Chiefs vs. Raiders: Will It Be Jason Campbell Or Bruce Gradkowski?

by Joel Thorman on Nov 4, 2010 11:01 AM CDT in 2010 Kansas City Chiefs Season

The Oakland Raiders have yet to declare their starting quarterback for Sunday's game against the Kansas City Chiefs in the Oakland-Alameda Coliseum. It's down to Jason Campbell and Bruce Gradkowski at the moment. Head coach Tom Cable has already indicated that Gradkowski, who is injured, is the starting quarterback when healthy.

But is he healthy?

"He did good and he's moving forward rapidly now," said Cable, according to the (other) AP. "The question will be kind of what we talked about a few weeks ago, if he can do everything that's necessary to go out and play."

Gradkowski has been limited in practice but is splitting first team reps with Campbell. It appears that once again the Chiefs will have to wait until late in the week to find out who the starting quarterback will be.

Todd Haley talked about both players on Wednesday and suggested there was a "tempo change" when Gradkowski, "little quicker athlete", is in the game. But Haley does note Campbell's big arm.

Whoever makes the most mistakes would be my pick from a Chiefs perspective. I don't see the Raiders being able to overcome turnovers in this game. Gradkowski has four picks in 102 attempts and Campbell has four picks in 138 attempts so they're both turnover prone to some extent.

Matt Cassel, by the way, hasn't thrown an interception in over 119 pass attempts.

Tweet Comment 30 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I don't think it makes much difference

They aren’t drastically different styles of QB, I would imagine we are putting in a singular gameplan that does not depend at all on who is at QB.

I also don’t believe that they will go with Gradkowski even if he’s healthy. I just don’t see them taking Campbell out of the lineup after putting up 92 with him running the O the last two weeks.

I think if one struggles in the first half, we’re likely to see the other in the 2nd, if Oak is down.

I’m much more interested if Nnamdi’s going to play…it sounds like he’s out, but…didn’t like reading today that they are still hopeful he’s in.

by kcsno56 on Nov 4, 2010 11:09 AM CDT reply actions

they have already publicly stated

that as soon as gradkowski is healthy, he’s going in.

by brand0n84 on Nov 4, 2010 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions

Scroll down...

NFL HC’s lie in pressers all the time.

And sometimes it makes perfect sense why they would.

Herm lied several times in pressers. Chilly lied last week.

by kcsno56 on Nov 4, 2010 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions

agreed,

but its not just the HC saying this stuff. and he didnt say it just once either.

by brand0n84 on Nov 4, 2010 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions

Cable is the HC, and he's stated Grad is starting when healthy...

Cable might also have less say than any HC in the NFL as to who starts.

It just takes one call from the walking corpse.

by kcsno56 on Nov 4, 2010 11:23 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

obviously.

thats my point. thanks for proving it for me.

by brand0n84 on Nov 4, 2010 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions

?

Sorry, I’m not following:

but its not just the HC saying this stuff. and he didnt say it just once either.

Are you saying Al Davis said it?

by kcsno56 on Nov 4, 2010 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions

the corpse is WALKING these days ??……AWESOME…may he live and direct the FAders till he’s older than the dustiest mummy; love that Al (I"ll Never DIE) Davis

by chiefsfan4ever on Nov 4, 2010 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions

agreed..

on the part about Asomughi. He is a stud. one of the best corners in the league without question, especially if you consult his contract, and paychecks. missing him would be a huge blow to the raiders, and that pass d.

by brand0n84 on Nov 4, 2010 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions

if you consult his contract and paychecks

matt cassel is one of the best quarterbacks in the league

To make a bad day worse, spend it wishing for the impossible.

I've had the same dream every night this week. I think it means that the spring season flopped and my subconscious has gone into reruns.

by chiefsandcigars on Nov 4, 2010 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions

Matt Cassel

actually is though, according to statistics, and the chiefs record. he is 10th overall in qb rating for the year. There are 32 nfl quarterbacks who have thrown more interceptions than cassel this year. And there are 30 qbs who have taken more sacks this year than him. say what you want about matt cassel, but dude is holding this team together. he’s not turning the ball over. and we’re winning with him in there. which is way more than i can say for a lot of guys around the league.

by brand0n84 on Nov 4, 2010 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs

my point wasnt a knock on Cassel, at least, not entirely

but rather that you cant pick out the best players in the league because they make the most money…Asomughoa (however you spell it) IS a stud (like you said) and IS one of the best corners in the league (also like you said) based on stats alone, not his paycheck.

To make a bad day worse, spend it wishing for the impossible.

I've had the same dream every night this week. I think it means that the spring season flopped and my subconscious has gone into reruns.

by chiefsandcigars on Nov 4, 2010 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions

agreed.

my statement wasnt because of his paycheck, rather, just that his paycheck also suggested he should be.

by brand0n84 on Nov 4, 2010 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

I thought we had put this to rest.

