PDA

View Full Version : brodie croyle



jacko58
03-19-2010, 12:15 PM
after seeing third string qb traded from sd to seattle for a third and switching seconds. whitehurst is un proven third string qb. croyles been a starter id like to keep croyle but if someone offered me a third id have to take it

Drunker Hillbilly
03-19-2010, 01:43 PM
......sucks

DC_Chiefsfan
03-19-2010, 02:47 PM
......sucks


agreed.

KottkeKU
03-19-2010, 03:04 PM
LOL...

i think we would all be happy to get a 3rd rounder for Glass Man

captainamerica
03-19-2010, 04:23 PM
The Chargers have been winners lately and have had lots of success finding QBs (Brees, Rivers, etc.). They can get 3rd round picks for guys like Whitehurst. We on the other hand would be lucky to get a 5th for Brodie Croyle. Him being labeled "injury prone" has really hurt his trade value.

matthewschiefs
03-19-2010, 05:50 PM
I would take a 3rd rounder for him for sure. I like Brodie I think he could be a good qb the thing is injuries. However I will say that he is not the first QB to get hurt under Herm Edwards. But theres nothing to prove that he can stay on the field so to get something for him would be best for this team probley.

Canada
03-19-2010, 06:32 PM
I still wouldn't mind seeing what he can do behind an offensive line. I honestly don't know if he is a good QB or not. I heard somewhere that his style of play suits Haleys/Weis offensive schme quite well. He's got an arm, maybe with some time he could prove to be a solid back up. Im no more sold on Gutierrez than Brodie.

YZILLA
03-19-2010, 07:23 PM
I think Brodie played a hell of a game against the Ravens last year with a defensive man in his face the whole game. I think He should stay , he knows the system, hes got an arm and just had bad luck and a bad line blocking for him so far. Hes a very smart QB , He called the Touchdown pass to Castille last season which turned out to be a very great play .

YZILLA
03-19-2010, 07:28 PM
LOL...

i think we would all be happy to get a 3rd rounder for Glass Man

He took a beating in the Ravens game against probably the best defense in the league and almost won the damn game for us. Its not his fault we had a ****ty line since Vermeil left. how many QB's were injured in the past 4 years? hes a tough little **** and has a great arm. Give him a decent line to play behind before you judge the dude. Bad luck doesnt make him a ****ty QB.

captainamerica
03-19-2010, 09:48 PM
As far as physical talents go, he's a better QB than Cassel. The only thing Cassel really has on him is money and the fact that he's not labeled injury prone. I'd like to see the QB position up for grabs this season. I'd like to see a true competition between the two. Better man gets the job.

Pro_Angler
03-19-2010, 11:04 PM
I personally have a man crush on Brodie..lol.. all kidding aside I think he is a better QB then Cassell.. I wouldnt let him go for anything less then a 2nd rd.

Drunker Hillbilly
03-20-2010, 11:35 AM
I personally have a man crush on Brodie..lol.. all kidding aside I think he is a better QB then Cassell.. I wouldnt let him go for anything less then a 2nd rd.
SEVERE man crush!!!!! Could he have done what Cassel did in N.E.? I highly doubt it! You better get out to Patagonia and soak up some sun bro, I think your getting Brodie fever!:mancard:

tornadospotter
03-20-2010, 11:37 AM
I personally have a man crush on Brodie..lol.. all kidding aside I think he is a better QB then Cassell.. I wouldnt let him go for anything less then a 2nd rd.
I think you need to take some time off, I suggest a week of drowning worms. :fishing:

chief31
03-20-2010, 01:44 PM
I am with Yzilla on this.

I have yet to see Croyle play on an NFL team. I hardly call what Herm was doing here a fair chance for any QB.

Injury-prone? Perhaps. But it's not easy to sell me on that, considering how "injury-prone" every QB that played for Herm seemed to be. Even those who had been considered among the toughest in the NFL prior to entering Herms offense.

tornadospotter
03-20-2010, 01:59 PM
I am with Yzilla on this.

I have yet to see Croyle play on an NFL team. I hardly call what Herm was doing here a fair chance for any QB.

Injury-prone? Perhaps. But it's not easy to sell me on that, considering how "injury-prone" every QB that played for Herm seemed to be. Even those who had been considered among the toughest in the NFL prior to entering Herms offense.

