View Full Version : Huard to start Sunday
This just shows you how inconsistent the Chiefs management is. We are no longer following the plan of sticking with the youth movement. We wasted a chance last week on an experiment that Herm has already given up on. I guess Thigpen struggled enough on game tape that Herm decided to pull Thigpen for the start.
Ironically every fan in the NFL realized that he needed to be pulled after the first three drives last Sunday.
You are asking fans to be patient and let the team grow, and after three weeks of pain and torture you are foldin. Might was well cut Thigpen now, if you aren't going to continue the youth movement that you commited us to.
Three7s
09-23-2008, 09:26 AM
This is why Herm fails as a coach. He uses his QBs like a pitching staff. Croyle is the ace, Huard is long-inning reliever, and Thigpen is the call up from the minors.
To think I'd be comparing QB usage with pitching......pathetic.
greg3564
09-23-2008, 12:54 PM
Stick with Thigpen. We don't even know now when Croyle is coming back. And who's to say he doesn't get hurt his first game back. Huard has a year or two left. Keep Thigpen in and let that guy get the experience so that maybe one day he becomes a solid back up for whoever our next starting QB may be.
jerhart
09-23-2008, 12:59 PM
Stick with Thigpen. We don't even know now when Croyle is coming back. And who's to say he doesn't get hurt his first game back. Huard has a year or two left. Keep Thigpen in and let that guy get the experience so that maybe one day he becomes a solid back up for whoever our next starting QB may be.
100% Agree :sign0098:
Stick with Thigpen. We don't even know now when Croyle is coming back. And who's to say he doesn't get hurt his first game back. Huard has a year or two left. Keep Thigpen in and let that guy get the experience so that maybe one day he becomes a solid back up for whoever our next starting QB may be.
Nope, it has already been announced or at least that is what the radio folk are saying. Huard is starting againt the Donkies.
TRB05
09-23-2008, 01:22 PM
Noone is ever happy. Maybe they will all show up later, but where are all of the people that wanted Huard to start last week.
I think the Chiefs have found out what they needed to know about Thigpen, and have decided he is not in the future in any way. He had his chance, now we know he is no good, but if he never had the chance we would have never known.
This is what rebuilding is like-give players a chance, keep the ones that succeed, lose the ones that don't. Thigpen will probably ride out the rest of the season as 3rd string (once Croyle comes back), and then be let go, never to play another down in the NFL.
Now, I do think that they should probably have given him until Croyle comes back to settle in, but it doesn't look like that is the way it's going to go.
tornadospotter
09-23-2008, 01:31 PM
If this is all true, I am not happy! Thig needs to start, Huard is not the future QB, Thig may not be either. But we need to play Thig, one game does not mean he will not be successfull! He made it thru a game, did not leave because of injury, Thats the best any of our QB's have done so far. Huard may start and do good, maybe even get us a win. But he is not the future.
Noone is ever happy. Maybe they will all show up later, but where are all of the people that wanted Huard to start last week.
I think the Chiefs have found out what they needed to know about Thigpen, and have decided he is not in the future in any way. He had his chance, now we know he is no good, but if he never had the chance we would have never known.
This is what rebuilding is like-give players a chance, keep the ones that succeed, lose the ones that don't. Thigpen will probably ride out the rest of the season as 3rd string (once Croyle comes back), and then be let go, never to play another down in the NFL.
Now, I do think that they should probably have given him until Croyle comes back to settle in, but it doesn't look like that is the way it's going to go.
I wanted Huard to start last week, and I wanted him to play the full game against Oakland. We all knew what Thigpen was going to bring last week and he backed it up. Yet Herm still started Thigpen. Okay, I am fine with that, because he was sticking to his plan of getting young players experience.
So why change now. Why not change after the first four 3 and out drives? Why not change when we were down by 14?
It doesn't make sense to do it now. Regadless of what Herm does, changing the QB's is wrong.
A. Thigpen shouldn't have started because he just wasn't ready to play and Herm was wrong, and now he is back tracking to hopefully salvage Thigpen's career.
B. Thigpen just ins't an NFL QB and they should cut him today because they have seen enough.
m0ef0e
09-23-2008, 01:54 PM
I still like Huard and hope he does well but this is just a band-aid.
TRB05
09-23-2008, 02:28 PM
I wanted Huard to start last week, and I wanted him to play the full game against Oakland. We all knew what Thigpen was going to bring last week and he backed it up. Yet Herm still started Thigpen. Okay, I am fine with that, because he was sticking to his plan of getting young players experience.
So why change now. Why not change after the first four 3 and out drives? Why not change when we were down by 14?
It doesn't make sense to do it now. Regadless of what Herm does, changing the QB's is wrong.
A. Thigpen shouldn't have started because he just wasn't ready to play and Herm was wrong, and now he is back tracking to hopefully salvage Thigpen's career.
B. Thigpen just ins't an NFL QB and they should cut him today because they have seen enough.
How did you know what Thigpen was going to bring last week? Hey, he could have been the next Tony Romo, but we never would have found out if it weren't for the last 2 weeks. Now we DO know.
They should cut him today, for his sake, but they won't because they still need 3 QBs on the team, and since he has been here and knows the system, he is better than Ingle Martin, or any other QB they could bring in for the rest of this season.
TRB05
09-23-2008, 02:29 PM
I still like Huard and hope he does well but this is just a band-aid.
I think that most fans feel the same way, we all like Huard as a QB, but he is not going to take us where we need to go.
Three7s
09-23-2008, 02:47 PM
If this is all true, I am not happy! Thig needs to start, Huard is not the future QB, Thig may not be either. But we need to play Thig, one game does not mean he will not be successfull! He made it thru a game, did not leave because of injury, Thats the best any of our QB's have done so far. Huard may start and do good, maybe even get us a win. But he is not the future.
So, you're willing to accept three interceptions a game until he is? Btw, out of all NFL QBs, Thigpen is ranked as the worst.
Hayvern
09-23-2008, 03:19 PM
This is why Herm fails as a coach. He uses his QBs like a pitching staff. Croyle is the ace, Huard is long-inning reliever, and Thigpen is the call up from the minors.
To think I'd be comparing QB usage with pitching......pathetic.
I was just thinking this same thing last week. Our QB situation looks more like a rotation of major league pitching than leadership on the football field.
Hayvern
09-23-2008, 03:26 PM
If this is all true, I am not happy! Thig needs to start, Huard is not the future QB, Thig may not be either. But we need to play Thig, one game does not mean he will not be successfull! He made it thru a game, did not leave because of injury, Thats the best any of our QB's have done so far. Huard may start and do good, maybe even get us a win. But he is not the future.
I really like Huard, I like his work ethic and the fact that he has put up with this horse$4!7 from Edwards for so long.
However, I also agree that he is not the future of this team at QB and constantly juggling these guys back and forth is not doing anyone any good. The receivers are not able to adjust to the different play style, the lineman don't seem to be able to adjust, and no one has been able to step in and take a leadership role on the team.
Edwards made a statement that Huard was third string at the beginning of this season, Huard accepted that, and if you were a man of conviction, you would have stood by that and started Thigpen over Huard.
