Clark Judge: Rating smartest, boldest, scariest offseason moves

[DaneMcCloud]

Rating smartest, boldest, scariest offseason moves
May 13, 2009
By Clark Judge
CBSSports.com Senior Writer

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/11743195

Five boldest moves

Kansas City hiring Scott Pioli

Some people automatically put this one in the win column. Not me. Not after Charlie Weis fizzled at Notre Dame and Romeo Crennel bombed out in Cleveland. OK, so they were former New England coaches, and Pioli was a decorated GM. They still fall from the same tree. The question I have is this: How much was Pioli responsible for what happened in New England? "I guess we're about to find out," said one NFC general manager.

The good news is that Thomas Dimitroff had New England ties, too, and he circled the bases in his first turn as a GM in Atlanta. The bad news: Pioli's first draft with Kansas City: There are reaches everywhere. He also reversed the team's Get Young Now policy by adding 30-something discards like Bobby Engram, Zach Thomas, Monty Beisel and Mike Vrabel. You can do that when you're at or near the top, like New England. But this is a team that lost 23 of its last 25, for crying out loud.

Five biggest gambles

Kansas City acquiring Matt Cassel

I know what he did with New England. But that was the Patriots, and tell me where you find Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Richard Seymour and Bill Belichick in the 816 area code. Cassel was surrounded by a raft of talent on the field and on the sidelines in New England, and I'm still looking for that support group here. So he produced a couple of 400-yard passing games and won 10 of 15 starts. That was nice. But I want to see him reproduce it here. OK, I know what you're thinking: What do the Chiefs have to lose -- especially when all they surrendered for Cassel and Vrabel was a second-round draft pick? Try this: They're paying Cassel $14.65 million in guaranteed salary. If he turns out to be the next Scott Mitchell I know some bean counters in red suits who will demand explanations.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Mecca

I'll say again Cassel has 2 things about him that bug me, he is not good from under center and holds onto the ball forever.

I honestly think he has every bit the bust factor of anyone that just got drafted, Derrick Anderson as an example speaks to that.

Those are definitely concerns. I would argue that the Pats' offensive line looked really awful last year and that his move to the shotgun was moreso due to the pocket collapsing too quickly than it was holding the ball too long, but that's just an opinion. But at least those are points about his actual physical ability. These arguments about nepotism and draft position and age are stretches. I am not convinced at all that his downside risk is any more than Sanchez's and would still argue that because he at least has positive NFL experience, it's a lot less.

[Mecca]

The other argument there would be Sanchez is 22 Cassel is 27...so if you think there isn't a great difference wouldn't you prefer the younger one?

I've seen Cassel plenty, he holds the ball a long time, his splits from shotgun and non shotgun are extremely wide, wide enough to cause concern. He's mobile, his deep balls and balls to the middle of the field still not alot of improvement.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Mecca

The other argument there would be Sanchez is 22 Cassel is 27...so if you think there isn't a great difference wouldn't you prefer the younger one?

I've seen Cassel plenty, he holds the ball a long time, his splits from shotgun and non shotgun are extremely wide, wide enough to cause concern. He's mobile, his deep balls and balls to the middle of the field still not alot of improvement.

My personal take is that Sanchez has more upside potential while Cassel has less downside risk. In other words, Sanchez is more likely to be great, but Cassel is less likely to bust. It's just a matter of opinion which you'd prefer--I personally think it's a wash and I like Cassel enough to back him for now.

As for the Cassel stuff, I think the reason people mention the shotgun vs. under-center splits is because they are vastly overrating the Pats' offensive line. Again, take a look at highlights of him snapping from under center--he was getting harassed like there was no tomorrow. We've seen in both New Orleans and New England that when a starter like Brees and Brady are that good, their lightning quick reads make their offensive line look a lot better than they should.

And so, I don't think Cassel holds on to the ball too long because on most downs, he didn't have enough time to hold on to the ball too long. People just think he had enough time because they think the Pats' offensive line is much better than it actually is. I don't think he holds on to the ball any more than Sanchez does, given that that's a knock some people have on him too. Like Cassel, Sanchez got that knock largely because people overrated the USC offensive line as well.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by Mecca

The other argument there would be Sanchez is 22 Cassel is 27...so if you think there isn't a great difference wouldn't you prefer the younger one?

