For the record, I cannot and will not ever root against the Kansas City Chiefs. I don't care if we're talking about the 16th game of the season with the No. 1 pick on the line. I never want to see the Chiefs lose. Now, if a loss leads to a top five pick, that makes the loss more palatable, but to me, it never makes it acceptable.

Yet, at the same time, I can understand the rationale behind the "Suck 4 Luck" phenomena. That leaves me a little off-balanced. I am a huge Andrew Luck fan and believe he has the potential to be the next Peyton Manning. Plus, I think Matt Cassel is a long way from being the quarterback necessary to win the team a Super Bowl. So short-term pain would be worth the long-term gain, right?

I don't know the answer to that. Instead, I'll build the case for both sides of the argument and let you decide.

Continue reading this post »

Well, it's happened. The Chiefs are a few games into the season and the pitchforks are already out. Let me make a bold statement. If Todd Haley is fired, then the Chiefs are committing a grave injustice.

A head coach can only coach the players he's given to work with. But naturally, the head coach is the first person you look to when the fingers start pointing. Some of the Chiefs' problems in 2011 are due to poor decisions made by Haley. Some are due to extraordinarily bad luck. Yet more are due to the fact that this team is still a little flawed regardless of who is coaching.

Would the Chiefs have been competitive had Moeaki, Berry, and Charles been healthy? Did Scott Pioli give Haley the pieces to field a competitive team? And, while Todd Haley has made some mistakes as a head coach, how many of those mistakes could have been avoided through front office intervention?

After answering those questions, it's hard to be too tough on Todd Haley. More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

It's almost go time, which means that  I need to get on the ball with these "State of the Chiefs" evaluations.

Today, let's talk a little bit about the offensive line:

The Chiefs Offensive Line Grade: D

Chiefs' Offseason Grade: C-

This time, I won't be so generous. I could probably sum this all up in one sentence: "If the Chiefs lose any of their starters, the team is screwed." But still, more after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

I know what you're thinking right now. What is going on with the whole Jonathan Baldwin/Thomas Jones locker room scuffle? Which is why I thought it would be appropriate to start talking about the Chiefs' Defensive Line.

Give the readers what they want, right?

Anyway, in my last piece, I talked at length about the Chiefs' Quarterback situation. I gave the Chiefs a generous grade of a B, but pointed out (clearly to strong agreement) that their backup Quarterback situation leaves a lot to be desired. On the Defensive Line, I'm going down a pretty similar path:

The Chiefs' Defensive Line Grade: B+

Chiefs' Offseason Grade: B

More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

The Chiefs' regular season is rapidly approaching, which makes this a good time to start talking about their roster position by position. Today, we'll start with the Quarterback position.

Here's where I would grade the Chiefs today:

The Chiefs' Quarterback Grade: B

Chiefs' Offseason Grades: B+

A lower grade for sure, but it has a lot less to do with the Quarterback than it does with the situation.

I'll explain more after the jump

Continue reading this post »

Last week, I mentioned that the Chiefs' best chance at a Super Bowl run is to build around the defense. That means building the defense to be dominant and focusing on a terrific running game on offense. Again, while I've grown to like Matt Cassel, I also recognize that he's probably best suited to win a Super Bowl in Eli Manning fashion, not in Drew Brees fashion.

Naturally, the Chiefs can't have the negative offense they sometimes had last year in the passing game. Adding Steve Breaston and Jonathan Baldwin will help big time. If the Chiefs' offense became dominant with the kinds of pieces they added this offseason, then they don't have to worry about building an elite defense. I just don't see that happening. 

And so, if the Chiefs are built to be strong but unspectacular on offense, then they need to build to be elite on defense. The Chiefs have made the moves to be a strong defense in the short-term, but it remains to be seen if they have the pieces to dominate in the long-term.

More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

It looks like the Kansas City Chiefs got a steal by signing Steve Breaston. That's great news. Supposedly the Chiefs are looking into Le'Ron McClain too. Even better news. But I'm not sure I can say that it's great news. Not yet, at least.

