Bash me now, but wrong QB

Clove

Shrinkage
Messages
64,894
Reaction score
27,491
Cassel hasn't played in a while so I'm willing to give him time. He definitely is much better at moving the offense than Weeden. Weeden is a check down QB with no lower parts. He's too chicken **** to take chances. Cassel takes chances and I love that. He just has a weak arm. But this offense put up 20 and it could've been more than that. Our terrible special team gave up a freaking punt return and Cassel gave up a pick 6 that gave them 14 cheap points. Clean up the INT's but don't stop taking chances, please. The coaches don't need him throwing out-routes or slow developing bombs.

Had he looked the safety off, then tight roped that pass, it could've done something, IMO. Keep Cassel where he is, that's our only hope.
 

Sandyf

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,249
Reaction score
1,379
We can bash both Weeden and Cassells until the cows come home but the fact remains that the Cowboys did not prepare for Romo to be an extended time. We are using QBs that are discards from other teams instead of developing someone behind Romo. I would rather lose with the younger Moore than keep bashing or making excuses for Weeden or Cassell. Neither of these guys should be on our team next year. There aren't any or maybe 1 or 2 Earl Morrell out there where a team can survive the loss of the starter but most teams seem to have a younger backup that at least has a fire win or lose. Right now, it is hard to imagine any wins until Romo gets back, maybe we sneak in one or two if we get lucky but to get to the playoffs, we will need to win out once Romo gets back and that my friends is a very tall order.
 

Idgit

Fattening up
Staff member
Messages
58,971
Reaction score
60,826
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Did that lead to more points? Did that lead to a win? You think anyone was threatened by this?

puVlk3V.png


That ball was under thrown by at least 15 yards.

Man. Williams should have just trucked through that CB and hoped for the flag.
 

stiletto

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,509
Reaction score
15,094
Cassel looked rusty and is in a new system on a new team. No one likes turnovers but I'd like to see him get a couple more games to see if he can get comfortable. We know what we have in Weeden, a guy who can NEVER win games. Cassel has in the past and I think he will for us as well but I am not expecting MVP quality play out of him, no doubt..
 

Risen Star

Likes Collector
Messages
89,471
Reaction score
212,433
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
I don't think the right QB is on the roster, unfortunately.

There it is right there. Our genius decision makers decided Brandon Weeden was the next man up should Romo miss time. That evaluation cost the Cowboys the 2015 season. I'm not blaming Matt Cassel for being here a few weeks and throwing a some picks. He's a roster filler just getting familiar with this offense. It's was Weeden that ended the season.
 

Garrettop

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,115
Reaction score
2,121
Having Weeden in the game would have made a major difference. Dallas would have lost 20-3 instead of 27-20.
 

punchnjudy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,786
Reaction score
1,872
Cassel hasn't played in a while so I'm willing to give him time. He definitely is much better at moving the offense than Weeden. Weeden is a check down QB with no lower parts. He's too chicken **** to take chances. Cassel takes chances and I love that. He just has a weak arm. But this offense put up 20 and it could've been more than that. Our terrible special team gave up a freaking punt return and Cassel gave up a pick 6 that gave them 14 cheap points. Clean up the INT's but don't stop taking chances, please. The coaches don't need him throwing out-routes or slow developing bombs.

Had he looked the safety off, then tight roped that pass, it could've done something, IMO. Keep Cassel where he is, that's our only hope.

Agreed. Regardless of the QB, you have to make plays down the field to score points with a lot more regularity than they had been. This defense is improved with the starters coming back, but this isn't the '85 Bears. They aren't winning games 13-10. As great as the running game was yesterday, the net result was one rushing TD. Even if you take away the points caused by the special teams gaffes and the pick 6, it's a 13-13 game if you also remove the big plays in the passing game.
 

big dog cowboy

THE BIG DOG
Staff member
Messages
101,920
Reaction score
112,967
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Did that lead to more points? Did that lead to a win? You think anyone was threatened by this?

puVlk3V.png


That ball was under thrown by at least 15 yards.
Cassel said the ball was slipping as he threw it. Your attempt to make a point by using this one specific play has failed.
 

gmoney112

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,589
Reaction score
15,694
Weeden is terrible.

If Cassel can cut back on the TO's a bit, he's a significant upgrade. He had several throws yesterday that were money and left me thinking "Weeden would never/could never make that throw".

Cassel's weakness is the long ball and throwing in the middle of the field. I won't put the TWill curl route on him because that was just laziness on Williams part. That ball was basically exactly where it was supposed to be, and it showed anticipation, something Weeden never showed.

