Chiefs Thoughts on Preseason Game #2 - Page 31

**petegz28** · 08-18-2012, 08:32 PM

No sense in waiting for this to end.

Break it down

**SAUTO** · 08-19-2012, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini

What? His hands are very questionable. There's no way right now he's a #1 WR.

That pass to the endzone was terrible
Posted via Mobile Device

Coogs · 08-19-2012, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC

I just don't understand how the hell people (aka Clayton) keep bashing Cassel for this performance?

13/18, 142 yards, 8 yard average per completion, 4/6 on 3rd down all with his WR fumbling and his OT ruining a drive with 2 straight penalties.

Yes Cassel has been bad the past 3 years, but the way he's playing right now is encouraging.

He plays like he did in 2010 and we win the division.

2010...

When we ran more than we passed we won 10 times. We also lost a game (Houston) where we ran more. (There may be more than this one, but I don't care to go back and look right now)

When we passed more than we ran, we lost.

2012...

First half under Cassel...

Game 1. Ran more times. Up at half... Won

Game 2. Passed more times. Down at half... Lost

If we run more times than we pass in 2012 then you may be correct. We just may win the division. Just like we did in 2010.

Titty Meat · 08-19-2012, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

2010...

When we ran more than we passed we won 10 times. We also lost a game (Houston) where we ran more. (There may be more than this one, but I don't care to go back and look right now)

When we passed more than we ran, we lost.

2012...

First half under Cassel...

Game 1. Ran more times. Up at half... Won

Game 2. Passed more times. Down at half... Lost

If we run more times than we pass in 2012 then you may be correct. We just may win the division. Just like we did in 2010.

We didn't lose last night because of Matt Cassel.

jd1020 · 08-19-2012, 07:19 PM

We weren't losing against the Rams because we passed more than we ran. Our D was shit and we turned the ball over.

Chiefshrink · 08-19-2012, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

Fitzgerald had already been in the league for 4 years when Warner played his first full season as the starter in Arizona.

Wrong. Fitz drafted in 04. Warner signed in 05. Again, Fitz proved his rookie yr he was special and Warner was able to accelerate and expose his greatness from there on out with a little Leinert hiccup along the way. Baldwin does not have that luxury in a QB situation here but I believe he will have his great moments but they just won't be as often as we would like with Cassel at the helm.

Chiefs Pantalones · 08-19-2012, 07:51 PM

We're gonna be primarily a running team. That's our identity with a QB like Cassel. If he's passing the ball more than 30 times then we're screwed. He's a game manager. Run the ball, play defense, don't make mistakes, check downs are ok, etc. That's the way it looks so far anyway. When Cassel has to throw the ball a lot even HE looks uncomfortable. I don't think he wants to be "the guy."

Coogs · 08-19-2012, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini

We didn't lose last night because of Matt Cassel.

I didn't say we did.

I'm just stating the facts, and I will sit back and wait for you to disprove this...

Not always... in either case... but more likely than not... when we throw more than we run with Matt Cassel, we lose. When we run the ball more, we win.

Facts are facts.

I will wait for your rebuttal to disprove this.

jd1020 · 08-19-2012, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefshrink

Wrong. Fitz drafted in 04. Warner signed in 05. Again, Fitz proved his rookie yr he was special and Warner was able to accelerate and expose his greatness from there on out with a little Leinert hiccup along the way. Baldwin does not have that luxury in a QB situation here but I believe he will have his great moments but they just won't be as often as we would like with Cassel at the helm.

God you are dumb as hell. Warner wasn't the full time starter in Arizona until 08.

already.

Coogs · 08-19-2012, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

We weren't losing against the Rams because we passed more than we ran. Our D was shit and we turned the ball over.

That goes for you too.

dj56dt58 · 08-19-2012, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefshrink

He did ?? Warner ? Don't get me wrong I believe Fitz would have gotten to that elite level eventually but my whole point is when you have HOF QB's to get your career off to a great start( a la Rice and Fitz) it makes it much easier to get to that Rice/Fitz level of play of which Baldwin DOES NOT have that luxury in Cassel and WHY it will take Baldwin longer IMHO. I along with many others here I believe he has the physical tools to get to that level but he also needs a top tier QB to utilize ALL of his abilities. And top tier QB is not defined as HOF caliber either. But Cassel is not even in the top 20 of this league at this point IMO.

According to the thing they did on Kurt Warner on NFL Network, Fitz was fine with being good and had no desire to be the best..Kurt pushed him to become the best

Messier · 08-19-2012, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

I didn't say we did.

I'm just stating the facts, and I will sit back and wait for you to disprove this...

Not always... in either case... but more likely than not... when we throw more than we run with Matt Cassel, we lose. When we run the ball more, we win.

Facts are facts.

I will wait for your rebuttal to disprove this.

I too have facts. Throw to Jon Baldwin but incomplete = win

Throw to Jon Baldwin complete but fumbles = lose.

Therefore, we must not complete passes to Jon Baldwin.

Disprove that.

Chiefshrink · 08-19-2012, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

when we throw more than we run with Matt Cassel, we lose. When we run the ball more, we win.

Facts are facts.

I will wait for your rebuttal to disprove this.

BINGO !!

milkman · 08-19-2012, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

God you are dumb as hell. Warner wasn't the full time starter in Arizona until 08.

already.

Dumb is an inderstatement.

Chiefshrink · 08-19-2012, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

I too have facts. Throw to Jon Baldwin but incomplete = win

Throw to Jon Baldwin complete but fumbles = lose.

Therefore, we must not complete passes to Jon Baldwin.

Disprove that.

Coogs ain't talkin about Baldwin he is talking about Cassel. Disprove it !

Chiefshrink · 08-19-2012, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj56dt58

According to the thing they did on Kurt Warner on NFL Network, Fitz was fine with being good and had no desire to be the best..Kurt pushed him to become the best

Proves my point that Fitz needed a top tier QB to make him better !!

08-18-2012, 08:32 PM
petegz28 Supporter Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Olathe, Ks Casino cash: $2314127	Thoughts on Preseason Game #2 No sense in waiting for this to end. Break it down
Posts: 128,396

08-19-2012, 07:19 PM	#454
jd1020 In Search of a Life Join Date: Nov 2010 Casino cash: $7692645	We weren't losing against the Rams because we passed more than we ran. Our D was shit and we turned the ball over.
Posts: 24,340

08-19-2012, 07:51 PM	#456
Chiefs Pantalones GO CHIEFS!!!!!! Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Kansas City Casino cash: $7888717	We're gonna be primarily a running team. That's our identity with a QB like Cassel. If he's passing the ball more than 30 times then we're screwed. He's a game manager. Run the ball, play defense, don't make mistakes, check downs are ok, etc. That's the way it looks so far anyway. When Cassel has to throw the ball a lot even HE looks uncomfortable. I don't think he wants to be "the guy." __________________ Don't be fooled by my username, I'm white.
Posts: 26,630