What seems evident to me is that the Chiefs are trying to stack the deck...on offense. They have not hesitated to fill every single offensive gap with quality players.

They're so committed, in fact, that they want to have not one, not two, but three top-notch receivers. Not one, but two outstanding running backs. With the first pick of the 2011 draft, they picked Jonathan Baldwin. They brought in two free agent veterans on the offensive line in Ryan Lilja and Casey Wiegmann. They brought in Thomas Jones as a veteran No. 2 back and may be taking a look at Le'Ron McClain. The Chiefs are one right tackle away from having their offense filled with quality players at virtually every position. Even the depth positions.

But while it's exciting to me that the Chiefs are trying to get better on offense, I'll hold my applause until I see clear commitments to improving the defense.

More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

Raise your hand if you're convinced that Matt Cassel is a Quarterback who can lead the Chiefs to a Super Bowl. Put your hand down.

Now raise your hand if you're convinced that Matt Cassel is NOT a Quarterback who can lead the Chiefs to a Super Bowl.

My guess is that there are a few of you in the first camp, a few of you in the second camp, and a huge chunk of you in the "neither" camp. Good--that's where I am too. I thought Matt Cassel showed signs toward the end of the season that he could be the guy, but he still has a lot to prove. He has to prove he can consistently beat elite competition and that he can win in big situations, particularly in the playoffs. Giving up on him would undermine the massive improvements he made in 2010. Yet, my sense is that many in the "neither" group have explored the alternate possibility: becoming too confident in a Quarterback that may not be the answer could set the franchise back several years.

So before I really dive into the post, let me throw out the following disclosure: my opinion that the Chiefs need to draft a Quarterback early does not in any way suggest that the Chiefs need to draft a replacement for Cassel. Instead, the Chiefs need to draft an extra option.

More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

Let's get one thing straight: Jamaal Charles is a flat-out baller and he is a difference-maker for the Chiefs. When he's on the field and has room to run, he is unstoppable. When you have a player that important, you want to find a way to gameplan to get him involved.

I know that we're all getting over the Kansas City Chiefs' playoff loss and move on, so allow me to touch on one last point before we do that. What exactly happened to Jamaal Charles in the Chiefs-Ravens playoff game? Why did he dominate the first half and then become a non-factor in the second half? Did the coaches forget about him? Was he punished for fumbling? Was he hurt? Did the Ravens make a halftime adjustment that took him out of the game?

The only people who know the answers to these questions are the coaches and the players, and they're probably not going to tell anybody the complete story. Let me offer my best guess, based on what i saw in the game: it had some to do with injury, just a little to do with getting too cute with playcalling, and probably some to do with Charles not being 100%. But, in my opinion, the biggest factor was that the Chiefs 'players, not the coaches, effectively took Charles out of the second half.

Huh? I'll explain more after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

Could the Chiefs have beaten the Ravens? Of course. Should they have been expected to? Absolutely not. Not at this stage in the Chiefs' "process."

Understandably, some fans will be in a panic.

"The Chiefs were outcoached."

"The Chiefs were a product of their schedule."

"The Chiefs were an embarrassment."

While there's an element of truth to each of those kinds of comments, let's be real about one thing: the Chiefs weren't supposed to make the Super Bowl this year. Most of us didn't even expect them to make the playoffs. They were David and Baltimore was Goliath. We watch movies every day that mislead us into thinking that David has a fighting chance against Golaith, but the statistics tell us otherwise. Baltimore has a lot more talent than the Chiefs and won a game they should have won.

And that in no way upsets me. More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

Dr. Jekyl? Or Mr. Hyde?

Princess Fiona? Or Ogre?

Beauty (or Beautician)? Or the Beast?

Who are the Kansas City Chiefs? Are they a legit 10-6 team? Or are they paper tigers that benefited off of a 4-0 record against the NFC West? Are they playoff contenders? Or should we be concerned that they got demolished in 3 of the last 4 division games they played?

