11 replies to this topic

[nathanKent]

http://www.homeofthe...shed-gentlemen/

[Raised on Riots]

I'm somewhat surprised you did not mention that the high school playbook used by squad 1 was not the opened up playbook used by Croyle and Company. How does Croyle "out general" Cassel when Cassel's primary assignment is handing the ball off to a running back?

When Cassel scrambled to make that conversion, the pass was money and the Tight End was not.

If Haley wants to find out how well 1st squad plays Edwards-esque, Vanilla R2P2 with sub-par receivers; I hope he's learned all he needs to know.

[nathanKent]

Raised on Riots, on 16 August 2009 - 12:51 AM, said:

I'm somewhat surprised you did not mention that the high school playbook used by squad 1 was not the opened up playbook used by Croyle and Company. How does Croyle "out general" Cassel when Cassel's primary assignment is handing the ball off to a running back?

When Cassel scrambled to make that conversion, the pass was money and the Tight End was not.

If Haley wants to find out how well 1st squad plays Edwards-esque, Vanilla R2P2 with sub-par receivers; I hope he's learned all he needs to know.

They gave Brodie a few more shots at deep passes, but overall the playcalling wasn't that different IMO.

[Raised on Riots]

nathanKent, on 16 August 2009 - 12:55 AM, said:

Raised on Riots, on 16 August 2009 - 12:51 AM, said:

I'm somewhat surprised you did not mention that the high school playbook used by squad 1 was not the opened up playbook used by Croyle and Company. How does Croyle "out general" Cassel when Cassel's primary assignment is handing the ball off to a running back?

When Cassel scrambled to make that conversion, the pass was money and the Tight End was not.

If Haley wants to find out how well 1st squad plays Edwards-esque, Vanilla R2P2 with sub-par receivers; I hope he's learned all he needs to know.

They gave Brodie a few more shots at deep passes, but overall the playcalling wasn't that different IMO.

I don't say this to argue, but EVERYONE in the game thread observed the conservative play calling during squad 1's time on the field. I understand WHY it was done, but it sure made for some lame-assed football entertainment-wise.

But, these games aren't really for us anyway.

[Access Denied]

Nice write up nK.

[The_Jonas]

Cassel was 2/5 with 2 dropped 3rd down would have been conversions.

I gotta say that's not making me thing poorly of Cassel as much as what he was throwing at. A QB can only place the ball right on the numbers... after that it's kinda the WR's job to catch it.

[The_Jonas]

Raised on Riots, on 16 August 2009 - 01:05 AM, said:

nathanKent, on 16 August 2009 - 12:55 AM, said:

Raised on Riots, on 16 August 2009 - 12:51 AM, said:

I'm somewhat surprised you did not mention that the high school playbook used by squad 1 was not the opened up playbook used by Croyle and Company. How does Croyle "out general" Cassel when Cassel's primary assignment is handing the ball off to a running back?

When Cassel scrambled to make that conversion, the pass was money and the Tight End was not.

If Haley wants to find out how well 1st squad plays Edwards-esque, Vanilla R2P2 with sub-par receivers; I hope he's learned all he needs to know.

They gave Brodie a few more shots at deep passes, but overall the playcalling wasn't that different IMO.

I don't say this to argue, but EVERYONE in the game thread observed the conservative play calling during squad 1's time on the field. I understand WHY it was done, but it sure made for some lame-assed football entertainment-wise.

But, these games aren't really for us anyway.

I think the run heavy offense early on was just because Haley wasn't going to give LJ too many snaps and opted to hand him the ball when he was in there.

