PDA

View Full Version : McIntosh back to practice!!!


Count Zarth
08-31-2007, 10:40 PM
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/256598.html

Chiefs notes: McIntosh will practice

McIntosh looks ‘better’

Acquiring left tackle Damion McIntosh was so important to the Chiefs last winter that they flew him to Kansas City in the opening moments of free-agency and signed him before he had a chance to leave.

The Chiefs haven’t had McIntosh since the early days of training camp because of a knee injury but they are cautiously optimistic about having him for the Sept. 9 regular-season opener against the Texans in Houston.

“He’s getting better,” coach Herm Edwards said. “He has an outside chance.”

Edwards indicated McIntosh would practice Monday when the Chiefs begin preparations for the Texans game.

•STICKING WITH MEDLOCK: Rookie kicker Justin Medlock is struggling, but Edwards said the Chiefs had no plans to replace him. The Chiefs tried to jump-start Medlock in Thursday night’s game in St. Louis by sending him out for a 52-yard field goal attempt.

It was a low line drive that was well short.

“It was long, (52) yards right out of the box,” Edwards said. “I needed to find out, to put him in that situation to see where he was. We might need some of those field goals. He can make them. The snap was OK and the hold was OK. He just didn’t hit it real good. Then he came back later and made one.”

•NO TRADE FOR WESLEY: Safety Greg Wesley will apparently begin the regular season with the Chiefs. Wesley had lost his starting spot when the Chiefs promoted two of last year’s draft picks, Jarrad Page and Bernard Pollard. The Chiefs discussed a trade involving Wesley with at least two teams, the Broncos and more recently the Texans. But those talks cooled.

Demonpenz
08-31-2007, 10:40 PM
whats the point.

Direckshun
08-31-2007, 10:41 PM
Thank Jesus Christ the Lord.

Get healthy, Big Apple. You're our only hope for solid pass protection on the left.

OctoberFart
08-31-2007, 10:56 PM
What's the big deal about another retread? Don't tell me how great he looked in camp because every guy wearing red got you worked up and all queer. You have proved over and over you have no eye for talent. LT's that are good, not even great, don't bounce from team to team.

Fruit Ninja
08-31-2007, 10:57 PM
What's the big deal about another retread? Don't tell me how great he looked in camp because every guy wearing red got you worked up and all queer. You have proved over and over you have no eye for talent. LT's that are good, not even great, don't bounce from team to team.
ITs better then Svetek thats what the big deal is. We arent used of the 2006 Raiders offsnse around here.

Count Zarth
08-31-2007, 10:58 PM
What's the big deal about another retread? Don't tell me how great he looked in camp because every guy wearing red got you worked up and all queer. You have proved over and over you have no eye for talent. LT's that are good, not even great, don't bounce from team to team.

The big deal is that he's much better than Will Svitek.

AZORChiefFan
08-31-2007, 10:59 PM
What's the big deal about another retread? Don't tell me how great he looked in camp because every guy wearing red got you worked up and all queer. You have proved over and over you have no eye for talent. LT's that are good, not even great, don't bounce from team to team.

Do you feel that it's AutumnWind blowing on my nutsack.

dj56dt58
08-31-2007, 11:00 PM
What's the big deal about another retread? Don't tell me how great he looked in camp because every guy wearing red got you worked up and all queer. You have proved over and over you have no eye for talent. LT's that are good, not even great, don't bounce from team to team.
right...just like if Willie Roaf was worth a shit, the Chiefs never would have gotten him because NO wouldn't have let him go

htismaqe
09-01-2007, 07:12 AM
Yeah! He's back just in time to make sure Damon Huard can start the entire season!

CoMoChief
09-01-2007, 07:16 AM
Still wont think he'll be back up to par by the time this game rolls around.

This is gonna be a tough game for us whether you wanna believe that or not.

Skip Towne
09-01-2007, 07:23 AM
What's the big deal about another retread? Don't tell me how great he looked in camp because every guy wearing red got you worked up and all queer. You have proved over and over you have no eye for talent. LT's that are good, not even great, don't bounce from team to team.
How about that Jamarcus Russell? What a bunch of losers. Hahahahahahahaha

BigMeatballDave
09-01-2007, 07:36 AM
Yeah! He's back just in time to make sure Damon Huard can start the entire season!Gotta get that 9-10 season win quota to sustain season ticket sales for next season...
:)

siberian khatru
09-01-2007, 08:26 AM
Our 8-8 season is saved!

Zouk
09-01-2007, 08:33 AM
Gotta get that 9-10 season win quota to sustain season ticket sales for next season...
:)


This is probably not the best thread for this, but I'd just like for someone to give me a couple of good recent examples of teams who took lumps with young QBs, went 4-12 or 5-11, and then magically became a Super Bowl contender because of it.

You can skip off Peyton Manning, because Brodie Croyle ain't that.

Thanks.

Oh Snap
09-01-2007, 08:37 AM
he has missed all preseason. i cant help but to think that it will take a game or 3 for him to become accommodated to the game speed.

CoMoChief
09-01-2007, 08:40 AM
This is probably not the best thread for this, but I'd just like for someone to give me a couple of good recent examples of teams who took lumps with young QBs, went 4-12 or 5-11, and then magically became a Super Bowl contender because of it.

You can skip off Peyton Manning, because Brodie Croyle ain't that.

Thanks.
You cant really tell with QB's coming out of college. Leaf was supposed to be better than Manning coming out and we all know what happened there.

milkman
09-01-2007, 08:41 AM
This is probably not the best thread for this, but I'd just like for someone to give me a couple of good recent examples of teams who took lumps with young QBs, went 4-12 or 5-11, and then magically became a Super Bowl contender because of it.

You can skip off Peyton Manning, because Brodie Croyle ain't that.

Thanks.

No one magically became contenders because they let young QBs take their lumps.

Teams that have built around young QBs have, however, won more SBs than teams that try to compete with career journeyman backups.

htismaqe
09-01-2007, 08:42 AM
This is probably not the best thread for this, but I'd just like for someone to give me a couple of good recent examples of teams who took lumps with young QBs, went 4-12 or 5-11, and then magically became a Super Bowl contender because of it.

You can skip off Peyton Manning, because Brodie Croyle ain't that.

Thanks.

Maybe you missed the point.

Brodie Croyle may, or may not, get better.

But at this point, he represents something DIFFERENT. Different than what we've been doing for the past EIGHTEEN years. Perhaps you have infinite patience for Carl and his buffoonery, but many of us do not.

Zouk
09-01-2007, 08:52 AM
Maybe you missed the point.

Brodie Croyle may, or may not, get better.

But at this point, he represents something DIFFERENT. Different than what we've been doing for the past EIGHTEEN years. Perhaps you have infinite patience for Carl and his buffoonery, but many of us do not.


All due respect, I just really don't see how or why the Brodie Croyle/Damon Huard needs to carry the weight of 18 years of history. And call me naive, but I really do believe that Herm, Solari, and Dick Curl methodically made the decision after watching tape of every snap in minicamps, River Falls, and the preseason. I don't know if you ever have to make decisions in any kind of professional capacity - but in my experience frantically trying to just "do something different" no matter the evidence never works.

I also think that Herm agrees with you that the best chance the team has to make it to the next level is with a young QB with all the tools playing. But wishing won't make it happen. Most young QBs with all the tools never make it, nevermind by their 2nd year. He'll get another chance.

Losing never made any team better.

OnTheWarpath58
09-01-2007, 09:01 AM
All due respect, I just really don't see how or why the Brodie Croyle/Damon Huard needs to carry the weight of 18 years of history. And call me naive, but I really do believe that Herm, Solari, and Dick Curl methodically made the decision after watching tape of every snap in minicamps, River Falls, and the preseason. I don't know if you ever have to make decisions in any kind of professional capacity - but in my experience frantically trying to just "do something different" no matter the evidence never works.

I also think that Herm agrees with you that the best chance the team has to make it to the next level is with a young QB with all the tools playing. But wishing won't make it happen. Most young QBs with all the tools never make it, nevermind by their 2nd year. He'll get another chance.

Losing never made any team better.


We disagree.

Signed,

The 2000-2003 San Diego Chargers

The 1995-1998 St. Louis Rams

The 1986-1990 Dallas Cowboys

The 1999 & 2000 New England Patriots

The 1996-1999 Baltimore Ravens

The 1997 & 1998 Indianapolis Colts

htismaqe
09-01-2007, 09:07 AM
All due respect, I just really don't see how or why the Brodie Croyle/Damon Huard needs to carry the weight of 18 years of history. And call me naive, but I really do believe that Herm, Solari, and Dick Curl methodically made the decision after watching tape of every snap in minicamps, River Falls, and the preseason. I don't know if you ever have to make decisions in any kind of professional capacity - but in my experience frantically trying to just "do something different" no matter the evidence never works.

I also think that Herm agrees with you that the best chance the team has to make it to the next level is with a young QB with all the tools playing. But wishing won't make it happen. Most young QBs with all the tools never make it, nevermind by their 2nd year. He'll get another chance.

Losing never made any team better.

Because Damon Huard is a 34-year old backup, who in TEN YEARS couldn't get anyone in the league to notice him enough to get a shot. He represents EXACTLY the same safe, mediocre plan we've had for the last 18 years. Our starting QB is an over-the-hill journeyman that nobody else wanted.

And yes, I do have to make decisions in a professional capacity all the time. Sometimes, you have to pass on the "safe" choice and take the risk, in hopes that it pays off. Because in my job, 90% success is the same as 30% success - it's not success. Nothing short of 100% is acceptable, and sometimes those big risks pay off to the tune of 150, 175, or even 200%.

noa
09-01-2007, 09:10 AM
Because Damon Huard is a 34-year old backup, who in TEN YEARS couldn't get anyone in the league to notice him enough to get a shot. He represents EXACTLY the same safe, mediocre plan we've had for the last 18 years. Our starting QB is an over-the-hill journeyman that nobody else wanted.

And yes, I do have to make decisions in a professional capacity all the time. Sometimes, you have to pass on the "safe" choice and take the risk, in hopes that it pays off. Because in my job, 90% success is the same as 30% success - it's not success. Nothing short of 100% is acceptable, and sometimes those big risks pay off to the tune of 150, 175, or even 200%.

What do you think of JoPo's argument...that Herm would lose the confidence of his team by starting a QB who was given all the opportunity in the world and didn't do squat with it?

Zouk
09-01-2007, 09:10 AM
We disagree.

Signed,

The 2000-2003 San Diego Chargers

The 1995-1998 St. Louis Rams

The 1986-1990 Dallas Cowboys

The 1999 & 2000 New England Patriots

The 1996-1999 Baltimore Ravens

The 1997 & 1998 Indianapolis Colts

I never said losing teams never got better. I'm not an idiot.

The only way the losing helped is with draft picks, but the experience of losing did not make players get better.

OnTheWarpath58
09-01-2007, 09:12 AM
I never said losing teams never got better. I'm not an idiot.

The only way the losing helped is with draft picks, but the experience of losing did not make players get better.

Huh?

You might want to re-read your post.

Your EXACT words:

"Losing never made any team better."

And you bet your ass losing can make a player better. It tests his character. How he faces adversity says a lot about him. You find out real quick who the real players are on the team when you have a 3-13 season. The guys that roll over get the ax. The guys who continue to work their asses off, you build around them.

Zouk
09-01-2007, 09:12 AM
Because Damon Huard is a 34-year old backup, who in TEN YEARS couldn't get anyone in the league to notice him enough to get a shot. He represents EXACTLY the same safe, mediocre plan we've had for the last 18 years. Our starting QB is an over-the-hill journeyman that nobody else wanted.

And yes, I do have to make decisions in a professional capacity all the time. Sometimes, you have to pass on the "safe" choice and take the risk, in hopes that it pays off. Because in my job, 90% success is the same as 30% success - it's not success. Nothing short of 100% is acceptable, and sometimes those big risks pay off to the tune of 150, 175, or even 200%.


I see your perspective, but I still think the recent history shows that putting a young QB out there before he's shown himself to be ready ultimately hurts rather than helps his development.

milkman
09-01-2007, 09:21 AM
I see your perspective, but I still think the recent history shows that putting a young QB out there before he's shown himself to be ready ultimately hurts rather than helps his development.

Drew Brees wasn't ready.

htismaqe
09-01-2007, 09:25 AM
What do you think of JoPo's argument...that Herm would lose the confidence of his team by starting a QB who was given all the opportunity in the world and didn't do squat with it?

