Gretz: No new QB...

[Coogs]

...sounds like 3 more weeks of Cassel at least.

http://www.bobgretz.com/


September 21, 2011 - Bob Gretz | Comments (3)

From the Truman Sports Complex


Todd Haley said Wednesday afternoon it was too early to judge the performance of starting QB Matt Cassel, other than to say it must improve.

“Two games is too early to recognize an identity of a team,” Haley said. “We obviously need to change things here pretty quick to keep our identity from being something we don’t want it to be. It does take four or five games. The same goes for players.”

Statistically, only Jacksonville’s starting QB Josh McCown has gotten off to a worse start than Cassel. His passer rating is 50.4, a full 20 points behind the next guy above him in the league rankings. His 4.3 yards per passing attempt is the worst in the league. In 10 statistical areas for quarterbacks, Cassel’s highest ranking is No. 13 for completion percentage. Otherwise, he’s ranked 22 and below and in half of those categories, he’s ranked No. 30 or lower.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by milkman

I don't think anyone saw enough to make a fair assesment, so I'm not ready to hand the keys over to him, but I am also not ruling out the possibility that he might be the best, most polished, QB on this roster in terms of mechanics and reads.

I don't disagree with that, but I would probably go on to add that being the best, most polished QB on this roster might not necessarily be construed as high praise, or as quite enough in the way of qualification for starting time.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I don't disagree with that, but I would probably go on to add that being the best, most polished QB on this roster might not necessarily be construed as high praise, or as quite enough in the way of qualification for starting time.

Which is why I pointed to Skelton and Hall.

But the fact that he is the most polished on this roster absolutely should earn him a spot on the roster, and should warrant consideration for #2 soon.

[xztop12]

Identity of a team... hahahah more cliche's alrady... get this guy out of here

[movinbones]

Originally Posted by suds79

I'll take this.

Yes we are going to watch. Even when the Chiefs lose, I want to see how some guys develop. ex: Houston, Baldwin, etc.

Do I cheer when the other team scores? Heck no. Never. But I'm pretty apathetic when it does happen. Saves me from getting gray hairs. Why get all worked up over the inevitable?

Am I going to throw a party after every loss? No. Just the that mathematically gives us the #1 overall pick.

It's no joke. It's a trade off. 16 games for 15 years.

THIS

[Chiefshrink]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

That's good, actually. That means they do have a clock on him, even if it's not as quick as people might like.

while they get Stanzi up to speed to even more.

[Ace Gunner]

Originally Posted by BossChief

Im trying to keep my takes on Stanzi reasonable, but the conversation of Palko being #2 and therefore better than Stanzi is horribly misguided if not for the playbook aspect.

Falko would be great if it weren't for the hollywood movie aspect.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by BossChief

Im trying to keep my takes on Stanzi reasonable

Yeah, right.

but the conversation of Palko being #2 and therefore better than Stanzi is horribly misguided if not for the playbook aspect

I'm going to start on a tangent: I think people have this misinterpretation that I have a thing against Stanzi. I don't. It's no secret that I was not particularly impressed by him in college, and I (vehemently) did not want them to draft him in the 2nd or 3rd round. But I was okay with a 5th, and the truth is that I'm not the kind of guy who's going to let a preconceived opinion of a player (good or bad) color anything once they reach the NFL. Frankly, draft analysis and college play mean absolutely nothing after the draft is over. Because at that point the slate is clean and you judge a guy based on what they do from that point on. At least that's how I see it.

Look, he didn't earn the backup job in camp. That's a simple fact. You can color it any way you want, but it doesn't change it. You guys are convinced that it must be due to the playbook, and maybe it is. I don't actually think I've said otherwise at any point. Although I will say one other thing: I thought Palko was the better player in the preseason. Not by much, which is a positive sign for Stanzi. But saying that doesn't mean I want to see Palko on the field. Personally, at this point, if it's not Cassel, I don't think either of them is the direction I'd go. I don't think Palko's an NFL quarterback, and I don't think Stanzi's ready to be an NFL quarterback.

And there's actually something that ties into that: this is just a guess on my part - it's not like I'm in practice or meetings... - but I'm not sure how much I buy into the idea that anybody is 'getting Stanzi ready' at this point. I suspect that most of their time and attention is spent on Cassel and the first team offense preparing the gameplan for that week, and that if Stanzi is getting any work at all, it's as the scout team QB. That's generally how it goes in the NFL as I understand it: the lion's share of the work goes to the starter. I doubt Stanzi gets much attention unless or until Cassel is out of the lineup and he's given an opportunity rather than Palko. And at that point, it's a thrown headfirst into the deep end of the pool situation, rather than a gently school and bring along a rookie. I don't believe there's ever actually that much "grooming" going on in terms of coaching on NFL teams for players who don't start, not during the regular season. I'm guessing at this point that whatever he learns will be primarily what he sees on film and during meetings.

But that's just a guess and I could be 180 degrees off from reality.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I thought Palko was the better player in the preseason.

How?????

[lcarus]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

The real question is do we screw it up and make a QB change to Palko instead of Stanzi?

That's exactly why I don't care if Cassel is benched. They'll just go to Palko instead of Stanzi. Stupid.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

How?????

Because I watched the games and I didn't/don't have any preconceived notions about the two players. I think people forget that he played relatively well in both the Baltimore and St. Louis games. All they remember is the So'oto pick. Sort of related to something I said yesterday: people like Stanzi so they'll focus only on the good plays and forget everything else. On the flip side, they don't like Palko so they won't remember anything positive.

I tend to try and be a little more level-headed about it.