I've seen Cassel plenty, he holds the ball a long time, his splits from shotgun and non shotgun are extremely wide, wide enough to cause concern. He's mobile, his deep balls and balls to the middle of the field still not alot of improvement.

NOTE: I would have taken Sanchez.

As far as the age thing, I think that is offset by zilla's point that the odds of Cassel all out busting are lower than they are for Sanchez, ESPECIALLY coupled with his 16 starts.

The shotgun thing is concerning. There was an article from the Pats posted here awhile back that showed that Cassel didn't start to play well until he started taking most of his snaps from under center. It was a very good article and I can't remember anything about the name or I'd try to search for the thread. I think this is a very very serious concern. However, he has made some plays from under center. Several plays to beat the Chiefs' asses (like that is a major accomplishment). So I don't think it is a Thigpen-esque level of dependence on shotgun.

I'm OK with the Cassel pickup, as the only thing that IMO would have been better would have been Sanchez (but I acknowledge that it is very very risky). I'm still concerned about the overall suck of the offense, particularly at RT and ****ing anybody that can catch a pass not named Dwayne Bowe.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

My personal take is that Sanchez has more upside potential while Cassel has less downside risk. In other words, Sanchez is more likely to be great, but Cassel is less likely to bust. It's just a matter of opinion which you'd prefer--I personally think it's a wash and I like Cassel enough to back him for now.

As for the Cassel stuff, I think the reason people mention the shotgun vs. under-center splits is because they are vastly overrating the Pats' offensive line. Again, take a look at highlights of him snapping from under center--he was getting harassed like there was no tomorrow. We've seen in both New Orleans and New England that when a starter like Brees and Brady are that good, their lightning quick reads make their offensive line look a lot better than they should.

And so, I don't think Cassel holds on to the ball too long because on most downs, he didn't have enough time to hold on to the ball too long. People just think he had enough time because they think the Pats' offensive line is much better than it actually is. I don't think he holds on to the ball any more than Sanchez does, given that that's a knock some people have on him too. Like Cassel, Sanchez got that knock largely because people overrated the USC offensive line as well.

I disagree. I think he holds it too long. As bad as NE's line MAY have been, they were at least middle of the pack, and he led the league in sacks taken at 47 (referenced from another article I read here. Sorry no link). But from what Amnorix and others have stated, he does have some mobility.

Personally I'm hoping a lot of those sacks were rust showing, but we'll see when he lines up behind Sackintosh.

To me, it comes down to Gailey (Haley) and what scheme he puts in. Hopefully he can find a way to make him successful and not try to Herm him into getting hurt. In AZ, Haley tried to go down the field a lot more than the OL will allow him to here. Hopefully they can adjust for it. Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing some trick plays like they had last year, just to give the Defense half a second of doubt, and hopefully that half a second will be beneficial for Cassel.

[Mecca]

The only thing I'll say is the complete 180 that happened around here after that trade still puzzles me, the overwhelming majority did not want him.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by Mecca

The only thing I'll say is the complete 180 that happened around here after that trade still puzzles me, the overwhelming majority did not want him.

It's not what I would have done, but it is a BILLION times better than going into the season with Thigpen.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

It's not what I would have done, but it is a BILLION times better than going into the season with Thigpen.

Signing Jeff Garcia would have been better than going into the year with Thigpen.

Just being better than Thigpen wasn't and still isn't what the goal should have been.

[chiefbowe82]

thigpen would have had us in the playoffs last year, if we fielded a defense

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Signing Jeff Garcia would have been better than going into the year with Thigpen.

Just being better than Thigpen wasn't and still isn't what the goal should have been.

Agreed.

I think Cassel has potential to do well, and do well long term. I don't know whether he can be all-world like we all want, but I think there is POTENTIAL for him to be a Super Bowl winning QB (which is the goal). Whether or not he gets there, I don't know. I do know that the rest of the team has to suck much much less before we can even begin to figure it out.

