PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Has Cassel improved to the point where we can compete with SD for the AFC West?


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 05:43 PM
That's the big question right now.

I'm thrilled and ecstatic over the win today. I didn't expect Cassel to play this well. He made a couple of fucking phenomenal plays that I didn't legitimately think he was capable of.

I'm still not convinced he's the guy that's going to win playoff games for us.

That question will be answered in two weeks.

Has Cassel improved enough to the point where he can go toe-to-toe with Philip Rivers and lead the Chiefs to an AFC West title?

If he can't, you can take those 22 touchdown passes and shove them up your ass. :evil:

Bane
11-28-2010, 05:44 PM
Taking everything I've seen so far this season into consideration,I have to say yes.

LaChapelle
11-28-2010, 05:45 PM
PASS RUSH
PASS RUSH
PASS RUSH get one

Shogun
11-28-2010, 05:46 PM
Im thinking yes. But still Skeptical.

noa
11-28-2010, 05:47 PM
He's improved his pocket presence and it seems like he's much less erratic, making it less crucial that we get him in a good rhythm before we can expect anything decent out of him. That really opens up our playbook and our options, so thanks to that, I would say yes.

KC kid
11-28-2010, 05:47 PM
I think the Chiefs still need help (GO INDY). . . and it has nothing to do with Cassel. Their defense is very spotty still.

Bwana
11-28-2010, 05:48 PM
He is looking damn good.....Thank God!

LiveSteam
11-28-2010, 05:48 PM
Its the D that will fall short when you match up against the LIGHTNING BOLTZZZZ IMO
But if KC losses im sure MATT will take all the blame

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 05:49 PM
Cassel is actually concerning me less than the injury situation though I think Albert could have played today, he was active.

zonachief
11-28-2010, 05:51 PM
Did anyone expect this team to compete for a playoff spot this year? Im thrilled at the spot we are in right now. I think next two weeks are huge. Just worried that winning four in a row for us is alot to ask.

LiveSteam
11-28-2010, 05:51 PM
NO!

milkman
11-28-2010, 05:53 PM
The Guardian has talked about the Donkey game as one in which Cassel had the oppotunity to grow, and I agree with him.

I also believe that that game provided an opportunity for Cassel and Bowe to develop a chemistry that they have been lacking since Cassel was brought here, and that has helped to open up other things in the passing game, like providing an opportunity for a young receiver like Tucker to begin to emerge.

The San Diego game will be a real test, and if Cassel can continue to play with the confidence and poise he's devloping in these games, then he has a shot to compete in a shootout with Rivers.

I never thought that would be possible.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 05:54 PM
we won't beat San Diego @ San Diego...

Just Passin' By
11-28-2010, 05:54 PM
Kansas City is the division leader after 11 games, meaning the team is clearly competing for the AFC West, and Cassel has been the QB. How the hell did you even think to post such a stupid question?

philfree
11-28-2010, 05:55 PM
Cassel is actually concerning me less than the injury situation though I think Albert could have played today, he was active.

I never heard about McCluster but he obviously didn't play. The injuries concern me but it appears that Haley's coaching has everyone ready to play so I'm getting excited.

We dominated this game on the raod and that was the next step for the Chiefs.......Cassel played like a King and now we have the donks at home.

It's a bigger game then the last one.......


go chiefs!

PhilFree:arrow:

JASONSAUTO
11-28-2010, 05:55 PM
umm we lead the division. i would say we are competing for the division already. chargers should worry about the colts
Posted via Mobile Device

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 05:55 PM
Kansas City is the division leader after 11 games, meaning the team is clearly competing for the AFC West, and Cassel has been the QB. How the hell did you even think to post such a stupid question?

I'm not just talking about this year.

I'm talking about this year and every year for the rest of Cassel's Chiefs career.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 05:56 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.

SDChiefs
11-28-2010, 05:56 PM
Yes but only if he continues to play this well.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 05:57 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.

uhm, why?

TheGuardian
11-28-2010, 05:57 PM
The Guardian has talked about the Donkey game as one in which Cassel had the oppotunity to grow, and I agree with him.

I also believe that that game provided an opportunity for Cassel and Bowe to develop a chemistry that they have been lacking since Cassel was brought here, and that has helped to open up other things in the passing game, like providing an opportunity for a young receiver like Tucker to begin to emerge.

The San Diego game will be a real test, and if Cassel can continue to play with the confidence and poise he's devloping in these games, then he has a shot to compete in a shootout with Rivers.

I never thought that would be possible.

Thank you! Someone gets it!

That Denver game was NOT garbage stats. The loss today should have told everyone that. Casselback folded against a similar zone defense when the game got too big for him. Cassel turned it on against Denver when he was allowed to gun for it. We have all seen Qb's fold under these same situations to the point where the backup comes in. Cassel seemed to rise to the occasion. Then last week, he continued right on with it. And again today.

The fact that he did not fold is important, whether the casual fan realizes it or not. He could have, and no one would have said anything. But he tried his damndest to get us back in that game. Sure he started off shaky, but even Trent Dilfer talked eariler in the year about how QB's get handicapped if they aren't allowed to get into a ryhthym throwing the ball.

I think Cassel has turned the corner. It DOES NOT mean he will never have a bad game again, or won't suck sometimes. Even Brady and Manning do. But I think he's arriving right before our eyes.

I personally think our hold up is another good pass rusher to compliment Hali and some depth at nose.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 05:57 PM
Right now, I want to take care of Denver. Fuck SD.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 05:58 PM
uhm, why?:spock:

Just Passin' By
11-28-2010, 05:58 PM
I'm not just talking about this year.

I'm talking about this year and every year for the rest of Cassel's Chiefs career.

That must be why you referred to 2 weeks from now and 22 touchdowns. You were clearly talking about years down the road. After all, there's no doubt that what happens 2 weeks from now will lock in all the world's future history.

milkman
11-28-2010, 05:58 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.

Why?

The Packers offense today was productive without the benefit of the run.

The result?

A loss that could have been avoided if they only had a decent running back.

kstater
11-28-2010, 05:59 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.

This is quite possibly the craziest argument I've ever seen on CP,

KChiefs1
11-28-2010, 06:00 PM
Pass Rusher is now definitely the #1 need of this team.

doomy3
11-28-2010, 06:00 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.

This makes no sense.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:01 PM
Thank you! Someone gets it!

That Denver game was NOT garbage stats. I agree the Denver game may have given Cassel and Bowe the opportunity to click. However, it is still GARBAGE time stats, anyway you fucking slice it.

If he can do it in a win, I will happily eat crow.

pkane
11-28-2010, 06:01 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.


Why? This makes no sense.

Pawnmower
11-28-2010, 06:02 PM
I think he has been showing the answer for weeks. Some didn't want to see it...

Inspector
11-28-2010, 06:03 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.

Do we have a smilie that scratches it's head?

I'm sort of baffled by this post.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:03 PM
This makes no sense.:spock: Whats not to get?

If Cassel can throw for 300+ yards against a good team with the running game struggling, thats what I mean. Its not rocket science.

TheGuardian
11-28-2010, 06:03 PM
I agree the Denver game may have given Cassel and Bowe the opportunity to click. However, it is still GARBAGE time stats, anyway you ****ing slice it.

If he can do it in a win, I will happily eat crow.

I've already explained why it wasn't. Try to keep up.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:03 PM
:spock:

I bet you feel pretty dumb now...

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:04 PM
:spock: Whats not to get?

If Cassel can throw for 300+ yards against a good team with the running game struggling, thats what I mean. Its not rocket science.

No...

We got it.

But it's fucking dumb.

jjchieffan
11-28-2010, 06:04 PM
I'm not just talking about this year.

I'm talking about this year and every year for the rest of Cassel's Chiefs career.

Well then, you should include Chokeland in the question. I believe they will be a bigger threat than the Chargers as long as Norv Turner is their coach.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:04 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see the PASSING O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.Does this make MORE sense?

doomy3
11-28-2010, 06:05 PM
:spock: Whats not to get?

If Cassel can throw for 300+ yards against a good team with the running game struggling, thats what I mean. Its not rocket science.

Why would you want to see that? How about we just let him continue to run the offense and continue to mix the pass with the run, which is when our offense is at its best.

It's not rocket science.

ChiefsCountry
11-28-2010, 06:05 PM
We will see in two weeks.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:05 PM
I bet you feel pretty dumb now...ROFL

pkane
11-28-2010, 06:05 PM
:spock: Whats not to get?

If Cassel can throw for 300+ yards against a good team with the running game struggling, thats what I mean. Its not rocket science.

Whats not to get? The fact that you want to see the running game struggle. Why would you want any part of our game to struggle? Its a dumb idea.

-King-
11-28-2010, 06:06 PM
Does this make MORE sense?

No. Seriously...it makes no fucking sense. It's fucking stupid.

Baby Lee
11-28-2010, 06:06 PM
Thank you! Someone gets it!

That Denver game was NOT garbage stats. The loss today should have told everyone that. Casselback folded against a similar zone defense when the game got too big for him. Cassel turned it on against Denver when he was allowed to gun for it. We have all seen Qb's fold under these same situations to the point where the backup comes in. Cassel seemed to rise to the occasion. Then last week, he continued right on with it. And again today.

The fact that he did not fold is important, whether the casual fan realizes it or not. He could have, and no one would have said anything. But he tried his damndest to get us back in that game. Sure he started off shaky, but even Trent Dilfer talked eariler in the year about how QB's get handicapped if they aren't allowed to get into a ryhthym throwing the ball.

I think Cassel has turned the corner. It DOES NOT mean he will never have a bad game again, or won't suck sometimes. Even Brady and Manning do. But I think he's arriving right before our eyes.

I personally think our hold up is another good pass rusher to compliment Hali and some depth at nose.

I'm beginning to sense that you don't quite grasp what 'garbage stats' means.

No one denies that the Denver game turned out to be a valuable opportunity for Cassel to grow as a passer, but that doesn't make the 'stats' valuable. The stats were still achieved in an artificial setting primed to foster passing yards. It's no different than if he had a private practice session with a QB guru, the experience might help his growth, but no one would count his passing yards in such a session as 'valuable NFL game stats.'

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:06 PM
Why would you want to see that? How about we just let him continue to run the offense and continue to mix the pass with the run, which is when our offense is at its best.

It's not rocket science.Oh FFS. :facepalm:

pkane
11-28-2010, 06:07 PM
Does this make MORE sense?


Not really

Reaper16
11-28-2010, 06:07 PM
Thank you! Someone gets it!

That Denver game was NOT garbage stats. The loss today should have told everyone that. Casselback folded against a similar zone defense when the game got too big for him. Cassel turned it on against Denver when he was allowed to gun for it. We have all seen Qb's fold under these same situations to the point where the backup comes in. Cassel seemed to rise to the occasion. Then last week, he continued right on with it. And again today.

The fact that he did not fold is important, whether the casual fan realizes it or not. He could have, and no one would have said anything. But he tried his damndest to get us back in that game. Sure he started off shaky, but even Trent Dilfer talked eariler in the year about how QB's get handicapped if they aren't allowed to get into a ryhthym throwing the ball.

I agree with you. But I am going to say the same thing that Baby Lee told you earlier today (and is 100% correct about):

The stats themselves are indicative of nothing. They were relatively easy stats picked up in garbage time. People were pointing to Cassel's statistical performance in that game as proof that he was good. That is absolutely a false connection to make.

