Chiefs Chiefs may part ways with Cassel this off-season ..... - Page 4

royr17 · 09-24-2010, 08:15 PM

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/pla...rt=NFL&id=3237

NFL Network's Jason LaCanfora believes the Chiefs will "strongly consider" cutting ties with Matt Cassel after the 2010 season.

Cassel is due a $4.75 million salary plus a $7.5 million option bonus, which would make him one of the highest paid players in the league next year. The Chiefs upgraded the talent around him, so the excuses for his poor play are running out. Cassel has provided no reason to believe he can develop into a franchise quarterback.

Jerm · 09-24-2010, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Yeah, but all that means is he's a good sized guy with good arm strength. He's also very mobile.

The problem is that this offense doesn't fit in with his strengths. The guy would be ****ing perfect for Air Coryell. Perfect. Instead we have him throwing bubble screens against 8 man coverage.

You're gonna have to work on his drops and his play under center, but he has every too you could want from a player. I can't remember a QB playing through an injury like his before.

That's why it's always surprised me that he came to Mizzou.

I could see him flourishing in a system like what Arkansas or even like Boise run.

He's just not made for the Spread IMO.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-24-2010, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

Gabbert would be a pretty big project if he comes out after this year.

You know what would suck?

I could see them holding onto Cassel for another year (or two, possibly) if they drafted Gabbert because he would need a lot of work until he would be ready.

I don't think Gabbert is the kind of guy that would be ready to play by mid season, more like mid season of year two at earliest.

He is a spread quarterback with a abnormally low completion percentage and health concerns...not saying he wont make it, I do like him as a prospect and him being a local kid definitely adds to possible motivation (as well as pressure that would come with it)....but he would need a lot of work before he would be ready to start for us and produce at a high level.

I sure would cheer the selection, but I dont see him as a guy that fits the criteria of "the tree" as a guy they would draft in the first round. He doesnt meet the parameters of minimum wins, senior quarterback, minimum starts..or other stuff they look for to be selected that high.

I guess we'll see.

As Ive said before, if Luck decides change his mind and to come out early, I would cheer like a muther****er if we traded whatever it takes to select him.

He'd have 24 college starts under his belt, plus action in several games as a freshman.

Bledsoe had 28 starts and went to one bowl game (Gabbert will go to at least two as a starter) and Parcells took him #1 overall.

**DaneMcCloud** · 09-25-2010, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

You know what would suck?

These guys want to win and they want to win NOW.

I could see them trading for a Matt Flynn or Kolb or Kafka or someone else LONG before I see them drafting a QB high in an effort to "groom" him.

These guys aren't ****ing around and from what I can tell based on this year's draft, have no patience for losing.

If Cassel blows, he's gone.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-25-2010, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerm

That's why it's always surprised me that he came to Mizzou.

I could see him flourishing in a system like what Arkansas or even like Boise run.

He's just not made for the Spread IMO.

No one is made for the Spread anymore. Defenses are beginning to catch up to it. It's not a coincidence that all these BXII teams are having problems scoring points in non-con, save for Okie State.

**BossChief** · 09-25-2010, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Yeah, but all that means is he's a good sized guy with good arm strength. He's also very mobile.

The problem is that this offense doesn't fit in with his strengths. The guy would be ****ing perfect for Air Coryell. Perfect. Instead we have him throwing bubble screens against 8 man coverage.

You're gonna have to work on his drops and his play under center, but he has every too you could want from a player. I can't remember a QB playing through an injury like his before.

Leftwich?

Also, just because they use Cassel the way they are, doesn't mean they would use Gabbert the same way. I know its the system, but Weis has said multiple times that "you cant ask your guy to do things he cant do" and that is directly reflective of how we are using Cassel.

If we had a 28 year old Gabbert with the coaching Cassel has had, I guarandamntee that we would be stretching the damn field.

keg in kc · 09-25-2010, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Gabbert's weapons are subpar. He has a very good slot receiver, no downfield threat and a good TE. He has average RB play and a mediocre DL.

Yeah, that's what I was insinuating.

His situation may drop his stock (or may not...) and then he turns out to be the gem of the bunch. I think it will be either he or Mallet in terms of biggest upside (Mallet's a freak, I think - we'll see how far he's come tomorrow) if he comes out.

The real irony would be if we ended up winning 8 or 9 games and ended up out of range for anybody.

**BossChief** · 09-25-2010, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

He'd have 24 college starts under his belt, plus action in several games as a freshman.

Bledsoe had 28 starts and went to one bowl game (Gabbert will go to at least two as a starter) and Parcells took him #1 overall.

Id have to dig it up, but the tree requires a senior with a certain amount of wins and starts and all of those would be working against Gabbert.

iirc, Bledsoe barely made the minimums when they took him.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-25-2010, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

Leftwich?

Also, just because they use Cassel the way they are, doesn't mean they would use Gabbert the same way. I know its the system, but Weis has said multiple times that "you cant ask your guy to do things he cant do" and that is directly reflective of how we are using Cassel.

If we had a 28 year old Gabbert with the coaching Cassel has had, I guarandamntee that we would be stretching the damn field.

Leftwich was the closest, although that was a fractured shin. I also don't know how many more games he played through.

McNabb played a whole game on a broken ankle once.

Gabbert taking that shitkicking from Nebraska and then riding out the rest of conference on that bad wheel is just amazing, though.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-25-2010, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

Id have to dig it up, but the tree requires a senior with a certain amount of wins and starts and all of those would be working against Gabbert.

iirc, Bledsoe barely made the minimums when they took him.

