Clark Judge loves Matt Cassel, and so should you.

[Hammock Parties]

Cassel proving to be difference-maker in K.C.

By Clark Judge CBSSports.com Senior Writer Nov. 30, 2010

Let's get this out of the way up front and admit what we should know -- namely, that the Kansas City Chiefs made the right move when they acquired quarterback Matt Cassel.

Matt Cassel's 2010 numbers put him among the league's elite passers. (Getty Images)

They thought they were getting someone who could stabilize the most important position in the game, and they did. They thought they were getting someone who was smart, accurate and reliable, and they did. They thought they were getting someone who could win, and they did. In short, they thought they were getting a quarterback they could trust. And they did.

Matt Cassel is having the best season of his career a year after he, the Chiefs and general manager Scott Pioli took heat for Cassel's underwhelming play -- with one local columnist so outraged that he characterized Cassel as "horrible."


Um, maybe not. Cassel has the Chiefs on top of the AFC West. He's won more games (7) in 11 starts than the club won the past two seasons (6). He hasn't lost at home. He leads the league in touchdown percentage. He's second only to Tom Brady in ratio of touchdowns-to-interceptions. And he's fourth overall in passer rating, ahead of luminaries like Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers and Matt Ryan.

"Matt Cassel keeps setting the bar higher and higher," coach Todd Haley said after Kansas City's latest victory.

I'll second that. It's not just that the Chiefs continue to win under Cassel's direction; it's what Cassel's done to put them in that position, and the envelope, please: Over his last seven starts Cassel has 18 touchdown passes and one interception. Let me repeat: 18 and 1, a ratio that is better than anyone -- including Tom Brady -- over that period, and tell me that shouldn't put this guy front and center of the national spotlight.

It should. Only it hasn't. And one reason it hasn't is because there's a lingering feeling that Kansas City is overachieving and, well, that the Chiefs will eventually get caught by San Diego anyway. I don't buy into the overachieving argument, but after watching San Diego dissect Indianapolis the other night I do believe the Chargers, not the Chiefs, are the team to beat in the AFC West -- basically because the schedule falls their way in December, a month where they have won their last 18.

But that's a projection. Let's look at what we know, and what we know is that Matt Cassel is everything Pioli and the Chiefs envisioned when they acquired him. OK, so it took offensive coordinator Charlie Weis and a system with which Cassel was comfortable for him to flourish. But that happens. It took Brees four seasons before he started to feel comfortable in San Diego.

No question about it, Cassel struggled last season, but let's be honest: There were an abundance of reasons. One was the change of offensive coordinators immediately prior to the season, with Cassel forced to learn on the fly. Another was the Chiefs' mistake-prone receivers, with Kansas City two flubs away from tying an unofficial record for most drops in a year (51). Still another was the team's inability to run the ball until Jamaal Charles stepped into the huddle midway through the schedule.

Now fast forward to 2010, with Weis refining Haley's system to add a few wrinkles that Cassel might have known or practiced when he was with New England. It was there that Cassel first became a starter, stepping into the lineup for the first time in nine years when Brady was hurt in the 2008 opener. And it was there he was supposed to flop. Only he didn't, leading the Patriots to an 11-5 finish.

Surprising? Yes. But that was the guy Kansas City thought it was getting when it traded for Cassel. And that is the guy it has.

Look, I don't know that kicked in this season, but it's hard to ignore the results. What I do know is that Haley worked with Cassel on being more precise in his drops within the pocket, and Cassel has responded. I also know that having the league's top-ranked running game -- with the Chiefs shredding Seattle for 270 yards -- has helped. And I know the emergence of wide receiver Dwayne Bowe -- one of those guys who last season looked more like a backboard than a pass catcher -- has been a huge plus.

In the end, though, it comes back to Matt Cassel. The Chiefs had Larry Johnson to run the ball in 2007-08, and they couldn't win. They had Tony Gonzalez to catch it then, too, and they couldn't win. And they couldn't win because they didn't have someone, anyone, at quarterback to throw the right passes, avoid the big mistakes and make the smart decisions.
Now they do.

"I think he's an NFL starting quarterback you can win with and win championships with," Pioli said at training camp last summer. "Matt adjusted to a lot of change, showed his competitiveness, resiliency and his ability. Beyond the mental and emotional (aspect) and his competitiveness, he showed the physical ability to be able to win."

Pioli was right. Kansas City is not where it is today without Matt Cassel, and it's high time the club, its G.M., its head coach, its assistants and Matt Cassel himself are recognized for what is working with the Chiefs. And what is working is their quarterback.

Adding Matt Cassel not only was a good move; it was a necessary one. And it has the Chiefs where they haven't been in years. Good for them. Good for Pioli. And, most important, good for Matt Cassel.

