What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

How good/bad is Cassel playing? (1 Viewer)


Not sure if these numbers have been posted before so here goes...

In Brady's first season under center (age 24, in his second year)...

63.9% completions, 4.4% TD's, 2.9% INT's, 6.9 yds/att, 10.8 yds/comp, 86.5 QB rating, 9.0% sacks

In Cassel's first seven games under center (age 26, in his fourth year)...

65.8% completions, 3.5% TD's, 3.0% INT's, 6.8 yds/att, 10.4 yds/comp, 84.6 QB rating, 12.3% sacks

I found it interesting that Bledsoe, never accused of having a keen talent for sensing and avoiding the pass rush, had a lower sack % than did Brady in both the 2001 "injury" season (7.0%) and in the 2000 season (7.8%). So it seems to me that a spike upward in sacks when an inexperienced QB takes the reigns can be expected as reasonably normal.

It's true that Cassel has Moss while Brady had Brown back in 2001, so a clear advantage for Cassel. But it's not surprising that with BB running a more conservative offense, Cassel seems to be putting up Brady-like numbers.

I'm not saying that Cassel is going to be a starter in the NFL or has starter talent. But for those who have already concluded he can't do it, these numbers might give you cause to withold judgment for a little while, especially with BB calling such a conservative game.

If Cassel continues to improve and gain experience, I can see his season ending measurables improving over these 7-game numbers.

I don't like him. Although I think he can improve if he was given more time I don't think he's a long term starter in this league. He's an athletic guy who's got a decent arm but he lacks touch, overall accuracy and he doesn't see the field. I don't even want to compare him to Brady because it's just not fair, although it's difficult in this situation just like it's difficult not to compare Farve and Rodgers.

I've been wrong before but I wouldn't invest in M. Cassel in dynasty etc..., I just don't see it.

Try to remember what Brady was like early on though. Far more a game manager than a game changer. In no way do I think Cassel will be in Brady's realm, btw, I'm just sayin.

Cassel is getting better. I think he took a big step last weekend, but he's got a ways to go. He's a very lucky man to have the personnel that he does around him. As a Pats fan, I've been watching these games with my eyes half covered because some of the stuff he does just makes you cringe. We've been very spoiled by Brady's talent.

The words "very good" can be used to describe the St Louis game.

So that's the problem; we need more data to confirm the possibility that Cassel really is becoming very good.

The words "very good" can be used to describe the St Louis game.So that's the problem; we need more data to confirm the possibility that Cassel really is becoming very good.
I definitely agree we need more data. The results of the STL game were very good, but I still have reservations that it was due to a "very bad" STL defense rather than a "very good" Matt Cassel.Still, it does look like progress, so :fingerscrossed:
He's fortunate enough to be playing on a team that knows how to win. Having Randy Moss doesn't hurt either.

He's playing good enough to allow and already good team still be good. If he were quarterbacking the Lions or Bengals, or even a team like Cleveland, they'd be calling for the backup.

it's all about "IT".

What is "IT" you ask?

"IT" is that intangible attribute that the great players in all sports seem to have and "IT" is far more mental and intangible than physical.

The guys with "IT" seem to see everything slower when they're surrounded by chaos and pressure; they are always aware of field position, game clocks, timeouts, and mismatches.

Boston sports fans starting talking about "IT" back when Bledsoe was on his way out and Brady on his way in.

Bledsoe didn't have "IT".

Brady did.

At the time we knew Brady had "IT", we just weren't sure if he had the physical tools (arm, size, etc) to make it in the NFL. He was the complete opposite of Bledsoe (in a way) as Bledsoe had all the physical tools but lacked "IT".

The players that have "IT" aren't always the most physically gifted:

Larry Bird was slow and couldn't jump, but he had "it".

Derek Jeter isn't the best power hitter, but he had "it".

Michael Jordan had all the physical skills AND he had "It"... and he became the undisputed greatest in his sport.

why is "IT" being discussed at length here?

