Erik Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 As usual, you will be wrong again. C'Mon. I know it's cool around here to rip on the Bills and say the Pats are perfect at everything and we would only be so lucky to be as well run as them and while msot of that is true this is sorta getting ridiculous. How many Cassel threads is this now in the past few days? People are talking about this guy like he's the second coming. Let's say that Arizona and Denver lose next week for the sake of argument, that means that the Pats will have played 6 teams with winning records this season. Their record? 2-4. Are you really gonna throw the farm at a guy who has that record? And did you see their game against PIT? He looked like Losman. No thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 Not to mention Moss and Welker. pats also have a crappy running game which means their QB will throw a lot and have big #s even if the team loses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 pats also have a crappy running game which means their QB will throw a lot and have big #s even if the team loses Most of his best games have been against some of the worst passing defenses in the NFL. And the Cards game was an obvious attempt to inflate his stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 C'Mon. I know it's cool around here to rip on the Bills and say the Pats are perfect at everything and we would only be so lucky to be as well run as them and while msot of that is true this is sorta getting ridiculous. How many Cassel threads is this now in the past few days? People are talking about this guy like he's the second coming. Let's say that Arizona and Denver lose next week for the sake of argument, that means that the Pats will have played 6 teams with winning records this season. Their record? 2-4. Are you really gonna throw the farm at a guy who has that record? And did you see their game against PIT? He looked like Losman. No thanks. I don't think anyone is saying he will be the second coming of Brady or Montana or anything of the sort. What they are saying is that he will be good, which, quite frankly was the opinion of a lot of people since he's been with the Patriots. He has the physical attributes, he makes good decisions, he's mentally tough and he produces. Trent is injury prone, sometimes plays very good, sometimes plays like JP. Given the choice, 31 teams would take Cassell. Well, at least 29, you can't predict what the Bengals or Lions might do. A lot of people talk about the Patriots like they are the 16-0 team of last year. They are not. They are older, more injured and even slower on defense. They have one of the least talented groups of RB's in the league. They lost their playmaking star Asante Samuel. I mean, sh*t, the Bills lost Nate Clements and dropped from 7th in the league in pass defense to 27th. The Pats find ways to win, but make no mistake, Cassell is winning games for them with outstanding play. Do I expect him to put up 400 yard games routinely? No, but he's doing it now. That's not all system any more than Brady is all system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 I don't think anyone is saying he will be the second coming of Brady or Montana or anything of the sort. What they are saying is that he will be good, which, quite frankly was the opinion of a lot of people since he's been with the Patriots. He has the physical attributes, he makes good decisions, he's mentally tough and he produces. Trent is injury prone, sometimes plays very good, sometimes plays like JP. Given the choice, 31 teams would take Cassell. Well, at least 29, you can't predict what the Bengals or Lions might do. A lot of people talk about the Patriots like they are the 16-0 team of last year. They are not. They are older, more injured and even slower on defense. They have one of the least talented groups of RB's in the league. They lost their playmaking star Asante Samuel. I mean, sh*t, the Bills lost Nate Clements and dropped from 7th in the league in pass defense to 27th. The Pats find ways to win, but make no mistake, Cassell is winning games for them with outstanding play. Do I expect him to put up 400 yard games routinely? No, but he's doing it now. That's not all system any more than Brady is all system. I don't want to make an argument between Edwards and Cassel because that's not really the argument. The argument is whether or not Cassel is that much of an upgrade over Edwards that you tie so much money into the QB position when you have greater needs. I think the answer clearly is no...I'd have to see more from Cassel before I signed that guy to a big deal. I think it's pretty obvious. It's not as black and white as your argument. He doesn't have the track record of a Drew Brees, who we absolutely should have pursued, but the numbers, salary wise, will probably be similar. To me, it's not worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 I don't think anyone is saying he will be the second coming of Brady or Montana or anything of the sort. What they are saying is that he will be good, which, quite frankly was the opinion of a lot of people since he's