As far as the original topic about Stanzi replacing Cassel, I actually don't/won't have a problem with Stanzi coming in. I only have a problem with bringing him in before he's prepared. And what I originally said is that I take the fact that he's 3rd on the depth chart as an indication that he's not.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Because I watched the games and I didn't/don't have any preconceived notions about the two players. I think people forget that he played relatively well in both the Baltimore and St. Louis games. All they remember is the So'oto pick. Sort of related to something I said yesterday: people like Stanzi so they'll focus only on the good plays and forget everything else. On the flip side, they don't like Palko so they won't remember anything positive.

I tend to try and be a little more level-headed about it.

Palko looked like crap. He was throwing off of his back foot in the game you thought he looked good. Hell, Haley let him run with the 1st offense in the 3rd game and even subbed him in again late in the game to let him accomplish something and he failed. That's not even getting to the final game where he was atrocious.

[lcarus]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Because I watched the games and I didn't/don't have any preconceived notions about the two players. I think people forget that he played relatively well in both the Baltimore and St. Louis games. All they remember is the So'oto pick. Sort of related to something I said yesterday: people like Stanzi so they'll focus only on the good plays and forget everything else. On the flip side, they don't like Palko so they won't remember anything positive.

I tend to try and be a little more level-headed about it.

As far as the original topic about Stanzi replacing Cassel, I actually don't/won't have a problem with Stanzi coming in. I only have a problem with bringing him in before he's prepared. And what I originally said is that I take the fact that he's 3rd on the depth chart as an indication that he's not.

I just think the potential with Stanzi is a lot higher. We all know Palko isn't going to amount to anything in this league. Stanzi is a question mark. Might as well see what he brings. I don't care that he is a rookie. Once we're 0-6 or 0-7 and the season is all but lost, there's really no reason not to see if this rookie can emerge as a good future prospect.

[InChiefsHeaven]

Originally Posted by lcarus

I just think the potential with Stanzi is a lot higher. We all know Palko isn't going to amount to anything in this league. Stanzi is a question mark. Might as well see what he brings. I don't care that he is a rookie. Once we're 0-6 or 0-7 and the season is all but lost, there's really no reason not to see if this rookie can emerge as a good future prospect.

Yep, either as a keeper or trade bait. We have to figure out what Stanzi brings to the table.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Palko looked like crap. He was throwing off of his back foot in the game you thought he looked good. Hell, Haley let him run with the 1st offense in the 3rd game and even subbed him in again late in the game to let him accomplish something and he failed. That's not even getting to the final game where he was atrocious.

I never said that he "looked good". I said he played relatively well, and by that I mean in comparison to Stanzi in those same games.

Originally Posted by lcarus

I just think the potential with Stanzi is a lot higher. We all know Palko isn't going to amount to anything in this league.

I don't disagree with any of that. Well, check that, I think Stanzi's potential may be higher. Although I don't know about "a lot higher".

Stanzi is a question mark. Might as well see what he brings. I don't care that he is a rookie. Once we're 0-6 or 0-7 and the season is all but lost, there's really no reason not to see if this rookie can emerge as a good future prospect.

That's what I don't agree with, in any way, shape or form. I don't believe you just throw players into games on a whim to see how they'll do.

Now, on the other hand, if he earns the job, and they believe he can be a competitive NFL starting quarterback right now, as opposed to some "oh well, we're ****ed anyway, might as well throw this guy into there" mentality then fine, play him. No problem at all with that. But a guy has to be ready to play. Prepared for the speed of the game, prepared not only in terms of mastering our own playbook but just as importantly able to read/recognize and react to what defenses are going to throw at him. Throwing a guy in there as an experiment, some baptism of fire? No thanks.

Personally, I don't think Palko should be on the field either. As I've tried to explain about 27 times now, I'm not saying that he is or ever will be better than Stanzi. All I've said, simply put, is that I think it's meaningful that Stanzi has not surpassed him on the depth chart. I think that's evidence that perhaps Stanzi is not ready to play in an NFL game, and because I don't think 2nd or 3rd string quarterbacks get a whole lot of coaching during the season, I would suspect that means he may not be ready to play at any point in 2011.

But that's just my opinion. I'm admittedly cautious/conservative when it comes to quarterbacks. I think it's a position that takes years to learn, even for the best, and I don't personally believe there's anything to be gained by throwing young ones to the wolves, to borrow a phrase.

I think the real tragedy here is that we're talking about Cassel/Palko/Stanzi in this situation, that we don't have a better veteran backup than Palko, and that we didn't aquire a QBotF in the 2007-2008 time frame. I think that's going to set us back years going forward, whether it's Stanzi or Luck.

[whoman69]

Say what you want about the lack of preparedness for our backups. What I know is the starter is not prepared right now. I have an absolute lack of confidence in said starter. He has proven he cannot be a capable player going forward. I have no faith in him. The fact that Palko probably will fail still elevates him over Check Down who I know is a fail. If Stanzi cannot play this year, he probably will never be able to play. The Chiefs will bring in another QB if there is no other option available. This is already a lost season for me. Week 1 was a wake-up call. Week 2 was a reality check. This team needs to see who is going to be a part of this franchise going forward. I give Todd Haley a 0% chance of retaining his job with Check Down behind center. There is absolutely no way they win a game the way Check Down is playing. I give Haley a small chance if he takes a chance and can get a few wins from someone else.

I hear the arguments that Pioli wants Check Down in there. Haley can't go against that. Under those circumstances he's going to lose his job anyway. If he's going out, he might as well try to go out fighting.