Chiefs Disappointed in McCluster - Page 40

Hammock Parties · 10-10-2010, 08:41 PM

Bla bla bla, he's a playmaker, he has two touchdowns already, whatever.

He has seven catches for 93 yards. 1/3 of that yardage came on one play. At least two of those are screen passes I believe.

That ****ing sucks.

This guy needs to be a threat as a WIDE RECEIVER. He hasnt made a single play down the field. I'm not even talking 20 yards. How about 10? How about coming off the line, putting your foot in the ground, getting open and giving Cassel a target?

I'm not willing to accept the idea that Cassel is so god awful he makes all our wide receivers look terrible.

McCluster hasn't done shit yet. And he was utter garbage in Indy.

Don't buy any of his ****ing t-shirts.

**Rausch** · 10-11-2011, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gif Horse

Do you think Pioli has done a good job in the draft?

Let's take a look at his top 9 picks, the picks you HAVE to hit on to build a long-term successful franchise through the draft.

Tyson Jackson - turning into a mediocre defensive end. Terrible pick.
Matt Cassel - single-handedly holding back the entire franchise.
Alex Magee - enormous bust.

Eric Berry - stud
Dexter McCluster - enormous bust.
Javier Arenas - good player.

Jonathan Baldwin - can't get on the field
Rodney Hudson - can't get on the field
Justin Houston - disappointing thus far.

If you count this year's class, Pioli is batting .222 on top three picks through three drafts. He's 2 for 9, and those two players are a nickel corner and a safety on IR.

Impressive.

I wouldn't grade this year yet. Hudson will be starting next year and Casey will be gone. Then 2 of our starting 5 will have been drafted by Pioli with (hopefully Lilja is pushed to the bench) 1 of them a FA signing.

And while his record has been far less than impressive I wouldn't blame the GM for injuries...

**Bane** · 10-11-2011, 11:34 AM

NE is 4-1 without Pisoli or a defense.Yeah the totally suck..

Stupid mother****ers.

**DaKCMan AP** · 10-11-2011, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bane

NE is 4-1 without Pisoli or a defense.Yeah the totally suck..

Stupid mother****ers.

Who said NE sucks?

Deberg_1990 · 10-11-2011, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bane

NE is 4-1 without Pisoli or a defense.Yeah the totally suck..

Stupid mother****ers.

Once again, Having a "truly great" QB disguises alot of your teams shortcomings in other areas.

I wouldnt say Green Bay, NE, The Colts (With Manning) or The Saints have a great defense. The way to win in todays game is to outscore your opponent and have your D be able to bend and not break.

**Rausch** · 10-11-2011, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Once again, Having a "truly great" QB disguises alot of your teams shortcomings in other areas.

I wouldnt say Green Bay, NE, The Colts (With Manning) or The Saints have a great defense. The way to win in todays game is to outscore your opponent and have your D be able to bend and not break.

Green Bay is not playing great so far but they've got a damned good defense.

jd1020 · 10-11-2011, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

Green Bay is not playing great so far but they've got a damned good defense.

21st ranked defense is "damned good?"

**Rausch** · 10-11-2011, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

21st ranked defense is "damned good?"

Did you read the whole sentence?

They are not playing well right now but they are damned good.

We're 5 weeks in and they've had to face two of the more dangerous offenses in the league in the Saints and Falcons. The Bears and Panthers have been respectable as well.

jd1020 · 10-11-2011, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

Did you read the whole sentence?

They are not playing well right now but they are damned good.

We're 5 weeks in and they've had to face two of the more dangerous offenses in the league in the Saints and Falcons. The Bears and Panthers have been respectable as well.

Nothing about 21st is damned good. Sugar coat it as much as you want to fit your argument.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 10-11-2011, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

Nothing about 21st is damned good. Sugar coat it as much as you want to fit your argument.

Who gives a shit if they are 21st in yards allowed?

The NFL doesn't award wins and losses based on yards, but on points.

GB is 11th in points allowed, which is pretty impressive considering who they've played so far.

jd1020 · 10-11-2011, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Who gives a shit if they are 21st in yards allowed?

The NFL doesn't award wins and losses based on yards, but on points.

GB is 11th in points allowed, which is pretty impressive considering who they've played so far.

... Who do you think is going to give up more points? A team with an offense who wins the field position battle or a team with an offense who loses that battle?

**DaKCMan AP** · 10-11-2011, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Who gives a shit if they are 21st in yards allowed?

The NFL doesn't award wins and losses based on yards, but on points.

GB is 11th in points allowed, which is pretty impressive considering who they've played so far.

Not only that, but they're 8th in sacks, 2nd in INTs, and 10th in FF's.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 10-11-2011, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

... Who do you think is going to give up more points? A team with an offense who wins the field position battle or a team with an offense who loses that battle?

Why don't we ask the Saints that question?

**OnTheWarpath15** · 10-11-2011, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Not only that, but they're 8th in sacks, 2nd in INTs, and 10th in FF's.

Yep, they're ****ing awful.

**DaKCMan AP** · 10-11-2011, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

... Who do you think is going to give up more points? A team with an offense who wins the field position battle or a team with an offense who loses that battle?

Who do you think is going to give up more yards? A team with an offense that's always playing in close games or a team with an offense that builds big leads so that other teams have to throw and play catch-up?

jd1020 · 10-11-2011, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Why don't we ask the Saints that question?

You mean another not great defense backed by a great offense? I'll let you know what I find out after I ask.

10-10-2010, 08:41 PM
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4700478	Disappointed in McCluster Bla bla bla, he's a playmaker, he has two touchdowns already, whatever. He has seven catches for 93 yards. 1/3 of that yardage came on one play. At least two of those are screen passes I believe. That **ing sucks. This guy needs to be a threat as a WIDE RECEIVER. He hasnt made a single play down the field. I'm not even talking 20 yards. How about 10? How about coming off the line, putting your foot in the ground, getting open and giving Cassel a target? I'm not willing to accept the idea that Cassel is so god awful he makes all our wide receivers look terrible. McCluster hasn't done shit yet. And he was utter garbage in Indy. Don't buy any of his **ing t-shirts.
Posts: 277,952

10-11-2011, 11:34 AM	#587
Bane C.H.I.E.F.S Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: **** your face Casino cash: $10005055	NE is 4-1 without Pisoli or a defense.Yeah the totally suck.. Stupid mother****ers.
Posts: 12,621