Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 62

Thread: Chiefs have QB decision ahead

  1. #1
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Posts
    5,091
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 23
    Given: 0

    Default Chiefs have QB decision ahead


    0 Not allowed!
    Chiefs have QB decision ahead

    By ADAM TEICHER

    The Kansas City Star

    Will Kansas City pick the potential of Brodie Croyle (left) or the experience of Damon Huard?




    RIVER FALLS, Wis. | When forced to choose a starting quarterback between Brodie Croyle and Damon Huard, the Chiefs will have hour after hour of practice video to aid in the process.


    Some of that video will be more valuable, like that from two joint weekend practices with the Minnesota Vikings. The teams will get together Friday night at Vikings camp in Mankato, Minn., and then have a return engagement in River Falls the following night.


    After almost a week of training, the Chiefs have come to know themselves too well. Cornerbacks recognize pass routes and can jump into passing lanes without fear of getting burned. Quarterbacks recognize pass coverages and can avoid trouble.


    Against the Vikings, everything is new.


    “Those practices definitely will help us,” said Dick Curl, the Chiefs’ quarterbacks coach. “All of a sudden you’re going against a different team and they’re going to do some different things than we might be doing. We’ll see maybe some different looks, different types of schemes. That’s good for us. In some ways, it’s like a preseason game.”


    Publicly, the Chiefs are being noncommittal about what they’ve seen from Croyle and Huard through the first week of training camp. Work between the two has been split almost evenly.


    The Chiefs are also trying to give them similar plays so they can better make a side-by-side comparison.
    “We’re trying to be fair to both of those guys,” Curl said.


    Privately, the Chiefs are so pleased with Croyle that it’s hard to imagine he won’t be their choice as long as he continues his current arc. He has demonstrated a better ability to make all of the necessary throws than any Chiefs quarterback in a long time.


    An example came in a recent practice with the Chiefs inside the opposing 10-yard line. Croyle had the narrowest of windows in which to fit a pass to Jeff Webb over the middle. His release, zip and accuracy were all perfect and the Chiefs had a touchdown.


    Former Chiefs starting quarterback Trent Green certainly couldn’t have made the throw. Huard probably couldn’t, either.


    “Not only did he get rid of it real quick, but he put the ball in a position where only Jeff could catch it,” Curl said. “His accuracy has been really good. The thing that will determine a lot of how far we can go with him is his decision-making when he has (defenders) running at him.”


    Croyle didn’t fare so well in a recent practice with blitzing safety Bernard Pollard running at him. Croyle tried to force his pass to Michael Bennett, but Pollard tipped and intercepted it.


    “It’s little things like don’t try to force things down the field when you have a back who can get you to second and 5,” Croyle said. “I’ve probably been told that more times than anything in this camp.”
    Huard has been hanging on in the NFL for several years, so it’s wise never to count him out. He played better than the Chiefs dared hope last year when they lost Green.


    “Certainly there’s a sense of urgency for me,” he said. “Like every other year I’ve gone to training camp, you’re always fighting for something. Whether it’s to be the backup or make the team, or this year to be the starter. I’ve been in this situation before, so it’s kind of what pro football is about. It’s all about competition.”


    Croyle’s potential and inexperience make him the riskier pick. Huard is the safer choice. The Chiefs are certain what they would get from him.


    “You believe in yourself and more importantly your teammates know they can win with you,” Huard said. “I hope that gives me an edge. But again, I’m 34 and Brodie’s 24. That’s the reality of it. We’ll go out there and compete every day and both of us probably are going to have to play this season at some point anyway. We both know we’re fighting to learn the system and the gain the respect of our teammates and make this team better every day.”


    Coach Herm Edwards hasn’t set a date for deciding on a starting quarterback but has said he would like to have one halfway through the four exhibition games.

    “You’ll see the separation as we go through the preseason,” he said.
    THAT quarterback is NOT a Pro Bowl quarterback. Never was and never will be.

  2. #11
    Member Since
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Springfield, MO
    Posts
    2,049
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by m0ef0e View Post
    I just think Croyle seems kind of frail. He doesn't really seem to me like a guy that can take the hits that will probably be delivered on him this year with all the changes on our o-line.
    I heard he's been doing really well in camp, and that he's been bulking up.

    I don't know, I just don't think Huard is the superstar that people made him out to be during his partial season starting. He either simply gave the ball to LJ (causing a record number of touches), or he had WR's who were able to make great catches. Seems like WR's either had to turn around to catch the pass behind them (underthrown) or had to jump or dive to make a catch (overthrown). Huard had awesome stats, but I'm not a believer that stats tell the whole story. He definitely had help.
    Everything happens for a reason.