[The Bad Guy]

I've seen Stevie be plenty critical over the years.

[Brock]

Jesus, back to this tiresome who's a true fan shit?

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

So if you had a daughter who turned out to be a prostitute and smoked crack you would stop loving her?

Interesting insight into your one dimensional soul, thank you.

No, I would not. You see, I would have unconditional love for my daughter which would prevent me from being rational when looking at her. I have the ability to be rational when I look at the Chiefs. Neither you nor steveie can claim the same. It's not a bad thing, it just makes you look stupid when you try to argue. It would be like me saying my crackhead, slut of a daughter was an outstanding citizen of our society.

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by Brock

Jesus, back to this tiresome who's a true fan shit?

Apparently Stevie is the truest...but I am getting there.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

Oh so you didn't see where he wanted cassel to lose his job?

Or you didnt realize losing a job = fail

Or are you just a ****ing douche troll?

Yes, he wanted Cassel to lose his job BECAUSE he was failing. Nowhere in that post did he say "Jeez, Cassel is playing lights out, I hope that guy starts playing like shit."

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by Pants

It would be like me saying my crackhead, slut of a daughter was an outstanding citizen of our society.

You changed your words after you realized how stupid they were.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

Or are you just a ****ing douche troll?

You know, I hate to interject into your love fest but you've been a member of this site for less than a year, correct?

I hope you understand that calling people trolls, people that have been around for three, four, five and even ten years is not only incorrect, but stupid as well?

Okay, back to the love fest.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

You changed your words after you realized how stupid they were.

Huh?

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by Pants

Nowhere in that post did he say "Jeez, Cassel is playing lights out, I hope that guy starts playing like shit."

That isn't what we were talking about. You like to change other people's words to fit your arguments, don't you?

[zonachief]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

And what if he fails Sunday?

Or in STL?

You might find it funny, I don't.

Look around the league. 8 of the 12 division leaders have elite QB's.

It's a QB driven league, and will be for quite a while, I think.

He's 28 years old, and he's yet to prove he can win an important road game against a solid opponent. He's yet to show that if parts of the team are faltering, he can put the team on his back and win.

I don't see what the issue is in needing to see that happen at least once before we say the guy is a ****ing franchise QB.

If the team falters, you guys are going to rip Cassel and blame him for digging a hole for the team anyways... Its a lose-lose arguement. Until Cassel dies or wins a nobel prize, a medal of honor AND 7 superbowls it will be the same back and forth on here.

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You know, I hate to interject into your love fest but you've been a member of this site for less than a year, correct?

I hope you understand that calling people trolls, people that have been around for three, four, five and even ten years is not only incorrect, but stupid as well?

Being here for a length of time does not mean you aren't a troll...last I checked...

I can't for the life of me understand why this person would keep arguing a basic fact I just proved to him 100%..Thats why I assumed he was a troll..

My bad if mistaken.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

Being here for a length of time does not mean you aren't a troll...last I checked...

I can't for the life of me understand why this person would keep arguing a basic fact I just proved to him 100%..Thats why I assumed he was a troll..

My bad if mistaken.

Apparently, you haven't learned much about this site.

If Pants were a true troll (which he is NOT), his rep would be FAR into the red.

Secondly, my advice would be to get to know the members here a little better before using the "troll" word because it only weakens your argument.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

That isn't what we were talking about. You like to change other people's words to fit your arguments, don't you?

No, that is precisely what we're talking about here. You just don't understand causality. The poster you quoted wanted Cassel to be dropped BECAUSE he was failing. Failing as a QB doesn't mean getting fired. There have been plenty of failures playing for teams BEFORE they got fired. It's really not that hard of a concept to grasp.

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by Pants

No, that is precisely what we're talking about here. You just don't understand causality. The poster you quoted wanted Cassel to be dropped BECAUSE he was failing.

No He didn't.

You're wrong. He wanted the Chiefs to fail so that Cassel would lose his job.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by zonachief

If the team falters, you guys are going to rip Cassel and blame him for digging a hole for the team anyways... Its a lose-lose arguement. Until Cassel dies or wins a nobel prize, a medal of honor AND 7 superbowls it will be the same back and forth on here.

Uh, yeah, none of us saw this coming.

Who here had a concern that the QB position could potentially hold us back, whether it be over the entire season, or on a game-to-game basis?

That's the whole point. "Better" isn't good enough.

Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that if Cassel had played the Texans, Raiders and Broncos games like he played the Arizona and Seattle games, we would have won those games, and wouldn't be sweating the last 5 weeks?

He was brought here under the pretense he's a franchise QB that can win the big games.

Time to prove it.