Chiefs Anyone hear Bill Maas yesterday? - Page 3

bobbything · 10-11-2010, 01:39 PM

I honestly don't think this guy watches the games.

I sat in my car yesterday listening to him go off on people who were bashing Cassel. He was furious because he claimed that the offensive line was the problem, not the QB. When someone called in and said that that offensive line was the same line that was producing the 3rd best rushing attack in the league, he basically said bullsh*t. That if the line were that good then Cassel would be great.

His (almost) exact words were, "If we have the 3rd best rushing attack, then we should have the 2nd or 3rd best passing attack. I could put you (referring to Shaun Sharif (sp)) back there and have success off play action passing."

He then went on to say that the reason we were running screens and reverses is because we have an offensive line that can't block, so we have to go with misdirection to cover up the blemishes.

Aside from the fact that I only remember running one screen yesterday and zero reverses, here we have a former defensive lineman who's absolutely clueless about the offensive line. The 2001-2005 Chiefs teams, with arguably the best O-line in the game at the time, ran basically nothing but screens and misdirection plays.

He might be the biggest Cassel apologist I've heard. Though, he was also the guy that said during training camp that this team would be scoring around 30 points per game and that "they'll need to because the defense is going to be giving up 30 points per game."

KCbroncoHATER · 10-11-2010, 04:17 PM

Funny that's what I just said about Matt.

Saccopoo · 10-11-2010, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

Kietzman & Petro must have been listening to him because they are agreeing with him.

****ing tards. If they just read the Chiefs Planet, they'd know our offensive line is completely solid and kicking ass. What the **** do people in sports know? Nothing apparently.

Saccopoo · 10-11-2010, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu

I don't share your love for LJ (at all), but I think there's some truth to the idea that the offensive line is probably around average and that the coaching is covering up for it to some extent. If they were really a good offensive line, we'd occasionally line up and power forward for a yard in short yardage situations, but they don't really ever do that. For example, last week on the 4th down play that they rushed into after first having their punt team in the game. On that play, they run a tricky sweep rather than just lining up and bulldozing some people.

Shut the **** up.

Kicking ass. The offensive line.

Kicking ass.

People don't know anything around here and never watch football. If they did, they'd know the offensive line is completely solid and is kicking ass.

LaChapelle · 10-11-2010, 04:24 PM

Mike Gollic(?) on yesterday's game: "The Chiefs sure are a fun team to watch"
WTF was fun about yesterday's game

bobbything · 10-11-2010, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saccopoo

****ing tards. If they just read the Chiefs Planet, they'd know our offensive line is completely solid and kicking ass. What the **** do people in sports know? Nothing apparently.

Neither of them were agreeing that the line sucked. In fact, Kietzman said today that he thought the line was playing well. And it is. It's not spectacular, but good enough to protect the least-sacked QB in the league (currently at 3 sacks, would have been 2 if Cassel hadn't Keystone Cop'd himself into a sack yesterday).

Point being, the line is less of a problem than a QB who is being paid $10+ mil per year to hand the ball off and not throw interceptions.

Saccopoo · 10-11-2010, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbything

Neither of them were agreeing that the line sucked. In fact, Kietzman said today that he thought the line was playing well. And it is. It's not spectacular...

Bullshit. I was told certain players were "ascending" and "kicking ass."

Kicking ass is kicking ass. That's damn near the polar opposite of "not spectactular."

I mean, we could theorize about why they are having Cassel dink and dunk and sweeps and nifty little tricks and the like, but we all know that would be hypothetical blather as it's been stated here repeatedly that the o-line is "kicking ass."

Mecca · 10-11-2010, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sure-Oz

Petro pretty much said earlier that Cassel is at best Delhomme and he isnt a franchise QB

Which he followed by saying he was perfectly fine with that.

bobbything · 10-11-2010, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saccopoo

Bullshit. I was told certain players were "ascending" and "kicking ass."

Kicking ass is kicking ass. That's damn near the polar opposite of "not spectactular."

