Ideally you want your franchise QB to be young and groom him at a young age.. but Cassel isn't just going to skip that phase because hes 27. Some players are late bloomers, that doesn't mean they can't be anything special. Maybe hes just our answer at QB for five-ten years instead of ten-fifteen, oh well.

With this shit team how much better do you expect him to get? Name me any qb ever who got a whole lot done with such a bad team and please don't be stupid and try to say John Elway.

I think you guys are in some kind of denial how bad this team is. Its like, if you put it on all on the qb it gives you some hope.

The Chiefs are an awful football team. And if Pioli doesn't get them to .500 by the end of 2010 its on him.
Posted via Mobile Device

Sure they can win games. About 5. Because football isn't a one man sport.
Posted via Mobile Device

Seriously. Stop.

The 80s-early 90s Broncos were largely comprised of horse shit teams, but that's beside the point.

It's the ultimate team sport, and Cassel plays the key position. He must be a prime mover, not just another part.

What do I expect? A hell of a lot more than what he's shown, which has been limited at best.

And this team will not be .500 by the end of next season, so I think you're setting yourself up for disappointment. But, incidentally, who is responsible for the construction of the current roster?

You seriously have no idea how bad your football team is. They are like an expansion team. And you expect a qb to single handidly make them, what, 8-8??
Posted via Mobile Device

I ask again; what was the Casshole sales-pitch against drafting a rookie?

You're preaching to the choir. Few people have complained about the supporting cast and the shitty situation Cassel has had to deal with than I have.

But in Tom Brady, you're talking about a quarterback who takes 20-30 sacks less behind the same exact o-line as Cassel, AND was a pro bowl, Super Bowl QB throwing to receivers like Jabar Gaffney and Reche Caldwell. You're talking about a QB like Big Ben, who takes the biggest beating of any QB in the league and has thrived despite an o-line that gives up 45+ sacks. And you're talking about Peyton Manning, the best QB in the game who runs his own offense and gets rid of the ball and recognizes blitzes better than any QB in the game. You say they could only win 5 games all season. All three of those QBs would have easily beat Oakland, Washington, Dallas, and Jacksonville with our supporting cast.

I like Cassel and am willing to wait. But when you undermine the credibility of three QBs that are hands down the best in the game, you're going 100 steps too far.

Let me guess, since you expected a Super Bowl this year I suppose you think its 100 percent Pioli. Yeah, it was Pioli who made all those draft picks the last 10 years. No, I'm not thrilled with his not addressing the offense more. But you have to give the GM at least a couple of years for Petes sake. But did you take in what I said, if they aren't .500 by the end of next season then its fair to get all over the guy.
Posted via Mobile Device

I don't know, I wasn't part of that. I was going solely from what I saw last year and what I've seen this year the rare occassions his dumbass coach let him air it out.
Posted via Mobile Device

Fine. Its all Cassels fault for not being Peyton Manning. If he was Peyton Manning, which he should be for making all that money, the Chiefs would be a playoff team. Its all Matt Cassels fault. There. I'm an idiot Chiefs fan now.
Posted via Mobile Device

Good lord man, really? This is what you throw back to this board as answers?

Christ, you're the dumbass that keeps saying Peyton Manning couldn't win more than 5 games with the Chiefs. Stop skirting around your idiotic Chiefs comment.

As much as you're on this board, I'm not sure how you're still making these types of statements.

Feel free to hang out exclusively with your ultra-evolved, highly football-intelligent Patriot fans.