PDA

View Full Version : Huard...((((sigh))))



texaschief
10-15-2007, 11:31 PM
I'm not able to watch the games cuz i have a mac and cant find a way to see it on my computer. Also, i'm in San Antonio and all i get to see are the Texans games...so...

Is it just me or is Huard getting sacked when he shouldn't be getting sacked. The only thing i have to go on is how he played the first 4 games of this year where he was a statue in the back field and when he couldn't complete a screen pass.

Are the sacks something the line is giving up or is it the lack of mobility by Damon Huard? Would the drop off really be that big if we brought in Croyle?

Once again, we're playing .500 football...just like every season, so we won't get a high first round pick, shouldn't Croyle be in getting experience for next year?

hermhater
10-15-2007, 11:39 PM
Huard is not mobile. The O line is not a step or two behind.

Put them together and you have the Chiefs offense in a nutshell.

Any complaints should be directed to HERM!

texaschief
10-15-2007, 11:51 PM
Huard is not mobile. The O line is not a step or two behind.

Put them together and you have the Chiefs offense in a nutshell.

Any complaints should be directed to HERM!

yeah, you're right. Let's get rid of the guy who took us to the playoffs his first year...with the same team that didn't make it the year before.

Wait, they weren't the same team. Last year's team didn't have Roaf. My bad.

hermhater
10-15-2007, 11:56 PM
yeah, you're right. Let's get rid of the guy who took us to the playoffs his first year...with the same team that didn't make it the year before.

Wait, they weren't the same team. Last year's team didn't have Roaf. My bad.

As some wise poster has said before, we didn't make the playoffs last year, 4 other teams decided they didn't want to go so the NFL chose us.

The year before we were one of only 4 teams to go 10-6 and not make the playoffs in NFL history.

I think if we had made the playoffs in DV last year we would have won the Super Bowl.

The team was all together and were motivated. Lots of guys were trying very hard because they were planning on getting th Super Bowl win and were gonna retire, so they were gonna give it their all!

Chiefster
10-16-2007, 12:11 AM
Huard brings experience and good decision making to the table while Croyle has a stronger arm and has more athleticism. In either case the "O" line has to step up their game. Sunday they weren't absolutely horrible, but are mediocre at best.

timsatt1
10-16-2007, 12:15 AM
yeah, you're right. Let's get rid of the guy who took us to the playoffs his first year...with the same team that didn't make it the year before.

Wait, they weren't the same team. Last year's team didn't have Roaf. My bad.

yes, this was a very moronic post.

do we give herm the sperm credit for getting us to the playoffs?

or do we give the fact that 4 or 5 games over the last 2 weeks had to go JUST RIGHT for us to win, and we were #$# lucky to get to go to Indianapolis and get our #$# kicked by payton for the second time in the playoffs.

stlchief
10-16-2007, 12:38 AM
yes, this was a very moronic post.

do we give herm the sperm credit for getting us to the playoffs?

or do we give the fact that 4 or 5 games over the last 2 weeks had to go JUST RIGHT for us to win, and we were #$# lucky to get to go to Indianapolis and get our #$# kicked by payton for the second time in the playoffs.

I don't think there is a lot lof LUCK in getting to the play-offs in the NFL. I guess Cinnci & Denver and the other team that all laid an egg on the final game of the season just didn't get "lucky".

And why did we get our butts handed to us? Herm. Green obviously couldn't handle it. Herm said before the game he was on a short leash. This is no where close to saying "he's our guy, we'll go with him no matter what". He said "He's on a short leash."

So why didn't Herm give him the hook? Simple: He panicked. He couldn't imagine pulling the town favorite, regular pro-bowl QB to go with a career back up. He was afraid of the repercussions.

We needed things to go right? c'mon. more than half of the games in the NFL (even between mismatched teams) come down to a few plays. There is a fine line between 6-10 / 8-8 / 10-6. Probably 10 plays can change a season. But guess what? That fine line is NOT luck.

The Chiefs no more deserved to lose those games than they deserved to win the ones they lost. It comes down to coaching, preparation and execution.

This team will win the division. Why? They are good. Do they need to win close games to get there, sure. But when they do, it won't be because of luck. And if they miss it, for sure it will have nothing to do with luck.

McLovin
10-16-2007, 12:47 AM
I'm not able to watch the games cuz i have a mac and cant find a way to see it on my computer. Also, i'm in San Antonio and all i get to see are the Texans games...so...

Is it just me or is Huard getting sacked when he shouldn't be getting sacked. The only thing i have to go on is how he played the first 4 games of this year where he was a statue in the back field and when he couldn't complete a screen pass.

Are the sacks something the line is giving up or is it the lack of mobility by Damon Huard? Would the drop off really be that big if we brought in Croyle?

Once again, we're playing .500 football...just like every season, so we won't get a high first round pick, shouldn't Croyle be in getting experience for next year?

Totally agree with ya here, I have been saying this for weeks just not worded the same. I also felt that despite the numbers, despite the 112 pass ratio, Huard was just average. If not maybe a little below average last week against Cincy. Just because we won doesn't make him money.



yeah, you're right. Let's get rid of the guy who took us to the playoffs his first year...with the same team that didn't make it the year before.

Wait, they weren't the same team. Last year's team didn't have Roaf. My bad.

K here is where you lost me, since when has it been enough to get to the playoffs, I would much rather tank and take a good pic at this point then to ... get to the playoffs,

One even though we got to the playoffs last year, we didnt get playoff respect, we backed in, no one else wanted it they let us in, etc. How bout we actually have a rebuilding year, get the veterans that are on the way out (Huard, Kennison, Dunn) out and get the kids that are the future (Croyle, Bowe, Sippio Grigsby) some playing time so that after picking up a couple more pieces (which should be better due to higher pick) then we have a superbowl team. Rather then be mediocre, never horrible, never great, get to the playoffs and bow out in the first round, have a veteran qb that is a diamond in the rough, and was never a star but now is fairly good, not great, but only has a few years in front of him.

Examples of that are Huard, Green, Kreig, and as much as it pains me to say it, Montana (greatest qb in the football history, but by the time he was a Chief, while still good, he didn't have much time left and his best years were behind him.

Grbac was in there also and was only in the league 4 years, but again we still didn't draft him, thought since he was in San Fran that he must be gold.

You all know I could go on all day on this, but I will stop BTW Croyle might get in and be horrible, then at least we would know THIS offseason and we could go get someone else (draft please not someone else's worn out QB) If we dont get him 8 games as starter we wont know, and I am sorry but with how Jax, NE, and Indy are playing we may get to the playoffs but we arent going to make it to the Super Bowl. We may be leading the division, but in most any other division (AFC of NFC) we would not be, and to hear most analysts call it, even though we hold the head to head tiebreaker and the same record, SD still leads this division.

Put in the kid. Let him get his lumps in a real game. Whats the worst that can happen, we get a better draft pick.

stlchief
10-16-2007, 12:56 AM
Totally agree with ya here, I have been saying this for weeks just not worded the same. I also felt that despite the numbers, despite the 112 pass ratio, Huard was just average. If not maybe a little below average last week against Cincy. Just because we won doesn't make him money.




K here is where you lost me, since when has it been enough to get to the playoffs, I would much rather tank and take a good pic at this point then to ... get to the playoffs,

One even though we got to the playoffs last year, we didnt get playoff respect, we backed in, no one else wanted it they let us in, etc. How bout we actually have a rebuilding year, get the veterans that are on the way out (Huard, Kennison, Dunn) out and get the kids that are the future (Croyle, Bowe, Sippio Grigsby) some playing time so that after picking up a couple more pieces (which should be better due to higher pick) then we have a superbowl team. Rather then be mediocre, never horrible, never great, get to the playoffs and bow out in the first round, have a veteran qb that is a diamond in the rough, and was never a star but now is fairly good, not great, but only has a few years in front of him.

Examples of that are Huard, Green, Kreig, and as much as it pains me to say it, Montana (greatest qb in the football history, but by the time he was a Chief, while still good, he didn't have much time left and his best years were behind him.

Grbac was in there also and was only in the league 4 years, but again we still didn't draft him, thought since he was in San Fran that he must be gold.

You all know I could go on all day on this, but I will stop BTW Croyle might get in and be horrible, then at least we would know THIS offseason and we could go get someone else (draft please not someone else's worn out QB) If we dont get him 8 games as starter we wont know, and I am sorry but with how Jax, NE, and Indy are playing we may get to the playoffs but we arent going to make it to the Super Bowl. We may be leading the division, but in most any other division (AFC of NFC) we would not be, and to hear most analysts call it, even though we hold the head to head tiebreaker and the same record, SD still leads this division.

Put in the kid. Let him get his lumps in a real game. Whats the worst that can happen, we get a better draft pick.

What's the rush? You sound really, really worried we might make the play-offs. OMG - that would be awful. And we have a top 10 defense - what if in that, (don't say it, please don't say it) play-off game (OMG - he said it), that top 10 defense caused some turn-overs and we squeeked out a win. Imagine how far our draft pick would fall. Then to think the unthinkable - in the 2nd play-off game, a rookie stepped up and had a great/awful game???? Disaster. Bowe breaks tackles on 2 runs for TD's, TG gets one also, and the defense holds. I can't go on. We would be picking so late in the first round....