We really won't know until Sunday, because to me, it represents the first competitive game the Chiefs have played in a long time where they have their deck completely stacked and the stakes are high. Against San Diego, the Chiefs were minus their starting Quarterback; against Oakland, the Chiefs were potentially minus any real motivation to win. But it goes back to a point I made earlier in the season: more than likely, the Chiefs are an ascending team that still has talent deficiencies that require a perfect football game for them to win games against competitive teams. If they play fundamentally sound, mistake-free football, they can compete with just about anybody regardless of talent gaps.

I started the year thinking that this was a consistent formula that Haley had established for the team. In recent weeks, I've become a little concerned that they're a little bit of beauty and a little bit of beast. The Kansas City Chiefs are basically like a box of chocolates (you know the rest).

More movie references to come.

Today, I'll start with the offense.

Continue reading this post »

Worst to First.

Pretender to Contender.

4-12 to 10-5 (potentially 11-5?)

The Chiefs have turned their team around in a very big way and if we truly believe that success and failure should be credited and blamed from the top-down, then Todd Haley undoubtedly belongs in the Coach of the Year conversation. The question is, does he have a legitimate chance of winning the award? And, if so, does he deserve it? I will do my best to answer this question as objectively as I can.

Continue reading this post »

Congratulations, Matt Cassel. You have officially won me over.

Yeah, yeah, I know. Matt Cassel put in a gutsy performance coming back from an appendectomy. Believe me, I'm not trying to short-sell that effort, but he did much more than that on Sunday.

In the beginning of the season, I laid out a pretty detailed wish list of things he would need to do to be considered the Quarterback of the Future for the Chiefs. Honestly, I thought he was a long shot. A few early wins did nothing to sway my opinion. Yeah, the Chiefs were winning games with Matt Cassel, but they weren't winning many of those games because of him. His job was to avoid the big mistake and to take advantage of what the running game and defense gave him. Still, he was wildly inconsistent on third downs and had questionable pass accuracy. As the season progressed, we learned that the Chiefs' defense can be a little patchier than we thought. We learned that teams can successfully limit the run offense by committing to stopping the run. Suddenly, the wheels started to fall off the wagon. It's no longer okay for Cassel to play not to lose. He would need to start taking command of the Chiefs' offense. Of the team. That became particularly clear after the Chiefs got handled by Denver.

I thought he took charge with an almost nervous energy. The passing game started to open up out of necessity and Cassel's response was to make some plays followed by major bouts of inconsistency. Against Denver the first time around, he pretty much took the Chiefs completely out of the game by misfiring on first half throws that an NFL Quarterback needs to complete. When he came out of the locker room at halftime, he was a different Quarterback. Skeptic that I am, I chalked it up to playing out of desperation and to Denver playing Prevent defense. Little did I realize that the Chiefs' embarrassing first half performance against Denver may have been the most positive moment for the Chiefs all season. It appears to be the game where Matt Cassel learned he had to be the man.

As the season progressed and teams learned how to scheme the Chiefs, the Chiefs needed to find an unquestionable leader. Matt Cassel showed some of that the last few games. Against, St. Louis, he sent that message loud and clear. This team is his. He's got this.

Continue reading this post »

Based on Matt Cassel's performance in 2009, I never thought I'd say this, but the Kansas City Chiefs really missed him on Sunday. And oh by the way, that's not necessarily an indictment on Brodie Croyle nor is that a glorification of all things Matt Cassel.

Croyle looked out of sync, which is something you would expect from a guy who has barely seen meaningful playing time suddenly forced into a shootout. And while not having Matt Cassel on the field appeared to really hurt the Chiefs, there's no guarantee that he would have played any better than Croyle (especially given that he only threw for 68 yards the first time against the Chargers). It's all speculation. Besides, all this game really proved is that Cassel is clearly the best Quarterback on the roster. It doesn't necessarily say that the Chiefs would have done better with a quarterback other than Cassel under the helm.

We should be equally disturbed that this team as a whole, from the coaches down to players, acted like they didn't believe Brodie Croyle could win for them.