In the New England game, Edwards clearly showed that he had no ethics when he comes to players when he started Huard over Thigpen. I know football players all want to be competitive and win, I just don't know how either of these QBs can stay upbeat and positive with the way they have been jerked around.
rbedgood
09-23-2008, 03:57 PM
How did you know what Thigpen was going to bring last week? Hey, he could have been the next Tony Romo, but we never would have found out if it weren't for the last 2 weeks. Now we DO know.
They should cut him today, for his sake, but they won't because they still need 3 QBs on the team, and since he has been here and knows the system, he is better than Ingle Martin, or any other QB they could bring in for the rest of this season.
System...? What system? I'm guessing 90% of the QBs in the NFL right now could step in and play in this "system". It is very similar to the run, run, pass if you have to system that most high school programs run. Personally I'd stick with Thigpen for 1-2 more games and see if a little experience helps him. It is highly unlikely that he's the QB of the future, but he could be a very serviceable backup long-term and as such some playing time and experience this season could be invaluable for the future. But if you are going to make a switch why not try to chase down a practice squad guy from another team, or a 3rd stringer you might be able to get inexpensively. (Maybe Jordan Palmer?...Carson's kid brother who played at UTEP)
IlovetheChiefs
09-23-2008, 04:12 PM
I would rather Huard start this week than Thigpen. Huard may not be our future but for the game at hand I think he'll be more likely to deliver a win for us. Add to the fact that Denver's pass defense has been poor and maybe Damon's experience will result in at least a couple of passes and/or td's.
How did you know what Thigpen was going to bring last week? Hey, he could have been the next Tony Romo, but we never would have found out if it weren't for the last 2 weeks. Now we DO know.
They should cut him today, for his sake, but they won't because they still need 3 QBs on the team, and since he has been here and knows the system, he is better than Ingle Martin, or any other QB they could bring in for the rest of this season.
Did you watch the Oakland game? It was pretty obvious after that game, he wasn't ready to start and his performance against Atlanta was right on par. At least for my expectations.
I don't think it is time to give up on him. Basically 20 months ago he was still playing Community College football. He needs more time. It just wasn't time to start him yet.
However, Huard was able to play last week and he should have started. Since Herm didn't go that route, I don't see logically why he would change his mind now.
IlovetheChiefs
09-23-2008, 04:25 PM
I would rather Huard start this week than Thigpen. Huard may not be our future but for the game at hand I think he'll be more likely to deliver a win for us. Add to the fact that Denver's pass defense has been poor and maybe Damon's experience will result in at least a couple of passes and/or td's.
I meant to say a couple of BIG passes. Heh, he better complete at least a couple of routine passes!
TRB05
09-23-2008, 06:33 PM
System...? What system? I'm guessing 90% of the QBs in the NFL right now could step in and play in this "system". It is very similar to the run, run, pass if you have to system that most high school programs run. Personally I'd stick with Thigpen for 1-2 more games and see if a little experience helps him. It is highly unlikely that he's the QB of the future, but he could be a very serviceable backup long-term and as such some playing time and experience this season could be invaluable for the future. But if you are going to make a switch why not try to chase down a practice squad guy from another team, or a 3rd stringer you might be able to get inexpensively. (Maybe Jordan Palmer?...Carson's kid brother who played at UTEP)
Whatever system it is, it still takes some time to get the terminology, reads, chemistry with WRs etc. down, just look at Favre in NY.
Why go after a practice squad guy from another team? We already have one of them, no need to give up anything for another Thigpen.
Did you watch the Oakland game? It was pretty obvious after that game, he wasn't ready to start and his performance against Atlanta was right on par. At least for my expectations.
I don't think it is time to give up on him. Basically 20 months ago he was still playing Community College football. He needs more time. It just wasn't time to start him yet.
However, Huard was able to play last week and he should have started. Since Herm didn't go that route, I don't see logically why he would change his mind now.
Seek, I think we agree in different words. I misread your post and thought you meant we knew what we had in Thigpen before the Oakland game. However, I think he really deserved at least the start vs. Atlanta to determine for sure, and really probably a couple more starts. That's why I think they should start him until Croyle gets back to get a bigger sample, and let him settle in a little more. I will say, however, that coming in off the bench in the Oakland game is not a real good indicator, since he most likely did not get first team reps all week (although who the hell knows what went on that week).
Coach
09-23-2008, 09:35 PM
Stick with Thigpen. We don't even know now when Croyle is coming back. And who's to say he doesn't get hurt his first game back. Huard has a year or two left. Keep Thigpen in and let that guy get the experience so that maybe one day he becomes a solid back up for whoever our next starting QB may be.
yep.
McLovin
09-23-2008, 10:19 PM
How did you know what Thigpen was going to bring last week? Hey, he could have been the next Tony Romo, but we never would have found out if it weren't for the last 2 weeks. Now we DO know.
They should cut him today, for his sake, but they won't because they still need 3 QBs on the team, and since he has been here and knows the system, he is better than Ingle Martin, or any other QB they could bring in for the rest of this season.
Wow after 1 start your know that Thigpen isnt any good, why exactly are you not an NFL head coach. From your criteria I believe you would have cut over 95 percent of all current NFL quarterbacks. I dont know that Thigpen has a future in the NFL but to throw him under the bus after 1 start ... and with an oline that hasnt protected him like a person would like with a young player. Just WOW. I found stats for Peyton Mannings first game I believe, Game 1
P Manning
21-37 302 yards 1 TD 3 Ints
Colts lose to Miami 24-15
Yes he piled up the yards but he also threw three INTs and lost the game, would you have said he wasnt going to be an NFL QB and sent him packing also. Again WOW.
McLovin
09-23-2008, 10:21 PM
BTW if that was sarcasm I didnt see the sarcasm sign and slightly apologize, not much but slightly.
Three7s
09-23-2008, 10:36 PM
Didn't the Colts start Manning right off the bat? Most rookie QBs are awful if they are starting right after they're drafted. Of course, there are exceptions.
OTR Chiefs fan
09-23-2008, 10:40 PM
Huard should have started against Atlanta. He should continue to start until Croyle is ready to play again. We need to get a win and we have the best chance with some sort of stability at QB. I'm not sold on Huard, but he's better than Thigpen at this point. :11:
greg3564
09-23-2008, 10:52 PM
Huard should have started against Atlanta. He should continue to start until Croyle is ready to play again. We need to get a win and we have the best chance with some sort of stability at QB. I'm not sold on Huard, but he's better than Thigpen at this point. :11:
We're either rebuilding or we're not. If we are, we need to know if Thigpen has the potential to be the next number 2 QB. Huard's days are numbered. We all saw what happened to him last season. He's too old to play more than a few games at a time. We have zero chances at any playoff hopes. We'll be lucky to win more than 1 or 2 games this season. Let's see if Thigpen is the future number 2. We all know he's not likely to be a starter in the NFL. Huard wasn't cut out for the starter position either, but does make a great backup.
