I agree with this. But I don't see it without waters. our o-line will just be too thin.

people keep talking about their concern with sacks and the o-line. the biggest concern is that we will have no running game bc our o-line sucks especially without waters. if you have no running game and your offense is one dimensional, it's going to be a long rough season.

Agreed, but i think they are a different type of mobile. Thigpen is the kinda of mobile that you could almost make him a wide receiver. Cassel is pretty tough though, i've seen him take some hits that would put Brodie Croyle into a coma.

Explains the career-long 65 and 63-yard runs.

Cassel played in more games, took more snaps, threw higher-risk passes.

Not really. If we can protect that pass enough to become a pass first team then our running game can be halfway decent. I think that is exactly what Haley will try to do too. Pass,Pass,Pass until the Defense backs the hell up, then run some draws and stretch plays using a 3rd down back like Jamaal Charles.

Cassel had a better line and better receivers.

I'm not advocating Thigpen at all, just pointing out that he's not any more turnover prone than Cassel.

I dunno about that, Cassel threw a ton of short passes, a shit ton. The patriots running game helped Cassel alot too. The pats ran the ball 130 times more than us.

We will be better next year, both offensively and defensively. Because we couldn't get worse. And there are the Broncos and Raiders in our division. Both seem to have taken a, um, step down in terms of cohesiveness in this off-season. Plus a Norv Turner coached team.

Sure the o-line, at least on paper, sucks. But keep in mind, this o-line, up until last season had minimal coaching, bad quarterback play, a reliance on a tight end as the primary offensive target and, above and beyond all things, Herm. Gailey helped a lot last season, but still was shackled by inconsistency at quarterback, hurt Larry, checkdowns to Tony all season, a qb who was a cast of of the Vikings practice squad, etc.

Holding Cottam in to help block will be a major help to the offensive line. Tony was a receiving stud, but he'd ole block more than LJ. Properly using a fullback and having a tight end stick around and actually block someone will be a bigger boon to the Chiefs offensive line than plugging in some free agent. As well, having a quarterback who can actually throw a spiral will help tremendously.

They will be okay.

Cassel took roughly 100 more snaps than Thigpen (passing plays) and had one more turnover.

If Thigpen played in the same offense as Cassel, and threw the same number of passes, he'd have more turnovers. Thigpen's inaccuracy means he'd waste opportunities even if Welker and Moss got open.

I like how Teicher suggests that he's not worried about Cassel's shaky performance(s) in the wind because he's "seen him throw indoors." Might be a valid reason if we played 8 games in a dome.

News flash, Arrowhead is a windy stadium.

ROFL. All I could think about were thigpen's rainbow-duck longball passes that were 15 yards short.

Mad me laugh.

Carry on.
Posted via Mobile Device

Cassel's Int% was 2.1, comparied to Thigpen's 2.9. Cassel also had 73 rushing attempts and 47 sacks with 7 fumbles, compared to Thigpen's 62 attempts and 26 sacks with 6 fumbles.

On a per-play basis, Thigpen was definitely more turnover prone than was Cassel. How much that difference holds up now that Cassel isn't in New England is one of the keys to the Kansas City season.

Cassel attempted 32.25 passes per game with 0.9375 turnovers/game.

Thigpen attempted 30 passes per game with an even 1 turnover/game.

In turnovers/pass attempt per game, you can't really get much similar.

That's a terrible statistic to use.

Cassel played in more games. Hello?