PDA

View Full Version : do we still want Green over Huard?


Pages : 1 [2]

Short Leash Hootie
11-05-2006, 11:39 PM
He's talking about the end of games in 2004. Trent choked against Carolina, Tampa Bay, New Orleans, New England and San Diego.
exactly.

I think 2004 was the year we should've beat Jacksonville as well...and one game, I FORGET WHICH ONE, it might have even been that same Jacksonville game...we had 2nd and goal from the 1, Green through a fade pick 6 14 point swing...terrible playcall and terrible execution and it cost us the game...I think it was the Carolina game, actually..

Anyways...as I've said several times...our defense was terrible that year, but Green always had that chance to drive down the field for a game winning TD or game tying field goal and he failed several times...getting sacked or 4 and done...and I'm saying a clutch leader doesn't go 7-9 when his team leads every game but 1 in the 4th quarter...

Yeah guys, we were HYPED in 2004, totally hyped as super bowl contenders...and we lead ALMOST EVERY GAME IN THE 4TH QUARTER...and we had 7 wins.

I don't care if our defense can't stop K-State...when the most potent offense in the NFL leads almost every game in quarter #4 and comes out of the season with 7 wins...something is wrong with the guy behind center.

(he rebounded nicely last year IMO...he was clutch in several games...Dallas comes to mind, as well as some others)

Sure-Oz
11-05-2006, 11:39 PM
He's talking about the end of games in 2004. Trent choked against Carolina, Tampa Bay, New Orleans, New England and San Diego.
I guarantee huard has a bad game or 2 and you few huard backers will throw him under the bus. Where the hell was he in Pittsburgh? Our success def. depends on LJ mostly when huard is in there, atleast trent will give opposing defenses more to worry about.

Short Leash Hootie
11-05-2006, 11:40 PM
a game like Huard had in Pittsburgh?

Out of all the poor play we witnessed that weak, I think I'd say Huard's play was the thing that worried me the least.

They lost that game before the friggin' coin toss.

Short Leash Hootie
11-05-2006, 11:41 PM
Huard, I think, has started 13 games and has 5 4th quarter comebacks...

That's a pretty nice ratio...I think he's something like 10-3 as a starter, as well.

DRU
11-05-2006, 11:54 PM
He's talking about the end of games in 2004. Trent choked against Carolina, Tampa Bay, New Orleans, New England and San Diego.

Carolina had 3 TD passes and ran for 180 yds or some shit with a TD there as well. Not Trent's fault.

Green thew 3 TD's against the Bucs in '04 and we lose 34-31. I hardly call that Green's fault.

Against the Saints he had 2 INT's, but he thew for 311 yards as well. The Chief's also gave up a football field of penalty yards in that game. Tough to win with that. 2 INT's, fine, call it a Green loss, but I think that's kinda weak.

Against the Pats he threw for 381 yards w/ a couple of TD passes. Green drove them the length of the field to score a TD putting us down 24-19 with 6:00 left. D couldn't hold, we lose. Can't really call that a Trent loss either in my book.

Against the Chargers, Chiefs score 31 points. I remember Dante Hall flat dropping the ball on his way into the end-zone on a kick return. Gave that way. Green only threw for 200 yards in this one, but again, 31 points put up by his side of the ball. Hall holds on to the ball on the way in the end-zone and we win this game. D holds the team to under 31 points at home and we win this game. Not Trent's fault.

So...I'm still confused.

Short Leash Hootie
11-05-2006, 11:56 PM
he had the ball against the Pats with time on the clock and we turned the ball over, 4 and out I think...

WE'RE NOT ARGUING HE HAD GREAT STATS IN 2004, I'm saying, in each of those games, we had 4th quarter leads, and I remember several times Green flat out not getting it done on that final possession.

We were supposedly the team that could score every time we had the football...but as soon as we were in a must pass situation, we were no longer very scary...

Our offense, and Green, benifited greatly from having such a potent running game.

DRU
11-05-2006, 11:58 PM
I don't care if our defense can't stop K-State...when the most potent offense in the NFL leads almost every game in quarter #4 and comes out of the season with 7 wins...something is wrong with the guy behind center.

this statement completely contradicts itself. How can there be something wrong with the guy behind center when he's leading the most potent offense in the NFL!?

I cannot believe Green is getting so much heat right now. This is insane. The guy has better numbers than anybody but Manning. Led the a top 3 offense for what, like 4 years in a row??? And now you're saying he choked those games away!?

This is just insane.

Sure-Oz
11-06-2006, 12:00 AM
he had the ball against the Pats with time on the clock and we turned the ball over, 4 and out I think...

WE'RE NOT ARGUING HE HAD GREAT STATS IN 2004, I'm saying, in each of those games, we had 4th quarter leads, and I remember several times Green flat out not getting it done on that final possession.

We were supposedly the team that could score every time we had the football...but as soon as we were in a must pass situation, we were no longer very scary...

Our offense, and Green, benifited greatly from having such a potent running game.
I'd rather take my chances when we have to pass with Trent than Huard, and i believe huard has benefited with knowing their main focus is LJ.