You are so right. Let's take out all of our starters now to insure good draft picks. The people paying $100 a ticket will still keep coming. They will know it's an investment in the future. Free agents will still be excited about joining our team even though we finish 3 - 13. But we better sit TG & Bowe, because they might keep trying to win. And the young safeties, get 'em out of there. Young'uns might actual intercept a pass and take a chance of securing a game.

Yeah - let's throw in the season and get better draft picks. (Imagine how busy this site will be....)

hermhater
10-16-2007, 12:58 AM
Put in the kid. Let him get his lumps in a real game. Whats the worst that can happen, we get a better draft pick.

Beatin' a dead horse... I have made this argument so many times...

It ain't gonna happen this year...

Chiefster
10-16-2007, 01:40 AM
Beatin' a dead horse... I have made this argument so many times...

It ain't gonna happen this year...

Agreed; unless Huard gets hurt.

texaschief
10-16-2007, 03:49 AM
Totally agree with ya here, I have been saying this for weeks just not worded the same. I also felt that despite the numbers, despite the 112 pass ratio, Huard was just average. If not maybe a little below average last week against Cincy. Just because we won doesn't make him money.




K here is where you lost me, since when has it been enough to get to the playoffs, I would much rather tank and take a good pic at this point then to ... get to the playoffs,

One even though we got to the playoffs last year, we didnt get playoff respect, we backed in, no one else wanted it they let us in, etc. How bout we actually have a rebuilding year, get the veterans that are on the way out (Huard, Kennison, Dunn) out and get the kids that are the future (Croyle, Bowe, Sippio Grigsby) some playing time so that after picking up a couple more pieces (which should be better due to higher pick) then we have a superbowl team. Rather then be mediocre, never horrible, never great, get to the playoffs and bow out in the first round, have a veteran qb that is a diamond in the rough, and was never a star but now is fairly good, not great, but only has a few years in front of him.

Examples of that are Huard, Green, Kreig, and as much as it pains me to say it, Montana (greatest qb in the football history, but by the time he was a Chief, while still good, he didn't have much time left and his best years were behind him.

Grbac was in there also and was only in the league 4 years, but again we still didn't draft him, thought since he was in San Fran that he must be gold.

You all know I could go on all day on this, but I will stop BTW Croyle might get in and be horrible, then at least we would know THIS offseason and we could go get someone else (draft please not someone else's worn out QB) If we dont get him 8 games as starter we wont know, and I am sorry but with how Jax, NE, and Indy are playing we may get to the playoffs but we arent going to make it to the Super Bowl. We may be leading the division, but in most any other division (AFC of NFC) we would not be, and to hear most analysts call it, even though we hold the head to head tiebreaker and the same record, SD still leads this division.

Put in the kid. Let him get his lumps in a real game. Whats the worst that can happen, we get a better draft pick.

dude, i couldn't agree with you more...believe me!!! i was the one on this board hoping we won all of 2 games this year!! I WANT A HIGH DP FOR A QB... but, SSHHHHH....they'll attack you here if you suggest anything about breaking they cycle of mediocrity...This team is not a Super Bowl winning team. Put Brodie in!!! Let's see if he's really the future.

hermhater
10-16-2007, 03:52 AM
dude, i couldn't agree with you more...believe me!!! i was the one on this board hoping we won all of 2 games this year!! I WANT A HIGH DP FOR A QB... but, SSHHHHH....they'll attack you here if you suggest anything about breaking they cycle of mediocrity...This team is not a Super Bowl winning team. Put Brodie in!!! Let's see if he's really the future.


I want to see if he is the future or not!

Just being in the hunt is not enough for me.

I want the Chiefs to be the dominate force in the NFL!

Guru
10-16-2007, 03:54 AM
dude, i couldn't agree with you more...believe me!!! i was the one on this board hoping we won all of 2 games this year!! I WANT A HIGH DP FOR A QB... but, SSHHHHH....they'll attack you here if you suggest anything about breaking they cycle of mediocrity...This team is not a Super Bowl winning team. Put Brodie in!!! Let's see if he's really the future.

I like how the representations of a few posters automatically become the views of all posters by guys like you.

If you do some research, you will see that there is a STRONG Croyle base on this site.

And there are quite a few here that were ready for a losing season too.

I am happy the Chiefs are doing decent right now but I still know that Carl is getting what he wants. A mediocre season that keeps butts in the seats.

hermhater
10-16-2007, 03:58 AM
dude, i couldn't agree with you more...believe me!!! i was the one on this board hoping we won all of 2 games this year!! I WANT A HIGH DP FOR A QB... but, SSHHHHH....they'll attack you here if you suggest anything about breaking they cycle of mediocrity...This team is not a Super Bowl winning team. Put Brodie in!!! Let's see if he's really the future.


I like how the representations of a few posters automatically become the views of all posters by guys like you.

If you do some research, you will see that there is a STRONG Croyle base on this site.

And there are quite a few here that were ready for a losing season too.

I am happy the Chiefs are doing decent right now but I still know that Carl is getting what he wants. A mediocre season that keeps butts in the seats.

Has anyone in this zip code ever heard Carl Peterson?

Guru
10-16-2007, 04:02 AM
Has anyone in this zip code ever heard Carl Peterson?

I don't know? What is YOUR zip code?

hermhater
10-16-2007, 04:06 AM
I don't know? What is YOUR zip code?

64055 and am proud of it!

Right next to ARROWHEAD!

Guru
10-16-2007, 04:13 AM
64055 and am proud of it!

Right next to ARROWHEAD!

Mine begins with 666. Kind of fitting for Carl don't you think?:D

hermhater
10-16-2007, 04:15 AM
Mine begins with 666. Kind of fitting for Carl don't you think?:D


So you moved there on purpose because of your disposition?

j/k!

:lol:

Guru
10-16-2007, 04:34 AM
So you moved there on purpose because of your disposition?

j/k!

:lol:

Nope. Born and raised and STUCK.

hermhater
10-16-2007, 04:52 AM
Nope. Born and raised and STUCK.

I got away once, and came back for various reasons.

STUCK in the midwest myself.

Kind of runs in the family!

chief31
10-16-2007, 05:24 AM
yeah, you're right. Let's get rid of the guy who took us to the playoffs his first year...with the same team that didn't make it the year before.

Wait, they weren't the same team. Last year's team didn't have Roaf. My bad.

For the record, the '05 Chiefs were 10-6, while the '06 Chiefs were 9-8.


I don't think there is a lot lof LUCK in getting to the play-offs in the NFL. I guess Cinnci & Denver and the other team that all laid an egg on the final game of the season just didn't get "lucky".

We needed things to go right? c'mon. more than half of the games in the NFL (even between mismatched teams) come down to a few plays. There is a fine line between 6-10 / 8-8 / 10-6. Probably 10 plays can change a season. But guess what? That fine line is NOT luck.

The Chiefs no more deserved to lose those games than they deserved to win the ones they lost. It comes down to coaching, preparation and execution.

This team will win the division. Why? They are good. Do they need to win close games to get there, sure. But when they do, it won't be because of luck. And if they miss it, for sure it will have nothing to do with luck.

Luck is a factor in everything. And when it doesn't asppear to be, then you are lucky it wasn't.


dude, i couldn't agree with you more...believe me!!! i was the one on this board hoping we won all of 2 games this year!! I WANT A HIGH DP FOR A QB... but, SSHHHHH....they'll attack you here if you suggest anything about breaking they cycle of mediocrity...This team is not a Super Bowl winning team. Put Brodie in!!! Let's see if he's really the future.

Just because you root against the Chiefs doesn't make you some superior Chiefs fan. I will never understand that cowardly (There's the attack you were asking for.) train of thought.

You seem to think that being the worst team on football includes some kind of guarantee that it will make you the best and that is as wrong as anything that I have ever heard.

If the world revolves around the "High first round draft picks", then how about trading away some of the lesser picks for the almighty savior that is a "high first round pick"?

I couldn't stand to see any team of mine play coward-ball. That kinda has a way of becoming a learned behaviour. You play cowardly, then you continue to play cowardly.

Take a look around at who is drafting in the upper half of the first round, each year. There is a trend in it.

Adopt a culture of being losers? No thanks.

McLovin
10-16-2007, 01:56 PM
1970, Last time the Chiefs were in the superbowl, Also the only superbowl win.

1968, 1977, 1981, 2003 Oakland SuperBowl Years, Won it in 1977, 1981

1978, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1998, 1999, Denver SuperBowl Years, Won it in 98, 99.

1995 only time San Diego has been to the Super Bowl. they lost.

37 Years is a long time without a SuperBowl, I am behind the Chiefs 0-16 or 16-0 I just would rather see a SuperBowl appearance rather then just another playoff run.

Ohhh and yes there are some perennial bottom dwellers but just a few years ago,

Eli Manning demanded San Diego not draft him because they were worthless and now look at them.

Last year Oakland was horrible, but this year they are ok.

It may have been a one year wonder but the Aints were a bottom dweller for some time and last year almost made the Super Bowl.

This year it will be a toss up for 1st pick but the Falcons look like they could end up with it due to losing ONE player, granted they weren't that great but they had a 27th selection in 2005. They did though they had 8th selection last year.

Need I mention perennial bottom dwellers Cincinnati , in 03 with the first draft pick Carson Palmer, they have been fairly good since then. One player can turn a franchise around. (they do have some issues but they aren't where they were.