But yes, even this tough Matt Cassel critic can't deny that not having him on the field hurt the Chiefs in very visible ways. I'll explain more after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

Touchdown totals. Yardage totals. This is how fantasy football tells us we should evaluate a running back. There is no consideration for how hard a player had to work to achieve those statistics. That's why Willie Roaf and Jonathan Ogden never won an MVP. That's why Shaun Alexander was an MVP, despite having an ultra-strong supporting cast to set the table for him.

And so, a player like Jamaal Charles really throws people for a loop. He's untraditional. He's not the Chiefs' full-time running back, he's not a touchdown machine, and he may not end up leading the league in rushing.

But let's put statistics aside for a moment. Here's a question I like to ask: of all the players up for MVP consideration, which players are the most irreplaceable? I'll dive into why Charles is in that mix after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

Following the blowout against Denver a few weeks ago, Todd Haley commented on how he wanted to fix the team by focusing on the basics.

Duh. Obvi, right? I mean, a team that knows how to tackle and catch and executes the fundamentals is going to be better than one that doesn't, right? Pure coachspeak, and yet something interesting happened after Haley's comments. The Chiefs followed a blowout loss with two impressive wins. I've heard many comment that this turnaround was due to the light suddenly turning on for players like Matt Cassel and Dwayne Bowe. No doubt there's truth to that.

But to me, the real turning point for the Chiefs was Haley's devotion to the basics. The basics extend further than just blocking and tackling. Sometimes, teams have problems because they have talent gaps. Other times, teams have problems because they don't make the plays they're supposed to. The first problem is a front office problem and one that can be difficult to address midseason. The latter is a problem that is affected by coaching. 

Because maybe I'm alone in this, but while the Chiefs are 7-4, there were some wins that felt more comfortable than others, and the past two wins in particular felt especially comfortable. I could just use pure opinion to say that "the Buffalo win, while great, just didn't feel right." But I'd rather try to figure out if the numbers tell us anything. The numbers tell me that the Chiefs are winning more comfortably of late because they are more consistently executing the basics.  More details after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

I've been a pretty harsh critic of Matt Cassel this season and undoubtedly one of AP's toughest Cassel critics. Some may think I've been unfair in this criticism, but I feel I've been pretty consistent on a few key points: he needs to be efficient on third down, he needs to make big plays when the Chiefs need him, he needs to prove he can make plays downfield, and he needs to prove he can find a receiver outside of his primary read. A few simple points, but still, we've seen quite a bit of inconsistency on most of those points this season.

I don't care what his TD/INT ratio or QB rating or his yardage totals look like. Instead, I care about all those above points. Even at his most statistically productive, there haven't been many games where I could grade Cassel as above "good enough." I know there are some who are okay with Cassel being the Chiefs' version of Trent Dilfer. Not I. In the playoffs, no matter how good the defense is, they could easily have an off-game. And sometimes you can't rely on your dominant run game to move the ball consistently. In those instances, particularly in big games, you need the Quarterback to step up and take charge. Rather than be a Quarterback the Chiefs can win with, Cassel needs to be a Quarterback who consistently leads the charge toward winning games.

The good news is that in 2 of the past 3 games, I've been happy with Cassel's Quarterback play, the first being the Oakland game (even in a loss). Against Arizona, I thought he had a terrific game. Cassel didn't have happy feet, he was mostly throwing strikes and with purpose, was effective on third down, and was looking off his primary read on most plays. He still has a lot to prove, but to me, yesterday made me feel like maybe there is a Quarterback in Cassel that the Chiefs can build around.

Continue reading this post »

It was bound to happen. The Chiefs were bound to get blown out one of these games. Now the wheels have fallen completely off the bandwagon.

Let me remind everyone of two critical points. Write them down. Study them hard. Pop quiz yourself. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

• This is the first game the Chiefs lost in convincing fashion. The fact that it happened 9 games into the season isn't a bad thing
• The Chiefs all season long have been an average, non-playoff team cloaked in exquisite robes

Did you take notes? If you didn't, read the above points again.

