Did you over-react to the work of Casshole?

[B_Ambuehl]

Against Seattle and Arizona?

From reading this board it sounds like Cassell just won the MVP trophy, but when I look at his stats for the last 2 football games this is what I find:

Denver: 17-31 196 1-0
St Louis: 15-29 184 1-1

That's barely 50% completion percentage against 2 shitty football teams WITH an outstanding running game behind him.

When I look at his record I don't think he's won a football game when he didn't get at least 140 rushing yards to support him.

The fact is Seattle and Arizona can make anybody look good. Hell, Alex Smith went for ~300 yds and 3 TDs last week vs Seattle.

At some point Casshole's gonna have to prove he can win a football game by himself without much of a running game against a good defense playing coverage. Opposing teams routinely sell out on the run when they face us. When you're only completing ~50% of your passes vs the kind of coverage he's been getting I think there are legitimate questions whether he's capable of doing that.

"But casshole is so tough and he's become a leader blah blah blah". ****ing trent dilfer was tough and a leader too. Doesn't make him a good QB. Hell, Tim Tebow's tough and a leader. Doesn't make him an NFL player.

Flame away.

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Don't you think that, in many cases, he has met their initial requirements only to watch as the goalposts are whisked away?

Exactly. If you held MC or this team up to that golden standard then so be it but all these people who preseason used all this hyperbole about what they would do or think if the Chiefs won 7 or 9 games (one members actually saying he would suck his own cock) only to sit back and find more holes to pick when it all comes true then screw you. lol

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

I disagree with this, but I think you are close. People don't want the Chiefs to lose. Those who have the most invested in him failing want us to win in spite of him when we win and lose because of him when we lose. They would rather have the former, but the last thing they want is for Cassel to play great and have us still lose.

I'd say it goes down like this in terms of what the bashers want:

1. Chiefs win and Cassel plays poorly (We win, and I'm right!)



2a. Chiefs win and Cassel plays well (I'm wrong, but at least we won)
2b. Chiefs lose and Cassel plays poorly (I told you so!)



3. Chiefs lose and Cassel plays well (FML)

Spot on. I think there is literally nobody who wants the Chiefs to lose. Maybe Mecca...but aside from Mecca nobody.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Don't you think that, in many cases, he has met their initial requirements only to watch as the goalposts are whisked away?

I don't know.

I do know that a many of these guys have asked me many times since Cassel was traded for and I posted my observations and thoughts from watching '08 Patriot replays on NFL Network over the summer if I thought he was a guy that could lead this team to wins in the playoffs?

Until the last month, my answer was no.

I do believe otherwise now.

[DeezNutz]

There's a lot of gray area, even for those like myself who admitted to hating the acquisition and his play for the majority of his time in KC. I'm sorry, when you post a QB rating of 14.6, and then claim you graded out "perfectly," I won't say positive things.

But even during this period, if he performed well, made a good throw, etc., I said so (usually in game threads).

So, back to the initial question. Again, this is too simplistic. Did I react rashly to the initial acquisition? Perhaps. Did I react rashly to his on-field play? I think a strong argument can be made for "no."

What might be my biggest mistake is that I claimed that "presence" and "football instincts" cannot be learned at the highest level. If Cassel continues his current trajectory, he will definitely prove me wrong.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by milkman

I gave Cassel props for that Pittsburg game, but that isn't really the kind of critical situation we are talking about here.

Well, hasn't one of the problems with the Cassel/Anti-Cassel debates been the moving goalposts? That Steelers game was an overtime win against a better opponent. Cassel brought the team back from a 17-7 deficit. That's succeeding in a critical situation against a better team, yet you're now essentially saying "But that's not enough". And that's even though you're one of the people who've warmed to him a bit. Some of the other posters will still be complaining if he wins 2 Super Bowls, because he'll have failed to cure cancer and all STDs while he was at it.

Originally Posted by milkman

And I think there there is probably small group of people who are that are invested in the notion of failing.

I think some of it is people who have legitimate reservations about Cassel's ability to consistently get it done against top competition. That's an open question, and a legitimate thing to watch moving forward. I do, though, think it's pretty shitty of them to take that position and keep bashing the QB at the same time, since he can only play the teams he lines up against.

Originally Posted by milkman

But I don't think it's going to be more than a handful, at most, and I believe that the majority of the posters that I believe that TRR is referring to will come around when Cassel meets the requirements I'm talking about.