I can agree to that, and I also like Croyle, when he is not breaky.

captainamerica
03-20-2010, 04:22 PM
SEVERE man crush!!!!! Could he have done what Cassel did in N.E.? I highly doubt it!
I don't doubt it whatsoever. Just about any QB could've been successful under those standards. Cassel was working with a great O-line, the best coaching staff a QB could ask for, the best WR tandem in the league, and a defense/special teams that more than held their own.

wichitaj
03-20-2010, 04:32 PM
agreed.

ditto, and ditto

Drunker Hillbilly
03-20-2010, 04:38 PM
I don't doubt it whatsoever. Just about any QB could've been successful under those standards. Cassel was working with a great O-line, the best coaching staff a QB could ask for, the best WR tandem in the league, and a defense/special teams that more than held their own.
Really? Hmmm, great O line eh? Ya your right, he was only sacked 47 times!!!!!!!! Even under that pressure he still threw for almost 3700 yds. Brodie.........LOL I don't think so!

nigeriannightmare
03-20-2010, 04:40 PM
Brodie has been injury prone since high school I don't if I would call that bad luck or poor conditioning.

matthewschiefs
03-20-2010, 04:42 PM
SEVERE man crush!!!!! Could he have done what Cassel did in N.E.? I highly doubt it! You better get out to Patagonia and soak up some sun bro, I think your getting Brodie fever!:mancard:

I would not be shocked if he could. The truth is Brodie has never had the team around him that Matt did in N.E. so we don't no what he could do on a GOOD football team. Brodie's injury history is the only reason that I do doubt that he could. But we will never no.

Drunker Hillbilly
03-20-2010, 04:47 PM
I would not be shocked if he could. The truth is Brodie has never had the team around him that Matt did in N.E. so we don't no what he could do on a GOOD football team. Brodie's injury history is the only reason that I do doubt that he could. But we will never no.
He would be dead if he got sacked 40+ times! No to mention scared sh**less! He'd be callin audible run plays every down.

captainamerica
03-20-2010, 05:59 PM
Really? Hmmm, great O line eh? Ya your right, he was only sacked 47 times!!!!!!!! Even under that pressure he still threw for almost 3700 yds. Brodie.........LOL I don't think so!
He was sacked 47 times, because he holds on to the ball for WAY TOO LONG! He still has this problem. Our O-line last year was far from good, but I remember many games where they took unnecessary flack for Cassel holding on to the ball for too long. In 2007 Brady was hardly even touched. In 2008 Cassel was sacked 47 times. I'd hardly place that all on the O-line. The majority of the blame goes to Cassel in my opinion.

Don't get me wrong, I like Cassel. I really do. I think he can be a very solid backup. I just don't think he's our franchise guy. He doesn't have the arm and he holds onto the ball too long.

Drunker Hillbilly
03-20-2010, 07:02 PM
He was sacked 47 times, because he holds on to the ball for WAY TOO LONG! He still has this problem. Our O-line last year was far from good, but I remember many games where they took unnecessary flack for Cassel holding on to the ball for too long. In 2007 Brady was hardly even touched. In 2008 Cassel was sacked 47 times. I'd hardly place that all on the O-line. The majority of the blame goes to Cassel in my opinion.

Don't get me wrong, I like Cassel. I really do. I think he can be a very solid backup. I just don't think he's our franchise guy. He doesn't have the arm and he holds onto the ball too long.
PLEASE don't tell me you are insunuating that Croyle should be the franchise guy....

captainamerica
03-20-2010, 07:17 PM
PLEASE don't tell me you are insunuating that Croyle should be the franchise guy....
Absolutely not, but besides questions about his durability, I think he's a better QB in every way possible than Matt Cassel. I think he more than deserves an opportunity to compete with Matt Cassel for the starting job next season. I don't think Cassel should just be anointed the roll of starter.

chief31
03-21-2010, 02:25 AM
Really? Hmmm, great O line eh? Ya your right, he was only sacked 47 times!!!!!!!!

Yes. Great o-line. Top five in sacks allowed in, both, the year before, and the year after Cassel.

It was Cassel's first ever season as a starter. But it was the same pass-blocking crew.

Do we honestly believe that they went from best, to worst, to best, over a three year time?

Or was it more of, essentially, a rookie QB struggling to get comfortable in the pocket?

Drunker Hillbilly
03-21-2010, 11:07 AM
Yes. Great o-line. Top five in sacks allowed in, both, the year before, and the year after Cassel.

It was Cassel's first ever season as a starter. But it was the same pass-blocking crew.

Do we honestly believe that they went from best, to worst, to best, over a three year time?

Or was it more of, essentially, a rookie QB struggling to get comfortable in the pocket?
Never said they were the worst, I simply questioned that they were a "great" O line. Don't believe they were. Holding the ball too long does not result in 47 sacks I don't care what anyone says.

Coach
03-21-2010, 12:37 PM
If we polled all 32 GM's in the league on which QB they would rather have, how many of them do you think would choose Croyle?

Are NFL GM's pretty good evaluators of talent?

Sorry to be so blunt, but I just don't see how anyone could conclude that Brodie should be leading this team. To each his own and I respect everyone's opinion even if they are wrong. j/k.