Enough of this ridiculous talk about the Chiefs falling out. Enough ridiculous talk or comments about Todd Haley coaching for his job. Enough ridiculous comments about Todd Haley losing his team. Long story short, this is a team that still has talent gaps that has been largely overachieving all season long. Despite that, yesterday was the first game all season where they were never really in a position to win. That means the problem isn't with the team or the coach; the problem is with the unrealistic expectations put on this team as a result of finally winning games.

I'll explain more after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

This is not a gut reaction to a loss. There are a lot of culprits for the Chiefs' loss to the Raiders. I hate it when I'm prophetic about things that go wrong, but let's look again at what killed the Chiefs against the Raiders: stupid penalties, inability to convert on third down, and horrible special teams play. 

But regardless of all the penalties, the Chiefs were in a position to seal the game in regulation and to piece together a game-winning drive in Overtime.The problem on Sunday is that they couldn't seal the deal on offense. When you look back at the season, this has actually been a recurring problem. In most games, they get away with it. But that's not going to happen for long and they can't expect to win big games consistently if that piece is missing.

Now, I get that the Chiefs' defense failed to stop the Raiders twice, but as I will highlight in this post, they were put in a bad situation because the Chiefs' offense didn't make plays when they had to. More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

A win is a win. I get that. But there was something that just didn't feel right about the Chiefs' win against Buffalo on Sunday. I responded to the win the same way I responded to the Chiefs backing into the playoffs several years ago under Herm Edwards: "I'm really excited that things worked out for us in the end, but I just don't feel like we deserved it." I get that Buffalo is a better team than their record indicates, but if the Chiefs play like they did on Sunday and Oakland plays like they did on Sunday, I don't think the Chiefs walk out of Oakland with a win.

What's disconcerting is that the Chiefs we saw on Sunday are not the Chiefs we saw the weeks prior.  In some cases, it is what it is. Our receivers are who they are. Our pass rushers outside of Hali are who they are. But in most cases, we've seen that the Chiefs are capable of better. That's great news, because the Chiefs can get back on track just by doing the things they have been doing.

And to me, this is a statement game. The Chiefs have proven to the world they are legit, but they need to step up and beat an ascending team. The Chiefs are once again a dominant force at Arrowhead; now they need to prove they can win a tough road game. I believe that if the Chiefs get back on track, they have a very good chance at beating Oakland.

Continue reading this post »

It's always interesting to me the way that people often look at decisions through such a narrow lens. Randy Moss is a great player. He would make the Chiefs' offense better. He is much better than anyone the Chiefs have. What do the Chiefs have to lose by bringing him in?

I don't deny that he makes the Chiefs a lot better on offense. What is head-scratching to me is how many people seem to think that the Chiefs have nothing to lose by bringing the guy in for the remainder of the season. And so, you'll hear a lot of talk about the benefits. You'll hear talk about how he opens up the running game by pulling the safeties back, how he opens up the underneath game for guys like Dexter McCluster, how he gives the Chiefs a legit vertical threat that they haven't had since Taft was President (you're welcome, voters, for the election reference). All of those points are completely true.

But on election week, what better time than now is there to spin the parts that we don't like. You'll hear a lot of talk about how Moss just didn't respect Brad Childress, but that's okay because he's not a good coach. Forget that just a few weeks earlier, Moss was cut by Bill Bellichick, a guy who knows a thing or two about coaching. You'll hear people talk about how the Chiefs and Haley will get him under control, as if Bellichick and the Pats run some kind of second-rate organization that has no history of dealing with players. You'll hear a lot of talk about how Moss only cares about winning. Forget that he lobbied his way out of New England, currently the league's most winningest team, because he wanted to get a bigger paycheck. Forget that he is being accused this year more than ever of taking important plays off (for the record, I don't buy the argument that young Randy Moss took a lot of plays off; 2010 Randy Moss is a totally different story).  You'll hear about how his character issues are overblown, nevermind that we keep hearing rumors about internal fights with coaches, prima donna locker room behaviors, and inconsistent effort on the field.