All of the confidence and rhythm and connections with Bowe, etc. that you argue were made in that garbage time? Yes, that's valuable, and it means that the process of acquiring those stats was worth it.

TL;DR? The Denver stats themselves are not evidence of Cassel being a QB. The stats he put up are worthless. What has worth is the rhythm and confidence gained. There is a difference between the two.

WebGem
11-28-2010, 06:08 PM
The question doesn't really make sense to me.

I think he's playing to the point where we're better than we were, for sure.

The way he was playing, we were winning enough to win the division if SD slipped up again, even once.

So yeah, I think our division chances go up, but we were already in contention, I mean after all we have been in 1st place all year.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:08 PM
Oh FFS. :facepalm:

I get the fact Cassel excels because we have such a great run game...

Of course we wouldn't be that great without a running game...we have 1 receiver who is worth a damn...and a QB who is more of a game manager than a game breaker...

Nothing wrong with being a game manager...

I'd take 10 years of THE BEST game manager any day of the week...

Only 3 or 4 legit franchise QB's on a year to year basis.

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 06:09 PM
Well then, you should include Chokeland in the question. I believe they will be a bigger threat than the Chargers as long as Norv Turner is their coach.

Oakland is not going to be a threat until they get a quarterback. Even people who doubt Cassel can admit he's a lot better option than a Jason Campbell/Bruce Gradkowski merry go round.

Rain Man
11-28-2010, 06:09 PM
Cassel has been darn impressive the past couple of weeks. That play today where Richardson completely whiffed and Matt the Magnificent avoided him and threw a completion was masterful.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:10 PM
No. Seriously...it makes no fucking sense. It's fucking stupid.:rolleyes:

If the running game is not there, I would like Cassel to control the offense with his arm. I want to see that before I fucking crown his ass.

Very good to great QBs do this.

Show me a game where Matt has done this.

Show me a game as a Chief where Matt has 300+ yards and the running game has less than 100 and they won.

RedThat
11-28-2010, 06:10 PM
PASS RUSH
PASS RUSH
PASS RUSH get one

Damn right.

What the heck happened to Hali? He's been a little cold lately.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:12 PM
Whats not to get? The fact that you want to see the running game struggle. Why would you want any part of our game to struggle? Its a dumb idea.:spock:ROFL

pkane
11-28-2010, 06:12 PM
:rolleyes:

If the running game is not there, I would like Cassel to control the offense with his arm. I want to see that before I ****ing crown his ass.

Very good to great QBs do this.

Show me a game where Matt has done this.

Show me a game as a Chief where Matt has 300+ yards and the running game has less than 100 and they won.


Well its a good thing the running game is there. We were a complete offense today and thats what I want to see. I don't want to see one part fail to see if the other part picks it up.

TRR
11-28-2010, 06:12 PM
This Cassel debate is beyond ridiculous. The bottom line is that the bashers will NEVER admit they could be wrong. Cassel can throw for x amount of yards with x amount of TD's and x amount of INT's, and the bashers will always have an excuse or a BUT...

But I want to see him do it when it matters. Yea but I want to see him come back and win a game. But I want to see him do it against a great team. But I want to see him do it when the running game struggles. Yea but I want to see him do it on the road. But I want to see if he can do it in the playoffs. Yea but I want to see him do it against a good passing defense. But I want to see if he can get his yards going deep....before I call him adequate.

It is all fucking boring. Enjoy the season, enjoy the wins, and enjoy the maturation of a young QB coming into his own in KC.
Posted via Mobile Device

Ugly Duck
11-28-2010, 06:12 PM
I can't vote because the Chiefs are obviously good enough to compete for the AFCW title, but that is not necessarily a result of the play of Casell.

TheGuardian
11-28-2010, 06:12 PM
I agree with you. But I am going to say the same thing that Baby Lee told you earlier today (and is 100% correct about):

The stats themselves are indicative of nothing. They were relatively easy stats picked up in garbage time. People were pointing to Cassel's statistical performance in that game as proof that he was good. That is absolutely a false connection to make.

All of the confidence and rhythm and connections with Bowe, etc. that you argue were made in that garbage time? Yes, that's valuable, and it means that the process of acquiring those stats was worth it.

TL;DR? The Denver stats themselves are not evidence of Cassel being a QB. The stats he put up are worthless. What has worth is the rhythm and confidence gained. There is a difference between the two.

I'm not even going to debate these stupid arguments. Anyone you as a QB, continue to battle to get back into a game, and play well doing it, matters. Period. End of story. Hassleback threw picks, got sacked and fumbled, and did all sorts of shit with the game out of hand. We have seen plenty of other QB's do that as well. Cassel seemed to rise to the occasion and relish the opportunity to try to get the team back into that game, even if he fell short.

The point is, those stats count and so does the experience. He could have thrown 4 picks with no touchdowns and I bet you money people would say the stats count then now wouldn't they? Fuck yes they would. So the fact is if he throw for 450 with 4 TD's and no picks, it counts too. End of discussion.

TheGuardian
11-28-2010, 06:13 PM
I can't vote because the Chiefs are obviously good enough to compete for the AFCW title, but that is not necessarily a result of the play of Casell.

Ummm yes it is now.

milkman
11-28-2010, 06:14 PM
Damn right.

What the heck happened to Hali? He's been a little cold lately.

Wearing down.

Only pass rusher gets a lot of attention, thus has to work harder to get after the QB.

jjchieffan
11-28-2010, 06:15 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.

Then go root for Dungver. That's how they are playing. How well is that working out?

Graystoke
11-28-2010, 06:15 PM
I thought he was pretty impressive today.....I mean he ran the ball for positive yardage.
POSITIVE YARDAGE!

Psyko Tek
11-28-2010, 06:15 PM
I am no longer worried about the QB
yes I think we need a franchise qb , but you can win with a good qb
but I think terry bradshaw was a franchise qb

I am concerned about the D

philfree
11-28-2010, 06:15 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.

The first TD drive of the game was from passing the ball.....

Oh My G!......I think he should do it with a machine gun going off in his face! That way we'd know for sure!


Whut?


PhilFree:arrow:

Baby Lee
11-28-2010, 06:16 PM
This Cassel debate is beyond ridiculous. The bottom line is that the bashers will NEVER admit they could be wrong. Cassel can throw for x amount of yards with x amount of TD's and x amount of INT's, and the bashers will always have an excuse or a BUT...

But I want to see him do it when it matters. Yea but I want to see him come back and win a game. But I want to see him do it against a great team. But I want to see him do it when the running game struggles. Yea but I want to see him do it on the road. But I want to see if he can do it in the playoffs. Yea but I want to see him do it against a good passing defense. But I want to see if he can get his yards going deep....before I call him adequate.

It is all fucking boring. Enjoy the season, enjoy the wins, and enjoy the maturation of a young QB coming into his own in KC.
Posted via Mobile Device

Like this is the genesis of some new phenomenon, when something sucks for a long time, so long that they're now playing inferior opponents d/t strength of schedule, and they start to make strides, there's caution in crowning them prematurely. That's the way it was for the entirety of the Rams' 1999 SB season.

milkman
11-28-2010, 06:16 PM
This Cassel debate is beyond ridiculous. The bottom line is that the bashers will NEVER admit they could be wrong. Cassel can throw for x amount of yards with x amount of TD's and x amount of INT's, and the bashers will always have an excuse or a BUT...

But I want to see him do it when it matters. Yea but I want to see him come back and win a game. But I want to see him do it against a great team. But I want to see him do it when the running game struggles. Yea but I want to see him do it on the road. But I want to see if he can do it in the playoffs. Yea but I want to see him do it against a good passing defense. But I want to see if he can get his yards going deep....before I call him adequate.

It is all ****ing boring. Enjoy the season, enjoy the wins, and enjoy the maturation of a young QB coming into his own in KC.
Posted via Mobile Device

Love the stereotyping.

I have been as big a basher as anyone, and I'm giving Cassel all due credit.

Rain Man
11-28-2010, 06:17 PM
Wearing down.

Only pass rusher gets a lot of attention, thus has to work harder to get after the QB.


We won, so I guess I won't complain, but on that late long touchdown pass he was held not just once but twice. The tackle wrapped his arm around him after getting beat, and then when Hali kept going he used the time-honored technique of grabbing Hali's neck as well. It was right out in open space, too, so I figured for sure the would-be touchdown was coming back.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:17 PM
Then go root for Dungver. That's how they are playing. How well is that working out?JFC! Are you guys really this fucking stupid?

TheGuardian
11-28-2010, 06:17 PM
But I want to see him do it when it matters. Yea but I want to see him come back and win a game. But I want to see him do it against a great team. But I want to see him do it when the running game struggles. Yea but I want to see him do it on the road. But I want to see if he can do it in the playoffs. Yea but I want to see him do it against a good passing defense. But I want to see if he can get his yards going deep....before I call him adequate.

Yup. Pretty much. Everyone wants something different to happen before they will admit he has improved. It's fucking comical. And stupid.

kstater
11-28-2010, 06:18 PM
The first TD drive of the game was from passing the ball.....

Oh My G!......I think he should do it with a machine gun going off in his face! That way we'd know for sure!


Whut?


PhilFree:arrow:

No, no, no, he needs to do it with a cannon going off in his face.

Reaper16
11-28-2010, 06:18 PM
the stats count then now wouldn't they? Fuck yes they would.
Probably not. The garbage time thing goes both ways. People would understand that he was forcing throws in an effort to try and make plays happen.

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 06:18 PM
We could easily be 8-3 right now if not for some defensive collapse and a few dropped passes.

pkane
11-28-2010, 06:19 PM
No, no, no, he needs to do it with a cannon going off in his face.

He did it with Richardson getting beat up and down all game.

TRR
11-28-2010, 06:20 PM
Like this is the genesis of some new phenomenon, when something sucks for a long time, so long that they're now playing inferior opponents d/t strength of schedule, and they start to make strides, there's caution in crowning them prematurely. That's the way it was for the entirety of the Rams' 1999 SB season.

Nobody is asking for you to "crown him, whatever that means. Most "bashers" (the most is for Milkman) just flat out won't give the guy credit for anything...and the excuses for why are ridiculous.
Posted via Mobile Device

milkman
11-28-2010, 06:21 PM
He did it with Richardson getting beat up and down all game.

But the DEs name wasn't Cannon.

Ugly Duck
11-28-2010, 06:21 PM
Ummm yes it is now.

I remember the 3-0 streak when the Planet was squealing "We're on top of the division in spite of that waste of oxygen!" And now you're still on top because of him? Make up your minds!

Rain Man
11-28-2010, 06:21 PM
We could easily be 8-3 right now if not for some defensive collapse and a few dropped passes.

We've been on the lower end of the score against Indy (could've won), Houston (should've won), Oakland (should've won), and Denver (would've won if they weren't filming our team beforehand). I'm thinking 11-0.

milkman
11-28-2010, 06:21 PM
Nobody is asking for you to "crown him, whatever that means. Most "bashers" (the most is for Milkman) just flat out won't give the guy credit for anything...and the excuses for why are ridiculous.
Posted via Mobile Device

I'm just trying to get some recognition damnit!

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:22 PM
In a perfect world, we run the ball for 200+ yards every week.

My question to those who are completely sold on Cassel: Will he be able to come thru when the run is not there?

I'm NOT saying he cant. I pray he can. Good teams will sell out on the run and force cassel to beat them.