DRU
11-06-2006, 12:00 AM
One thing's for sure, it's gonna be VERY interesting to see what happens when he gets back into the game. We can all bicker and fuss over this, but the fact of the matter is Herm is going to put him back in. So, are you gonna cheer for him or boo him?

Sure-Oz
11-06-2006, 12:02 AM
One thing's for sure, it's gonna be VERY interesting to see what happens when he gets back into the game. We can all bicker and fuss over this, but the fact of the matter is Herm is going to put him back in. So, are you gonna cheer for him or boo him?
Based on what he say's he'll cheer it up! But i have a feeling trent throws an INT after completing 8 straight passes the huard bandwagon will show up, probably on every mistake he makes.

DRU
11-06-2006, 12:04 AM
Also, back to this 2004 talk, the Chiefs avg. 30 points a game in 2004. If you actually try and say that a losing season in a year where you score 30 points a game is anything to do with anybody on the offensive side of the ball then...well...i just don't know what to say to that. Nothing can be done to sway your thoughts.

Count Zarth
11-06-2006, 12:18 AM
So...I'm still confused.

Go back and watch the games. Our offense had a chance to tie or win all of those games in the final 2, 3 or 4 minutes.

Everytime, Green and the offensive line choked. Usually Green would get sacked against a 3-man rush or something.

Against the Chargers the game was tied late in the fourth and he threw an interception.

Count Zarth
11-06-2006, 12:19 AM
Also, back to this 2004 talk, the Chiefs avg. 30 points a game in 2004. If you actually try and say that a losing season in a year where you score 30 points a game is anything to do with anybody on the offensive side of the ball then...well...i just don't know what to say to that. Nothing can be done to sway your thoughts.

Personally I don't really like sitting here blaming any of those games on the offense. The defense was SO ****ING BAD.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 12:34 AM
the defense was friggin' terrible...

I hate talking about 2004 in all honesty, I don't know why I even bring it up. One of my least favorite years of being a Chiefs fan. Painful.

DRU
11-06-2006, 12:35 AM
I do remember sacks at end of some games and feeling rather sick about it. But none of feeling was meant for Green. He had done his part over and over in those games and was still asked repeatedly "just one more time, please." Well by that time you know why there were 3 man rushes..?? Cuz 8 guys were sitting down the field covering our receivers. Green had to stand and stand and hope somebody could get open. This speaks more about the ability (or lack there-of) of our receivers to get open when the other team knows we have to pass. But again, by that time there's no reason they should have been doing anything but going to a knee.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 12:36 AM
did diddy do it!?

DRU
11-06-2006, 12:36 AM
I hate talking about 2004 in all honesty, I don't know why I even bring it up. One of my least favorite years of being a Chiefs fan. Painful.

I'm with ya on that one, but not because I feel like the offense ever did a single thing wrong when you look at the year as a whole. It's painful to me that we wasted one of the best offenses the NFL has ever seen. And you know what? It was led by Trent Green.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 12:39 AM
Trent Green fed off Holmes/Blaylock/Johnson and they all fed off Roaf/Waters/Shields/Weigmann...

Green was the leader but they had a whole lot of pieces...

DRU
11-06-2006, 12:46 AM
Trent Green fed off Holmes/Blaylock/Johnson and they all fed off Roaf/Waters/Shields/Weigmann...

Green was the leader but they had a whole lot of pieces...

Which is exactly why I think it's crazy to blame that year on anybody on the offensive side of the football. They were a beautiful thing to watch and there's no way they were at all responsible for the 9 losses that season you're trying to pin them with.

greg63
11-06-2006, 01:32 AM
do we still want Green over Huard?

Yes.

mcan
11-06-2006, 01:54 AM
Look: Trent Green is a better quarterback than Huard. There just isn't any question about it. Anybody that thinks we should stick with Huard is only saying so because they are superstitious.

Any and all logic says: now that our Offensive line is blocking people better, and now that we've opened up the playbook, and now that Larry is running well, and now that Gonzalez is getting open over the middle...

When we put Trent in, our offense could very well be every bit as good as it was under Vermeil and Saunders. And as good as Damon has been playing, there is no doubt that our offense still isn't the same. We aren't consistant. We have too many three and outs. We get balls batted down at the line of scrimmage too often. We've had about 6 interceptions dropped by linemen and linebackers who've been surprised to be HIT IN THE CHEST WITH THE BALL!!!! When was the last time you saw Trent hit a defensive lineman in the chest with the ball? Just because they dropped the easy pick, doesn't mean that bad throw didn't happen.

tk13
11-06-2006, 02:22 AM
Can somebody tell me why the heck 2004 comes up in any of these discussions? Five years of great play and we're gonna pick out 4 or 5 games from a miserable season two years ago? Does that have any lick of logic at all? Why not just pick some of the terrible games from 01. That's like saying Wham is the best musical group ever because they had a #1 hit in 1985 or whenever. Just completely random.

tk13
11-06-2006, 02:24 AM
Apples come from apes, because the letters in ape are in apple.

tk13
11-06-2006, 02:24 AM
Eggs must smell like feet, because they rhyme with legs.

tk13
11-06-2006, 02:25 AM
I'm going to start a TV show with Tony Danza and Scott Baio, and call it "Who's in Charge?"

tk13
11-06-2006, 02:26 AM
Cardinals have red facial hair. Scott Spiezio has red facial hair. Trent Green doesn't have red facial hair. Therefore, Trent Green is not a Cardinal.

tk13
11-06-2006, 02:45 AM
Trent Green and Damon Huard both have 10 letters in their names.

They both have five letters in their first name, and five in their last name.

They were both born on July 9th.

They are both 6'3" tall.

Trent Green weighs 217 lbs. Damon Huard weighs 218 lbs.

Both are married to women named Julie.

Both have three children.

Both have been a backups on Super Bowl winning teams.

Both played behind surprise Super Bowl MVP QB's who got their job due to injury.

Damon Huard played at the University of Washington. Trent Green is from St. Louis, home of Washington University.

Green had a secretary named Huard. Huard had a secretary named Green.

tk13
11-06-2006, 02:54 AM
Actually, I have to say, a frightening number of those are actually true. I was just gonna make a bunch of stupid jokes, but then I looked at their bios, and was creeped out.

'Hamas' Jenkins
11-06-2006, 06:29 AM
Go back and watch the games. Our offense had a chance to tie or win all of those games in the final 2, 3 or 4 minutes.

Everytime, Green and the offensive line choked. Usually Green would get sacked against a 3-man rush or something.

Against the Chargers the game was tied late in the fourth and he threw an interception.

You really are a dumbass. So if a guy is 4-5with 2 Homeruns, a double, 5 RBI and he pops out in the 9th with the tying run on second and you lose 6-5, he's a choker.

psychadelicdream
11-06-2006, 07:24 AM
Ok...hootie your so lame that i just had to register so i could post on this
besides of the fact that yer name resembles the lame gay "hootie and the blowfish"......you come in here bashing trent and wanting to keep him benched cause the BACKUP is doing his job?.....and all your doing is balancing yourself on the fence so that when/if trent comes back and does a better job you wont be proven wrong.....why dont u grow some balls and stick to one decision.. huard is playing great....awesome....hes doing his job......as a BACKUP... I'm going to have to keep reading this forum to see how u jump ship when he does come back and play good......talk a bout a fair weather fan.... and heck your not even in kc......laaaame

BigRedChief
11-06-2006, 07:31 AM
ESPN's Claytons take on Huard and Green.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2650819&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1

Although the Chiefs would love to have offensive leader Trent Green (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?statsId=2547) back, Damon Huard (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?statsId=4180) has turned Kansas City into a playoff contender in Green's absence. Coach Herman Edwards already has gone on record as saying Green, out since Week 1 after suffering a concussion, will start when he's healthy. Following Sunday's 31-17 victory over St. Louis (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=stl), Green said he's targeting the Nov. 19 game against the Raiders. That buys Edwards time to make what Huard has turned into the toughest decision in his first year as Chiefs head coach. Benching a hot Huard will be an extremely difficult decision for Edwards.


In 1997, Chiefs coach Marty Schottenheimer faced a situation similar to the one Edwards faces in the coming weeks. Elvis Grbac was the starting quarterback that season, but he suffered a broken collarbone. Rich Gannon came off the bench and won games. The Chiefs finished 13-3 and secured homefield advantage, but Schottenheimer went back to Grbac, and the result was disastrous.

MOhillbilly
11-06-2006, 07:39 AM
i would like to think that w/ green healthy the qb stats would double.

but w/ lj running the way he is...

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 03:29 PM
Ok...hootie your so lame that i just had to register so i could post on this
besides of the fact that yer name resembles the lame gay "hootie and the blowfish"......you come in here bashing trent and wanting to keep him benched cause the BACKUP is doing his job?.....and all your doing is balancing yourself on the fence so that when/if trent comes back and does a better job you wont be proven wrong.....why dont u grow some balls and stick to one decision.. huard is playing great....awesome....hes doing his job......as a BACKUP... I'm going to have to keep reading this forum to see how u jump ship when he does come back and play good......talk a bout a fair weather fan.... and heck your not even in kc......laaaame
lay off the acid, dude.

Count Zarth
11-06-2006, 03:36 PM
i would like to think that w/ green healthy the qb stats would double.


This is just ludicrous.

You're talking about Green throwing for 3200 yards and 22 touchdowns in EIGHT GAMES?

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 03:40 PM
This is just ludicrous.

You're talking about Green throwing for 3200 yards and 22 touchdowns in EIGHT GAMES?
these people have no idea what they're talking about...

With Green, at the VERY BEST, we can expect a slight, a very slight, increase in production at the QB position...

However, we can also see a very big decrease in production...which is why I say it isn't worth the risk.

Keep Huard in, we're rolling...

DRU
11-06-2006, 03:44 PM
In 1997, Chiefs coach Marty Schottenheimer faced a situation similar to the one Edwards faces in the coming weeks. Elvis Grbac was the starting quarterback that season, but he suffered a broken collarbone. Rich Gannon came off the bench and won games. The Chiefs finished 13-3 and secured homefield advantage, but Schottenheimer went back to Grbac, and the result was disastrous.

Way to pick out the part of the article that you want people to see. The article goes on to explain how Gannon was such a leader on the field and demanded things from his players. It talks about how Grbac could throw a good ball but was never really a leader. There wasn't anything near even half/half that wanted to put Grbac back in the game. Everybody wanted Gannon.

Green has been a true leader of this team for 5 straight years. Comparing this situation to Grbac/Gannon does not work IMO.

DRU
11-06-2006, 03:46 PM
However, we can also see a very big decrease in production...which is why I say it isn't worth the risk.

What makes you say this? He's played less than 1 full game under Herm and because we lost it you say the production will likely drop?? I really don't understand that.

Count Zarth
11-06-2006, 03:48 PM
I don't think it's a guarantee that the production would drop, but there's no way to know what will happen. It's a risk, IMO.

DRU
11-06-2006, 03:56 PM
I never thought I'd see the day when people would say that putting the 2nd best QB in the league for 4 years would be a risk. Just goes to show ya how spoiled we've been as Chiefs fans on the offensive side of the ball since the 90's ended.

Raiderhader
11-06-2006, 03:59 PM
he had the ball against the Pats with time on the clock and we turned the ball over, 4 and out I think...

WE'RE NOT ARGUING HE HAD GREAT STATS IN 2004, I'm saying, in each of those games, we had 4th quarter leads, and I remember several times Green flat out not getting it done on that final possession.

We were supposedly the team that could score every time we had the football...but as soon as we were in a must pass situation, we were no longer very scary...

Our offense, and Green, benifited greatly from having such a potent running game.



Wow, the things some of you post. You want to lay that at the feet of Green? Sure, in some of those situations he f#cked up, he's human like the rest of us. But more often than not you can lay the blame on our WR corps. Remember ALL of the drops? Shit, how Green managed to be second only to Manning in passing yards the past 3-4 seasons when his best reciever was his friggen TE is way the hell beyond me (and God bless Tony, but he's had his fair share of drops as well). Hell, Green most likely would have surpassed Manning if our WRs had held onto only half of the balls they dropped.

Our weakness at the WR position has been well lamented over the years, but now you want to start laying blame at the feet of the guy least deserving of it in favor of keeping him on the bench? Some of you people are so fickle it's disgusting. It's been said before, and is being proven true now; Kansas City fans are very hard on their QBs.

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:00 PM
I don't think it's a guarantee that the production would drop, but there's no way to know what will happen. It's a risk, IMO.

There's also no way to know what would happen against a real team, with a real defense, on the road, in the playoffs with Huard at the helm of an obviously neutered offense...

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:02 PM
There's also no way to know what would happen against a real team, with a real defense, on the road, in the playoffs with Huard at the helm of an obviously neutered offense...
neutered offense?!

We've put up 30, 35, 31 in the last three weeks...

WHEN GREEN COMES BACK ARE WE EXPECTING 50 PER?!

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:06 PM
neutered offense?!

We've put up 30, 35, 31 in the last three weeks...

WHEN GREEN COMES BACK ARE WE EXPECTING 50 PER?!

I guess I watched the wrong game. I missed the games where Damon Huard SINGLE-HANDEDLY scored all those points.

You've become a pathetic (so pathetic it's no longer entertaining) parody of yourself.

DRU
11-06-2006, 04:08 PM
We've put up 30, 35, 31 in the last three weeks...

What about when we face a team that can stop the run and we have to throw more than 15 times? A team that can put 8 in the box and still have good coverage down field because Huard only gets 2 options? that's where the neutered offense part comes into play. It's not the same offense we've run so many years now, but it's working because of a great running back who can gain yards even when people do focus on him.

Games will get nothing but tougher from here on out and when we start meeting good run defenses the entire scenario will change.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:08 PM
Oh.

I mean...I'm the one saying our offense is neutered yet we're putting up A TON OF POINTS like we always have.

When has Trent Green SINGLE-HANDEDLY scored all of our points!?

We've always been a running team...Green had a whopping 17 TD's last year...

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:09 PM
What about when we face a team that can stop the run and we have to throw more than 15 times? A team that can put 8 in the box and still have good coverage down field because Huard only gets 2 options? that's where the neutered offense part comes into play. It's not the same offense we've run so many years now, but it's working because of a great running back who can gain yards even when people do focus on him.

Games will get nothing but tougher from here on out and when we start meeting good run defenses the entire scenario will change.
Arizona?

Huard threw 38 times for 280 yards and 2 TD's...

Did you forget about that game?

The game where LJ had 36 rushing yards...

Or maybe the San Diego game where Huard threw for 319 yards...forget about that game, too?!

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:11 PM
Oh.

I mean...I'm the one saying our offense is neutered yet we're putting up A TON OF POINTS like we always have.

When has Trent Green SINGLE-HANDEDLY scored all of our points!?

We've always been a running team...Green had a whopping 17 TD's last year...

I'm really trying to cut you some slack here, but it's obvious to me you don't have any idea what you're watching.

Huard has one deep route in his repertoire - the fade. He forces the ball to Gonzo. And he progresses beyond his 2nd read maybe once or twice a game. There are plays that aren't being run simply because he's in there. People that know football can see it.

The results you speak of have to do with EXECUTION, and Huard has done a great job of doing what he's been asked to do. It is a fact, however, that they're not asking him to do as much as they have asked Green to do in the past.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:13 PM
well I can't wait for TG to try to progress beyond his 2nd read...he'll be laying flat-faced on the turf. Huard is pressured almost ever time he passes the ball...and I'm glad we finally have a QB that forces the ball to Gonzo...why the **** do we have such a force if we don't use him!?

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:17 PM
Arizona?

Huard threw 38 times for 280 yards and 2 TD's...

Did you forget about that game?

The game where LJ had 36 rushing yards...

Or maybe the San Diego game where Huard threw for 319 yards...forget about that game, too?!

You mean the Arizona game where Larry Johnson, who incidentally is NUMBER ONE IN THE LEAGUE IN YARDS AFTER CATCH, had 6 catches for 101 yards including a Huard dump-off that he converted into a 78-yard gain?

Or the San Diego game, where Tony Gonzales caught a 10-yard pass over the middle and ran for another 47 yards after the catch?

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:18 PM
You mean the Arizona game where Larry Johnson, who incidentally is NUMBER ONE IN THE LEAGUE IN YARDS AFTER CATCH, had 6 catches for 101 yards including a Huard dump-off that he converted into a 78-yard gain?

Or the San Diego game, where Tony Gonzales caught a 10-yard pass over the middle and ran for another 47 yards after the catch?
oh, so, when Trent Green plays his receivers don't gets yards after the catch...they just fall down and get in the fetal position.


GOTCHA!

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:20 PM
oh, so, when Trent Green plays his receivers don't gets yards after the catch...they just fall down and get in the fetal position.

GOTCHA!

Seriously, you've become overly pathetic.

Nowhere did I say that. But that's all you've got, apparently.

Luzap
11-06-2006, 04:22 PM
What about when we face a team that can stop the run and we have to throw more than 15 times? A team that can put 8 in the box and still have good coverage down field because Huard only gets 2 options? that's where the neutered offense part comes into play. It's not the same offense we've run so many years now, but it's working because of a great running back who can gain yards even when people do focus on him.

Games will get nothing but tougher from here on out and when we start meeting good run defenses the entire scenario will change.

Luz
:clap:

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:24 PM
Seriously, you've become overly pathetic.

Nowhere did I say that. But that's all you've got, apparently.

What do you have?

All you've been doing is calling me pathetic for thinking Huard should be our starting QB.

You haven't backed up anything that has me changing my mind.

I pointed out two games where Huard did it with his arm and apparently he had nothing to do with it because Gonzalez made a terriffic run after the catch...

Well, Tony Gonzalez WAS on our team last year as well...and if Trent didn't utilize him like Huard has been...I don't see how that is Huard's fault.

Trent liked to 15 yard dig routes to his receivers...Huard likes the 'find my biggest, best target' and let him make a play for me.

Plus, the Chiefs run, run, run and then it allows Huard to take that shot, you know, the one where we complete a long fade to Parker or Kennison.

Either way, if Green comes back...we better keep this game plan...

Count Zarth
11-06-2006, 04:24 PM
You mean the Arizona game where Larry Johnson, who incidentally is NUMBER ONE IN THE LEAGUE IN YARDS AFTER CATCH, had 6 catches for 101 yards including a Huard dump-off that he converted into a 78-yard gain?

Or the San Diego game, where Tony Gonzales caught a 10-yard pass over the middle and ran for another 47 yards after the catch?

What difference does that make? Green routinely racked up big passing yards on screen plays to Priest Holmes. We've been at or near the top of the league in YAC for several years now.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:25 PM
If Green returns, I think we'll say an increase in Samie Parker's production.

I don't know whether or not that is a good thing...

Luzap
11-06-2006, 04:26 PM
I'm really trying to cut you some slack here, but it's obvious to me you don't have any idea what you're watching.

Huard has one deep route in his repertoire - the fade. He forces the ball to Gonzo. And he progresses beyond his 2nd read maybe once or twice a game. There are plays that aren't being run simply because he's in there. People that know football can see it.

The results you speak of have to do with EXECUTION, and Huard has done a great job of doing what he's been asked to do. It is a fact, however, that they're not asking him to do as much as they have asked Green to do in the past.

Luz
:clap:

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:26 PM
What do you have?

All you've been doing is calling me pathetic for thinking Huard should be our starting QB.

You haven't backed up anything that has me changing my mind.

I pointed out two games where Huard did it with his arm and apparently he had nothing to do with it because Gonzalez made a terriffic run after the catch...

Well, Tony Gonzalez WAS on our team last year as well...and if Trent didn't utilize him like Huard has been...I don't see how that is Huard's fault.

Trent liked to 15 yard dig routes to his receivers...Huard likes the 'find my biggest, best target' and let him make a play for me.

Plus, the Chiefs run, run, run and then it allows Huard to take that shot, you know, the one where we complete a long fade to Parker or Kennison.

Either way, if Green comes back...we better keep this game plan...

I never set out to change your mind.

I've refuted, successfully, every point you've made. Whether or not you want to acknowledge reality is up to you.

As for Trent Green utilizing Gonzales, it's hard to throw to a guy that is engaged in blocking a DL or LB.

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:28 PM
What difference does that make? Green routinely racked up big passing yards on screen plays to Priest Holmes. We've been at or near the top of the league in YAC for several years now.

It makes a world of difference for one simple reason:

TRENT GREEN IS THE STARTER.

The burden of proof is not on Trent. The burden of proof is on Huard.

Huard's job as a backup is to fill in for the starter and make sure there's little or no drop-off. He's done that.

But for him to EARN the starter's spot, he has to prove he provides something to the team that the current starter does not provide. He HAS NOT done that. He hasn't even come close.

OldTownChief
11-06-2006, 04:28 PM
Tony didn't become our yards from scrimmage "all time" leader without Green throwing to him.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:29 PM
I never set out to change your mind.

I've refuted, successfully, every point you've made. Whether or not you want to acknowledge reality is up to you.

As for Trent Green utilizing Gonzales, it's hard to throw to a guy that is engaged in blocking a DL or LB.
he was blocking a DL or LB because Green couldn't get through all of his reads without getting sacked...you know, all of those extra reads he makes that Huard can't do...

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:30 PM
he was blocking a DL or LB because Green couldn't get through all of his reads without getting sacked...you know, all of those extra reads he makes that Huard can't do...

ROFL

At some point are you going to stop, or are you willing to make this issue your entire legacy at Chiefsplanet?

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:30 PM
Tony didn't become our yards from scrimmage "all time" leader without Green throwing to him.
Gonzalez found the end zone a whole lot more with GrBac as our QB...

Green >>>>>>>> GrBac

So don't even try and get me on this one.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:32 PM
ROFL

At some point are you going to stop, or are you willing to make this issue your entire legacy at Chiefsplanet?
I'll say it once again...

If/when Green starts for us, this year, I'm all for Trent Green. I don't care if Dustin Colquitt is our QB if we win the game...

You guys are confusing me as the anti-Green, and that's simply not true.

I want the Chiefs to win, win now...that's my main concern.

I think we have a better chance with Huard, the hot hand, and the guy not coming off a serious, career-threatening injury.

Basileus777
11-06-2006, 04:33 PM
Gonzalez found the end zone a whole lot more with GrBac as our QB...

Green >>>>>>>> GrBac

So don't even try and get me on this one.

You kind of refuted yourself here....

Even if it were true that Huard finds Gonzo in the endzone more, by your own logic it wouldn't mean that Huard > Green.

Besides its not like Gonzo has gotten alot of TDS this year, before yesterday he had one.

OldTownChief
11-06-2006, 04:35 PM
Gonzalez found the end zone a whole lot more with GrBac as our QB...

Really? I didn't say anything about TD's I was refering to Yds. But you're wrong on both counts.

Year Team G GS Rec Yds Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ 1st
1997 Kansas City Chiefs 16 0 33 368 11.2 30 2 5 0 21
1998 Kansas City Chiefs 16 16 59 621 10.5 32 2 6 0 33
1999 Kansas City Chiefs 15 15 76 849 11.2 73 11 8 1 47
2000 Kansas City Chiefs 16 16 93 1203 12.9 39 9 16 0 66
2001 Kansas City Chiefs 16 16 73 917 12.6 36 6 13 0 49
2002 Kansas City Chiefs 16 16 63 773 12.3 42 7 10 1 39
2003 Kansas City Chiefs 16 16 71 916 12.9 67 10 14 2 48
2004 Kansas City Chiefs 16 16 102 1258 12.3 32 7 19 0 69
2005 Kansas City Chiefs 16 16 78 905 11.6 39 2 9 0 45
2006 Kansas City Chiefs 8 8 38 504 13.3 57 3 7 1 27

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:35 PM
I'll say it once again...

If/when Green starts for us, this year, I'm all for Trent Green. I don't care if Dustin Colquitt is our QB if we win the game...

You guys are confusing me as the anti-Green, and that's simply not true.

I want the Chiefs to win, win now...that's my main concern.

I think we have a better chance with Huard, the hot hand, and the guy not coming off a serious, career-threatening injury.

I've never mistaken you for the anti-Green.

I know you want the Chiefs to win, which is why I think your position is absurd. You've chosen superstition over reality.

Green is the better QB. Huard has been on this roster for 3 years. If he was better than Green, it wouldn't have taken an injury to get him on the field.

DRU
11-06-2006, 04:35 PM
he was blocking a DL or LB because Green couldn't get through all of his reads without getting sacked...you know, all of those extra reads he makes that Huard can't do...

This is a good point, and I'd agree that everything we've said about Green getting more reads depends on the o-line being able to give him the time. I could also agree that I'd like to stick with the game plan that we've been doing...for the most part...even with Green in the game.

Experience is the major factor here for me. We've gotten the same production out of both guys. When stats are the same, you move on to something else. Green has been a starter in this league for many years. Huard has had his chances and has NOT been able to win that job...ever. He's a backup, and I think there are reasons for that far beyond what any of us think we know.

If this team does make it to the playoffs, or even big games that could get us there, I'd rather have the guy who's seen all of these defenses before. The guy who can read blitz packages without even thinking about it because he's played these teams so many times and he's seen their packages so many times.

One bad read against a good team close to playoff time is all it would take to send us home.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:36 PM
You kind of refuted yourself here....

Even if it were true that Huard finds Gonzo in the endzone more, by your own logic it wouldn't mean that Huard > Green.

Besides its not like Gonzo has gotten alot of TDS this year, before yesterday he had one.
I guess...

I really don't care who finds the end zone as long as we're scoring.

Comparing GrBac to Green/Huard and the way Gonzalez is used was pretty stupid...so you're right.

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:37 PM
When stats are the same, you move on to something else.

Exactly.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:40 PM
I've never mistaken you for the anti-Green.

I know you want the Chiefs to win, which is why I think your position is absurd. You've chosen superstition over reality.

Green is the better QB. Huard has been on this roster for 3 years. If he was better than Green, it wouldn't have taken an injury to get him on the field.
Eh.

It took two injuries for LJ to find the field.

Huard has all of the confidence right now, he's the hot hand, and he's the younger QB...

Why not ride him out and see what happens?

If we win a playoff game with him, and he stays effective...we can resign the guy, restructure Green or let him find a starting job elsewhere, and free up some money so we can sign some more playmakers.

Green isn't getting any younger...we've always cherry-picked backup QB's from other teams to take over as our starting QB, historically we haven't exactly had much success developing QB's...

Why not ride Huard for 3-4 more years? I really haven't been too impressed with Croyle.

I know, I know...I know nothing about football blah blah blah.

OldTownChief
11-06-2006, 04:41 PM
ROFL
Tony's TD rec. fell off in 2005 but still had a better year than all but one with GrBac.

htismaqe
11-06-2006, 04:42 PM
Eh.

It took two injuries for LJ to find the field.

Huard has all of the confidence right now, he's the hot hand, and he's the younger QB...

Why not ride him out and see what happens?

If we win a playoff game with him, and he stays effective...we can resign the guy, restructure Green or let him find a starting job elsewhere, and free up some money so we can sign some more playmakers.

Green isn't getting any younger...we've always cherry-picked backup QB's from other teams to take over as our starting QB, historically we haven't exactly had much success developing QB's...

Why not ride Huard for 3-4 more years? I really haven't been too impressed with Croyle.

I know, I know...I know nothing about football blah blah blah.

Because he's the BACKUP.

Do you really want to send a message to your team that all you have to do to lose your job is get hurt? Especially after guys like Eric Hicks did everything but screw the coaches wife and not get benched?

That's the surest way to not only not get the best out of your QB, but kill the chemistry of the entire team as well.

Que Card QB
11-06-2006, 04:43 PM
I remember many years with NO quarterback, let alone two excellent ones.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:46 PM
Because he's the BACKUP.

Do you really want to send a message to your team that all you have to do to lose your job is get hurt? Especially after guys like Eric Hicks did everything but screw the coaches wife and not get benched?

That's the surest way to not only not get the best out of your QB, but kill the chemistry of the entire team as well.
so, let's say Herm names Huard the starting QB...

You really think the team is going to stop playing for Huard?

Really?

I don't.

Short Leash Hootie
11-06-2006, 04:47 PM
and I don't think it'll ever come to that...

If Herm decides on Huard...we'll continue to hear about another setback blah blah blah until eventually Green will suit up, be our emergency QB...and if something actually happens to Huard I wouldn't be surprised to see Green enter the game...

I don't think Herm is going to come out and name Huard the starting QB...but I think it's 50/50 right now on whether or not Huard will finish the season as starter.

Count Zarth
11-06-2006, 05:05 PM
I guess I watched the wrong game. I missed the games where Damon Huard SINGLE-HANDEDLY scored all those points.


And I missed the games where Green did.

psychadelicdream
11-07-2006, 06:43 AM
lol their he goes again still not gonna hope off the middle of that fence huh buddy.......and huard single handly scores all of our points? yah cause hes the one running the ball....if anyone is scoring all the points its lj....so whats yer next best reply....you already used acid? what am i now on crack....loser.......go find anouther team.. im sure the cheifs dont want u as a fan

htismaqe
11-07-2006, 08:37 AM
And I missed the games where Green did.

I already explained it to you. It's not my fault you're playing dumb.

Green is the STARTER.

Huard has to distinguish himself ABOVE AND BEYOND Trent in order to WIN the starting job. You become a starter because you're BETTER THAN THE GUY BEHIND YOU, not because a guy gets hurt.

So far, Huard has done EXACTLY what Green has done - manage a game and utilize his weapons. Until Huard does MORE than that, he's the BACKUP.

htismaqe
11-07-2006, 08:37 AM
so, let's say Herm names Huard the starting QB...