One great player can make a world of difference. And while some greats drop way down and even out of the draft, a large number of them go top 10, if we are constantly picking in the 20s we are not going to get one of these top 10 players, Because teams that have these players generally don't let them go.


Herm Hater, do you live in that dumpy lil trailer park off of 40 Hwy, lol it is right across from Arrowhead, that is where I used to live (dont like to admit it though) this was after living in Independence, KC North. and Gardner.

rbedgood
10-16-2007, 03:22 PM
Herm Hater, do you live in that dumpy lil trailer park off of 40 Hwy, lol it is right across from Arrowhead, that is where I used to live (dont like to admit it though) this was after living in Independence, KC North. and Gardner.

Wow, just me or did Bryon just call HH trailer trash...:lol: :lol: :lol:

hermhater
10-16-2007, 03:28 PM
Mine begins with 666. Kind of fitting for Carl don't you think?:D

That is rather spooky...

McLovin
10-16-2007, 03:29 PM
Wow, just me or did Bryon just call HH trailer trash...:lol: :lol: :lol:

Did I forget my sarcasm sign again, LOL.

BTW I used to live there, so watch it lol.

hermhater
10-16-2007, 03:33 PM
Wow, just me or did Bryon just call HH trailer trash...:lol: :lol: :lol:

I am apartment trash!!!

I actually live in one of the few half way decent parts of Independence.

Living in this city though, you are never far from a trailer park!!!

Meth labs blow up at least once a month around here. If you turn down the game, you can usually hear them booming in the distance!

:lol:

rbedgood
10-16-2007, 03:40 PM
Did I forget my sarcasm sign again, LOL.

BTW I used to live there, so watch it lol.

Therein lies the humor...:yahoo:

chief31
10-16-2007, 04:00 PM
1970, Last time the Chiefs were in the superbowl, Also the only superbowl win.

1968, 1977, 1981, 2003 Oakland SuperBowl Years, Won it in 1977, 1981

1978, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1998, 1999, Denver SuperBowl Years, Won it in 98, 99.

1995 only time San Diego has been to the Super Bowl. they lost.

37 Years is a long time without a SuperBowl, I am behind the Chiefs 0-16 or 16-0 I just would rather see a SuperBowl appearance rather then just another playoff run.

Ohhh and yes there are some perennial bottom dwellers but just a few years ago,

Eli Manning demanded San Diego not draft him because they were worthless and now look at them.

Last year Oakland was horrible, but this year they are ok.

It may have been a one year wonder but the Aints were a bottom dweller for some time and last year almost made the Super Bowl.

This year it will be a toss up for 1st pick but the Falcons look like they could end up with it due to losing ONE player, granted they weren't that great but they had a 27th selection in 2005. They did though they had 8th selection last year.

Need I mention perennial bottom dwellers Cincinnati , in 03 with the first draft pick Carson Palmer, they have been fairly good since then. One player can turn a franchise around. (they do have some issues but they aren't where they were.

One great player can make a world of difference. And while some greats drop way down and even out of the draft, a large number of them go top 10, if we are constantly picking in the 20s we are not going to get one of these top 10 players, Because teams that have these players generally don't let them go.


Herm Hater, do you live in that dumpy lil trailer park off of 40 Hwy, lol it is right across from Arrowhead, that is where I used to live (dont like to admit it though) this was after living in Independence, KC North. and Gardner.

And exactly how many years would you like for us to be the laughing stock of the league? How many years did it take the Bengals? The Chargers? The Saints?

Oh and for the record, the Raiders being as decent as they are is not because of the number one, overall, pick. He hasn't been on the field.


Here's a concept. Tom Brady. Kurt Warner. Rich Gannon. One player can most definitely make a big difference. But there is no reason that that guy has to be from the top of the draft, nor even the first round, nor the draft at all.


We could do a comparison...

L.T. - 5 years in the league, zero Super Bowl appearences.

Peyton Manning - made it to and won a Super Bowl, in his ninth season.

Michael Vick - Sorry. I know that isn't fair.

Tom Brady - First year ever starting a game, won a Super Bowl. Then proceeded to win a couple more. (Sixth-round draft pick.)

Kurt Warner - First season ever starting a game, won a Super Bowl. Then made it to a second one, a couple years later.

Again, one player can have a major impact, but he often isn't the first guy drafted.

luv
10-16-2007, 04:09 PM
And exactly how many years would you like for us to be the laughing stock of the league? How many years did it take the Bengals? The Chargers? The Saints?

Oh and for the record, the Raiders being as decent as they are is not because of the number one, overall, pick. He hasn't been on the field.


Here's a concept. Tom Brady. Kurt Warner. Rich Gannon. One player can most definitely make a big difference. But there is no reason that that guy has to be from the top of the draft, nor even the first round, nor the draft at all.


We could do a comparison...

L.T. - 5 years in the league, zero Super Bowl appearences.

Peyton Manning - made it to and won a Super Bowl, in his ninth season.

Michael Vick - Sorry. I know that isn't fair.

Tom Brady - First year ever starting a game, won a Super Bowl. Then proceeded to win a couple more. (Sixth-round draft pick.)

Kurt Warner - First season ever starting a game, won a Super Bowl. Then made it to a second one, a couple years later.

Again, one player can have a major impact, but he often isn't the first guy drafted.
Agreed. Just because someone's drafted in the first round may mean he's good, but it doesn't necessarily guarantee that he will fit in to the system that a coach has developed. You also don't have to have a high pick in order to draft well.

Chiefster
10-16-2007, 04:25 PM
Mine begins with 666. Kind of fitting for Carl don't you think?:D


That is rather spooky...


It is simply a number; unless the government is forcing you to accept a micro-chip or bar code in your right hand or forehead you simply have nothing to fear from it.

hermhater
10-16-2007, 04:27 PM
It is simply a number; unless the government is forcing you to accept a micro-chip or bar code in your right hand or forehead you simply have nothing to fear from it.

But Guru is there and he is da debil!

Chiefster
10-16-2007, 04:59 PM
But Guru is there and he is da debil!

Point well taken. :sign0098::lol:

hermhater
10-16-2007, 05:06 PM
Point well taken. :sign0098::lol:

If I wear a hat, my point doesn't show!

http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2007/10/137.jpg

Chiefster
10-16-2007, 05:16 PM
If I wear a hat, my point doesn't show!

http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2007/10/137.jpg


Heh! Nice! :lol:

DrunkHillbilly
10-16-2007, 05:25 PM
Huard brings experience and good decision making to the table while Croyle has a stronger arm and has more athleticism. In either case the "O" line has to step up their game. Sunday they weren't absolutely horrible, but are mediocre at best.
Like I said earlier in the week, It was our crappy players against their crappy players!!! Guess their players are crappier!!

m0ef0e
10-16-2007, 05:32 PM
What's the effing problem here???

If somebody says to my face, one more time, that we need to put Croyle in, I'm gonna knock their damn teeth out before they complete the sentence because it's FOOLISH!!!

Huard has moved up to the 12th-rated passer in the league. Last week, he completed over 71% of his passes and had a rating of 112.1. No picks and 2 TD's. This guy is doing exactly what was asked and was expected of him when he got the starting job. Now, he's just starting to come on to play like he did last year more consistently. Now, some idiots want to smother the fire before it has really gotten going. Starting Croyle may have been a valid argument a month ago. Now, it's just stupid. Give it a rest, already. The horse is not only dead, it has been mutilated until there is nothing left but a greasy smear.

hermhater
10-16-2007, 05:34 PM
What's the effing problem here???

If somebody says to my face, one more time, that we need to put Croyle in, I'm gonna knock their damn teeth out before they complete the sentence because it's FOOLISH!!!

Huard has moved up to the 12th-rated passer in the league. Last week, he completed over 71% of his passes and had a rating of 112.1. No picks and 2 TD's. This guy is doing exactly what was asked and was expected of him when he got the starting job. Now, he's just starting to come on to play like he did last year more consistently. Now, some idiots want to smother the fire before it has really gotten going. Starting Croyle may have been a valid argument a month ago. Now, it's just stupid. Give it a rest, already. The horse is not only dead, it has been mutilated until there is nothing left but a greasy smear.

Rep added!

:sign0098:

Chiefster
10-16-2007, 05:44 PM
What's the effing problem here???

If somebody says to my face, one more time, that we need to put Croyle in, I'm gonna knock their damn teeth out before they complete the sentence because it's FOOLISH!!!

Huard has moved up to the 12th-rated passer in the league. Last week, he completed over 71% of his passes and had a rating of 112.1. No picks and 2 TD's. This guy is doing exactly what was asked and was expected of him when he got the starting job. Now, he's just starting to come on to play like he did last year more consistently. Now, some idiots want to smother the fire before it has really gotten going. Starting Croyle may have been a valid argument a month ago. Now, it's just stupid. Give it a rest, already. The horse is not only dead, it has been mutilated until there is nothing left but a greasy smear.

I was merely pointing out each players strengths against the other's perceived weaknesses, and that our "O" line will need to continue to improve. I was not endorsing one QB over the other. Now as far as knocking my teeth out, I'll simply chalk that up to an emotional state of mind.

m0ef0e
10-16-2007, 05:49 PM
I was merely pointing out each players strengths against the other's perceived weaknesses, and that our "O" line will need to continue to improve. I was not endorsing one QB over the other. Now as far as knocking my teeth out, I'll simply chalk that up to an emotional state of mind.