Baby Lee
11-28-2010, 06:23 PM
I'm not even going to debate these stupid arguments. Anyone you as a QB, continue to battle to get back into a game, and play well doing it, matters. Period. End of story. Hassleback threw picks, got sacked and fumbled, and did all sorts of shit with the game out of hand. We have seen plenty of other QB's do that as well. Cassel seemed to rise to the occasion and relish the opportunity to try to get the team back into that game, even if he fell short.

The point is, those stats count and so does the experience. He could have thrown 4 picks with no touchdowns and I bet you money people would say the stats count then now wouldn't they? Fuck yes they would. So the fact is if he throw for 450 with 4 TD's and no picks, it counts too. End of discussion.
What you're missing is the second half of the Denver game is the situation where ANY QB is primed for a lot of passing yards, if passing yards are achieved in that situation he's doing as well as ANY COMPETENT QB would be expected to, if not there's even more cause for concern if he can't flourish in even the most advantageous of situations. All you 'find out' in garbage time is if a QB has run of the mill competence, unless they pull a Frank Reich and bring them ALL THE WAY back, which countenances the DEFENSE reverted to their primary game plan as things draw close.

Mr. Laz
11-28-2010, 06:23 PM
Defense is a problem

we need to blitz ... it's very hard to generate pressure on the QB from a 3-4 defense without blitzing. In a 3-4 you supposed be able to zone blitz a QB to create pressure without sending a ton of guys. We need to do that.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:24 PM
Nobody is asking for you to "crown him, whatever that means. Most "bashers" (the most is for Milkman) just flat out won't give the guy credit for anything...and the excuses for why are ridiculous.
Posted via Mobile DeviceRead the game thread. Anyone here who has bashed Cassel in the past was praising him there.

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 06:24 PM
In a perfect world, we run the ball for 200+ yards every week.

My question to those who are completely sold on Cassel: Will he be able to come thru when the run is not there?

I'm NOT saying he cant. I pray he can. Good teams will sell out on the run and force cassel to beat them.

I think the pass opened the run today. Nice change. Seattle was 13th against the run giving up about 105 a game going into today.

-King-
11-28-2010, 06:25 PM
We won, so I guess I won't complain, but on that late long touchdown pass he was held not just once but twice. The tackle wrapped his arm around him after getting beat, and then when Hali kept going he used the time-honored technique of grabbing Hali's neck as well. It was right out in open space, too, so I figured for sure the would-be touchdown was coming back.

He gets held on every single play. And thats not even an exaggeration. The fact that he has any sacks is just a testament of how good he is.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 06:26 PM
We could easily be 8-3 right now if not for some defensive collapse and a few dropped passes.The way Cassel is playing now, we would have won in Indy.

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 06:27 PM
I remember the 3-0 streak when the Planet was squealing "We're on top of the division in spite of that waste of oxygen!" And now you're still on top because of him? Make up your minds!

No kidding but that's the difference in how is playing the last few weeks compared to early in the season.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:28 PM
if Cassel and Bowe play like they did today going forward, we are legitimate Super Bowl contenders

Bearcat
11-28-2010, 06:29 PM
:rolleyes:

If the running game is not there, I would like Cassel to control the offense with his arm. I want to see that before I ****ing crown his ass.

Very good to great QBs do this.

Show me a game where Matt has done this.

Show me a game as a Chief where Matt has 300+ yards and the running game has less than 100 and they won.

This is pretty close... :shrug:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=291122012

Of course people would love to have a great QB on top of a running game that's good for 150+ ypg, but that's not the question. I think the one thing missing now is consistency... yeah, he's had a couple of good games, and people are feeling good after beating up the NFC West. Well, we'll find out if he can compete for the AFC West in the next couple of weeks. I hope we see more of this... I hope he proves me wrong.

Pablo
11-28-2010, 06:30 PM
No, no, no, he needs to do it with a cannon going off in his face.I want him to throw a game winning pass through the window of a Ferrari doing 149 mph while being hosed down with mace.

Then I'll believe.

OH, AND STATS ARE FOR LOSERS.

milkman
11-28-2010, 06:30 PM
In a perfect world, we run the ball for 200+ yards every week.

My question to those who are completely sold on Cassel: Will he be able to come thru when the run is not there?

I'm NOT saying he cant. I pray he can. Good teams will sell out on the run and force cassel to beat them.

I don't want to see that situation, and it has nothing to do with Cassel can carry this team.

Teams with balance win SBs.

Teams that can't run don't.

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 06:31 PM
if Cassel and Bowe play like they did today going forward, we are legitimate Super Bowl contenders

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:sRBfmKo_HbVYAM:http://1funny.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/calm-down.jpg&t=1

This season has been fun, but the Chiefs haven't played a single AFC or NFC contender. They haven't played Baltimore, Pittsburgh, New England, New York, Philly, Green Bay, Atlanta or New Orleans.

This team needs to go into San Diego and wax that ass before you can crown them.

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 06:31 PM
I don't want to see that situation, and it has nothing to do with Cassel can carry this team.

Teams with balance win SBs.

Teams that can't run don't.

X2. We need to do both and right now we can. I know Seattle is a bad team defensively but we looked like the 2003 KC offense today. Well, close anyway.

milkman
11-28-2010, 06:33 PM
X2. We need to do both and right now we can. I know Seattle is a bad team defensively but we looked like the 2003 KC offense today. Well, close anyway.

Thomas Jones is our achilles heel right now.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:34 PM
Uhm

They played Indy and played them damn close...before Cassel had any confidence whatsoever.

And Indy is definitely a contender.

Ebolapox
11-28-2010, 06:34 PM
I sure fucking hope so...

Sully
11-28-2010, 06:34 PM
Nobody is asking for you to "crown him, whatever that means. Most "bashers" (the most is for Milkman) just flat out won't give the guy credit for anything...and the excuses for why are ridiculous.
Posted via Mobile Device

Can you please tell us who this "most" consists of?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pablo
11-28-2010, 06:36 PM
Cassel needs to win a Super Bowl played inside an active volcano; and deliver a baby and write a concerto during the game winning drive before I'll believe.

STATS = LOSERS.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:36 PM
Thomas Jones is our achilles heel right now.

but I don't think there is any doubt his usage keeps Charles fresh...

Dude is average like 6.3 YPC now...I think Jones deserves some credit for that and Jones isn't really much of a slouch himself.

Last year the Jets used Jones all season long...and then turned the reigns over to Greene when the playoffs started...

Maybe the Chiefs have something like that in mind for Mr. Charles when we're hosting a playoff game at Arrowhead...

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 06:36 PM
Thomas Jones is our achilles heel right now.

I would agree except it hasn't really hurt us and JC needs his rest. I bet you see more and more JC as the season continues.

tk13
11-28-2010, 06:40 PM
We ran the ball 48 times today. Today was probably a good balance... I love it when both guys can get 20 carries. It's just not feasible to give Charles 30 carries and Jones 15 every week. Well, it's possible, but I think that would wear Charles down and he wouldn't be nearly as effective.

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 06:41 PM
Uhm

They played Indy and played them damn close...before Cassel had any confidence whatsoever.

And Indy is definitely a contender.

Indy is not a contender. They have a terrible defense and running game.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:43 PM
Indy is not a contender. They have a terrible defense and running game.

That is the dumbest thing you've ever said.

Rain Man
11-28-2010, 06:45 PM
Cassel needs to win a Super Bowl played inside an active volcano; and deliver a baby and write a concerto during the game winning drive before I'll believe.

STATS = LOSERS.


I'd need to see it more than just once. Once could be a fluke.

kstater
11-28-2010, 06:45 PM
Indy is not a contender. They have a terrible defense and running game.

They have Peyton Manning. They'll be a contender every year he decides to keep playing. Whether they win it is a different story.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:45 PM
Indy lost nailbiters @HOU, @JAC, @PHI and @NE...

but you're right...a team that has been a contender every year for the past 8 years isn't a contender...

Real brilliant thought process Clay.

kstater
11-28-2010, 06:45 PM
I'd need to see it more than just once. Once could be a fluke.

Yup, Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl

Pablo
11-28-2010, 06:46 PM
I'd need to see it more than just once. Once could be a fluke.Even if it did happen; I bet the concerto would only be adequate at best.

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 06:46 PM
That is the dumbest thing you've ever said.

The Colts wouldn't have even been in the playoffs had they started this week.

They're having a down year and are not a serious contender.

And besides, they beat the Chiefs, and Cassel was terrible, so it only strengthens my point.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:46 PM
The Colts wouldn't have even been in the playoffs had they started this week.

They're having a down year and are not a serious contender.

And besides, they beat the Chiefs, and Cassel was terrible, so it only strengthens my point.

The Colts will finish NO WORSE than 11-5.

milkman
11-28-2010, 06:46 PM
Indy is not a contender. They have a terrible defense and running game.

Indy had a terrible run game last year, and their defense has never been stellar, except for one playoff run.

Pablo
11-28-2010, 06:47 PM
Yup, Trent Dilfer won a Super BowlEven if he did; it would probably be the least impressive Super Bowl winning drive ever.

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 06:48 PM
Indy lost nailbiters @HOU, @JAC, @PHI and @NE...

but you're right...a team that has been a contender every year for the past 8 years isn't a contender...

Real brilliant thought process Clay.

You can't be a contender unless you make the playoffs.

That's a big question mark for the Colts right now.

LaChapelle
11-28-2010, 06:49 PM
Anderson and Hasselbeck are no cause
to suck each others dick

milkman
11-28-2010, 06:50 PM
You can't be a contender unless you make the playoffs.

That's a big question mark for the Colts right now.

If the Colts win tonight, they are division leaders.

Craqhead
11-28-2010, 06:54 PM
Not saying Cassel will win the game, but w/ Bowe finally catching some, and our O~line playing the way they have. We have a legit shot at winning in SD.
SD will come out fired up due too their loss at Arrowhead too start the season, but I think we can hang with em.

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 06:56 PM
You can't be a contender unless you make the playoffs.

That's a big question mark for the Colts right now.
Yea because the Colts have a history of missing the PO.

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 06:57 PM
We beat the Chargers, and the Chargers are the best team in the NFL.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 06:57 PM
It's not a big question mark...

I'd bet all of the money I have after week 17 that the Colts make the playoffs and host a game.

ChiefsCountry
11-28-2010, 07:02 PM
It's not a big question mark...

I'd bet all of the money I have after week 17 that the Colts make the playoffs and host a game.

Way to go out on a limb and say they will host a playoff game. Only way they make the playoffs is they win the division, and division winners are guaranteed to host.

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 07:08 PM
It's not a big question mark...

I'd bet all of the money I have after week 17 that the Colts make the playoffs and host a game.

Two Manning interceptions later....

The Colts are not Super Bowl contenders this year. They might make the playoffs, but I guarantee they get bumped in the first round.

Chiefshrink
11-28-2010, 07:09 PM
we won't beat San Diego @ San Diego...

Probably not "BUT" I want Cassel to play well enough to put us in a position to win is all. :thumb:

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 07:10 PM
Two Manning interceptions later....

The Colts are not Super Bowl contenders this year. They might make the playoffs, but I guarantee they get bumped in the first round.

Who is better than SD? Right now, they are easily the best team in the NFL.

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 07:12 PM
Who is better than SD? Right now, they are easily the best team in the NFL.

At 5-5? No. You are what your record is.

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 07:13 PM
We haven't played a contender except for the Chargers, the Colts, the Jaguars, and the division leading Seahawkss

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 07:13 PM
At 5-5? No. You are what your record is.

