PDA

View Full Version : Is Damon Huard likely to be the odd man out?


Pages : [1] 2

jAZ
06-21-2006, 11:32 AM
Sounds like it...

"Both of them (Printers and Croyle) will make this team" (Shea)
"(Printers is) going to be a backup for us..." (Peterson)

http://www.tsn.ca/cfl/news_story/?ID=169275&hubname=cfl

Printers impresses Chiefs; likely to stick
TSN.ca Staff

6/20/2006 7:47:27 PM

It appears that Casey Printers will not be returning to the Candian Football League this season.

Terry Shea, the quarterbacks coach for the Kansas City Chiefs, told CKNW in Vancouver that he expects Printers will stick with the NFL club.

Kansas City is set with Trent Green as the starter and Damon Huard as the primary back-up, and the Chiefs entered their off-season workouts expecting a battle for the third spot between Printers and third round draft pick Brodie Croyle.

Green, who will be 36 this season, has been resting his arm in camp, which has given the Chiefs a lot of good looks at the newcomers. Shea said Printers and Croyle are simply too good to let go.

"Both of them will make this team," Shea told CKNW. "They've done a nice job of picking up the offence."

The only problem for the Chiefs now is figuring out how to carry four quarterbacks. League rules permit clubs to carry three, but another can be signed to the practice squad.

The Chiefs' training camp opens July 28.

Printers signed with the Chiefs in January after a short, but stellar, career with the B.C. Lions. He was the league MVP in 2004 after throwing for 5,000 yards, 35 touchdowns and only 10 interceptions. He also ran for almost 500 yards and nine touchdowns.

Printers, though, did not start the Grey Cup game, which the Lions lost. Injuries hampered him in 2005, and he lost the starting job to veteran Dave Dickenson.

After the 2005 season, Printers started to explore his options and signed with the Chiefs.

"We've had some good fortune with Canadian players," Chiefs president/general manager Carl Peterson told the Kansas City Star after Printers signed.

"I look at it this way: It's like having an additional draft choice. And this draft choice has pro football experience, albeit the CFL. It’s a bigger, wider field and so on. But I think he's got a chance to come in and help us. He’s going to be a backup for us and learn what we do and what this offense is all about."

After a workout last May, Printers told KCChiefs.com that his CFL experience will help him make the Chiefs.

"Well it definitely prepared me for this because in the CFL you have five receivers going out on every play," Printers said. "Here it’s kind of similar and we were running the same kind of stuff up there. It prepared me a bunch. I was able to play a bunch up there and I'm just prepared for the opportunity when it's given."

After watching him practice this spring, Shea has high hopes for the former B.C. Lions pivot.

"Eventually, Casey has a chance to compete as a starting quarterback in the NFL," Shea said.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 11:34 AM
Huard ain't going anywhere. There's zero chance that Herm lets the only experienced backup go after what happened in New York last year.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 11:34 AM
PBJ PBJ PBJ

just cut Huards butt and move on


if we go ahead and commit to the young guys now, we can get them more experience so they are ready to play sooner.

if we keep f-in around with Huard it will only slow their development

Cochise
06-21-2006, 11:35 AM
Not after all he's done for us...

BigMeatballDave
06-21-2006, 11:36 AM
One can only hope...

Gaz
06-21-2006, 11:38 AM
Sign Huard to the practice squad.

Problem solved.

xoxo~
Gaz
Channeling Occam.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 11:38 AM
Sign Huard to the practice squad.

Problem solved.

xoxo~
Gaz
Channeling Occam.


I think that's a great idea.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 11:40 AM
just trade Huard to Carolina for Julius Peppers .... problem solved.

jAZ
06-21-2006, 11:42 AM
Huard ain't going anywhere. There's zero chance that Herm lets the only experienced backup go after what happened in New York last year.
You mean his pulling an experienced former player off the couch to step in and start in place of the injured star QB?

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:42 AM
I'd like a backup who's been with the system a few years. Sign Printers or Croyle to the practice squad. As a matter off fact, Croyle would be a perfect fit to the practice squad, as the main problem for most rookies is getting everything down, which he would be able to work on more than having to suit up.

Moooo

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 11:43 AM
There's no way we cut Croyle. And I just can't see a conservative coach like Edwards cutting Huard.

jAZ
06-21-2006, 11:45 AM
Sign Huard to the practice squad.

Problem solved.

xoxo~
Gaz
Channeling Occam.

Isn't that impossible to do with a vet like Huard.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 11:45 AM
I'd like a backup who's been with the system a few years. Sign Printers or Croyle to the practice squad. As a matter off fact, Croyle would be a perfect fit to the practice squad, as the main problem for most rookies is getting everything down, which he would be able to work on more than having to suit up.

Moooo

neither croyle or printers will make it through waivers to make the practice squad.

printers will go back to the CFL before playing on the practice squad

Croyle would be picked up off waivers by another team

Brock
06-21-2006, 11:45 AM
I'd like a backup who's been with the system a few years. Sign Printers or Croyle to the practice squad. As a matter off fact, Croyle would be a perfect fit to the practice squad, as the main problem for most rookies is getting everything down, which he would be able to work on more than having to suit up.

Moooo

Exposing Croyle to other teams that way would be pretty dumb.

noa
06-21-2006, 11:45 AM
Maybe we can get Printers to play on special teams so Herm will want to keep him on the roster.
He's gotta keep Huard and Croyle.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 11:46 AM
Isn't that impossible to do with a vet like Huard.
yes... check your sarcas-o-meter

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:46 AM
Will anyone even pick up Huard from our practice squad?

I'm willing to take my chances with Croyle and Printers.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:46 AM
Exposing Croyle to other teams that way would be pretty dumb.

Good point, perhaps he'll have to put Printers on the practice squad if for no reason to protect a future investment.

Moooo

JBucc
06-21-2006, 11:47 AM
I like Gaz's idea. If we put Printers or Croyle on the practice squad someone will grab them but nobody wants Huard. He can just sit there until he retires or dies.

jAZ
06-21-2006, 11:47 AM
I'd like a backup who's been with the system a few years. Sign Printers or Croyle to the practice squad. As a matter off fact, Croyle would be a perfect fit to the practice squad, as the main problem for most rookies is getting everything down, which he would be able to work on more than having to suit up.

Moooo
There's probably about a dozen teams that would cut their #3 QB in order to claim Croyle off our PS/waivers for their #3 spot. He'd be gone before Peterson could finish signing the paperwork.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 11:48 AM
you can't put a veteran like Huard on the practice squad.

JBucc
06-21-2006, 11:48 AM
you can't put a veteran like Huard on the practice squad.Why not?

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 11:48 AM
Maybe we can keep Printers on the roster as special teams/3rd string running back? :hmmm:

Claynus
06-21-2006, 11:48 AM
you can't put a veteran like Huard on the practice squad.

Why not?

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:49 AM
True.

But would anyone even pick Huard up off the scrap heap?

jAZ
06-21-2006, 11:49 AM
yes... check your sarcas-o-meter
I took the Occam comment by Gaz to mean he was serious. But I'll give it a kick to be sure.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:50 AM
I like Gaz's idea. If we put Printers or Croyle on the practice squad someone will grab them but nobody wants Huard. He can just sit there until he retires or dies.

I'm kinda confused, is it not that necessary to have a player who has exposure to the system for a year or two? I mean, I saw what Green did his first season as a starter... I question if its always that way, or if a QB can usually step in.

This season, right now, I want Huard to be the one who comes in if Green is injured. I won't like it, but he knows the plays, which IMO is the most important aspect of the position.

Moooo

alpha_omega
06-21-2006, 11:51 AM
Can/would they keep all 4?

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 11:52 AM
Practice squad rules: Teams can have a maximum of eight players on the practice squad. The limit was increased by three in 2004. Players credited with two or more NFL seasons are ineligible. There is no restriction for age or last season in college.

jAZ
06-21-2006, 11:52 AM
Why not?
See Section 4.
http://www.nflpa.org/media/main.asp?subPage=CBA+Complete#art34

JBucc
06-21-2006, 11:53 AM
Practice squad rules: Teams can have a maximum of eight players on the practice squad. The limit was increased by three in 2004. Players credited with two or more NFL seasons are ineligible. There is no restriction for age or last season in college.Then cut him

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 11:53 AM
I took the Occam comment by Gaz to mean he was serious. But I'll give it a kick to be sure.

i guess you were correct and i was wrong ... i thought for sure a veteran like Gaz would know the rules


my bad



laz
~sarcasm meter = broken~

JBucc
06-21-2006, 11:54 AM
Also, what other Canadian players have we had good fortune with?

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:55 AM
Practice squad rules: Teams can have a maximum of eight players on the practice squad. The limit was increased by three in 2004. Players credited with two or more NFL seasons are ineligible. There is no restriction for age or last season in college.

I was also under the impression the practice squad was still part of the organization. Why is it that the contracts are null and void if a player is on the practice squad? If the contract has been signed, and the guy is getting his dough...

Also, no one else finds it necessary our backup has actual NFL experience?

Moooo

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 11:55 AM
They can't keep all 4.

They can't put Huard on the PS.

There's no way Croyle would clear waivers to go the PS.

There's only 2 choices:

1) Cut Huard and have zero experience backing up Green.
2) See if Printers can clear waivers and put him on the PS.

I personally like #2. I've seen too many Brian Shay-types come through this organization to get too excited about Printers.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:58 AM
They can't keep all 4.

They can't put Huard on the PS.

There's no way Croyle would clear waivers to go the PS.

There's only 2 choices:

1) Cut Huard and have zero experience backing up Green.
2) See if Printers can clear waivers and put him on the PS.

I personally like #2. I've seen too many Brian Shay-types come through this organization to get too excited about Printers.That's kind of how I see it too.

Although, to be honest I might prefer option 1. We lose our Green, and it won't matter who's next man in.

The one thing I wonder about is the differing styles of Croyle and Printers. I have to think one of these guys does not fit like the other. Printers currently doesn't fit, but Croyle may not fit what Edwards has invisioned for the future (god forbid).

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:00 PM
2) See if Printers can clear waivers and put him on the PS.

i don't think that works either


there were a few teams in contract negotiations for Printer and he can always just go back to the CFL.


i doubt the 75k per year practice squad contract is enough to keep him around even if he did clear waivers.



either/or huard or printers or Croyle ....... the chiefs are just gonna have to cut one imo.


i hope it's Huard personally

jAZ
06-21-2006, 12:00 PM
Also, what other Canadian players have we had good fortune with?
Warren Moon?