I don't see how Thigpen can be succesful. He's in the same situation Croyle was last year with a suspect O line. Herm can't make a decision. But either way, the braintrust that are the coaches need to make a decision and STICK with it. I've heard of RB by committee, but QB by committee?
tornadospotter
09-23-2008, 11:06 PM
Thig should start, but he is not so I hope Huard does well and we win!
TRB05
09-24-2008, 07:13 AM
Wow after 1 start your know that Thigpen isnt any good, why exactly are you not an NFL head coach. From your criteria I believe you would have cut over 95 percent of all current NFL quarterbacks. I dont know that Thigpen has a future in the NFL but to throw him under the bus after 1 start ... and with an oline that hasnt protected him like a person would like with a young player. Just WOW. I found stats for Peyton Mannings first game I believe, Game 1
P Manning
21-37 302 yards 1 TD 3 Ints
Colts lose to Miami 24-15
Yes he piled up the yards but he also threw three INTs and lost the game, would you have said he wasnt going to be an NFL QB and sent him packing also. Again WOW.
I agree that he needs more playing time to make a more accurate assesment, I was trying to make a point that we had no idea what Thigpen could do before the Oakland game and really before the start last week. Now that he has had nearly 2 games, at least we have something to go on. I totally agree that he needs to start until Croyle comes back, I've posted that several times here. Comparing Thigpen to Manning is a little silly, I know you were illustrating your point, but it's a little far-fetched. Manning has a successful college career against top notch talent to add in to his experience, Thigpen does not. Arm strength, size, poise leadership, etc. were all determined in college with Manning being a #1 overall, and Thigpen going in the 7th round.
Bottom line is, I think the Chiefs have seen what they needed to see out of Thigpen.
Lets just throw Ingle Martin in there.
Lets just throw Ingle Martin in there.
Why not? What have we got to lose - besides another game. I'm sure Huard gives us best chance to win. But let Martin have the ball for 1st quarter. He may be our best shot at winning, and not even know it...
Dyno-Mite
09-24-2008, 12:40 PM
The Chiefs have been a very good football team during the months of September.We definitely need a victory while having Damon as the starting quarterback.Going 0-4 during the month of September will be simply a disaster for us.Damon gives us the best shot toward winning that game.Damon needs to make it his goal to play the entire game.He should of played against the Falcons but also should've played against the Raiders.If he played those entire 2 games then we could've had at least a victory already.Herm's big emphasis toward getting young at the quarterback position only allowed Thigpen to start but when in desperate need of a victory we can count on Damon to get it for us.
m0ef0e
09-24-2008, 01:16 PM
Didn't the Colts start Manning right off the bat? Most rookie QBs are awful if they are starting right after they're drafted. Of course, there are exceptions.
Actually, I tend to disagree with this policy that a QB has to ride the pine for a season or two before he gets his shot. Think about it, you draft somebody at probably the height of their career-- when his confidence is peak, to be 'your guy', somebody to 'build around', etc. Then, you sit him. That may or may not hurt his confidence. What that will do, is cool his jets-- maybe make him a little lethargic or rusty, if you will. When you aren't playing your franchise QB, he's getting used to the speed of practice and preseason games. He's not getting the valuable and necessary experience of playing when it counts.
There have been many QB's who have been immediately thrown into the fire that have found success. Eli Manning and Ben Roethlisberger both already have championship rings. Also look at the careers of guys like Peyton Manning and Donovan McNabb.
Of course, it doesn't work out all the time but if you have a truly special talent and he's coming into the NFL on a roll, I say let him play. Granted, for a guy to win in this situation takes more than just a stud QB. The ones who find success immediately are usually surrounded by a very good team. A big reason why Matt Ryan is having success and building so much confidence is the fact that there's not a lot of pressure put on him due to the Falcons' success running the football. It's much easier to develop a QB on the fly and build his confidence when he only has to throw 20 times a game as opposed to having to air it out 40-60 times a game for whatever reason. You can bring him along a little more slowly but he's still getting that essential experience and confidence that only comes from playing in the games that matter.
Now, there have been guys developed on the bench that have stepped in when it became their time and found success. There's also been a whole lot of those guys who have fell flat. My point is, for example, if you're the Oakland Raiders and you're on your way to a 4-12 season, why not get your big-name big-contract some snaps and start the real development in a 'rebuilding year' so he's more ready to go when the slate is clean and it's still anybody's game.
It's tough to find top-quality QB's any more. Nobody can say that this or that guy is the next Montana or Favre. They just don't know yet. However, if the guy may have the potential to be that, why not try and find out? Too many coaches shackle their QB's anymore, IMO. It's not about opening things up, making big plays, and keeping a defense on thier heels. Too many QB's look like they are out there only thinking about not making a mistake-- like they are gun-shy because all the coaching staff is grilling into his head on the sidelines is things like "just don't turn it over" or "don't force it"... and a lot of the time, a coach's play-calling will reflect that mentality. I understand you have to play smart, play within yourself, and not turn the ball over. Unfortunately, when all somebody is thinking about is making mistakes, often times that will be when the mistake is made. Maybe not always a turnover, but you can't throw to your check-down every time you pass the ball. Especially, if you have a chance down the field and a confident QB may be thinking, "I know I can make that throw," where another may hesitate and the opportunity is suddenly gone. Then, you get 2 yards on a check-down to your running back instead of 20 to a receiver. That's a mistake.
The Chiefs have been a very good football team during the months of September.We definitely need a victory while having Damon as the starting quarterback.Going 0-4 during the month of September will be simply a disaster for us.Damon gives us the best shot toward winning that game.Damon needs to make it his goal to play the entire game.He should of played against the Falcons but also should've played against the Raiders.If he played those entire 2 games then we could've had at least a victory already.Herm's big emphasis toward getting young at the quarterback position only allowed Thigpen to start but when in desperate need of a victory we can count on Damon to get it for us.
No. First of all, what this team has done in past Septembers has nothing to do with this team this year.
Second, how can you say Huard would have won us the last two games?. No way. Our entire team played good enough to lose both those games.
Third, we can't count on any of our qb's to give us a desperately need victory. We have no imaginetive game planning and the right side of our OL needs serious help.
Nope, Its gonna take a complete team effort to beat the donks this sunday, No matter if its Huard or Thig.
I hope like hell LJ can get 150 yards, or its gonna be a long day.
Huard is starting, but I think we shoulda left Thig in there until at least after bye week. JMO.
Three7s
09-24-2008, 02:00 PM
No. First of all, what this team has done in past Septembers has nothing to do with this team this year.
Second, how can you say Huard would have won us the last two games?. No way. Our entire team played good enough to lose both those games.
Third, we can't count on any of our qb's to give us a desperately need victory. We have no imaginetive game planning and the right side of our OL needs serious help.
Nope, Its gonna take a complete team effort to beat the donks this sunday, No matter if its Huard or Thig.
I hope like hell LJ can get 150 yards, or its gonna be a long day.
Huard is starting, but I think we shoulda left Thig in there until at least after bye week. JMO.
Agreed, if Huard was in, two less interceptions are thrown, but far more sacks are added in.
Dyno-Mite
09-24-2008, 03:18 PM
No. First of all, what this team has done in past Septembers has nothing to do with this team this year.
Second, how can you say Huard would have won us the last two games?. No way. Our entire team played good enough to lose both those games.
Third, we can't count on any of our qb's to give us a desperately need victory. We have no imaginetive game planning and the right side of our OL needs serious help.
Nope, Its gonna take a complete team effort to beat the donks this sunday, No matter if its Huard or Thig.
I hope like hell LJ can get 150 yards, or its gonna be a long day.
Huard is starting, but I think we shoulda left Thig in there until at least after bye week. JMO.
Bike you are a superstar on Chiefs crewd which is superb but there is no way in hell I can imagine seeing Thigpen rip apart the Broncos defense.Should've of he did that against weaker defenses such as the Falcons and Raiders.It didn't happen.That's why Herm won't consider allowing Thigpen do that to the Broncos defense.I also mentioned in another post that Adrian Jones was a disaster which is true.We should've kept McIntosh at left tackle next to B-dub and allow Albert to play right guard or right tackle.
m0ef0e
09-24-2008, 03:43 PM
Bike you are a superstar on Chiefs crewd which is superb but there is no way in hell I can imagine seeing Thigpen rip apart the Broncos defense.Should've of he did that against weaker defenses such as the Falcons and Raiders.It didn't happen.That's why Herm won't consider allowing Thigpen do that to the Broncos defense.I also mentioned in another post that Adrian Jones was a disaster which is true.We should've kept McIntosh at left tackle next to B-dub and allow Albert to play right guard or right tackle.
Statistically, the donkeys have one of the worst defensive units in the league after 3 weeks of play.
Statistically, the donkeys have one of the worst defensive units in the league after 3 weeks of play.
Statistically the Donkies have also played two very potent offenses in San Diego and New Orleans which will skew their stats.
nigeriannightmare
09-24-2008, 03:51 PM
Statistically, the donkeys have one of the worst defensive units in the league after 3 weeks of play.
And one of the best offenses in the league, statistically....
m0ef0e
09-24-2008, 03:58 PM
Statistically the Donkies have also played two very potent offenses in San Diego and New Orleans which will skew their stats.
True.
And one of the best offenses in the league, statistically....
Also true.
Homeristically, the donkeys still suck. :lol:
nigeriannightmare
09-24-2008, 04:02 PM
True.
Also true.
Homeristically, the donkeys still suck. :lol:
Agreed. I haven't seen the chiefs win at home in 2 years, (thanksgiving day against the Donkeys) so it would be sweet to watch it happen again.
Homeristically, the donkeys still suck. :lol:
Nothing could be more true. :sign0098:
Bike you are a superstar on Chiefs crewd which is superb but there is no way in hell I can imagine seeing Thigpen rip apart the Broncos defense.Should've of he did that against weaker defenses such as the Falcons and Raiders.It didn't happen.That's why Herm won't consider allowing Thigpen do that to the Broncos defense.I also mentioned in another post that Adrian Jones was a disaster which is true.We should've kept McIntosh at left tackle next to B-dub and allow Albert to play right guard or right tackle.
Superstar? Uh, I'm a newbie here. The only thing I'm a superstar at is beer guzzling.
Dude, you need to actually say whats coming out of your mouth, listen to it, THEN type it on your keyboard.
Defensive rankings as of week 3:
Atlanta - 15
Jokeland-21
Denver - 30
I looked this sh!t up on espn.com. But If you keep up with the nfl at all, you would have already known that Denvers defense is terrible this year, even worse than ours. IMO, starting Thig at home against this defense would have been good experience for him. Toss him out after 1st quarter if he ain't moving the team.
But they pay other people to make those decisions...
Canada
09-25-2008, 08:00 PM
Superstar? Uh, I'm a newbie here. The only thing I'm a superstar at is beer guzzling.
Dude, you need to actually say whats coming out of your mouth, listen to it, THEN type it on your keyboard.
Defensive rankings as of week 3:
Atlanta - 15
Jokeland-21
Denver - 30
I looked this sh!t up on espn.com. But If you keep up with the nfl at all, you would have already known that Denvers defense is terrible this year, even worse than ours. IMO, starting Thig at home against this defense would have been good experience for him. Toss him out after 1st quarter if he ain't moving the team.
But they pay other people to make those decisions...
We should hang out! :bananen_smilies046:
We should hang out! :bananen_smilies046:
Beer guzzlers unite!!!!:bananen_smilies046: :bananen_smilies046:
tornadospotter
09-25-2008, 10:31 PM
burp! ok when, hopefully in Nov at Arrowhead, burp!:bananen_smilies046:
Chiefster
09-25-2008, 10:49 PM
It would help if our QB's werent getting killed on every other play.
Sn@keIze
09-25-2008, 11:40 PM
thank god we're finally putting Huard in. Its obvious that neither one of these guys is starting calibur.
But Huard gives us the best chance.
Dyno-Mite
09-26-2008, 04:05 PM
Superstar? Uh, I'm a newbie here. The only thing I'm a superstar at is beer guzzling.
Dude, you need to actually say whats coming out of your mouth, listen to it, THEN type it on your keyboard.
Defensive rankings as of week 3:
Atlanta - 15
Jokeland-21
Denver - 30
I looked this sh!t up on espn.com. But If you keep up with the nfl at all, you would have already known that Denvers defense is terrible this year, even worse than ours. IMO, starting Thig at home against this defense would have been good experience for him. Toss him out after 1st quarter if he ain't moving the team.
But they pay other people to make those decisions...
Herm should've been tossed Thigpen out and should've of never let him return after the half against the Falcons.Face it......Thigpen sucks.Herm just wanted to use him for the youth movement at the quarterback position.It makes no sense to allow Thigpen to throw 2 INTS against the Broncos in the first quarter then replace him.Take notice that Damon isn't accustomed to throwing interceptions and we can rely on him to move the chains against the Broncos.Let's hope we get the win and build off of it while keeping Damon as QB until the Rainbow City slugger comes back.
Herm should've been tossed Thigpen out and should've of never let him return after the half against the Falcons.Face it......Thigpen sucks.Herm just wanted to use him for the youth movement at the quarterback position.It makes no sense to allow Thigpen to throw 2 INTS against the Broncos in the first quarter then replace him.Take notice that Damon isn't accustomed to throwing interceptions and we can rely on him to move the chains against the Broncos.Let's hope we get the win and build off of it while keeping Damon as QB until the Rainbow City slugger comes back.
HuH? You sound pretty anxious to get back Croyle - who-btw-has yet to win an nfl game.
What a pick-me-up that'll be!
rbedgood
09-26-2008, 05:08 PM
HuH? You sound pretty anxious to get back Croyle - who-btw-has yet to win an nfl game.
What a pick-me-up that'll be!
Tim...err...I mean Grbac just likes to stir up crap. One week he likes Huard the next he likes Croyle and next week he'll be talking about trying to get Warren Moon out of retirement. It just depends which ID he logs in with on a particular day
Three7s
09-26-2008, 06:55 PM
Tim...err...I mean Grbac just likes to stir up crap. One week he likes Huard the next he likes Croyle and next week he'll be talking about trying to get Warren Moon out of retirement. It just depends which ID he logs in with on a particular day
Didn't he want to get Grbac out of retirement once, too?