been with the Patriots. He has the physical attributes, he makes good decisions, he's mentally tough and he produces. Trent is injury prone, sometimes plays very good, sometimes plays like JP. Given the choice, 31 teams would take Cassell. Well, at least 29, you can't predict what the Bengals or Lions might do. A lot of people talk about the Patriots like they are the 16-0 team of last year. They are not. They are older, more injured and even slower on defense. They have one of the least talented groups of RB's in the league. They lost their playmaking star Asante Samuel. I mean, sh*t, the Bills lost Nate Clements and dropped from 7th in the league in pass defense to 27th. The Pats find ways to win, but make no mistake, Cassell is winning games for them with outstanding play. Do I expect him to put up 400 yard games routinely? No, but he's doing it now. That's not all system any more than Brady is all system. I'm no Cassell hater, and think he looks pretty good. He's improved, actually. However, he has accuracy issues, and I am not impressed with his deep and medium-deep ball. He's blessed with good receivers, a good line, and a good system, however, which has made him look better than pretty good. The bottom line is that if you put Edwards on the Pats, he's gonna look like a superstar too. He's accurate, can efficiently digest a playbook, makes quick decisions, and sees the whole field. Whatever his flaws (and he has some), he'd be a stud in that system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 I don't want to make an argument between Edwards and Cassel because that's not really the argument. The argument is whether or not Cassel is that much of an upgrade over Edwards that you tie so much money into the QB position when you have greater needs. I think the answer clearly is no...I'd have to see more from Cassel before I signed that guy to a big deal. I think it's pretty obvious. It's not as black and white as your argument. He doesn't have the track record of a Drew Brees, who we absolutely should have pursued, but the numbers, salary wise, will probably be similar. To me, it's not worth it. Well then, maybe the question to you is do you trust Trent Edwards to both play well and stay healthy? My guess is you do. 6 years of missing games to injury says he won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 Well then, maybe the question to you is do you trust Trent Edwards to both play well and stay healthy? My guess is you do. 6 years of missing games to injury says he won't. I don't think he's been particularly injury prone in the NFL -- a couple of games last year for a minor tweak, a couple this year for the same. It's pretty typical unless you're Manning or Favre. Kelly was a regular visitor to the inactive list in his career for minor sh*t like that. Let's see where Edwards is after year four before making such broad statements based on little more than those tweaks and a broken foot playing for a dreadful Stanford team. You may end up being right, but as I've said before (and which you've disputed), the percentage of NFL players who aren't "injury prone" is about 5%, and they're freaks. Everyone else is, and after that it's all luck of the draw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 I'm no Cassell hater, and think he looks pretty good. He's improved, actually. However, he has accuracy issues, and I am not impressed with his deep and medium-deep ball. He's blessed with good receivers, a good line, and a good system, however, which has made him look better than pretty good. The bottom line is that if you put Edwards on the Pats, he's gonna look like a superstar too. He's accurate, can efficiently digest a playbook, makes quick decisions, and sees the whole field. Whatever his flaws (and he has some), he'd be a stud in that system. Like I said, if you put Edwards on the Pats he still gets injured and misses a bunch of games. I mean, is the OL responsible for the groin injury that sidelined him while the Bills dim playoff hopes turned to dust? We are talking about 6 years of injury history, not one season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 Like I said, if you put Edwards on the Pats he still gets injured and misses a bunch of games. I mean, is the OL responsible for the groin injury that sidelined him while the Bills dim playoff hopes turned to dust? We are talking about 6 years of injury history, not one season. How do you know Cassell isn't injury prone? He's played one season in his career going back to college. For all you know, he has Tommy John surgery three weeks from now. By your standard, Jake Delhomme is injury prone, but his five seasons out of the seven which he plays are preferable to the seven out of seven that many non-injury prone QBs play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 I'm no Cassell hater, and think he looks pretty good. He's improved, actually. However, he has accuracy issues, and I am not impressed with his deep and medium-deep ball. He's blessed with good receivers, a good line, and a good system, however, which has made him look better than pretty good. The bottom line is that if you put Edwards