yeah, unlike all those other good QBs who were surrounded by shitty players...thanks for the insight...

So? Manning was slinging the ball to Harrison, Wayne, and Clark during that time and was the only QB to throw for more yards over a couple years span Green was in KC.

LMAOLMAOLMAO

Charles had a magical season last year....our passing offense was one of the worst in the league

you are a ****ing idiot

Post your address so Trent Green can come over and bitch slap you...

Moron.

LMAO

Yep, Jamaal Charles is worth 7 points a game to this offense and Cassel isn't worth shit.

in Cassel's "magical season" he averaged 200 yards per game, completed only 58% of his passes, barely threw for 3000 yards and helmed the 30th rated passing attack in the league...


meanwhile Charles had the second highest yards per carry in nfl history...

Cassel is a joke

Yes he is worth something. And that value is negative. He's below replacement level as Orton made abundantly clear.

Well yes, by Cassel standards that is a "magical" season.

To every other QB worth thier salt that's a piss poor season...

When did we acquire Cutler?

All of Cassel's high QB rating was embedded in his TD/Int rate, which is really noisy. As the Grantland article made clear, Cassel is the ****ing worst QB in the league who has attempted 1000 passes over the last 3 years. Yet we still get these morons that use "magical" and "Cassel" in the same sentence. Cassel is garbage.

Oopsie...:redface:

Cassel is magical. How else can you explain how he managed to make multiple millions of dollars and keep his starting job despite his tremendously piss poor play?

LMAO LMAO LMAO

I don't usually do the age smack thing, but you have GOT to be 12 years old. Or younger.

I remember when I was that young and the Chiefs had the best QB in the league and would win all their games including the Super Bowl. Fun times.

Good receivers can help elevate a QB.

But you have to have at least a mediocre ability to elevate.

Cassel and Palko can only strive for mediocrity.



The Packer receivers lead the league in drops, according to stat posted elsewhere.
But no one realizes this, because Rodgers has been so spectacular that it masks that fact.

Rodgers had an off game against the Chiefs, and it is not solely because of the defense.

Yeah, cause 3rd round picks and scrubs off the scrap heap are = to trading for a guy that you think is your franchise QB and signing him to a huge contract.

FYP


Really?

Were you born yesterday?

Well, since this franchise has only drafted a first round QB a total of 4 times in it's history, they haven't actually shown that they can't draft QB.

And the only names you recognize are Fuller and Croyle?

Todd Blackledge?

Really?
Were you born yesterday?


:facepalm:

So... Trent Green is no Peyton Manning. He was a decent quarterback in a great situation. He wasn't the "stud" that BigChiefTablet and others think he was.

Cassel and Haley have been fortunate to be surrounded by good casts throughout most of their careers.

Cassel had a great wide receiver corps in New England with Moss and Welker and a good defense around him with a good coaching staff. Last year in KC he was surrounded with a similar situation, except Todd Haley is not a great coach. Last year he had great running game, good defense behind him and a great offensive coordinator in Charlie Weis.

I think that pretty much explains why he had a productive season because he was surrounded with a good cast.

Take Todd Haley throughout his career he's been blessed with great wide receivers in Keyshawn, Owens, Booker, Fitzgerald, Boldin. Yeah he had a good wide receiving corps in Arizona but he also had a great quarterback in Kurt Warner and he ran an offense that was under Ken Whisenhunt.

This year was truly a message to reveal how shit Todd Haley and Matt Cassel really are. Especially when they had to do things independently by themselves. Charles goes down, Moeaki gets hurt, Weis leaves, the schedule isn't as soft, look what happens? you see how crap they really are. Those guys have had their weaknesses masked throughout most of their careers. At least Pioli did something right by firing Haley. Now if he keeps Cassel he is simply a moron.

Any perceived improvement is Cassel's play since he's been a Chief has been the direct result of Charles in the lineup.

Take Charles out of the lineup, and Cassel's suckiness is on full display.

Lets not get too confused about who Trent Green is here... his first season here... he didn't have the arm strength and was labeled TrINT by almost everyone. Years following priest Holmes bailed his ass out by taking his dumpoffs to the house. Trent has NEVER been an all on his shoulders QB as he was aided by an excellent O-Line and above avg surrounding cast. He went 20 yards DOWN FIELD unless it was up the seam to Gonzo and maybe a bomb to EK. His 4000/year numbers were inflated by YAC #'s. Not by actually going down the field.

YAC per reception - 2002 season
Trent Green 6.33
Rich Gannon 5.65
Mark Brunell 5.45
Joey Harrington 5.41

% of passing yards AFTER the catch!
Tom Brady 52.66
Joey Harrington 50.74
Rich Gannon 50.35
Trent Green 49.24

Here are the YAC stats for receivers
1 Priest Holmes KC 774
2 Charlie Garner Oak 769
3 Terrell Owens SF 599





What might be of particular interest to Chiefs fans reading the article is a perceived slight of former two-time Pro Bowl and Super Bowl champion quarterback Trent Green, both by Murphy and Gonzalez.

"The numbers the tight end (Gonzalez) put up in Kansas City, year after year, are all the more impressive considering that he never worked with a topflight quarterback," says Murphy.

That was magical season? ROFL

That sounds a lot like Cassel in New England.

LMAO

What a freaking joke.

Priest Holmes had 187 yards receiving in 2004 and Trent still passed for 4,600 yards.

There is no evidence that supports this asinine Orton > Green theory.

Peyton Manning was number 2 on NFL Network's greatest players of all time. So by your standard, he and Tom Brady are the only quarterbacks ever that have been worth a shit. Good luck finding a quarterback that lives up to your expectations.

Trent Green played against Manning in the 2003 playoffs. In a game with ZERO punts, we lost by one touchdown. We had a touchdown called back at the end of the first half because Tony G. was called for offensive pass interference. Holmes fumbled once in the second half, and the Colts took advantage and scored. The Chiefs lost because we had no defense at all.

You are right, Trent Green is no Peyton Manning. But he was definitely a stud quarterback.

Nope. In fact I was born 51 years ago.

In Chicago.

He might be tremendously important to Kansas City, but that doesn't mean the rest of the country has even noticed him.

As I just said, I was born in Chicago. So MY team is Da Bears.

But I have spent my adult life in the Air Force. So I've moved around a bit and learned to appreciate other NFL teams. I watch beyond the Bears, although I always watch the Bears.

I'll admit to being a "player-fan" as well as a "team-fan." I liked Orton in Chicago. He was clearly the Bears' best QB since Dave Krieg in the mid-90s and the best one we'd drafted since Jim McMahon. I still think that Chicago would be better off if they'd kept Orton instead of trading him for Cutler. I was very upset when KC grabbed him off waivers before the Bears could (but the Cowboys still would have kept him from us).

Admittedly, I hadn't paid much attention to the Chiefs before Kyle landed in KC. But I have to say that the Defense, WRs, and RBs were very impressive looking in last week's game. They look like a fun team to watch for the rest of this season...

THIS! I've said it form day 1.
Although... Cassle STILL led the league in sacks that year.

RB's still accounted for almost 1000 of those yards... Whether it was Priest, Johnson, Blaylock or T. Rich... point still valid.

The "Were you born yesterday?" question was posed to highlight your complete moronacy.

I'm not a Bears fan, but I know who Martin Mayhew is.

You do realize that Cutler makes plays under pressure that Orton is absolutely incapable of making?

I by,"you do realize", I mean you're a ****ing moron.

Orton is a guy that needs a clean pocket.

Milkman's gout must be acting up.

Thanks for posting. It's good to get an outsider's perspective. Groupthink distorts reality at times in a place like this.

The thing that separates elite QBs from the league average is how they perform under pressure.

Every QB is going to struggle against pressure, but the elite ones are the ones that can consistently rise above that pressure and make plays.

They aren't going to succeed every time, but their success rate is far greater than the league average.

This! LMAO

Running backs accounted for 829 of Green's 4,591 yards that year. (18 percent)

That same year Manning's RBs accounted for 11 percent of his yardage.

Culpepper's RBs - 22.7 percent

Favre's RBs - 20.1 percent

Those are the top 4 passing QBs that year.

So your point that Green was only throwing for a lot of yards because of running backs is flat out bullshit. Unless you want to tell us that 2004 Brett Favre was overrated, too.

Not sure what you're getting at.

YAC, in large part, is a product of the QB delivering the ball accurately and on time.

In New England, McDumbass kept it as simple as he could for Cassel, and essentially ran a college spread in order to maximize Cassel's production.

When it gets more complicated than that, Cassel can not deliver the ball accurately and on time.

As for Orton, while he can do this in a more complicated offense, he absolutely has to have everything working for him to be effective.

If things start to break down, he is terrible.

I want a QB that can carry his team when things break down.

I don't want a QB that has to be carried, and Orton is one that has to be carried.

Still makes sense to try and secure Orton as a stop gap until we find that guy. Anything that gets Cassel the hell off this team.

Orton doesn't need EVERYTHING else working to be effective. But he does need SOMETHING else working.

In this era a free agency and salary caps, teams can no longer build dynastic teams that are strong EVERYWHERE. So they have to pick and choose where they focus their strengths. Passing Offense, Running Offense, Special Teams, or Defense. Teams need to have it working in at least TWO of those areas to be successful. No NFL QB is going to get very far nowadays without some help from one of those other areas.

Give Orton a team that's decent in any one of those areas and he can run a passing Offense well enough for a winning team. Last weekend, I saw a Chiefs team that was executing well on Defense and running the ball well. That allowed the passing game some room to work and the result was a win over the unbeaten defending SB Champs...

"well enough for a winning team". Great! Chiefs fans, don't ever change.

i can not believe there is an Orton fanboi...

Why do fans always expect their teams to magically transform from a dumpster fire into world-beating Super Bowl Champs by simply drafting some flashy college QB?

Football is very much a TEAM sport. It takes more than a single player to win.

At any given time there's probably 3-4 QBs in the NFL capable of transforming a team - see Indy with and without Peyton Manning. That leaves 28 teams without such a transforming player - and virtually no chance of acquiring one. Yet the teams without those elite QBs still manage to win. See the 49ers this year.

So, do you keep beating your head against the wall wishing the QB-fairy would finally visit your team, or do you go with the best QB available and build the best team that you can?

I don't think that KC's problem has been the lack of an elite QB. It's been a lack of commitment in building a great team overall.

This thread took a turn for exactly what I claimed about Chiefs fans.

What did you win?

DurangoOrtonStalker did show up
awesome

This kind of thinking is why this team is always an also-ran. You can be stacked at every single position except QB and hope to be the 2000 Ravens or the 2002 Buccaneers, or you can realize that there is no bigger factor in having a championship team than having a franchise QB.

Years of continued torment watching this team go nowhere as the front office continues to placate the fanbase with another mediocre quarterback because we just need to fix the lines.

That explains why we have playoff losses to teams quarterbacked by Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, John Elway and Peyton Manning in the last 18 years.

But building a solid all-around team with a solid QB is a LOT EASIER to do than finding an "elite QB." Too many teams ignore doing the rest of the work as they engage on one wild-goose-chase after another seeking the semi-mythical "great" QB.

No one says that you can keep looking for a great QB while you build a good overall team. If one comes along, sure - grab him.

But that's not what happens. Teams throw away solid QBs that they can win a lot a games with in a frantic, panicked search for "THE GUY." Squandering resources grabbing up one false hope after another.

Or else the Front Office uses the QB position as an excuse why they can't build a winner, rather than admitting to their own incompetence...

Since 1993:

Montana > O'Donnell
Montana > Moon
Montana < Kelly
Montana < Marino
Bono < Harbaugh
Grbac < Elway
Green < Manning
Green < Manning
Cassel < Flacco

That's not a coincidence.

of course it is easier to build a team that goes 8-8 than a Superbowl team...the Chiefs are living proof

the only question is why are you obsessed with the former when the latter is the only ****ing thing that matters?

any team that isn't in a frantic search to find a great QB is a team that is cheating it's (incredibly stupid) fans and simply banking $$$ for its owner...

This also explains why it took the Steelers 14 years to win a Super Bowl under Bill Cowher.

It actually wasn't the fact that Neil O'Donnell, Kordell Stewart and Tommy Maddox sucked.

Nope. For 13 years the Steelers just weren't committed to building great teams.

When they finally wised up, BOOM! Super Bowl. Ben Roethlisberger just happened to be the benefactor of good timing.

Wow, you really dropped some knowledge there. It's easier to just build a solid all around team and hope for the best? You don't say.

One would think that Chiefs fans would know better than anyone else that picking up these "solid QBs that can win" that other teams "threw away" just gets you beat in the playoffs and rather quickly.

Take a look at the past 10 super bowls and realize which side of the odds you're playing.

Chiefs fan: afraid of trying to win a Superbowl but not afraid of finishing 8-8

You're on a roll.

Did you also know that the reason the Cowboys went 12 years between Super Bowls had nothing to do with Roger Staubach and Troy Aikman?

Nope. See, little known fact: Tom Landry started doing cocaine and black tar heroin in the 80s. It completely sapped his commitment to great team building.

I knew he must have hid his stash under that hat.

Here are the dynamics.

Orton is demonstrably better than Cassel, but doesn't want to be pressed by a replacement, wants to be THE guy.

Cassel is beyond horrible and way overpaid.

Stanzi is a complete unknown.

Palko is worthless.