I mean, we could theorize about why they are having Cassel dink and dunk and sweeps and nifty little tricks and the like, but we all know that would be hypothetical blather as it's been stated here repeatedly that the o-line is "kicking ass."

You sound bitter.

Fish · 10-11-2010, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saccopoo

Bullshit. I was told certain players were "ascending" and "kicking ass."

Kicking ass is kicking ass. That's damn near the polar opposite of "not spectactular."

I mean, we could theorize about why they are having Cassel dink and dunk and sweeps and nifty little tricks and the like, but we all know that would be hypothetical blather as it's been stated here repeatedly that the o-line is "kicking ass."

This really isn't working out for you bub....

bobbything · 10-11-2010, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Which he followed by saying he was perfectly fine with that.

This is the problem.

You don't pay a QB that kind of money, and trade away a high draft pick, unless you're convinced he's the guy to build your team around. You can pay Rex Grossman, or Todd Collins, $1 mil to simply "not screw up" for a few seasons. But that's not what they acquired Cassel for. They got him to be a franchise QB. Now, everyone's realizing that he's not a franchise QB. This is an indictment on Pioli. And true to revisionists history, people in the local media are justifying his performance with comments such as, "He is what he is."

Yeah, he's an inaccurate QB who get's paid $10 million per year to hand the ball off to Jamaal Charles, and not throw interceptions.

Hell, I remember when Pioli first got here and was extremely stand-offish with the media. Kietzman defended him when the Cassel trade surfaced by saying (something to the effect of), "I understand now why they've been so secretive. They made the biggest trade in the history of the franchise."

Now, I take most of what he says with a grain of salt. However, I think many people felt sort of this way. That we had made a huge acquisition that would eventually propel this team to the next level.

Now, we have fans and the media hoping for Trent Dilfer, or Jake Delhomme. It's depressing.

This season, if he's ends up being Trent Dilfer, fine. But we better cut his ass the second we lose in the first round to the Jets because he went 1 for 7 on 3rd down.

Mecca · 10-11-2010, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbything

This is the problem.

You don't pay a QB that kind of money, and trade away a high draft pick, unless you're convinced he's the guy to build your team around. You can pay Rex Grossman, or Todd Collins, $1 mil to simply "not screw up" for a few seasons. But that's not what they acquired Cassel for. They got him to be a franchise QB. Now, everyone's realizing that he's not a franchise QB. This is an indictment on Pioli. And true to revisionists history, people in the local media are justifying his performance with comments such as, "He is what he is."

Yeah, he's an inaccurate QB who get's paid $10 million per year to hand the ball off to Jamaal Charles, and not throw interceptions.

Hell, I remember when Pioli first got here and was extremely stand-offish with the media. Kietzman defended him when the Cassel trade surfaced by saying (something to the effect of), "I understand now why they've been so secretive. They made the biggest trade in the history of the franchise."

Now, I take most of what he says with a grain of salt. However, I think many people felt sort of this way. That we had made a huge acquisition that would eventually propel this team to the next level.

Now, we have fans and the media hoping for Trent Dilfer, or Jake Delhomme. It's depressing.

This season, if he's ends up being Trent Dilfer, fine. But we better cut his ass the second we lose in the first round to the Jets because he went 1 for 7 on 3rd down.

There were people here who knew what he was before the move was ever made that's why all that talk was met with facepalms a year and a half ago. There was the 180 because he was the Chiefs new QB by a lot of people and now we're back to where we were before the trade was made...about 2% of people like him or want him.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 10-11-2010, 04:44 PM

The guy's reads are just flat-out terrible. He had a wide-open receiver on that "go for it" play, and just completely ignored him.

**BigMeatballDave** · 10-11-2010, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saccopoo

Shut the **** up.

Kicking ass. The offensive line.

Kicking ass.

People don't know anything around here and never watch football. If they did, they'd know the offensive line is completely solid and is kicking ass.

Dude, seriously. Just stop. Pretty much this ENTIRE board will tell you our line is playing well. How many times has Matt been sacked?

