PDA

View Full Version : POSNANSKI: Edwards has to go with Huard to save team


dirk digler
08-28-2007, 07:36 AM
There should be no doubt that Chiefs coach Herm Edwards wanted Brodie Croyle to win the starting quarterback job this preseason. The Chiefs spent one uncomfortable offseason dangling longtime starter Trent Green. Why? One reason.

Herm Edwards had seen the future, and its name was Croyle.

It wasn’t just that Edwards had fallen in love with Croyle’s arm, his enthusiasm, his energy, his charisma. No, Edwards wants to jolt the Chiefs out of their stupor. For 12 seasons now, the Chiefs have not won a playoff game, even though at different times over that span they’ve had the league’s best offense, they’ve had the league’s best defense and they’ve had the league’s best special teams. So what was missing?

Edwards says two things:

1. Balance.

2. A quarterback to call their own.

Edwards, as you no doubt know, has harped constantly about balance ever since he arrived in town. He is always telling his players that the offense needs to help the defense (longer drives, more first downs, play the field-position game) and the defense needs to help the offense (force more turnovers, play big on third downs, create field position). He thinks that in the past, Chiefs offenses and defenses were too much about themselves and their stats and not enough about winning championships.

The second part, the quarterback, is touchier. It is possible (not likely, but possible) to win with someone else’s discarded quarterback. Baltimore and Tampa Bay won Super Bowls with Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson, respectively. Oakland went to the Super Bowl with Rich Gannon. But those teams tend to collapse quickly. Your consistent winners, generally speaking, are teams with their own quarterbacks. Indianapolis has Peyton Manning. New England has Tom Brady. Philadelphia has Donovan McNabb. Edwards wants the Chiefs to be one of those teams.

So, yes, Edwards is ready for the Chiefs to make that quarterback jump. He’s more than ready. One of the consistent themes of the Carl Peterson era has been to go into the season with a veteran quarterback bought, borrowed or stolen from other teams. That strategy took the Chiefs so far. But it never took them all the way.

So you better believe Edwards wanted Croyle to win the job. He wasn’t alone. Lots of Chiefs fans wanted Croyle to win the job. Heck, I wanted Croyle to win the job. Why not? He represented something new, something potentially exciting. Damon Huard, the likeable and sturdy veteran quarterback, seemed like more of the same.

Here’s the trouble, though: Croyle did not win the job. And this past weekend, Herm Edwards did exactly what he had to do. He named Huard the starter. I know there are people out there who were upset by his move, people who thought Edwards wimped out and went with the safe and uninspired choice. I disagree. I think naming Huard now wasn’t just the right choice, it was the only choice.

The most important thing about coaching or managing a team — something that matters more than strategy, philosophy and inspiration — is keeping your players’ respect. When you lose their respect, you lose everything. You can be the most brilliant X’s and O’s coach who ever lived, you can know exactly how to prepare a team, you can be Knute Rockne, Vince Lombardi and George Patton all rolled up into one at halftime. But if you lose the players, you lose the fight, end of story.

Here’s one sure way to lose players: Give someone a job he doesn’t deserve. I am convinced that former Royals general manager Allard Baird lost the team the day he inexplicably brought up a non-prospect named Eduardo Villacis to pitch against the New York Yankees in 2004. Villacis got rocked, of course, and every player on the team had unshakable doubts about Allard Baird and the direction of the Royals from that day on.

Same thing here. Croyle has been brutal in the preseason games. Yes, he has had a moment or two — the guy has talent — but all in all, he has looked confused and raw. This hasn’t been entirely his fault. He has been getting crushed. If the Chiefs’ offensive line doesn’t shore up, this will be a disastrous season no matter who is playing quarterback. But that does not take away from the simple fact that Croyle, so far anyway, has looked overmatched.

And there’s only so much a coach can do. This isn’t fantasy football, where you can start whoever you want anytime you have a hunch. No, here, the choice has been made already. You cannot start Brodie Croyle. The quarterback is, by far, the most important position on the football team. You send a few dozen messages to your players, none of them good, if you start Croyle now. You are telling them you play favorites — he clearly has not won the job. You are telling them that this is a rebuilding season (i.e. “a season to develop a quarterback”). You are telling them that all that talk about how “the best players play,” was just that: Talk.

No, Edwards has no choice at all. He wanted Croyle to win the job, he really did, but at some point there’s only so much a coach can do. The kid didn’t win it. He wasn’t ready. For now, Edwards’ choice is to go with Huard, who played so well last year when given the chance. With him, the Chiefs can try to win games the old-fashioned way: Run the ball, play defense, punt well, don’t turn the thing over. That gives something for everybody on the team to rally around.