:D

bringbackmarty
06-21-2006, 12:01 PM
Huard needs to step it up and break his neck. That way we carry the two most viable athletes. it's six of one or half dozen of the other between Croyle\Printers.

I think croyle would be better for us short term, but Printers could be the kind of guy that causes the Rat to retire if he lives up to his potential.

That said, Carl will float a rumor about croyle having more knee probs, and put him on the pup, and sneak him onto the ps in week six when priest comes back, and rushes for 183 yards off the bench. Either that, or he will trade croyle for some tweener fb\te de\dt\lb that will never see the field.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:01 PM
There's only 2 choices:

1) Cut Huard and have zero experience backing up Green.
2) See if Printers can clear waivers and put him on the PS.

I personally like #2. I've seen too many Brian Shay-types come through this organization to get too excited about Printers.

Yep, I agree with you. From what I've been hearing, Croyle is showing alot more than Printers this preseason, too.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:04 PM
I was also under the impression the practice squad was still part of the organization. Why is it that the contracts are null and void if a player is on the practice squad? If the contract has been signed, and the guy is getting his dough...

Also, no one else finds it necessary our backup has actual NFL experience?

Moooo

NFL contracts are not guaranteed ... and a player has to be cut(contract termination) before being placed on the practice squad.

when a player whom is under contract is cut by an NFL team they have go through the waiver process before a team can sign them again.


practice squad players have a set contract amount IIRC. It was 50k per year .......... now i think it's been raised (75k ??? )

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:04 PM
That's kind of how I see it too.

Although, to be honest I might prefer option 1. We lose our Green, and it won't matter who's next man in.

The one thing I wonder about is the differing styles of Croyle and Printers. I have to think one of these guys does not fit like the other. Printers currently doesn't fit, but Croyle may not fit what Edwards has invisioned for the future (god forbid).

Well, to be honest, I don't see why any team would keep two QBoTF. If Green sprains an ankle and is going to miss the last 2 quarters, but will be back the following week, play Huard. If Green is down for 3 or 4 games, start Huard for the first couple of games and see how it goes, replace him with Croyle if he struggles. If Green goes down for the season, play Croyle. I see no reason to keep Printers on this team.

That being said, I care about Green and Croyle. I could really care less what they do with the other two.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:05 PM
I think croyle would be better for us short term, but Printers could be the kind of guy that causes the Rat to retire if he lives up to his potential.

This is PRECISELY the type of Printers hyperbole I'm talking about.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:08 PM
i don't think that works either

there were a few teams in contract negotiations for Printer and he can always just go back to the CFL.

i doubt the 75k per year practice squad contract is enough to keep him around even if he did clear waivers.

either/or huard or printers or Croyle ....... the chiefs are just gonna have to cut one imo.

i hope it's Huard personally

Isn't it fun to see us go through the process of elimination? So basically we either have to get rid of Huard, Printers, or Croyle, because all three are either ineligible for the practice squad, or have too much upside to be left out in the open.

So either cut one of the two with the upsides or cut our #2 QB, and double down on the bet that one of them will develop into a star.

Moooo

Cochise
06-21-2006, 12:09 PM
This is PRECISELY the type of Printers hyperbole I'm talking about.

Where in the hell would anyone get that idea? He lost a starting job in the CFL didn't he?

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:09 PM
So either cut one of the two with the upsides or cut our #2 QB, and double down on the bet that one of them will develop into a star.

Moooo

pretty much

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:11 PM
Where in the hell would anyone get that idea? He lost a starting job in the CFL didn't he?
evidently the chiefs have some idea ........ they signed the guy who lost his starting job in the CFL.


iirc he was also the MVP in the CFL at one point.

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 12:11 PM
They can't keep all 4.

They can't put Huard on the PS.

There's no way Croyle would clear waivers to go the PS.

There's only 2 choices:

1) Cut Huard and have zero experience backing up Green.
2) See if Printers can clear waivers and put him on the PS.

I personally like #2. I've seen too many Brian Shay-types come through this organization to get too excited about Printers.

I agree but I heard Herm yesterday say that they are only going to keep 4 WR's and Dante counts as one. Last year we had 5 WR's and 3 QB's so maybe they are going 4 and 4.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:12 PM
What will really suck is if Printers outperforms Croyle in the preseason games...but I doubt that happens.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:13 PM
I agree but I heard Herm yesterday say that they are only going to keep 4 WR's and Dante counts as one. Last year we had 5 WR's and 3 QB's so maybe they are going 4 and 4.

I really, really hate this idea. I want Webb and Thorpe on the roster.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 12:14 PM
I agree but I heard Herm yesterday say that they are only going to keep 4 WR's and Dante counts as one. Last year we had 5 WR's and 3 QB's so maybe they are going 4 and 4.You can't carry 4 QBs on your roster.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:14 PM
I agree but I heard Herm yesterday say that they are only going to keep 4 WR's and Dante counts as one. Last year we had 5 WR's and 3 QB's so maybe they are going 4 and 4.

except that i think that the NFL has a rule about how many QB's you can have on the roster.

to keep 4 QB's, i think one has to be a practice squad QB ... back to the problem of the practice squad again. :shrug:

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:15 PM
NFL contracts are not guaranteed ... and a player has to be cut(contract termination) before being placed on the practice squad.

when a player whom is under contract is cut by an NFL team they have go through the waiver process before a team can sign them again.


practice squad players have a set contract amount IIRC. It was 50k per year .......... now i think it's been raised (75k ??? )

I thought it was more of a minor league thing, where they were still members of the organization.

That's what football needs. Not this NFLE, they need farm teams where they are still under NFL contract. Get rid of NFLE, and maybe have certain teams share farm clubs, but have them able to be under NFL contract without playing in the NFL.

Then again, maybe that's a bad idea.

Moooo

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 12:15 PM
You can't carry 4 QBs on your roster.

Those damn NFL rules.. :banghead:

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:16 PM
evidently the chiefs have some idea ........ they signed the guy who lost his starting job in the CFL.


iirc he was also the MVP in the CFL at one point.

I'm not saying the guy doesn't have talent. It's just that if you listen to people here, you might be inclined to believe he's ****ing Warren Moon, and he hasn't yet played a single down.

Wasn't Doug Flutie the CFL MVP at one point?

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 12:17 PM
I really, really hate this idea. I want Webb and Thorpe on the roster.

I agree. Dante gets hurt to much to count on him especially as the #3 WR.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:17 PM
What will really suck is if Printers outperforms Croyle in the preseason games...but I doubt that happens.

Don't be so sold on Croyle yet. I'm a Bama fan and am skeptical about him. This is an entirely different league, and things happen. Printers could very well be a golden egg sitting in our lap, as could Croyle. At this point, with one being great in the CFL, and the other being a stellar NCAA QB, I'd say they're about even as far as how good they are.

Moooo

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:17 PM
I thought it was more of a minor league thing, where they were still members of the organization.

That's what football needs. Not this NFLE, they need farm teams where they are still under NFL contract. Get rid of NFLE, and maybe have certain teams share farm clubs, but have them able to be under NFL contract without playing in the NFL.

Then again, maybe that's a bad idea.

Moooo

i think the NFL is hoping to avoid that because if they actually have an official Farm system then the Players Union is gonna start fighting for more money and more benefits for those players.

big bucks, big problems


similar reasons to not want full-time officials

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:20 PM
Practice squad rules: Teams can have a maximum of eight players on the practice squad. The limit was increased by three in 2004. Players credited with two or more NFL seasons are ineligible. There is no restriction for age or last season in college.

Does Huard actually get credit for his seasons of being worthless. I personally would rather live and die with a rookie/young QB than have that piece of sh*t running the plays, regardless of whether he knows the plays or not. Have you seen Huard throw in the preseason? I'll bet he couldn't hit a wide open King Kong 1 time out of 100 throws.

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 12:21 PM
Also, what other Canadian players have we had good fortune with?

Bo?

Halfcan
06-21-2006, 12:22 PM
Not after all he's done for us...

ROFL Nice one!

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:22 PM
Bo?

If Printers = Boerigter, go ahead and cut him now and save the trouble.

JBucc
06-21-2006, 12:24 PM
Bo?I said good fortune

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:25 PM
Does Huard actually get credit for his seasons of being worthless. I personally would rather live and die with a rookie/young QB than have that piece of sh*t running the plays, regardless of whether he knows the plays or not. Have you seen Huard throw in the preseason? I'll bet he couldn't hit a wide open King Kong 1 time out of 100 throws.

This is ****ing pathetic. This forum will never give Huard a chance and judges him solely on one preseason game.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:26 PM
Huard reminds me of the backup QB in the movie Unnecessary Roughness, the one who begs the ref to blow the whistle the first time he gets in the game.

Can anyone here please justify why you would actually want Huard to be the guy that goes in the game if Green goes down? I will not accept "he knows the playbook" as a valid point of justification. All of these guys will know the playbook by the time the season rolls around.

FAX
06-21-2006, 12:27 PM
Hypnosis could not allow me to imagine that Printers would beat out Croyle in camp. I just don't see that happening. And, I think we should face the sad fact that, should Green go down with a major injury, our season is over. We may have a great rushing offense, but we can't run it that much.

With that in mind, I say keep either Huard or Printers but definately keep Croyle. It won't really matter if the worst happens. Neither Huard nor Printers can carry this franchise into the future, in my view.

Also, I'm somewhat uncomfortable with overusing Dante at WR. I really liked having dominant special teams play. What year was that? Oh yeah, the one before we lost Derrick Blaylock.

FAX

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:28 PM
This is ****ing pathetic. This forum will never give Huard a chance and judges him solely on one preseason game.

Exactly. When it comes to backups, we as fans have no ability to judge them, cause what we see in preseason games and whatnot makes up about 5% of what they actually do. Even if it is the only real-game situations, the coaching staff still knows...

Moooo

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:29 PM
Huard reminds me of the backup QB in the movie Unnecessary Roughness, the one who begs the ref to blow the whistle the first time he gets in the game.

Can anyone here please justify why you would actually want Huard to be the guy that goes in the game if Green goes down? I will not accept "he knows the playbook" as a valid point of justification. All of these guys will know the playbook by the time the season rolls around.

In his one season of real action in Miami, he had a 79.8 QBR, 8 TDs, and 4 INTs. That's a far cry better than Printers or Croyle.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:29 PM
Can anyone here please justify why you would actually want Huard to be the guy that goes in the game if Green goes down?

Yes.



+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| Passing | Rushing |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| Year TM | G | Comp Att PCT YD Y/A TD INT | Att Yards TD |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| 1998 mia | 3 | 6 9 66.7 85 9.4 0 1 | 0 0 0 |
| 1999 mia | 16 | 125 216 57.9 1288 6.0 8 4 | 28 124 0 |
| 2000 mia | 3 | 39 63 61.9 318 5.0 1 3 | 0 0 0 |
| 2001 nwe | 5 | 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 0 0 0 |
| 2002 nwe | 2 | 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 1 4 0 |
| 2003 nwe | 2 | 0 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 1 -1 0 |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| TOTAL | 31 | 170 289 58.8 1691 5.9 9 8 | 30 127 0 |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:29 PM
This is ****ing pathetic. This forum will never give Huard a chance and judges him solely on one preseason game.

I'm actually judging him on the crap statistics and the lowlights that I have seen of him in his previous stops around the NFL. The guy sucks. Period

Thig Lyfe
06-21-2006, 12:30 PM
Cut Huard. Keep Printers and Croyle. If they've both "done a nice job of picking up the offence" then who gives a shit if Huard has experience watching it from the bench. Printers of Croyle have too much talent to let one go in favor of Huard.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:30 PM
Hypnosis could not allow me to imagine that Printers would beat out Croyle in camp. I just don't see that happening. And, I think we should face the sad fact that, should Green go down with a major injury, our season is over. We may have a great rushing offense, but we can't run it that much.

With that in mind, I say keep either Huard or Printers but definately keep Croyle. It won't really matter if the worst happens. Neither Huard nor Printers can carry this franchise into the future, in my view.

FAX

I'm guessing that's what we said when Bono went down too. You never know where you'll find great talent. I'm sure Vermeil thought the same thing when Green went down once before. You just can't say that for a fact.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:30 PM
It won't really matter if the worst happens

why i think we should just roll the dice and cut Huard.


if Green goes down we are toast, so why not double our chances of developing a QBotF.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:31 PM
I'm actually judging him on the crap statistics and the lowlights that I have seen of him in his previous stops around the NFL. The guy sucks. Period

ROFL

Did you not see the stats I just posted?

Spicy McHaggis
06-21-2006, 12:32 PM
This is ****ing pathetic. This forum will never give Huard a chance and judges him solely on one preseason game.

I agree we can't judge him on one preseason game. However, do you really believe that the Chiefs are better off with him under center if Trent goes down than Printers or Croyle. I'm inclined to say no. At the very least it's worth the debate.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:33 PM
One glory year in Miami, if you can even call it that. Those stats are from 6 years ago. He had a younger arm them. Watch him throw the ball now, he sure does sling it.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:33 PM
I agree we can't judge him on one preseason game. However, do you really believe that the Chiefs are better off with him under center if Trent goes down than Printers or Croyle. I'm inclined to say no. At the very least it's worth the debate.

Yes, I do, because of his history in Miami and the fact that he actually has NFL experience and knows the playbook.

Croyle and Printers might be better NEXT YEAR, but not in 2006.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:34 PM
ROFL

Did you not see the stats I just posted?

yeah, real impressive :clap:

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:34 PM
I agree we can't judge him on one preseason game. However, do you really believe that the Chiefs are better off with him under center if Trent goes down than Printers or Croyle. I'm inclined to say no. At the very least it's worth the debate.

WHAT?!?!?

Neither Printers nor Croyle have ever SEEN a real NFL defense. We're ABSOLUTELY BETTER off with a vet, even if it is Huard, at least initially. It only makes sense to subject Printers or Croyle to that if you expect them to play for an extended period (ie. Green gets a season-ending injury).

JBucc
06-21-2006, 12:34 PM
Yes.



+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| Passing | Rushing |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| Year TM | G | Comp Att PCT YD Y/A TD INT | Att Yards TD |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| 1998 mia | 3 | 6 9 66.7 85 9.4 0 1 | 0 0 0 |
| 1999 mia | 16 | 125 216 57.9 1288 6.0 8 4 | 28 124 0 |
| 2000 mia | 3 | 39 63 61.9 318 5.0 1 3 | 0 0 0 |
| 2001 nwe | 5 | 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 0 0 0 |
| 2002 nwe | 2 | 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 1 4 0 |
| 2003 nwe | 2 | 0 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 1 -1 0 |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| TOTAL | 31 | 170 289 58.8 1691 5.9 9 8 | 30 127 0 |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

16 games and only 1200 yards? How many did he start?

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:35 PM
One glory year in Miami, if you can even call it that. Those stats are from 6 years ago. He had a younger arm them. Watch him throw the ball now, he sure does sling it.


You are knee-jerking with the rest of the morons over one preseason game. I'll take his excellent season off the bench as proof that he's a much better QB than most people here give him credit for.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:35 PM
yeah, real impressive :clap:

Who, besides you, said anything about Huard being "impressive"?

If you don't have a leg to stand on, by all means change the facts to suit your argument.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:35 PM
16 games and only 1200 yards? How many did he start?
i only believe he started 5 games that year ... i guess he was active for 16 ... but only held a clipboard for 11 games.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:36 PM
16 games and only 1200 yards? How many did he start?

Those are games played. Marino started like 9 games that year.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:36 PM
16 games and only 1200 yards? How many did he start?

He threw 20 or more passes in 7 games. He started 5. He actually played BETTER than Marino that year.

ct
06-21-2006, 12:38 PM
Just cut Huard, nobody will pick him up. Tell him on the way out to stay in shape, we will call you back in we get in an injury jam.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:38 PM
You are knee-jerking with the rest of the morons over one preseason game. I'll take his excellent season off the bench as proof that he's a much better QB than most people here give him credit for.

Yeah, but I'm only seeing 6 ypa? Just something to think about...

Moooo

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:38 PM
Yes, I do, because of his history in Miami and the fact that he actually has NFL experience and knows the playbook.

Croyle and Printers might be better NEXT YEAR, but not in 2006.

That sure is some history. One average year. Here is a tidbit from kcchiefs.com

1999
Played in 16 games as the holder and saw duty in nine games (five starts) at QB, posting a 4-1 record as a starter … Completed 125 of 216 passes for a career-high 1,288 yards with eight TDs and four INTs for a 79.8 QB rating … Joined QB Earl Morrall as only the second quarterback in Dolphins history to win his first three games as a starter. Morrall accomplished his feat during the Dolphins undefeated season in ‘72 … Completed 24 of 42 passes for 240 yards with two TDs and one INT at New England (10/17) for a comeback 31-30 win to earn Miller Lite NFL Player of the Week honors. Added six carries for 52 yards … Started his first NFL game in place of an injured Marino vs. Philadelphia (10/24), connecting on 15 of 21 passes for 142 yards with one INT and added six rushes for 12 yards … Started at Oakland (10/31), completing 16 of 32 passes for 221 yards and caught a pass for no yards … Opened vs. Tennessee (11/7), connecting on 15 of 25 passes for 210 yards with two TDs in his third consecutive victory, making him the first Dolphins QB to lead the team to three consecutive victories other than Dan Marino since David Woodley did it in ‘82 … Completed nine of 25 throws for 65 yards with an INT in a start at Buffalo (11/14) ... Started his final game of the season vs. New England (11/21), connecting on 18 of 30 passes for 129 yards with two TDs before leaving the game in the third quarter with a broken nose … Completed four of five passes for 44 yards at Dallas (11/25) ... Connected on six of seven passes for 75 yards with one TD at the N.Y. Jets (12/12) ... Completed 18 of 29 passes for 162 yards with a TD and an INT at Washington (1/2/00) ... Did not play in an AFC Wild Card Game at Seattle (1/9/00) ... Connected on five of 16 passes for 46 yards in AFC Divisional Playoff Game at Jacksonville (1/15/00).

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:39 PM
Just cut Huard, nobody will pick him up. Tell him on the way out to stay in shape, we will call you back in we get in an injury jam.

yep ... keep huard to the last cut just in case


but give all the reps to green,croyle and printers


cut huard late, tell him he's on our short call list


if green gets hurt sign huard ...

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:40 PM
That sure is some history. One average year.

Gee. What do you want, an all-pro?

Huard is a solid backup quarterback. He proved it in 1999.

Do you have some other reason for thinking otherwise?

DTLB58
06-21-2006, 12:40 PM
just trade Huard to Carolina for Julius Peppers .... problem solved.

Julius Peppers??? But we have Eric Hicks :)

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:41 PM
Who, besides you, said anything about Huard being "impressive"?

If you don't have a leg to stand on, by all means change the facts to suit your argument.

I said that the stats that GoChiefs posted were really impressive. I didn't say anything about Huard being impressive. He posts those 99 stats like they are something to get a hard on over. Give me a break. Apparently you take your own advice.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:41 PM
Just cut Huard, nobody will pick him up. Tell him on the way out to stay in shape, we will call you back in we get in an injury jam.


That might be the best idea, but I wouldn't assume nobody will pick him up. The QB situation in the NFL isn't exactly sparkling.

FAX
06-21-2006, 12:42 PM
I'm guessing that's what we said when Bono went down too. You never know where you'll find great talent. I'm sure Vermeil thought the same thing when Green went down once before. You just can't say that for a fact.

Good point, Mr. Moooo. It's still merely opinion as my future visor remains in the development stage. I do have a bunch of butt monkeys flying around my office, though.

All I'm saying is that it is highly unlikely that any of our backup QBs could fill Green's shoes this year. To make any kind of run at the SB, I mean.

So ... if you count that as a remote possibility, a prudent person would be forced to start thinking of the future should Trent fall to a major injury. And Huard, regardless of past performance, is not the future of this franchise, at least I don't think so.

FAX

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:42 PM
Just cut Huard, nobody will pick him up. Tell him on the way out to stay in shape, we will call you back in we get in an injury jam.

I find it hard to believe that even a team like San Fran wouldn't want him as a backup... You're crazy to think he won't get picked up by someone else. He's our second, and I refuse to believe our second string QB is so bad he wouldn't make third string anywhere else.

All three of these guys will get picked up by another team, it's just a matter of experience vs. upside in our decision.

Moooo

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:43 PM
He posts those 99 stats like they are something to get a hard on over.

I did? I wasn't aware of that.

I only post them as evidence that overrides his bad preseason game.

Chiefs fans have been judging him on that ONE GAME for a year now. It's not an accurate representation.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:44 PM
I said that the stats that GoChiefs posted were really impressive. I didn't say anything about Huard being impressive. He posts those 99 stats like they are something to get a hard on over. Give me a break. Apparently you take your own advice.

For sarcasm to WORK, it has to have an air of truth or belief. Nobody here ever insinuated the Huard, OR HIS 99 STATS, were impressive. Therefore, your attempt at sarcasm was both lame and unsuccessful. Apparently, you don't have any idea what you're talking about.