  3. #12
    Member Since
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Grain Valley, MO
    Posts
    2,425
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by luv View Post
    I heard he's been doing really well in camp, and that he's been bulking up.

    I don't know, I just don't think Huard is the superstar that people made him out to be during his partial season starting. He either simply gave the ball to LJ (causing a record number of touches), or he had WR's who were able to make great catches. Seems like WR's either had to turn around to catch the pass behind them (underthrown) or had to jump or dive to make a catch (overthrown). Huard had awesome stats, but I'm not a believer that stats tell the whole story. He definitely had help.
    Good! I hope the guy has a good career in front of him. I'm a hard sell on a guy, though, who is not really proven yet, in my opinion. I agree Huard had some help last season (especially in the form of LJ) but I also feel that the playcalling was so conservative last year because the coaches were skittish about Huard throwing the ball.

    As far as receivers go, if they need an imperfect pass to actually make the damn catch, I say stretch em over the middle or throw it short or high every time. It was sooo painful to watch Trent come back last year and get a few passes right on the money, just to watch somebody drop it. Trent was obviously struggling after the concussion, but when he DID uphold his end of the bargain, somebody else was dropping the ball, it seemed.
    Thanks for all the yards, TDs, and memories, Priest!

  4. #13
    Member Since
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Springfield, MO
    Posts
    2,049
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by m0ef0e View Post
    Good! I hope the guy has a good career in front of him. I'm a hard sell on a guy, though, who is not really proven yet, in my opinion. I agree Huard had some help last season (especially in the form of LJ) but I also feel that the playcalling was so conservative last year because the coaches were skittish about Huard throwing the ball.

    As far as receivers go, if they need an imperfect pass to actually make the damn catch, I say stretch em over the middle or throw it short or high every time. It was sooo painful to watch Trent come back last year and get a few passes right on the money, just to watch somebody drop it. Trent was obviously struggling after the concussion, but when he DID uphold his end of the bargain, somebody else was dropping the ball, it seemed.
    I definitely agree with the entirety of this post. I guess I'm just a little more easily sold on Croyle since I'm ready to see some major changes, or at least us having the guts to do so.

    I absolutely can't wait to go to the Dolphins preseason game. I want to see how the crowd reacts to Trent, and I'm dying to see both Croyle and Huard go up against him. It will probably be a telling game, even if it is only a preseason game.
    Everything happens for a reason.

  5. #14
    Member Since
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Grain Valley, MO
    Posts
    2,425
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Yea, that one's going to be interesting to say the least.
    Thanks for all the yards, TDs, and memories, Priest!

  6. #15
    Member Since
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    544
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    I think Huard had great numbers in spite of Herm's predictable run / run / pass philosphy. You throw in the dropped passes we had, and he had a great year.

    If you think we will have a mediocre season w/ him. Why not give him the first 6 games? If we go 3-3, pull him and rebuild. If we hit 4-2, or 5-1, then make a run for it.

    Maybe I am wrong, but I didn't think Croyle has looked that good in mop-up time. Practice is one thing, but to say he performs well in 9 on 7's is not enough to say put him in and let him go.

    So my recommendation: Huard to start. If 6 games in he is not on fire, start building and developing Croyle.
    You can only have one favorite team. There are no "second favorites".
    -- Chris, resident of Arrowhead East (St. Louis)

  7. #16
    Member Since
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Grain Valley, MO
    Posts
    2,425
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by stlchief View Post
    I think Huard had great numbers in spite of Herm's predictable run / run / pass philosphy. You throw in the dropped passes we had, and he had a great year.

    If you think we will have a mediocre season w/ him. Why not give him the first 6 games? If we go 3-3, pull him and rebuild. If we hit 4-2, or 5-1, then make a run for it.

    Maybe I am wrong, but I didn't think Croyle has looked that good in mop-up time. Practice is one thing, but to say he performs well in 9 on 7's is not enough to say put him in and let him go.

    So my recommendation: Huard to start. If 6 games in he is not on fire, start building and developing Croyle.
    Makes sense to me.
    Thanks for all the yards, TDs, and memories, Priest!

  8. #17
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SE Kansas
    Posts
    27,932
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 236
    Given: 421

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by stlchief View Post
    I say let Huard have a shot. The finished 5-3 (albeit against a soft part of the schedule).

    I'm not ready to say "rebuilding" yr this yr. Let it be next year when we have more draft picks and at least one big name veteran will probably be gone (Allen / Johnson).

    I want to take a shot this year....

    I agree; this will bode well for my Arrowcash prospects.


  9. #18
    Member Since
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Springfield, MO
    Posts
    2,049
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by stlchief View Post
    I think Huard had great numbers in spite of Herm's predictable run / run / pass philosphy. You throw in the dropped passes we had, and he had a great year.

    If you think we will have a mediocre season w/ him. Why not give him the first 6 games? If we go 3-3, pull him and rebuild. If we hit 4-2, or 5-1, then make a run for it.

    Maybe I am wrong, but I didn't think Croyle has looked that good in mop-up time. Practice is one thing, but to say he performs well in 9 on 7's is not enough to say put him in and let him go.

    So my recommendation: Huard to start. If 6 games in he is not on fire, start building and developing Croyle.
    aka playing it safe.....again.

    BORING!

    If Huard isn't doing well, why put some no name rookie in to botch things up even more? If he wasn't good enough to beat out Huard, then he's got to be terrible (if Huard is doing that bad). If Huard does well, he still won't get play time. If Croyle doesn't start, he won't all season.

    Start developing a rookie QB in the middle of the season whenever you've been developing other young players at other positions who have gotten used to Huard? You won't be rebuilding just a QB at mid-season, you'll be starting from scratch with the entire friggin' offense!

    I say take the above scenario, only reverse it. Start Croyle. If he doesn't cut it, then put in Huard. He's already a proven BACKUP. Still throws the offense off, IMO, but at least with a bit of a more experienced QB and not a rookie mid-season.
    Everything happens for a reason.

  10. #19
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SE Kansas
    Posts
    27,932
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 236
    Given: 421

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by luv View Post
    aka playing it safe.....again.

    BORING!

    If Huard isn't doing well, why put some no name rookie in to botch things up even more? If he wasn't good enough to beat out Huard, then he's got to be terrible (if Huard is doing that bad). If Huard does well, he still won't get play time. If Croyle doesn't start, he won't all season.

    Start developing a rookie QB in the middle of the season whenever you've been developing other young players at other positions who have gotten used to Huard? You won't be rebuilding just a QB at mid-season, you'll be starting from scratch with the entire friggin' offense!

    I say take the above scenario, only reverse it. Start Croyle. If he doesn't cut it, then put in Huard. He's already a proven BACKUP. Still throws the offense off, IMO, but at least with a bit of a more experienced QB and not a rookie mid-season.
    AMEN! My Chiefs sister! That is your best reply ever! Rep...again!


  11. #20
    Member Since
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    544
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by luv View Post
    aka playing it safe.....again.

    BORING!

    If Huard isn't doing well, why put some no name rookie in to botch things up even more? If he wasn't good enough to beat out Huard, then he's got to be terrible (if Huard is doing that bad). If Huard does well, he still won't get play time. If Croyle doesn't start, he won't all season.

    Start developing a rookie QB in the middle of the season whenever you've been developing other young players at other positions who have gotten used to Huard? You won't be rebuilding just a QB at mid-season, you'll be starting from scratch with the entire friggin' offense!

    I say take the above scenario, only reverse it. Start Croyle. If he doesn't cut it, then put in Huard. He's already a proven BACKUP. Still throws the offense off, IMO, but at least with a bit of a more experienced QB and not a rookie mid-season.

    I don't follow at all... If Croyle IS good enough to be the future of the team -- which you have to accept as fact by giving him the job day one and working on developing him -- then why stop at 6 games if he doesn't cut it? Are you going to then release him at the end of the season?

    If he is our future, and we are saying we would be willing to sacrifice the season to develop him, then give him 16 starts. If you go 0-16, from you reasoning, then it was worth it because we are investing in a career, not a season.

    I think the two different philosophies are:
    1) Start Huard & try to get to the play-offs and see what happens. If it doesn't look like a play-off season, spend the rest working on developing Croyle.
    2) Start Croyle and say he is the future, come what may. Let him have the season.

    These are both valid and have some sense behind them. I happen to be for the first option, but I can understand the second.

    But the idea of giving Croyle a few starts and if he struggles yanking him for a "proven" backup... WHY??? There is no gain there. If Huard is not good enough to get us to the play-offs, why bring him in to finish a season. The whole idea of starting Croyle is to get him experience and develop him. If a season is over (meaning no liklihood of play-offs), why take away the remaining experience?

    The reason I like #1: You have a squad that went to the play-offs. You have Allen & Johnson (probably) both for one more year. The team seems to be improved. You have a guy who was 5-2 and should NOT have lost his starting job.

    The potential is there for another play-off year.

    Want to trade that potential play-off game for a sure-fire development QB and probably less likely play-off run? I just don't follow....
    You can only have one favorite team. There are no "second favorites".
    -- Chris, resident of Arrowhead East (St. Louis)

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •