Cassel has Moss to thank for his good fortune

[BigtimeColtsfans]

Whitlock is the black Skip Bayless.

That's exactly how I think of him, they both just say outrageous crap to get attention. I can't stand either of them.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

This guy has been hating on Cassell since the day the deal went through.

That is not entirely true........

His hate goes back further than that.

When Brady went down he wrote an article urging Belichick to sign Jeff George. Claiming in part that Moss would be irrelevent with Cassel as QB. But George would be able to stretch the field.

Now he is claiming Moss was the reason for both George and Cassel's success.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

What is wrong with that idiot GM in Kansas City.

He really should have watched more game film of Cassel - otherwise he'd know that he just handed $60 million to a guy who only looks good on the surface because he played with Moss.

I mean he should REALLY do a little more homework in the future.

Come on, really. Give the guy a break. He is relatively new. He was only the job about a month when he traded for Cassel. I doubt he even had much time to view the film the Chiefs had on Cassel.

 

[Deus Irae]

Cunningham was out of football after the 1995 season and did not get his last great run until the 1998 after signing with the Vikings in 1997.

Brady never had more than 28 TDs before Randy arrived and it jumps up to 50 in ONE season. Do you honestly think that Brady even comes close to 50 without Moss? Welker only had 8 TDs in 1997.

And in 2004, Culpepper had 18 TDs in the first 5 games before Randy got hurt.
In the last 11 games, 21 TDs. Good but not god awesome before Randy got hurt.

And to throw 33 TDs in his first season as a starter is an accomplishment and a significant amount of that had to do with Randy Moss' 15 TDs in 2000.

Moss has been on 2 of the highest scoring offenses in NFL history.

The evidence is there, you are just too blind as a Moss hater to recognize it, Deus.

It is not 100% Randy, but I can unquestionably say that without Randy, Culpepper wouldn't have had the success he had from 2000-2004. Brady would not have come close to 50TDs, or even 40 TDs without Randy. Cunningham never would have experienced his comeback after being out of football in 1996.

Pretend that you're not completely in the tank about Moss. First, I was one defending the idea of getting Moss. I'm nowhere near 'hater' status.

Second, How many touchdowns Brady had prior to Moss is irrelevant. Brady was the best in the game before Moss showed up. As you may recall, by the way, a player by the name of Welker showed up along with Moss.

As for the rest, the 'evidence' is open to question. The problem is that Whitlock didn't bother to address that. Now, run along with your Randy Moss underoos and go play with the other children.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Scout.com: Cassel Doesn?t Need Moss

Nice find, Box. Cassel has hard work, unwavering determination, and perhaps a handful of hearty souls with the conviction to reward it to thank for his contract. I believe between last September and this week, gracious youg man that he also is, he has thanked them all.

I'm stumped as to whom Whitlock has to thank for his good fortune. But there must be someone or something since it's been clear for a long time he's not an NFL columnist because of talent.

 

[BelizePats]

How preposterous is it that Whitlock is calling Moss lazy?
Whitlock is about the laziest sports reporter on the planet, not named Tomasee.
Oh the hypocrisy!

 

[TruthSeeker]

I'm stumped as to whom Whitlock has to thank for his good fortune. But there must be someone or something since it's been clear for a long time he's not an NFL columnist because of talent.

Quoted for truth.

 

[Synovia]

No, BB said there were no other (firm) offers.

You apparently didn't read my post.


Not being ready to move right now means the offer isn't firm.

 

[Synovia]

Second, How many touchdowns Brady had prior to Moss is irrelevant. Brady was the best in the game before Moss showed up..

According to what, other than us new england homers? We're talking about a QB who was good for 28 TD, 14 Ints, and 3500 yards every year. Thats squarely average.

 

[Deus Irae]

According to what, other than us new england homers? We're talking about a QB who was good for 28 TD, 14 Ints, and 3500 yards every year. Thats squarely average.

According to most analysts, Brady and Manning were the two best QBs in the game. If you think it was only Patriots 'homers' thinking that, you need to learn how to access information in the modern age.

 

[BradyManny]

According to what, other than us new england homers? We're talking about a QB who was good for 28 TD, 14 Ints, and 3500 yards every year. Thats squarely average.

Bullsh*t, it was already decided long before 2007 Brady & Manning were the top 2 QBs:

Cold, Hard Football Facts.com: Brady vs. Manning: Complete & Unabridged, Vol. II

CHFF also (pre 2007) studied how Brady stacked up against the all-time greats statistically, and he was right up there with every one of them.

I've re-watched the 01, 03, 04 DVDs recently, and truly, the only thing that stopped Brady from putting up even higher numbers was a) the one brutal game a year he'd have b) the rain/snow games that they hardly threw in c) how damn good Corey Dillon was in 2004.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

According to what, other than us new england homers? We're talking about a QB who was good for 28 TD, 14 Ints, and 3500 yards every year. Thats squarely average.

Given his supporting cast in NE, that is not squarely average - it's beyond a FO's wildest dreams that a QB can do that consistently. Manning and Brady have long been considered 1 and 2 or 1 and 1a nationally with a considerable gap between them and the rest of the best. Manning had better stats, but he had weapons that helped him accumulate those. Brady had the rings and consistency in the face of inconsistent weaponry.

 

[Synovia]

According to most analysts, Brady and Manning were the two best QBs in the game. If you think it was only Patriots 'homers' thinking that, you need to learn how to access information in the modern age.

These same Analysts who think you need to "establish the run" or who think that QBs are the only players on the field and should be judged only by the rings they've won? These same analysts who don't even know the rules most of the time? These same analysts who have been Favring all over us despite the fact hes been declining for years? These same analysts who predicted everyone from the Jets to the Bengals to win the superbowl last year? These same analysts who judge offenses and defenses by total yards?


Brady was only in that conversation because of the rings, and those rings are just as much, if not more, due to the defense and special teams.


Prior to 2007, Brady's best year was 28 TDs and 14 Ints, and the best argument for him even being a top tier QB was "Rings" and "intangibles", which are veiled misunderstanding of "plays on a great team"

 

[Synovia]

Cold, Hard Football Facts.com: Brady vs. Manning: Complete & Unabridged, Vol. II

Hold on, you're using Cold Hard Football Facts as a reference? That site is a f*cking tabloid.

 

[Deus Irae]

These same Analysts who think you need to "establish the run" or who think that QBs are the only players on the field and should be judged only by the rings they've won? These same analysts who don't even know the rules most of the time? These same analysts who have been Favring all over us despite the fact hes been declining for years? These same analysts who predicted everyone from the Jets to the Bengals to win the superbowl last year? These same analysts who judge offenses and defenses by total yards?


Brady was only in that conversation because of the rings, and those rings are just as much, if not more, due to the defense and special teams.


Prior to 2007, Brady's best year was 28 TDs and 14 Ints, and the best argument for him even being a top tier QB was "Rings" and "intangibles", which are veiled misunderstanding of "plays on a great team"

Ahh, the trolling Synovia is back. How nice.

 

[BigtimeColtsfans]

These same Analysts who think you need to "establish the run" or who think that QBs are the only players on the field and should be judged only by the rings they've won? These same analysts who don't even know the rules most of the time? These same analysts who have been Favring all over us despite the fact hes been declining for years? These same analysts who predicted everyone from the Jets to the Bengals to win the superbowl last year? These same analysts who judge offenses and defenses by total yards?


Brady was only in that conversation because of the rings, and those rings are just as much, if not more, due to the defense and special teams.


Prior to 2007, Brady's best year was 28 TDs and 14 Ints, and the best argument for him even being a top tier QB was "Rings" and "intangibles", which are veiled misunderstanding of "plays on a great team"

Brady was considered a great QB before 2007. 2007 showed he could put up gaudy stats too, but before that he was certainly considered a great HOF caliber QB. His stats even before 2007 blow away Aikmans and Aikman is in the Hall.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Hold on, you're using Cold Hard Football Facts as a reference? That site is a f*cking tabloid.

Tell me Synovia, were you a fan of Felger's radio show...because you sound like you've convinced yourself that all manner of evidence aside, anyone who can't see what you see is lacking objective intelligence.

Brady did what he did within a system constructed to succeed even if unable to provide it's QB with any pro bowl caliber talent. Prior to Moss and Welker arriving his best weapons were a rapidly aging Troy Brown and David Patton and an off injured youngster named Branch (who missed most of the 2004 regular season) and a couple of other guys who are no longer playing in the league let alone as #1 or #2 WR's and were disappointments once seperated from Brady. And he's never had remotely accomplished TE... Although for one year he had a hell of a RB. And like his HC a mentality that says it doesn't matter how you score as long as you score enough to win...

 

[BradyManny]

Hold on, you're using Cold Hard Football Facts as a reference? That site is a f*cking tabloid.

How so? I'm supposed to take your word for it? You signed up here so you could come tell us why we should trade Brady and keep Matt Cassel. Clearly you're the voice of reason.

 

[glm]

According to what, other than us new england homers? We're talking about a QB who was good for 28 TD, 14 Ints, and 3500 yards every year. Thats squarely average.

Joe Montana Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com
Troy Aikman Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com
Jim Kelly Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com
John Elway Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com
Terry Bradshaw Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com
Bob Griese Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com
Roger Staubach Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com


And they're all in the HOF.

 

[BradyManny]

Scout.com: Cassel Doesn?t Need Moss

The problem with that line of thinking is that it's not a credit to Cassel, but a disservice to Moss. It doesn't take into account what Moss does to opposing defenses, which Belichick constantly stresses. When Belichick went on EEI following each of the 400 yard games, he literally said "Moss was the best player on our team that day" and basically gave Moss complete credit for both offensive onslaughts.

I'll stress that it doesn't take anything away from Cassel (or Welker, or Faulk), but when the Hooded One himself pretty much points to Moss and says "we won b/c of this guy", I take it earnestly.