Edwards still believes in Croyle. He should. The kid does have talent. Croyle still looks like a good bet to be the Chiefs’ quarterback of the future. It’s just that the future isn’t here yet.

KC Jones
08-28-2007, 07:41 AM
bingo

TEX
08-28-2007, 07:49 AM
Here’s one sure way to lose players: Give someone a job he doesn’t deserve.

Justin Medlock? :shake:

DaKCMan AP
08-28-2007, 07:52 AM
Spot on.

DaKCMan AP
08-28-2007, 07:53 AM
Here’s one sure way to lose players: Give someone a job he doesn’t deserve.

Justin Medlock? :shake:

Who deserves the job? The guy who missed a 30yd fg in the playoffs? The guy who shanked extra points? The guy who missed both his kicks in the last preseason game? (Hint: the guy who accomplished all of these amazing feats has the initials LT and he's not a RB or a LB).

Dr. Facebook Fever
08-28-2007, 07:53 AM
JoPo nails it.

TEX
08-28-2007, 07:56 AM
Croyle still looks like a good bet to be the Chiefs’ quarterback of the future. It’s just that the future isn’t here yet.

Possible. But I've said many times that IMO Croyle's the type of QB that in 3 years people will still be saying the same thing. He has the tools, but...

Regardless, Herm needs to pull his head out - let Dick Curl manage the clock (something that he's known for) and hire a REAL QB COACH to work with Croyle.

Bwana
08-28-2007, 07:58 AM
Good read

StcChief
08-28-2007, 08:00 AM
JoPo's conclusion is correct. Croyle's job to lose and he did. truely isn't quite there yet.

Huard get's his chance to really shine.... Let's hope he does. 12 years in the league, ball is in his court.

C-Mac
08-28-2007, 08:00 AM
Nice work JoPo :thumb:

dirk digler
08-28-2007, 08:03 AM
[B]

Regardless, Herm needs to pull his head out - let Dick Curl manage the clock (something that he's known for) and hire a REAL QB COACH to work with Croyle.

I totally agree Tex.

This was a fantastic column by JoPo.

TEX
08-28-2007, 08:05 AM
Who deserves the job? The guy who missed a 30yd fg in the playoffs? The guy who shanked extra points? The guy who missed both his kicks in the last preseason game? (Hint: the guy who accomplished all of these amazing feats has the initials LT and he's not a RB or a LB).

Um...it's called COMPETITION! There is NONE at that position. There is everywhere else. Pretty simple concept. And since you're speaking of Tynes, I'll play along - please look up what he did a few preseasons ago when the Chiefs kept Morton Anderson. They cut his a$$ for kicking exactly like Medlock is now! (Actually he kicked slightly better). I'm not saying they should have kept Tynes, I agree that he was too inconsistent. I'm saying they probably could have gotten Medlock without drafting him and invited him and other kickers (competition) to camp. As it stands, Herm's giving him the job and he doesn't deserve it.

Braincase
08-28-2007, 08:08 AM
Who is this Joe Posnanski guy? He ought to write more stuff. Maybe he can get a gig with WPI or something.

TEX
08-28-2007, 08:08 AM
I totally agree Tex.

This was a fantastic column by JoPo.

Sure was. The deal is everyone can say the same thing and some were. But when those that weren't see it spelled out like this - they realize that it was the best thing at this time.

GoHuge
08-28-2007, 08:09 AM
Yeah JoPo was spot on. He gave Croyle every chance and then some. He just didn't get it done. Does this mean we won't get to see Kelli as much anymore on Hard Knocks? She needs to be there with those knockers to cheer him up.

DaKCMan AP
08-28-2007, 08:11 AM
I'm saying they probably could have gotten Medlock without drafting him

BS. Medlock was one of the highest rated kickers who had great workouts and outshined the other top kickers at competitions.

And you want competition? He's competing against every FA kicker. ;)
I know this kid's going to be a VERY good kicker, and with a new LS, holder (Colquitt didn't hold for a lefty kicker before) I'd rather Medlock get all of the reps.

the Talking Can
08-28-2007, 08:15 AM
and yet another poem to 9-7

"win now"

"window of opportunity"

patteeu
08-28-2007, 08:17 AM
It bugs me for some reason when people call professional athletes "kid". Almost all of these guys, including Brodie Croyle are full grown men. If you're not going to pat him on the head and pinch his cheek when you see him, you shouldn't call him a kid no matter how old you are, IMO.

In all other aspects, I agree with JoPo's article. :thumb:

patteeu
08-28-2007, 08:19 AM
and yet another poem to 9-7

"win now"

"window of opportunity"

Yeah, sorry. You're going to have to either wait for another year or pick another team to get that 3-13 season your jones'n for. I'm sad for you. Really.

the Talking Can
08-28-2007, 08:22 AM
Yeah, sorry. You're going to have to either wait for another year or pick another team to get that 3-13 season your jones'n for. I'm sad for you. Really.

True Fan!

look everyone! a TRUE FAN

Mr. Kotter
08-28-2007, 08:23 AM
As much as I wanted to see Croyle win the job....I agree with Joe.

As someone who's coached some youth and HS football....I can tell you, that Joe is absolutely right about this.

Croyle simply didn't win the job. Period.

Any other decision by Herm, would have been the beginning of the end for him in KC. As Joe said, he'd have lost the respect of any self-respecting player. And he'd then be dead-in-the-water as a coach.

trndobrd
08-28-2007, 08:45 AM
Huard will not start 16 games this season. Period.

The reality of our O-line and QB injuries in the NFL dictates that Croyle will be starting at some point this season.

Herm is not wrong for starting Huard opening day on the road. Croyle didn't win it, and will benefit from some time as THE backup QB.

Letting Croyle hold the clipboard for a while instead of getting beat to death while McIntosh, LJ, J Dunn, and Turley's back get things worked out is the right call. Nobody wants to see the "future" crumpled up on the turf because Svitek whiffed another block.

Otter
08-28-2007, 08:50 AM
Who gives a flying **** anymore

Donger
08-28-2007, 08:59 AM
If the Chiefs’ offensive line doesn’t shore up, this will be a disastrous season no matter who is playing quarterback.

Is this an accurate statement, and if so, can it be 'shored up' in time?

Sure-Oz
08-28-2007, 09:02 AM
I was unhappy with croyle not starting out but this may be the best decision in the long run. If we do well, people dont bitch, if he sucks then croyle comes in, win win!

Tribal Warfare
08-28-2007, 09:12 AM
I don't believe placing Huard as the starter was a King Carl move and not Herms. If you saw hardknocks on HBO you would know what I'm talking about

Cochise
08-28-2007, 09:13 AM
I guess I'm ok with starting Huard right now, but only because of the fact that (a) Croyle, by any objective measure, has looked awful this preseason and has no business taking a snap as an NFL quarterback, and (b) Croyle would be out there getting murdered behind the worst offensive line in the NFL.

But if we go this whole season without giving Croyle playing time in the name of trying to make some fruitless playoff push, that's insane. Our objective needs to be to shore up the protection and get Croyle in there. I don't really approve of naming Huard the starter, but I guess I can see some universe where you are committed to the future but still do that.

I don't want to see a 4-6 team in November though with Huard at QB, and Herm Edwards about how "every game is a playoff game".

That will make me head down there with the torches and pitchforks.

Cochise
08-28-2007, 09:14 AM
Who deserves the job? The guy who missed a 30yd fg in the playoffs? The guy who shanked extra points? The guy who missed both his kicks in the last preseason game? (Hint: the guy who accomplished all of these amazing feats has the initials LT and he's not a RB or a LB).

I see our future... it's October... Carl is blowing up Jose Cortez's cellphone...

Deberg_1990
08-28-2007, 09:16 AM
Better it be Huard out there getting beat up every Sunday behind that line than Croyle.

Huard = Sacrificial lamb. Especially with that slow as molasses release of his.

oldandslow
08-28-2007, 09:17 AM
I was unhappy with croyle not starting out but this may be the best decision in the long run. If we do well, people dont bitch, if he sucks then croyle comes in, win win!

Nope...

Croyle loses 5,7, or 9 games of experience.

We are not going to the SB with Damon Huard at QB.

This entire "win now" philosophy is silly. We aren't going to win now. Honestly, if any of you were gamblers, would you bet on the Chiefs, this year, to win 10? to go to the Playoffs? to go to the SB?

This article is PR, plain and simple.

We are beginning to look like the Az Cardinals of the 80's and 90's with the decisions we are making. It's stupid.

DaKCMan AP
08-28-2007, 09:19 AM
Looks like the myth that we have the worst offensive line in football is still alive and well. :)

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 09:21 AM
1. Balance? Are you freaking kidding me? Balance, yea right.

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 09:22 AM
1. Balance? Are you freaking kidding me? Balance, yea right.
Herm knows as much about balance as dick did.

Deberg_1990
08-28-2007, 09:29 AM
Herm knows as much about balance as dick did.

I dont get the Herm hate sometimes? The whole article mentions how much he wants Croyle to win the job because teams with long term success groom their own QB.

He drafted a WR in the 1st round.

The talent just isnt there completely on the offensive side of the ball. What else do you want him to do??