Not yours. And not anybody's in particular. Unless they are standing right in front of me, of course. :lol:

I know you aren't putting up the Croyle picket signs, dude. I'm talking about the knobs that want to come on here starting the same, stupid, pointless thread week after week. I honestly didn't expect the Broyle bandwagon to be out in force this week and was disappointed to see some people holding on to a dead issue the way that chick was hanging on Stallone's arm at the beginning of 'Cliffhanger'. Especially after Huard is coming off his best week of the season. JMHO, but those who are still calling for Brodie as a starter at this point are just proving their foolishness.

Chiefster
10-16-2007, 05:55 PM
Not yours. And not anybody's in particular. Unless they are standing right in front of me, of course. :lol:

I know you aren't putting up the Croyle picket signs, dude. I'm talking about the knobs that want to come on here starting the same, stupid, pointless thread week after week. I honestly didn't expect the Broyle bandwagon to be out in force this week and was disappointed to see some people holding on to a dead issue the way that chick was hanging on Stallone's arm at the beginning of 'Cliffhanger'. Especially after Huard is coming off his best week of the season. JMHO, but those who are still calling for Brodie as a starter at this point are just proving their foolishness.

Agreed, this was probably among his best performances this year.

McLovin
10-16-2007, 08:57 PM
Not yours. And not anybody's in particular. Unless they are standing right in front of me, of course. :lol:

I know you aren't putting up the Croyle picket signs, dude. I'm talking about the knobs that want to come on here starting the same, stupid, pointless thread week after week. I honestly didn't expect the Broyle bandwagon to be out in force this week and was disappointed to see some people holding on to a dead issue the way that chick was hanging on Stallone's arm at the beginning of 'Cliffhanger'. Especially after Huard is coming off his best week of the season. JMHO, but those who are still calling for Brodie as a starter at this point are just proving their foolishness.

Kinda have a feeling that this may be aimed at me, either way I feel that I have expressed why I want Croyle in, and it has nothing to do with Huard, I really like Huard. As far as knocking my teeth out, better bring Canada with ya lol. I am not posting new threads calling to bench Huard and bring in Croyle but I will respond with my feelings in a reasonable manner and insert facts and my opinions whenever I feel the need.

Am I going to be mad if Huard starts this weekend, No.

Am I going to going to be surprised when Huard starts this weekend. Again No.

During the game am I going to find spots I feel Croyle may have done a better job. Yes

Is anyone going to change my opinion, Not with threats, but with good arguments to back up their point of view, Absolutely there is a chance.

Last am I going to get offended at this post, others filled with emotion, or any post bashing me or my opinion. No If you bring your opinion and back it up I will listen and respect, If you call others opinions invalid and disrespect me I will just ignore what you have to say and probably not even see the parts of your post that are valid, If you bash others on this site and call names, then I will step up and defend others.

The you in this post is not directed at m0ef0e, it is directed at whoever should post. All I ask is respect for others opinions and for the people posting them.

rbedgood
10-16-2007, 09:40 PM
What's the effing problem here???

If somebody says to my face, one more time, that we need to put Croyle in, I'm gonna knock their damn teeth out before they complete the sentence because it's FOOLISH!!!

Huard has moved up to the 12th-rated passer in the league. Last week, he completed over 71% of his passes and had a rating of 112.1. No picks and 2 TD's. This guy is doing exactly what was asked and was expected of him when he got the starting job. Now, he's just starting to come on to play like he did last year more consistently. Now, some idiots want to smother the fire before it has really gotten going. Starting Croyle may have been a valid argument a month ago. Now, it's just stupid. Give it a rest, already. The horse is not only dead, it has been mutilated until there is nothing left but a greasy smear.

We call that http://sp1.mm-a7.yimg.com/image/3815367925 (http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fs earch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dhorse%2Bglue%2Bfactory%26ei%3 DUTF-8%26js%3D1%26ni%3D21%26fr%3Dyfp-t-501%26b%3D22&w=200&h=200&imgurl=www.oddjack.com%2FELMERS.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oddjack.com%2Fcategory%2Fhor se-racing%2Fhorseys&size=10.5kB&name=ELMERS.jpg&p=horse+glue+factory&type=jpeg&no=35&tt=48&oid=b12d6932c085f2a6&ei=UTF-8) where I come from...

texaschief
10-17-2007, 12:18 AM
You seem to think that being the worst team on football includes some kind of guarantee that it will make you the best and that is as wrong as anything that I have ever heard.

If the world revolves around the "High first round draft picks", then how about trading away some of the lesser picks for the almighty savior that is a "high first round pick"?

I couldn't stand to see any team of mine play coward-ball. That kinda has a way of becoming a learned behaviour. You play cowardly, then you continue to play cowardly.

First off, i had to edit the rest of your post because it was presumptuous and completely retarded. The Chiefs are the same old mediocre team they always are. Letting Brodie Croyle get experience isn't cowardly. It's smart to give your "QB of the future" game experience. Again, it all comes down to foresight. Carl Peterson doesn't have that. His motto is compete now, sacrafice wins later. Make no mistake, Huard is NOT our future. But at least we wouldn't have to wait ANOTHER season to figure out if Croyle is.

The Chiefs are re-building for the future. We're developing a dominant defense. We're lacking a dominant O-line and athletic CBs. We could draft those around pick 20 any year. But if we put Croyle in right now, he either proves he's THE MAN or we lose and we draft a QB high in the draft. I'm sure you look at it as lose/lose, but anyone with a brain could see that it's win/win.



And exactly how many years would you like for us to be the laughing stock of the league? How many years did it take the Bengals? The Chargers? The Saints?

Oh and for the record, the Raiders being as decent as they are is not because of the number one, overall, pick. He hasn't been on the field.


Here's a concept. Tom Brady. Kurt Warner. Rich Gannon. One player can most definitely make a big difference. But there is no reason that that guy has to be from the top of the draft, nor even the first round, nor the draft at all.


We could do a comparison...

L.T. - 5 years in the league, zero Super Bowl appearences.

Peyton Manning - made it to and won a Super Bowl, in his ninth season.

Michael Vick - Sorry. I know that isn't fair.

Tom Brady - First year ever starting a game, won a Super Bowl. Then proceeded to win a couple more. (Sixth-round draft pick.)

Kurt Warner - First season ever starting a game, won a Super Bowl. Then made it to a second one, a couple years later.

Again, one player can have a major impact, but he often isn't the first guy drafted.

This is another dumb argument. Ok, lets wait till the 5th and 6th round to draft our QB...that's a MUCH safer route than drafting him high in the first. :sign0153: There's risk to EVERY draft pick. I promise you that the players you made as example first round picks, weren't the problem on those teams and it's dumb to draw that comparison. The difference between the Chiefs and those other teams is that the Chiefs are ready to win now. The Saints, Chargers, Bengals, and Colts surrounded those players with talent that made them contenders. The Chargers/Colts etc. aren't one man teams. The Chiefs on the other hand have the talent they need to surround a super star.The Chiefs kinda did it backward...well, if you don't count LJ as a super star. they've rebuilt that defense and right now, we're lacking are clear cut direction at QB.

And by the way, Croyle isn't a first round pick either...shouldn't he be a super star by now?



Huard has moved up to the 12th-rated passer in the league. Last week, he completed over 71% of his passes and had a rating of 112.1. No picks and 2 TD's. This guy is doing exactly what was asked and was expected of him when he got the starting job. Now, he's just starting to come on to play like he did last year more consistently.

Umm, yeah, it only took the guy 7 games to get it going...against one of the WORST defenses in the league. If we could run the ball like that every week, he'd be putting up numbers like that all year...but apparently, that's a BIG if. How long will it take next year for him to get going...you know, when he's a year older.

Starting Croyle may have been a valid argument a month ago.

Trust me. It's a valid argument now too.



I honestly didn't expect the Broyle bandwagon to be out in force this week and was disappointed to see some people holding on to a dead issue the way that chick was hanging on Stallone's arm at the beginning of 'Cliffhanger'. Especially after Huard is coming off his best week of the season.

You probably didn't expect it because you don't know how a non-bandwagon jumper thinks. After 5 weeks of throwing picks and poor SCREEN passes, Huard has one good game against a horrible defense and suddenly he's a great QB?. The guy is a career backup for a reason. He's a mediocre starter at best. He's led us to a .500 record...oh wait, that's all Herm's fault...i forgot.

This team is gettin so much better than they have been in the past few years, but it amazes me that nobody sees that. We need a QB that will grow with this team, not one that will be here for a year or two giving mediocre performances week in and week out.

JMHO, but those who are still calling for Brodie as a starter at this point are just proving their foolishness.

Says the guy who thinks Damon Huard is a good QB after one good week.




You know what, not only do i think we should start Croyle, but i think we should've sent LJ to Tampa instead of Bennett. Even after ONE good week. His value would've been as high if not higher than at any point this season. Probably could've gotten a few high draft picks to fill holes at CB, OL, and QB. But, that would've taken butts out of the seats.

Like i said before, KC is all about competing now while sacrificing wins later. This is the last i'll talk about trading LJ though because if we didn't trade him to Tampa, he'll never be traded and shouldn't be now. Our depth would be depleted even with Holmes being activated.

