2010 Matt Cassel vs 2011 Tim Tebow

[Coogs]

Since the Chiefs seem to be hanging their hat on the return of the 2010 Matt Cassel, I did a little number crunching on the 2010 version of Matt... and the 2011 Tim Tebow... team rushing stats style.

Tebow (Denver) 13 games. 11 regular season, 2 playoff games.

502 rushes for 2398 yards... or 39 carries per game for 184 yards a contest.


Matt Cassel. 10 wins...

389 rushes for 1968 yards... or 39 carries per game for 197 yards per contest.

1 loss... Houston (which coulda/shoulda been a win)

38 carries for 228 yards. Right on par with the win games for Matt.

5 other losses...

131 carries for 491 yards... or 26 carries per game for 98 yards per contest.


.......


Eerily similar when Matt is successful wouldn't you say?

David DeCastro anyone?

[L.A. Chieffan]

Ship

[Coogs]

Originally Posted by L.A.Chieffan

Ship

Not exactly what I was thinking.

[milkman]

These numbers are meaningless unless you compare the passing stats in each of those games.

The Chiefs wins do not necessarily mean that Cassel was successful in those games.

The Chiefs won the home opener in 2010 in spite of Cassel's "successful" 68 yard passing performance.

[Coogs]

Originally Posted by milkman

These numbers are meaningless unless you compare the passing stats in each of those games.

The Chiefs wins do not necessarily mean that Cassel was successful in those games.

The Chiefs won the home opener in 2010 in spite of Cassel's "successful" 68 yard passing performance.

I don't think they are so meaningless. Unless Cassel has run support nearly to the extent that Tebow had in Denver, the chance he is going to win a ballgame become nearly non-existant. In fact, I was just doing research on what it was that the Chiefs/Cassel did so well in 2010 that would give us optimism of a repeat performance in 2012. The running totals in the games we won... and the Houston game that we should have won... were nearly mind boggling.

Only then, did I decide to see how close those rushing stats were to what Denver had to put up in order for Denver to have success with Tebow at the helm last season. To my surprise, we were nearly dead even.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Coogs

I don't think they are so meaningless. Unless Cassel has run support nearly to the extent that Tebow had in Denver, the chance he is going to win a ballgame become nearly non-existant. In fact, I was just doing research on what it was that the Chiefs/Cassel did so well in 2010 that would give us optimism of a repeat performance in 2012. The running totals in the games we won... and the Houston game that we should have won... were nearly mind boggling.

Only then, did I decide to see how close those rushing stats were to what Denver had to put up in order for Denver to have success with Tebow at the helm last season. To my surprise, we were nearly dead even.

If you can run the ball, then you have a chance to win some games.

But at the end of the day, there is going to come a time when you need your QB to step up and make plays.

Until we have a QB that can do that, the best we can hope for is to not be embarrassed in the playoffs.

[Coogs]

Originally Posted by milkman

If you can run the ball, then you have a chance to win some games.

But at the end of the day, there is going to come a time when you need your QB to step up and make plays.

Until we have a QB that can do that, the best we can hope for is to not be embarrassed in the playoffs.

That's what I am saying. Despite Cassel going 27-7... or whatever it was that is being thrown about... it was the fact that we could and did run the ball nearly 40 times a game... for nearly 200 yards a game... in all of our wins. When that didn't happen... we lost.

If Cassel is to lead us to wins this season, it would appear that is going to have to be the exact same formula that is going to be needed. 40 runs a game and an average of 200 yards.

Very simialr to what Tebow had to have.

[-King-]

You just compared rushing stats....for quarterbacks...

[Coogs]

Originally Posted by -King-

You just compared rushing stats....for quarterbacks...

to be successful.

[whoman69]

Originally Posted by Coogs

That's what I am saying. Despite Cassel going 27-7... or whatever it was that is being thrown about... it was the fact that we could and did run the ball nearly 40 times a game... for nearly 200 yards a game... in all of our wins. When that didn't happen... we lost.

If Cassel is to lead us to wins this season, it would appear that is going to have to be the exact same formula that is going to be needed. 40 runs a game and an average of 200 yards.

Very simialr to what Tebow had to have.

There is usually a reason why we didn't run in those losses. If its a magical formula, then you're saying if we would have run more in those losses, we would have won. That is truly not the case. Matt Cassel doesn't give teams a reason to respect the pass to open the run game.

[The Dawg]

Wakka Wakka

[Coogs]

Originally Posted by whoman69

There is usually a reason why we didn't run in those losses. If its a magical formula, then you're saying if we would have run more in those losses, we would have won. That is truly not the case. Matt Cassel doesn't give teams a reason to respect the pass to open the run game.

That is exactly my point. With Matt Cassel as our QB, we are going to have to run the ball, and run the ball very well if we are going to win. No run. No win.