He was a junior.

beach tribe · 09-25-2010, 12:10 AM

I have no doubt that Matt Cassel will be looking for work when the season is over. It's not like this team just loves handing out money. You have seen our payroll right? Plus, Cassel gone creates a virtual surplus that we would have to use on some nice additions just to keep us above the CFL payrolls lol.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-25-2010, 12:14 AM

He must be a senior, because you need time and maturity to develop into a good professional quarterback.
He must be a graduate, because you want someone who takes his responsibilities seriously.
He must be a three-year starter, because you need to make sure his success wasn’t ephemeral and that he has lived as “the guy” for some period of time.
He must have at least 23 wins, because the big passing numbers must come in the context of winning games.

FWIW, Sam Bradford, Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, and Matt Ryan all fell short of this. Brady never did it, either.

Matt Cassel graduated. He met none of the other criteria. If you add his college and pro wins to this point, he's still only at 16. He's just now in his third year starting post-HS.

Tim Tebow and Colt McCoy did it, through, as did Graham Harrell.

**BossChief** · 09-25-2010, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

He must be a senior, because you need time and maturity to develop into a good professional quarterback.
He must be a graduate, because you want someone who takes his responsibilities seriously.
He must be a three-year starter, because you need to make sure his success wasn’t ephemeral and that he has lived as “the guy” for some period of time.
He must have at least 23 wins, because the big passing numbers must come in the context of winning games.

FWIW, Sam Bradford, Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, and Matt Ryan all fell short of this. Brady never did it, either.

Matt Cassel graduated. He met none of the other criteria. If you add his college and pro wins to this point, he's still only at 16. He's just now in his third year starting post-HS.

Tim Tebow and Colt McCoy did it, through, as did Graham Harrell.

of the seven quarterbacks to win a Super Bowl in the 2000s, five — Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Peyton Manning and Trent Dilfer — met all four requirements when drafted.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-25-2010, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

of the seven quarterbacks to win a Super Bowl in the 2000s, five — Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Peyton Manning and Trent Dilfer — met all four requirements when drafted.

It's a stupid ass ****ing requirement for one, because it's basically asking them if they were good QBs on winning teams. Of course those guys are going to be better prospects on average.

That said, counting Trent Dilfer is a pretty dumb move on their part.

Again, if they spent a #1 overall on a guy who didn't meet the criteria (Bledsoe), it seems like it's just a made up excuse to pass on certain players and a BS way to validate your selection of others.

I mean, really, is Tim Tebow winning 40 games at Florida all that impressive? If you are looking for leadership and intelligence, well Jay Cutler was a 3 year captain and 4 year starter in a major conference who didn't win much, but fielded a pretty damned competitive team his final year. And is Jay Cutler even that much of a leader?

It's completely contradictory.

Goldmember · 09-25-2010, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadMax

I hope it cost's Clark cause he needs to learn a lesson.

Well, I guess indirectly he's responsible since he hired Piloi but he put his trust in him thinking he should know what he's doing. Pioli ****ed up, plain and simple.

-King- · 09-25-2010, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

These guys want to win and they want to win NOW.

I could see them trading for a Matt Flynn or Kolb or Kafka or someone else LONG before I see them drafting a QB high in an effort to "groom" him.

These guys aren't ****ing around and from what I can tell based on this year's draft, have no patience for losing.

If Cassel blows, he's gone.

I wouldn't be mad if they got Flynn.

Kolb or Kafka on the other hand...

09-24-2010, 08:15 PM
royr17 MVP Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Lovin my kids Casino cash: $1858676	Chiefs may part ways with Cassel this off-season ..... http://www.rotoworld.com/content/pla...rt=NFL&id=3237 NFL Network's Jason LaCanfora believes the Chiefs will "strongly consider" cutting ties with Matt Cassel after the 2010 season. Cassel is due a $4.75 million salary plus a $7.5 million option bonus, which would make him one of the highest paid players in the league next year. The Chiefs upgraded the talent around him, so the excuses for his poor play are running out. Cassel has provided no reason to believe he can develop into a franchise quarterback.
Posts: 6,194

09-25-2010, 12:10 AM	#55
beach tribe Keep doubting J MFing Houston Join Date: May 2007 Location: ft.lauderdale Casino cash: $4778036	I have no doubt that Matt Cassel will be looking for work when the season is over. It's not like this team just loves handing out money. You have seen our payroll right? Plus, Cassel gone creates a virtual surplus that we would have to use on some nice additions just to keep us above the CFL payrolls lol.
Posts: 21,429

09-25-2010, 12:14 AM	#56
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7989572	He must be a senior, because you need time and maturity to develop into a good professional quarterback. He must be a graduate, because you want someone who takes his responsibilities seriously. He must be a three-year starter, because you need to make sure his success wasn’t ephemeral and that he has lived as “the guy” for some period of time. He must have at least 23 wins, because the big passing numbers must come in the context of winning games. FWIW, Sam Bradford, Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, and Matt Ryan all fell short of this. Brady never did it, either. Matt Cassel graduated. He met none of the other criteria. If you add his college and pro wins to this point, he's still only at 16. He's just now in his third year starting post-HS. Tim Tebow and Colt McCoy did it, through, as did Graham Harrell. __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln Last edited by 'Hamas' Jenkins; 09-25-2010 at 12:20 AM..
Posts: 74,833