Once Romo comes back, Weeden is probably gone.
 

punchnjudy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,786
Reaction score
1,872
Weeden is terrible.

If Cassel can cut back on the TO's a bit, he's a significant upgrade. He had several throws yesterday that were money and left me thinking "Weeden would never/could never make that throw".

Cassel's weakness is the long ball and throwing in the middle of the field. I won't put the TWill curl route on him because that was just laziness on Williams part. That ball was basically exactly where it was supposed to be, and it showed anticipation, something Weeden never showed.

Once Romo comes back, Weeden is probably gone.

Probably. Honestly, if Moore develops enough to even look passable as a mop up guy, then they both could be gone depending on how the next few games go. You figure that no matter what happens the season would definitely be over if Tony sustained a second injury. Then it really would make sense to play a younger QB. My message to both would be rent, don't buy lol.
 

HoustonSucks

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
1,008
Honestly, I think the problem is cause and effect. Weeden couldn't do crap, sorry. Wouldn't take chances, would take sacks, and wouldn't even throw beyond the freaking markers. So we benched him. Instead of bringing Cassel along we basically (read: Jerry) said take chances, please. So I believe we went from one extreme (being the opposite of Weeden) to the other (forcing things). Dude tried to win on his own. Even Romo has been reigned in from doing that (though Romo, at least, is capable of it most times). Do you see what I'm saying? I was scared it would happen the minute jerry said the crap about taking chances. How about you drive the bus and, take a chance here and there? You are NOT Romo. You don't have to be. But Cassell did too much in order to help us out. That tells me he will be reined in just enough to get it done. My opinion.
 

Rogerthat12

DWAREZ
Messages
14,605
Reaction score
9,989
Honestly, I think the problem is cause and effect. Weeden couldn't do crap, sorry. Wouldn't take chances, would take sacks, and wouldn't even throw beyond the freaking markers. So we benched him. Instead of bringing Cassel along we basically (read: Jerry) said take chances, please. So I believe we went from one extreme (being the opposite of Weeden) to the other (forcing things). Dude tried to win on his own. Even Romo has been reigned in from doing that (though Romo, at least, is capable of it most times). Do you see what I'm saying? I was scared it would happen the minute jerry said the crap about taking chances. How about you drive the bus and, take a chance here and there? You are NOT Romo. You don't have to be. But Cassell did too much in order to help us out. That tells me he will be reined in just enough to get it done. My opinion.

Probably what needs to happen, reign in the careless decisions and ultra risky attempts but still pass down field, he showed he can do it, he just needs to do it better.
 

punchnjudy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,786
Reaction score
1,872
Honestly, I think the problem is cause and effect. Weeden couldn't do crap, sorry. Wouldn't take chances, would take sacks, and wouldn't even throw beyond the freaking markers. So we benched him. Instead of bringing Cassel along we basically (read: Jerry) said take chances, please. So I believe we went from one extreme (being the opposite of Weeden) to the other (forcing things). Dude tried to win on his own. Even Romo has been reigned in from doing that (though Romo, at least, is capable of it most times). Do you see what I'm saying? I was scared it would happen the minute jerry said the crap about taking chances. How about you drive the bus and, take a chance here and there? You are NOT Romo. You don't have to be. But Cassell did too much in order to help us out. That tells me he will be reined in just enough to get it done. My opinion.

He'll certainly try, but unfortunately he'll only have a split second to make most of these decisions. Weeden seemed to recognize his own inability to make reads... the New England columnists had a field day laughing at how gun shy and lost he was...but for Cassell it's going to be a really fine line between being aggressive enough to generate offense without giving the game away.
 

CyberB0b

Village Idiot
Messages
12,639
Reaction score
14,106
Cassel said the ball was slipping as he threw it. Your attempt to make a point by using this one specific play has failed.

So he's not responsible for a terrible pass? Cassel should change his name to Teflon Don.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,886
Reaction score
12,670
Did that lead to more points? Did that lead to a win? You think anyone was threatened by this?

puVlk3V.png


That ball was under thrown by at least 15 yards.

You're saying the ball should have been thrown to the cameraman back there?
 

Yakuza Rich

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,043
Reaction score
12,385
Weeden played well enough against the Falcons and the Saints.

I think he played very well against the Falcons. The Saints performance was not nearly as good because he left too much yards and points on the field. The Patriots performance was pathetic.

It's too bad we couldn't combine their two assets....Weeden's arm strength, accuracy and throwing motion with Cassel's mobility and willing to take chances.





YR
 

Floatyworm

The Labeled One
Messages
23,023
Reaction score
21,202
Did that lead to more points? Did that lead to a win? You think anyone was threatened by this?

puVlk3V.png


That ball was under thrown by at least 15 yards.

This play might be the play that leads to everything unraveling. Cassel can't throw a football 50 yards? That was a 45 yard punt. The Giants D played us pretty much straight up yesterday....and they paid by getting gashed in the run game. Until I see Cassel able to throw something w/ some zip over 30 yards....I play 8 in the box.....w/ safety help....If I'm the Seahawks. We won't be gashing people again until Cassel can prove it other wise.
 

CowboyRoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,924
Reaction score
38,930
I thought it all week, and I still think it....we picked the wrong time to move from Weeden to Cassel.

Yes, Weeden is labeled check-down Charlie, but he's also the guy who Witten on a deep seam route vs. NO after missing him vs. Atlanta; the guy who hit the TD pass to Williams, the guy who hit the long sideline pass perfectly to Butler; and the guy who hit the deep slant td perfectly to Williams vs. PHilly....and the guy who missed the meaningless td pass to a wide open Williams vs. the Patriots.

He's also the guy with the best QB rating and very few turnovers.

We all knew that the Giants had the worst defense we might face all year due to injuries to all three areas, especially in a depleted secondary. As far as backup QB's go, we see very little upside in either of ours to ever be starters, but I thought this was the wrong game to replace Weeden. Most of Cassel's success came throwing to TE's and RBs, just like Weeden, and he hit some receivers who actually worked open vs. a poor secondary, something they hadn't been doing.

However, we also saw some terrible decisions by Cassel, throwing passes where guys weren't open, throwing passes too soon under pressure. He threw 3 poor ints. The long pass was absolutely pathetic...underthrown, and Williams did try to come back to the ball, but it was double coverage and the safety had better position. The pass on the sidelines was a typical pattern where Williams turns and looks for the pass to be there, in blanketed and assumes the pass is going elsewhere....you can argue that he should have run to the sideline and defended the pass, but Cassel didn't even look elsewhere...he could have simply thrown it out of bounds. The pass over the middle was into heavy coverage as well, and worse, he threw at least 3 other passes that could easily have been intercepted. Even two of the completed passes we were all wondering how the defender didn't pick those off.

Maybe you need a guy to take risks vs. NE, but against these poor teams, like the Giants, I would have been perfectly happy with a QB taking the open man. ONe pass Cassel got away with throwing down the field, McFadden was wide open shorter, but was passed up. Personally, with the pass protection being very good, I didn't see a QB willing to stand in the pocket and wait to make the right decisions either.

Weeden stinks as a starting QB, but I think we win that game with him instead of Cassel....just my opinion, and I'd rather have Weeden vs. Philly as well.

Linehan finally stuck with a RB and gave him the ball over and over even after 2-3 yard gains, and it paid off. Protecting the ball and hitting the open receivers was the correct strategy vs. the Giants. Instead we got 3 turnovers and a 17.9 QBR. Will he get better? He had a few weeks including the bye with the receivers, and at his age, that's a good question. Personally, vs. the pass rush of the Seahawks, I predict at least 3 more interceptions from Cassel making rushed and poor decisions, along with floating passes.

They both stink buddy, but Cassel is better. The problem with Cassel is his lack of experience in the offense and lack of experience with our receivers. Personally I prefer the risk taking guy to a slow death from
Weeden is no savior but we needed a Weeden performance yesterday. The problem is, with this team's luck if you start Weeden then the defense will give up 2 quick TDs and then we will need a Cassel type of performance. It just seems to not be our year.

LOL.......OMG, this has to be the worst thing I have read all day. Someone begging for Weeden? Wow, this is how bad it has gotten. Maybe we should throw Garrett out there to play QB.
 

Arkyvarminter

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,501
Reaction score
1,904
Cassel obviously is much more comfortable in the pocket than Weeden is. He made more checks at the line, he made some beautiful throws into tight coverage, and he's able to look off receivers. Those are things Weeden's not going to learn to do in a short period of time.

I'm more comfortable trusting Cassel to reign in the bad decisions than I am trusting Weeden to grow dramatically from a little bit more experience, but neither one of those options is particularly appealing right now.


Best bet is to play better defense and to not suck on ST coverage. I feel like a broken record.

It also helps if we don't get TD's called back for no reason. I like Cassel better. He's more mobile and looks down field more....
 
Top