Is Matt Cassel As Good As Tom Brady?
by Enite on Dec 7, 2009 1:12 AM CST
59 comments
I know that he's not, but I would like to point something out to everyone who was saying that the only reason Cassel had the record he had last year in New England was because of the team... As of today, the best Brady can do is to match Cassel's record last season in New England. And Brady has all of his offensive weapons. Im not saying that Cassel is going to be the best QB ever, and I agree he had a dismal performance today. But lets at least give him a fair shot, and a full season. The truth is, Brady could come here right now and he probably would not do much better. It is just always funny to watch people panic at the first sign of trouble. We will not be there this year, but we are on the way.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.
0 recs |
59 comments
Email
Print
Comments
It's an Equation of Multiple Factors...
Dropped Passes + Poor Pass Blocking + Bad Chiefs Defense + Schedule + Playbook Change + No OC like Josh McDaniels = Matt Cassel’s Record as Chief Sucks
by Dono on Dec 7, 2009 1:20 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Dono, you forgot a few things ...
overthrown and/or underthrown passes, poor timing on passes, holding the ball far too long (resulting in unnecessary sacks and negative yardage), inability to read defenses and/or make adjustments and/or audibles to compensate
you see, Dono, you “blame” everyone and everything EXCEPT Cassel … and while dropped passes and a poor line are contributin issues, the ball starts in Cassel’s hands and Cassel is the one actually throwing the ball
in the game just concluded, Cassel’s worst in forever, the consensus was that he was given ample time to throw by the O-Line … so beyond dropped passes, Cassel muct be held accountable for his throws and lack of decision while in the pocket
honestly, aren’t there times when you want to just scream to him to Throw The Fucking Ball, OK? Just Throw The Fucking Ball!
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Dec 7, 2009 8:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You also notice....
………Croyle took a big shot in the back after releasing the ball on his second drive. He couldn’t see the defensive player behind him he just has a clock in his head.Cassel woul’ve been sacked there and probably fumbled.
by J ray on Dec 7, 2009 9:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, and your dog would have got run over if it ran out in front a semi on I-70
Let’s play the what if game class.
Coffee. The NEW Performance Enhancing drug for Sport's Writers. Just ask Ken Rosenthal.
by 306008 on Dec 7, 2009 11:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That is exactly what your doing asking if Brady was here
He is not and his states are at the top of the league this year. Cassels were not last year and are not this year so that comparison is gone plus NE does not have the D it had last year.
by kcchiefstd on Dec 7, 2009 12:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
so beyond dropped passes
That pretty much kills a QB’s confidence in his receivers. I agree that he holds the ball for far to long sometimes, but when you’re receivers have had the ball bounce off their hands almost ten times you have to think twice before you throw to them.
If someone asks you if you want extra mayonnaise you have to say yes, cus that's part of it.
-Jared Allen
by JComp11 on Dec 7, 2009 9:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
it takes a team effort to get stomped like that. Players and coaches. It’s not a fair assessment to blame everything on Cassell. Our receivers drop more balls than they catch and can’t get open. Denver has a pretty good secondary so it doesn’t matter how much time the qb gets if his receivers don’t give him something to throw at. I agree Cassell didn’t play very well but the team did nothing to help him out. Cassell isn’t a horrible qb he is just playing as well as our team is as a whole. Monday’s are the hardest time to get on here and read the posts. At least Enite is trying to talk about something positive instead of saying chiefs suck, cassell sucks, haley sucks. Go read KCSatchmo’s post again.
by MTCHIEF on Dec 7, 2009 9:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I (personally) don't blame everything on Cassel ... all I'm saying is he is NOT "The Answer"
certainly not right now … and as this is an evaluation year (did anyone honestly think Pioli or Haley cared about winning right now? not a chance) they need to take an HONEST look at Croyle … and again, Haley says he’s all for competition and the best player on the field, so why not give Croyle a few weeks (and if Haley’s not in favor of that, then he’s been lying to us all season long and should be fired immediately)
so give Croyle some games … who knows, maybe he IS our QB of the Future
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Dec 7, 2009 11:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the long view had priority over the short view, but yes, I think Haley and Pioli expected to win more than the paltry 3 they have in hand, with 4 games to go.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 9:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
but a QB can NEVER be hesitant and indecisive (and still be effective)
that would be like a trapeze troupe – working with nets, of course – practicing and someone misses a grab or spot or whatever – if there is hesitation and lack of confidence the NEXT time you have a GUARANTEED fail
Cassel has been hesitant all year … now that might be PARTLY due to lack of confidence in WRs but I think it’s also just plain old indecision in the pocket, and that’s a killer
worse is if he simply can’t read the defenses he’s facing … if that’s the case he has absolutely NO business starting the game
whatever the reason(s) … Croyle is the better choice for the rest of the season (IMNSHO) … we have nothing to lose but a few games, and everything to gain if he works out )not just games, but team confidence and maybe our real QB of the Future)
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Dec 7, 2009 9:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"maybe our real QB of the Future"
in Croyle?