Go back to "BUH-BUH, HE SUCKS!" That's more your style.

ct
06-21-2006, 12:44 PM
Also, what other Canadian players have we had good fortune with?

Bo?

LaChapelle, Vanover. I don't remember Bo playing in Canada, but could be mistaken. any others?

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:44 PM
Gee. What do you want, an all-pro?

Huard is a solid backup quarterback. He proved it in 1999.

Do you have some other reason for thinking otherwise?

ROFL

Yes, I've watched him play. And no, not just the one preseason game where he threw the ball like he was using his opposite throwing arm. It is my opinion that the guy sucks and I would rather cut him and lose with the younger guys if it comes down to it. You are entitled to your opinion as well. I just don't see how one average year back in 1999 has you believing he would be more suitable than Printers or Croyle god-forbid Green goes down.

JBucc
06-21-2006, 12:46 PM
Cut Huard and if someone picks him up and we need a QB that bad we can just call Jeff George.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 12:46 PM
Yes, I've watched him play. And no, not just the one preseason game where he threw the ball like he was using his opposite throwing arm.

When exactly did you watch him play? He's barely played other than that one year.

One average year > NO NFL EXPERIENCE

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:46 PM
Good point, Mr. Moooo. It's still merely opinion as my future visor remains in the development stage. I do have a bunch of butt monkeys flying around my office, though.

All I'm saying is that it is highly unlikely that any of our backup QBs could fill Green's shoes this year. To make any kind of run at the SB, I mean.

So ... if you count that as a remote possibility, a prudent person would be forced to start thinking of the future should Trent fall to a major injury. And Huard, regardless of past performance, is not the future of this franchise, at least I don't think so.

FAX

Right, but I think if Green went down for half the season, we might still have a chance with Huard. He could win a few games here and there, and keep us in the mix. If Croyle or Printers steps in, I would almost guarantee he won't win his first 3 or so.

Moooo

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 12:46 PM
For sarcasm to WORK, it has to have an air of truth or belief. Nobody here ever insinuated the Huard, OR HIS 99 STATS, were impressive. Therefore, your attempt at sarcasm was both lame and unsuccessful. Apparently, you don't have any idea what you're talking about.

Go back to "BUH-BUH, HE SUCKS!" That's more your style.
he has 192 posts ... how much style can he have established?



"aaparently, you don't have any idea what you're talking about" translation ... you don't agree with parker. :)

ct
06-21-2006, 12:47 PM
That might be the best idea, but I wouldn't assume nobody will pick him up. The QB situation in the NFL isn't exactly sparkling.

And neither is Huard, which is why I don't think anybody would even give him the ToD.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:49 PM
For sarcasm to WORK, it has to have an air of truth or belief. Nobody here ever insinuated the Huard, OR HIS 99 STATS, were impressive. Therefore, your attempt at sarcasm was both lame and unsuccessful. Apparently, you don't have any idea what you're talking about.

Go back to "BUH-BUH, HE SUCKS!" That's more your style.

Actually, if you go back through the dialogue between GoChiefs and myself, he answers my question about whether people want Huard as their backup with a "Yes" and then the stats highlighted in red, as if to say, look at these numbers, they're great.

So keep thinking you're an all knowing poster because you have 50,000 posts and you don't like what I have to say. I know how sarcasm works, I don't need some old balls has been telling me what it takes to be sarcastic.

Frosty
06-21-2006, 12:49 PM
I'm still hazy on this "can't keep four QBs" thing. Is this a brand new rule? The Chargers had four QBs on the roster (not PS) on opening day in 2004 (Brees, Rivers, Lemon, Flutie). Does anyone have a link to the actual rule?

I'm not saying it's a good idea, but if Printers could play a "Slash" role, they might find room on the active roster for him.

JBucc
06-21-2006, 12:49 PM
I have never watched Damon Huard play that I can recall, not even in this preseason game everyone is talking about. But the man couldn't beat out ****ing Todd Collins and has only once sniffed playing time in the last six years. I'll take two guys that have played recently at any level over a sucky old guy that hasn't.

greg63
06-21-2006, 12:50 PM
Is Damon Huard likely to be the odd man out?

Let us all hope so.

sedated
06-21-2006, 12:51 PM
just keep 4 QBs

Frosty
06-21-2006, 12:51 PM
LaChapelle, Vanover. I don't remember Bo playing in Canada, but could be mistaken. any others?

Joe Horn?

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:51 PM
The article says they're gonna keep all four, they just have to figure out how...

I just noticed that. I guess that means we might have a backup punter or something this year...

Moooo

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:51 PM
he has 192 posts ... how much style can he have established?


http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=142491&page=2&pp=50

"aaparently, you don't have any idea what you're talking about" translation ... you don't agree with parker. :)

That would probably the first and most glaring sign that you don't know what you're talking about. The second would be if you agree with Laz. :D

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:51 PM
When exactly did you watch him play? He's barely played other than that one year.

One average year > NO NFL EXPERIENCE

I can tell you that his one preseason game last year wasn't the only preseason game he has seen action in.

Spicy McHaggis
06-21-2006, 12:53 PM
It only makes sense to subject Printers or Croyle to that if you expect them to play for an extended period (ie. Green gets a season-ending injury).

I guess that was more my thinking. In a spot start I'd take the vet but if Green goes down for the year then start the youngin'.

FAX
06-21-2006, 12:53 PM
I think it's funny that our QB controversy is about which QB with little or no experience sucks more.

Ah, the life of a Chiefs fan.

FAX

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 12:54 PM
Actually, if you go back through the dialogue between GoChiefs and myself, he answers my question about whether people want Huard as their backup with a "Yes" and then the stats highlighted in red, as if to say, look at these numbers, they're great.

So keep thinking you're an all knowing poster because you have 50,000 posts and you don't like what I have to say. I know how sarcasm works, I don't need some old balls has been telling me what it takes to be sarcastic.

Finally, we're getting somewhere. First a paragraph that pretty much proves you completely misunderstood GoChiefs' point.

And then a follow-up paragraph whining about being oppressed by users with 50k posts, as if that's the reason you look like a dumbass.

Gaz
06-21-2006, 12:55 PM
I doubt that Edwards would go into the season with no veteran backup.

Either Printers or Croyle will go to the practice squad and we will probably lose him.

xoxo~
Gaz
Not used to having too many QBOTF candidates on the roster.

greg63
06-21-2006, 12:56 PM
I think it's funny that our QB controversy is about which QB with little or no experience sucks more.

Ah, the life of a Chiefs fan.

FAX

...It is a many a splendid thing. :p

Gaz
06-21-2006, 12:57 PM
Printers can break wedges on Special Teams.

Problem solved.

xoxo~
Gaz
Muddying the already-murky waters.

ct
06-21-2006, 12:57 PM
Joe Horn?

good call

Wile_E_Coyote
06-21-2006, 12:57 PM
sadly, I can remember reading on this forum the wonders of one Johnathon Quinn

Moooo
06-21-2006, 12:57 PM
I doubt that Edwards would go into the season with no veteran backup.

Either Printers or Croyle will go to the practice squad and we will probably lose him.

xoxo~
Gaz
Not used to having too many QBOTF candidates on the roster.


But the article says that they will not be cutting either. That's the whole thing. They are elegible for practice squad, but being cut they are open to be taken (which they will in this league). Huard isn't eligible for the practice squad, and I don't know why you'd put him there (the only good he does is as 2nd back).

Moooo

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 12:58 PM
Finally, we're getting somewhere. First a paragraph that pretty much proves you completely misunderstood GoChiefs' point.

And then a follow-up paragraph whining about being oppressed by users with 50k posts, as if that's the reason you look like a dumbass.

I do happen to get GoChiefs' point. He thinks that those are good stats for a backup guy coming off the bench. I don't agree and believe it as a fluke, thus, they DON'T IMPRESS me.

And I'm not worried about you thinking I'm a dumbass, trust me. Knowing that you're a mod or admin, I'm sure you get off on screwing around with NOOBs all the time. I'd even venture a guess that you talk about ChiefsPlanet to others at your work or in your family that could care less what posters have to say about various subjects, yet humor you, because they are your friends.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 01:00 PM
The second would be if you agree with Laz. :D
don't you have a BBS to work on?! :spock:


















dirty bastige :p

greg63
06-21-2006, 01:01 PM
good call

...on his Nextell.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 01:01 PM
How are those numbers not good off the bench?

2:1 TD to INT ratio.

4-1 record as a starter.

Yeah, HORRIBLE.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 01:02 PM
How are those numbers not good off the bench?

2:1 TD to INT ratio.

4-1 record as a starter.

Yeah, HORRIBLE.

I hear what you're saying, but even Aaron Brooks had a good year... There's plenty of QBs who have that one stellar year then dissappear.

Moooo

rad
06-21-2006, 01:04 PM
In his one season of real action in Miami, he had a 79.8 QBR, 8 TDs, and 4 INTs. That's a far cry better than Printers or Croyle.

That's not even a valid argument. You're smarter than that.

You can't use NFL stats to compare against 2 guys that don't have any.

You think Huard will save the season if Trent goes down? Or you would just "feel" better with a vet in there?

Between those 3 guys, if Trent goes down were ****ed. I think letting 2 young guys battle it out
is better than taking a chance on letting a potential star go.

FAX
06-21-2006, 01:05 PM
So, Mr. GoChiefs, are you saying that you would keep Huard? Maybe I'm missing your point here. Like say ...

1. Green tweaks an ankle kicking Turley's ass for not pass blocking and is out for a few games?

2. Green breaks his pelvis while demonstrating proper squat thrust technique to the Mamba and is out for the season?

FAX

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 01:08 PM
How are those numbers not good off the bench?

2:1 TD to INT ratio.

4-1 record as a starter.

Yeah, HORRIBLE.

They don't impress be bud, so get off of it.

Or because I'm new around here, should I be submissive and bow my head to the almighty veteran and strip myself of the ability to have an opinion.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 01:08 PM
i hope the chiefs commit heavily to Croyle


i want them to go into the season with the idea that he is gonna have to play at some point.


imo the attitude of a team about a young player often determines the success that players has.


push,push,push ...... Croyle should be our #2 by the time the season starts.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 01:10 PM
So, Mr. GoChiefs, are you saying that you would keep Huard?

Yes.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 01:11 PM
They don't impress be bud, so get off of it.

Or because I'm new around here, should I be submissive and bow my head to the almighty veteran and strip myself of the ability to have an opinion.

Why don't they impress you?

And no, you shouldn't be submissive. What you could try to do is present some facts that back up your position other than "uhhh...I watched Huard."

FAX
06-21-2006, 01:11 PM
Yes.

In both scenarios?

FAX

John_Wayne
06-21-2006, 01:11 PM
Ditch Huard. Carry Croyle and Printers on the roster. If Green goes down to injury, we're screwed no matter if the QB is Huard, Printers or Croyle. We might as well have the two rookies on the roster and let them develop. One of them, hopefully Croyle, will be our QBotF.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 01:11 PM
In both scenarios?

FAX

I would continue to play Huard unless he started sucking.

58-4ever
06-21-2006, 01:13 PM
i hope the chiefs commit heavily to Croyle


i want them to go into the season with the idea that he is gonna have to play at some point.


imo the attitude of a team about a young player often determines the success that players has.


push,push,push ...... Croyle should be our #2 by the time the season starts.


:clap: I couldn't agree more. We shouldn't keep Huard because he's the "safe" choice. The "safe" choices are a large part of why we haven't tasted the sweetness of a championship since 1969.

58-4ever
06-21-2006, 01:14 PM
I would continue to play Huard unless he started sucking.

Which wouldn't take long IMO.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 01:15 PM
:clap: I couldn't agree more. We shouldn't keep Huard because he's the "safe" choice. The "safe" choices are a large part of why we haven't tasted the sweetness of a championship since 1969.

Actually, Gannon was the "safe" choice. Grbac was a risk.

FAX
06-21-2006, 01:15 PM
I would continue to play Huard unless he started sucking.


Fair enough. I will agree with you on scenario 1, Mr. GoChiefs. Not on scenario 2, though. If Trent is out for the year, I would urge the powers to go with Croyle. Then, we can argue about who should back him up. Come to think of it, even then it would be nice to have someone with some experience and the only person we have is Huard.

So, my final answer is that Printers must go if he can't play ST.

FAX

Moooo
06-21-2006, 01:16 PM
Kansas City is set with Trent Green as the starter and Damon Huard as the primary back-up...

Shea said Printers and Croyle are simply too good to let go.

"Both of them will make this team," Shea told CKNW. "They've done a nice job of picking up the offence."


Just to put things back into perspective, NO ONE is getting cut. It's just how they're going to arrange everything.

Like I said before, I see us having a backup kicker or punter this year...wink wink.

Moooo

jAZ
06-21-2006, 01:18 PM
This is ****ing pathetic. This forum will never give Huard a chance and judges him solely on one preseason game.
Huard is likely the only one of the 3 that will be available later if we release him during camp.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 01:18 PM
Why don't they impress you?

And no, you shouldn't be submissive. What you could try to do is present some facts that back up your position other than "uhhh...I watched Huard."

They don't impress me because I believe them to be a fluke and I just don't think they are that great. They are average stats in my opinion.

And I happen to believe that watching Huard play on a few occasions entitles me to form an opinion about his abilities as a QB. I don't think he throws the ball very well and I can't comment on his decision making. But based on some of his preseason performances in previous years on OTHER teams, I don't think he is a good backup for us. This is my opinion and for some reason, I give my opinion a little more respect because I've watched him play, rather than say "Uhh, look at 99, he did great, whoopeeee!!!"

58-4ever
06-21-2006, 01:20 PM
Actually, Gannon was the "safe" choice. Grbac was a risk.

According to who...you? :rolleyes:

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 01:20 PM
So, my final answer is that Printers must go if he can't play ST.

FAX
a final answer before even playing a preseason game??



give the guy a chance, Mr. Fax, give the guy a chance.

58-4ever
06-21-2006, 01:21 PM
Just to put things back into perspective, NO ONE is getting cut. It's just how they're going to arrange everything.

Like I said before, I see us having a backup kicker or punter this year...wink wink.



Moooo

I really don't think Herm is going to waste a roster spot on a 4th QB. Just my opinion.

jAZ
06-21-2006, 01:21 PM
Cut Huard and if someone picks him up and we need a QB that bad we can just ...
... trade a draft pick for him.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 01:22 PM
And I happen to believe that watching Huard play on a few occasions entitles me to form an opinion about his abilities as a QB.

Quite frankly, I think you're full of shit. You're saying you watched Patriots or Dolphins preseason games? How? You live in Kansas.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 01:23 PM
According to who...you? :rolleyes:

Yeah, you disagree?

Gannon is the one that led that team to 13-3. Sticking with him would have undoubtedly been the safe choice.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 01:23 PM
Yeah, you disagree?

Gannon is the one that led that team to 13-3. Sticking with him would have undoubtedly been the safe choice.

and the right one

Moooo
06-21-2006, 01:23 PM
I really don't think Herm is going to waste a roster spot on a 4th QB. Just my opinion.

I do. But that's the argument. It's not whether or not they're gonna get rid of Huard. It was stated in the article quite clearly he is the bar-none 2nd QB. the 3rd spot is what's up for grabs, and all the article is saying is that both are too good to let go.

I personally don't think you'll see a problem with one of them being a backup kicker. I know those spots are hard to come by, but I really think if what they're saying is true, and these guys are that good, they will make the space for him, and make him a backup punter or something.

Moooo

rad
06-21-2006, 01:28 PM
and the right one

Don't get htismaqe going on that argument again......

Thig Lyfe
06-21-2006, 01:28 PM
Just cut Huard, nobody will pick him up. Tell him on the way out to stay in shape, we will call you back in we get in an injury jam.

I'd say that's the best solution. Although if Green has to sit for an extended period of time, we might as well use it as a chance to develop the young players.

FAX
06-21-2006, 01:30 PM
a final answer before even playing a preseason game??

give the guy a chance, Mr. Fax, give the guy a chance.

Ding a Dang. I thought we had to decide this today, Mr. Laz.

Besides, ultimately we have to go with NFL experience if we're talking about a short-term backup while Trent hot tubs his troubles away. And, I would prefer Croyle to Printers in the QBOTF role only because I have watched him quite a bit living here in SEC country.

I like your idea of letting them sort this out during camp, though. That's probably the best thing to do.

FAX

Moooo
06-21-2006, 01:30 PM
I'd say that's the best solution. Although if Green has to sit for an extended period of time, we might as well use it as a chance to develop the young players.

Cutting Huard isn't even an option though. That's not in their plans at all, and he is THE 2QB this year...

Moooo

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 01:31 PM
Quite frankly, I think you're full of shit. You're saying you watched Patriots or Dolphins preseason games? How? You live in Kansas.

Actually the girl I dated in HS and her family were the biggest Dolphins nuts in Kansas and they had preseason games taped by her Uncle in Miami. So yes, I did watch some Dolphins preseason games. Now for the Patriots preseason games, I don't recall ever watching one. Thanks though for trying to bust my balls again, and failing.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 01:33 PM
Cutting Huard isn't even an option though. That's not in their plans at all, and he is THE 2QB this year...

Moooo
:titus:

Moooo
06-21-2006, 01:37 PM
:titus:

I don't know what this means, but nonetheless, if you read the article there is no way in hell we cut Huard. It's not going to happen. The question is how we can keep Printers and Croyle protected without breaking the rule of only keeping 3 qbs. We could put one or the other on the practice squad, but they could easliy be signed by someone else. We can't keep 4 QBs, so if they are as good as the article says they are the only feasable alternative is to keep one as a backup kicker or something.

Moooo

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 01:40 PM
I do happen to get GoChiefs' point. He thinks that those are good stats for a backup guy coming off the bench. I don't agree and believe it as a fluke, thus, they DON'T IMPRESS me.

And I'm not worried about you thinking I'm a dumbass, trust me. Knowing that you're a mod or admin, I'm sure you get off on screwing around with NOOBs all the time. I'd even venture a guess that you talk about ChiefsPlanet to others at your work or in your family that could care less what posters have to say about various subjects, yet humor you, because they are your friends.

That's the one benefit of being here as long as I have. You're quite predictable.

You've moved from the "I'm being oppressed by someone with 50k posts" complaint to the "I'm being oppressed by a mod" complaint.

I don't ever **** with n00bs, in fact I quite often help them. Sometimes I help them even when I know that it's going to be unpopular or cause me alot of personal anguish (ie. Tom Cash). Of course, you haven't been here long enough to know that. What we have to base our opinions on is what we've read since we've been here.

And thanks for venturing that guess. I don't talk to people at work or at home about CP, unless it's my boss wanting to know what I'm doing all day instead of working. It's a completely separate endeavor from real life. But nice try, it's mildly amusing.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 01:40 PM
Come to think of it, my ex is in town. Maybe I should call to ask her and her family what they thought of the heroic and breathtaking 6 game ride that Huard took all those Dolphins fans on in 1999. Maybe I don't think he is any good because his back is still hurt from carrying the team that year.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 01:41 PM
I don't know what this means, but nonetheless, if you read the article there is no way in hell we cut Huard. It's not going to happen. The question is how we can keep Printers and Croyle protected without breaking the rule of only keeping 3 qbs. We could put one or the other on the practice squad, but they could easliy be signed by someone else. We can't keep 4 QBs, so if they are as good as the article says they are the only feasable alternative is to keep one as a backup kicker or something.

Moooo
it basically means "we'll remember you said this........" :fire:


btw - it's the article that says "huard IS the #2 QB"


i don't think the writer knows this ...... hopefully the chiefs don't even know it yet.

i would hope the everyone (especially the chiefs) would wait until the players show what they can do in training camp and preseason before making their roster cuts.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 01:41 PM
That's not even a valid argument. You're smarter than that.

You can't use NFL stats to compare against 2 guys that don't have any.

You think Huard will save the season if Trent goes down? Or you would just "feel" better with a vet in there?

Between those 3 guys, if Trent goes down were ****ed. I think letting 2 young guys battle it out
is better than taking a chance on letting a potential star go.

I answered all of those questions in detail earlier in the thread:

Well, to be honest, I don't see why any team would keep two QBoTF. If Green sprains an ankle and is going to miss the last 2 quarters, but will be back the following week, play Huard. If Green is down for 3 or 4 games, start Huard for the first couple of games and see how it goes, replace him with Croyle if he struggles. If Green goes down for the season, play Croyle. I see no reason to keep Printers on this team.

That being said, I care about Green and Croyle. I could really care less what they do with the other two.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 01:42 PM
What has Huard done in the last five years to make anyone believe he's worth a shit?

He rotted away in obscurity for two years behind Todd freaking Collins for god's sake. He's not a second string QB. He's a third string QB that moved up the depth chart by default.

