ChiefsPlanet
Page 8 of 15 « First 4567 8 9101112 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Football 11 QB's under the gun in '12 (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=262753)

htismaqe 08-23-2012 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 8845134)
Cassel is not taking us to the Super Bowl. We know that with some degree of certainty because there is a mountain of playing time and evidence that indicates that he has flaws that he still not yet corrected.

Stanzi has a lot of unknown about him. Because he has the unknown, we don't know what his ceiling is. And it's pretty damn ridiculous that people have decided his ceiling before he has taken any meaningful starting snaps with this team.

You have a guy with no shot at a Super Bowl (Cassel) vs. a guy who has a longshot chance at one (Stanzi). This isn't a hard argument.

But by all means, enjoy celebrating another 9-7 season.
Again, suggesting that Cassel has NO chance, when history suggests otherwise, isn't being objective.

At all.

If Stanzi or Quinn have "a chance" so does Cassel. You know why? Because NONE of them are going to win it by themselves.

L.A. Chieffan 08-23-2012 04:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 8845134)
Cassel is not taking us to the Super Bowl. We know that with some degree of certainty because there is a mountain of playing time and evidence that indicates that he has flaws that he still not yet corrected.

Stanzi has a lot of unknown about him. Because he has the unknown, we don't know what his ceiling is. And it's pretty damn ridiculous that people have decided his ceiling before he has taken any meaningful starting snaps with this team.

You have a guy with no shot at a Super Bowl (Cassel) vs. a guy who has a longshot chance at one (Stanzi). This isn't a hard argument.

But by all means, enjoy celebrating another 9-7 season.
If Matt Hasselbeck and Rex Grossman can do it, Cassell can do it.

chiefzilla1501 08-23-2012 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 8845137)
Stanzi has a lot known about him. We know he's not ready. Keep on pimpin that #3 spot.
Eli Manning and Philip Rivers looked a hell of a lot rougher than Stanzi did at this point in his career. JFC. This is why we'll never develop a QB. If we're willing to accept a mediocre QB instead of taking a risk on a developmental one.

It's a different story if you talked about a mediocre QB with upside. We're not. We're talking about a mediocre QB with the upside to be above-mediocre.

jd1020 08-23-2012 04:03 PM
****ing Alex Smith should have been in the SB and that was just last year.

ShortRoundChief 08-23-2012 04:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 8845134)
Cassel is not taking us to the Super Bowl. We know that with some degree of certainty because there is a mountain of playing time and evidence that indicates that he has flaws that he still not yet corrected.

Stanzi has a lot of unknown about him. Because he has the unknown, we don't know what his ceiling is. And it's pretty damn ridiculous that people have decided his ceiling before he has taken any meaningful starting snaps with this team.

You have a guy with no shot at a Super Bowl (Cassel) vs. a guy who has a longshot chance at one (Stanzi). This isn't a hard argument.

But by all means, enjoy celebrating another 9-7 season.
Everything I needed to know about Stanzi I found out already. He isn't the answer and, quite frankly, the only attraction to him is in his unknowns. However, what I do know is that he is very much not ready, if he will ever be.

jd1020 08-23-2012 04:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 8845144)
Eli Manning and Philip Rivers looked a hell of a lot rougher than Stanzi did at this point in his career. JFC. This is why we'll never develop a QB. If we're willing to accept a mediocre QB instead of taking a risk on a developmental one.

It's a different story if you talked about a mediocre QB with upside. We're not. We're talking about a mediocre QB with the upside to be above-mediocre.
Oh boy! Now we are comparing 2 QB's who were THE guys and were pegged as franchise QB's to some 5th rounder from Iowa.

chiefzilla1501 08-23-2012 04:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 8845138)
Again, suggesting that Cassel has NO chance, when history suggests otherwise, isn't being objective.

At all.

If Stanzi or Quinn have "a chance" so does Cassel. You know why? Because NONE of them are going to win it by themselves.
Obviously I'm being facetious.

But the standard I've always set isn't whether Cassel can take you to the Super Bowl. It's whether an average QB could do the same thing as Cassel in that same scenario. That's the problem. At this point, the bar isn't for Stanzi to be Eli Manning. The bar is that with a half a season, he can be better than Cassel. That's not unreasonable in the least.

Reerun_KC 08-23-2012 04:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by notorious (Post 8845129)
I might stop reading threads about QB's until Cassel is gone. It's the same shit over and over.

Cassel sucks, and has ruined a pretty good team.
This times 100000000000000000000

ChiefsCountry 08-23-2012 04:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 8845138)
Again, suggesting that Cassel has NO chance, when history suggests otherwise, isn't being objective.

At all.

If Stanzi or Quinn have "a chance" so does Cassel. You know why? Because NONE of them are going to win it by themselves.
History says a 7th round pick ins't going to win a Super Bowl.

htismaqe 08-23-2012 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 8845144)
Eli Manning and Philip Rivers looked a hell of a lot rougher than Stanzi did at this point in his career. JFC. This is why we'll never develop a QB. If we're willing to accept a mediocre QB instead of taking a risk on a developmental one.

It's a different story if you talked about a mediocre QB with upside. We're not. We're talking about a mediocre QB with the upside to be above-mediocre.
Dude, I am an Iowa fan. Stanzi is one of the best QBs to ever play there.

Comparing him to Eli Manning is flat laughable.

Reerun_KC 08-23-2012 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 8845138)
Again, suggesting that Cassel has NO chance, when history suggests otherwise, isn't being objective.

At all.

If Stanzi or Quinn have "a chance" so does Cassel. You know why? Because NONE of them are going to win it by themselves.
Introducing logic into a Cassel discussion is like sand papering a bobcats ass in a phone booth...

The end result isnt what you'd hoped for.

chiefzilla1501 08-23-2012 04:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 8845148)
Oh boy! Now we are comparing 2 QB's who were THE guys and were pegged as franchise QB's to some 5th rounder from Iowa.
I'm talking about the idea that people "know what we have already."

Bull-****ing-shit. If Rivers and Eli, two elite prospects, are going to struggle embarrassingly in their first snaps as a pro, then why should we give up on Stanzi if he struggles too.

The difference is, I'm saying I don't know what we have in Stanzi. He could be really bad. And I acknowledge and always have acknowledged that he's a longshot.

jd1020 08-23-2012 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 8845157)
I'm talking about the idea that people "know what we have already."

Bull-****ing-shit. If Rivers and Eli, two elite prospects, are going to struggle embarrassingly in their first snaps as a pro, then why should we give up on Stanzi if he struggles too.

The difference is, I'm saying I don't know what we have in Stanzi. He could be really bad. And I acknowledge and always have acknowledged that he's a longshot.
Because Stanzi was selected in the 5th ****ing round and wasn't an elite prospect. There's a huge difference. If you can't see the difference between the #1 pick and a 5th round pick then you are a ****ing moron.

Stanzi has to earn his shot on the field and he hasn't earned shit but the back seat.

htismaqe 08-23-2012 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 8845149)
Obviously I'm being facetious.

But the standard I've always set isn't whether Cassel can take you to the Super Bowl. It's whether an average QB could do the same thing as Cassel in that same scenario. That's the problem. At this point, the bar isn't for Stanzi to be Eli Manning. The bar is that with a half a season, he can be better than Cassel. That's not unreasonable in the least.
I can say with a reasonable amount of certainty that Stanzi will never be better than Cassel, if for no other reason that he's not ever going to earn the right to play.

This is a conservative front office and staff when it comes to QB. He's not ever going to look like Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning. So far, he hasn't even looked like Cassel.

buddha 08-23-2012 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 8845148)
Oh boy! Now we are comparing 2 QB's who were THE guys and were pegged as franchise QB's to some 5th rounder from Iowa.
Exactly.

And for the record, both Rivers and Manning showed more fortitude and more general signs that they had "it" than has Stanzi in very limited play. In fact, Rivers showed enough to chase Drew Brees out of town.

Those comparisons aren't going anywhere.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:12 AM.
Page 8 of 15 « First 4567 8 9101112 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.