I just think that, yes, we'd be giving up a super star, but we could've filled most of the remaining holes in our team with what we could've got in return. If we could've got an OL, CB, or QB in exchange thru draft picks or returning players, we'd only have one glaring position that needed to be filled and that would be at RB. But even RBs are one of the easiest postions to draft.....and all this could be in line going in to next season. Then, give them one more year to play together, and we could very well see a New England type dominant team in Kansas City. But again, it's all about those season ticket holders who don't have the foresight to see a "work in progress" or have the patience for one either.

spiman
10-17-2007, 12:33 AM
Playoff? Miracles sometimes happen..--Well don't they?
I'll start praying to the big guy..Look at the way our funky Div. is playing out. Leave the veteran in.

texaschief
10-17-2007, 12:39 AM
Playoff? Miracles sometimes happen..--Well don't they?
I'll start praying to the big guy..Look at the way our funky Div. is playing out. Leave the veteran in.

Yeah, you're right. that 14-2 team from last season is horrible!!! let's write them off...wait...they have the same record as we do...Guess someone woke them up.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 12:42 AM
For those of you that are sitting on either side of the fence...

Name calling does not get respect from anyone.

Valid points from all here, just seems like a playground spat with all the "idiots", "morons", etc, rather than serious conversation.

I guess everyone is frustrated that we won, and are in first place in our division.

tammietailgator
10-17-2007, 12:43 AM
Kinda have a feeling that this may be aimed at me, either way I feel that I have expressed why I want Croyle in, and it has nothing to do with Huard, I really like Huard. As far as knocking my teeth out, better bring Canada with ya lol. I am not posting new threads calling to bench Huard and bring in Croyle but I will respond with my feelings in a reasonable manner and insert facts and my opinions whenever I feel the need.

Am I going to be mad if Huard starts this weekend, No.

Am I going to going to be surprised when Huard starts this weekend. Again No.

During the game am I going to find spots I feel Croyle may have done a better job. Yes

Is anyone going to change my opinion, Not with threats, but with good arguments to back up their point of view, Absolutely there is a chance.

Last am I going to get offended at this post, others filled with emotion, or any post bashing me or my opinion. No If you bring your opinion and back it up I will listen and respect, If you call others opinions invalid and disrespect me I will just ignore what you have to say and probably not even see the parts of your post that are valid, If you bash others on this site and call names, then I will step up and defend others.

The you in this post is not directed at m0ef0e, it is directed at whoever should post. All I ask is respect for others opinions and for the people posting them.



Spoken like a true Gardnerite!! :yahoo:

hermhater
10-17-2007, 12:46 AM
Spoken like a true Gardnerite!! :yahoo:


I thought you guys were Gardnerians?

:lol::lol::lol:

Seriously I used to party out there and you guys are awesome!!!

tammietailgator
10-17-2007, 12:52 AM
:drunkhb: Not as hard as I have partied right next to arrowhead (literally) Mostly on Sundays, a few Monday nights though!

:lol: :lol:
Maybe we are gardnerians.... I'll get back to you on that.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 12:56 AM
:drunkhb: Not as hard as I have partied right next to arrowhead (literally) Mostly on Sundays, a few Monday nights though!

:lol: :lol:
Maybe we are gardnerians.... I'll get back to you on that.



Funny how Arrowhead will do that to a person!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQNsmA7KQYw (http://www.digitalfog.com/songs/arrowhead33.asf)

stlchief
10-17-2007, 01:12 AM
This is another dumb argument. Ok, lets wait till the 5th and 6th round to draft our QB...that's a MUCH safer route than drafting him high in the first. :sign0153: There's risk to EVERY draft pick. I promise you that the players you made as example first round picks, weren't the problem on those teams and it's dumb to draw that comparison. The difference between the Chiefs and those other teams is that the Chiefs are ready to win now. The Saints, Chargers, Bengals, and Colts surrounded those players with talent that made them contenders. The Chargers/Colts etc. aren't one man teams. The Chiefs on the other hand have the talent they need to surround a super star.The Chiefs kinda did it backward...well, if you don't count LJ as a super star. they've rebuilt that defense and right now, we're lacking are clear cut direction at QB.

And by the way, Croyle isn't a first round pick either...shouldn't he be a super star by now?






You know what, not only do i think we should start Croyle, but i think we should've sent LJ to Tampa instead of Bennett. Even after ONE good week. His value would've been as high if not higher than at any point this season. Probably could've gotten a few high draft picks to fill holes at CB, OL, and QB. But, that would've taken butts out of the seats.

Like i said before, KC is all about competing now while sacrificing wins later. This is the last i'll talk about trading LJ though because if we didn't trade him to Tampa, he'll never be traded and shouldn't be now. Our depth would be depleted even with Holmes being activated.

I just think that, yes, we'd be giving up a super star, but we could've filled most of the remaining holes in our team with what we could've got in return. If we could've got an OL, CB, or QB in exchange thru draft picks or returning players, we'd only have one glaring position that needed to be filled and that would be at RB. But even RBs are one of the easiest postions to draft.....and all this could be in line going in to next season. Then, give them one more year to play together, and we could very well see a New England type dominant team in Kansas City. But again, it's all about those season ticket holders who don't have the foresight to see a "work in progress" or have the patience for one either.

I thought we should have traded LJ PRIOR to the draft this year. Bad attitude, huge contract looming, as high a value as you can get from a guy, it made sense to do that, grab a decent back from free agency, use the money to get 2 or 3 free agent offensive linemen in the next year or two and have some of those draft picks everyone covets so badly.

The Centaur looks human with this line. Maybe it would have been easier to take Centaur money to build a line that would have built another Centaur....

Guru
10-17-2007, 01:28 AM
It is simply a number; unless the government is forcing you to accept a micro-chip or bar code in your right hand or forehead you simply have nothing to fear from it.

Carl Carpathia? Hmmmmmm

hermhater
10-17-2007, 01:39 AM
Carl Carpathia? Hmmmmmm

Is Peterson rescuing Titanic survivors?

A little bit over my head I guess...

Please explain?!

Guru
10-17-2007, 01:40 AM
Is Peterson rescuing Titanic survivors?

A little bit over my head I guess...

Please explain?!

You need to have read the Left Behind series of books to understand the reference. I am pretty sure that Chiefster would have recognized the reference.

rbedgood
10-17-2007, 01:43 AM
I've read the Peretti series, but not the Left Behind series. I'll have to get around to that eventually. Are they on Audiobook yet?!? I'm an IPOD junkie.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 01:44 AM
You need to have read the Left Behind series of books to understand the reference. I am pretty sure that Chiefster would have recognized the reference.

Yeah, I'll bet he did...

Guru
10-17-2007, 01:46 AM
I've read the Peretti series, but not the Left Behind series. I'll have to get around to that eventually. Are they on Audiobook yet?!? I'm an IPOD junkie.


They are a very good read. Twelve books and I never got bored.

I am near certain they are on audiobook. Too popular not to be. Check your local library.

rbedgood
10-17-2007, 01:54 AM
They are a very good read. Twelve books and I never got bored.

I am near certain they are on audiobook. Too popular not to be. Check your local library.

Huh??? Seriously, I haven't been to one of those since college...I'll keep my run alive...Barnes and Noble has better coffee!!! :yahoo: :yahoo:

Guru
10-17-2007, 01:57 AM
Huh??? Seriously, I haven't been to one of those since college...I'll keep my run alive...Barnes and Noble has better coffee!!! :yahoo: :yahoo:

You really don't like money, do you?

I can even get my DVDs from our local library. Free is a hell of a lot cheaper than Blockbuster or Barnes and Noble. :11:

hermhater
10-17-2007, 01:58 AM
They are a very good read. Twelve books and I never got bored.

I am near certain they are on audiobook. Too popular not to be. Check your local library.


Huh??? Seriously, I haven't been to one of those since college...I'll keep my run alive...Barnes and Noble has better coffee!!! :yahoo: :yahoo:

Our local library is a very valuable resource for me.

I can't afford books!!!

Guru
10-17-2007, 02:06 AM
Our local library is a very valuable resource for me.

I can't afford books!!!

I cracks me up how much books cost these days. More than buying a movie anymore.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 02:11 AM
I cracks me up how much books cost these days. More than buying a movie anymore.

Tell me about it.

It is a rare occasion that I buy a book anymore.

They are generally given to me as gifts, if I own them.

Did I mention today is my Birthday?

(hint,hint,wink,wink,nudge,nudge)

Cr@p my Birthday ended 10 minutes ago.

At least rbedgood is still celebrating it!!!!

:sign0098:

rbedgood
10-17-2007, 02:13 AM
You really don't like money, do you?

I can even get my DVDs from our local library. Free is a hell of a lot cheaper than Blockbuster or Barnes and Noble. :11:

I travel a lot (200+ days per year) so Barnes and Noble and my Blockbuster.com membership are my friends...

I can watch DVDs on the road, mail them in, and have a new one waiting for me at home when my trip is over. As for Barnes and Noble, I don't read a lot, I tend to do audiobooks and I use the Barnes and Noble magazine rack while drinking coffee and letting my son play with the Thomas the Train set in the kids area.

chief31
10-17-2007, 02:13 AM
This is another dumb argument. Ok, lets wait till the 5th and 6th round to draft our QB...that's a MUCH safer route than drafting him high in the first. :sign0153: There's risk to EVERY draft pick. I promise you that the players you made as example first round picks, weren't the problem on those teams and it's dumb to draw that comparison. The difference between the Chiefs and those other teams is that the Chiefs are ready to win now. The Saints, Chargers, Bengals, and Colts surrounded those players with talent that made them contenders. The Chargers/Colts etc. aren't one man teams. The Chiefs on the other hand have the talent they need to surround a super star.The Chiefs kinda did it backward...well, if you don't count LJ as a super star. they've rebuilt that defense and right now, we're lacking are clear cut direction at QB.

And by the way, Croyle isn't a first round pick either...shouldn't he be a super star by now?






You know what, not only do i think we should start Croyle, but i think we should've sent LJ to Tampa instead of Bennett. Even after ONE good week. His value would've been as high if not higher than at any point this season. Probably could've gotten a few high draft picks to fill holes at CB, OL, and QB. But, that would've taken butts out of the seats.

Like i said before, KC is all about competing now while sacrificing wins later. This is the last i'll talk about trading LJ though because if we didn't trade him to Tampa, he'll never be traded and shouldn't be now. Our depth would be depleted even with Holmes being activated.

I just think that, yes, we'd be giving up a super star, but we could've filled most of the remaining holes in our team with what we could've got in return. If we could've got an OL, CB, or QB in exchange thru draft picks or returning players, we'd only have one glaring position that needed to be filled and that would be at RB. But even RBs are one of the easiest postions to draft.....and all this could be in line going in to next season. Then, give them one more year to play together, and we could very well see a New England type dominant team in Kansas City. But again, it's all about those season ticket holders who don't have the foresight to see a "work in progress" or have the patience for one either.


Appearently, anything that doesn't include becoming the crappiest team in the league is a dumb idea in Texas.

You just can't seem to accept that players drafted after the top-ten have become better than those who were top ten guys, on countless occaisions. A top-ten draft pick is not something that a team has to have. You can get that "saviour" player from anywhere, if you are lucky and know how to find them. Every draft in NFL history can show you a second roun, or lower, guy, who made a bigger impact than some of the top-ten picks from that year.

When you suggest that you need to have the "forsight" to "shank" a season and go after a high draft spot, it isn't "forsight" that you are seeing, it's the interior walls, lining your own colon.

You don't teach a team how to be losers, if you want them to become winners.


K.C. is all about competing now, while sacrificing wins later.

Not competing is to be a loser. Not just by the scoreboard. Not just by ones record.

L.J. wouldn't have brought a real high pricetag, otherwise I would agree that he could go.

Guru
10-17-2007, 02:16 AM
Tell me about it.

It is a rare occasion that I buy a book anymore.

They are generally given to me as gifts, if I own them.

Did I mention today is my Birthday?

(hint,hint,wink,wink,nudge,nudge)

Cr@p my Birthday ended 10 minutes ago.

At least rbedgood is still celebrating it!!!!

:sign0098:

I'm sorry. Did you say something?:D

hermhater
10-17-2007, 02:22 AM
Appearently, anything that doesn't include becoming the crappiest team in the league is a dumb idea in Texas.

You just can't seem to accept that players drafted after the top-ten have become better than those who were top ten guys, on countless occaisions. A top-ten draft pick is not something that a team has to have. You can get that "saviour" player from anywhere, if you are lucky and know how to find them. Every draft in NFL history can show you a second roun, or lower, guy, who made a bigger impact than some of the top-ten picks from that year.

When you suggest that you need to have the "forsight" to "shank" a season and go after a high draft spot, it isn't "forsight" that you are seeing, it's the interior walls, lining your own colon.

You don't teach a team how to be losers, if you want them to become winners.



Not competing is to be a loser. Not just by the scoreboard. Not just by ones record.

L.J. wouldn't have brought a real high pricetag, otherwise I would agree that he could go.

Whoaaaa!!!

This thread just got back on track I see...

I think that what texas is saying is put in Broyle now and see if he is the future and sacrifice some wins to build for the future.

I don't think anyone would EVER say the CHIEFS would throw a game to get a draft pick.

I hope to God I am right or this sport will become another lost cause in the world of competitiveness.

Great arguments on both sides guys!!!

chief31
10-17-2007, 02:24 AM
Whoaaaa!!!

This thread just got back on track I see...

I think that what texas is saying is put in Broyle now and see if he is the future and sacrifice some wins to build for the future.

I don't think anyone would EVER say the CHIEFS would throw a game to get a draft pick.

I hope to God I am right or this sport will become another lost cause in the world of competitiveness.

Great arguments on both sides guys!!!

I understand what he is saying. But "sacrificing games" is cowardly and teaches a team how to be losers.

Guru
10-17-2007, 02:24 AM
The problem with high draft picks is the salary they get for doing NOTHING!!!!! They get paid ridiculous cash and haven't even played a down for the team yet.

We really need structured ROOKIE maximum contracts in this league.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 02:28 AM
The problem with high draft picks is the salary they get for doing NOTHING!!!!! They get paid ridiculous cash and haven't even played a down for the team yet.

We really need structured ROOKIE maximum contracts in this league..


HAHAHAHA!!!!

That will never happen!!! They pay these guys to be the hope and future of their respective teams.

If they don't give them the cash, they will never sign with the team.

It would wreck the endorsement industry, etc...

BTW, did being on the Madden cover injure Vince Young?

Spooky!

Guru
10-17-2007, 02:31 AM
.


HAHAHAHA!!!!

That will never happen!!! They pay these guys to be the hope and future of their respective teams.

If they don't give them the cash, they will never sign with the team.

It would wreck the endorsement industry, etc...

BTW, did being on the Madden cover injure Vince Young?

Spooky!

And that is a stupid way to do business too. Show me what you have, then you will get paid accordingly.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 02:36 AM
And that is a stupid way to do business too. Show me what you have, then you will get paid accordingly.

As much as we like to root for our teams, this industry is based on entertainment.

You need big stars, so you create them, to get viewers, and fans to buy the merchandise.

That is where the NFL makes it's money.

I don't think that the networks are that big of a revenue source anymore.

Well maybe since the NFL network came out.

A little rusty on economics, guys.

Guru
10-17-2007, 02:37 AM
As much as we like to root for our teams, this industry is based on entertainment.

You need big stars, so you create them, to get viewers, and fans to buy the merchandise.

That is where the NFL makes it's money.

I don't think that the networks are that big of a revenue source anymore.

Well maybe since the NFL network came out.

A little rusty on economics, guys.

Which is why they are looking at Europe to host a Superbowl.

that will so cheapen the league for me.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 02:38 AM
As much as we like to root for our teams, this industry is based on entertainment.

You need big stars, so you create them, to get viewers, and fans to buy the merchandise.

That is where the NFL makes it's money.

I don't think that the networks are that big of a revenue source anymore.

Well maybe since the NFL network came out.

A little rusty on economics, guys.


Which is why they are looking at Europe to host a Superbowl.

that will so cheapen the league for me.

Me too, guy, me too....

chief31
10-17-2007, 02:45 AM
.


HAHAHAHA!!!!

That will never happen!!! They pay these guys to be the hope and future of their respective teams.

If they don't give them the cash, they will never sign with the team.

It would wreck the endorsement industry, etc...

BTW, did being on the Madden cover injure Vince Young?

Spooky!

I would love to see a team grow a set, and let some high first round pick sit and rot for a year.

Guru
10-17-2007, 02:48 AM
Me too, guy, me too....

If Europeans want the NFL so bad, they need to support the league they HAD. The idea of the two best teams in AMERICA playing to see which is the BEST in EUROPE just reeks.

chief31
10-17-2007, 02:51 AM
If Europeans want the NFL so bad, they need to support the league they HAD. The idea of the two best teams in AMERICA playing to see which is the BEST in EUROPE just reeks.

The occaisional regular season game is O.K. with me, but not the Super Bowl. Not unless they really get with the program first. If they wind-up proving that there is enough interest to warrant getting their own team.... Then we could talk about the possibility of a Super Bowl there. Until they really want it, we can offer them the teasers.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 03:08 AM
I would love to see a team grow a set, and let some high first round pick sit and rot for a year.

You mean the raiders have grown a set???

:sign0153:

hermhater
10-17-2007, 03:11 AM
The occaisional regular season game is O.K. with me, but not the Super Bowl. Not unless they really get with the program first. If they wind-up proving that there is enough interest to warrant getting their own team.... Then we could talk about the possibility of a Super Bowl there. Until they really want it, we can offer them the teasers.

What if we play the American Super Bowl here, and then send them to play against the NFL Europe champion...

Then we could see how much the Euros enjoy the football.

I'll bet that is probably being strategeried right now in Goodell's office.

I'm serious.

Is Goodell the new Lamar?

chief31
10-17-2007, 03:14 AM
What if we play the American Super Bowl here, and then send them to play against the NFL Europe champion...

Then we could see how much the Euros enjoy the football.

I'll bet that is probably being strategeried right now in Goodell's office.

I'm serious.

Is Goodell the new Lamar?

There is no more NFL Europa, and it was made-up of NFL players anyway. So that wouldn't work.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 03:17 AM
There is no more NFL Europa, and it was made-up of NFL players anyway. So that wouldn't work.

Thank God I am not in Europe anymore.

When did this happen?

And since it did, why would they send the Super Bowl there?

To get NFL Europe back?

:sign0153:

Guru
10-17-2007, 03:19 AM
What if we play the American Super Bowl here, and then send them to play against the NFL Europe champion...