____________
Posted from my BlackBerry, PM me for Details

Canada
03-21-2010, 03:43 PM
If we polled all 32 GM's in the league on which QB they would rather have, how many of them do you think would choose Croyle?

Are NFL GM's pretty good evaluators of talent?

Sorry to be so blunt, but I just don't see how anyone could conclude that Brodie should be leading this team. To each his own and I respect everyone's opinion even if they are wrong. j/k.



____________
Posted from my BlackBerry, PM me for Details

I don't think anyone is saying he is better than Cassel, I would say that there is a chance he is better than Gutierrez!! Give him a chance as a backup, at least up his trade value this season.

Fansincebirth
03-21-2010, 05:05 PM
Lets face it. It doesnt matter who you pick in the draft or trade for. No young player is ready for the NFL. Even if they start their first year and play well. They had OTAs, Rookie week, and Training camp. On top of that the top draft picks usually dont make the pro bowl that first season. Point being players must BE developed, and have time to develope. In the past, KC has not been a great team for developing players. We now have a staff that have proven that they can develope players. Some of the players to look for to make big improvement in this year: Castle, Croyal, Albert, Dorsey, Jackson, Bowe, Long, O'Connell, Morgan, and Studebaker.

chief31
03-21-2010, 05:33 PM
Never said they were the worst, I simply questioned that they were a "great" O line. Don't believe they were. Holding the ball too long does not result in 47 sacks I don't care what anyone says.

So then the o-line went from near best to near worst, then back to near best?

Or is there some other reason that you have in mind?

And, for my money, holding the ball too long exactly results in increased sacks.


If we polled all 32 GM's in the league on which QB they would rather have, how many of them do you think would choose Croyle?

Are NFL GM's pretty good evaluators of talent?

Sorry to be so blunt, but I just don't see how anyone could conclude that Brodie should be leading this team. To each his own and I respect everyone's opinion even if they are wrong. j/k.



____________
Posted from my BlackBerry, PM me for Details

While I agree that there really doesn't seem to be any reason for someone to guess, based on so little evidence, that Croyle would be a better QB than Cassel, I also don't see enough evidence to suggest that Croyle is no good, or has no chance of being that good.

By the way, name recognition plays into trade value, and any GM would be a fool to choose the lower value.

So maybe a HC should have been used in your example, as they want the best player, regardless of trade value.

But the point still stands.

Vandelay
03-21-2010, 06:18 PM
So then the o-line went from near best to near worst, then back to near best?

Or is there some other reason that you have in mind?

And, for my money, holding the ball too long exactly results in increased sacks.



While I agree that there really doesn't seem to be any reason for someone to guess, based on so little evidence, that Croyle would be a better QB than Cassel, I also don't see enough evidence to suggest that Croyle is no good, or has no chance of being that good.

By the way, name recognition plays into trade value, and any GM would be a fool to choose the lower value.

So maybe a HC should have been used in your example, as they want the best player, regardless of trade value.

But the point still stands.
If the O-line was that great, then Brady would never have gotten hurt to begin with.

captainamerica
03-21-2010, 11:35 PM
If the O-line was that great, then Brady would never have gotten hurt to begin with.
Brady got hurt by a freak like play that's now illegal. I find it a little silly to try and pin the blame for that on the O-line, especially when Tom wasn't even sacked on that play.

chief31
03-22-2010, 03:30 AM
If the O-line was that great, then Brady would never have gotten hurt to begin with.

So... a good o-line would never allow a defender to get to the QB?

Well, then... by that standard, every o-line to have ever played on an NFL field has been crap.

And, of course, any QB who has even missed his target on a pass, every WR who has ever dropped a pass, any ball-carrier who has been tackled, any defender who was on the field when an opponent gained a first down..... They have all been garbage too?

You can have that theory to yourself. Though I wouldn't have any clue what you would watch football for.

:wtfdude:

Seek
03-22-2010, 12:44 PM
Croyle sucks... Herm tried to give him the team and he totally blew it. He has won zero games. Tyler Thigpen looked like a pro-bowler compared to Croyle.

Fact of the matter, Croyle has had injury issues that dated back before he was even drafted. He is very inconsistent. YOu can all wish what you want, but no coach in the NFL would keep a player on the bench if they thought it would help them win games.

Croyle will be a life time back up. If he becomes our starter, the Chiefs are in bad shape.

chief31
03-23-2010, 05:48 AM
Croyle sucks... Herm tried to give him the team and he totally blew it. He has won zero games. Tyler Thigpen looked like a pro-bowler compared to Croyle.

Fact of the matter, Croyle has had injury issues that dated back before he was even drafted. He is very inconsistent. YOu can all wish what you want, but no coach in the NFL would keep a player on the bench if they thought it would help them win games.

Croyle will be a life time back up. If he becomes our starter, the Chiefs are in bad shape.