Everything else said, I wish Huard the best of luck sunday against brokeback donks (stole from moefoe).
Hang in there, Damon. We need a win.
Kick some donkey a$$!!!
jtandcrew
09-27-2008, 06:40 AM
Didn't he want to get Grbac out of retirement once, too?
WHAT? Wheres my spoon so I can gouge out my eyes from what im reading! Do we have to go back into the whole Grbac v Gannon thing?! For the love of god, leave it alone! :mob: :lol:
Sn@keIze
09-30-2008, 02:01 AM
I wanted to have this thread resurface so all you thigpen fans can go on and look at how stupid your post were.
Go ahead and read them. Huard fans read them too, Heck! everybody read them.
I dont want to even hear of anybody mention Thig to touch that ball ever again after what Huard did to the 3-0 donks!
chief31
09-30-2008, 07:25 AM
Wow after 1 start your know that Thigpen isnt any good, why exactly are you not an NFL head coach. From your criteria I believe you would have cut over 95 percent of all current NFL quarterbacks. I dont know that Thigpen has a future in the NFL but to throw him under the bus after 1 start ... and with an oline that hasnt protected him like a person would like with a young player. Just WOW. I found stats for Peyton Mannings first game I believe, Game 1
P Manning
21-37 302 yards 1 TD 3 Ints
Colts lose to Miami 24-15
Yes he piled up the yards but he also threw three INTs and lost the game, would you have said he wasnt going to be an NFL QB and sent him packing also. Again WOW.
What a strange source for me to find some sanity.
J/K McL. :D
How are we now all so positive that Thigpen doesn't have what it takes to be an NFL starter?
Yet, somehow, we are still unsure about Croyle?
Really?
Croyle has looked like crap for what... ten starts?
Thigpen looked like crap for a couple of games.
WTF are we looking at? One game makes a career?
Someone want to explain Peyton Manning and Troy Aikman to me then?
Both of those guys looked like absolute garbage as rookies. Now, they are both Super Bowl champions, and HOFers (Manning has already secured his spot)
Not to mention, that through the first three games, we had the worste pass-protection in the NFL.
How does anyone make these kind of judgements on these guys, with the crap circumstances that they are dealing with?
I'm not trying to say that any of those judgements are incorrect. I just don't see how anyone can make such quick assessments.
Hell, Huard had a great game. He must be HOF material. :lol:
I wanted to have this thread resurface so all you thigpen fans can go on and look at how stupid your post were.
Go ahead and read them. Huard fans read them too, Heck! everybody read them.
I dont want to even hear of anybody mention Thig to touch that ball ever again after what Huard did to the 3-0 donks!
You may want to re-read all your posts. Thats what stupid really is.
It takes more than a game and a half nfl experience to become a winning qb.
Sn@keIze
09-30-2008, 08:06 AM
You may want to re-read all your posts. Thats what stupid really is.
It takes more than a game and a half nfl experience to become a winning qb.
Whats up with everybody acting like Im saying Huard if a HOF?
Im saying Thig is a piss load worse than Huard, and he shoudve been in there a lot earlier.
Im mean my god man, Huard just help break our worse streak and your acting like we STILL shouldve put Thig in!
Whats up with everybody acting like Im saying Huard if a HOF?
Im saying Thig is a piss load worse than Huard, and he shoudve been in there a lot earlier.
Im mean my god man, Huard just help break our worse streak and your acting like we STILL shouldve put Thig in!
I'm just saying that fans that wanted Thig to do well shouldn't be called out as stupid. We tried him, didn't work - move on. The next time we put him in there he may throw for 4 td's and 400 yards. Who knows. But right now Huard is our best shot at winning.
arrowheadGoon305
09-30-2008, 02:23 PM
huard is our best qb right now...all i can say is keep him in the game until brodie comes back...
slc chief
09-30-2008, 02:28 PM
huard is our best qb right now...all i can say is keep him in the game until brodie comes back...
amen to that
IlovetheChiefs
09-30-2008, 05:02 PM
huard is our best qb right now...all i can say is keep him in the game until brodie comes back...
Just posted about Huard on another thread. I agree use him as the starter (instead of Thigpen). But also even when Brodie comes back. (Unless Huard struggles a lot, of course). Especially if we win a second straight game having been 9.5 underdogs in both. If Huard gets us to 2-3 then why switch to Croyle?
I wanted to have this thread resurface so all you thigpen fans can go on and look at how stupid your post were.
Go ahead and read them. Huard fans read them too, Heck! everybody read them.
I dont want to even hear of anybody mention Thig to touch that ball ever again after what Huard did to the 3-0 donks!
I don't think anyone supported Tylyer Thigpen because they thought he presented the best option to win the game.
This is a rebuilding year. We have to see what Tyler has this year instead of next year. If you want to call people stupid, don't stop there. Anyone in support of Croyle over Huard is just as guilty.
Since Herm made the decision to go with Tyler against Atlanta it showed his discipline to the youth. Changing a week later was change BS. He should have played Huard againt Atlanta also or not at all.
greg3564
09-30-2008, 07:07 PM
I wanted to have this thread resurface so all you thigpen fans can go on and look at how stupid your post were.
Go ahead and read them. Huard fans read them too, Heck! everybody read them.
I dont want to even hear of anybody mention Thig to touch that ball ever again after what Huard did to the 3-0 donks!
So 21/28 for 160 yards and 1 TD against the 30th ranked defense in the NFL is some sort of milestone? Come on. Let's withhold some of that grand praise and see what the offense and Huard can do against the 8th ranked defense in Carolina. We'll be lucky if they don't maul him into early retirement.
Huard is nothing more than a backup and a good one at that. He won't last an entire season and shouldn't have to either. Thigpen needs to be evaluated. Because if he's not fit to be a backup and Croyle turns out to be a bust, the Chiefs are going to be looking for 2 QBs, and maybe 3 if Huard decides to retire, in the next year.
huard is our best qb right now...all i can say is keep him in the game until brodie comes back...
If Huard keeps winning, the only thing we need Croyle for is to back him up.
Canada
09-30-2008, 11:24 PM
gimme $5
If Huard keeps winning, the only thing we need Croyle for is to back him up.
Again, it is not about this year. The chiefs are looking for the QB who will be here for 10 years from now. Not this year.
Everyone who reports on the Chiefs say that they are going to play Croyle so they know what he has. Your opinion of playing Huard over Croyle is not the direction the Chiefs are following.
Again, it is not about this year. The chiefs are looking for the QB who will be here for 10 years from now. Not this year.
Everyone who reports on the Chiefs say that they are going to play Croyle so they know what he has. Your opinion of playing Huard over Croyle is not the direction the Chiefs are following.
I understand that. But Croyle has been oft injured and still hasn't won a game. I don't think he is the answer. I don't think the answer is even on our roster yet. Thats why I think Damon should be our starting qb the rest of this season. We KNOW he can win!
Hayvern
10-01-2008, 10:20 AM
Again, it is not about this year. The chiefs are looking for the QB who will be here for 10 years from now. Not this year.