I agree with this. Unfortunately, that handful made the board almost unbearable for much of last year, and the beginning of this season. The good news is that their voices are a lot less influential now.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Well, hasn't one of the problems with the Cassel/Anti-Cassel debates been the moving goalposts? That Steelers game was an overtime win against a better opponent. Cassel brought the team back from a 17-7 deficit. That's succeeding in a critical situation against a better team, yet you're now essentially saying "But that's not enough".

The Chiefs weren't playing for anything but pride at that time.

It just doesn't register as critical by my definition.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by milkman

It just doesn't register as critical by my definition.

And therein lies the escape clause. Mind you, I'm not calling you out as one who's specifically moved the posts. I'm just noting the way the goalposts get moved.

[Sully]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Sorry but, if you can't see it, you're blind. The team is 9-5 and leading the division, just 2 years removed from a 2 win season, and there's still a significant portion of this board bitching about Cassel at every opportunity.

That's not "wanting the Chiefs to do the best".

Got it.
Wanting better from our QB is NOT wanting the best.
Makes sense.


Sent from my Teddy Ruxpin using Tapatalk

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

And therein lies the escape clause. Mind you, I'm not calling you out as one who's specifically moved the posts. I'm just noting the way the goalposts get moved.

Escape clause?

Enlighten me.

How does a team with nothing more than draft position to play for find itself in a critical situation?

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by Sully

Got it.
Wanting better from our QB is NOT wanting the best.
Makes sense.


Sent from my Teddy Ruxpin using Tapatalk

JFC


I'm a Patriots fan, and I still want better from Brady. I'd expect that about 99.99999999% of Colts fans feel that way about Manning. That doesn't translate to bashing the QB over every incompletion. You're trying to make them the same thing.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by milkman

Escape clause?

Enlighten me.

How does a team with nothing more than draft position to play for find itself in a critical situation?

You think playing superior teams and coming from behind to win isn't going to lend itself to being looked at as having had critical situations just because one team is out of the playoff hunt. I know from playing in games like that at a moderately high level, as well as from talking with professional-level athletes, that your position is often not the mindset of the players involved.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Sully

Got it.
Wanting better from our QB is NOT wanting the best.
Makes sense.


Sent from my Teddy Ruxpin using Tapatalk

It's fine to want better play from our QB. It's another thing to refuse to acknowledge it when we get better play. The Chiefs have plenty of holes. Starting QB is not one of them. We are getting good play from a QB that is trending upward. This is beyond what anyone expected to see a year ago.

[Sully]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

And therein lies the escape clause. Mind you, I'm not calling you out as one who's specifically moved the posts. I'm just noting the way the goalposts get moved.

There was a thread several weeks ago. I think it was titled "I know everyone hates Cassel."
If that's the right thread, many bashers put forth the things they would need to see from Cassel to accept him as the answer.
All this talk of "moving goalposts," you'd think it'd be easy to pull up that thread and use specifics.

You see... This has become every bit as idiotic as a political argument.
Why?
Because it has turned into people constantly saying, "You believe _____," rather than listening to people say what they believe.
It's much easier to build statement than to actually deal with the real-life facts.


Sent from my Teddy Ruxpin using Tapatalk

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Sully

There was a thread several weeks ago. I think it was titled "I know everyone hates Cassel."
If that's the right thread, many bashers put forth the things they would need to see from Cassel to accept him as the answer.
All this talk of "moving goalposts," you'd think it'd be easy to pull up that thread and use specifics.

You see... This has become every bit as idiotic as a political argument.
Why?
Because it has turned into people constantly saying, "You believe _____," rather than listening to people say what they believe.
It's much easier to build statement than to actually deal with the real-life facts.


Sent from my Teddy Ruxpin using Tapatalk

That's when the goalposts really started moving. Go back to last year or the offseason or even the first 5 weeks of this season to see what people were saying about him before he started playing well.

[Sully]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

That's when the goalposts really started moving. Go back to last year or the offseason or even the first 5 weeks of this season to see what people were saying about him before he started playing well.

Since each "basher" has their own set of goalposts, and since you are confident in their movement, can you point to specific posters and their movement?
Can you tell me where to look specifically?
I'm confident of mine, but I'm sure you have some specifics in mind to turn me around on this "they root for a flat tire!" theory.


Sent from my Teddy Ruxpin using Tapatalk