I'd be willing to bet these hacks on the air are talking shit to get listeners. Its what they do. You, however are just a moron and a drama queen.

WilliamTheIrish · 10-11-2010, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROR

The guy's reads are just flat-out terrible. He had a wide-open receiver on that "go for it" play, and just completely ignored him.

If you're talking about the TD that Bowe dropped, just stop. If not, please explain.

Saccopoo · 10-11-2010, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCD

Dude, seriously. Just stop. Pretty much this ENTIRE board will tell you our line is playing well. How many times has Matt been sacked?

But yet it's funny to see that it's suddenly the O-line that deserves the credit for Cassel not getting sacked after they were responsible for getting him drilled 47 times last season.

It couldn't possibly be that the coaching staff is trying to get the ball out of his hands substantially quicker this season.

It couldn't be that Cassel is finally figuring out how to avoid sacks. (See sentence above.)

It couldn't be that they are utilizing quick slants, running sweeps, end runs, etc. to minimize QB pressure.

It's got to be that the offensive line has had an epiphany and went from super bad to kicking ass overnight.

Quote:

I'd be willing to bet these hacks on the air are talking shit to get listeners.

I'd be willing to bet that they've been in the business of looking at sports, analyzing sports and talking sports (and in the instance of Bill Maas, playing sports) and have a general understanding of what's going on.

Quote:

Its what they do.

Yeah, because a quarterback controversy wouldn't stir as much shit as saying that the coaching staff is putting in a lot of effort to mask shitty offensive line play.

Talking about the offensive line is much more controversial and fire branding than trying to pull in listeners with a "start Croyle" campaign. I mean, other than around here anyway.

Quote:

You, however are just a moron and a drama queen.

Yep. You are right and everyone else is wrong and a moron. Typical response from self-appointed, self-aggrandizing know it alls.

10-11-2010, 01:39 PM
bobbything Distributor of Pain Join Date: Nov 2004 Casino cash: $8644900	Anyone hear Bill Maas yesterday? I honestly don't think this guy watches the games. I sat in my car yesterday listening to him go off on people who were bashing Cassel. He was furious because he claimed that the offensive line was the problem, not the QB. When someone called in and said that that offensive line was the same line that was producing the 3rd best rushing attack in the league, he basically said bullsht. That if the line were that good then Cassel would be great. His (almost) exact words were, "If we have the 3rd best rushing attack, then we should have the 2nd or 3rd best passing attack. I could put you (referring to Shaun Sharif (sp)) back there and have success off play action passing." He then went on to say that the reason we were running screens and reverses is because we have an offensive line that can't block, so we have to go with misdirection to cover up the blemishes. Aside from the fact that I only remember running one screen yesterday and zero reverses, here we have a former defensive lineman who's absolutely clueless about the offensive line. The 2001-2005 Chiefs teams, with arguably the best O-line in the game at the time, ran basically nothing but screens and misdirection plays*. He might be the biggest Cassel apologist I've heard. Though, he was also the guy that said during training camp that this team would be scoring around 30 points per game and that "they'll need to because the defense is going to be giving up 30 points per game."
Posts: 3,480

10-11-2010, 04:17 PM	#31
KCbroncoHATER KCBH Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Lee's Summit, Missiouri Casino cash: $9984900	Funny that's what I just said about Matt.
Posts: 1,326

10-11-2010, 04:24 PM	#34
LaChapelle Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Casino cash: $10004900	Mike Gollic(?) on yesterday's game: "The Chiefs sure are a fun team to watch" WTF was fun about yesterday's game
Posts: 8,588

10-11-2010, 04:44 PM	#42
Sweet Daddy Hate Unsparing Join Date: Aug 2008 Casino cash: $10004900	The guy's reads are just flat-out terrible. He had a wide-open receiver on that "go for it" play, and just completely ignored him. __________________ 1. Merciless, severe. 2. Given freely and generously. 100% refusal to overrate 20 year Head Coaches with ZERO **ing rings as a Head Coach. CP's Official Professor of 'Dem Blues for 2019/2020!**
Posts: 77,135