Probably a valid argument.

I just can't get myself to care.

Count Zarth
09-01-2007, 09:35 AM
I think there would have been a veteran revolt if he had started Croyle.

Law, Surtain, Gonzalez, Kennison, Edwards, Wiegmann, Waters, maybe even LJ...

StcChief
09-01-2007, 09:41 AM
This is probably not the best thread for this, but I'd just like for someone to give me a couple of good recent examples of teams who took lumps with young QBs, went 4-12 or 5-11, and then magically became a Super Bowl contender because of it.

You can skip off Peyton Manning, because Brodie Croyle ain't that.

Thanks.
The 99 Rams. outta no where. Trent injury Kurt surprised the league

OnTheWarpath58
09-01-2007, 10:19 AM
I think there would have been a veteran revolt if he had started Croyle.

Law, Surtain, Gonzalez, Kennison, Edwards, Wiegmann, Waters, maybe even LJ...

So the veteran revolt begins NEXT year?

That makes sense. :rolleyes:

If I'm a vet with 2-5 years left in my career, I'd rather go through the growing pains NOW rather than my last year or two.

Short Leash Hootie
09-01-2007, 10:22 AM
You cant really tell with QB's coming out of college. Leaf was supposed to be better than Manning coming out and we all know what happened there.
As evidenced by the fact Manning went #1, and Leaf went #2?

Short Leash Hootie
09-01-2007, 10:25 AM
No use in trying to make valid points to htismaque and onthewarpath, neither have an open mind about the Croyle/Huard situation...

Sure-Oz
09-01-2007, 10:27 AM
I thought there was alot of hype with Leaf when they said he was better....i myself didn't want Leaf with SD, glad he did though haha

Count Zarth
09-01-2007, 10:31 AM
So the veteran revolt begins NEXT year?


If Croyle wins the job next year, no one will revolt.

Messier
09-01-2007, 10:31 AM
So the veteran revolt begins NEXT year?

That makes sense. :rolleyes:

If I'm a vet with 2-5 years left in my career, I'd rather go through the growing pains NOW rather than my last year or two.


Well, that's you. And you're not an NFL player. I heard quotes from players and coaches, and they all say the same thing. They could care less who is starting, as long as they get the job done, and don't cost games. There are no growing pains with losing, just pains. With turnover in the league why would players want to play for two or three years from now? In two or three years even with mild turnover the roster would be different by a third. They want to win games now. And they only want the players that give them the best chance to win playing. No player is playing to so that another player can learn the ropes.

OnTheWarpath58
09-01-2007, 10:38 AM
No use in trying to make valid points to htismaque and onthewarpath, neither have an open mind about the Croyle/Huard situation...

Open mind my ass.

There is no "situation." It's pretty black and white.

If you're OK with 8-8 while a young QB sits, instead of gaining valuable experience, then Huard is your guy.

If you think there isn't much difference between 8-8 and 6-10, and would like to have some certainty as to where the QB position sits for the franchise, instead of going through the growing pains NEXT year, then Croyle is your guy.

This isn't about talent, or lack thereof. It's about having a clearer idea about the future of the franchise.

I'm not saying the kid is going to be the next Payton Manning.

I'm not saying he'll be the next Ryan Leaf.

But we won't KNOW until we play him in games that COUNT, with a full arsenal of STARTERS at his disposal, and a full PLAYBOOK and GAMEPLANS.

But since you're so sure about Damon, put your money where your mouth is.

I'll put $50 on the line that Huard can not, and will not duplicate his 2006 performance.

No way in hell his QB rating is 98.0 or better this year.

No way in hell his TD/INT is 11 to 1.

GoHuge
09-01-2007, 10:42 AM
Well he was the final piece of the puzzle for this Super Bowl bound team. Glad he's back. Print em!

boogblaster
09-01-2007, 10:50 AM
Were in it to win the damn game .....

BigMeatballDave
09-01-2007, 10:58 AM
No use in trying to make valid points to htismaque and onthewarpath, neither have an open mind about the Croyle/Huard situation...Jesus. Huard has been a back-up in this league for 10 seasons for a reason. His play last season was a fluke. We'll see what happens. Hope I am wrong...