ChiefsPlanet - Chiefs This far in, would you say Cassel was the only option for the Chiefs?

Page 5 of 6

Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)

- -

This far in, would you say Cassel was the only option for the Chiefs? (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=218750)

LaChapelle

11-24-2009 04:52 PM

While Castle was stinking the place up, the camera paned down to Brodie standing near a equipment box with some older dude. I wonder how close Matt came to being yanked

CoMoChief

11-24-2009 04:54 PM

If Brodie Croyle wasn't made of glass I still to this day would rather have him at QB

DeezNutz

11-24-2009 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 6291548)

hell yes ... anyone that even considering any other option than Sanchez got gang ****ed by a "group of 14"

There was a lot riding on this off-season, and it definitely got heated, but it worked both ways. In reality, no one was victimized.

In hindsight, there should have been more discussion about players like Maclin, Harvin, Crabtree, and Moreno, since we ultimately went a pretty stupid route with the Jackson selection. And any of the previous 4 would have been a more effective choice.

Oh, well...

OnTheWarpath15

11-24-2009 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigChiefDave (Post 6291367)

When you're sacked this often, that is going to happen.

I'm not in a position to look it up, but Aaron Rodgers has been sacked more than Cassel, and hasn't fumbled nine times.

keg in kc

11-24-2009 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6291691)

I'm not in a position to look it up, but Aaron Rodgers has been sacked more than Cassel, and hasn't fumbled nine times.

NFL.com says Rodgers has 7 fumbles and has been sacked 43 times. Last year, he had 34 sacks and fumbled 10 times, whereas Cassel was sacked 49 times with 7 fumbles.

BigMeatballDave

11-24-2009 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6291691)

I'm not in a position to look it up, but Aaron Rodgers has been sacked more than Cassel, and hasn't fumbled nine times.

Probably not. I don't think Cassel is perfect, my point is when you get knocked around as much as Cassel does, you're bound to lose the ball here and there. Rodgers has 7 fumbles. He's been sacked 43 times.

RedThat

11-24-2009 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 6291381)

I don't want to open a huge can of worms, but they had a shot at both of these guys. The cost may have been expensive, but a trade up could have happened. IIRC, both the Fish and the Rams were looking for trade down partners leading up to the 2008 draft, and I am not so sure the Falcons would not have moved either if the "price was right". Same for last year. I bet the Lions would have listened if Clark would have offered up a deal to swap spots.

And I mentioned this before. they could of traded up, but they would of mortgaged their future. So, with a team that is rebuilding, I guess the whole concept was to give up very little value as possible and get the best QB possible (Cassel). He was the most suitable choice given the teams circumstance, situation. Matt Ryan is the best QB though imo.

ChiefsCountry

11-24-2009 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan (Post 6291377)

Cassel was the best choice.... not the only one, but the best one.

The only franchise QB available in the draft was Stafford, and the price to get him was too high. Sanchez will be a very similar QB to Cassel down the road. They were both largely backups at USC.

Cassel is taller, and was only a second round draft pick.

And, Pioli knew him. He has proven to be as advertised. He is a tough, hardworking QB. And, despite coming from a great team to a poor team, he has continued to work hard, play hard, and actually give a d@mn.

Sanchez will be a Matt Hasselbeck kind of QB, which is fine, but about the same as Cassel will be.

I think in the end, the guys who were drooling over Sanchez will be dissapointed. And, the guys who think he is going to be a bust will be proven wrong.

He will be a decent, middle of the road QB. Which is what Cassel will be. So, why spend the #3 pick on a QB with similar talent, that the GM is less familiar with?

Well with you saying that, Sanchez will be a HOF then.

el borracho

11-24-2009 07:38 PM

Oh, yes! Cassel was the only choice. How could we ever have achieved 3-7 with any other QB?:rolleyes:

And OMG! The rookie QB is throwing interceptions? Irrefutable proof that he sucks, sucks hard and will always suck. Yep... no denying it.

MahiMike

11-24-2009 07:57 PM

All you need to know about Cassel is the 30 yd pass from to Lance Long in the most pressure situation he's been in all year.

OnTheWarpath15

11-24-2009 08:43 PM

So by my math, Aaron Rodgers has fumbled once every 6.14 sacks, while Matt Cassel has fumbled once every 3.7 sacks.

I'd say that's pretty significant.

Hammock Parties

11-24-2009 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MahiMike (Post 6292108)

All you need to know about Cassel is the 30 yd pass from to Lance Long in the most pressure situation he's been in all year.

He's thrown that particular pass well all year. He threw it to Long with pinpoint accuracy and he's thrown it to Wade at least twice. He threw a similar pass to Bowe for the tying TD against Dallas.

I look at that and don't miss Thigpen a bit.

DeezNutz

11-24-2009 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoChiefs (Post 6292270)

I look at that and don't miss Thigpen a bit.

The fact that this skeleton ****er is even being discussed by fans isn't a real positive sign about Cassel's play thus far.

Rudy tossed tigger's salad

11-24-2009 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6292250)

So by my math, Aaron Rodgers has fumbled once every 6.14 sacks, while Matt Cassel has fumbled once every 3.7 sacks.

I'd say that's pretty significant.

while we are making up stats...I guess it should be pointed out that Brady has a 3.5 sack/fumble ratio. Manning a 4.0 sack/fumble ratio. And Sanchez with a 1.9 sack/fumble ratio

OnTheWarpath15

11-24-2009 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lemon_Pie (Post 6292282)

while we are making up stats...I guess it should be pointed out that Brady has a 3.5 sack/fumble ratio. Manning a 4.0 sack/fumble ratio. And Sanchez with a 1.9 sack/fumble ratio

Great.

What does that have to do with this, again?

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigChiefDave

When you're sacked this often, that is going to happen.

Just pointing out that getting hit isn't an excuse for coughing up the ball - and that a fumble a game is unacceptable.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:23 PM.

Page 5 of 6

Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page