To justify those points above, you'll hear comments about how the Patriots' ordeal was all about money and that the players and teammates spoke very highly of Moss to the media. As if Brady has much history using the podium to call his teammates. As if Bellichick wasn't speaking in coachspeak and, while we're at it, as if Bellichick is the type of guy that wants to admit to the public that he couldn't control one of his players. And sorry, the fact that the Patriots got a third round pick out of the deal, even though they got a second for Cassel and a first for Seymour, does not justify that this was a move purely about picks.

Yes, I am leaning toward one side of this argument ,clearly. You have a talented player who was cut by two teams after only 7 games amid numerous stories of character issues, some based on public knowledge and some based on "sources," And the justification that these stories are untrue are based on some nice things two leaders said to him in the media and a third round pick? Sorry, I don't buy it.

Any person who asks "what could possibly go wrong" is in denial.  If you believe the benefit he brings to the team is worth the risk, I understand your argument. But please acknowledge the risk exists.

Continue reading this post »

Usually I like to post on one topic, but too many thoughts came into my head following the Chiefs-Jaguars game. So I thought I'd be sort of clever (but not really) and post a few numbers that I find to be interesting. Enjoy (or not)!

86 - Could that be Tony Moeaki's two-game receiving totals? Nope. Could that be Dwayne Bowe's total yards this week? Not quite. 86 represents the number of yards the Chiefs have lost in the past two games due to three borderline Pass Interference calls. Three. If that were a Quarterback throwing three passes, he would be averaging 29 Yards per Completion. Wow.

If you're going to cost a team more than 15 yards and especially if you're going to cost a team over 30 yards on one penalty, you better get the call right. Pass Interference needs to be reviewable. You cannot let a team march halfway down the field because of one missed call. 

116 - Let's piggyback off the previous point. Given that two of the PI calls were definitely Offensive PI and one of them (against Berry) was arguably so, if all three OPI calls are made, that pushes the opposing team back 30 total yards. So on three calls, the refs may have cost the Chiefs 116 total yards. When a Running Back runs for 100+ yards, that's considered an accomplishment. If a RB were to run 3 plays for 116 yards, that would be a pretty amazing 39 yards per carry. That should tell you how ridiculously, obscenely, insanely bad those calls were.

17 - You guessed it: that's the number of points the Texans and Jaguars have scored on those PI drives. Enough is enough. I know Todd Haley won't say it, nor should he have to, but the refs have to, have to, have to, have to stop screwing the Chiefs over on Pass Interference calls. And the refs have to start becoming accountable for mistakes like this. I'm sorry, but a letter to the team doesn't make me or you as a fan feel comforted. "Oh sorry, we apologize for costing your team 41 yards... AGAIN. We won't let it happen, except for when we do let it happen again, in which case, we will make sure it doesn't happen again until it does happen again.

Continue reading this post »

Before I begin my post, let me make one thing clear. By now, every Chiefs fan has probably seen the questionable Pass Interference call on Brandon Flowers. For the record, the outrage is not that there shouldn't have been any call at all. Andre Johnson caught the ball and the Texans ended up declining the penalty. The outrage is that the play should have been taken back and then some. The call should have been Offensive Pass Interference and Houston should have been forced into a 2nd and 20 on the Houston 35 instead of a 1st and 10 on the KC 24 yard line. That blown call took the Texans away from a long yardage situation and into a first down in field goal range where a 41 yarder would have tied the game. That blown call changed the Texans' final drive from a desperation drive with over 40 yards to go to playing for a better field goal while being able to attack the end zone without consequence. And oh by the way, their Kicker happens to be Neil Rackers, a player who hasn't exactly been Mr. Clutch in his career.  Even NFL experts chimed in, saying it was a horrible blown call.

There. I've spoken my peace. While the refs definitely Mr. Magoo'ed that Pass Interference call, I've always been careful not to blame the loss on one specific call, even if it happens on the last play of the game (ahem, Calvin Johnson). I remember when Broncos fans blamed their loss to the Chiefs a few years ago on an illegal block in the back during a Dante Hall return. My retort, homer that I am, is that in any given game, you can point to multiple incidents on both sides of the ball where the ref missed a call or two. More importantly, a team has to be prepared to win even when the bounces don't go their way. In the Broncos' case, if they didn't want a blown call to affect the final outcome of the game, they shouldn't have kept the game so close. More importantly, the Broncos had a chance to recapture the lead in the final drive of the game, but didn't.

My feeling about refs in that Chiefs-Broncos game was easy to dish out when I saw my team benefit from a lucky break. It was a little harder to swallow when the Chiefs got gipped out of a call. After digesting the bad call and patching up all my broken windows, here's what I came out with: great teams don't make excuses when the ball doesn't bounce their way. They overcome. Bad teams tend to get a lot more caught up in blaming other people but themselves for losses.

I don't know what Todd Haley has said to the team since that blown call, but I trust and hope that he sent a clear message to the Chiefs that while the call didn't help their cause, there were dozens of other ways the Chiefs lost outside of a poor call.

Continue reading this post »

As I mentioned in Part I, I like Matt Cassel. I love the guy's work ethic and I love the way he approaches the game. I always want good things to happen to good people. I then went into two long posts about what's wrong with Matt Cassel, so maybe my comment seemed disingenuous. To wrap up my series on Matt Cassel (because clearly, I'm the only person talking about him), I wanted to point out some of his redeeming qualities.

In fairness to Cassel, the scrutiny about what he needs to improve shouldn't override some of the things that we should like about the guy. More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

A few days ago, I spoke about why Matt Cassel has thusfar proven to be a disappointment. Aiken_drum had an interesting rebuttal in suggesting that Cassel's season is comparable to Tom Brady's initial Super Bowl season, but as I commented in his thread, Cassel is not in nearly the same league as Tom Brady then. Brady had a lot less experience, still would have had 600 yards on him (projecting a 16-game season) and has shown enormous improvement since he's been a pro. There's no doubting by now that we can win with Cassel, but getting to the next step and winning the games that matter most is going to be significantly harder if we don't see significant improvement in Quarterback play. Cassel in year 3 is below Brady's level as a rookie, and Cassel in year 3 is a mile away from the improvement Brady saw in year 2 and 3.

Here's a critical point I need to make before going any further: in the NFL, you absolutely, positively cannot screw up the Quarterback decision. Nine times out of ten a good Quarterback will be instrumental to your football team's success. In some cases, you ask a Quarterback to completely set the tone and tempo for the team, as Drew Brees does for New Orleans. In other cases, you ask a Quarterback to effectively manage games, as Ben Roethlisberger does for Pittsburgh. In all cases, you expect your Quarterback to be a guy who can march your team down the field in the most critical stages of the game. If you don't have that guy, you better have a dominant defense (ala the 2001 Ravens) and you better hope that the team can get some favorable bounces, because when we're talking about playoff football, you have to avoid mistakes and a Quarterback is easily the position that will help you do/not do that.

Ask yourself this simple question: if the Chiefs face a team that can put up 20+ points against them in the playoffs, do they have a fighting shot of winning? That's all it takes. Either one or two slip-ups on special teams/defense or a few lucky bounces. What makes Pittsburgh so special and what made New England special is the ability of the offense to score as many points as the defense gave them. When the defense struggled, they could put up 30, even if in most games, they were hovering below 20. 

Which brings us back to the Quarterback decision. Let me put it this way: if this were the most important Poker game in his life, then Pioli gambled everything he had on his first hand, even though it was anything but a sure bet. If this were a game of golf, then Pioli is "Tin Cup." I don't care about Cassel's $63M contract or however you want to slice that up. What I care about is how that gamble may have set this franchise back several years.

Continue reading this post »

I'm an optimistic guy, so I'm rooting for Matt Cassel to prove me wrong. He seems like a good kid--tries hard, works his tail off, and is coachable. I'm not ruling out the idea that he can still improve. Still, with every disappointing performance, it becomes a lot harder to be optimistic.

That's a shame because as of now, the Cassel trade stands as a blemish to an otherwise remarkable franchise turnaround. That is a decision Scott Pioli should be accountable for and one that may set this franchise backward several years (more to come later in the week). Without a franchise Quarterback, making a legit Super Bowl push becomes markedly more difficult.

I know there will be a fair share of Matt Cassel apologists, so I first want to make it clear why even they can't continue to make excuses for Matt Cassel. Later in the week, I will explain how Pioli's decision to trade for Matt Cassel can potentially set this franchise backward.

Continue reading this post »

The Chiefs are not running a Marty Ball offense, but the philosophy is similar. In the first three games, they have shown that they can win games by running the ball down the other team's throat and eating up a lot of clock. The results have been staggering. The Chiefs won the Time of Possession game against both the Browns and the 49ers by 7 minutes. That has kept the defense fresh, especially late in games against Peyton Hillis and Frank Gore, two backs who are an absolute load to take down. Seven minutes could amount to 10-15 extra runs. Pretty significant. 

Here's a few interesting stats about the Chiefs' drive progressions against San Francisco and Cleveland:

• Against the 49ers, the Chiefs' average series was 6 plays, 44 yards with a TOP of 3:09
• Against Cleveland, the Chiefs' average series was 6 plays for 25 yards with a TOP of 3:00
• Against Cleveland, in the first half, the average TOP was 5 plays for 16 yards and a TOP of only 1:58 (a half that featured 53% passes, and one where most agree that the Chiefs were not particularly successful)

Note: Those stats also include "outliers," which include drives that either led to a very quick Touchdown or a very quick turnover, both of which limit Time of Possession.

So where am I going with this? In this post, you will pretty clearly see that the Chiefs have been very effective in controlling the clock despite the fact that our offense has been extremely inconsistent at converting makeable third down situations. And oh by the way, I'd also like to point out that Thomas Jones' contribution to those results is extremely understated by the fan base and extremely underappreciated. You'll see why in a minute.

More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

Seems a lot of people are getting riled up about Jamaal Charles based on some comments 610 Sports' Nick Wright made on his show a few days ago. I'm not here to question that story. I don't know the truth behind it and I don't know the sources behind it, but I do trust that Wright wouldn't say those kinds of things if there wasn't a hint of truth to it. That's irrelevant for now.

What I'm more interested in is how that story has evolved from an isolated clash between a player and a coach to a story about whether Jamaal Charles is starting to fall out of favor with the Kansas City Chiefs' coaching staff and front office. If you ask me, I'm not ruling out the second possibility, but I think we have to be careful not to get too far ahead of ourselves and become too engrossed in conspiracy theory.

I'll detail a few reasons why I think it's too soon to overreact after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

I have to admit that I thought the Chiefs vs. Chargers game was over after only one Touchdown. The Chargers were moving the ball down the field surgically and, like last year, the Chiefs' offense sputtered right out the gate.

The Chiefs then spent the next few quarters proving why they aren't the 2009 Chiefs. They are a much better football team. Maybe you can credit their win against the Chargers to good fortune. The ball and ground were slippery, which took away some of the Chargers' biggest strengths. Still, there were some visible improvements that I expect to see from game to game. The players are playing with discipline, committing less penalties and making less boneheaded miscues that lead to big plays. Glenn Dorsey and Derrick Johnson played like complete animals. Tyson Jackson and Jovan Belcher played solid football. And, of course, it was great to see Arrowhead back in form.

I am excited by the progress the Chiefs seem to have made, but before I get too far ahead of myself, I need to see the Chiefs answer the next five things.

Continue reading this post »

Last week, I focused heavily on how the Chiefs have gotten visibly better in 2010. Now that I've given you a week to celebrate and rejoice, allow me to give a little bit of a gut check. The Chiefs have improved in many ways, but there are still a number of big pieces that will likely keep them from becoming a .500 team.

More after the jump.

Continue reading this post »