Yes. They are the best team in football.

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 07:14 PM
We haven't played a contender except for the Chargers, the Colts, the Jaguars, and the division leading Seahawkss

3-1. Oh yea.

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 07:16 PM
Yes. They are the best team in football.

NE would argue. When has SD beat NE anyway?

They are what they are, a strong finisher who will fold in the end because they are a soft team. Only question is who they lose against.

cdcox
11-28-2010, 07:24 PM
This Cassel debate is beyond ridiculous. The bottom line is that the bashers will NEVER admit they could be wrong. Cassel can throw for x amount of yards with x amount of TD's and x amount of INT's, and the bashers will always have an excuse or a BUT...

But I want to see him do it when it matters. Yea but I want to see him come back and win a game. But I want to see him do it against a great team. But I want to see him do it when the running game struggles. Yea but I want to see him do it on the road. But I want to see if he can do it in the playoffs. Yea but I want to see him do it against a good passing defense. But I want to see if he can get his yards going deep....before I call him adequate.

It is all ****ing boring. Enjoy the season, enjoy the wins, and enjoy the maturation of a young QB coming into his own in KC.
Posted via Mobile Device

There is a reason why we want to see these things. Because that is when having a franchise QB matters. I want a team that competes for the SB every year.

We didn't need the Peyton Manningesque performance that Cassel gave today to win against one of the worst teams in the NFL. We won by three scores even giving away two cheap touchdowns. But there will come a day when we do need that kind of performance in a must-win game. That will be the difference between being a team that makes SB appearances and a Bono-led fiasco against the Colts.

Cassel has looked great the last 2.5 games. But those are all teams in the bottom half of the league. And people are acting silly by crowning him based on that competition.

If he hasn't been tested according to my standard, why should I act like he has passed the test?

ChiefsCountry
11-28-2010, 07:26 PM
There is a reason why we want to see these things. Because that is when having a franchise QB matters. I want a team that competes for the SB every year.

We didn't need the Peyton Manningesque performance that Cassel gave today to win against one of the worst teams in the NFL. We won by three scores even giving away two cheap touchdowns. But there will come a day when we do need that kind of performance in a must-win game. That will be the difference between being a team that makes SB appearances and a Bono-led fiasco against the Colts.

Cassel has looked great the last 2.5 games. But those are all teams in the bottom half of the league. And people are acting silly by crowning him based on that competition.

If he hasn't been tested according to my standard, why should I act like he has passed the test?

Best post of the day. :thumb:

milkman
11-28-2010, 07:30 PM
There is a reason why we want to see these things. Because that is when having a franchise QB matters. I want a team that competes for the SB every year.

We didn't need the Peyton Manningesque performance that Cassel gave today to win against one of the worst teams in the NFL. We won by three scores even giving away two cheap touchdowns. But there will come a day when we do need that kind of performance in a must-win game. That will be the difference between being a team that makes SB appearances and a Bono-led fiasco against the Colts.

Cassel has looked great the last 2.5 games. But those are all teams in the bottom half of the league. And people are acting silly by crowning him based on that competition.

If he hasn't been tested according to my standard, why should I act like he has passed the test?

But he has done what we needed to see from him against these teams, one on the road.

Hs he passed a test?

No.

But he has passed a marker.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 07:30 PM
There is a reason why we want to see these things. Because that is when having a franchise QB matters. I want a team that competes for the SB every year.

We didn't need the Peyton Manningesque performance that Cassel gave today to win against one of the worst teams in the NFL. We won by three scores even giving away two cheap touchdowns. But there will come a day when we do need that kind of performance in a must-win game. That will be the difference between being a team that makes SB appearances and a Bono-led fiasco against the Colts.

Cassel has looked great the last 2.5 games. But those are all teams in the bottom half of the league. And people are acting silly by crowning him based on that competition.

If he hasn't been tested according to my standard, why should I act like he has passed the test?Well done! I couldnt quite find the words to explain this, but you did it.

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 07:31 PM
NE would argue. When has SD beat NE anyway?

They are what they are, a strong finisher who will fold in the end because they are a soft team. Only question is who they lose against.

So if they don't win the Super Bowl, they aren't a contender?

Why don't you just stop doubling down?

Cassel is a legit NFL QB.
Bowe is a #1 WR.
Pioli isn't an idiot.

It's okay to admit that you were wrong.

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 07:34 PM
There is a reason why we want to see these things. Because that is when having a franchise QB matters. I want a team that competes for the SB every year.

We didn't need the Peyton Manningesque performance that Cassel gave today to win against one of the worst teams in the NFL. We won by three scores even giving away two cheap touchdowns. But there will come a day when we do need that kind of performance in a must-win game. That will be the difference between being a team that makes SB appearances and a Bono-led fiasco against the Colts.

Cassel has looked great the last 2.5 games. But those are all teams in the bottom half of the league. And people are acting silly by crowning him based on that competition.

If he hasn't been tested according to my standard, why should I act like he has passed the test?

Give me 5 games all season where a QB has thrown for 300+ yards, 3 TDs, and won a game where the team had fewer than 62.5 rushing yards (the average needed to have a 1,000 season).

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 07:40 PM
So if they don't win the Super Bowl, they aren't a contender?

Why don't you just stop doubling down?

Cassel is a legit NFL QB.
Bowe is a #1 WR.
Pioli isn't an idiot.

It's okay to admit that you were wrong.

? Your first line makes sense. Are they a contender, not yet, and will they be a player in the end, yea.

Doubling down?

I agree with all 3 of the the last 3 points. Not sure where you are going.

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 07:46 PM
? Your first line makes sense. Are they a contender, not yet, and will they be a player in the end, yea.

Doubling down?

I agree with all 3 of the the last 3 points. Not sure where you are going.

You don't think that either SD nor Indy are contenders? Keep f*cking that chicken.

Marcellus
11-28-2010, 07:47 PM
You don't think that either SD nor Indy are contenders? Keep f*cking that chicken.

I never said Indy wasn't. Keep up.

milkman
11-28-2010, 07:48 PM
You don't think that either SD nor Indy are contenders? Keep f*cking that chicken.

Think you got lost somehwre along the line.

cdcox
11-28-2010, 07:50 PM
Give me 5 games all season where a QB has thrown for 300+ yards, 3 TDs, and won a game where the team had fewer than 62.5 rushing yards (the average needed to have a 1,000 season).

First of all, there is a huge difference between a 1000 yard season for a single back, and 1000 yards for a whole team.

And how you constructed that straw man from my post I'm not sure.

If you think Cassel has proven everything he needs to, then good for you.

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 07:54 PM
Think you got lost somehwre along the line.

I didn't get lost. My argument was in response to Claythan saying:

"This season has been fun, but the Chiefs haven't played a single AFC or NFC contender."

cdcox
11-28-2010, 07:54 PM
But he has done what we needed to see from him against these teams, one on the road.

Hs he passed a test?

No.

But he has passed a marker.

I'll agree with that.

You watched all of the Patriot-Cassel games closely. Do you think he has progressed beyond what he was in NE, or has he just gotten back to even after regressing during his first 1+ seasons here?

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 07:57 PM
First of all, there is a huge difference between a 1000 yard season for a single back, and 1000 yards for a whole team.

Fine. Give me something close. Give me 5 games where a QB threw for 3 TDs, 300+ yards, and won a game where his team ran for fewer than 75 yards (pace for a 1200 yard season).

It just doesn't happen in the NFL. That's akin to Mecca's statement (later parroted by ROR) that a QB needs to consistently throw a 40 yard out (even though no such route exists).

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 08:00 PM
I saw some stuff from Aaron Rodgers today (in a loss) that I know Matt Cassel isn't capable of (that 100 MPH fastball strike to Jordy Nelson to tie the game)...

but Matt can be good...he has command of the huddle...his teammates appear to respect him...and he's a damn hard worker...

If he keeps improving...he can get there...something I never imagined at the start of this year.

milkman
11-28-2010, 08:01 PM
I'll agree with that.

You watched all of the Patriot-Cassel games closely. Do you think he has progressed beyond what he was in NE, or has he just gotten back to even after regressing during his first 1+ seasons here?

I think he has progressed beyond where he was with the Patriots.

He has improved his mechanics as drop back passer immensely, and is starting to show pocket awareness he never showed with New England.

At San Diego will be a big test.

I thought he had to go into these games and show some growth and improved confidence to even consider the question of whether that was going to be a test.

-King-
11-28-2010, 08:02 PM
Has Tribal Warfare posted why he voted no? I'm sure it would be very interesting seeing as how he is very knowledgeable about the QB position due to his father being a all American in college and a Hall of Fame QB in the NFL.

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 08:17 PM
The Colts are not contenders.

Manning is good, but he is not good enough to overcome the rest of that team.

Sorry, Hootie.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 08:17 PM
The Colts are not contenders.

Manning is good, but he is not good enough to overcome the rest of that team.

Sorry, Hootie.

$10 says they win THIS game

Pablo
11-28-2010, 08:18 PM
Has Tribal Warfare posted why he voted no? I'm sure it would be very interesting seeing as how he is very knowledgeable about the QB position due to his father being a all American in college and a Hall of Fame QB in the NFL.Yeah, plus we all know that TW taught the Quarterback Psychology course at Yale. Dude knows QB's.

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 08:21 PM
$10 says they win THIS game

I'll take that.

Saul Good
11-28-2010, 08:25 PM
The Colts are not contenders.

Manning is good, but he is not good enough to overcome the rest of that team.

Sorry, Hootie.

How about the Chargers?

I'll stand behind my claim that they are the best team in football.

Short Leash Hootie
11-28-2010, 08:26 PM
I'll take that.

Done.

ChiefsNow
11-28-2010, 10:55 PM
Today would be, provided JC can run for 180+ yards.

I STILL want to see this O be productive WITHOUT the benefit of the run.

How bout Without the benifit of the run and two legs tied behind their backs??:LOL:

jak112460
11-28-2010, 11:00 PM
That's the big question right now.

I'm thrilled and ecstatic over the win today. I didn't expect Cassel to play this well. He made a couple of ****ing phenomenal plays that I didn't legitimately think he was capable of.

I'm still not convinced he's the guy that's going to win playoff games for us.

That question will be answered in two weeks.

Has Cassel improved enough to the point where he can go toe-to-toe with Philip Rivers and lead the Chiefs to an AFC West title?

If he can't, you can take those 22 touchdown passes and shove them up your ass. :evil:


I think today was a big poke in the eye to every fan that has been complaining about Matt Cassell. In fact I live in AZ now and I hope you whiners run him right to the Cardinals. LOL. Actually I'm a Chiefs fan first so I hope he continues to improve. The Chiefs looked great today except for a couple of defensive screwups when the game was in Chiefs control.

stevieray
11-28-2010, 11:03 PM
the goalposts keep moving.

you guys set yourself up for it. it's actually pretty amusing to watch unfold..

jd1020
11-28-2010, 11:06 PM
Cassel has played his best 2 games the last 2 weeks, no doubt. I'll wait til the Denver game to make any judgements on Cassel. I still say no. SD is going to light up the score board. Can the Chiefs running game do enough to keep Rivers on the sideline? If they cant can you see Cassel throwing 50 times and keeping the Chiefs in it?

Count Zarth
11-28-2010, 11:10 PM
the goalposts keep moving.

you guys set yourself up for it. it's actually pretty amusing to watch unfold..

My goalposts are exactly the same as they were following the loss in Oakland - get the Chiefs to the playoffs.