Seriously?
If you only knew...
by IISaiNtII on Dec 7, 2009 9:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry but I have to disagree
Croyle will never be the qb of the future. He is a good backup but will never be a starter. Just because he played ok during garbage time does not mean he should be the starter. It is called garbage time for a reason. Last year when he was the starter everyone was calling for his head. Now people want him instead of Cassell? I will never understand. Our whole team lacks confidence but who can blame them. It will take a while for for that to return and the team to get back on track. Won’t happen this year and maybe not next year. When that happens I believe most will change their mind on Cassell. I hope
by MTCHIEF on Dec 7, 2009 9:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He played ok?
I saw the same thing from him I did from Cassel, only minus the turnovers… probably because Denver’s starting secondary was resting.
If you only knew...
by IISaiNtII on Dec 7, 2009 10:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
lol ok for Croyle
He completed a few passes and didn’t get hurt
by MTCHIEF on Dec 7, 2009 10:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Heh. They had 4th-quarter-preseason personnel defending against Croyle.
I will say this: Quinten Lawrence finally got off the schnide, registering his first NFL reception.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 9:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Still want to see Lawrence get ONE catch in space and just run away from everybody.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 9:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Played OK in garbage time?
You’re forgetting his performance in the Ravens game at the beginning of the season. I didn’t know garbage time started at 15:00 of the first quarter
by Sam D on Dec 7, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He was comparing
the two in Sunday’s game. Didn’t realize Cassell played in the Baltimore game
by MTCHIEF on Dec 7, 2009 1:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How much of that “hesitation” also comes from the fact that his receivers can’t get open? Like I said, Cassel isn’t blame-free, but a lot of what you are attributing to indecision comes from his receivers being covered. There is more than just lack of skill that can account for a QB holding the ball for too long.
If someone asks you if you want extra mayonnaise you have to say yes, cus that's part of it.
-Jared Allen
by JComp11 on Dec 7, 2009 10:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather take a 4 yard loss getting sacked
Then having him unspool a poor pass that gets intercepted. I think anyone who watches football would agree that turnovers are bad, mmkay?
by jk86 on Dec 7, 2009 10:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Martin Manley of Upon Further Review did an excellent post a few weeks ago ...
that showed by statistics that it’s actually better to throw SOME interceptions as opposed to continually holding the ball too long (which usually results in sacks/negative yardage) and on many occasions fumbles (and that’s your turnover … mmkay?)
Cassel needs to sit … now
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Dec 7, 2009 11:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm OK with sittin' him. He has little to prove, at this point, and a lot to lose behind this OL. The Chiefs have little to lose.
Why not see what Croyle’s got, now that the line’s about as good as it’s gonna get? Not so much demoting Cassel as saving him for next year, and seeing if Croyle’s worth keeping.
I don’t see that happening for those kinds of reasons, but I can see Cassel being benched the last 3 games if he doesn’t make the most of his opportunities. He DID get more opportunities. But he also faced a better-than-average secondary that doesn’t give many good looks, and has a knack for presenting opportunities that are illusionary. Eli Manning had a helluva time finding his receivers.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 9:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"...but we are on the way."
apparently downward.
by Special K on Dec 7, 2009 1:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Shotgun
Everyone seems to forget that Cassel got much better after NE put him in the shotgun formation.I seem to remember a QB we had that did fairly well there also.He can’t seem to play well under center.NE uses this formation for Brady at least 50% of the time.Seems like we should follow suit.After all don’t we try to do everything the Pats do?Except win of course.
John Soellner
by chiefs63 on Dec 7, 2009 6:46 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
rec'd
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Dec 7, 2009 8:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually...
I seem to recall seeing a stat on here somewhere that showed that Cassel was actually doing better under center than he was in the shotgun. Surprising to me. I’ll try to find it.
by LTownChiefsFan on Dec 7, 2009 11:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No
He isn’t.
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius, in contrary to Glenn Dorsey lining up in the 2-tech
by ArrowSpread on Dec 7, 2009 7:23 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
you took the WORD right out of my mouth ...
NO
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Dec 7, 2009 8:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong. I appreciate your effort at a post but it's pointless.
