45 replies to this topic

[NOLA]

ChiefsChick23, on 24 November 2009 - 11:47 PM, said:

Tridents don't kill people, people with tridents kill people.

That's why I don't keep people in my house.

[Raised on Riots]

ChiefsChick23, on 24 November 2009 - 11:47 PM, said:

Tridents don't kill people, people with tridents kill people.

[milkman]

The_Jonas, on 24 November 2009 - 11:39 PM, said:

And you don't think that maybe

http://www.nfl.com/s...TM&d-447263-p=1

Has something to do with it?

You're putting everything on Cassel. You can't credit everyone else when something goes right and blame only him when things don't.

I'm not a big fan of being forced to defend the guy, but you seriously aren't even trying to be objective when it comes to him.

I just got around to reading this article this morning, and I'm with you here.

I am not a fan of Cassel, and I have some questions and concerns about his arm strength and pocket awareness.
I've talked about my concern that, as bad as this Chiefs O-Line is/has been, he actually makes it look worse than it is.

However, to place the blame solely on Cassel for the Chiefs inability to move the chains and sustain drives making an inaccurate assertion due to bias, or simply disengenuous.

And the other thing that I find to be a rather ridiculous statement is the following:

Quote

I’m glad Tony Gonzalez isn’t here. Tony would do for Cassel what Wes Welker did for him last year in New England: obscure the fact that the guy can’t really play NFL-caliber quarterback.

.

The fact is, there are only a handful of QBs that can succeed and raise the level of play around them,
Most others are simply game managers that succeed or fail as the result of the talent around them.
Hell, Eli Manning is showing us how much he needs a reliable big target to really succeed.

Cassel is not a franchise QB.
Put him the right system, give him protection and some weapons, and he can make some plays.
Give him a defense that can make stops and and create turnovers and give the ball to the offense in favorable field position, and he can lead the Chiefs to some wins.

Further, on another subject, his claim here:

Quote

It probably mattered more for Pendergast. Haley’s postseason exposition earned him the opportunity to accept a better, higher paying job. Clancy’s contributions to January’s and February’s network television offerings, on the other hand, got him fired. He took a defense chock full of talented players and proved that it was distinctly possible to accomplish nothing with everything.

Is another misrepresentation.

Let me be clear on this, Clancy Pendergast sucks, and I hope like hell that he is replaced at the end of this season.

That being said, that Cardinal defense showed up in the playoffs last year.
Even in the SB, when Reothlisberger did what he does so often, lead his team to a last minute win, that defense played well, and if the players execute, and make tackles and sack Reothlisberger on a couple of big plays when they let him get away, the Cards win that game.

The failure to stop that game winning drive was on the players, not Pendergast.

And that Card defense played as big a role in getting the Cards to the SB in the playoffs as did the offense.

Pendergast was fired because that Card defense underperformed in the regular season.

[nathanKent]

In the postseason the Cards' defense was 6th in overall yardage, 5th in rushing yardage, and 9th in passing yardage. They were better than they were during the regular season, but their numbers were still pedestrian at best.

[The_Jonas]

nathanKent, on 29 November 2009 - 12:22 PM, said:

In the postseason the Cards' defense was 6th in overall yardage, 5th in rushing yardage, and 9th in passing yardage. They were better than they were during the regular season, but their numbers were still pedestrian at best.

While that is true, that's because of the Philly game.

They held Atlanta, Carolina, and Pittsburgh under 300 yards total. They held all 4 opponents under 100 yards rushing.

What's more is they forced 13 turnovers in 4 games.

If you're forcing 3+ turnovers per game in the playoffs, the defense is coming up big.

[nathanKent]

The_Jonas, on 29 November 2009 - 12:30 PM, said:

What's more is they forced 13 turnovers in 4 games.

They were kicking ass in forcing turnovers during the regular season too. Nothing changed. They were always a talented group. Just poorly coached. You arguing semantics as to when they rose above their coaching and when they didn't doesn't make my point any less valid.