Poor Preseason Puts Heat on Pioli, Cassel

[Hammock Parties]

Poor Preseason Puts Heat on Pioli, Cassel


Did the Chiefs seriously just complete another losing preseason?

If you’re keeping score at home, that’s 1-7 in the preseason for the Scott Pioli era. Over the last four years, the Chiefs are a woeful 3-13 in preseason. While it would be foolish to assign too much relevance to exhibition wins and losses, when they come in tandem with 10 Chiefs regular season wins in three years, the correlation is a concern.

When you factor in the performance of the Chiefs’ key starters and draft picks this preseason, there’s even more reason for concern.

Aside from the shocking revelation that Todd Haley can control his previously nuclear sideline temper for an entire month, the most important thing we learned from August is that Pioli and his highly-paid quarterback, Matt Cassel, still have a lot to prove. Preseason provided no legitimate answers to the questions that have surrounded the pair since last season.

In Pioli’s case, the question is simple – can he effectively identify and cultivate game-changing, impact players?

Most of his initial draft class appears to have been written off already. Jake O’Connell, Javarris Williams, Quinten Lawrence, Colin Brown and Donald Washington have been pushed down the depth chart by 2010 rookies.

The three who don’t appear to have been written off - Alex Magee, Tyson Jackson and Ryan Succop – are a mixed bag. Magee actually showed up this preseason, recording a sack, which makes the crown jewel of Pioli’s 2009 rookie class, Tyson Jackson, look like a lump of cubic zirconia. After a disastrous rookie year, Jackson didn’t show much progress over the last month. He was invisible. If he made an impact play, I missed it.

Clearly, the Chiefs don’t consider Jackson much of a threat as a pass rusher. He comes off the field frequently on third down. It’s not hard to see why – Magee and Wallace Gilberry are far more athletic and explosive, not to mention cheaper. Considering his price tag, Jackson’s impact should be more noticeable.

Has Pioli picked the right players? Getty Images

After missing four field goals all of last year, Succop missed three this preseason. Sure, they were long kicks. Is that supposed to make Chiefs fans feel better when a game is on the line this season and Succop needs to make another long kick?

Conclusion: there are no signs from the 2009 draft class of a game-changing, impact player. How about Pioli’s 2010 draft class? Any signs there?

Pencil in safety Eric Berry as a legit possibility. After seeing Berry blast through a fullback to upend a ball carrier against the Buccaneers two weeks ago, I began speaking in tongues. The Chiefs shut down starting quarterbacks this preseason (apart from one busted play against Tampa) and Berry was definitely part of it.

The problem is Pioli’s second-round picks, wide receiver Dexter McCluster and cornerback Javier Arenas, and his third-round pick, tight end Tony Moeaki. Carl Peterson is no longer hanging around Arrowhead Stadium, which means second-round picks should be having a huge impact, even as rookies.

Are McCluster and Arenas having a huge impact? Based on preseason, the answer is no. While they’ve both proven to be exciting, athletic players who can change a game on special teams, they have to be more.

Arenas has to make an impact on defense. In a perfect world, he’d challenge for Brandon Carr’s starting job by season’s end. If he’s Allen Rossum, a great “cornerback” who has elite return skills but never plays defense, Pioli reached on the pick.

McCluster’s preseason receiving numbers – seven catches, 40 yards, no touchdowns, two or three drops – are disappointing. While it’s great that McCluster can make explosive plays as a running back, he needs 600 receiving yards and three or four touchdowns to justify the pick Pioli spent, and that’s setting the bar low. Kenny Britt and Hakeem Nicks, selected in 2009 in roughly the same draft slot as McCluster, both went over 700 yards as rookies.

And let’s go ahead and set the bar a little higher for Moeaki, who finally caught a pass Thursday night. Third-round picks, especially on teams lacking viable starting tight ends, have to make more of an impact.

But maybe we should temper the expectations for any of KC’s pass catchers. Because based on Cassel’s preseason, the Chiefs will again struggle to throw the ball.

Will Cassel chuck it down the field? Getty Images

I’m honestly flabbergasted that Cassel managed to complete 64 percent of his passes this preseason, throw more touchdowns than interceptions, and finish with a lousy 79.3 rating. Previously, football scientists believed such a feat was impossible, because the NFL weights completion percentage and touchdown-to-interception ratio so heavily in their passer rating formula.

But Cassel pulled it off by quickly dumping the ball short on almost every snap this preseason, averaging a shockingly low five yards per pass attempt. In some cases, Cassel was dumping the ball to running backs behind the line of scrimmage before receivers running down the field had even completed their patterns.

Either the approach was Cassel’s diabolical plan to avoid looking too inept, or KC’s new offensive coordinator, Charlie Weis, watched film of Cassel taking too many sacks and missing too many throws down the field the last two seasons. After sweating profusely for a moment, Weis yanked his 1983 Morristown High School Football playbook out of mothballs, fired up a Xerox machine, and voila! He produced the 2010 Kansas City Chiefs playbook and hatched a plot to turn Cassel into a mistake-free, accurate passer.

Humor aside, here are the facts: had Dwayne Bowe not caught a short pass from Cassel and rumbled for a 30-yard gain Thursday night, every one of Kansas City’s starting receivers and tight ends would have averaged fewer than 10 yards per catch this preseason. Quite literally, in four exhibition games, Cassel did not complete a pass that traveled 15 yards or more from the line of scrimmage.

All of this happened in the midst of an improved offensive line that barely resembled the unit responsible for Cassel’s knee injury last year. Cassel handed the ball to three dynamite running backs this preseason, threw it to a receiver (Bowe) who appears to have made a quantum leap in maturity, and had not one, but two former Super Bowl offensive coordinators talking inside his helmet between plays.

Chan Gailey, Bobby Wade, Larry Johnson and Mike Goff are gone. The excuses are drying up.

Is preseason a mirage, or will Cassel continue to play quarterback as if he were coached by Herm Edwards and Dick Curl? We’re talking about a player who will make more money this year than Donovan McNabb, Tony Romo, Ben Roethlisberger, Drew Brees and Tom Brady.

That means he has something to prove. So does Pioli. The heat is on.

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

I agree. Pioli will be here for a decade most likely. Heat is most definately on Haley.

Yup. When Crennel and Weis were hired that tells you all you need to know where the blame will be placed if things don't work.

[bobbything]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Preseason shouldn't be an excuse to suck.

I don't think they've looked spectacular, but I don't think they've completely sucked. I've seen improvements in pretty much all areas of this team except for the QB play.

The O-line looks better, if not great. Bowe looks better. Chambers, I don't know, they never threw to him. The running game is deeper.

The D-line looks about the same. Linebackers appear to be better with Studebaker and (possibly) Williams. The secondary is the strength and is improved.

Special teams goes without mentioning.

This team will be as good as the QB plays IMO. If they can get a Steve Bono-esque performance out of Cassel (3200 yards, 20+ TDs, <15 INTs), this team will be decent.

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Look around the league.

How many teams that are projected to be division winners and playoff contenders looked like dogshit on both sides of the ball?

This whole "it's preseason" is a bullshit excuse. These guys have had OTA's, mini-camps and training camp and STILL look like ****ing dogshit.

Preseason shouldn't be an excuse to suck.

You know as well as I, there have been Super Bowl winners who have had crappy preseasons. Pre season game mean nothing for the most part.

Having said that, I think the Chiefs win 5 or 6 games.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by beer bacon

McCluster couldn't handle being a full time WR than RB in the SEC. There is no way he can do it in the NFL. Right guys?

What?

[Red Brooklyn]

Originally Posted by milkman

What?

I think what he's saying is.... no, wait, what?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by billay

Oh Dane. I remember the 2003 offense looking like shit in pre-season might have scored 1 TD? Preseason is meaningless my friend.

The Chiefs 2003 offense had absolutely nothing in preseason to prove.

BIG difference.

How'd that 2003 preseason defense look?

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The Chiefs 2003 offense had absolutely nothing in preseason to prove.

BIG difference.

How'd that 2003 preseason defense look?

Pretty good as I recall. Preseason doesn't matter this team will win 6 games wether they went 4-0 in preseason or 0-4.

[Messier]

This wasn't a poor preseason.

[RedThat]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Nonsense.

Sproles was a 4th rounder. Breaston was a 5th rounder. Perrish Cox was a 5th rounder.