Everyone who reports on the Chiefs say that they are going to play Croyle so they know what he has. Your opinion of playing Huard over Croyle is not the direction the Chiefs are following.
I have to agree here. As much as I like Huard, and I think he is the best chance of winning we have right now, we have to go through the pain with Croyle.
Look at Cutler for a minute, when he took over in Denver three years ago, people were screaming bloody murder about him. No one is screaming now, (except for the fact we kicked his A$$).
We have to give Croyle a chance this year, and if he is not the answer, then we do something about it. To this point, I still don't think we know, and if he keeps getting injured, well that could be the answer to our question.
I have to agree here. As much as I like Huard, and I think he is the best chance of winning we have right now, we have to go through the pain with Croyle.
Look at Cutler for a minute, when he took over in Denver three years ago, people were screaming bloody murder about him. No one is screaming now, (except for the fact we kicked his A$$).
We have to give Croyle a chance this year, and if he is not the answer, then we do something about it. To this point, I still don't think we know, and if he keeps getting injured, well that could be the answer to our question.
I don't know. Croyle is in his 3rd year here and STILL has yet to win us a game. I just don't see it.
I don't know. Croyle is in his 3rd year here and STILL has yet to win us a game. I just don't see it.
I don't either, but he hasn't been really given a fair shot either. He has played 8 games with a suspect offensive line and didn't have LJ until the opener.
Based on the reports from Adam Teicher, Croyle proved in the off season that he has the tools to make every throw. The question still remains, can he adapt that to a real game and can he stay healthy. They have to use this season to definately rule him out.
Hayvern
10-01-2008, 11:07 AM
I don't know. Croyle is in his 3rd year here and STILL has yet to win us a game. I just don't see it.
Well one has to consider that he has not been a starter here for three years. He only got the starting position last year and missed a lot of the season due to injury.
Which again, might be the answer that we are looking for.
I don't either, but he hasn't been really given a fair shot either. He has played 8 games with a suspect offensive line and didn't have LJ until the opener.
Based on the reports from Adam Teicher, Croyle proved in the off season that he has the tools to make every throw. The question still remains, can he adapt that to a real game and can he stay healthy. They have to use this season to definately rule him out.
Nah. Lets try to make something of this season and build off this win. If we turn around and lose at Carolina, I say start Croyle after bye. But if we win, and there is no doubt in my mind that we will, You got to give this offense to Huard.
Croyle already has proved to me that he cannot withstand the punishment of the nfl.
How can you pull Huard after 2 straight wins following 8 losses by Croyle?
m0ef0e
10-01-2008, 11:48 AM
I don't have a problem with Brodie getting one more shot. Though, I would wait until Huard or the offense stumbles to put him back in. If Croyle gets hurt again, he's done IMO.
Nah. Lets try to make something of this season and build off this win. If we turn around and lose at Carolina, I say start Croyle after bye. But if we win, and there is no doubt in my mind that we will, You got to give this offense to Huard.
Croyle already has proved to me that he cannot withstand the punishment of the nfl.
How can you pull Huard after 2 straight wins following 8 losses by Croyle?
I am just telling what I am hearing. It is not my opinion. I think he has already provent hat he isn't reliable, but Herm has stated that he is very patient.
The Chiefs have every intention to pull Huard once Croyle is back. It is a rebuilding year. They want to see if he is the future. It is do or die for him.
IlovetheChiefs
10-01-2008, 11:49 AM
That's my opinion too. Should Huard play really well and help enable another victory this week at Carolina then I would think the best option is keep to what's working and stay hot. If he gets a loss I still think he would be our best chance at a w the next game, but having Croyle play to get more experience and see what he can do would at least be more reasonable in such a circumstance.
But yeah looks like Croyle comes back either way when he's able (probably Oct. 19th against the Titans, which is a difficult game). Course a win at Carolina will have our whole team even more fired up, and then they get a bye, and then will be rarin' to rock the Titans. And it would be great to see Croyle also get his first win.
Watching Herm's lengthy press conference yesterday they really didn't address the qb situation until a little vaguely near the very end where he said, "Well Huard won a game and hopefully he can win another one. And then if he wins another one we'll have a great conversation after the bye, won't we? Stay tuned."
Could get interesting to say the least!
GO CHIEFS!!!!!!!!!
Edit: Oops, while I was typing this 2 others posted entries. I was referring to Bike's last post that I agree with. I shoulld use the quote feature more often, heh.
I just don't think Croyle is an nfl qb. I hope he proves me wrong.
m0ef0e
10-01-2008, 11:56 AM
I just don't think Croyle is an nfl qb. I hope he proves me wrong.
Same here.
I don't have a problem with Brodie getting one more shot. Though, I would wait until Huard or the offense stumbles to put him back in. If Croyle gets hurt again, he's done IMO.
I'm with ya moefoe:bananen_smilies046:
I just don't think Croyle is an nfl qb. I hope he proves me wrong.
I don't think he is an every down Starting QB in the NFL. He would be a very effective back up for us. You know manage the game, and dump the ball of to safety valve or throw it away to avoid the sack.
I don't think he is an every down Starting QB in the NFL. He would be a very effective back up for us. You know manage the game, and dump the ball of to safety valve or throw it away to avoid the sack.
Just no wins.
Dyno-Mite
10-01-2008, 03:37 PM
Ok,the spotlight will be on Damon for this upcoming game but if he wins it for us then that should allow him to remain as the starter.If he loses it for us then Herm may consider getting Brodie back.I believe that Damon is better than Brodie as a quarterback.Brodie truly can be the future quarterback for us.During moments like this when we need to get wins we can rely on Damon(forget Thigpen)to rack up wins for us.As for as the youth movement Brodie definitely is the right guy.No need to draft another College quarterback.
Ok,the spotlight will be on Damon for this upcoming game but if he wins it for us then that should allow him to remain as the starter.If he loses it for us then Herm may consider getting Brodie back.I believe that Damon is better than Brodie as a quarterback.Brodie truly can be the future quarterback for us.During moments like this when we need to get wins we can rely on Damon(forget Thigpen)to rack up wins for us.As for as the youth movement Brodie definitely is the right guy.No need to draft another College quarterback.
How can you say Brodie is the right guy? He has to be healthy to win us games. And when he has been healthy, he hasn't won anything. If he doesn't show any signs of life this season, we will have to draft a qb.
Dyno-Mite
10-01-2008, 05:23 PM
How can you say Brodie is the right guy? He has to be healthy to win us games. And when he has been healthy, he hasn't won anything. If he doesn't show any signs of life this season, we will have to draft a qb.
If so then I got Tim Tebow.
Three7s
10-01-2008, 08:42 PM
If so then I got Tim Tebow.
I liked Tim Tebow a lot, but after seeing him perform throughout this season, I'm beginning to think that he might be overrated. I think he relies too much on his feet and not enough on his arm.
Hayvern
10-01-2008, 08:49 PM
How can you say Brodie is the right guy? He has to be healthy to win us games. And when he has been healthy, he hasn't won anything. If he doesn't show any signs of life this season, we will have to draft a qb.
Honestly, I just don't think we have seen what Croyle can do. Its hard to show anyone anything when a defensive lineman is lying on top of you. (OK i know the picture that paints.. ick)
Seriously, I would like to see the guy play and be successful. I am worried about his injuries though as i have said before.
Ultimately, I do not want a Michael Vick type quarterback here. Yeah it might be exciting, but the Chiefs have never been, nor should they become a one man show.
I don't have an answer for our qb problems, and neither does Herm and CP. All I know is that we do have a qb that has proven he can win in the NFL. I say stick with Damon and deal with our qbotf in the off-season. If Damon gets knocked out or plays sh!tty, put in Croyle.
Croyle is a backup qb, just as Damon always has been.
We have yet to find our starting qbotf. I would be shocked if Brodie turns out to be the qb he was suppose to be.
Whatever. Start Brodie against tennessee. Then make a decision on the rest of the year.
spiman
10-01-2008, 09:28 PM
I liked Tim Tebow a lot, but after seeing him perform throughout this season, I'm beginning to think that he might be overrated. I think he relies too much on his feet and not enough on his arm.
:wheelchair: For those who do not know me.. {Haurd supporter} I have wanted a Qb for years/ not a has been or a 3rd/4th etc drafted Qb.. Were is the next 1 out there? Our scouts better be watching colledge football more than they watch us/Chiefs..I do want a stud and not a skinney/no mechanics type either!!:wheelchair: :yahoo: :11:
Three7s
10-01-2008, 09:32 PM
:wheelchair: For those who do not know me.. {Haurd supporter} I have wanted a Qb for years/ not a has been or a 3rd/4th etc drafted Qb.. Were is the next 1 out there? Our scouts better be watching colledge football more than they watch us/Chiefs..I do want a stud and not a skinney/no mechanics type either!!:wheelchair: :yahoo: :11:
I really like Stafford, Colt McCoy looks good too.
I really like Stafford, Colt McCoy looks good too.
Matt Stafford is currently my first choice. Could be competition with the Lions for him though.
Dyno-Mite
10-02-2008, 11:07 AM
I really like Stafford, Colt McCoy looks good too.
Colt McCoy is one of the top 5 College quarterbacks as of this moment but I can't imagine him becoming a Chief.Colt Brennan should've been the second answer to Brodie Croyle during the previous draft being that we have seen Brodie get injured too many times thus far.Brodie can be considered the future for us at the quarterback position.That's if only he can stay healthy.Face it,we've seen him get hurt so many times but also failed to get any sort of win for us but players such as D-rainbow and Gonzo mentioned that Brodie was dynamite during offseason till preseason.I'll support the Rainbow City Slugger when he gets right with us.
chief31
10-03-2008, 12:03 AM
What I would like to see happen is for Damon to start, and see how the offensive line holds-up until Croyle is ready.
If that group is truly improved in pass protection, then I would support a change back to Croyle. But if it is a truly improved unit, then Huard will probably play too well to get pulled.
If the o-line goes back to the garbage that I have seen for so long here, then just keep Huard in and protect the kids for as long as Huard can stand it.
LJ, play action, bootlegs, sweeps. Whoever is qb, can't just drop back and throw it. He'll get killed. I hope we get Albert back soon.
spiman
10-03-2008, 10:28 PM
Do it again..LJ :toast2: :11:
LJ, play action, bootlegs, sweeps. Whoever is qb, can't just drop back and throw it. He'll get killed. I hope we get Albert back soon.
zachl
10-05-2008, 03:47 PM
You all don't know me, I am new to the site. Huge Chiefs fan my whole life. I am getting sick and tired of not having a qb or playing the wrong one. The only ones in recent memory we have had that were any good was Montana (last years in the league) and Gannon (went on to be MVP for a different team because we thought Elvis Grbac was our savior...) it is pretty ridiculous, I like carl peterson as much as the next guy, but i think his time is up. Maybe Herm's time is up, as well. I vote to trade for a decent qb. you can find anyone better than our 3, maybe even go out and try to sign culpepper or do SOMETHING, they act like they dont even care and they are not trying to improve. It is one thing to be "rebuilding", it is another to be trying to lose....
greg3564
10-05-2008, 04:40 PM
You all don't know me, I am new to the site. Huge Chiefs fan my whole life. I am getting sick and tired of not having a qb or playing the wrong one. The only ones in recent memory we have had that were any good was Montana (last years in the league) and Gannon (went on to be MVP for a different team because we thought Elvis Grbac was our savior...) it is pretty ridiculous, I like carl peterson as much as the next guy, but i think his time is up. Maybe Herm's time is up, as well. I vote to trade for a decent qb. you can find anyone better than our 3, maybe even go out and try to sign culpepper or do SOMETHING, they act like they dont even care and they are not trying to improve. It is one thing to be "rebuilding", it is another to be trying to lose....
This season was over before it began. We definitely should not be trading for a QB. Let the three stooges, that are Croyle, Huard and Thigpen, finish the season and get a first round QB in the draft. Croyle is doomed. He has poor coaching and honestly can't do anything with an offense that is hamstrung. He's almost a victim of circumstance. I think he has the potential to be a good QB, but just does not have the tools available to work with. We don't know if he'll be good, because he's constantly getting hurt from lack of protection.
Hayvern
10-05-2008, 05:29 PM
You all don't know me, I am new to the site. Huge Chiefs fan my whole life. I am getting sick and tired of not having a qb or playing the wrong one. The only ones in recent memory we have had that were any good was Montana (last years in the league) and Gannon (went on to be MVP for a different team because we thought Elvis Grbac was our savior...) it is pretty ridiculous, I like carl peterson as much as the next guy, ....
You certainly are new...
greg3564
10-05-2008, 05:30 PM
You certainly are new...
:funnypost::lol:
chief31
10-05-2008, 05:36 PM
This season was over before it began. We definitely should not be trading for a QB. Let the three stooges, that are Croyle, Huard and Thigpen, finish the season and get a first round QB in the draft. Croyle is doomed. He has poor coaching and honestly can't do anything with an offense that is hamstrung. He's almost a victim of circumstance. I think he has the potential to be a good QB, but just does not have the tools available to work with. We don't know if he'll be good, because he's constantly getting hurt from lack of protection.
The problem I have with taking a first-round QB is that he will get the same lack of protection as our current guys.
It's a well-known fact that QBs don't play as well when they are regularly under heavy pressure. It doesn't matter that that QB gets four plays per game with good protection, because he has adapted to an environment of heavy pressure, so he is used to rushing his reads.
I would rather rebuild the offensive line, then worry about a QB, once we are able to give them a well protected environment. When we can get them used to reading a defense and trusting their protection.
Hell, maybe the QBs hat are looking like crap with all of the heavy pressure that we are allowing, will look like NFL QBs with protection.
I've seen that happen alot of times. Just look at what we got last week. Offer some decent protection, and a QB starts to relax, and suddenly makes better decisions, with more time to think about it.
This week, get the QB pressured early, and he is never able to relax.
The same is true with the HB position. If we make and hold our blocks, a HB gets past the LOS without contact alot.
If we are missing our blocking assignments, or just unable to hold blocks, then HBs get defenders in their face when they recieve the football.
Branden Albert might be able to handle the LOT position. It's pretty difficult to say after two and a half games. And Waters still has some time left. (If we can convince him to stay here.)
Niswanger might work-out, but he really should be having some kind of competition for the job.
But the right side is currently just whatever we can thow out onto th field.
O have been hearing about how we need LBs. There are three starting LB positions, and we have five guys who are of a higher quality than our starting RG and ROT.
The o-line has five starting positions, and we may, or may not, have three decent players. Forget about any quality depth. We have 60% of the starting jobs filled...at best!
I'm not saying that the LB positions shouldn't be upgraded. But, if your boat is sinking and there are two holes, (a big one and a smaller one) don't you try and plug the big hole first?
Shouldn't you concentrate on the big hole, and consider everything else secondary until you get the big problem to a more managable state?
tornadospotter
10-05-2008, 06:08 PM
The problem I have with taking a first-round QB is that he will get the same lack of protection as our current guys.
It's a well-known fact that QBs don't play as well when they are regularly under heavy pressure. It doesn't matter that that QB gets four plays per game with good protection, because he has adapted to an environment of heavy pressure, so he is used to rushing his reads.
I would rather rebuild the offensive line, then worry about a QB, once we are able to give them a well protected environment. When we can get them used to reading a defense and trusting their protection.
Hell, maybe the QBs hat are looking like crap with all of the heavy pressure that we are allowing, will look like NFL QBs with protection.
I've seen that happen alot of times. Just look at what we got last week. Offer some decent protection, and a QB starts to relax, and suddenly makes better decisions, with more time to think about it.
This week, get the QB pressured early, and he is never able to relax.
The same is true with the HB position. If we make and hold our blocks, a HB gets past the LOS without contact alot.
If we are missing our blocking assignments, or just unable to hold blocks, then HBs get defenders in their face when they recieve the football.
Branden Albert might be able to handle the LOT position. It's pretty difficult to say after two and a half games. And Waters still has some time left. (If we can convince him to stay here.)
Niswanger might work-out, but he really should be having some kind of competition for the job.
But the right side is currently just whatever we can thow out onto th field.
O have been hearing about how we need LBs. There are three starting LB positions, and we have five guys who are of a higher quality than our starting RG and ROT.
The o-line has five starting positions, and we may, or may not, have three decent players. Forget about any quality depth. We have 60% of the starting jobs filled...at best!
I'm not saying that the LB positions shouldn't be upgraded. But, if your boat is sinking and there are two holes, (a big one and a smaller one) don't you try and plug the big hole first?
Shouldn't you concentrate on the big hole, and consider everything else secondary until you get the big problem to a more managable state?
You are very right chief31, but Clark has to grow some, and fire cp!:D
zachl
10-05-2008, 06:21 PM
what's that supposed to mean? That you are big time or something because you have been on the site longer than me? So does that make you old?
greg3564
10-05-2008, 06:24 PM
The problem I have with taking a first-round QB is that he will get the same lack of protection as our current guys.
It's a well-known fact that QBs don't play as well when they are regularly under heavy pressure. It doesn't matter that that QB gets four plays per game with good protection, because he has adapted to an environment of heavy pressure, so he is used to rushing his reads.
I would rather rebuild the offensive line, then worry about a QB, once we are able to give them a well protected environment. When we can get them used to reading a defense and trusting their protection.
Hell, maybe the QBs hat are looking like crap with all of the heavy pressure that we are allowing, will look like NFL QBs with protection.
I've seen that happen alot of times. Just look at what we got last week. Offer some decent protection, and a QB starts to relax, and suddenly makes better decisions, with more time to think about it.
This week, get the QB pressured early, and he is never able to relax.
The same is true with the HB position. If we make and hold our blocks, a HB gets past the LOS without contact alot.
If we are missing our blocking assignments, or just unable to hold blocks, then HBs get defenders in their face when they recieve the football.
Branden Albert might be able to handle the LOT position. It's pretty difficult to say after two and a half games. And Waters still has some time left. (If we can convince him to stay here.)
Niswanger might work-out, but he really should be having some kind of competition for the job.
But the right side is currently just whatever we can thow out onto th field.
O have been hearing about how we need LBs. There are three starting LB positions, and we have five guys who are of a higher quality than our starting RG and ROT.
The o-line has five starting positions, and we may, or may not, have three decent players. Forget about any quality depth. We have 60% of the starting jobs filled...at best!
I'm not saying that the LB positions shouldn't be upgraded. But, if your boat is sinking and there are two holes, (a big one and a smaller one) don't you try and plug the big hole first?
Shouldn't you concentrate on the big hole, and consider everything else secondary until you get the big problem to a more managable state?
I agree with your assessment. I'm just saying that we shouldn't be wasting time, draft picks or money on a QB trade. It will change nothing about how this team performs. There are so many glaring holes in this team that if rebuilding is how they do this, it's going to be 4-6 more seasons before a playoff caliber team takes the field. There's just no way we'll be ready in 2 or 3 like Carl and Herm would like us to believe. If those two clowns are shown the door this season and someone else is brought in we may be able to accelerate the number of seasons. But with these two dummies, it's painfully obvious they have no clue how to rebuild or evaluate talent. At its most basic level, Herm has no clue on how to coach a single game.
chief31
10-05-2008, 06:51 PM
what's that supposed to mean? That you are big time or something because you have been on the site longer than me? So does that make you old?
Hunh?
I agree with your assessment. I'm just saying that we shouldn't be wasting time, draft picks or money on a QB trade. It will change nothing about how this team performs. There are so many glaring holes in this team that if rebuilding is how they do this, it's going to be 4-6 more seasons before a playoff caliber team takes the field. There's just no way we'll be ready in 2 or 3 like Carl and Herm would like us to believe. If those two clowns are shown the door this season and someone else is brought in we may be able to accelerate the number of seasons. But with these two dummies, it's painfully obvious they have no clue how to rebuild or evaluate talent. At its most basic level, Herm has no clue on how to coach a single game.
I got that. I just wanted to try and keep our main focus on that line. All QBs play poorly with alot of pressure. So I don't have any idea what our current QBs can do.
Hayvern
10-05-2008, 07:00 PM
what's that supposed to mean? That you are big time or something because you have been on the site longer than me? So does that make you old?
Hey, first lesson, don't get so defensive.
It was mearly meant to point out that you are new to the site if you think anyone (well outside of a couple) here likes Herm Edwards.
Go back and read some of the other posts.
So it was not meant to mean anything more than you have not been here very long.
tornadospotter
10-05-2008, 07:10 PM
Hey, first lesson, don't get so defensive.
It was mearly meant to point out that you are new to the site if you think anyone (well outside of a couple) here likes Herm Edwards.
Go back and read some of the other posts.
So it was not meant to mean anything more than you have not been here very long.
Even less like carl peterson.
spiman
10-08-2008, 08:42 PM
:wheelchair: We have something to give once in a while..Psss We need Qb-2nd round/1st O-line. :sign0104:
YouTube - Funny Old People
:yahoo:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.