FAX
08-28-2007, 09:32 AM
"Herm knows all. Herm has a plan. Herm can't be wrong. It's okay. Blah, Blah, Blabablah."

There's only one thing wrong with this fabulous analysis. Brodie performed better than Downfield in pre-season and (based on almost all reports) in training camp, as well. Personally, I'm not buying it.

So the team will revolt if a job goes to an unproven player? We still have Samie Jabar Parker at receiver and zero competition at kicker. How "proven" was Downfield when his number got called last year? I call hogwash.

FAX

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 09:32 AM
What else do you want him to do??
Not be the paul hackett of the head coaching ranks.........his whole offensive philosophy is throw a 3 yard pass if you need 7.

Rausch
08-28-2007, 09:38 AM
"Herm knows all. Herm has a plan. Herm can't be wrong. It's okay. Blah, Blah, Blabablah."

There's only one thing wrong with this fabulous analysis. Brodie performed better than Downfield in pre-season and (based on almost all reports) in training camp, as well. Personally, I'm not buying it.



Croyle has consistently ****ed up. He keeps making the same stupid mistakes, and to top it off couldn't manage to move the ball vs. the Nawlins 2nd and 3rd stringers.

HE'S NOT READY.

FAX
08-28-2007, 09:48 AM
Croyle has consistently ****ed up. He keeps making the same stupid mistakes, and to top it off couldn't manage to move the ball vs. the Nawlins 2nd and 3rd stringers.

HE'S NOT READY.

Simmah!!! Simmah down nah!!

I'm walking a fine line here in respect to this article and I know it, Mr. Rausch. It's a nuanced position.

1. The claim that Herm will lose the team if he starts a player who hasn't "earned" the job is inconsistent with other decisions Hermoine has made.

2. Based on statistics alone, Brodie played better than Downfield in pre-season. Mistakes and all.

I'm not saying that the best decision is to start Brodie if he isn't ready to take the reins. Maybe he doesn't know the playbook, maybe he has failed to go to the number one receiver, maybe he put salt in Herm's coffee, I don't know.

What I do know is that the justification for the decision as proferred by this article isn't really supported by facts or evidence.

FAX

Chiefnj2
08-28-2007, 09:48 AM
I dont get the Herm hate sometimes? The whole article mentions how much he wants Croyle to win the job because teams with long term success groom their own QB.

He drafted a WR in the 1st round.

The talent just isnt there completely on the offensive side of the ball. What else do you want him to do??

What he should have done is place a greater focus on the OL in the offseason. Going into the season with Terry, Turley and Svitek as the top RT starters and LT/RT backups was not good foresight.

I still think it was a mistake to start Bowe off so slowly. Other teams got their late signed players on the field much more quickly.

Finally, I find it interesting that Herm keeps playing Parker, but the guy he dumped, C. Thorpe, has 10 receptions for 111 yards and 2 TDs in preseason thus far. He has better stats than just about the entire KC WR corps put together.

el borracho
08-28-2007, 09:50 AM
I don't want to see a 4-6 team in November though with Huard at QB, and Herm Edwards about how "every game is a playoff game".
This is my fear, as well. We will hover just below .500 until the end of the season- mathmatically (but not really) "in contention."

at Houston
at Chicago
Minnesota
at San Diego..............1-3

Jacksonville
Cincinnatti
at Oakland
Green Bay..................3-5

Denver
at Indianapolis
Oakland
San Diego..................5-7

at Denver..................5-8 Yay! Our season is effectively over and there are only3 weeks left to play our QBoTF!

el borracho
08-28-2007, 09:53 AM
We are not going to the SB with Damon Huard at QB.

This entire "win now" philosophy is silly. We aren't going to win now. Honestly, if any of you were gamblers, would you bet on the Chiefs, this year, to win 10? to go to the Playoffs? to go to the SB?

This article is PR, plain and simple.
Exactly correct. We aren't going anywhere this year no matter who starts at QB and Huard does not represent any future. Huard is a bandaid on a shotgun wound.

King_Chief_Fan
08-28-2007, 09:54 AM
It is funny when you read something rather quickly as when I read the post heading....... I read it to mean Edwards and Huard has to go.

Now that would be a story I would be interested in!

el borracho
08-28-2007, 09:55 AM
Looks like the myth that we have the worst offensive line in football is still alive and well. :)
Hyperbole?- Maybe, but we are near the bottom. Our line has been a disaster this preseason. I don't expect McIntosh to make a huge difference; do you?

Chiefnj2
08-28-2007, 09:55 AM
Simmah!!! Simmah down nah!!

2. Based on statistics alone, Brodie played better than Downfield in pre-season. Mistakes and all.



What I do know is that the justification for the decision as proferred by this article isn't really supported by facts or evidence.