You really think the team is going to stop playing for Huard?

Really?

I don't.

I didn't say that.

And thank God we don't have to worry about it. Herm will do the right thing.

Wile_E_Coyote
11-07-2006, 10:09 AM
Green has proven himself here for over 5 years, Huard for 7 games. He has played well, but how many backups have lit it up for a few games & then gone to shit. Kelly Holcombe, Billy Volek, Tommy Mattox...

mcan
11-09-2006, 11:18 AM
Huard is winning games, and that's very seductive. But there is no question that Trent is the better QB. Anybody thinking that he's going to go "Roethlesburger" on us and be crap after his injury is either one or both of two things:

1. Superstitious.
2. Not watching.

Huard has thrown a lot of interceptions that were dropped. He's also had a bunch of balls batted down at the line, and some misques with recievers who hadn't made their break yet. I trust either to get the job done, but I'm much more comfortable with Trent out there.

As for the possibility of Trent sucking after his injury. I admit it's a possibility; but I don't think it's any more likely than Damon going out and laying an egg at Miami. In fact, I kinda think it's less likely. Trent has not only come back from injury before, but he's been STELLER in games where he was the backup and had to come in cold... Anybody remember the Rams game of 2000? Kurt Warner has played a season and a half of steller football. Then the Chiefs pound them for two quarters and Kurt Warner gets benched with a "bad finger." Trent Green stepped in and scored something like 28 points in the second half and made it look like a real game for awhile. Of course, their defense couldn't stop us that day either and we ended up with 54 points.

underEJ
11-09-2006, 11:26 AM
Huard is winning games, and that's very seductive. But there is no question that Trent is the better QB. Anybody thinking that he's going to go "Roethlesburger" on us and be crap after his injury is either one or both of two things:

1. Superstitious.
2. Not watching.

Huard has thrown a lot of interceptions that were dropped. He's also had a bunch of balls batted down at the line, and some misques with recievers who hadn't made their break yet. I trust either to get the job done, but I'm much more comfortable with Trent out there.

As for the possibility of Trent sucking after his injury. I admit it's a possibility; but I don't think it's any more likely than Damon going out and laying an egg at Miami. In fact, I kinda think it's less likely. Trent has not only come back from injury before, but he's been STELLER in games where he was the backup and had to come in cold... Anybody remember the Rams game of 2000? Kurt Warner has played a season and a half of steller football. Then the Chiefs pound them for two quarters and Kurt Warner gets benched with a "bad finger." Trent Green stepped in and scored something like 28 points in the second half and made it look like a real game for awhile. Of course, their defense couldn't stop us that day either and we ended up with 54 points.


I was at that game. Trent looked brilliant. No rust to shake off at all. His only enemy once he got in there was the clock. He was scoring faster than the Chiefs, and it wasn't a case of third stringers out there defending him.

Sure-Oz
11-09-2006, 05:51 PM
Green has proven himself here for over 5 years, Huard for 7 games. He has played well, but how many backups have lit it up for a few games & then gone to shit. Kelly Holcombe, Billy Volek, Tommy Mattox...
I agree on that but....huard is definetly lighting it up..this game will be huge on who our QB is next week. I kinda hope that Green can atleast get in this game or the next one if he isn't the starter. But a blowout is the likely scenario. I am all for the chiefs winning than anything, but know Trent is the better QB. I just hope he is the same guy at the helm we know he is. Can't argue though too much now on Huards QB rating and how he is on fire. I would prefer trent to start at oakland but won't bitch if he doesn't.

DRU
11-12-2006, 11:54 AM
Prime example of the release time. 11:20 left in first half and we go deep. Kennison is wide open down the right sideline and the camera finds him...1...2...3 full seconds of nobody but Kennison in the screen while he's waiting on the ball. Meanwhile the safety catches him and knocks it away.

Green would have had that ball in his chest immediately when he turned around and he'd have been gone. Remember that play against the Bills in 2003 when he stuck Dante Hall down the sideline on the same play? How about when he stuck Kennison on '04 against the Pats?

Receivers have to wait on Huard's passes. Not Green's.

KChiefs1
11-12-2006, 12:12 PM
1/7 for 2yds

PastorMikH
11-12-2006, 02:17 PM
FWIW, Trent Green has NEVER turned in this low of a passing percentage in any game he has ever played that he threw at least than 2 passes.

Huard - 39.4% pass completion today.


:shake:

DRU
11-12-2006, 02:22 PM
FWIW, Trent Green has NEVER turned in this low of a passing percentage in any game he has ever played that he threw at least than 2 passes.

Huard - 39.4% pass completion today.

And you could have very easily added a couple of INT's to that performance if Miami could have caught the ball.

that one where Taylor almost stole the screen pass was rediculous. Huard didn't even glance that direction before lazily tossing it up in the air over there.

greg63
11-12-2006, 09:49 PM
do we still want Green over Huard?
I reiterate:

Yes.

Short Leash Hootie
01-06-2007, 11:30 PM
...

??