Then we could see how much the Euros enjoy the football.

I'll bet that is probably being strategeried right now in Goodell's office.

I'm serious.

Is Goodell the new Lamar?

I am OK with that. yet they couldn't support NFLE.

Still, it would be years before they could build teams that would be able to compete at that level. Talk about an anti-climatic championship.

chief31
10-17-2007, 03:58 AM
Thank God I am not in Europe anymore.

When did this happen?

And since it did, why would they send the Super Bowl there?

To get NFL Europe back?

:sign0153:

It happened this summer, at the end of the NLFE season. The NFL doesn't want the NFLE back, but I would imagine that they are trying to get the rest of the world involved in the game of American Football.

We have all seen the spanish commercials and such. So it is clear that they are trying to expand the popularity beyond the states.

I doubt that it will wind-up working, but I can't blame the league for trying. Just for trying too hard.

rbedgood
10-17-2007, 05:36 AM
It happened this summer, at the end of the NLFE season. The NFL doesn't want the NFLE back, but I would imagine that they are trying to get the rest of the world involved in the game of American Football.

We have all seen the spanish commercials and such. So it is clear that they are trying to expand the popularity beyond the states.

I doubt that it will wind-up working, but I can't blame the league for trying. Just for trying too hard.

That's because in Europe they're used to the game being on the field and the violence being in the stands...not on the field.

hermhater
10-17-2007, 05:41 AM
It happened this summer, at the end of the NLFE season. The NFL doesn't want the NFLE back, but I would imagine that they are trying to get the rest of the world involved in the game of American Football.

We have all seen the spanish commercials and such. So it is clear that they are trying to expand the popularity beyond the states.

I doubt that it will wind-up working, but I can't blame the league for trying. Just for trying too hard.

So Goodells wanting to play in London is a ploy to take the NFL back to Europe or what?

I don't get the difference.

What is going on in the NFL head offices?

Is this becoming a bigger issue that I thought?
:sign0153:

McLovin
10-17-2007, 11:21 AM
I would love to see a team grow a set, and let some high first round pick sit and rot for a year.
Bo Jackson was signed first overall, he sat out the entire 86 season.

http://asp.usatoday.com/community/utils/idmap/28425861.story

So no one has to read a whole story bout the Raidahs,

It's been more than two decades since the top pick missed a game. Bo Jackson sat out the entire 1986 season after being drafted first overall by Tampa Bay. Jackson chose to play baseball instead, and that contract dispute worked out well for the Raiders.
Jackson went back into the draft the following year and owner Al Davis took a chance by using a seventh-round pick on the running back. Jackson joined the Raiders for the second half of the 1987 season and ran for 2,782 yards and 16 touchdowns before a hip injury in a playoff game in January 1991 ended his football career.

chief31
10-17-2007, 01:07 PM
Bo Jackson was signed first overall, he sat out the entire 86 season.

http://asp.usatoday.com/community/utils/idmap/28425861.story

So no one has to read a whole story bout the Raidahs,

It's been more than two decades since the top pick missed a game. Bo Jackson sat out the entire 1986 season after being drafted first overall by Tampa Bay. Jackson chose to play baseball instead, and that contract dispute worked out well for the Raiders.
Jackson went back into the draft the following year and owner Al Davis took a chance by using a seventh-round pick on the running back. Jackson joined the Raiders for the second half of the 1987 season and ran for 2,782 yards and 16 touchdowns before a hip injury in a playoff game in January 1991 ended his football career.


That was the wrong time to do it. Bo had a pretty good backup plan. Baseball kept him in good shape.

rbedgood
10-17-2007, 02:19 PM
The problem for Bo was he dropped 6 rounds and lost a lot of cash with the move. Although he made plenty between baseball, football and "Bo Knows"...

m0ef0e
10-17-2007, 11:28 PM
The problem with high draft picks is the salary they get for doing NOTHING!!!!! They get paid ridiculous cash and haven't even played a down for the team yet.

We really need structured ROOKIE maximum contracts in this league.

I totally agree with this.

McLovin
10-17-2007, 11:42 PM
The problem with high draft picks is the salary they get for doing NOTHING!!!!! They get paid ridiculous cash and haven't even played a down for the team yet.

We really need structured ROOKIE maximum contracts in this league.
I agree, I believe in incentives I just heard Adrian Peterson is only getting 285 thousand this year, But if he wins, Rookie of the Year he gets a 250 thousand dollar bonus.

On the side against Rookie Maximum, if there had been one Jamarcus Russell would have been in practice much earlier and the Faiders would have had more cap room.

I believe that their should be a max player contract, but also believe that contracts should be much more incentive lined.

I think LJ should have gotten a bonus, that was directly proportionate to the number of yards he picked up for the year, but that if he had a career ending injury he got a certain amount cash, like a settlement.

I also believe that the injury money should not count toward the cap, but the incentive money should.

I believe Atlanta should not be able to get back any of the money already paid to Michael Vick, but also it shouldn't count against them in the future, He isn't going to be able to play so why should it count against them.

I also believe that Kevin Everett should continue to get paid by the team for some time, but that it should not count against them.

Does anyone know did DT count against our cap after he died, or this year Darrent Williams, does he still count against the Broncos.

rbedgood
10-17-2007, 11:46 PM
Rookie contracts should be performance based...with the starting base being based on draft order and position...

rbedgood
10-17-2007, 11:47 PM
I agree, I believe in incentives I just heard Adrian Peterson is only getting 285 thousand this year, But if he wins, Rookie of the Year he gets a 250 thousand dollar bonus.

On the side against Rookie Maximum, if there had been one Jamarcus Russell would have been in practice much earlier and the Faiders would have had more cap room.

I believe that their should be a max player contract, but also believe that contracts should be much more incentive lined.

I think LJ should have gotten a bonus, that was directly proportionate to the number of yards he picked up for the year, but that if he had a career ending injury he got a certain amount cash, like a settlement.

I also believe that the injury money should not count toward the cap, but the incentive money should.

I believe Atlanta should not be able to get back any of the money already paid to Michael Vick, but also it shouldn't count against them in the future, He isn't going to be able to play so why should it count against them.

I also believe that Kevin Everett should continue to get paid by the team for some time, but that it should not count against them.

Does anyone know did DT count against our cap after he died, or this year Darrent Williams, does he still count against the Broncos.

I disagree on Vick, but otherwise I agree...

chief31
10-18-2007, 02:46 AM
I disagree on Vick, but otherwise I agree...

Ditto.

Vick has already cost his team their starting quarterback. Why wouldn't the team be awarded a certain amount of money that they paid to have him on the team, if he isn't going to be on the team?

Michael Vick is responsible for what he did, noone else. So if he got into trouble that will keep him from fulfilling his contract, then he should repay what he got from that contract. He is in breach.

Guru
10-18-2007, 02:49 AM
Ditto.

Vick has already cost his team their starting quarterback. Why wouldn't the team be awarded a certain amount of money that they paid to have him on the team, if he isn't going to be on the team?

Michael Vick is responsible for what he did, noone else. So if he got into trouble that will keep him from fulfilling his contract, then he should repay what he got from that contract. He is in breach.

I am still in shock that Atlanta got some of his signing bonus back.

McLovin
10-18-2007, 02:51 AM
My thought is that if he wasn't entitled to it then don't pay it yet. If it is paid I don't feel that it is for future work. I know I don't get paid for work I haven't done yet.

Anyway I don't think what Vick did is right, it is stupid and I cant stand the whole dog fighting thing. BUT there are a lot worse crimes being committed that don't get the punishment or the publicity, I won't go into any of them because then we would never get to talk Chiefs Football. :)

Anyway bring on the Faiders so we can send them yelping down the road with their tales between their legs.

anaeelbackwards
10-18-2007, 02:52 AM
I am still in shock that Atlanta got some of his signing bonus back.

did he give the money back? in shock? that man racking in the dough off of not only his endorsements and the dog investment, if he was smart... probably stashed that money in the bank as well.

chief31
10-18-2007, 02:58 AM
My thought is that if he wasn't entitled to it then don't pay it yet. If it is paid I don't feel that it is for future work. I know I don't get paid for work I haven't done yet.

Anyway I don't think what Vick did is right, it is stupid and I cant stand the whole dog fighting thing. BUT there are a lot worse crimes being committed that don't get the punishment or the publicity, I won't go into any of them because then we would never get to talk Chiefs Football. :)

Anyway bring on the Faiders so we can send them yelping down the road with their tales between their legs.

Rather he killed people, or was sent to prison for multiple jay-walking convictions, he still failed to live-up to the terms of the contract. Same as Ricky Williams.

hermhater
10-18-2007, 03:07 AM
This thread has gotten off track big time.

So I will continue the trend!

The people that are able to compete in the NFL are SUPERHUMAN FREAKS!!!!

Unlike us, they will be working in their profession for only a short amount of their lives.

The learning curve, their physical ability, and their ability to learn the Professional NFL game of football, limit them to about 1/5 of the time each of us will have a career in our respective professions.

These guys who are expected to perform have sacrificed alot in their lives to be able to get to this point.

They may be injured (not their fault) their first play of scrimmage, and never be able to perform again.

Therefore the risk provides the reason for paying the top prospects the big dollars!

chief31
10-18-2007, 03:15 AM
This thread has gotten off track big time.