The only advantage he'll have is knowledge of the playbook. He may be better short term, but anything beyond a game or so, and I'll take my chances with one of our two rookies that have more physical talent.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 01:44 PM
Come to think of it, my ex is in town. Maybe I should call to ask her and her family what they thought of the heroic and breathtaking 6 game ride that Huard took all those Dolphins fans on in 1999. Maybe I don't think he is any good because his back is still hurt from carrying the team that year.
huard wasn't the same person ... playing in the same system or playing with the same coaches back then.

all the stats from 1999 show is potiential ... huard CAN survive in the NFL.

which is more that Croyle and Printer have shown ...... but not much more imo.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 01:45 PM
i hope the chiefs commit heavily to Croyle


i want them to go into the season with the idea that he is gonna have to play at some point.


imo the attitude of a team about a young player often determines the success that players has.


push,push,push ...... Croyle should be our #2 by the time the season starts.

I am 100% in agreement with you. That's what frustrates me most about this fascination with Printers, I'm afraid it's going to eat up time they could be spending with Croyle.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 01:46 PM
That's the one benefit of being here as long as I have. You're quite predictable.

You've moved from the "I'm being oppressed by someone with 50k posts" complaint to the "I'm being oppressed by a mod" complaint.

I don't ever **** with n00bs, in fact I quite often help them. Sometimes I help them even when I know that it's going to be unpopular or cause me alot of personal anguish (ie. - ahem, shut your mouth -). Of course, you haven't been here long enough to know that. What we have to base our opinions on is what we've read since we've been here.

And thanks for venturing that guess. I don't talk to people at work or at home about CP, unless it's my boss wanting to know what I'm doing all day instead of working. It's a completely separate endeavor from real life. But nice try, it's mildly amusing.

And what have you read from me since I've been here? Give me your expert critique oh holy one.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 01:47 PM
What has Huard done in the last five years to make anyone believe he's worth a shit?

He rotted away in obscurity for two years behind Todd freaking Collins for god's sake. He's not a second string QB. He's a third string QB that moved up the depth chart by default.

The only advantage he'll have is knowledge of the playbook. He may be better short term, but anything beyond a game or so, and I'll take my chances with one of our two rookies that have more physical talent.

See, that's not the right question.

The correct question is:

What have either Printers or Croyle done to make anyone believe they'd be able to step in if Green went down.

Answer: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

That being said, your last paragraph is PRECISELY what I said 75 posts ago.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 01:48 PM
huard wasn't the same person ... playing in the same system or playing with the same coaches back then.

all the stats from 1999 show is potiential ... huard CAN survive in the NFL.

which is more that Croyle and Printer have shown ...... but not much more imo.

Agreed, I just don't happen to believe he is a better option than croyle or printers.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 01:49 PM
And what have you read from me since I've been here? Give me your expert critique oh holy one.

I posted the link earlier in the thread.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 01:49 PM
Agreed, I just don't happen to believe he is a better option than croyle or printers.

He has to be for this year, at least.

Name a rookie who has come into the NFL and done well? Even #1 picks play like backups their first year. This year, the way to go is Huard.

Moooo

jspchief
06-21-2006, 01:53 PM
He has to be for this year, at least.

Name a rookie who has come into the NFL and done well? Even #1 picks play like backups their first year. This year, the way to go is Huard.

MooooI don't know, I thought Ben Roethlisberger's 15-1 rookie year was pretty solid.

I could go on, but the point is, a lot of rookies have come in and done better trhan Damon Huard has done in all his years combined.

King_Chief_Fan
06-21-2006, 01:54 PM
What has Huard done in the last five years to make anyone believe he's worth a shit?

He rotted away in obscurity for two years behind Todd freaking Collins for god's sake. He's not a second string QB. He's a third string QB that moved up the depth chart by default.

The only advantage he'll have is knowledge of the playbook. He may be better short term, but anything beyond a game or so, and I'll take my chances with one of our two rookies that have more physical talent.

If I could say it any better I would.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 01:57 PM
See, that's not the right question.

The correct question is:

What have either Printers or Croyle done to make anyone believe they'd be able to step in if Green went down.

Answer: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

That being said, your last paragraph is PRECISELY what I said 75 posts ago.Well, my answer to your question would be that I've seen all three of these guys throw passes in the last year, and Huard looked the least capable of the three.

Do I know that Printers or Croyle are better than Huard? No. But I'm pretty confident in my opinion that Huard will be completely worthless.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 01:58 PM
I posted the link earlier in the thread.

Are you referring to the Top 25 comments between me and Wichita St fan? I went to the link, but didn't see anything in regards to me on that particular page..

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 01:58 PM
Well, my answer to your question would be that I've seen all three of these guys throw passes in the last year, and Huard looked the least capable of the three.

Do I know that Printers or Croyle are better than Huard? No. But I'm pretty confident in my opinion that Huard will be completely worthless.

No outside opinions please... :shake:

Moooo
06-21-2006, 01:59 PM
I don't know, I thought Ben Roethlisberger's 15-1 rookie year was pretty solid.

I could go on, but the point is, a lot of rookies have come in and done better trhan Damon Huard has done in all his years combined.

Big Ben's offense required him to throw less than 20 passes in a game...

Also, please do go on. Cause for every Big Ben, there's about 5 others who suck it up. Even Peyton Manning sucked his first year. My point is that everyone is making the backup seem like it's no big deal, but it is. I don't want some rookie being our backup, especially with the KC playbook the way it is. I don't like the idea that a 36 year old QB is the only thing between us and someone who hasn't ever taken a regular season snap.

Moooo

rad
06-21-2006, 01:59 PM
See, that's not the right question.

The correct question is:

What have either Printers or Croyle done to make anyone believe they'd be able to step in if Green went down.

Answer: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

That being said, your last paragraph is PRECISELY what I said 75 posts ago.

Now I'm confused. What question?

Just answer this: Do you WANT Huard to backup Green?

jlscorpio
06-21-2006, 02:01 PM
Prediction: Casey Printers will never start an NFL game

Request: Huard is our backup in the event that Trent goes down. Following his first incomplete pass, Croyle plays until Trent returns.

rad
06-21-2006, 02:02 PM
Big Ben's offense required him to throw less than 20 passes in a game...

Also, please do go on. Cause for every Big Ben, there's about 5 others who suck it up. Even Peyton Manning sucked his first year. My point is that everyone is making the backup seem like it's no big deal, but it is. I don't want some rookie being our backup, especially with the KC playbook the way it is. I don't like the idea that a 36 year old QB is the only thing between us and someone who hasn't ever taken a regular season snap.

Moooo

Don't forget Moooo, our situation here, with our O-line our running game, is very good for a rookie to come in and cut his teeth on.....

Inspector
06-21-2006, 02:03 PM
I'd say let's cut Grbac.


Or Bono.


Either one.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 02:03 PM
Don't forget Moooo, our situation here, with our O-line our running game is very good for a rookie to come in and cut his teeth on.....

This...is a good point.

I think this year, though, Huard will be the better QB. If there is a way we can keep all 4, we need to. Next year, I will probably be all for ditching Huard, but this year, he will be better.

Moooo

jspchief
06-21-2006, 02:07 PM
Big Ben's offense required him to throw less than 20 passes in a game...

Also, please do go on. Cause for every Big Ben, there's about 5 others who suck it up. Even Peyton Manning sucked his first year. My point is that everyone is making the backup seem like it's no big deal, but it is. I don't want some rookie being our backup, especially with the KC playbook the way it is. I don't like the idea that a 36 year old QB is the only thing between us and someone who hasn't ever taken a regular season snap.

MooooYou think we're going to throw 35 times per game with Damon Huard? If you do, I have a statue in NY to sell you.

Peyton Manning threw for 3700 yards his first year.

You act like we'll be expecting a rookie to come in and play at a Pro Bowl level or something. It's not particularly hard to imagine a rookie coming in and performing better than Huard. All he's going to do is throw screens and hand the ball off anyway.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:07 PM
Now I'm confused. What question?

Just answer this: Do you WANT Huard to backup Green?

jspchief's question

What has Huard done in the last five years to make anyone believe he's worth a shit?

And this will be the third time I've answered YOUR question in THIS thread. I even quoted you once, not 25 minutes ago. ROFL

Well, to be honest, I don't see why any team would keep two QBoTF. If Green sprains an ankle and is going to miss the last 2 quarters, but will be back the following week, play Huard. If Green is down for 3 or 4 games, start Huard for the first couple of games and see how it goes, replace him with Croyle if he struggles. If Green goes down for the season, play Croyle. I see no reason to keep Printers on this team.

That being said, I care about Green and Croyle. I could really care less what they do with the other two.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:07 PM
No outside opinions please... :shake:

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Here's a hint:

It's not what you post, it's how you post it.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:09 PM
Well, my answer to your question would be that I've seen all three of these guys throw passes in the last year, and Huard looked the least capable of the three.

Do I know that Printers or Croyle are better than Huard? No. But I'm pretty confident in my opinion that Huard will be completely worthless.

It's all about expectations. If Green goes down for a couple of games, a vet - ANY VET - should be the solution. You don't throw a rookie to the dogs with the playoffs on the line.

If Green goes out for an extended period of time, get the rook some playing time and accelerate the dawning of a new era.

FAX
06-21-2006, 02:10 PM
It's all about expectations. If Green goes down for a couple of games, a vet - ANY VET - should be the solution. You don't throw a rookie to the dogs with the playoffs on the line.

If Green goes out for an extended period of time, get the rook some playing time and accelerate the dawning of a new era.

That's all well and good, Mr. htismaqe. But, what if Green goes out for an extended period of time?

FAX

Moooo
06-21-2006, 02:13 PM
You think we're going to throw 35 times per game with Damon Huard? If you do, I have a statue in NY to sell you.

Peyton Manning threw for 3700 yards his first year.

You act like we'll be expecting a rookie to come in and play at a Pro Bowl level or something. It's not particularly hard to imagine a rookie coming in and performing better than Huard. All he's going to do is throw screens and hand the ball off anyway.

I think you'd be suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform. There's a reason they don't even allow any but the cream of the crop to do so, the others would be a JOKE. I bet you if Croyle were to start the first game this year, he would have maybe 1 TD and probably about 5 INTs.

And Peyton Manning if I'm not mistaken also had a low 70s QB rating. If that's good by your standards though...

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 02:13 PM
Yeah, that's the ticket.

Here's a hint:

It's not what you post, it's how you post it.

Thanks for the tip.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:14 PM
You think we're going to throw 35 times per game with Damon Huard? If you do, I have a statue in NY to sell you.

Peyton Manning threw for 3700 yards his first year.

You act like we'll be expecting a rookie to come in and play at a Pro Bowl level or something. It's not particularly hard to imagine a rookie coming in and performing better than Huard. All he's going to do is throw screens and hand the ball off anyway.