FAX

The only time Huard started a game and played with the first unit he was 3/5 with 0 INTs and 0 TDs. His stats as a "starter" are better than Croyle's although he really wasn't given much of a chance.

Ari Chi3fs
08-28-2007, 09:57 AM
wait, where is htismaqe to profess his manlove for Croyle?

DaKCMan AP
08-28-2007, 10:07 AM
Hyperbole?- Maybe, but we are near the bottom. Our line has been a disaster this preseason. I don't expect McIntosh to make a huge difference; do you?

Yes. Svitek has been the major downfall, as I-65 was last season. That's why they went out and paid big money for McIntosh. I expect him to solidify the position.

Also, when Jason Dunn was back last game the run game had a little more success. With a full-strength O-Line, Dunn, LJ & a FB, I expect our line to be better than advertised thus far this preseason.

There are several teams with lines worse than ours - Oakland, Miami, Houston, Green Bay, Buffalo, Arizona to name a few.

FAX
08-28-2007, 10:07 AM
The only time Huard started a game and played with the first unit he was 3/5 with 0 INTs and 0 TDs. His stats as a "starter" are better than Croyle's although he really wasn't given much of a chance.

I have no doubt you are correct, Mr. Chiefnj2. And thank you for pointing this out. Keep in mind, however, that both Downfield and Croyle played with 1st and 2nd string players. When the dust had cleared, and after all the sacks, pressures, dropped balls, and crappy calls, Brodie's statistics were better. Plus, one could argue all day long that Brodie's passes are more catchable and that he gives us options that Downfield doesn't.

Actually, I'm not saying that starting Downfield is the worst decision in the world. I have no idea how things will work out. I'm saying that this is a well-crafted article based on an emotional argument (how the players would "feel" about the decision to start Brodie). No one seems to care how the players "feel" about starting Samie The Oopsie, Medlock The Shank and Terry The Turnstile. Why? Because it doesn't sell news. The quarterback position does.

I've meditated on this and was told by the Muse of Truth that this is an after-the-fact justification for Herm's decision that really isn't supported by reality.

FAX

Cochise
08-28-2007, 10:10 AM
Looks like the myth that we have the worst offensive line in football is still alive and well. :)

The line we have put out there in these preseason games has an argument.

Otter
08-28-2007, 10:10 AM
.

el borracho
08-28-2007, 10:18 AM
Well, I hope you are correct, Dackman....... but I doubt it. We may add a few mediocre pieces but we will also face more pressure. I think teams are going to blitz our QB into the dirt. If our line struggles to handle preseason pressure (vanilla) how do you think they will do against regular season packages (stunts and blitzes)?

Chiefnj2
08-28-2007, 10:22 AM
. Plus, one could argue all day long that Brodie's passes are more catchable and that he gives us options that Downfield doesn't.

Actually, I'm not saying that starting Downfield is the worst decision in the world. I have no idea how things will work out. I'm saying that this is a well-crafted article based on an emotional argument (how the players would "feel" about the decision to start Brodie). No one seems to care how the players "feel" about starting Samie The Oopsie, Medlock The Shank and Terry The Turnstile. Why? Because it doesn't sell news. The quarterback position does.


FAX

Yes, Huard's passes are often high and Brodie's are generally more catchable. Unfortunately, Croyle's passes are often more catchable by opposing CB's than the intended WRs.

My own .02 cents on the other items you mentioned:

As far as Medlock is concerned, I honestly believe it was about getting the snapper and holder accustomed to a left footed kicker and not confusing matters with a right footed kicker or another left footed kicker with perhaps a different approach to the ball, or how the ball is held.

Parker continuing to start sucks. What sucks even more is that no other receiver has stepped up to the plate to unseat him. See my other post about Craphonso Thorpe having better stats than just about the entire Chiefs WR roster. Herm may have cut the wrong DV leftover.

Terry the turnstile - again there is nobody better than him on the roster at the moment. Herm and Carl should have addressed the position better in the draft, FA and supplemental draft but didn't. Sadly, Herm appears to be playing the best player on the roster at RT and has had an open competition at the spot (Sampson, Turley and Terry).

keg in kc
08-28-2007, 10:23 AM
This message brought to you in part by Carl Peterson.

BigRock
08-28-2007, 10:25 AM
1. The claim that Herm will lose the team if he starts a player who hasn't "earned" the job is inconsistent with other decisions Hermoine has made.

2. Based on statistics alone, Brodie played better than Downfield in pre-season. Mistakes and all.

I'm not saying that the best decision is to start Brodie if he isn't ready to take the reins. Maybe he doesn't know the playbook, maybe he has failed to go to the number one receiver, maybe he put salt in Herm's coffee, I don't know.