So I will continue the trend!

The people that are able to compete in the NFL are SUPERHUMAN FREAKS!!!!

Unlike us, they will be working in their profession for only a short amount of their lives.

The learning curve, their physical ability, and their ability to learn the Professional NFL game of football, limit them to about 1/5 of the time each of us will have a career in our respective professions.

These guys who are expected to perform have sacrificed alot in their lives to be able to get to this point.

They may be injured (not their fault) their first play of scrimmage, and never be able to perform again.

Therefore the risk provides the reason for paying the top prospects the big dollars!

That is a one-sided opinion. Look at it from the other side. Why would a team have to pay for a Pro-Bowler and get nothing? If a guy got hrut on his first play and could never play again, then why should he get superstar money? He isn't a superstar. Of course he should still get something, but not as much as if he had played.

hermhater
10-18-2007, 04:46 AM
That is a one-sided opinion. Look at it from the other side. Why would a team have to pay for a Pro-Bowler and get nothing? If a guy got hrut on his first play and could never play again, then why should he get superstar money? He isn't a superstar. Of course he should still get something, but not as much as if he had played.

Isn't there something going on in the news about this right now?

NFL veterans are getting denied benefits.

If you play one play and can never play again, that is not a very good retirement plan.

If you play one play aren't you an NFL veteran?

:D

chief31
10-18-2007, 04:53 AM
If a players gets hurt doing his job, then just like any other job, his empolyer should be held responsible. But not for paying him big-time salaries. But for some clear carreer supliment. In alot of cases, an employer will offer some kind of a "light-duty" job to the injured employee. I think that sounds resonable. But I couldn't imagine the amount of complications that would arise from the high number of employees that become injured.

If a player is hurt outside of his job, then that seems to be the players responsibility. And hopefully, he was covered by his insurance.

hermhater
10-18-2007, 04:58 AM
If a players gets hurt doing his job, then just like any other job, his empolyer should be held responsible. But not for paying him big-time salaries. But for some clear carreer supliment. In alot of cases, an employer will offer some kind of a "light-duty" job to the injured employee. I think that sounds resonable. But I couldn't imagine the amount of complications that would arise from the high number of employees that become injured.

If a player is hurt outside of his job, then that seems to be the players responsibility. And hopefully, he was covered by his insurance.

My point exactly.

The early round draft picks are targeted frequently when put in a game.

Adrian Petersen has excelled, and seems to be a stud.

Those others, that could have been as good as him, should have been able to stay healthy?

chief31
10-18-2007, 05:02 AM
My point exactly.

The early round draft picks are targeted frequently when put in a game.

Adrian Petersen has excelled, and seems to be a stud.

Those others, that could have been as good as him, should have been able to stay healthy?

Should the team have to pay them as if they are on the field getting A.P numbers?

It is bad luck. In some cases, it is good luck. If Ryan Leaf had had a career-ending injury right away, are you suggesting that he should be paid based upon what Peyton Manning has done? If he had gotten injured, then he would currently be collecting NFL paychecks, I believe.

hermhater
10-18-2007, 05:13 AM
Should the team have to pay them as if they are on the field getting A.P numbers?

It is bad luck. In some cases, it is good luck. If Ryan Leaf had had a career-ending injury right away, are you suggesting that he should be paid based upon what Peyton Manning has done? If he had gotten injured, then he would currently be collecting NFL paychecks, I believe.


My point exactly.

We are all trying to decide what will happen in the next game.

We assume we can predict what will happen any give Sunday.

It is also a big reason the draft it such a gamble.

I haven't heard a better draft choice system yet.

Is there one?

sling58
10-18-2007, 08:19 AM
Rookie contracts should be performance based...with the starting base being based on draft order and position...

Agreed, I love watching the draft every year but then hate the 2 months of contract talks about these Rook's saying "I gotta get mine" when they haven't proved themselves in the NFL. Contracts in the NFL should be like the NBA where there is a cap on the amount a Rookie can make with his first contract. That will force the player to perform and "earn" his paycheck. IMO.

rbedgood
10-18-2007, 12:37 PM
Frankly in my mind a kicker even if he is picked in the first round shouldn't get the same pay as a QB picked later in the same round...the positions are not of equal value. Set pay scale for each draft position, with a 4 year contract...then a premium based on position

QB +40%
RB +30%
WR +25%
TE +10%
OL +10%
DL +10%
LB +10%
DB +10%
P -10%
K -15%

hermhater
10-18-2007, 03:41 PM
Frankly in my mind a kicker even if he is picked in the first round shouldn't get the same pay as a QB picked later in the same round...the positions are not of equal value. Set pay scale for each draft position, with a 4 year contract...then a premium based on position

QB +40%
RB +30%
WR +25%
TE +10%
OL +10%
DL +10%
LB +10%
DB +10%
P -10%
K -15%


And if your kicker wins the Super Bowl 3-0, with a 64 yard field goal?

Still not as valuable as the QB?

chief31
10-19-2007, 12:57 AM
No. Not even close.

hermhater
10-19-2007, 01:05 AM
Frankly in my mind a kicker even if he is picked in the first round shouldn't get the same pay as a QB picked later in the same round...the positions are not of equal value. Set pay scale for each draft position, with a 4 year contract...then a premium based on position

QB +40%
RB +30%
WR +25%
TE +10%
OL +10%
DL +10%
LB +10%
DB +10%
P -10%
K -15%


And if your kicker wins the Super Bowl 3-0, with a 64 yard field goal?

Still not as valuable as the QB?


No. Not even close.

Would you trade Adam Vinatieri for Huard?

Just curious.

rbedgood
10-19-2007, 02:56 AM
Would you trade Adam Vinatieri for Huard?

Just curious.

Yes but I'd draft Adam V about 3 rounds earlier than Huard...so even with the position premium/discount Vinatieri would make more money than Huard...

chief31
10-19-2007, 02:59 AM
Would you trade Adam Vinatieri for Huard?

Just curious.

Today? No. Last year? No. The year before? Maybe. A third-string quarterback I night do. But not a second-stringer, and definitely not a starter.

Canada
10-19-2007, 09:02 AM
I can't believe you guys all want to start paying kickers!!

hermhater
10-20-2007, 12:33 AM
I can't believe you guys all want to start paying kickers!!


Me?

I don't have any money, I spent it all on beer!

:toast2::toast2::toast2::toast2::toast2::toast2::t oast2:

sling58
10-20-2007, 10:37 AM
Me?

I don't have any money, I spent it all on beer!

:toast2::toast2::toast2::toast2::toast2::toast2::t oast2:

I do that myself...

McLovin
10-21-2007, 02:31 AM
Today? No. Last year? No. The year before? Maybe. A third-string quarterback I night do. But not a second-stringer, and definitely not a starter.

Heck I would trade him at halftime tommorrow, Not really, lol but figured that would get your Huard fanboys going. When Medlock was still with us I would have traded in a second, But with Rayner Vinnawho? All depends on the need.

If you are a team with a stud QB and no Kicker the kicker is far more important, if you have a stud kicker and could use a QB.... well there you have it.

hermhater
10-21-2007, 02:35 AM
Heck I would trade him at halftime tommorrow, Not really, lol but figured that would get your Huard fanboys going. When Medlock was still with us I would have traded in a second, But with Rayner Vinnawho? All depends on the need.

If you are a team with a stud QB and no Kicker the kicker is far more important, if you have a stud kicker and could use a QB.... well there you have it.

Dude, that was all over the place, but I think I agree with most of it.

Did I start this?

:sign0153:

sling58
10-21-2007, 08:29 AM
Heck I would trade him at halftime tommorrow, Not really, lol but figured that would get your Huard fanboys going. When Medlock was still with us I would have traded in a second, But with Rayner Vinnawho? All depends on the need.

If you are a team with a stud QB and no Kicker the kicker is far more important, if you have a stud kicker and could use a QB.... well there you have it.

Were you trying to rile me :lol:

No Vinateri is more important than Manning in Indy

Canada
10-21-2007, 10:39 AM
Heck I would trade him at halftime tommorrow, Not really, lol but figured that would get your Huard fanboys going. When Medlock was still with us I would have traded in a second, But with Rayner Vinnawho? All depends on the need.

If you are a team with a stud QB and no Kicker the kicker is far more important, if you have a stud kicker and could use a QB.... well there you have it.

there is no such thing!! :bananen_smilies046:

McLovin
10-21-2007, 12:40 PM
Were you trying to rile me :lol:

Yup if you are a Huard Fanboy

No Vinateri is more important than Manning in Indy


I meant that if you have a stud QB the need to acquire a kicker is far more important.

And as for the comment by Canada that there is no such thing as a stud kicker, Colquitt, I rest my case, your witness.

chief31
10-21-2007, 01:12 PM
And as for the comment by Canada that there is no such thing as a stud kicker, Colquitt, I rest my case, your witness.

Colquitt is a punter. :D

Canada
10-21-2007, 02:18 PM
Kickers are kickers....you need kicker, go to a soccer field.

sling58
10-21-2007, 02:19 PM
Kickers are kickers....you need kicker, go to a soccer field.

Agreed

hermhater
10-21-2007, 02:23 PM
Kickers are kickers....you need kicker, go to a soccer field.

Or the dojo!

:lol: :beer: :yahoo::yahoo::yahoo: :bananen_smilies046::bananen_smilies046: