Legit chance for starting QB

[BallHawk92]

with matt now in the line up at QB it's going to be one fight for starter thigpen proved himself last season croyle shows flashs here and there do you guys think that their will be a legit chance for croyle and thigpen to take the job or are they just going to hand the job to matt. I know they already said it's anyones job but I don't belive that. I personal think if croyle stays heathy he is are best bet.

[chief31]

The entire crowd? Excuse me. Did I not get the survey. Stop lumping all into your opinion.


Croyle did have a NFL O-Line, sure it was not as good as we would like, but he had a line. This is the NFL, you have to be able to play, take a hit, some people can and do not get injured. Croyle has not yet.

I wasn't saying everyone, just the mob in general. I started with "most everyone" in an attempt to avoid anyone feeling like it was directed at them.

But, if that's your idea of an NFL O-line, then I wouldn't expect to see much offense in the future.

But it was more than just a horrible O-line. It was Herm Edwards' inability to even notice, until he was out of QBs. Even after a career of QB injuries in his offense.

It was having a horrible O-line and running an offense as if you still had Roaf and Shields out there, and expecting a young QB to be able to handle it ta-boot.

Well, I am one of those that wanted to see him play. I am also one of the few that stayed with him after the 2007 season, wanting to see him do well in the 2008 season.

After watching him in 2007 compete for a starting job, but unable to seal it and make it his own, there were lots of calls then to not start him. When Huard got injured, we put in Croyle, and it was his job from then on. There were a lot of injuries in 2007 because the line sucked so I stood by him, hoping to see him play better.

Last year, 2008, it was his job to lose. Well, injuries plagued him, he never finished a game he started. Sure he took some knocks. Huard took some knocks too, but he is old.

Thigpen came in behind the same line and took the same knocks that Croyle took and managed to play out the season.

Face it, QBs are going to get hit, even if they are not sacked, they still get hit. I wanted to see Croyle be the future, but you have to admit that he is pretty injury prone and that is always going to be a liability no matter what offensive line you put him behind.

You, as well as anyone, know that the entire offense was rearranged to help keep the QB from getting killed, because of how many QBs had been hurt here, including rent Green.

Thigpen had the decisive advatage of getting to play in the QB-friendly gimmick offense, instead of rying to play NFL QB without an NFL O-line.

If you accepted an injury in '07, then how do you have a problem with it in '08?

The line was no better.

I would like the record to note that I was always against Croyle, and I have not turned against him in any way.

Most QBs have suffered a whole lot worse abuse than Croyle did during the 13 games he played for us. He was sacked 19 times in those 13 games (1.5/game). To put this in perspective, Tyler Thigpen played 15 games in the past two years and has been sacked 26 times (1.7/game). Damon Huard played in 26 games over the past three years and was sacked 61 times (2.4/game). And that's just the Chiefs QBs. Cassel has played in 16 games last season, and he was sacked 47 times (2.9/game). Rothlisberger won a Super Bowl with a line that gave up 46 sacks (2.9/game).

Brodie was not hit more than any other QB on this team or on most teams. Did/does our OL stink? Sure. But Brodie's a fragile player. I don't see any way for you to debate that fact.

And a QB that does everything right but can't stay healthy is as useless as one who does everything wrong.

The O-line wasn't just bad. It was a Herm Edwards O-line.

Herm has always been a QB killer.

He killed QBs every single year of his career.

The only reason Thigpen survived is because the team was out of QBs, and went to an ultra QB-friendly offense.

Not sure why I am telling you this, as I have seen you point it out to others on several occaisions.

Yet he still got outperformed by Thigpen. The opinion around here changed over the last three years!! ya think? The guy was no good. Make all the excuses you want. Thigpen managed to make some things happen, Croyle did not. But I am sure that is all because of a ton of different variables that you will prevent and then I will see some stats about their completion % and some O line stats. My opinion changed because after two years of watching Croyle I never even saw a glimmer of hope. I cheered for the guy because he was a Chief. I also cheer for Huard when he was in but I wanted to see Croyle and I wanted to see him succeed. Fact is he twice as bad as Huard or Thigpen with the same line in front of him. If you want to continue being a Croyle guy then go ahead but don't act like it is so

UN


BELIEVE

ABLE

that no one but you has any faith in Croyle anymore.

I was never a Croyle guy. Nor do I have any faith in him now.

Just because you don't know how to interpret what I am saying doesn't mean that you need to make it up on your own.

Does that mean you have no faith in the judgement of Pioli by bringing Cassell to the team? I for one believe in what Pioli is doing and his judgement towards the QB situation is right on. Tyler Thigpen is a great back up, he has the ability to step in and move the ball but his ability to run the team as a starter IMO is nill as the record of the team reflects his ability to win. I know we can't blame it all on him as our Defense had a bit to do with it but the passes that were picked on Thiggy had alot to do with the losses we had that were inside of 5 points or less. If he could have turned those INT's into TDs we would have been much better than 2 - 14.

