clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

What Should The Kansas City Chiefs Do With Quarterback Matt Cassel?

New, comments

Despite the current standings after one-eighth of the regular season, the NFL was a quarterback's league last time I checked. The Super Bowl just several months ago featured Drew Brees vs. Peyton Manning. And the example of "Well, the Ravens won with Trent Dilfer" is now a decade old in the rear view mirror of NFL memories. So it's not really surprising to see teams already making a switch this early into the NFL season.

And don't be fooled into thinking that it's the losing teams switching their quarterbacks. You don't think the Eagles have playoff aspirations? Same with the Titans? Yet Andy Reid's high-profile switch to Michael Vick has everyone talking, while the more silent move by Jeff Fisher to bench Vince Young during their game should be almost as surprising. The Raiders gave Jason Campbell a game and a half to "stabilize" the quarterback position and the Panthers had visions of Matt Moore leading them all season long just a month ago. Now? Jimmy Clausen dons the starter's helmet for Week 3.

All of these moves are calculated strategies to either redeem a season slowly spiraling downward or to provide the "best chance of winning." The Eagles have a ton of talent on offense and defense. There's no reason to panic for any team at this point, to be honest. Yet making waves at the most important position on the football field is now a regular occurrence -- displaying the need to generate real production from the spot.

Which brings us to Matt Cassel. We've discussed over and over the pros and cons of Matt Cassel at quarterback. Yet for those who might say it's only been two games this season, that hasn't stopped several other franchises from making moves. After two games, Cassel sits 28th of 32 in completion percentage (52%), next to last in yards per attempt (4.9), and third from last in quarterback rating (55.7). The other guys occupying similar positions? Seneca Wallace, Trent Edwards, Matt Moore, Jason Campbell.

I'm not advocating one way or the other. But I'm curious when the Chiefs finally put a "1" in the loss column, will that change the argument for or against Matt Cassel in the line-up? It's interesting when lining up the numbers of other teams making a switch at quarterback with the Chiefs own starter and realizing the only difference might be that the Chiefs aren't 1-1 instead of 2-0.

Personally, I think Cassel should be the option all season and I believe a lot of these teams will be sad they switched early. Cassel deserves a full shot with his contract and the ability to gel with his receivers, offensive line and Charlie Weis' game plans and schemes. We spent a second rounder to grab him and Mike Vrabel and mid-season is no time to shift your leadership, in my opinion, unless the situation is beyond repair.

I also believe most of the teams currently switching will later regret it. The quarterback circus in Philly is rather ridiculous; to me, if you say you have a young franchise guy and you trade your old franchise guy, then you follow through a bit longer than two weeks on that decision. The Raiders already tried Bruce Gradkowski and Jason Campbell deserved more time there. Jimmy Clausen will in no way be ready to take the reins at this point for the Panthers. And Jeff Fisher should know where Kerry Collins got him last season before he switched to Vince Young to finish strong.
 
What do you believe the Chiefs will do? And what do you believe the Chiefs should do at the quarterback position? We'd love to hear your thoughts.