In order to do that, Cassel has to finish out beating up on crap teams (a win next week and we're 3-1 in the last 4) and then beat San Diego (most likely, barring a collapse on their part).

Have you guys forgotten Oakland already? We had a chance to solidify the division lead and Cassel shit the bed. Had we won that game the matchup with San Diego would not have been so huge, but now it looms incredibly large.

Cassel created this neck and neck division race, so he better go cross the finish line or his pretty stats will count for exactly jack shit.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 11:12 PM
the goalposts keep moving.

you guys set yourself up for it. it's actually pretty amusing to watch unfold..The Goalposts go all the way to the post-season. If he plays well in SD, leading to a win. I will buy in.

stevieray
11-28-2010, 11:14 PM
My goalposts are exactly the same as they were following the loss in Oakland - get the Chiefs to the playoffs.
.
not possible...2010 Chiefs are frauds.

stevieray
11-28-2010, 11:17 PM
The Goalposts go all the way to the post-season. If he plays well in SD, leading to a win. I will buy in.

ya, BCD..this has been your take for awhile now.


:rolleyes:

HIChief
11-28-2010, 11:22 PM
In order for the Chiefs to compete against the Chargers or any other contending team for that matter, they will need to put together complete games in all facets. They wil also need to reduce even further drive-killing errors. And, they are capable of doing that. To hang a win (or loss) all on Matt Cassel is unrealistic. You saw what happened to a toothless Colts team tonight. Hall-of-Fame QB Manning just couldn't get it done with a decimated offensive line and three missing playmakers, they couldn't hang with the Chargers. If you noticed, it was the Chargers' defense that scored or set up most of the scoring for them. Rivers, and his offense isn't all that potent...yet. They're banged up too.

BigMeatballDave
11-28-2010, 11:45 PM
ya, BCD..this has been your take for awhile now.


:rolleyes:But it matters. Cassel has to be consistent. He needs to play like this against AFC West opponents. I'm thrilled Matt is playing better. I want him to prove me wrong. The Chiefs cant afford to lose a game, really. Its all on Matt's shoulders now.

I'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop with Matt. I dont want to feel that way.

stevieray
11-29-2010, 12:28 AM
. Its all on Matt's shoulders now.

agree, if it were the Kansas City Cassels...

...but it's not, and it's totally unrealistic to to make this an individual sport.

IIRC, you once claimed he'd already peaked, or we win in spite of him and lose because of him, but that standard doesn't apply to other players.

My advice would be to get used to him, 'cause he's not going anywhere.

Earthling
11-29-2010, 04:02 AM
This Cassel debate is beyond ridiculous. The bottom line is that the bashers will NEVER admit they could be wrong. Cassel can throw for x amount of yards with x amount of TD's and x amount of INT's, and the bashers will always have an excuse or a BUT...

But I want to see him do it when it matters. Yea but I want to see him come back and win a game. But I want to see him do it against a great team. But I want to see him do it when the running game struggles. Yea but I want to see him do it on the road. But I want to see if he can do it in the playoffs. Yea but I want to see him do it against a good passing defense. But I want to see if he can get his yards going deep....before I call him adequate.

It is all ****ing boring. Enjoy the season, enjoy the wins, and enjoy the maturation of a young QB coming into his own in KC.
Posted via Mobile Device



Pretty much nailed it. Rep :thumb:

MichaelH
11-29-2010, 05:42 AM
I think Cassel has improved but I have reservations about other parts of the team. They're still too inconsistent. One game the defense lays an egg, the next it's the offense. Yesterday the special teams tried their best to blow the game. As Haley says they're still a year away.

King_Chief_Fan
11-29-2010, 05:48 AM
Cassel can hold his end of the bargain.
I worry about special teams and defensive backfield.

SD's defensive line made Manning cry like a baby.

This isn't a Cassel thing.....how will the Chiefs do against the Charagers?

King_Chief_Fan
11-29-2010, 05:53 AM
$10 says they win THIS game

you will never see your $10 from GoChiefs.......the biggest welcher

Kerberos
11-29-2010, 05:54 AM
The Guardian has talked about the Donkey game as one in which Cassel had the oppotunity to grow, and I agree with him.

I also believe that that game provided an opportunity for Cassel and Bowe to develop a chemistry that they have been lacking since Cassel was brought here, and that has helped to open up other things in the passing game, like providing an opportunity for a young receiver like Tucker to begin to emerge.

The San Diego game will be a real test, and if Cassel can continue to play with the confidence and poise he's devloping in these games, then he has a shot to compete in a shootout with Rivers.

I never thought that would be possible.

This

He plays well against shitty teams. Lets see how he does against great defenses like SD on the road.

I am extremely skeptical.

Saul Good
11-29-2010, 06:11 AM
If Cassel doesn't sweep the best team in football that just kicked Peyton Manning's ass, he sucks.

Chiefnj2
11-29-2010, 06:19 AM
To the Cassel bashers, football is solely dependent upon the QB. It isn't a team sport.

Cassel is one part of the puzzle. If KC's special teams falls apart against a good team, like they did yesterday, KC won't win. Can't run the ball on 3rd and short - they will likely lose. No pass rush, Rivers will kill KC. Big mistakes by the secondary - KC will lose.

Cassel and the offense were in the midst of putting up 40+ points yesterday, and on the rare occassion KC went 3 and out the bashers were out - "well it's good to see Matt can't be relied upon for a whole game..." Shut the f up already.

Kerberos
11-29-2010, 07:37 AM
To the Cassel bashers, football is solely dependent upon the QB. It isn't a team sport.

Cassel is one part of the puzzle. If KC's special teams falls apart against a good team, like they did yesterday, KC won't win. Can't run the ball on 3rd and short - they will likely lose. No pass rush, Rivers will kill KC. Big mistakes by the secondary - KC will lose.

Cassel and the offense were in the midst of putting up 40+ points yesterday, and on the rare occassion KC went 3 and out the bashers were out - "well it's good to see Matt can't be relied upon for a whole game..." Shut the f up already.

When he can win BIG games against Good Defenses 3 out of 4 games I will be the first on the Casshole bandwagon.

He hasn't proven to me or anyone with a brain that he can do that.

loochy
11-29-2010, 07:45 AM
This Cassel debate is beyond ridiculous. The bottom line is that the bashers will NEVER admit they could be wrong. Cassel can throw for x amount of yards with x amount of TD's and x amount of INT's, and the bashers will always have an excuse or a BUT...

But I want to see him do it when it matters. Yea but I want to see him come back and win a game. But I want to see him do it against a great team. But I want to see him do it when the running game struggles. Yea but I want to see him do it on the road. But I want to see if he can do it in the playoffs. Yea but I want to see him do it against a good passing defense. But I want to see if he can get his yards going deep....before I call him adequate.

It is all fucking boring. Enjoy the season, enjoy the wins, and enjoy the maturation of a young QB coming into his own in KC.
Posted via Mobile Device

I think the improvement Cassell has shown is in his intangibles and goes beyond stats. For example, on the Richardson whiff/no block play, he dodged the would be sacker and made a strong accurate throw. The Cassell would have freaked out and taken the sack. It seems like he finally has his feet under him and he knows what's going on. He looks confident and his throws (generally) are hard, tight spirals ON TARGET. Only a couple of times yesterday did he throw his signature insanely overthrown pass to the middle. In fact, on one third and short conversion he threw a perfect fade type pass to Bowe. Yeah, his stats look good, but I'm more impressed with his dimeanor and confidence.

Also, I think the coaching staff has gotten more confidence in him. They are letting him use the play action more, and he is taking full advantage of it.

Mr. Kotter
11-29-2010, 07:57 AM
My vote has more to do with the Charger's looking tough....than anything having to do with Cassel.

Saul Good
11-29-2010, 08:10 AM
When he can win BIG games against Good Defenses 3 out of 4 games I will be the first on the Casshole bandwagon.

He hasn't proven to me or anyone with a brain that he can do that.

So all he needs to do is win 75% of his games against top teams? I guess you aren't quite sold on Peyton Manning yet. Do you think he will ever progress into a solid QB, or should the Colts let him go?

RickObie
11-29-2010, 08:12 AM
I think the improvement Cassell has shown is in his intangibles and goes beyond stats. For example, on the Richardson whiff/no block play, he dodged the would be sacker and made a strong accurate throw. The Cassell would have freaked out and taken the sack. It seems like he finally has his feet under him and he knows what's going on. He looks confident and his throws (generally) are hard, tight spirals ON TARGET. Only a couple of times yesterday did he throw his signature insanely overthrown pass to the middle. In fact, on one third and short conversion he threw a perfect fade type pass to Bowe. Yeah, his stats look good, but I'm more impressed with his dimeanor and confidence.

Also, I think the coaching staff has gotten more confidence in him. They are letting him use the play action more, and he is taking full advantage of it.

Well said! :thumb:

BigMeatballDave
11-29-2010, 08:19 AM
agree, if it were the Kansas City Cassels...

...but it's not, and it's totally unrealistic to to make this an individual sport.

IIRC, you once claimed he'd already peaked, or we win in spite of him and lose because of him, but that standard doesn't apply to other players.

My advice would be to get used to him, 'cause he's not going anywhere.This is a QB driven league. Matt's position IS the most important one on the field. So, while football is a team sport, the QB is the leader on the field.

I've said a lot of shit about Matt. I'm also a flake. :) My comments still stand until Cassel can do this on a consistent basis.

Bill Brasky
11-29-2010, 08:32 AM
At this point I think It's obvious he has the physical ability to make amazing plays, which i honestly wasn't sure about at the beginning of the season. But now it all come down to his mental toughness under pressure, and that is something that develops with experience. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't expect him to do well against san diego, for example. He has the ability, but the dolts game on their turf will show a lot about his resolve when the playoffs are on the line.

Chief Henry
11-29-2010, 08:33 AM
I think the improvement Cassell has shown is in his intangibles and goes beyond stats. For example, on the Richardson whiff/no block play, he dodged the would be sacker and made a strong accurate throw. The Cassell would have freaked out and taken the sack. It seems like he finally has his feet under him and he knows what's going on. He looks confident and his throws (generally) are hard, tight spirals ON TARGET. Only a couple of times yesterday did he throw his signature insanely overthrown pass to the middle. In fact, on one third and short conversion he threw a perfect fade type pass to Bowe. Yeah, his stats look good, but I'm more impressed with his dimeanor and confidence.Also, I think the coaching staff has gotten more confidence in him. They are letting him use the play action more, and he is taking full advantage of it.


I bashed Cassel after the LACK of Leadership he displayed after the Dungver late a few weeks back. Since then he has done a complete 180. I'm glad to eat crow on what I said about him. NOW, lets see him continue to do this down the stretch. Cassel has had a couple of very good games. Now he NEEDS to CONTINUE this in EVERY GAME. THEN EVERY SEASON.

Matt, I want you to be the QB Pioli thinks you can be. Lets see you perform
consistently.

Count Zarth
11-29-2010, 03:23 PM
you will never see your $10 from GoChiefs.......the biggest welcher

The Colts LOST.

Hootie owes me ten bucks.

And isn't paying up.

milkman
11-29-2010, 09:27 PM
My goalposts are exactly the same as they were following the loss in Oakland - get the Chiefs to the playoffs.

In order to do that, Cassel has to finish out beating up on crap teams (a win next week and we're 3-1 in the last 4) and then beat San Diego (most likely, barring a collapse on their part).

