Chiefs Disappointed in McCluster - Page 9

Hammock Parties · 10-10-2010, 08:41 PM

Bla bla bla, he's a playmaker, he has two touchdowns already, whatever.

He has seven catches for 93 yards. 1/3 of that yardage came on one play. At least two of those are screen passes I believe.

That ****ing sucks.

This guy needs to be a threat as a WIDE RECEIVER. He hasnt made a single play down the field. I'm not even talking 20 yards. How about 10? How about coming off the line, putting your foot in the ground, getting open and giving Cassel a target?

I'm not willing to accept the idea that Cassel is so god awful he makes all our wide receivers look terrible.

McCluster hasn't done shit yet. And he was utter garbage in Indy.

Don't buy any of his ****ing t-shirts.

**dirk digler** · 10-10-2010, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

3 INT's in 4 games.

Not exactly great.

4 TD's in 4 games.

****ing pathetic.

650 yards?

That's a week and a half for Kyle Orton.

KYLE.

ORTON.

I was thinking more along the lines of Jake Cutler INT rate.

**dirk digler** · 10-10-2010, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

It's not the issue about turnovers or anything. The issue here is that he can't complete a pass of 15+ yards on a consistent basis, and not to mention that his arm strength, well, it's like a rainbow-ish throw that feels like it takes forever for the ****ing ball to get to the receiver.

I wonder if the majority of the playbook is being shelved because the coaching staff is/are aware of the fact that he can't throw more than 10-15 yards with some force on the ball, that they're having to settle for 3-5 yard dumpoffs, slants, ins, curls, etc. with a little occasional deep bomb attempt.

I agree with all of that but just listening to Haley every week talking about how little margin of error they have makes me think that Cassel with all his shortcomings they think he is the safest QB and won't turn the ball over.

chiefzilla1501 · 10-10-2010, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Of course he thought that.

He passed on potential franchise QB's in back-to-back drafts that at minimum would have provided insurance in the event Cassel sucked.

OTW, like I've said, looking more and more like missing Sanchez was a huge mistake. And the 2009 draft was an embarrassment. I just don't understand the case for 2010 and how people are using McCluster's performance against the Colts as some sort of a justification. I agree the Chiefs needed insurance at QB, but I'm not using a 2nd round pick on a QB unless I want him to be a starter for me.

It goes back to the way people move the uprights. There are about a million and a half threads about how the only way to get a franchise QB is in the first round. If that's the case, then Clausen doesn't fit that mold and we would have wasted a 2nd round pick on a career backup.

Lumping Clausen into the "potential franchise QB" category is very liberally stretching what I thought most people on this board were saying pretty clearly about the importance of first round QBs.

Silock · 10-10-2010, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler

I agree with all of that but just listening to Haley every week talking about how little margin of error they have makes me think that Cassel with all his shortcomings they think he is the safest QB and won't turn the ball over.

Safe? We're talking about playing it safe from a guy that went for an onside kick to start the game off, and then went for it on 4th down instead of taking the points?

That can't be the reason.

**dirk digler** · 10-10-2010, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock

Safe? We're talking about playing it safe from a guy that went for an onside kick to start the game off, and then went for it on 4th down instead of taking the points?

That can't be the reason.

That had more to do with the opponent than anything else.

Coach · 10-10-2010, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler

I agree with all of that but just listening to Haley every week talking about how little margin of error they have makes me think that Cassel with all his shortcomings they think he is the safest QB and won't turn the ball over.

Eh, I'd rather take my chances with Brodie than Matt Cassel as of this point.

**dirk digler** · 10-10-2010, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Of course he thought that.

He passed on potential franchise QB's in back-to-back drafts that at minimum would have provided insurance in the event Cassel sucked.

2009 probably. 2010 no chance. Clausen isn't even close to NFL ready.

**dirk digler** · 10-10-2010, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

Eh, I'd rather take my chances with Brodie than Matt Cassel as of this point.

As I would and stated such after the Cleveland game.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 10-10-2010, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler

2009 probably. 2010 no chance. Clausen isn't even close to NFL ready.

And where did I say anything about either of them starting?

I'm pretty sure I referred to both as insurance.

Hell, they had no contingency plan whatsoever.

Draft, FA, scrap heap, nothing.

Which tells me they don't think Cassel is the problem.

Coach · 10-10-2010, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

And where did I say anything about either of them starting?

I'm pretty sure I referred to both as insurance.

Hell, they had no contingency plan whatsoever.

Draft, FA, scrap heap, nothing.

Which tells me they don't think Cassel is the problem.

And becuase of that, I am afraid that they may continue to go forward in 2011 with Cassel, contract be damned.....

chiefzilla1501 · 10-10-2010, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

And where did I say anything about either of them starting?

I'm pretty sure I referred to both as insurance.

Hell, they had no contingency plan whatsoever.

Draft, FA, scrap heap, nothing.

Which tells me they don't think Cassel is the problem.

You don't use a second round pick as insurance. You use a second round pick on a guy you believe will be very good at the position he plays. Right now, you are hanging your case on the idea that Jimmy Clausen has potential to be a QBOTF and that is a very hard argument to make right now.

I get that Clausen couldn't be a whole lot worse than Cassel. But the goal isn't to get better than Cassel. The goal is to come as close to a franchise QB as we can get.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 10-10-2010, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

You don't use a second round pick as insurance. You use a second round pick on a guy you believe will be very good at the position he plays. Right now, you are hanging your case on the idea that Jimmy Clausen has potential to be a QBOTF and that is a very hard argument to make right now.

I get that Clausen couldn't be a whole lot worse than Cassel. But the goal isn't to get better than Cassel. The goal is to come as close to a franchise QB as we can get.

Feel free to ignore the other QB mentioned.

**dirk digler** · 10-10-2010, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

And where did I say anything about either of them starting?

I'm pretty sure I referred to both as insurance.

Hell, they had no contingency plan whatsoever.

Draft, FA, scrap heap, nothing.

Which tells me they don't think Cassel is the problem.

To me it sounds like they like Croyle as the backup and as insurance in comparison to Clausen.

They messed up not picking Sanchez.

I also understand why they are not saying anything negative about Cassel or even mentioning Brodie. They don't want a QB controversy because once that happens the season is lost and your locker room is fractured.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 10-10-2010, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

And becuase of that, I am afraid that they may continue to go forward in 2011 with Cassel, contract be damned.....

What choice do they have?

I have my doubts they'll spend a high pick on a QB next year as it is.

Starting him?

No ****ing way.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 10-10-2010, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler

To me it sounds like they like Croyle as the backup and as insurance.

Then play the ****ing kid, because the goddamn sacred cow isn't getting the job done.

You can't give games away in this league.

Today, they gave one away.

10-10-2010, 08:41 PM
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4800478	Disappointed in McCluster Bla bla bla, he's a playmaker, he has two touchdowns already, whatever. He has seven catches for 93 yards. 1/3 of that yardage came on one play. At least two of those are screen passes I believe. That **ing sucks. This guy needs to be a threat as a WIDE RECEIVER. He hasnt made a single play down the field. I'm not even talking 20 yards. How about 10? How about coming off the line, putting your foot in the ground, getting open and giving Cassel a target? I'm not willing to accept the idea that Cassel is so god awful he makes all our wide receivers look terrible. McCluster hasn't done shit yet. And he was utter garbage in Indy. Don't buy any of his **ing t-shirts.
Posts: 277,451