The Chiefs are presently moving away from the range where surefire franchise QBs are available, into a steep dive into franchise busts.

So what to do.

We don't know how many picks [if any] it'll take to move back into surefire franchise QB range.

We don't want Cassel back in any form

We don't want to waste too many years of a great many peaking performers, Hali, the Brandons, Bowe, hopefully Burrrry and Charles.

So many franchise QBs, especially the ones who eventually pan out, who start right away, suffer through 1, 2, 3 ATROCIOUS seasons [Manning, Aikman, in particular]. Even worse if they start out atrocious and just stay there.

OTOH, Rodgers sat and learned for 3 seasons and was ready to start at a high level right out of the box.

Information collation and analysis is an imperfect science, particularly when so much of it lies in the future. But my present take is to offer Orton at least the illusion/chance to be a long term solution. Sell him on the plan to draft a franchise QB who'll nevertheless sit on the bench for an extended period of seasoning and learning, during which time, the team is his. Be prepared to make judicious moves up in the draft for good value, resist temptation to go all Ditka on the draft, and hope like hell one of the surefires drops to our range.

Cassel has everything desirable [work ethic, durability, attitude, commitment], except talent. Talent can't be taught.

Orton has talent, but is suspicious for poise. Poise CAN be learned. This is again a future piece of information, but the possibility exists that that light has turned on, or is in the process of such.

I'd love to be sitting here a year from now with an RGII-v-Orton [or even RG-KO-RS] situation that is as win/win as SD's Rivers-v-Brees decision.

I'll sign on to all of that.

I have no problem with Orton starting for this team next year, but that's really the only year he should start for this team if it wants to do much of anything with the talent it has in place. Rookie QBs should, generally, sit, but they also need reps. Year one should just help them acclimate to the league, practice schedules, routines, film study, adjusting to the speed of the game through running the scout team, and occasional play in games that are decided.

Here's what we do know:

The odds are overwhelmingly, and I can't stress this enough, overwhelmingly in favor of Hali, Carr, Flowers, etc all being wasted if the QB is Orton anyway. The odds of a team winning the way the NFL is currently constructed with Kyle Orton types as its QBs are infinitesimally low. It was already low five years ago, it's nearly nonexistent now.

The Chiefs winning many of the games that they did this season hurt the franchise in the long run, but at this point, that cost is sunk. What we also know is that this is a team that has a lot of available cap room and one glaring weakness. It also has problems with depth.

Depth can be addressed wisely and, at times, economically through sound FA acquisitions. What you cannot acquire through FA in almost every instance is a quarterback that can win you a Super Bowl, unless said QB is coming off of some kind of injury thought to be career threatening (Brees, Warner, Montana), and even if you acquire said QB, the clock is usually at 11:30 for their career anyway.

Given that the draft is predictive in nature the best you can do is make sound scouting reports, do your due diligence, and then play the odds.

Trading a whole draft for a QB is absolutely worth the risk, because without that QB, you aren't going anywhere anyway.

Let's just assume that Pioli did go all "Ditka" in the 2009 draft, acquiring Stafford in the process. Is the team in better or worse shape? Or what if he realized Cassel wasn't the answer after the playoffs and did the same thing for Cam Newton.

The fact of the matter is that, regardless of where we are, there are never surefire franchise QBs at any point. All have inherent risks. If they bust, the team is set back, but it's only set back relative to where it would be if they had a franchise quarterback, because in this league, without one, you might as well be playing hockey without a goalie.

bingo

had we said 4 years ago that Pioli was going to waste the prime of Hali/Charles/Bowe/Flowers careers on Cassel and then Orton...would anyone have said "sign me up, that's a great plan!!"?

would anyone 4 years ago have said "I hope we waste 3 years and then sign Kyle Orton..."?

if we don't draft QB this year, a waste of 4 years (going on 5) is solidified and next year is already irrelevant, as is every year until we do draft a QB...

What if the FO ends up drafting Joey Harrington II?

"Trading a whole draft for a QB is absolutely worth the risk, because without that QB, you aren't going anywhere anyway"


A QB is nothing without protection and quality skill players...

Protection and skill players are nothing without a good QB (see: Tyler Palko/Matt Cassel/all 2011 Chiefs QBs)

One of these things is easier to acquire than the other. Any reerun can draft/sign linemen and receivers. To find the right QB is much harder. If you don't try hard continuously and constantly, you'll never find one.

The Chiefs haven't tried at all. That's why they haven't won playoff games since Clinton's first term

This year's 9ers are built from the same blueprint that the Chiefs in the 90s.

