only when we traded for another QB...

Thanks for enlightening us ol wise one...

Short Leash Hootie
03-02-2009, 11:40 AM
I'm really tired of this term drafturbator if you suck at drafting your team will suck.

you guys call us "true fans", it was only fair for me to dub you guys with a name...

Us "true fans" like a winning football team...a team that competes on Sunday...you "drafturbators" love March and April...you hate us because given the choice of 10-6 and the playoffs or 2-14 and the #1 pick, we're taking option A every time...in order to win a Super Bowl, you have to the playoffs first...I doubt anyone thought the Cardinals had a chance at the Super Bowl when they made the playoffs this year...but they got hot and look what happened...the "drafturbators" either want #1 seed or #1 pick.

ChiefRon
03-02-2009, 11:40 AM
Not true...I'd say more like 3 years since Cassel and his experience + last year being a full time, successful starter probably puts him ahead of the curve on Stafford by about 3 years...

So I'll sacrifice those 3 years for a guy we get at #34 rather than a TOTAL, COMPLETE unknown at #3...and keeping the #3 to further add to the talent on our current roster.

Fact is...if they put Cassel in this draft he'd be right there with Sanchez in terms of who'd be drafted where...and we got him at #34.

It's a steal, Pioli expects Cassel to be our franchise QB, and now the drafturbators just need to move on and start yelling at everyone for wanting Monroe or Curry over Raji...

If they put Cassel in this draft, he would be lucky to get drafted in the 7th round cuz there would only be a few games of college tape on him, mostly as a TE

BigRedChief
03-02-2009, 11:40 AM
don't let 'em get to you, You're no Mecca....ROFL

Mecca
03-02-2009, 11:41 AM
but according to the drafturbators, it's nearly impossible to trade out of a top 5 pick...

you guys like to contradict yourselves a lot

It is difficult which is why I don't expect it...so we're going to be overpaying some guy who's not worth it now.

Skip Towne
03-02-2009, 11:41 AM
that explains why you are at where you are in life:thumb:

That's what I was thinking. Mecca wants to learn by getting his butt kicked rather than using the experience of others.