Cassel’s contract (roughly 6 years, $63 million, iirc) is certainly huge compared to what most non NFL players make, but isn’t his contract roughly comparable to David Garrard’s (6 years, $60 million)? Certainly Matt Casse’ls contract doesn’t compare to Tom Brady’s 5 year, $78 million deal, and I’m sure it will be positively dwarfed by Peyton Manning’s new contract. It certainly already is by Eli Manning’s 7 year, $107 million deal. And if you look in our own division, Phillip Rivers’ current deal is worth $98 million over 7 years. I’m not saying Cassel’s contract isn’t big, but it’s pretty much the going rate for a good quarterback these days.

by MtHammer on Nov 4, 2010 4:15 PM CDT up reply actions

I also don’t believe that they will go with Gradkowski even if he’s healthy. I just don’t see them taking Campbell out of the lineup after putting up 92 with him running the O the last two weeks.

If you take Cable at his word, Campbell is only playing until Gradkowski can.

It doesn’t matter who the QB is – if we can limit the running game and limit our own mistakes, we will win

Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl

by PVChiefsfan on Nov 4, 2010 11:16 AM CDT reply actions

I don't take NFL HC's at their word in press conferences

We had one lie just last week.

by kcsno56 on Nov 4, 2010 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions

And now I recall, Andy Reid lied earlier this year as well...

Regarding his QB’s. It’s probably the #1 area where HC’s lie in the NFL.

by kcsno56 on Nov 4, 2010 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions

Reid flip-flopped

and I suppose Cable could too (though I am hesitant to call that a “lie”…things change)

Regardless, I don’t care who the Raiders start at QB – that position is not what worries me.

Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl

by PVChiefsfan on Nov 4, 2010 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions

You can call it a flip flop if you want

Sounds like we agree, I said I don’t think it makes much difference.

by kcsno56 on Nov 4, 2010 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions

Jinx

Matt Cassel, by the way, hasn’t thrown an interception in over 119 pass attempts.

Way to go, man. Now he will…and it will be all your fault.

Chiefs will. But...will Cassel?

10 + wins in 2010. Chiefs SHOCK the NFL!!! Mark it down.

by Scott B. on Nov 4, 2010 11:18 AM CDT reply actions

thats what we were saying on here before the bills game too.

maybe its a reverse jinx. if we DONT say it, then he will. Everyone keeps expecting Cassel to give the game away, and he keeps not doing that. so let ppl keep running their mouths, and Cassel can continue to quietly keep going about his own business.

by brand0n84 on Nov 4, 2010 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

"I don't see the Raiders being able to overcome turnovers in this game."

I’ll admit the Raiders have looked pretty good the last two weeks but turnovers will be the difference in the game. The Denver game got out of hand because the Broncos kept handing the ball to the Raiders, sure they had to still take advantage of those chances but when you start 3 straight possessions(after just scoring a TD), inside the opponents 25 chances are the score is going to get out of hand quickly. As well as the Raiders played Sunday the game was up in the air until again another turnover. The Chiefs have proven that they just don’t turn the ball over and don’t take dumb penalties(another thing the Raiders do) and when we do turn the ball over we don’t give up points. It will be close but I think the turnover battle will be the difference in our favor.

"Success is never ending, failure is never final."

by GenericBrand on Nov 4, 2010 11:23 AM CDT reply actions

I'm a little worried

We’ve been pretty fortunate not turning the ball over. Cassel in particular gets held up as:

Matt Cassel, by the way, hasn’t thrown an interception in over 119 pass attempts.

He should have had two last week. The throw to Pope up the seem, was a horrendous throw and horrendous decision.

I’m not Cassel bashing, I like what he’s done, I just don’t know how long he can keep up this streak.

I do think our running game leads us to play + TO possession football, and I do agree that this will be a key to the game.

by kcsno56 on Nov 4, 2010 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions

-1

On the otherhand, we forced 3 fumbles last week, and recovered none of them…so we were also unlucky in that regard.

by kcsno56 on Nov 4, 2010 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions

and DJ dropped a pick 6, and another pick

Team Pioli/Haley. Decade of the Chiefs.
Team Colquitt

by SDChief on Nov 4, 2010 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions

raidrs looing good

has anyone actually seen these raiders games? I saw highlights on inside the nfl last night and what I saw were allot of lucky breaks. Catches after the ball bonuced off of several players – interceptions after the ball bounces off the reciver and into the arms of the CB. Are they really looking good or is it just smoke and mirrors?

by tybme on Nov 4, 2010 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions

A little of both.

They aren’t as good as the 92-17 score would suggest but at the same time they deserve some credit for looking a whole lot better then they did earlier in the season. The defense seems to be playing with alot more confidence.

"Success is never ending, failure is never final."

by GenericBrand on Nov 4, 2010 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions

our game plan will be tight. Run, run, and run again. Keep it close, and wait for the Raiders to make a mistake. Not good for my well being, but it has worked vs. Oakland.

And, they may be trying to force us to prepare for two QBs.

by kc571 on Nov 4, 2010 11:27 AM CDT reply actions