Run the ball and play defense, while asking your mediocre QB to manage the game.

How many SBs did that win?

The QB position is even more important in today's NFL.

Well put! :clap:

I should repost the list of SB Linemen of the last three years.

Besides, here are the starters on OL for the last six SB teams:

LT: Jermon Bushrod, Charlie Johnson, Jonathan Scott, Chad Clifton, Max Starks, Mike Gandy
LG: Carl Nicks, Ryan Lilja, Chris Kemoatu (x2), Daryn College, Reggie Wells
C: Jonathan Goodwin, Jeff Saturday, Doug Legursky, Scott Wells, Justin Hartwig, Lyle Sendlein
RG: Jahri Evans, Kyle DeVan, Ramon Foster, Josh Sitton, Darnell Stapleton, Deuce Lutui
RT: John Stinchcomb, Ryan Diem, Flozell Adams, Brian Bulaga, Levi Brown, Willie Colon

Of those 29 players there are six Pro Bowlers:

Chad Clifton, Flozell Adams (who was a shell of himself at this point; it was his last year in the NFL), John Stinchcomb (played one more year after his SB appearance), Carl Nicks, Jahri Evans, Jeff Saturday

6/29, barely over 20%. If you count Kemoatu twice, then it's really 6/30, basically one PBer per line, and that assumes that guys like Adams and Stinchcomb were playing at a Pro Bowl level at that point in their career, and the truth was they were anything but.

My God!!! You're right!!!

What if we draft the next Trezell Jenkins!!! We should never draft a LT in the first round again!!!!

What if we draft another Snoop Minis or Sly Mo!!! Wide receiver in the first round, never again!!!

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

and?


we'd fail like we've been failing for decades, you ****ing moran...

what success are we risking here? in your addled brain are the Chiefs currently superbowl contenders?

If we draft Ryan Leaf II the next time, is the result any different than what it has been?

What drop off can you not tolerate? Is there something wildly successful about Chiefs football that I've missed as a result of a time warp, lobotomy, or psychotic episode?

That's certainly interesting. I would point out that to DEVELOP a YOUNG QB, a good OL is necessary.

Then again, NO got Brees in FA, AZ got Warner in FA, Aaron Rodgers sat for three full years...

but we have to spend the first on a QB, regardless of who that QB is...)

Big Ben, when he started, had 3 PBs on the OL, 2 at WR, and the Bus. That's what you need to start a young QB. Manning had 2 First Rounders at OT when he arrived in Indy.

I wish more Chiefs fans could understand that.

This team needs a solid QB (not Orton) fast or the careers of Bowe, Dorsey, Johnson, Hali, Flowers, Carr, Charles, ... will go to waste, which means all those guys make for a great team but if only we had a solid QB.

Yes, I would easily give up 3 first round picks for Luck.

Nope...

But the success failure ratio of First Round QBs isn't that inspiring, and many teams have won without a QB of their own First Round pick...

I think obsession with QB has gone too far, and where the Chiefs are picking in April, the "top QB" may not be there...

And the Chiefs were recently ranked in the top 10 in pass blocking efficiency, and just had a perfect game in pass protection.

Draft a QB or die.

Dumb ass, you are.

you don't have a ****ing clue about the nfl

you deserve 30 more years of failure

If you think the Chiefs OL is "perfect," then that's what you think.

I don't. I think the offensive scheme was designed to cover the flaws in the offense.

For a "perfect game" against a statistically leaky D, the Chiefs O scored how many TDs?

:facepalm:

It is better to have failed once with a QB in the first, then it is to have never failed with a QB in the first.

If this team doesn`t trade up for Barkley or Griffin, I`ll be very very skeptical of our future. Of course, we could have a team good enough to win the AFC WEST but to win the Superbowl absolutely not.

Barkley or Griffin do not assure nothing but at least they give us a hope, a chance (if they develop properly) to maybe contend for the Superbowl in the next few years.

Then by all means let's go down the George Allen line of thinking and trade all our draft picks for other team's players.

Lord knows drafting is too much of a risk...

At least I don't talk to 12 ounce pieces of cylindrical metal...

More precisely, QB is a risky position to Draft - high failure rate.

It doesn't mean I am against taking a QB. I don't want "we are taking a QB" written in stone before the Draft...

I guess asking you to see a correlation in the improvement of O-Line play from a craptastic QB like Cassel to a mediocre QB like Orton would achieve anything.

But if you could actually wrap your mind around that, then you could also imagine what kind of improvement would be possible simply by upgrading to a franchise level QB.

Sincerely,

Brett Favre
Drew Brees
Tom Brady