[jambal67]

A RT, a RT, a kingdom for a RT.!! That being said, I believe the play calling was pretty conservative, but maybe run first and pass second isn't a bad way to play this year. We truly need better receivers and protection. We've got LJ back to running tough, a pretty fair 2nd stringer in Battle, and a nice change of pace guy in Savage. This might be a throwback to Marty ball, but as boring as that may have been to some of you, at least we went to the playoffs.
Face it folks, we're not going to compete for the AFC West title this year. If we go 6-10, matching the number of wins we've had in TWO seasons, and are in another 6 to 8, I'll be happy. If fate smiles and we hit .500, I'll dance a jig. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. I'm hoping for marked improvement with a real shot at next year. It took DICK and Herm a lot of years to ruin a once proud team, so don't expect Haley and Pioli to turn it around overnight.

[nathanKent]

The_Jonas, on 16 August 2009 - 09:01 AM, said:

Cassel was 2/5 with 2 dropped 3rd down would have been conversions.

I gotta say that's not making me thing poorly of Cassel as much as what he was throwing at. A QB can only place the ball right on the numbers... after that it's kinda the WR's job to catch it.

I'm in agreement with you. I hope I did an adequate job of conveying that.

[BrooklynChiefsFan]

jambal67, on 16 August 2009 - 10:33 AM, said:

A RT, a RT, a kingdom for a RT.!! That being said, I believe the play calling was pretty conservative, but maybe run first and pass second isn't a bad way to play this year. We truly need better receivers and protection. We've got LJ back to running tough, a pretty fair 2nd stringer in Battle, and a nice change of pace guy in Savage. This might be a throwback to Marty ball, but as boring as that may have been to some of you, at least we went to the playoffs.
Face it folks, we're not going to compete for the AFC West title this year. If we go 6-10, matching the number of wins we've had in TWO seasons, and are in another 6 to 8, I'll be happy. If fate smiles and we hit .500, I'll dance a jig. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. I'm hoping for marked improvement with a real shot at next year. It took DICK and Herm a lot of years to ruin a once proud team, so don't expect Haley and Pioli to turn it around overnight.

true. And even when Dick made his version of the team good, it still took him 3 years to do so. I know some people hated that team and would call them flawed, but #1 seed overall in the playoffs was still a good team. Blame it on the ghost of you know who that we magically drew the Colts. No one seems to remember that we would have beat them if not for the Priest Holmes fumble. Who knows what would have happened in the Championship game then?

[NOLA]

BrooklynChiefsFan, on 16 August 2009 - 06:34 PM, said:

true. And even when Dick made his version of the team good, it still took him 3 years to do so. I know some people hated that team and would call them flawed, but #1 seed overall in the playoffs was still a good team. Blame it on the ghost of you know who that we magically drew the Colts. No one seems to remember that we would have beat them if not for the Priest Holmes fumble. Who knows what would have happened in the Championship game then?

Vermeil's team was good, and jambal suffers from a combo of misguided hatred and revisionist history when it comes to this subject.

We were the #2 seed after 2003, not #1 (Patriots got that at 14-2). We would've beat them, however, and I really believe that; unlike the Colts, we were a very physical offense, and our oline could've opened up a run game on frozen ground that the Patriots didn't see from Peyton & Co.

[BrooklynChiefsFan]

NOLA, on 16 August 2009 - 06:39 PM, said:

BrooklynChiefsFan, on 16 August 2009 - 06:34 PM, said:

true. And even when Dick made his version of the team good, it still took him 3 years to do so. I know some people hated that team and would call them flawed, but #1 seed overall in the playoffs was still a good team. Blame it on the ghost of you know who that we magically drew the Colts. No one seems to remember that we would have beat them if not for the Priest Holmes fumble. Who knows what would have happened in the Championship game then?

Vermeil's team was good, and jambal suffers from a combo of misguided hatred and revisionist history when it comes to this subject.

We were the #2 seed after 2003, not #1 (Patriots got that at 14-2). We would've beat them, however, and I really believe that; unlike the Colts, we were a very physical offense, and our oline could've opened up a run game on frozen ground that the Patriots didn't see from Peyton & Co.

I feel like you always catch me on that fact (or something of the same vein). Point remains, when he finally got his Chiefs to turn the corner, Vermeil had some good squads. It's amazing to think of how good Priest Holmes was in his prime. Like, seriously.