Chiefs People blaming Cassel for this loss are clearly maladjusted freaks. - Page 8

yhf · 10-17-2010, 10:06 PM

For Christs sake, blame the coaches, blame the refs, blame the defense.

Do NOT blame Matt Cassel. He provided a winning effort.

C/ATT YDS AVG TD INT RATING
M. Cassel 20/29 201 6.9 3 0 122.9

Anyone that asks for more production, is, a dumb****.

Don't get me wrong, I doubt the shit out of Cassel, but his performance in this game was extremely encouraging. Any purported Chiefs fan that wasn't impressed and pleased by his play should just... get a ****ing grip.

johnny961 · 10-17-2010, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

The Chiefs are a running and short/medium pass team, and the team was playing that way for pretty much the entire game. The offense did as it was designed to. Your argument ignores that, which is why pointing to those other teams' numbers doesn't really make a lot of sense.

Fair enough assessment. Bottom line is it sucks not having a good enough pass offense to exploit an obvious weakness in an opponents pass defense. That was obvious in our gameplan.

Hammock Parties · 10-17-2010, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Meat Dragon

GoChiefs is ignorant.

Our gameplan was to run the ****ing ball...

And what happens in the playoffs when we have a bad day and CAN'T run the ball?

WHAT THEN?

WHO'S GOING TO ****ING SAVE US?

DEXTER MC****STICK?

**Shogun** · 10-17-2010, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoChiefs

And what happens in the playoffs when we have a bad day and CAN'T run the ball?

WHAT THEN?

WHO'S GOING TO ****ING SAVE US?

DEXTER MC****STICK?

Touchdown Jesus

/knowmo

johnny961 · 10-17-2010, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Meat Dragon

statboy geeks who don't know what they watch

that's all it is

and i'm done for the night on this dumbass site filled with dumbass fans

Thanks for the compliments. Good Riddance.

Silock · 10-17-2010, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Meat Dragon

I disagree...

Our offense is underrated...teams HAVE to gameplan against our run which was enough for us to take advantage of their porous pass defense.

Funny enough, that's exactly what we did to them.

Quote:

We will win the AFC West barring a dramatic injury or two to key players.

I agree with this assessment at this point in the season. We may see some slipping up, though. I hope not. I hope we're more disciplined than that.

Just Passin' By · 10-17-2010, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny961

Fair enough assessment. Bottom line is it sucks not having a good enough pass offense to exploit an obvious weakness in an opponents pass defense. That was obvious in our gameplan.

That argument would be valid if the Chiefs had actually been unable to exploit that pass defense. It was able to do so, though, within the framework of the game plan. That's why the passing numbers don't really matter, which is what I was trying to point out with the 2003 Patriots example from earlier in the thread.

Hammock Parties · 10-17-2010, 11:36 PM

Maladjusted?

Why not just say classless and deranged...

Silock · 10-17-2010, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Meat Dragon

why would we pass the ball all over the place when we scored 31 ****ing points using the running game and scored on 4 straight ****ing possessions???

Seriously...

how reeruned can this fan base get to bash Cassel and the offense after this game???

Seriously?

OMG

You guys are...

****ING

STUPID

We're not bashing them for the majority of the game; just the parts where they sucked and had a chance to put the game away.

Hammock Parties · 10-17-2010, 11:38 PM

BTW, no one ****ing cares what stats Tom Brady had in 2003....****ing ridiculous....by that age he had already won a Super Bowl and had a 3,800, 28 TD season in which he attempted 600 passes because his team couldn't run the ball.

That was his SECOND SEASON AS A STARTER.

If anyone brings up Tom Brady in comparison to Matt Casshole again they lose a teste.

**Shogun** · 10-17-2010, 11:39 PM

THIS IS NOT A FANSITE ITS A CRITIC SITE.

....what

Just Passin' By · 10-17-2010, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoChiefs

BTW, no one ****ing cares what stats Tom Brady had in 2003....****ing ridiculous....by that age he had already won a Super Bowl and had a 3,800, 28 TD season in which he attempted 600 passes because his team couldn't run the ball.

That was his SECOND SEASON AS A STARTER.

If anyone brings up Tom Brady in comparison to Matt Casshole again they lose a teste.