What I do know is that the justification for the decision as proferred by this article isn't really supported by facts or evidence.
Trying to equate the position of kicker to the position of starting quarterback is really just a "gotcha" type game with the way Joe phrased a particular line. Tynes made it more than clear last season that he can't be counted on, so who on the team would be "lost" by seeing him get replaced? To use Medlock as a counter to Joe's point is like saying that if we'd drafted a left tackle, someone on the team might go "this rookie didn't compete against I-65, so Herm will lose me if he makes the new guy the starter". What are the odds of anyone actually saying that? Probably in the "billion to one" range.

Huard played well last year, so he's a different situation altogether.

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 10:31 AM
Huard actually played well last year, so he's a different situation altogether.Yea he's clearly earned the job in the preseason this year I mean hes been, what would you say, like 100% or 120% better then Croyle. Last week when he was standing on the sideline and they showed him on camera I could sorta imagine what his bust is gonna look like in the HOF. He is so awesome! I will feel so much better about this team if its Huard throwing INTs instead of Croyle. HERM RULES....YEA CARL!

BigRock
08-28-2007, 10:34 AM
Yea he's clearly earned the job in the preseason this year I mean hes been, what would you say, like 100% or 120% better then Croyle. Last week when he was standing on the sideline and they showed him on camera I could sorta imagine what his bust is gonna look like in the HOF. He is so awesome! I will feel so much better about this team if its Huard throwing INTs instead of Croyle. HERM RULES....YEA CARL!
How you took "Huard played well last year" to mean anything resembling what you just wrote is a complete mystery. But thanks for playing!

FAX
08-28-2007, 10:35 AM
Your words of iron are truthy, Mr. Chiefnj2.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that you agree with The Pos that, with the exception of quarterback, Herm won't "lose the players" because they are okay with starting incompetent boobs if we don't have anyone better at that position.

Well, if true, that's good. However, the argument that Herm's rationale for starting Downfield is based on how the team "feels" about it is still pretty weak since they can somehow find a way to tolerate crappy play from other teammates.

I'm just speculating, of course, but I think Herm's motivations are different. I don't believe that he made this move because he's worried about "losing" the team. I think he chose Downfield because it reflects his conservative nature and he doesn't "lose" Carl.

FAX

the Talking Can
08-28-2007, 10:41 AM
like moths to a 9-7 flame....

FAX
08-28-2007, 10:41 AM
Trying to equate the position of kicker to the position of starting quarterback is really just a "gotcha" type game with the way Joe phrased a particular line. Tynes made it more than clear last season that he can't be counted on, so who on the team would be "lost" by seeing him get replaced? To use Medlock as a counter to Joe's point is like saying that if we'd drafted a left tackle, someone on the team might go "this rookie didn't compete against I-65, so Herm will lose me if he makes the new guy the starter". What are the odds of anyone actually saying that? Probably in the "billion to one" range.

Huard played well last year, so he's a different situation altogether.

Good point, Mr. BigRock. Still, I'm sitting here trying to figure out how you develop a young quarterback by sitting his ass on the bench. Maybe Downfield could mind-meld with him in the locker room.

If Pos had said, Brodie didn't win the job because he still doesn't have the playbook down, doesn't make his reads, or farts in the huddle, I would said, "It's okay!". Instead, the justification seems to be that Herm was concerned that he would "lose" the team. Personally, I don't buy it.

FAX

Chiefnj2
08-28-2007, 10:42 AM
Your words of iron are truthy, Mr. Chiefnj2.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that you agree with The Pos that, with the exception of quarterback, Herm won't "lose the players" because they are okay with starting incompetent boobs if we don't have anyone better at that position.

Well, if true, that's good. However, the argument that Herm's rationale for starting Downfield is based on how the team "feels" about it is still pretty weak since they can somehow find a way to tolerate crappy play from other teammates.

I'm just speculating, of course, but I think Herm's motivations are different. I don't believe that he made this move because he's worried about "losing" the team. I think he chose Downfield because it reflects his conservative nature and he doesn't "lose" Carl.

FAX
Ahh, now I get your point - and I agree.

The main motivation for Herm going with Huard, IMO, is Herm's conservative nature and fear of turnovers. I do agree with Pos that Croyle was given the chance to win the job and didn't, and that Herm has been (for the most part) going with the best player wins the job approach.

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 10:44 AM
How you took "Huard played well last year" to mean anything resembling what you just wrote is a complete mystery. But thanks for playing!No what you are saying is there never was a competition this year, it was Huards job all he had to do was show up......awesome great way to build a team.