He does have some major concerns, but not so much that I can't be optomistic about it. I truly hope that Pioli/Haley can field a team decent enough that it doesn't ruin him as a QB.

I was in the Sanchez camp, and it didn't fall that way. I feel good enough about Cassel to not bitch and moan about picking him up and hope to all hopes he helps make this team a contender.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by KC_CHIEFS_06

thigpen would have had us in the playoffs last year, if we fielded a defense

Change your avatar or die.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by KC_CHIEFS_06

thigpen would have had us in the playoffs last year, if we fielded a defense

That's wrong, folding in the 2nd halves of games does not win games.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

I disagree. I think he holds it too long. As bad as NE's line MAY have been, they were at least middle of the pack, and he led the league in sacks taken at 47 (referenced from another article I read here. Sorry no link). But from what Amnorix and others have stated, he does have some mobility.

Personally I'm hoping a lot of those sacks were rust showing, but we'll see when he lines up behind Sackintosh.

To me, it comes down to Gailey (Haley) and what scheme he puts in. Hopefully he can find a way to make him successful and not try to Herm him into getting hurt. In AZ, Haley tried to go down the field a lot more than the OL will allow him to here. Hopefully they can adjust for it. Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing some trick plays like they had last year, just to give the Defense half a second of doubt, and hopefully that half a second will be beneficial for Cassel.

Yes, definitely, but on the plus side, he did make much better decisions as the year went on. Part of that can be attributed to a quick-strike offense, but I think a lot of that comes with maturity and learning by doing. When I watch games of him earlier in the year, I think the Pats too often forgot that he's not Tom Brady. Brady started his career as a game manager in a quick-strike offense, in which the scheme dictated his reads. I thought Cassel in the beginning of the year was asked to do way too many long plays than should be asked from a quarterback with his experience level.

Personally, I think the reason he improved was not because they moved him to a shotgun offense as much as it was the Pats finally simplifying the offense for him. The reason I'm fairly unconcerned about Cassel is that he'll have an entire offseason to grow into the offense instead of everyone learning on the fly. More importantly, he's got a hell of a work ethic. The cure for holding onto the ball less is to put in the work to make quicker reads, and he definitely has that in spades.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Yes, definitely, but on the plus side, he did make much better decisions as the year went on. Part of that can be attributed to a quick-strike offense, but I think a lot of that comes with maturity and learning by doing. When I watch games of him earlier in the year, I think the Pats too often forgot that he's not Tom Brady. Brady started his career as a game manager in a quick-strike offense, in which the scheme dictated his reads. I thought Cassel in the beginning of the year was asked to do way too many long plays than should be asked from a quarterback with his experience level.

Personally, I think the reason he improved was not because they moved him to a shotgun offense as much as it was the Pats finally simplifying the offense for him. The reason I'm fairly unconcerned about Cassel is that he'll have an entire offseason to grow into the offense instead of everyone learning on the fly. More importantly, he's got a hell of a work ethic. The cure for holding onto the ball less is to put in the work to make quicker reads, and he definitely has that in spades.

Put in the work to make quicker reads?

Either he should have already had that taken care of since he's already been in the league for 4 years, or that is a part of the game that has to be learned on the field, in games.

I tend to believe he has to learn it on the job, so to speak, but either way, your assertion that he has the work ethic to improve in that area is off base.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by milkman

Put in the work to make quicker reads?

Either he should have already had that taken care of since he's already been in the league for 4 years, or that is a part of the game that has to be learned on the field, in games.

I tend to believe he has to learn it on the job, so to speak, but either way, your assertion that he has the work ethic to improve in that area is off base.

I think it's a combination of both. I'm sure he's put the work in already to reading defenses and recognizing blitzes, but it's a lot different on the field from seeing that on tape. I truly believe that what separates Brees, Brady, and Manning from most of the rest of the pack, is that they put in twice the time in the film room as most QBs. Cassel apparently has that. Maybe it's over-optimism, but I think as he learns by doing on the field, that process is only going to accelerate if he continues to put work into learning from his mistakes on tape and perhaps recognizing when he missed reads or when he missed a blitz pick-up.