Precisely.

Manning threw for 3700 yards his first year. He also threw 2 more INT's than TD's and the team went 3-13.

Again, it comes down to how badly Green is injured. If Green goes down for just a couple of games, WHOEVER replaces him is going to throw screens and hand the ball off. However, they are going to have to throw downfield at some point to win a game. In the event, the second criteria is who is going to make the least amount of mistakes. In 99% of the cases, that WON'T be a rookie, no matter how mediocre the veteran in question is.

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 02:15 PM
I think you'd be suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform. There's a reason they don't even allow any but the cream of the crop to do so, the others would be a JOKE. I bet you if Croyle were to start the first game this year, he would have maybe 1 TD and probably about 5 INTs.

And Peyton Manning if I'm not mistaken also had a low 70s QB rating. If that's good by your standards though...

not too far off Prince Huard's 79 rating in the year he descended from heaven to save the dolphins

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:16 PM
That's all well and good, Mr. htismaqe. But, what if Green goes out for an extended period of time?

FAX

ROFL

What?

JBucc
06-21-2006, 02:16 PM
That's all well and good, Mr. htismaqe. But, what if Green goes out for an extended period of time?

FAXROFL

tk13
06-21-2006, 02:20 PM
I want to keep Huard around. Not sure if I want him to play much. But these other guys are still rookies. There have been rookies who have played well, and there have been rookies who were TOTALLY in over their head. See Alex Smith, or Ryan Leaf, etc, etc. Probably way more rookie failure stories than succcess stories. I actually think Croyle could do better than that though, he seems poised.

If... and a big if, Trent were to go down. If Croyle is ready let him play. But if he's not ready, if he is in over his head, I don't want him to go out there and get totally beat up and throw a bunch of picks and ruin his confidence. Same with Printers. If somebody is going to get his brains beat in, I want it to be Huard. I don't feel real comfortable having two rookies be the only guys behind Green.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 02:21 PM
not too far off Prince Huard's 79 rating in the year he descended from heaven to save the dolphins

Don't compare Manning to Huard, please. That's just wrong. My point was if MANNING as a rookie could only muster a low 70s rating, then what makes you think Croyle could even mimic that closely?

I guarantee you if Huard started a few games this next year he'd be around the 70s as far as QB rating. I bet if Croyle or Printers started, it'd be low 60s, high 50s. One could keep us in a game with our running offense, the other would actually cost us the game.

Moooo

jspchief
06-21-2006, 02:21 PM
I think you'd be suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform. There's a reason they don't even allow any but the cream of the crop to do so, the others would be a JOKE. I bet you if Croyle were to start the first game this year, he would have maybe 1 TD and probably about 5 INTs.

And Peyton Manning if I'm not mistaken also had a low 70s QB rating. If that's good by your standards though...Your point appears to be a moving target. You said name one rookie QB that has performed well. I did, then you shifted your point.

I wouldn't be "suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform." I'm fully aware of the odds of Croyle or Printers coming in and doing well. What I would be surprised by is Huard coming in and doing any better than the average rookie QB.

This isn't a question of which back-up is capable of taking us to the Superbowl (the answer to that is likely none). It's a question of which back-up is likely to be better. I'm saying that I'll take the chance with Croyle who might suck, over Huard who has already established that he sucks.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:25 PM
Your point appears to be a moving target. You said name one rookie QB that has performed well. I did, then you shifted your point.

I wouldn't be "suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform." I'm fully aware of the odds of Croyle or Printers coming in and doing well. What I would be surprised by is Huard coming in and doing any better than the average rookie QB.

This isn't a question of which back-up is capable of taking us to the Superbowl (the answer to that is likely none). It's a question of which back-up is likely to be better. I'm saying that I'll take the chance with Croyle who might suck, over Huard who has already established that he sucks.

I wouldn't say Manning performed well.

56.7% comp, 26 TD, 28 INT, 6.5ypa, the team only won 3 games...

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 02:25 PM
Don't compare Manning to Huard, please. That's just wrong. My point was if MANNING as a rookie could only muster a low 70s rating, then what makes you think Croyle could even mimic that closely?

I guarantee you if Huard started a few games this next year he'd be around the 70s as far as QB rating. I bet if Croyle or Printers started, it'd be low 60s, high 50s. One could keep us in a game with our running offense, the other would actually cost us the game.

Moooo

Man, I'm just being a d*ck in regards to some earlier posts in the thread regarding huard.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 02:26 PM
I wouldn't say Manning performed well.

56.7% comp, 26 TD, 28 INT, 6.5ypa, the team only won 3 games...Ben Roethlisberger

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:33 PM
Ben Roethlisberger

Fair enough.

Of course, there's one glaring statistic when you look at Big Ben's rookie year:

295 attempts

Trent Green threw 507 passes last year, despite the fact that we RODE Larry Johnson the last half of the season. There's no chance, even if Edwards goes full-on Marty caveman ball, that our replacement QB will have the benefits that Roethlisberger had. We only have 1 RB.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 02:33 PM
I wouldn't say Manning performed well.

56.7% comp, 26 TD, 28 INT, 6.5ypa, the team only won 3 games...Besides, if you told me right now I could have those numbers from my back-up QB if he had to come in, I would take them in an instant.

Donovan McNabb comes to mind to. Again not great numbers, but not terrible.

Like I said earlier. It's not about expecting a rookie to light the league on fire. It's about expecting a rookie to potentially be better than career bench warmer Damon Huard.

When considered with the prospect of losing one of our young QBs, It's a risk that I might be willing to take.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:33 PM
Man, I'm just being a d*ck in regards to some earlier posts in the thread regarding huard.

You'll fit in quite well here. :thumb:

RockChalk
06-21-2006, 02:35 PM
I wouldn't say Manning performed well.

56.7% comp, 26 TD, 28 INT, 6.5ypa, the team only won 3 games...

Based on the scores from the 1998 season, I wouldn't blame many of the losses on Manning. Looks like they had some defensive woes that we are all too familiar with.

1998 Indy results (http://www.allsports.com/nfl/colts/1998results.html)

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:35 PM
Besides, if you told me right now I could have those numbers from my back-up QB if he had to come in, I would take them in an instant.

Donovan McNabb comes to mind to. Again not great numbers, but not terrible.

Like I said earlier. It's not about expecting a rookie to light the league on fire. It's about expecting a rookie to potentially be better than career bench warmer Damon Huard.

When considered with the prospect of losing one of our young QBs, It's a risk that I might be willing to take.

No, not for me it's not.

The expectations CHANGE depending on whether Green's injury is short-term or long-term.

Those numbers for Manning look OK, until you consider that those 28 INT's contributed mightily to them being 3-13.

The goal is to win games, no matter how ugly it might look.

Chiefnj
06-21-2006, 02:35 PM
Bottom line: a Marty disciple isn't going to enter the regular season with his #2 and #3 QB's having zero NFL experience.

Lets see how they do in some preseason games before they are annointed great QBsOTF that couldn't possible clear waivers. Croyle is still a bit on the frail side with a history of injuries and Printers (from everything else I've read) hasn't looked too sharp in practice without any contact whatsoever.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:37 PM
Based on the scores from the 1998 season, I wouldn't blame many of the losses on Manning. Looks like they had some defensive woes that we are all too familiar with.

1998 Indy results (http://www.allsports.com/nfl/colts/1998results.html)

That defense was bad, yes it was. But they also were playing on a short field more often than the should have been.

milkman
06-21-2006, 02:38 PM
Precisely.

Manning threw for 3700 yards his first year. He also threw 2 more INT's than TD's and the team went 3-13.

Again, it comes down to how badly Green is injured. If Green goes down for just a couple of games, WHOEVER replaces him is going to throw screens and hand the ball off. However, they are going to have to throw downfield at some point to win a game. In the event, the second criteria is who is going to make the least amount of mistakes. In 99% of the cases, that WON'T be a rookie, no matter how mediocre the veteran in question is.

I disagree.

Huard simply doesn't fit into this system.

The couple of games that Huard played for the Dolphins in that '99 season that I saw, he was on a leash that would make the leash that Plummer played on pale by comparison.

The reason that Huard looked so bad in last year's preseason game is that he lacks the accuracy that this offense requires, and couldn't hit a deep route if his job depended on it.

tk13
06-21-2006, 02:39 PM
If one of those rookies threw 28 INT's this year this board would go NUTS. Insane... we couldn't control the meltdown, people would be calling him a total bust.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 02:40 PM
No, not for me it's not.

The expectations CHANGE depending on whether Green's injury is short-term or long-term.

Those numbers for Manning look OK, until you consider that those 28 INT's contributed mightily to them being 3-13.

The goal is to win games, no matter how ugly it might look.That team sucked top to bottom. How do you think they got Manning to begin with?

Manning's 28 INT's aren't any more to blame for those losses than the overall team around him is to blame for his INTs. They were 3-13 the year before, without his 28 INTs.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 02:41 PM
If one of those rookies threw 28 INT's this year this board would go NUTS. Insane... we couldn't control the meltdown, people would be calling him a total bust.Yea, just ask Trent Green.

Claynus
06-21-2006, 02:41 PM
If one of those rookies threw 28 INT's this year this board would go NUTS. Insane... we couldn't control the meltdown, people would be calling him a total bust.

ROFL

Taco would be all over it, too.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:43 PM
That team sucked top to bottom. How do you think they got Manning to begin with?

Manning's 28 INT's aren't any more to blame for those losses than the overall team around him is to blame for his INTs. They were 3-13 the year before, without his 28 INTs.

I didn't say the INT's were any MORE to blame.

tk13
06-21-2006, 02:44 PM
Yea, just ask Trent Green.
Exactly... it'd be just like that. Total firestorm.... maybe worse because Trent at least had shown some success prior to coming here.

milkman
06-21-2006, 02:44 PM
I think you'd be suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform. There's a reason they don't even allow any but the cream of the crop to do so, the others would be a JOKE. I bet you if Croyle were to start the first game this year, he would have maybe 1 TD and probably about 5 INTs.

And Peyton Manning if I'm not mistaken also had a low 70s QB rating. If that's good by your standards though...

I wouldn't be at all surprised by how poorly most rookie QBs perform.

The question I would raise is how many of those rookie QBs played on a team that wasn't among the league's cellar dwellers in rebuiling mode.

Big Ben is a guy that played on a team that wasn't, and he performed as well as any rookie QB.

In most cases, QBs that suck ass in their rookie year are usually on teams that suck ass.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 02:44 PM
I didn't say the INT's were any MORE to blame.OK, let's put it in perspective. Do you think Manning would have played that poorly behind our O-line, with LJ at RB?

rad
06-21-2006, 02:47 PM
jspchief's question

What has Huard done in the last five years to make anyone believe he's worth a shit?