Need I go on?

That was what? 3,4 or 5 years ago? You don't see players like that lasting far into the draft simply because those kind of players have more value in the game today than they did before.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

No, I don't "got" to look at like that, at all. While the Chiefs were and are in dire need of playmakers, I don't think the team would be worse if they had taken Lindval Joseph and Daryl Washington instead of Arenas and McCluster.

When the Chiefs are routinely gashed for 200 yards on the ground in 2010 and they only win 5 games tops, maybe THEN you'll understand.

No I do understand. I don't look for ways to complain that they didn't draft this guy or that guy because they could of filled this position instead of that one, etc...this is a long term process, a rebuilding process that takes a while. i understand no team is going to get all their pieces in place overnight. But for what we drafted at that time in that round was good value, and those players definately addressed positions of need. Now the key is, do this very same thing next year, except at another position that we could use BPA to go with position of need.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Best Available is a matter of opinion and in my opinion, these guys were NOT the best available. The Chiefs have needs all over the roster and would have benefited more from guys that play every snap, not guys that are role players.

Unfortunately the Chiefs disagree with you. You either cheer for them or complain against them.

Team needs aren't all going to be addressed in one night. People have to understand that. Accept the teams weaknesses for what they are, and hopefully they can address the team weaknesses next year. We argue about sh*t like this every year and it gets us nowhere. It's pointless. Considering what they got out of this years draft is progress. Like it or not. We should be grateful instead of complaining. Besides, what makes these picks great is that these guys( Arenas and McCluster) can improve your team in more ways than one.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by bobbything

I don't think they've looked spectacular, but I don't think they've completely sucked. I've seen improvements in pretty much all areas of this team except for the QB play.

The O-line looks better, if not great. Bowe looks better. Chambers, I don't know, they never threw to him. The running game is deeper.

The D-line looks about the same. Linebackers appear to be better with Studebaker and (possibly) Williams. The secondary is the strength and is improved.

Special teams goes without mentioning.

This team will be as good as the QB plays IMO. If they can get a Steve Bono-esque performance out of Cassel (3200 yards, 20+ TDs, <15 INTs), this team will be decent.

I"m not going to break this down but let's just say that I disagree everything you've stated, other than special teams.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

You know as well as I, there have been Super Bowl winners who have had crappy preseasons. Pre season game mean nothing for the most part.

Having said that, I think the Chiefs win 5 or 6 games.

So, the Saints looked "crappy" last season? The Steelers the year before? The Giants the year before?

They all looked like shit, eh? Poor QB play, couldn't stop the run, all of that?

Really?

No.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by billay

Pretty good as I recall. Preseason doesn't matter this team will win 6 games wether they went 4-0 in preseason or 0-4.

The point isn't to win games. The point is for the One's to play well against opposing One's and to determine how the rookies and new players fit on the depth chart.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Messier

This wasn't a poor preseason.

You're right: It was ****ing atrocious.

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The point isn't to win games. The point is for the One's to play well against opposing One's and to determine how the rookies and new players fit on the depth chart.

And everything fit just about how we expected it to. We knew the D-line and ILB would suck and that there wouldn't be much depth.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by RedThat

That was what? 3,4 or 5 years ago? You don't see players like that lasting far into the draft simply because those kind of players have more value in the game today than they did before.





No I do understand. I don't look for ways to complain that they didn't draft this guy or that guy because they could of filled this position instead of that one, etc...this is a long term process, a rebuilding process that takes a while. i understand no team is going to get all their pieces in place overnight. But for what we drafted at that time in that round was good value, and those players definately addressed positions of need. Now the key is, do this very same thing next year, except at another position that we could use BPA to go with position of need.





Unfortunately the Chiefs disagree with you. You either cheer for them or complain against them.

Team needs aren't all going to be addressed in one night. People have to understand that. Accept the teams weaknesses for what they are, and hopefully they can address the team weaknesses next year. We argue about sh*t like this every year and it gets us nowhere. It's pointless. Considering what they got out of this years draft is progress. Like it or not. We should be grateful instead of complaining. Besides, what makes these picks great is that these guys( Arenas and McCluster) can improve your team in more ways than one.

There isn't single thing you said here that is right, or even remotely makes a bit of sense.