Look, maybe he isn't any good. I don't know. But I know that Thigpen looked even worse than Croyle when he tried to play in that "born to lose" offense that Herm was forcing.

And Croyle didn't get the chance to play in Chan's experimental gimmick offense that Thigpen excelled in.

I cerainly don't claim that Croyle is great, nor even good. But, until I see him get a chance to play in a real offense, I don't see how anyone can say rather he is good or not.

Seek
03-23-2010, 09:06 AM
Look, maybe he isn't any good. I don't know. But I know that Thigpen looked even worse than Croyle when he tried to play in that "born to lose" offense that Herm was forcing.

And Croyle didn't get the chance to play in Chan's experimental gimmick offense that Thigpen excelled in.

I cerainly don't claim that Croyle is great, nor even good. But, until I see him get a chance to play in a real offense, I don't see how anyone can say rather he is good or not.

I truly believe if the coaching staff thought Croyle was better than Cassel, they would play him.

Instead there is rumors they are shopping him.

pbatrucker
03-23-2010, 09:33 AM
I truly believe if the coaching staff thought Croyle was better than Cassel, they would play him.

Instead there is rumors they are shopping him.
I totally agree!

Hayvern
03-23-2010, 03:15 PM
Look, maybe he isn't any good. I don't know. But I know that Thigpen looked even worse than Croyle when he tried to play in that "born to lose" offense that Herm was forcing.

And Croyle didn't get the chance to play in Chan's experimental gimmick offense that Thigpen excelled in.

I cerainly don't claim that Croyle is great, nor even good. But, until I see him get a chance to play in a real offense, I don't see how anyone can say rather he is good or not.

Well not that I would give Herm any type of football understanding, at the same time, Herm tried many times to give the team over to Croyle.

Remember when Green got hurt? Croyle was given a shot and couldn't hang, we had to go with Huard that year. Then Herm came out and said QB was Croyle's job to lose, and he lost it. Yeah we started the season with him at the helm, but that was short lived when we benched him, and we did bench him if you remember. It was only after Huard hurt his thumb that we brought Croyle back in and THEN he got hurt.

If Croyle had been any good then, he would have taken charge of the team and had been the starting QB. He lacked something, whether it was leadership, intelligence or what, it doesn't matter. He had his chance to take over the job and he failed.

:beat_DeadHorse:

chief31
03-23-2010, 05:01 PM
Well not that I would give Herm any type of football understanding, at the same time, Herm tried many times to give the team over to Croyle.

Remember when Green got hurt? Croyle was given a shot and couldn't hang, we had to go with Huard that year. Then Herm came out and said QB was Croyle's job to lose, and he lost it. Yeah we started the season with him at the helm, but that was short lived when we benched him, and we did bench him if you remember. It was only after Huard hurt his thumb that we brought Croyle back in and THEN he got hurt.

If Croyle had been any good then, he would have taken charge of the team and had been the starting QB. He lacked something, whether it was leadership, intelligence or what, it doesn't matter. He had his chance to take over the job and he failed.

:beat_DeadHorse:

It seems he ran a failed offense to perfection and failed with it. That's what a failed offense is supposed to do.

But then, everyone else did the same thing with it. In order for a QB to properly run Herm's offense, you must efficiently suck a** and then get injured. Am I right?

Well, that's what Croyle did.... To perfection it would seem. :D

tornadospotter
03-23-2010, 05:21 PM
It seems he ran a failed offense to perfection and failed with it. That's what a failed offense is supposed to do.

But then, everyone else did the same thing with it. In order for a QB to properly run Herm's offense, you must efficiently suck a** and then get injured. Am I right?

Well, that's what Croyle did.... To perfection it would seem. :D

Yes he did, because that is how hermie's offense works, QB's get hurt!














































:blindref:

I wonder if it is because of deep down resentment against QB's and WR's that is the problem with the way hermie coached.



:sign0094::saythat:

Coach
03-23-2010, 07:43 PM
Croyle sucks... Herm tried to give him the team and he totally blew it. He has won zero games. Tyler Thigpen looked like a pro-bowler compared to Croyle.

Fact of the matter, Croyle has had injury issues that dated back before he was even drafted. He is very inconsistent. YOu can all wish what you want, but no coach in the NFL would keep a player on the bench if they thought it would help them win games.

Croyle will be a life time back up. If he becomes our starter, the Chiefs are in bad shape.

It may not be right, but this is exactly how I feek about Croyle.

____________
Posted from my BlackBerry, PM me for Details

Seek
03-23-2010, 09:17 PM
It may not be right, but this is exactly how I feek about Croyle.

____________
Posted from my BlackBerry, PM me for Details

I mean I don't want to hate on the guy, but he is what he is. I am perfectly fine leaving him as our back up for years to come. He is a good back up, but we better have a decnet 3rd stringer too. Cause you just don't know.