Actually, neither tells a damned thing on its own.

He returns to the game because he makes around 400k a year doing so.

You didn't watch the game.

350 lb men running straight at you
after you've had surgery after surgery
standing in there and taking another hit is child's play

That may be somewhat motivating at this point in his career, Mr. Chiefnj2, but he kept coming back from somewhat nasty injuries in college. I think the boosters were only giving him about 50k a year back then.

Personally, I think he loves to play the game.

FAX

1.) The moniker "manager" implies that managing a game isn't playing "good". The reality is that every NFL QB is supposed to be managing the game.

2.) When Tom Brady was making the New York Jets team his bitch on Monday, he was "just a high priced manager". He was throwing short-medium passes pretty much exclusively, and avoiding interceptions. Seems to me that he had a "good" game anyway.



In other words, your use of the terms "manager" and "good" is lousy, and designed to beg the question.

Let me help you here, I didn't play Jr. College football, but I have been watching this team for 41 years, so I picked up a couple things.

1) When the center snaps the ball to #7, and from the snape #7 stares at one receiver until he throws it to him, or gets sacked still looking at that one receiver, or throws a pick while throwing to that same receiver, without looking at any other potential receivers, that is called not progressing through his reads (looking for alternative target to throw to), Follow?

As I have said numerous times, I think he did a great job on this in the Seattle game, it gave me wood just seeing that improvement. Not so good in the Denver game last week, but hey, everyone has a bad day. I hope he plays like the Seattle game every time, but so far he hasn't.

2) For the most part, his accuracy the last two years has been horrible, atrocious, receivers had to be double jointed. But that also has been looking better the last three games IMO.

Sure it does. If the play calls for Cassel to only read one route and then to check down if the receiver is deemed covered, it means the coaching staff doesn't trust Cassel to make multiple reads and make a decision quickly enough. The other case is pretty obvious and leads to the 'tunnel vision' conclusion. How about addressing the other things I listed now?

Both of this assertions are assuming 100% accuracy when there are plenty of other possibilities, which is why they are wrong. There are plays that actually call for a quick look one way and then a "check down", and every team in the NFL has them.

Like HemiEd, you're seeing what you want to see.

Couldn't agree more. I wonder if Weis cried when Haley said "86 the Bubble, Bubbles"?

Of course. I'm not claiming otherwise.

You must have forgotten them, given your recent posts on this subject.

This is the problem with people who have been "watching this team for 41 years". They think they know what the hell they are talking about just because of the duration of their fandom.

Just a heads up here.... while QB rating is not a perfect mirror of QB play, it's pretty difficult to achieve a 98.4 rating, over the course of 3/4 of a season, on the strength of just two games.

Also, every QB locks on to receivers. Sometimes it's a problem, sometimes it's inherent in the play.

Oddly enough, most people can watch a game and figure at least a few things out. You seem to have avoided even the blind squirrel sorts of fortune.

This is just complete bullshit.

Then asserting them as arguments is meaningless, unless you can put them in accurate context.

I was just trusting you saw what I saw. You're right, I don't have the exact plays written down anywhere.

I give up, enjoy the game if you watch this one.

But at least try and listen to the announcers, their explanations may help you.