Cassel is ranked in the toilet because that’s where he belongs.
by krayfish on Dec 7, 2009 7:28 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
brutal, kray ... just brutal
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Dec 7, 2009 8:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comparing Cassel and Brady.......
……….right now is asking to be called ignorant, Cassel sucks just as I told everyone he would before he ever took a snap. There is a reason he’s never started at any level. NO POCKET PRESENCE OR ARM! Anyone that knows what their watching out there realized a difference immediatly when Croyle came in,read react,read react Cassel simply does not have this ability Croyle needs to start call thiggy back and beg.
by J ray on Dec 7, 2009 9:26 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
The New England Patriots started him for 15 games. He took almost all the snaps in the other one.
11-5 record.
Good fit for a team that wants better arm and measurables than Thiggy, behind a line that requires toughness and mobility. He would probably be comparable to Brady this year in NE, with an arm and vision that are less good, but wheels that are a whole lot better.
I’m not as down on him as you are, J ray, but part of his success is in not forcing the ball, and being tough when he pulls it down and runs with it. Some of the finer points are clearly lacking, but I’ve seen very good QBs (Bulger, Warner) downgraded because they were in shitty situations. Cassel, despite having better-than-KC targets in NE, has played the better part of two seasons behind substandard O-Lines.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 9:38 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I heard about the comparison in records as well. I think you gotta give the guy a chance. Running away/yanking guys the first time they show adversity is NOT how you build a winning culture in the NFL.
Cassel defender: Tom Brady will have to win out to match Cassel's record last year. Cassel has no talent to work with. Receivers aren't open, and when they are, they drop passes, run routes incorrectly, and overall do their best Pop Warner impressions. He may hold onto the ball too long but good game managing and mature QB's do just that. I'd take a 4 yard loss on a sack then forcing a ball into the hands of the other team. We need to be patient. Rome wasn't built in a day and we already have a better record after dumping half of Herm's team. In a year or two we WILL be AFC West leaders.
by jk86 on Dec 7, 2009 10:42 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
losing the way we've been losing is not how you build a winning ANYTHING
… so if you’re driving along and you have a flat tire, do you leave it on the car because you’re trying to build a winning race car?
somehow I doubt it
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Dec 7, 2009 11:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree with that sentiment
Look at Vince Young and what happened with him after an extended stay on the bench. He improved! I think some time on the bench could really do Cassel some good. He looked much better early in the season and in the preseason before he got so rattled playing behind our line. He needs time to get rid of those jitters and happy feet if he is going to be successful in KC. I still would like to see him succeed as our QB but, if we keep throwing him back there in this state of mind, I think he will get worse, not better.
It’s time to see what the kid from Alabama with a rocket launcher arm can do. I can honestly see no advantage to having Cassel continue starting. We are mathematically eliminated from playoff contention and the rest of these games are meaningless. Croyle has a contract coming up this year and this team needs to find out without question who the better QB is before we allow Croyle to walk.
by Chiefsfan1970 on Dec 7, 2009 11:24 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm pretty close to that thinking.
Rather than answering whether or not Croyle is better, throwing him in the fire would help decide whether he’s worth keeping at ALL. And if Cassel struggles again against the Bills, Croyle might come in earlier rather than later. But we ought to hear the rumblings if Croyle is getting the majority of snaps with the #1s, and I haven’t heard any rumblings. Pretty sure that’s not happening, but I can see the logic in doing it.
Personally, I think it might hurt Cassel more to bench him right now than to let him tough it out with these guys. I’d like to see him extending his game a little bit, now that he has at least some confidence he’s going to get more than just garbage looks down the field. Let loose the reins a little bit and let him play a little riskier. I’ve been dismissive of getting Chambers and Bowe on the field at the same time, but they’re BOTH big targets, with one a little better at getting open and the other more likely to win the free-for-all for anything up for grabs.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 10:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think a QB has much to do with this team right now
I don’t think Cassell is #1 in the NFL. Nor is he JaMarcus Russell. QBs are a product of what they have in front of them and around them. In order to be a solid QB, you have to have at least a solid WR/TE/RB and line. What do we have that is solid? D. Bowe sitting on the sideline dropping weight with his diaretics? Sounds great. We knew this was going to be a bad year. We knew that when Cassell was signed he was told youre going to get hit, youre going to lose, but hang in there, year two is where we start to get going.
If we don’t have 7 dropped balls in the first half (stat provided by CBS, which is odd, because they usually don’t get this one right, usually they have 3 when it’s like 7…) Cassell and the Chiefs are right in position to have a solid game. But of course, when you have a lazy WR who wasn’t in shape when he reported to camp and had to “cheat” to get back in shape, you have this problem.