Pointing out passing yards in a similar Weis-led system is perfectly sensible when people like you are deliberately trying to stir up shit by making idiotic arguments.

And Cassel threw for just under 3700 yards in his first year as an NFL starter.

Hammock Parties · 10-17-2010, 11:50 PM

No, it's not sensible.

It's ****ing cherry picking.

And you left out the fact that most of the time, when he put up less productive passing days, that's all that was needed, because his defense was kicking ****ing ass.

When the opposing quarterback is raping our secondary in the fourth quarter I want a Chiefs quarterback who can respond.

**BossChief** · 10-17-2010, 11:50 PM

If you are washing Cassels balls over his performance today, you might just want to skip over this post:

We played the worst pass defense in all of football today and Matt Cassel put up barely over 200 yards against it.

He played the way a backup plays when he comes in for the starter. That's it.

I'm glad he looked better than he has in other contests, but better than shit doesn't equal chocolate ice cream.

He wasn't the only reason we lost this game, far from it, but he IS a reason we didn't win it ...when we could have.

Lets just hope things are STARTING to slow down for the guy a little and that he will continue to play better each week and it wasn't just because we were facing an embarrassing pass defense today that makes every quarterback look good, but only made ours look serviceable.

That is all.

johnny961 · 10-17-2010, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

That argument would be valid if the Chiefs had actually been unable to exploit that pass defense. It was able to do so, though, within the framework of the game plan. That's why the passing numbers don't really matter, which is what I was trying to point out with the 2003 Patriots example from earlier in the thread.

The point I was making was that out of what I beleive was 67 total plays on offense, 29 of these were pass attempts. 38 run attempts. The gameplan obviously favored the run when we were facing a team with a poor pass defense. Doesn't say much with regards to our coaches faith in our passing game.

**BossChief** · 10-17-2010, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoChiefs

When the opposing quarterback is raping our secondary in the fourth quarter I want a Chiefs quarterback who can respond.

10-17-2010, 10:06 PM
yhf Starter Join Date: May 2010 Location: OPKS Casino cash: $10004925	People blaming Cassel for this loss are clearly maladjusted freaks. For Christs sake, blame the coaches, blame the refs, blame the defense. Do NOT blame Matt Cassel. He provided a winning effort. C/ATT YDS AVG TD INT RATING M. Cassel 20/29 201 6.9 3 0 122.9 Anyone that asks for more production, is, a dumb**. Don't get me wrong, I doubt the shit out of Cassel, but his performance in this game was extremely encouraging. Any purported Chiefs fan that wasn't impressed and pleased by his play should just... get a **ing grip.
Posts: 430

10-17-2010, 11:36 PM	#112
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4320478	Maladjusted? Why not just say classless and deranged... __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 278,993

10-17-2010, 11:38 PM	#114
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4320478	BTW, no one **ing cares what stats Tom Brady had in 2003....**ing ridiculous....by that age he had already won a Super Bowl and had a 3,800, 28 TD season in which he attempted 600 passes because his team couldn't run the ball. That was his SECOND SEASON AS A STARTER. If anyone brings up Tom Brady in comparison to Matt Casshole again they lose a teste. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 278,993

10-17-2010, 11:50 PM	#117
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4320478	No, it's not sensible. It's **ing cherry picking. And you left out the fact that most of the time, when he put up less productive passing days, that's all that was needed, because his defense was kicking **ing ass. When the opposing quarterback is raping our secondary in the fourth quarter I want a Chiefs quarterback who can respond. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 278,993

10-17-2010, 11:50 PM	#118
BossChief SuperBowl or bust Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: BF Iowa Casino cash: $1504088	If you are washing Cassels balls over his performance today, you might just want to skip over this post: We played the worst pass defense in all of football today and Matt Cassel put up barely over 200 yards against it. He played the way a backup plays when he comes in for the starter. That's it. I'm glad he looked better than he has in other contests, but better than shit doesn't equal chocolate ice cream. He wasn't the only reason we lost this game, far from it, but he IS a reason we didn't win it ...when we could have. Lets just hope things are STARTING to slow down for the guy a little and that he will continue to play better each week and it wasn't just because we were facing an embarrassing pass defense today that makes every quarterback look good, but only made ours look serviceable. That is all. __________________ Dreams do come true... http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...postcount=1407
Posts: 47,178