on the Pats, he's gonna look like a superstar too. He's accurate, can efficiently digest a playbook, makes quick decisions, and sees the whole field. Whatever his flaws (and he has some), he'd be a stud in that system. For sure. He'd have Moss and Gaffney clearing out the underneath and the ultimate checkdown weapons in Welker and Faulk. But injury concerns would still be there. But regardless of Edwards' issues/injury-proneness, the point is that Cassel is NOT worth what he'll be offered in the off-season. Not unless the rest of his offense comes with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 For sure. He'd have Moss and Gaffney clearing out the underneath and the ultimate checkdown weapons in Welker and Faulk. But injury concerns would still be there. But regardless of Edwards' issues/injury-proneness, the point is that Cassel is NOT worth what he'll be offered in the off-season. Not unless the rest of his offense comes with him. I don't know if he's not worth it because I'm not sure how good he is. If he is in fact a good player (i.e., a guy who can legitimately succeed outside of NE), then of course he's worth it. Put him on the Bears, and they're 2 or 3 games better than what they are now. A good QB is that important, and many teams don't have one. Who are the Jets going to start next year anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 I don't know if he's not worth it because I'm not sure how good he is. If he is in fact a good player (i.e., a guy who can legitimately succeed outside of NE), then of course he's worth it. Put him on the Bears, and they're 2 or 3 games better than what they are now. A good QB is that important, and many teams don't have one. Who are the Jets going to start next year anyway? Who knows how he does on another team, until he gets there? I just don't want the Bills to find out the hard way. Having the offense he does certainly helps Cassel out immensely and few other QB's have the weapons he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 How do you know Cassell isn't injury prone? He's played one season in his career going back to college. For all you know, he has Tommy John surgery three weeks from now. By your standard, Jake Delhomme is injury prone, but his five seasons out of the seven which he plays are preferable to the seven out of seven that many non-injury prone QBs play. No, by my standard, past history is an indicator of future results. That's how decisions need to be made. By your standard, Peyton Manning could have Tommy John surgery three weeks from now. He's still the better player than Edwards. I mean let's not foresake logic as an excuse to continue failing. And btw, the issue with Trent isn't that he might get hurt some year, it's that he gets hurt EVERY year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 Who knows how he does on another team, until he gets there? I just don't want the Bills to find out the hard way. Having the offense he does certainly helps Cassel out immensely and few other QB's have the weapons he does. That is exactly why having a first-class scouting department, one that understands the value of a player in the system they are in and how/if it can translate to your own systems, are so damn valuable. That way, one isn't simply wearing a blindfold and tossing darts at a wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills88 Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 21 TD passes 3650 yards +10 t/o ratio. He is better than Edwards now and was a higher rated prospect coming out of HS than Edwards. Also he has a much better arm and has had great coaching for 4+ years. Where did you find that Cassel was a higher rated prospect out of HS? What I have read and could just find is Trent was higher rated out of HS and obviously played a lot more in college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 First of all Cassell has Randy Moss to throw to. Second, he plays under Bill Belicheat. Third, he has a well-coached team around him. Put Cassell on the Bills and you will miss JP Losman. When will you people understand that it takes more than a QB to win? PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 product of the system. no. The play call stealing system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 Relax JP, you are out in a week and you can go on to your HOF career. Was that an attempt to say that Trent doesn't have time to throw? Because I haven't seen him take a 3 step drop and release the ball after the 3rd step since the San Diego game. He routinely stands back there and holds onto the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynchneedsfood Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 I think Detroit or Minnesota picks up cassel in the offseason... He's good, but you can't say he's great - he's sitting behind an o-line that makes anyone look great, hell they still have ole' sammy morris running the ball... He's not only a product of great coaching, but look at the talent surrounding him, if trent were in new england I think he'd have just as much success if not more than cassel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts