Croyle and the rest of this season?

[greg3564]

This is a harsh opinion, but I'm throwing it out there.

So when do we start Croyle? The last game of the season? Unless they draft offensive linemen and acquire some talent off the market(which they won't) the O will be just as terrible next year as it is this year. So do it now. Yes, it will be tough. It will also show what he's made of in toughness and mentality.

They knew they had issues going back to last year and even the pre-season. Did they bring in any starting free agents? Nope. Did they draft any potential starting O-line players? Nope.

Herm and Peterson keep telling us that the team needs to be younger but keep bringing in old talent. ie Law, Surtain, Turley, etc. Instead they invested a boat load of money into an ineffective RB in Larry Johnson who didn't even have the decency to honor his contract. That guy is another T.O. and Moss and infects the locker room like a virus. They should have kept Bennett and sent his sorry a$$ packing when he pulled that. Call Vermeil what you want, but he brought in good decent players you liked and they performed for him. He didn't like LJ and I guess we're starting to see why.

Personally, the rest of this season is a wash. Yeah, we might win the West, but it sure isn't anything to brag about like past years. That will be it, because we can't even come close to competing in the playoffs. Start Croyle, maybe rotate some developing O line players and let's give the "QB of the future" some experience and serious playing time.

Huard will not win us a Superbowl, the O line will not win us a Superbowl and a strong defense alone will not win us a Superbowl. I want a Bowl appearance and I really could care less about winning the AFC West. I think we sell ourselves short and are settling for less if all we really care about is the AFC West. We as fans need to demand more.

I'm so disappointed this year. I knew we would struggle, but not to this extent. There are so many problems that this team needs to address. All the way from ageing corners, ageing QB and a failure of an effective O line. They need to really, really shake something up now! You also never hear if Huard has even taken a leadership role in this team.

[hermhater]

i concurr, we have had some great teams, even a few with superbowl potential, the cards just didnt fall the right way those years.

but great team, great talent, good coaching...till now.

we just have great talent, bad gameplans.

I contest that we have a shortage of talent on the O-line. Commonly overlooked area of a football team.

How many playoff wins since CP got here again? 31, it really is no surprise to me that you can't recognize mediocrity. Very good teams find ways to win in the playoffs. The cards don't need to "fall right" for good teams to win. By the way, i forgot our record...anyone?

I contest the same I merely hope that Priest can find a way to effectively utilize our swiss cheese "O" line.

Not sure who sucks worse...

You both seem to suck equally...

Hopefully Priest will do this thing.

If you both keep this up I will have to BAN you both.

chief31 you need to be carefull....

HEH!

[texaschief]

[chief31]

How many playoff wins since CP got here again? 31, it really is no surprise to me that you can't recognize mediocrity. Very good teams find ways to win in the playoffs. The cards don't need to "fall right" for good teams to win. By the way, i forgot our record...anyone?

Appearently I don't then. Because 13-3 is never going to be mediocre to me. Nor is 12-4, nor 11-5. Those are teams that are serious competitors.

I would hate to see you running a team. First you would teach them how to be the biggest losers around, so that you could add some high draft position. Then you would turn around and fire everyone for losing. Then you would turn around again, and fire everyone for losing, and again, and again. Never to admit that you might have made any mistakes.

You would have a new head coach every third season. First season they would be 7-9, then you would demand that they play for draft position, leading to 2-14. Then you would fire the coach for being unable to teach the losers that you requested to win. 4-12. Then the next coach would come in and be lucky to lead those trained losers to 8-8, and back to the playing for draft position.

"The cards don't need to fall right..." Of course they do. If they don't, then someone else wins. It's the same in any sport. The best team isn't nessecarily the team that wins. It's often known as the "any given Sunday" rule.

[hermhater]

Appearently I don't then. Because 13-3 is never going to be mediocre to me. Nor is 12-4, nor 11-5. Those are teams that are serious competitors.

I would hate to see you running a team. First you would teach them how to be the biggest losers around, so that you could add some high draft position. Then you would turn around and fire everyone for losing. Then you would turn around again, and fire everyone for losing, and again, and again. Never to admit that you might have made any mistakes.

You would have a new head coach every third season. First season they would be 7-9, then you would demand that they play for draft position, leading to 2-14. Then you would fire the coach for being unable to teach the losers that you requested to win. 4-12. Then the next coach would come in and be lucky to lead those trained losers to 8-8, and back to the playing for draft position.

"The cards don't need to fall right..." Of course they do. If they don't, then someone else wins. It's the same in any sport. The best team isn't nessecarily the team that wins. It's often known as the "any given Sunday" rule.

You mean we get rid of HERM next season???

Then I am for it!!!

[Chiefster]

Not sure who sucks worse...

You both seem to suck equally...

Hopefully Priest will do this thing.

If you both keep this up I will have to BAN you both.

chief31 you need to be carefull....

HEH!

Go for it.

[hermhater]

Not sure who sucks worse...

You both seem to suck equally...

Hopefully Priest will do this thing.

If you both keep this up I will have to Give Props to you both.

chief31 you need to be carefull....

HEH!

Go for it.

FMR!

[Chiefster]

FMR!

Better!

[Polleo Pit Man]

[Polleo Pit Man]

RAND: A tough spot for Croyle

Nov 13, 2007, 1:50:54 AM by Jonathan Rand - FAQ



Chiefs coach Herm Edwards doesn’t have a great choice between quarterbacks Damon Huard and Brodie Croyle. But a change became inevitable in a 27-11 loss to the Broncos.
Perhaps because of the punishment he’s absorbed to his body and confidence, Huard has regressed in two straight home losses. He’s committed five turnovers, including two that set up touchdowns and two returned for touchdowns.
So it’s time for Croyle, in his second season, to lead the Chiefs’ offense. That’s putting him in a tough spot unless the Chiefs can find a way to protect him from the wolves.
A quarterback making his first NFL start will have his best shot to succeed when supported by at least a solid cast. Then he can begin with a limited role and not get overwhelmed. But the Chiefs’ offense ranks 30th in the NFL, mainly because its line hasn’t generated much of a running game or protected its quarterback. Yet they’ll be asking Croyle to make a difference.
This is exactly the situation you don’t want for any quarterback, especially not a youngster. NFL history is littered with young blue-chip passers who got stuck with weak offenses and never learned their crafts because they were always on their backs.
Croyle was on track to start opening day before throwing those awful interceptions in the preseason. The job was his to lose all summer because any coach would rather play a quarterback with a promising upside than a journeyman who’s as good as he’ll get.
Huard won the job partly by default but also because he minimized his mistakes and made key plays while leading the Chiefs to a 5-3 record in his starts last season. He remained reliable this year, too, while the Chiefs won four of five games after an 0-2 start. But now that his turnovers have become frequent and costly, he’s lost his edge over Croyle.
Sadly enough for the Chiefs, this switch isn’t likely to make a difference soon. The offense’s collapse shouldn’t be blamed mainly on Huard, yet quarterback is the last offensive spot left where Edwards can shake things up.
Croyle is more nimble than Huard, but he’ll still be running for his life, given protection that’s allowed 29 sacks. Croyle also whips the ball more quickly than Huard and his quick, short throws are difficult to defend.
Croyle’s crisp passes helped him methodically move the Chiefs to a field goal, their lone scoring drive once he took over against the Broncos early in the third quarter. But it’s difficult for a quarterback to nickel and dime his way down the field without a respectable running game.
Defenses facing the Chiefs generally load up against the run and dare the quarterback to beat them. Croyle should expect more of the same.
Edwards saw a quarterback change, from veteran Vinny Testaverde to youngster Chad Pennington, boost the New York Jets from a 1-4 team to a playoff qualifier in 2002. There’s always a chance that a new quarterback’s talent and leadership can wake up a sluggish attack. Given the problems around him, however, that’s too much to ask of Croyle.
But the Chiefs right now have no better option, and little left to lose

[texaschief]

Appearently I don't then. Because 13-3 is never going to be mediocre to me. Nor is 12-4, nor 11-5. Those are teams that are serious competitors.

I would hate to see you running a team. First you would teach them how to be the biggest losers around, so that you could add some high draft position. Then you would turn around and fire everyone for losing. Then you would turn around again, and fire everyone for losing, and again, and again. Never to admit that you might have made any mistakes.

You would have a new head coach every third season. First season they would be 7-9, then you would demand that they play for draft position, leading to 2-14. Then you would fire the coach for being unable to teach the losers that you requested to win. 4-12. Then the next coach would come in and be lucky to lead those trained losers to 8-8, and back to the playing for draft position.

"The cards don't need to fall right..." Of course they do. If they don't, then someone else wins. It's the same in any sport. The best team isn't nessecarily the team that wins. It's often known as the "any given Sunday" rule.

lol...if i were running a team, we'd be a perennial playoff contender, not a team who had an 8-8 record, then 13-3, then back down to 7-9 and miss the playoffs for the next few years.

Let me help you out... you can pull out those 3 seasons over 20 years if you'd like, but since 1989, this team has played 307 games with a winning pct. of .57654723.

so, in just under 20 years, this team has won BARELY more than half it's games.

mediocre

adjective
1. moderate to inferior in quality; "they improved the quality from mediocre to above average"
2. lacking exceptional quality or ability; "a novel of average merit"; "only a fair performance of the sonata"; "in fair health"; "the caliber of the students has gone from mediocre to above average"; "the performance was middling at best" [syn: average]
3. poor to middling in quality; "there have been good and mediocre and bad artists"

I've never called for anyone to be fired...ESPECIALLY the head coach. Unlike you, who wants to fire a coach we just got...and just in time for the third season...hypocrite.

If i was in charge of the team, I'd let as many young players play as i possibly could my first few years so they would show bigger dividends sooner. Which is what i've been saying the whole season, which is the same thing that you call "teaching your team to lose". It's actually teaching your team to play.

While my young team was gaining game experience, i'd be stock piling draft picks to go with the high picks i'd be recieving because of a couple rebuilding seasons with new QB and rookie and first year players.

While i was rebuilding my team, i'd look at my roster and see which players would be too far past their prime to depend on when my team DOES start their playoff runs. I don't care if they are super stars like Larry Johnson. In return, i'm stock piling more draft picks and young players who can contribute longer than a 28 yr old RB who could get injured quite easily because of his position.

Fans show up for wins, not super stars. If you look at the Patriots when they won their first Championship, they came out at the Super Bowl as a team. There weren't any Randy Mosses, Dante Stallworths, no one knew who Tom Brady was and their defense didn't have any "super stars" either. That team was compiled of really good players and played as a team.

Anyone know what they've done since?

I would let my team grow up together and gain expeirence as they become a great team together. When dealing with a franchise, you can't just look at THIS year. You have to put yourself in position for wins in the future. You need to ALWAYS be looking to help your team's future. That means you draft well and put those players on the field right now while you rebuild.

I'd evaluate each player individualy and only fire players like Ryan Sims who had plenty of opportunities to perform without doing so.

I wouldn't care what ignorant fans who have no patience say, I would put my head down and plow thru a couple difficult seasons. All those fans who'll be trashing us will be back after we're in the playoffs year after year.

The "any given Sunday" rule is around because you never know what's going to happen in a game. If you're a great team, you find ways and prepare to beat teams you should beat. We should've beaten the Bills, Broncos, and the Colts in the playoffs...but it didn't happen.

I promise my plan of sacrifice/reward for a franchise would kill anything you could think of.