Because I'm still trying to figure out if Cassel has "It".

I can't remember how many games it took before we realized it in Brady... maybe 4 or 6?

Despite the 3TDs and AFC Offensive Player award a week earlier against DEN, Cassel looked better vs. STL.

His pocket presence was better.

He looked more relaxed.

He made the right reads and accurate throws.

His stats weren't as impressive, but he played a better game against STL.

He had more "IT" against STL than he did against DEN.

Until last week's game against STL, I would have said, "no way", Cassel doesn't have "It" and I'm still a doubter.

IMO, Cassel is good enough to manage the game and help NE sneak into the playoffs.

But I'm not convinced he'll be anything great.

Either way, Cassel won't be in NE next year. He's a FA.

If NE loses and doesn't make the playoffs, Cassel clearly isn't an option for NE; they won't resign him.

If NE wins and make the playoffs, some team will pay him starting money... money that NE won't part with for a #2 QB.

And that's where it gets interesting... when a team invests considerable dollars in Cassel. That's why I'm so hell bent on trying to figure out if he has "IT".

Last edited by a moderator:
Before everyone jumps all over me for Cassel-bashing, I think he's doing an ok job and doing what is asked of him (limit turnovers and post wins).

That being said, people appear to want to compare him to Brady (a logical comparison), but there are countless other QBs that have had similar career starts as Brady that have not evolved into Tom Brady.

As for Cassel, he has now faced SIX STRAIGHT defenses ranked in the Bottom 10 in passing (and that includes his limited production, so those teams really were putrid against everyone else):

NYJ -23

MIA - 24

SF - 29

SD - 32

DEN -26

STL - 25

And remember what he has to work with -- the highest scoring offense in league history stacked will Pro Bowl players.

I think what people should be asking or wondering about is how another QB would be doing in Cassel's shoes and how well the offense would be doing. IMO, putting him on a terrible team would make his stats plummet, especially one with a pourous O-Line. He already takes a zillion sacks WITH BLOCKING (for the most part).

I would guess that some team may sign him next year and give him a shot to start, but I suspect he is best suited as a backup. We'll have to see how the rest of the season goes, and as several people have mentioned he does seem to be doing a little better. We'll see what happens against some stronger defenses.

Last edited by a moderator:
I thought that the general consensus was that he's playing because O'Connell is more raw, but that the Pats think O'Connell is the better long term QB.

I thought that the general consensus was that he's playing because O'Connell is more raw, but that the Pats think O'Connell is the better long term QB.
I believe that to be an accurate statement. O'Connell was drafted to take Cassel's job as the Pats QB2. But with Brady going down in Week 1 the Pats had no choice but to start Cassel. I get the impression (echoed by others) that they liked Cassel as a Brady fill-in for a drive, a half, a game but not a season. He knows the play book and they felt he would be a decent band-aid if needed. Sadly for the Pats, he took on a much bigger role when Brady went down for the season.The other thing about Brady 01 vs. Cassel 08 is that the Pats offense talent in 01 paled in comparison to who they have now. Brady benefited from an opportunistic defense that caused a lot of turnovers and gave him excellent field position. The defense was what games for the Pats back then. The defense now is nowhere near as strong, and against better teams we may see the Pats struggle more heading forward.
The one area where Cassell is far behind Brady of 2001 is pocket presence. While the sack percentages aren't that far off between the two, Brady was under CONSTANT pressure in 2001 and found ways to slip around rushers and was always nimble within the pocket. Cassell holds the ball too long for my liking. Admittedly, I do acknowledge that Charlie Weis was a far more conservative play-caller in protecting Brady with more screens and gadgets than Josh McDaniels. However as Yudkin pointed out, Cassell has a vastly superior offensive line to the one that Brady inherited in '01.

5-2 is better than I thought they'd be. Maybe Cassel doesn't have a lot to do with that, but I'm pretty impressed with their determination so far. If this team gets to the AFC title game (win or lose), it will be more impressive to me than going 16-0.


Users who are viewing this thread