Chiefs Cassel or Sanchez?

keg in kc · 04-12-2009, 07:24 AM

I haven't seen sanchez play much at all. I'm pretty concerned about the single year starting, though. That's not historically a good thing. But, hey, we're talking about a team that's starting a QB with one year of experience since high school.

milkman · 04-12-2009, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I haven't seen sanchez play much at all. I'm pretty concerned about the single year starting, though. That's not historically a good thing. But, hey, we're talking about a team that's starting a QB with one year of experience since high school.

I'm not concerned about that one year of starting experience.

He at USC for four years, played in a pro set, is a hard worker both on the field and in the film room (reputed to be Manningesque in his dedication to film study), and has a level of maturity beyond most of the kids coming out.

philfree · 04-12-2009, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I haven't seen sanchez play much at all. I'm pretty concerned about the single year starting, though. That's not historically a good thing. But, hey, we're talking about a team that's starting a QB with one year of experience since high school.

Yeah but those starts were in the NFL. IMO since Cassel has been in the league for 4 years the comparison and number of starts between him and Sanchez are hard to make.

PhilFree

keg in kc · 04-12-2009, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Yeah but those starts were in the NFL. IMO since Cassel has been in the league for 4 years the comparison and number of starts between him and Sanchez are hard to make.

Cassel's still every bit the risk, and it's questionable as to whether the upside is even close.

Messier · 04-12-2009, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Cassel's still every bit the risk, and it's questionable as to whether the upside is even close.

No, Cassel is much less risky.

keg in kc · 04-12-2009, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

No, Cassel is much less risky.

That's a matter of opinion, and mine is that Cassel is pretty risky himself.

milkman · 04-12-2009, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

No, Cassel is much less risky.

Even if that were true, and I disagree, I would rather take the greater risk, because I think there's a greater reward with Sanchez.

Messier · 04-12-2009, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Even if that were true, and I disagree, I would rather take the greater risk, because I think there's a greater reward with Sanchez.

You could be right.

philfree · 04-12-2009, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Cassel's still every bit the risk, and it's questionable as to whether the upside is even close.

I'd have to disagree with that. He has played in the NFL and he lead his team to victorys down the stretch with a playoff birth on the line. They didn't make the playoffs as we all know bit it wasn't because of his play. He got it done. And he was acquired for a 2nd round pick and he cost a alot less too. And that's at the QB franchise tender. Upside? Maybe so but that's alot like potential, it can become a dirty word.

PhilFree

milkman · 04-12-2009, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

I'd have to disagree with that. He has played in the NFL and he lead his team to victorys down the stretch with a playoff birth on the line. They didn't make the playoffs as we all know bit it wasn't because of his play. He got it done. And he was acquired for a 2nd round pick and he cost a alot less too. And that's at the QB franchise tender. Upside? Maybe so but that's alot like potential, it can become a dirty word.

PhilFree

The bottom line here, to me, is that this fanbase is afraid to take (perceived) risks.

I'm not sure why most people were unhappy with Carl.

That guy never took risks.

philfree · 04-12-2009, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

The bottom line here, to me, is that this fanbase is afraid to take (perceived) risks.

I'm not sure why most people were unhappy with Carl.

That guy never took risks.

I'm not afraid of risk but after I weigh all the factors I think Sanchez at #3 is "too" risky. And then there's my gut that's telling me that Sanchez is a mirage. Time will prove my gut to be right or wrong. And FWIW I see Stafford as a very risky too. Because of his arm strength and over 30 starts I like him more then Sanchez.

PhilFree

chiefzilla1501 · 04-12-2009, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

I'm not afraid of risk but after I weigh all the factors I think Sanchez at #3 is "too" risky. And then there's my gut that's telling me that Sanchez is a mirage. Time will prove my gut to be right or wrong. And FWIW I see Stafford as a very risky too. Because of his arm strength and over 30 starts I like him more then Sanchez.

PhilFree

Consider me in the minority, but I think when all's said and done, Sanchez will be a better NFL QB. I just think Sanchez has the leadership and fire that I don't see as much of in Stafford. Underrated qualities in a QB.

keg in kc · 04-12-2009, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Upside? Maybe so but that's alot like potential, it can become a dirty word.

Not really. That just means the odds that Cassel is more than a game manager are pretty small. That doesn't mean they're non-existent, or that he can't/won't be more than that.

And a game manager would still be a significant upgrade from anyone else on the roster, assuming he's at least that much.

I don't think it's a bad trade for the price, it just wasn't the move I'd have made. But I can live with it.

We just better hope he's not Scott Mitchell.

**SAUTO** · 04-12-2009, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Not really. That just means the odds that Cassel is more than a game manager are pretty small. That doesn't mean they're non-existent, or that he can't/won't be more than that.

And a game manager would still be a significant upgrade from anyone else on the roster, assuming he's at least that much.

I don't think it's a bad trade for the price, it just wasn't the move I'd have made. But I can live with it.

We just better hope he's not Scott Mitchell.

how many "game managers" have MULTIPLE 400+ yard games??? and in his first year starting

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-12-2009, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

how many "game managers" have MULTIPLE 400+ yard games??? and in his first year starting

Did you watch either of those games?

I recall a play in each of those:

One was a short pass to Welker who made someone miss and ran for over 60 yards before being push OOB.

Another was a similar play to Sam Aiken, who ran for close to 50.

Cassel led the league in yards after the catch. Let's not make it out like he's the one responsible for these mammoth yardage numbers.

Oh, and they were 1-1 in those 2 games.

04-12-2009, 07:24 AM	#1
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	I haven't seen sanchez play much at all. I'm pretty concerned about the single year starting, though. That's not historically a good thing. But, hey, we're talking about a team that's starting a QB with one year of experience since high school.
Posts: 58,682