Don’t lose your hope. We won’t be able to evaluate Cassell until we get a solid line in front of him and more than one WR who can catch..
Coffee. The NEW Performance Enhancing drug for Sport's Writers. Just ask Ken Rosenthal.
by 306008 on Dec 7, 2009 11:57 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
I agree with a lot of this
One thing that’s almost universally ignored when people look at a stat sheet is factors such as drops. Yes, Cassel was 10-29 yesterday, but there were at least 7 dropped balls. If those 7 passes were completed, his percentage would respectable but unspectacular. Then, take into account that dropped passes mean that the team has to play another down, which in many cases means another pass. For instance, Lance Long dropped a touchdown pass on 2nd down at the goalline yesterday; Cassel was asked to throw again on 3rd down. Drops mean more attempts and further distort the completion percentage.
Also, I’m a long-time New England fan, and watched many of their games last year. Something like 56% of their passing yards were after the catch, and for that to happen the ball has to be delivered so that the receiver can catch and run; that sort of ball placement doesn’t just disappear all at once.
Thus, I would wonder if perhaps Cassel’s throwing mechanics are off this season, and doesn’t have adequate coaching to catch and correct slight problems in his mechanics that are affecting his accuracy. My memory of his late season games last year was that he delivered the ball in the short and intermediate game with superb accuracy, even in poor weather.
by DanielUM on Dec 7, 2009 12:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It seems his mechanics...
are a work in progress. It looks like he is trying to get rid of it quicker with a higher release, but you can’t make his feet any quicker, or improve his arm strength at this point. I am still holding out hope for him, but he has been the biggest disapointment for me the last several weeks. The o-line is playing better, and he’s not.
by 12t on Dec 7, 2009 5:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And Ben Roethlisberger is a lumbering bear.
Cassel’s got a bit of the bear in him, too, and he breaks some tackles and is capable of escaping. In about 2 years of play, it seems that he’s been coached more to avoid the mistake than to force the big completion. His petit hesitations could be as much risk-aversion by coaching staff than a true measure of up- or down-side. Just wait until the table is set.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 10:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I think I heard _8_ drops in 1st half, I think...
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 10:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is really
entertaining. I wonder how many of you who want Brodie to play were Brodie supporters when he was out there because he was sucking too. All Im saying is to give the guy a fair shot. And the comparison I made is very legitimate because all many people were saying was that Moss and Welker were the reasons for Cassel’s success. Anyone who can’t get that needs to re read the post. Now people want to talk about the defense in New England not being as good and other factors. Cassel is obviously gun shy. Most O lines may have 1 or 2 weak links, so the QB knows where the hole in the line is probably going to be. We have never had a good center since Cassel got here. The right tackle was the issue at the start of the season, then it was right guard, Albert went down then Wade smith was giving up tackles. Cassel never knows where the hit is coming from…..not to mention he’s in a new system. I have been saying and will continue to say that he has to get rid of the ball quicker, but lets give the guy a shot. This is so ridiculous that its funny to me :)
by Enite on Dec 7, 2009 1:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
C and RG were at issue from Day 1, as well.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 10:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Faulty premise.
I know that he’s not, but I would like to point something out to everyone who was saying that the only reason Cassel had the record he had last year in New England was because of the team… As of today, the best Brady can do is to match Cassel’s record last season in New England. And Brady has all of his offensive weapons.
Yes, but few of his defensive ones are left. The Patriots, you might remember, gave up Mike Vrabel, Ellis Hobbs, Rodney Harrison, Tedy Bruschii and Richard Seymour.
Their Offense might have all of the same weapons, but their Defense isn’t even close.
And, for the record, Brady’s Pats are averaging 50 more yards per game than they did last year under Cassel.
by JacinB on Dec 7, 2009 2:44 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
The Patriots also upgraded their secondary
The Patriots have gotten greatly improved play from the safety position in Meriwether, McGowan, Chung, and Sanders, while at linebacker Gary Guyton has replaced Tedy Bruschi, and is a faster, more athletic player. Harrison and Bruschi were savvy veteran players, but they no longer had the physical ability to play at high level week-in and week-out. The Patriots are probably better off at those positions this year. The corners are an improved group, although the team has had a questionable amount of confidence in Jonathan Wilhite.
The loss of Seymour certainly hurt the Patriots defense, as did the loss of Vrabel, but overall the unit is a more athlethic unit now than it was. In terms of experience, the Pats lost a lot, but gained a lot in rebuilding a unit that many had pointed to as old and slow.
by DanielUM on Dec 7, 2009 7:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
They almost certainly miss Seymour this season.