And this will be the third time I've answered YOUR question in THIS thread. I even quoted you once, not 25 minutes ago. ROFL

ROFL
It's JUST that YOU are being VAGUE in your POSITION.

DO you LIKE Huard OR just TOLERATE HIM?!?!><?":

rad
06-21-2006, 02:50 PM
No, not for me it's not.

The expectations CHANGE depending on whether Green's injury is short-term or long-term.

:rolleyes:
Unfortunately, decisions have TO be MADE before THE season STARTS.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:51 PM
OK, let's put it in perspective. Do you think Manning would have played that poorly behind our O-line, with LJ at RB?

Quite possibly. He'd be a rookie. Then again, for me, it all depends on how many games you're wanting him to start.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 02:52 PM
I wouldn't be at all surprised by how poorly most rookie QBs perform.

The question I would raise is how many of those rookie QBs played on a team that wasn't among the league's cellar dwellers in rebuiling mode.

Big Ben is a guy that played on a team that wasn't, and he performed as well as any rookie QB.

In most cases, QBs that suck ass in their rookie year are usually on teams that suck ass.Great point.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:53 PM
:rolleyes:
Unfortunately, decisions have TO be MADE before THE season STARTS.

Umm, I believe that's why I suggested we keep Huard and Croyle and try to put Printers on the practice squad.

We address BOTH possible scenarios if we do that.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 02:53 PM
ROFL
It's JUST that YOU are being VAGUE in your POSITION.

DO you LIKE Huard OR just TOLERATE HIM?!?!><?":

Definitely tolerate.

rad
06-21-2006, 02:59 PM
Umm, I believe that's why I suggested we keep Huard and Croyle and try to put Printers on the practice squad.

We address BOTH possible scenarios if we do that.

So you think Printers will last longer on the PS than Huard?

Or you don't want Printers on the Team?

milkman
06-21-2006, 03:02 PM
So you think Printers will last longer on the PS than Huard?

Or you don't want Printers on the Team?

Huard can't be placed on the PS.

Pay attention nOOb!

rad
06-21-2006, 03:04 PM
Huard can't be placed on the PS.

Pay attention nOOb!

Oh yeah, my bad. :redface:

I guess we have no choice, then.

jAZ
06-21-2006, 03:09 PM
btw - it's the article that says "huard IS the #2 QB"


i don't think the writer knows this ...... hopefully the chiefs don't even know it yet.

i would hope the everyone (especially the chiefs) would wait until the players show what they can do in training camp and preseason before making their roster cuts.
I take it we can all agree that according to the published depth chart, Huard is the #2 QB.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/depth_chart/

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 03:27 PM
it basically means "we'll remember you said this........" :fire:


btw - it's the article that says "huard IS the #2 QB"


i don't think the writer knows this ...... hopefully the chiefs don't even know it yet.

i would hope the everyone (especially the chiefs) would wait until the players show what they can do in training camp and preseason before making their roster cuts.

ROFL

That's a pretty atypical response for you Laz. Where were you when everybody was bitching about Teicher's "Hicks is the starter" article? :D

Thanks for bringing that back, jAZ. I missed it the first time.

htismaqe
06-21-2006, 03:28 PM
So you think Printers will last longer on the PS than Huard?

Or you don't want Printers on the Team?

I honestly don't give a flying shit what they do with Printers. I would PREFER to keep Huard because he has experience. If the cut him, oh well. I don't really care.

I've just seen the Brian Shay/Jessie Haynes/Joe Hall stuff too many times over the last 10 years on this and other BB. I can't find myself getting excited about Printers at all.

SLAG
06-21-2006, 03:39 PM
I honestly don't give a flying shit what they do with Printers. I would PREFER to keep Huard because he has experience. If the cut him, oh well. I don't really care.

I've just seen the Brian Shay/Jessie Haynes/Joe Hall stuff too many times over the last 10 years on this and other BB. I can't find myself getting excited about Printers at all.
I say we trade hutard for 0dd t0dd and then cut printers

printers leave's some to be desired.. you would think that if he was that good he would not have been in the CFL

Coach
06-21-2006, 03:55 PM
I think cutting Huard is a wise move. It doesn't matter who's the back-up is. If Trent goes down for a long period of time, we're ****ed anyways. So I think it's a better idea to have either Printers or Croyle do the job, where the Chiefs can figure out who's the better option is for the future. Why does the Chiefs want to keep Huard while he is at the end of his career, while either Croyle and Printers are younger?

rad
06-21-2006, 04:02 PM
I think cutting Huard is a wise move. It doesn't matter who's the back-up is. If Trent goes down for a long period of time, we're ****ed anyways. So I think it's a better idea to have either Printers or Croyle do the job, where the Chiefs can figure out who's the better option is for the future. Why does the Chiefs want to keep Huard while he is at the end of his career, while either Croyle and Printers are younger?

Right on. I just don't have the patienc to type all that.

milkman
06-21-2006, 05:37 PM
I honestly don't give a flying shit what they do with Printers. I would PREFER to keep Huard because he has experience. If the cut him, oh well. I don't really care.

I've just seen the Brian Shay/Jessie Haynes/Joe Hall stuff too many times over the last 10 years on this and other BB. I can't find myself getting excited about Printers at all.

I don't really care about Printers, either.

I don't know anything about Printers, but I do know that he can't be any worse than Huard, and at least would have the ability to make some plays with his legs if things break down.

Every one of these guys, including Huard, is going to limit what this offense does if they are asked to step in, whether short or long term.

SLAG
06-21-2006, 05:56 PM
I prefer Quinner to Hutard

JBucc
06-21-2006, 06:01 PM
I prefer Quinner to HutardI wouldn't go that far

Rain Man
06-21-2006, 06:27 PM
Another strategy would be to cut the guy who is least likely to get a call from another team. If Printers or Croyle went to the practice squad, would another team sign them? Possibly, particularly since we know at least one team is going to roll boxcars on QB injuries early in the year.

If we cut Huard, is another team going to pick him up? I knid of doubt it, because every team has their own version of Huard who knows their own system. It seems like every team has some sort of mid-career or late-career backup that they know they can call in a pinch.

Coach
06-21-2006, 07:46 PM
Every time I take a crap, I name it Huard.

I Have No Imagination
06-21-2006, 07:48 PM
We will keep Huard in case we need him for a spot start and move Printers to punter.



ChiefsPlanet has spoken.

Mr. Flopnuts
06-21-2006, 07:51 PM
We will keep Huard in case we need him for a spot start and move Printers to punter.



ChiefsPlanet has spoken.




ROFL this is pretty comical

hypersensitiveZO6
06-21-2006, 07:54 PM
I'm just worried we'll lose Printers to waivers and he'll become the next Daunte Culpepper.

Bowser
06-21-2006, 09:15 PM
Will anyone even pick up Huard from our practice squad?

I'm willing to take my chances with Croyle and Printers.

This thread could have been stopped right here.

Somebody please explain to me what the fascination with Damon Huard is? Doesn't this guy have just ONE NFL start under his belt? Whoopty-freaking-do! And if memory serves, did he stink up the joint when given a chance during preseason last year, inviting all the James Kilian talk?

Huard can take a walk. I'll stick with youth and potential over all the "wily veteran experience" Huard brings to the table.

Mecca
06-21-2006, 09:58 PM
I think anyone who thinks Damon Huard is going to win a game for the Chiefs is doing some serious drugs. Just keep the 2 most talented guys, your starting QB goes down you're screwed either way. It's better to drop the guy with 0 upside that isn't very good to begin with than drop a guy with actual talent.

The Chiefs need to start getting younger, something like this is a part of that. I don't see this team winning a Superbowl this year so keeping Huard because "he's our only veteran backup" isn't a good enough reason to me.

Rausch
06-21-2006, 10:05 PM
Huard is the worst b/u we've had in 15 years, easy.

At least Collins looked good in the preseason and you had SOME reason to believe we could last a 2-3 game stretch if he had to go in.

It's time to run with 2 young guys in hopes of finding someone to move in after Green...

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 10:36 PM
ROFL

That's a pretty atypical response for you Laz. Where were you when everybody was bitching about Teicher's "Hicks is the starter" article? :D

Thanks for bringing that back, jAZ. I missed it the first time.

Gee thanks SpAZ ... for bringing that Duck around for a 2nd shot.





:cuss:














:p

KCBOSS1
06-21-2006, 10:49 PM
Why would you say, "keep a veteran guy who knows the system" when he has been lousy in it when he's played.

Rausch
06-21-2006, 10:58 PM
Why would you say, "keep a veteran guy who knows the system" when he has been lousy in it when he's played.

Because you're Denver?...

Chief Chief
06-21-2006, 11:00 PM
Not after all he's done for us...

Like look like crap in the preseason when he's either making a hurried throw way off-target when there's no pressure on him...or trying to take off and scramble out of the pocket and going straight into the arms of the nearest defensive lineman. Who-word would be lucky if the Chiefs sent him to NFL Europe for a year so they can see if he can be a legit starting QB.

burt
06-21-2006, 11:01 PM
Huard is the worst b/u we've had in 15 years, easy.

At least Collins looked good in the preseason and you had SOME reason to believe we could last a 2-3 game stretch if he had to go in.

It's time to run with 2 young guys in hopes of finding someone to move in after Green...

me too!!!! Huard has looked less that College QB rate every time I have seen him play. He is a waste of money. I would rather see Dante be our BU. HUARD RUCKS!!!! He is so bad he doesn't deserve the s.

Rausch
06-21-2006, 11:06 PM
Huard-able is dog$#it.

He has no future and has shown no ability (even in preseason) to manage a drive.

There is absolutely NO excuse for having him on the roster this year...

burt
06-21-2006, 11:07 PM
Huard-able is dog$#it.

He has no future and has shown no ability (even in preseason) to manage a drive.

There is absolutely NO excuse for having him on the roster this year...

YOU DA MAN ON THIS THREAD!!!!!!

Claynus
06-21-2006, 11:09 PM
He has no future and has shown no ability (even in preseason) to manage a drive.


You've only seen him play in two preseason games. How can you be so sure?

burt
06-21-2006, 11:16 PM
You've only seen him play in two preseason games. How can you be so sure?

Yo, golixbuttscrale....BECAUSE HE SUCKS.........

Mecca
06-21-2006, 11:17 PM
You've only seen him play in two preseason games. How can you be so sure?

I like how you're stumping in this entire thread for a guy I seriously doubt could play QB effectivly in our offense.