OnTheWarpath58
08-28-2007, 10:45 AM
Good point, Mr. BigRock. Still, I'm sitting here trying to figure out how you develop a young quarterback by sitting his ass on the bench. Maybe Downfield could mind-meld with him in the locker room.

If Pos had said, Brodie didn't win the job because he still doesn't have the playbook down, doesn't make his reads, or farts in the huddle, I would said, "It's okay!". Instead, the justification seems to be that Herm was concerned that he would "lose" the team. Personally, I don't buy it.

FAX

Couldn't agree more, Mr. FAX.

Just another lame-ass excuse from 1 Arrowhead Drive, and it has Carl Peterson's fingerprints all over it.

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 10:45 AM
Ahh, now I get your point - and I agree.

The main motivation for Herm going with Huard, IMO, is Herm's conservative nature and fear of turnovers. I do agree with Pos that Croyle was given the chance to win the job and didn't, and that Herm has been (for the most part) going with the best player wins the job approach.
But Huard did NOTHING to win the job.

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 10:47 AM
How you took "Huard played well last year" to mean anything resembling what you just wrote is a complete mystery. But thanks for playing!
Is carlton Gray around? We should give him a huge contract based on the year before.

BigRock
08-28-2007, 10:47 AM
No what you are saying is there never was a competition this year, it was Huards job all he had to do was show up
I didn't say anything even remotely resembling that. But, again, thanks for playing.

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 10:49 AM
I didn't say anything even remotely resembling that. But, again, thanks for playing.
If we are playing assy kissy with Huard I think you are winning.

OnTheWarpath58
08-28-2007, 10:50 AM
Ahh, now I get your point - and I agree.

The main motivation for Herm going with Huard, IMO, is Herm's conservative nature and fear of turnovers. I do agree with Pos that Croyle was given the chance to win the job and didn't, and that Herm has been (for the most part) going with the best player wins the job approach.

To a degree, I agree with you. But I think it's a secondary issue. Bottom line is that it seemed EVERYONE wanted Croyle to start, except for Peterson. Then Huard is handed the job, and the blame lays at the feet of Herm because of his conservative nature?

I know a lot of people think Herm is a moron, but I think the guy is smart enough to know that Croyle was going to make mistakes. He knew that back in April. He didn't need 3 PS games to figure it out.

I think Herm, and the staff were ready to take the risk involved in starting a young QB, and CP vetoed it.

JMO.

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 10:50 AM
I didn't say anything even remotely resembling that. But, again, thanks for playing.
But really if he didnt win the job based on last year or this year why exactly should he be giving the Job?

Chiefnj2
08-28-2007, 10:54 AM
But Huard did NOTHING to win the job.

Huard performed well last year and he didn't do anything to lose the job this preseason.

Can you name many players that earned jobs this preseason?

Deberg_1990
08-28-2007, 10:58 AM
I think Herm, and the staff were ready to take the risk involved in starting a young QB, and CP vetoed it.

JMO.

Ill say it again...I think Carl didnt like the vibe he got from that crowd reaction at Arrowhead last week. He knew it would be a whole season of that if Croyle started so he overruled Herm.

Carl refuses to build a team the right way. He always goes with the band aid fix.

OnTheWarpath58
08-28-2007, 11:00 AM
Ill say it again...I think Carl didnt like the vibe he got from that crowd reaction at Arrowhead last week. He knew it would be a whole season of that if Croyle started so he overruled Herm.

Carl refuses to build a team the right way. He always goes with the band aid fix.

He was still in Huard's corner WAY before that.....was it the second episode of Hard Knocks? That would have been before the Miami game.

The fan reaction (which is ****ing retarded, considering the lack of STH there) was just the straw breaking the camel's back.

Woodrow Call
08-28-2007, 11:08 AM
He was still in Huard's corner WAY before that.....was it the second episode of Hard Knocks? That would have been before the Miami game.

The fan reaction (which is ****ing retarded, considering the lack of STH there) was just the straw breaking the camel's back.

I agree.

What does STH mean?

BigRock
08-28-2007, 11:08 AM
But really if he didnt win the job based on last year or this year why exactly should he be giving the Job?
I haven't said a single thing about how or why Huard has the job. What I said, in relation to people using Medlock and the kicking position as an example of an unproven player getting a job, is that Huard played well last season while Tynes did not. There is an enormous difference in perception between an unproven player replacing someone who did poorly and an unproven player replacing someone who played well.

Thus, it doesn't work to use Medlock as a counter to Joe's point about Huard/Brodie, because the circumstances are entirely different. And that's not even taking into account the fact that a kicker and the starting QB are not exactly equivalent positions.