But the fact is that Brady’s looked pretty pedestrian at times. O-Line isn’t yet fixed in NE, to my eye.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 10:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's very true
I agree entirely about the O-line, and though I do think they miss Seymour, I don’t think he was a disruptive force on the line anymore – many, many quiet games in the last few seasons. Still a very good run defender, though.
Matt Light is aging, and has been a better run blocker than pass blocker for years, plus he’s been hurt. Logan Mankins, Dan Koppen, and Stephen Neal are good, to my eye, though Neal and Koppen have both been injured at times. Nick Kaczur is simply not very good – I was stunned to see that he was given an extension. The rookie, Sebastian Vollmer, has been impressive, but also injured. It’s a group that overachieved for years, and played well together, but has never really been dominant. The best players are probably in the interior.
The Patriots do a lot of creative things with backs, tight ends, and receivers in protection – Mike Mayock, I believe, did an analysis of the protection in the Colts-Pats game, and it was very interesting how they handled Freeney and Mathis, and really neutralized them. Not sure how much of that the Chiefs are able to do; I’m not sure I’d trust their backs and receivers to chip a rusher and get into a pattern effectively.
by DanielUM on Dec 9, 2009 2:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think maybe the "get into the pattern" was tough for the Pats, too.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 9, 2009 2:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair point...
Although I still feel like everything was working for the Patriots in that game until Maroney fumbled near the Indy goaline- it was a chance for the Pats to ice the game- even a field goal would have provided points for a win, and he blew it. I never really understood why that escaped notice, even with the infamous 4th down call.
And, Brady did throw for more than 370 yards in the game – someone was getting out into their routes. On at least two plays in Mayock’s breakdown a back or receiver chipped a lineman and then caught the pass. It’s an interesting study.
I’m really enjoying reading your thoughts on the topics – you’ve made some very good points, sir.
by DanielUM on Dec 9, 2009 2:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not being able to get the 1st on 4th and 2 says something about where they're at.
Feeling that they have a better chance of winning by going for it on 4th-and-2 says something, too.
They were doing quite well against Indy for 3 quarters. But it was significant that as the game wore on, it became more and more clear that Indy was able to steamroll ‘em on offense, and that quick pass that used to be a virtual lock for 5 yards was JUST short of gaining 2 against a team that, by that point, had a real handle on what NE was trying to do. They were going to get to Brady before any of his deeper threats were going to develop. That’s pretty huge.
I always appreciate real football talk, especially when it varies more or less significantly from mine. If we keep it civil (even if a bit vulgar – with rules of fair play), we get a better handle on what’s going on.
Likewise on the good points, uh, sir.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 10, 2009 7:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I dont disagree.
All Im saying is that the people who were taking ALL credit from Cassel and giving it to Moss and Welker have to admit that is a little ridiculous. And the defense has not lost all of the games this year for the pats. But this is probably my last post on this issue. I know that some people are going to complain that there is nothing to complain about. I am not saying anything definite…..Im just saying lets wait and see. Many are saying so and so is a bust, or a horrible coach, or coordinator. When we turn out to be successful, Im going to be looking for all of the negative people to see what they will find to complain about then.
by Enite on Dec 7, 2009 7:50 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Cassel made some key completions and key scrambles last season when protections broke down.
But as a newbie to an established system, he had a lot more predictability and trust with his receivers. I think the talent level of his starting WRs has ratcheted steadily upwards over the course of the season, but talent upgrade is necessarily synonymous with discontinuity.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 8, 2009 10:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is ridiculous
Cassel sucks all you have to do is pay attention to how he handels himself. He takes to long to go through his reads and never steps up in the pocket,not to mention he has a worse QB rating and completion percentage than Mike Vicks worst season.May I also mention that he cant hit the broad side of a barn.
by J ray on Dec 9, 2009 4:46 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
You may be right. But I'm leery about judging QBs when the supporting cast is unsound.
I’m also leery about paying close-to-franchise money for QB before the pieces are in place. You risk mis-evaluating the QB and you risk losing him to injury. Same goes for RB and LB.
Prediction for '09: Chiefs are looking like a .500 team, especially considering Denver's inattention to D-Line, Chokeland's disarray, and a San Diego team that looks like it's on the decline. With a weak schedule, Chiefs steal a few and win between 7 and 9 games, and if .500 or better, will contend for supremacy in a weak division.
by hmills110 on Dec 10, 2009 7:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