Have you guys forgotten Oakland already? We had a chance to solidify the division lead and Cassel shit the bed. Had we won that game the matchup with San Diego would not have been so huge, but now it looms incredibly large.

Cassel created this neck and neck division race, so he better go cross the finish line or his pretty stats will count for exactly jack shit.

Cassel didn't shit the bed against Oakland.

stevieray
11-29-2010, 09:31 PM
This is a QB driven league. Matt's position IS the most important one on the field. So, while football is a team sport, the QB is the leader on the field.

I've said a lot of shit about Matt. I'm also a flake. :) My comments still stand until Cassel can do this on a consistent basis.
QB is the leader of the offense....not the team.

Short Leash Hootie
11-29-2010, 09:37 PM
The Colts LOST.

Hootie owes me ten bucks.

And isn't paying up.

I won't pay up if you keep telling me I'm not paying up...I'll tell you that right now.

Paypal won't accept my main card for some reason, I have to wait until my transfer to my other account goes through...if you keep being a bitch about it I won't pay a dime of it...you owe how many people at the Mane? Something about never paying $50 to someone...no?

chiefzilla1501
11-29-2010, 09:39 PM
Cassel didn't shit the bed against Oakland.

Agreed.

Despite his production against Denver, I think he shit the bed against Denver. But Oakland? A lot of shit about an Overtime throw, nevermind that Cassel put the team in a position to win in regulation. Think that's unfair to be called out for that.

BushyTheBeaver
11-29-2010, 09:40 PM
He's improving as a quarterback and is capable of making good plays. He takes care of the ball well. Equally clear is that he's no Tom Brady. He'll never be an elite NFL QB. But that doesn't mean he can't be an effective one.

Count Zarth
11-29-2010, 09:42 PM
I cant believe the myth of Cassel in Oakland is still being perpetuated.

The only reason we scored a TD in that game was the refs.

He couldn't lead a drive at the end of regulation to tie the game (the refs gifted him with a possession from the 30-yard line), and then in overtime his inability to do just that reared it's ugly head.

DaneMcCloud
11-29-2010, 09:43 PM
QB is the leader of the offense....not the team.

Nonsense.

The quarterback is very often the leader of the team, whether it's a Matt Ryan, Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning or a John Elway, Joe Montana, Brett Favre, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Namath or Roger Staubach.

Very, very, very few defensive players have led teams to greatness.

The Quarterback often leads teams to greatness.

DaneMcCloud
11-29-2010, 09:46 PM
I cant believe the myth of Cassel in Oakland is still being perpetuated.

The only reason we scored a TD in that game was the refs.

He couldn't lead a drive at the end of regulation to tie the game (the refs gifted him with a possession from the 30-yard line), and then in overtime his inability to do just that reared it's ugly head.

And if the Special Teams hadn't allowed Jacoby Ford to break free, overtime wouldn't have happened.

Regardless, breakdowns in special teams and defense are the main reasons why the Chiefs lost in Oakland. The defense looked worn out and tired in the second half, so the outcome was hardly surprising.

Cassel's been a different QB since that game. To deny that is ridiculous.

stevieray
11-29-2010, 09:47 PM
Nonsense.

The quarterback is very often the leader of the team, whether it's a Matt Ryan, Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning or a John Elway, Joe Montana, Brett Favre, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Namath or Roger Staubach.

Very, very, very few defensive players have led teams to greatness.

The Quarterback often leads teams to greatness.

Whatever, Dane. Vrable isn't going to lead the O, just like Cassel isn't leading the D.

Count Zarth
11-29-2010, 09:49 PM
Regardless, breakdowns in special teams and defense are the main reasons why the Chiefs lost in Oakland.

Disagree.

The quarterback should be expected to lead scoring drives.

Cassel didn't do that in that game without the aid of the refs.

DaneMcCloud
11-29-2010, 09:50 PM
Whatever, Dane. Vrable isn't going to lead the O, just like Cassel isn't leading the D.


Whatever? Huh?

First off, I didn't mention the Chiefs. You made a ridiculous statement that I countered with facts.

Secondly, IF Matt Cassel grows into the role that was projected by Pioli and Haley (and he definitely showed signs this past weekend), he will most certainly be the leader of the team.

But go ahead and tell us that Tom Brady isn't the leader of the Patriots. I'm sure everyone will agree.

milkman
11-29-2010, 09:50 PM
I cant believe the myth of Cassel in Oakland is still being perpetuated.

The only reason we scored a TD in that game was the refs.

He couldn't lead a drive at the end of regulation to tie the game (the refs gifted him with a possession from the 30-yard line), and then in overtime his inability to do just that reared it's ugly head.

The Chiefs had the lead and the ball, regardless of how they came to be in the lead.

Cassel made a play that should have sealed a win if Bowe doesn't drop the pass.

Cassel made enough plays to win that game.

milkman
11-29-2010, 09:52 PM
Whatever, Dane. Vrable isn't going to lead the O, just like Cassel isn't leading the D.

So, Lawrence Taylor wasn't the leader of those Giants teams.

DaneMcCloud
11-29-2010, 09:52 PM
Disagree.

The quarterback should be expected to lead scoring drives.

Cassel didn't do that in that game without the aid of the refs.

I think it's ridiculous to expect the quarterback, whether it's Peyton Manning or Philip Rivers or Tom Brady, to consistently overcome the poor play of the defense.

The Chiefs should have won in Oakland but Matt Cassel does not deserve the "blame" for the loss.

That would be on the defense and special teams.

OnTheWarpath58
11-29-2010, 09:53 PM
And if the Special Teams hadn't allowed Jacoby Ford to break free, overtime wouldn't have happened.

Regardless, breakdowns in special teams and defense are the main reasons why the Chiefs lost in Oakland. The defense looked worn out and tired in the second half, so the outcome was hardly surprising.

Cassel's been a different QB since that game. To deny that is ridiculous.

And if Cassel hadn't thrown a pass into double coverage in the EZ that gets picked off, we get at least three more points and potentially never go to OT.

We can do this about nearly every play in the game to some degree.

milkman
11-29-2010, 09:53 PM
Disagree.

The quarterback should be expected to lead scoring drives.

Cassel didn't do that in that game without the aid of the refs.

Teams are helped by calls every week.

This is just a stupid argument.

chiefzilla1501
11-29-2010, 09:54 PM
I cant believe the myth of Cassel in Oakland is still being perpetuated.

The only reason we scored a TD in that game was the refs.

He couldn't lead a drive at the end of regulation to tie the game (the refs gifted him with a possession from the 30-yard line), and then in overtime his inability to do just that reared it's ugly head.

So he doesn't get a credit for throwing a perfect strike to Verran Tucker and a 20-yard strike to Bowe for the go-ahead score just because the ref gave them very good field position on both plays? The majority of our third down efficiency problems was due to our running game being unable to convert on third and shorts. Two others were caused by a ridiculous drop by Moeaki on a key third down and then Bowe dropping a catchable third down ball on a pass that should have sealed the game.

Cassel didn't have a terrific game per se. But he did more than enough to put the team in a position to win in spite of the defense and special teams completely shitting themselves and in spite of our running game doing absolutely nothing.

To say Cassel shit the bed against Oakland is a biased interpretation.

milkman
11-29-2010, 09:55 PM
And if Cassel hadn't thrown a pass into double coverage in the EZ that gets picked off, we get at least three more points and potentially never go to OT.

We can do this about nearly every play in the game to some degree.

That was either a piss poor play design, or someone ran the wrong route.

DaneMcCloud
11-29-2010, 09:56 PM
And if Cassel hadn't thrown a pass into double coverage in the EZ that gets picked off, we get at least three more points and potentially never go to OT.

We can do this about nearly every play in the game to some degree.

Yeah, absolutely. But the Chiefs didn't lose that game because Cassel threw one bad pass.

The Chiefs lost due to a special teams failure (i.e., all eleven guys on the field) and because the defense, especially Hali, Vrabel, Smith and Edwards, were worn out by the end of the 4th quarter.

Further, Brandon Flowers played an absolutely horrific game and was constantly beat by Jacoby Ford. So if you're going to blame ONE player, Flowers is your man.

OnTheWarpath58
11-29-2010, 09:57 PM
So he doesn't get a credit for throwing a perfect strike to Verran Tucker and a 20-yard strike to Bowe for the go-ahead score just because the ref gave them very good field position on both plays? The majority of our third down efficiency problems was due to our running game being unable to convert on third and shorts. Two others were caused by a ridiculous drop by Moeaki on a key third down and then Bowe dropping a catchable third down ball on a pass that should have sealed the game.

Cassel didn't have a terrific game per se. But he did more than enough to put the team in a position to win in spite of the defense and special teams completely shitting themselves and in spite of our running game doing absolutely nothing.

To say Cassel shit the bed against Oakland is a biased interpretation.

These.

He played a pretty average game, IMO.

Could have done without a INT in the red zone.

Good chance we're not having this conversation if not for that play and a few others.

OnTheWarpath58
11-29-2010, 09:57 PM
That was either a piss poor play design, or someone ran the wrong route.

Regardless, it's a poor decision.

OnTheWarpath58
11-29-2010, 09:58 PM
Yeah, absolutely. But the Chiefs didn't lose that game because Cassel threw one bad pass.

The Chiefs lost due to a special teams failure (i.e., all eleven guys on the field) and because the defense, especially Hali, Vrabel, Smith and Edwards, were worn out by the end of the 4th quarter.

Further, Brandon Flowers played an absolutely horrific game and was constantly beat by Jacoby Ford. So if you're going to blame ONE player, Flowers is your man.

I don't think anyone is blaming Cassel solely for the loss.

But to say he didn't play a part in it is incorrect as well.

Count Zarth
11-29-2010, 09:59 PM
I think it's ridiculous to expect the quarterback, whether it's Peyton Manning or Philip Rivers or Tom Brady, to consistently overcome the poor play of the defense.

The Chiefs should have won in Oakland but Matt Cassel does not deserve the "blame" for the loss.

That would be on the defense and special teams.

I'm not blaming him for the loss as much as I am the fact he didn't go win it.

If Cassel had played well in that game we would have been up big at halftime instead of 10-0.

And he choked in overtime. Even if the rest of the team had allowed Oakland to come back, why couldn't he put a stop to it?

stevieray
11-29-2010, 09:59 PM
Whatever? Huh?

First off, I didn't mention the Chiefs. You made a ridiculous statement that I countered with facts.

Secondly, IF Matt Cassel grows into the role that was projected by Pioli and Haley (and he definitely showed signs this past weekend), he will most certainly be the leader of the team.

But go ahead and tell us that Tom Brady isn't the leader of the Patriots. I'm sure everyone will agree.


ridiculous ..in your opinion...doesn't make it fact.

The leader of this team. is. Todd. Haley.

Where is Peyton Manning when their defense is on the field? leading them?

That said, I was replying to BCD..not interested in squabbling with you after having a fantastic weekend.

OnTheWarpath58
11-29-2010, 10:00 PM
FWIW, I think that if Cassel had played the the way he's played the past two weeks in the Oakland game, we win going away even with ST and defensive blunders.

chiefzilla1501
11-29-2010, 10:01 PM
And if Cassel hadn't thrown a pass into double coverage in the EZ that gets picked off, we get at least three more points and potentially never go to OT.

We can do this about nearly every play in the game to some degree.

QBs are going to throw INTs. They're going to make mistakes. You have to look for whether they make more mistakes than usual or if they make plays that put you in a position to win the game. Cassel only threw one INT, but also threw for 216 yards in a game where our running game was inefficient. He also gave the Chiefs a 4th quarter lead with a go-ahead TD and on the last possession threw a catchable pass to Bowe that should have sealed the win.

Special teams rarely give up TDs. Running games usually aren't that inefficient on third and short. And when we're talking about 1 play that specifically could win the game, you don't drop that pass. For one, no doubt he didn't "shit the bed" as GC is suggesting. But for another, he's long down the list of goats for that game.

Sure-Oz
11-29-2010, 10:02 PM
I would like to see more leadership from Cassel, he's been playing real well lately and looks confident. Hope he keeps it up, also loved how he tried to block for Charles..

Doesn't look like a deer in headlights like he was earlier

stevieray
11-29-2010, 10:04 PM
So, Lawrence Taylor wasn't the leader of those Giants teams.

one of many, i imagine...like most teams.

each phase of the team needs players to stand up and lead.

OnTheWarpath58
11-29-2010, 10:05 PM
QBs are going to throw INTs. They're going to make mistakes. You have to look for whether they make more mistakes than usual or if they make plays that put you in a position to win the game. Cassel only threw one INT, but also threw for 216 yards in a game where our running game was inefficient. He also gave the Chiefs a 4th quarter lead with a go-ahead TD and on the last possession threw a catchable pass to Bowe that should have sealed the win.

Special teams rarely give up TDs. Running games usually aren't that inefficient on third and short. And when we're talking about 1 play that specifically could win the game, you don't drop that pass. For one, no doubt he didn't "shit the bed" as GC is suggesting. But for another, he's long down the list of goats for that game.

No argument that QB's will make mistakes.

Making one in that situation, taking points off the board with a boneheaded decision isn't your run-of-the-mill mistake. It's a biggie.

And I'm sorry, but throwing for 216 yards isn't anything special - especially when there's no running game. 216 isn't going to get it done against anyone in that situation, IMO.

We can agree on this: He wasn't nearly as bad as GC is claiming.

My stance is that he wasn't nearly as good as others are claiming.

Count Zarth
11-29-2010, 10:05 PM
So he doesn't get a credit for throwing a perfect strike to Verran Tucker and a 20-yard strike to Bowe for the go-ahead score just because the ref gave them very good field position on both plays? The majority of our third down efficiency problems was due to our running game being unable to convert on third and shorts. Two others were caused by a ridiculous drop by Moeaki on a key third down and then Bowe dropping a catchable third down ball on a pass that should have sealed the game.

Cassel didn't have a terrific game per se. But he did more than enough to put the team in a position to win in spite of the defense and special teams completely shitting themselves and in spite of our running game doing absolutely nothing.

To say Cassel shit the bed against Oakland is a biased interpretation.

It's not biased.

The fact is, the running game took the afternoon off and we couldn't finish drives without help from the refs.

And in overtime, that chicken came home to roost.

He made a couple of nice throws but he has to do a lot more than that.

stevieray
11-29-2010, 10:07 PM
FWIW, I think that if Cassel had played the the way he's played the past two weeks in the Oakland game, we win going away even with ST and defensive blunders.

he put the winning throw in bowes hands, but agree, it's not one guy..the game wouldn't have it any other way...every player has the chance to shine or fail, in ordinary or pressure sitiuations.

chiefzilla1501
11-29-2010, 10:08 PM
I'm not blaming him for the loss as much as I am the fact he didn't go win it.

If Cassel had played well in that game we would have been up big at halftime instead of 10-0.

And he choked in overtime. Even if the rest of the team had allowed Oakland to come back, why couldn't he put a stop to it?

This proves that your bias makes you see things the way you want to see it.

The Chiefs had 8 drives in the first half.
-On 3 drives, the Chiefs set up a 3rd and short and got NOTHING on the run game. I guess that's Cassel's fault for not handing it off right
-On 1 drive, Moeaki dropped a ball that was literally in between his hands. I guess that's Cassel's fault for not dropping the pass
-On 1 drive, a holding penalty set up a 1st and 20. We ran the ball 2 out of 3 of those downs including 3rd and 15. And then we left 3 points on the board because Studebaker held on the field goal. That drive is clearly on Cassel for not having the leadership to direct his team to not hold, leading to 20 yards in key penalties that forced a field goal miss

Your basis for Cassel's horrible first half is based on 2 drives where he didn't convert on 3rd down and 1 drive where he threw an INT.

Count Zarth
11-29-2010, 10:12 PM
Actually, zilla, to boil it down to those plays is deceiving.

Those plays weren't Cassel's fault. But it's Cassel's fault that he didn't do enough on the other plays to lead the team down the field.

When the running game isn't working the quarterback has to take over and he didn't do that.

And by the way:

We ran the ball 2 out of 3 of those downs including 3rd and 15.

That's because they didn't trust Cassel to go win the game. And sure enough, in overtime, he couldn't...

DaneMcCloud
11-29-2010, 10:13 PM
These.

He played a pretty average game, IMO.

Could have done without a INT in the red zone.

Good chance we're not having this conversation if not for that play and a few others.

On the converse, we're not having this conversation if the Special Teams hadn't given up a touchdown.

:D

The special teams were excellent last year but this year, they've definitely had their share of issues. I'm certainly not placing the blame on Steve Hoffman but I do think that they're missing key personnel from last year in Richardson, Belcher, McGraw and others that were fresh for special teams and not starting.

It all goes back to a lack of depth on the roster, which I'm sure will be addressed in the next two offseasons.

chiefzilla1501
11-29-2010, 10:15 PM
No argument that QB's will make mistakes.

Making one in that situation, taking points off the board with a boneheaded decision isn't your run-of-the-mill mistake. It's a biggie.

And I'm sorry, but throwing for 216 yards isn't anything special - especially when there's no running game. 216 isn't going to get it done against anyone in that situation, IMO.

We can agree on this: He wasn't nearly as bad as GC is claiming.

My stance is that he wasn't nearly as good as others are claiming.

While I agree that INTs can be damning, the average QB throws about 1 per game and most of them either kill a scoring drive or put the opposing team in scoring range. Bad mistake, but picking on that one mistake is being overly critical.

Cassel did more than enough to win the game. That's despite the defense not protecting the lead. That's despite a horrendous third down efficiency by our running game on 3rd and short. That's despite two ENORMOUS dropped passes on third downs. That's despite horrendous special teams play that led to a 17-point swing (7 for the TD we gave up to Jacoby Ford, 7 for the Arenas punt return TD called back for a BS penalty, 3 for Studebaker's hold which pushed our FG back 10 yards and led to a miss).

That's a game where our run game, special teams, and defense were piss poor and we committed 100 yards worth of penalties. Despite that, Cassel did enough to set up a pass in the final Chiefs' drive which should have won the game for the Chiefs in regulation.

chiefzilla1501
11-29-2010, 10:18 PM
Actually, zilla, to boil it down to those plays is deceiving.

Those plays weren't Cassel's fault. But it's Cassel's fault that he didn't do enough on the other plays to lead the team down the field.

When the running game isn't working the quarterback has to take over and he didn't do that.

And by the way:



That's because they didn't trust Cassel to go win the game. And sure enough, in overtime, he couldn't...

Total BS. Setting up a 3rd and 1 is doing your job just fine--the Chiefs did that on 3/8 drives and whiffed on all three conversions because of the running game. Putting the ball into Moeaki's hands (only to lead to a drop) on third down is doing your job completely. Blaming a QB for two missed drives and one drive where we started at 1st and 20 is being unreasonable.

stevieray
11-29-2010, 10:21 PM
When the running game isn't working the quarterback has to take over and he didn't do that.



there's no guarantee that your passing game will work, or even be the same from week to week...it's why standings change throughout the season. how many yards did Rivers throw for against us? and they lost. how many yards did he throw for last night?

DaneMcCloud
11-29-2010, 10:22 PM
I'm not blaming him for the loss as much as I am the fact he didn't go win it.

If Cassel had played well in that game we would have been up big at halftime instead of 10-0.

And he choked in overtime. Even if the rest of the team had allowed Oakland to come back, why couldn't he put a stop to it?

While I understand exactly where you're coming from, I don't necessarily agree that it should be his job exclusively, especially at that point in time, to will the Chiefs to a win.

The guy has grown this year, probably exponentially. Whether it's because he's finally played three years in a row after sitting on the bench for seven years prior or it's Charlie Weis or it's just his time, I'm beginning to think that he wouldn't make the same mistakes in Week 13 as he did in Week 9.

Time will tell.

stevieray
11-29-2010, 10:31 PM
While I understand exactly where you're coming from, I don't necessarily agree that it should be his job exclusively, especially at that point in time, to will the Chiefs to a win.

The guy has grown this year, probably exponentially. Whether it's because he's finally played three years in a row after sitting on the bench for seven years prior or it's Charlie Weis or it's just his time, I'm beginning to think that he wouldn't make the same mistakes in Week 13 as he did in Week 9.

Time will tell.

I think he's ahead of schedule....as is the team...and that's coaching.

I still believe they expected to be where they wanted by year three....they knew they were going young and he was gonna grow with this team...

He and Bowe are getting dangerous. I've heard the offseason with fitz was the turning point for Bowe, and the harvest is in full bloom. he was trying make every catch a highlight reel, and jumping when he didn't need to, losing concentration with his hands, and losing his power by leaving the ground...notice now he's catching the ball in stride and running strong in YAC?

it sure is fun to watch.

MadMax
11-29-2010, 10:48 PM
I think he's ahead of schedule....as is the team...and that's coaching.

I still believe they expected to be where they wanted by year three....they knew they were going young and he was gonna grow with this team...

He and Bowe are getting dangerous. I've heard the offseason with fitz was the turning point for Bowe, and the harvest is in full bloom. he was trying make every catch a highlight reel, and jumping when he didn't need to, losing concentration with his hands, and losing his power by leaving the ground...notice now he's catching the ball in stride and running strong in YAC?

it sure is fun to watch.




Yes it is Stevie, It is a very pleasant surprise to me :) I'm havin fun again :)

stevieray
11-29-2010, 10:52 PM
Yes it is Stevie, It is a very pleasant surprise to me :) I'm havin fun again :)

ya, last road game was the indy playoff. so this was sweet...

chiefsnorth
11-29-2010, 11:04 PM
I think Cassel can be like Trent Green, a guy who is above average and will really elevate when surrounding talent allows.

Now that guys are getting open a bit, the protection has been good, he is putting the ball on target and not looking so jittery in the pocket.

Cassel also needed to be coached and it looks like someone has finally done some of it.
Posted via Mobile Device

Short Leash Hootie
11-29-2010, 11:20 PM
is anyone ready for this dipshit OTWP to take another hiatus?

JFC

BigMeatballDave
11-29-2010, 11:22 PM
is anyone ready for this dipshit OTWP to take another hiatus?

JFCHey, you were supposed to leave 3 yrs ago. What happened to that? :)

Short Leash Hootie
11-29-2010, 11:23 PM
Hey, you were supposed to leave 3 yrs ago. What happened to that? :)

I'LL START LIKING CASSEL WHEN THE CHIEFS REFUSE TO RUN THE BALL AND HE WILLS US TO VICTORY WITH NO OFFENSIVE LINEMAN!

THAT'S WHAT IT WILL TAKE!

patteeu
11-30-2010, 06:52 AM
I agree with you. But I am going to say the same thing that Baby Lee told you earlier today (and is 100% correct about):

The stats themselves are indicative of nothing. They were relatively easy stats picked up in garbage time. People were pointing to Cassel's statistical performance in that game as proof that he was good. That is absolutely a false connection to make.

All of the confidence and rhythm and connections with Bowe, etc. that you argue were made in that garbage time? Yes, that's valuable, and it means that the process of acquiring those stats was worth it.

TL;DR? The Denver stats themselves are not evidence of Cassel being a QB. The stats he put up are worthless. What has worth is the rhythm and confidence gained. There is a difference between the two.

Yeah, that must be what the Cassel haters were talking about when they were dismissing Cassel's Denver performance as irrelevant to the argument about whether Cassel was pure ass or whether he had actually been showing some promise. :shake:

Seriously, your attempt to save face with this semantic/technical argument is embarrassing. The Guardian was right after that game and Cassel's naysayers were wrong, garbage time or not. You can't completely separate stats from performance. The real question is whether or not you can use those stats to reach the right conclusion. The Guardian did. Those who continued to see Cassel as a conclusively failed experiment didn't.

Reaper16
11-30-2010, 07:22 AM
Yeah, that must be what the Cassel haters were talking about when they were dismissing Cassel's Denver performance as irrelevant to the argument about whether Cassel was pure ass or whether he had actually been showing some promise. :shake:

Seriously, your attempt to save face with this semantic/technical argument is embarrassing. The Guardian was right after that game and Cassel's naysayers were wrong, garbage time or not. You can't completely separate stats from performance. The real question is whether or not you can use those stats to reach the right conclusion. The Guardian did. Those who continued to see Cassel as a conclusively failed experiment didn't.
Please start making some goddamned sense before you start making assessments of what is embarrassing or not. This post of yours either doesn't address anything I said, or it was meant for someone else.

MahiMike
11-30-2010, 07:25 AM
He's shown that he's more than capable when given enough time to throw. I don't see him beating the Steelers or the Ravens but other than that, the sky's the limit.

Chiefnj2
11-30-2010, 07:40 AM
Just because the Broncos had a big lead and played a bend but don't break doesn't mean that all of Cassel's yards were garbage. The Broncos D didn't want to give up those TDs. In those situations QB's often throw picks and get sacked up the ass. Cassel didn't turn the ball over and got rid of the ball effectively.

Whatever, there is a contingent that will never give Cassel, Pioli and Haley any credit because Sanchez is not a Chief.

patteeu
11-30-2010, 07:40 AM
Please start making some goddamned sense before you start making assessments of what is embarrassing or not. This post of yours either doesn't address anything I said, or it was meant for someone else.

Don't play dumb.

BigMeatballDave
11-30-2010, 07:45 AM
Yeah, that must be what the Cassel haters were talking about when they were dismissing Cassel's Denver performance as irrelevant to the argument about whether Cassel was pure ass or whether he had actually been showing some promise. :shake:

Seriously, your attempt to save face with this semantic/technical argument is embarrassing. The Guardian was right after that game and Cassel's naysayers were wrong, garbage time or not. You can't completely separate stats from performance. The real question is whether or not you can use those stats to reach the right conclusion. The Guardian did. Those who continued to see Cassel as a conclusively failed experiment didn't.Awesome. So we're STILL talking about garbage time stats from 3 weeks ago? :rolleyes:

patteeu
11-30-2010, 07:46 AM
Awesome. So we're STILL talking about garbage time stats from 3 weeks ago? :rolleyes:

I think we're talking about how Cassel has improved this year and you were one of the last to notice.

BigMeatballDave
11-30-2010, 07:53 AM
I think we're talking about how Cassel has improved this year and you were one of the last to notice.Please. :rolleyes: I've noticed. We all have. The difference is, you and others are ready to crown him after a 400+ yard performance. In a LOSS, no less.

BigMeatballDave
11-30-2010, 07:55 AM
Just because the Broncos had a big lead and played a bend but don't break doesn't mean that all of Cassel's yards were garbage. The Broncos D didn't want to give up those TDs. In those situations QB's often throw picks and get sacked up the ass. Cassel didn't turn the ball over and got rid of the ball effectively.

Whatever, there is a contingent that will never give Cassel, Pioli and Haley any credit because Sanchez is not a Chief.Oh, FFS :facepalm:

Saul Good
11-30-2010, 07:58 AM
Yes it is Stevie, It is a very pleasant surprise to me :) I'm havin fun again :)

You must be having fun. If the Chiefs win another game, you're going to suck your own dick.

loochy
11-30-2010, 08:02 AM
The stats from the Broncos game are obviously garbage time stats - plan and simple.

However, I really do believe that Cassel gained confidence and chemistry during that game and it allowed him to get some major "practice reps" against a real live defense after the defense already blew the game. That confidence gained is NOT garbage.

loochy
11-30-2010, 08:03 AM
I'LL START LIKING CASSEL WHEN THE CHIEFS REFUSE TO RUN THE BALL AND HE WILLS US TO VICTORY WITH NO OFFENSIVE LINEMAN!

THAT'S WHAT IT WILL TAKE!

Also this.

patteeu
11-30-2010, 08:04 AM
Please. :rolleyes: I've noticed. We all have. The difference is, you and others are ready to crown him after a 400+ yard performance. In a LOSS, no less.

One of the last to notice. That's you. That's also the difference.

Saul Good
11-30-2010, 08:05 AM
Just because the Broncos had a big lead and played a bend but don't break doesn't mean that all of Cassel's yards were garbage. The Broncos D didn't want to give up those TDs. In those situations QB's often throw picks and get sacked up the ass. Cassel didn't turn the ball over and got rid of the ball effectively.

Whatever, there is a contingent that will never give Cassel, Pioli and Haley any credit because Sanchez is not a Chief.
Exactly. If he had thrown 3 INTs and 1 TD, you could make the case that the yards were garbage because the prevent did exactly what it was supposed to do. Throwing 4 TDs and no INTs against a defense designed to prevent TDs and force turnovers was a strong performance.

Cassel's play since then has been further proof that those numbers were the result of improved play rather than indifference on the part of the Broncos.

BigMeatballDave
11-30-2010, 08:06 AM
The stats from the Broncos game are obviously garbage time stats - plan and simple.

However, I really do believe that Cassel gained confidence and chemistry during that game and it allowed him to get some major "practice reps" against a real live defense after the defense already blew the game. That confidence gained is NOT garbage.This. After watching the last 2 games, I could not agree more. Something clicked in Denver.

BigMeatballDave
11-30-2010, 08:07 AM
One of the last to notice. That's you. That's also the difference.ROFL

Chiefnj2
11-30-2010, 08:09 AM
Exactly. If he had thrown 3 INTs and 1 TD, you could make the case that the yards were garbage because the prevent did exactly what it was supposed to do. Throwing 4 TDs and no INTs against a defense designed to prevent TDs and force turnovers was a strong performance.

Cassel's play since then has been further proof that those numbers were the result of improved play rather than indifference on the part of the Broncos.

The perceived improved play is also a result, IMO, of Weis opening things up and giving Cassel and the receivers more freedom. No way in hell they are drawing up plays in the dirt the first 6 games this year.

To me it's pretty clear that Cassel developed some horrible habits last year that Weis wanted to break the first half of this season. He broke them by going back to the basics - good footwork, safer passes, limited reads, get rid of the ball and avoid sacks and turnovers. Once Cassel demonstrated that ability, he's slowly been given more freedom and it seems to be paying off, for now.

Reaper16
11-30-2010, 08:12 AM
The stats from the Broncos game are obviously garbage time stats - plan and simple.

However, I really do believe that Cassel gained confidence and chemistry during that game and it allowed him to get some major "practice reps" against a real live defense after the defense already blew the game. That confidence gained is NOT garbage.
Watch out -- Patteeu will pretend to refute you but not actually do it.

Saul Good
11-30-2010, 08:21 AM
Watch out -- Patteeu will pretend to refute you but not actually do it.

Are all stats against a prevent defense garbage?
Did the Broncos play 3 quarters of prevent?

I admire the ability of people to dig in their heels despite all evidence to the contrary. "He didn't play well in the game where he had 470 yards, 4 TDs, and no INTs. He still sucked. It's just a coincidence that he followed that up with two of the best games of his career."

Sweet Daddy Hate
11-30-2010, 08:22 AM
Oh FFS. :facepalm:

Dude, the fucking cuntery from these fucks is just off the fucking charts after a road win.

It's Cunt Planet. Just give up, sit back, and wait for them to get bitch-slapped back down to earth when the regular season is over.

patteeu
11-30-2010, 08:23 AM
Watch out -- Patteeu will pretend to refute you but not actually do it.

When you ignore stats simply because the score of a game was lopsided (along with all the defensive adjustment that that entails), you miss the opportunity to gain insight from them. It's one of the reasons you and BCD were among the last to recognize Matt Cassel's improvement this year. Trying to mask that failure with a semantic argument based on a definition of "garbage time" instead of admitting that stats during garbage time still have meaning even if it's not the same meaning they'd have in a different context is what leads me to feel embarrassment for you.

philfree
11-30-2010, 08:24 AM
Just because the Broncos had a big lead and played a bend but don't break doesn't mean that all of Cassel's yards were garbage. The Broncos D didn't want to give up those TDs. In those situations QB's often throw picks and get sacked up the ass. Cassel didn't turn the ball over and got rid of the ball effectively.

Whatever, there is a contingent that will never give Cassel, Pioli and Haley any credit because Sanchez is not a Chief.

Yeah aftrer the Chiefs win the Superbowl in a year or so I can her that contingent mutter something like." If we had Sanchex our window would be 5 years longer!"


PhilFree:arrow:

Saul Good
11-30-2010, 08:26 AM
When ROR agrees with you, its time to re-evaluate your position.

Sweet Daddy Hate
11-30-2010, 08:27 AM
When ROR agrees with you, its time to re-evaluate your position.

When Saul opens his myopic cunt-hole, the free-thinking world weeps.

patteeu
11-30-2010, 08:27 AM
Dude, the ****ing ****ery from these ****s is just off the ****ing charts after a road win.

It's **** Planet. Just give up, sit back, and wait for them to get bitch-slapped back down to earth when the regular season is over.

Matt Cassel will most likely have another bad game or two this year, but the damage has already been done to the reputation of those who wrote him off as having reached his peak as an unreliable game manager.

Saul Good
11-30-2010, 08:31 AM
When Saul opens his myopic ****-hole, the free-thinking world weeps.

Give me a specific example of something you have been right about.

I know that you flat out said that you know more about football than Pioli. I don't think knowing that Dan Saleamua played on the O-line or that QBs should be judged on how they throw the 45 yard out qualifies, though.

Sweet Daddy Hate
11-30-2010, 08:34 AM
Matt Cassel will most likely have another bad game or two this year, but the damage has already been done to the reputation of those who wrote him off as having reached his peak as an unreliable game manager.

Has it really? Because unless he can play at the same level against the Big Boys and not soft schedule garbage, I'd say "unreliable game manager" is still VERY MUCH on the table.

But I'm a pessimistic hater. Hate! Hate! Hate! LMAO

Sweet Daddy Hate
11-30-2010, 08:35 AM
Give me a specific example of something you have been right about.

I know that you flat out said that you know more about football than Pioli. I don't think knowing that Dan Saleamua played on the O-line or that QBs should be judged on how they throw the 45 yard out qualifies, though.

Just enjoy your moment, Saul. I'm actually about sick of this shit.