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 11:10 AM
Huard performed well last year and he didn't do anything to lose the job this preseason.
He didn't do anything to win the job this preseason either. Look its pretty simple you want to go with the guy that looked awful in the preseason who could get us to 6 or 7 wins and an average draft pick thus putting us right back in the same position we are right now, and for all intentions wasting the whole season.........I on the other hand want to go with the young MAYBE qbotf(who also looked awful in the preseason) and yes 3 to 4 wins but at the end of the season we would be in position to draft the best LT on the board OR if Croyle has proven he can't cut it we draft a top 5 valued stud QB and build a future for this team which makes this year not a waste at all.

MGRS13
08-28-2007, 11:13 AM
I haven't said a single thing about how or why Huard has the job. What I said, in relation to people using Medlock and the kicking position as an example of an unproven player getting a job, is that Huard played well last season while Tynes did not. There is an enormous difference in perception between an unproven player replacing someone who did poorly and an unproven player replacing someone who played well.

Thus, it doesn't work to use Medlock as a counter to Joe's point about Huard/Brodie, because the circumstances are entirely different. And that's not even taking into account the fact that a kicker and the starting QB are not exactly equivalent positions.
Ok fair enough. Just for the record I'm cool with Medlock hes young and if hes good weve got a kicker for a long time, if he sucks we'll just get another one. This is also my take on the QB.

underEJ
08-28-2007, 11:15 AM
If Pos had said, Brodie didn't win the job because he still doesn't have the playbook down, doesn't make his reads, or farts in the huddle, I would said, "It's okay!". Instead, the justification seems to be that Herm was concerned that he would "lose" the team. Personally, I don't buy it.

FAX

I'm inclined to agree with your questioning of this suspect argument. The fear of losing the team idea is old fart logic. No old fart ever wants to see other old farts lose out to youth, thus the continued use of the word kid to describe younger players and verbally put them in their place. And actually it's kind of the way newspapers work, so I guess it makes sense he would see it this way, but professional sports leagues have learned the excitement of youth and promise of bright futures can be as compelling to a fan base as continued playoff contention (and I mean that in the yearly 9-7, in it til the last field goal mathematically eliminates way.)

Unfortunately, the front office can never just come out and say, we've decided the hope of .500 is enough to make us postpone our development of Croyle, and as we have done so many years before, we might just go shopping for the next 30 year old steady veteran for next year. But, that's exactly what I heard when they gave the job to Huard.

I like Huard too; I just wanted to see something exciting even if it cost a winning season. I wanted to see this team try to build up a young QB. Now I don't think they ever will. And I think Joe P. was lunched and friended into writing a tired old excuse for the front office.

OnTheWarpath58
08-28-2007, 11:15 AM
I agree.

What does STH mean?

Season Ticket Holder.

A good chunk of them sell or give their PS games away.

The crowd at Arrowhead on 8/16 and 8/23 is not representative of the crowd that will be there 9/23 and beyond.

OnTheWarpath58
08-28-2007, 11:18 AM
And I keep forgetting about Hard Knocks.

I'm hoping we get the chance to see what REALLY happened.

Wonder if they've kept the story straight down at 1 Arrowhead Drive?

Woodrow Call
08-28-2007, 11:20 AM
And I keep forgetting about Hard Knocks.

I'm hoping we get the chance to see what REALLY happened.

Wonder if they've kept the story straight down at 1 Arrowhead Drive?

Should be an interesting episode to say the least.

MadMax
08-28-2007, 11:34 AM
Out of 3 games how many quarters did he actually play? About 1 1/2 games? Is that really enough time to evaluate? Just curious what everyone else thinks, I say no.

RINGLEADER
08-28-2007, 12:41 PM
Damon Huard played well last year. Maybe it was a fluke but I'd rather see Croyle come in after the season's lost rather than being the one that fans deem responsible for losing the season. And if he never comes in and Huard plays well then I'm ok with that too.

patteeu
08-28-2007, 01:13 PM
And I keep forgetting about Hard Knocks.

I'm hoping we get the chance to see what REALLY happened.

Wonder if they've kept the story straight down at 1 Arrowhead Drive?

You should be aware that reality TV isn't very real.

dirk digler
08-28-2007, 01:24 PM
You should be aware that reality TV isn't very real.

Yep also add the fact that the Chiefs have the final say on what goes on the show

go bowe
08-28-2007, 01:29 PM
It bugs me for some reason when people call professional athletes "kid". Almost all of these guys, including Brodie Croyle are full grown men. If you're not going to pat him on the head and pinch his cheek when you see him, you shouldn't call him a kid no matter how old you are, IMO.

In all other aspects, I agree with JoPo's article. :thumb:well, pardon me for calling you a kid, kid...

compared to me, you are definitely a kid...

a rather large kid, but still a kid... :D :D :D