Rather or not one believes that Pioli is a good/great talent evaluator is nil.

Regardless of what either QB is getting paid, you should be looking to put the best player for the team on the field.

If, as most expect, Cassel is put in a position of "his job to lose", then you don't get a a fair sample from the two "competitors".

I think there should be a fair competition between the two. But I don't think there will be.

And that would be a bad idea. Though, even bad ideas work out sometimes.

But, let it be known, that I think Thigpen will wind-up being a poor QB in the long run.

[Canada]

I know exactly how to interpret what you are saying.

You want to bring up the fact that some people wanted Croyle to succeed and now they don't. and that you were right all along!! Nice work.

[prough91]

I'm a Thigpen fan. Thigpen did awesome with the line he had. He's inaccurate? Try throwing a football on a dead run like he had to. Cassell was sacked twice as much as Thigpen. Twice. Cassell had the same o-line as Brady did. Now, tell me the line was a year older. You going to say that NE's line all lost two or three steps in a year? That's feasible.

[Canada]

I'm a Thigpen fan. Thigpen did awesome with the line he had. He's inaccurate? Try throwing a football on a dead run like he had to. Cassell was sacked twice as much as Thigpen. Twice. Cassell had the same o-line as Brady did. Now, tell me the line was a year older. You going to say that NE's line all lost two or three steps in a year? That's feasible.

I'm not sure who this is directed at.

[chief31]

I know exactly how to interpret what you are saying.

You want to bring up the fact that some people wanted Croyle to succeed and now they don't. and that you were right all along!! Nice work.

I was never right about him, because I never ventured any guess. Except that he would get injured. But that was a no-brainer anyway.

But we are calling him washed-up just because he had the same problem as Chad Pennington. Hell, Chad Pennington didn't have a 16 game season until he got out from under Herm, and he's done it twice since.

Pennington had five years of that. Croyle is still salvagable, having only dealt with Herm for two years.

I'm not saying that we need to be starting him. Nor that he should get serious consideration to start.

Just find it amusing how people are so quick to discard him and call him names.

[Three7s]

We could trade Croyle to the Broncos, then when he beats us, people will complain.

[Canada]

We could trade Croyle to the Broncos, then when he beats us, people will complain.

People here? Complain? Come on now!! Nice to see you are giving us a chance against the donx though!!

[tornadospotter]

We could trade Croyle to the Broncos, then when he beats us, people will complain.

I think that is a great idea!

[jmlamerson]

The O-line wasn't just bad. It was a Herm Edwards O-line.

Herm has always been a QB killer.

He killed QBs every single year of his career.

The only reason Thigpen survived is because the team was out of QBs, and went to an ultra QB-friendly offense.

Not sure why I am telling you this, as I have seen you point it out to others on several occaisions.

True, and that ultra-friendly offense is what Thigpen alive. My only point is that most NFL QBs have taken more hits in a shorter time period than Croyle and they didn't break. Croyle was injured at Alabama, and he hasn't been able to stay healthy in the NFL. Not to mention that when he did play, I just wasn't impressed.

This isn't to say that Croyle couldn't have a Pennington-style renissance with a real OL and real HC, but I just don't see it.

I will gladly agree that Herm Edwards does have a knack for getting his QBs killed. God, he was a terrible coach. Even a pretty decent braintrust in Pioli/Haley will need a couple seasons to undo all the damage he did to his team.

[chief31]

True, and that ultra-friendly offense is what Thigpen alive. My only point is that most NFL QBs have taken more hits in a shorter time period than Croyle and they didn't break. Croyle was injured at Alabama, and he hasn't been able to stay healthy in the NFL. Not to mention that when he did play, I just wasn't impressed.

This isn't to say that Croyle couldn't have a Pennington-style renissance with a real OL and real HC, but I just don't see it.

I will gladly agree that Herm Edwards does have a knack for getting his QBs killed. God, he was a terrible coach. Even a pretty decent braintrust in Pioli/Haley will need a couple seasons to undo all the damage he did to his team.

No doubt, there is a case to be made that Croyle is fragile. It's definitely a fair argument.

But Herms track record for injuring his own QBs is the other end of that argument.

Is there something to the way Herm "protects" his QBs? Is there something to the fact that Croyle had injuries before coming to The NFL?

Which is responsible for how Croyles career has gone so far?

I find it hard to label Croyle as injury-prone, or not, becasue of that Herm factor.

Just as I find it difficult to label him as a good QB, or not, due to the poor offense that he was put into.

If you already fealt like Croyle was a bad choice, or particularly injury-prone, then you will obviously have seen nothing to alter that opinion.

But I don't see playing QB for Herm Edwards as an opportunity to show that you are a good QB, nor that you are not injury-prone.

Thigpen lucked-out, because Herm had to allow Chan Gailey to design an offense to protect his last remaining QB.

And he did a great job, just without the same Herm factor.