PDA

View Full Version : Huard was completely out of sync with the offense


PunkinDrublic
09-09-2007, 07:36 PM
They showed a few signs they could be alright but Huard not working much with the offense for a few weeks before the season really hurt the m o n offense. For the most part Huard couldn't seem to find his timing with the offense. That combined with the atrocious play calling sealed our fate. It doesn't help that we kept turning the ball over and got screwed on some weak assed penalties. How the hell was that one pass play offensive pass interferance?

B_Ambuehl
09-10-2007, 12:24 AM
I actually thought Huard looked more composed and confident then he had at anytime last year. I was quite impressed with him and the pass protection. McIntosh looked pretty good and what surprised me is he's an asset in the running game....he can get out on the pitch and get downfield and take some people out. However, none of that matters when your receivers drop the ball 8 times. That's what did us in. I don't think the playcalling was that bad. It appeared bad due to so many easy drops on 1st and 2nd down, but this offense should actually be better than last years offense simply due to the improved pass protection.....I don't know that it will because the schedule looks quite a bit tougher, but there's no reason to throw in the towel.

Buehler445
09-10-2007, 12:30 AM
I don't know why everyone keeps dogging on the playcalling. I don't know where to find the ratios, but I'm sure the Pass:Run ratio was much higher this game than any game last season. Huard made a few nice throws and receivers cannot CATCH THE BALL (exempting Sammie Parker...I'm convinced we're in the Twilight Zone).

My problem with Huard is that he cannot move. If the pocket collapsed, he did not show any mobility and ate a couple of sacks he could have at least scrambled enough to throw the ball away. There are also several passes that he cannot make, but we've been over that.

unlurking
09-10-2007, 12:31 AM
I actually thought Huard looked more composed and confident then he had at anytime last year. I was quite impressed with him and the pass protection. McIntosh looked pretty good and what surprised me is he's an asset in the running game....he can get out on the pitch and get downfield and take some people out. However, none of that matters when your receivers drop the ball 8 times. That's what did us in. I don't think the playcalling was that bad. It appeared bad due to so many easy drops on 1st and 2nd down, but this offense should actually be better than last years offense simply due to the improved pass protection.....I don't know that it will because the schedule looks quite a bit tougher, but there's no reason to throw in the towel.
Are you seriously saying that every ball Huard threw that was not caught was dropped?! He did not overthrow a single receiver? He didn't throw high and behind and receiver?

I think it's time to get thicker glasses.

SPchief
09-10-2007, 12:33 AM
My problem with Huard is that he cannot move. If the pocket collapsed, he did not show any mobility and ate a couple of sacks he could have at least scrambled enough to throw the ball away. There are also several passes that he cannot make, but we've been over that.


And a couple of times when the pocket was starting to colapse, instead of stepping up, I saw him turn around and prepare for the sack before someone was even within a couple of yards of him.

DaneMcCloud
09-10-2007, 12:35 AM
I don't know why everyone keeps dogging on the playcalling.


Because:

A) They didn't WATCH the game and instead listened to cranky ol' Len Dawson (sorry, he's a cranky old man these days) or:

B) They don't know jacksh*t about football.

The offense looked like Vermiel & Saunders offense on the first drive. Excellent mix of pass and run. Medlocke's shank and the subsequent mistakes by the special teams, receivers and later, offensive line play made it impossible to the Chiefs to stick to their original game plan, especially on the ROAD.

Add to that, a Pro Bowl running back who's clearly NOT ready to carry the load and a new signed left tackle who missed training camp.

ANYONE who expected more than what we saw today is either fooling themselves or doesn't understand football.

PERIOD.

ChiefaRoo
09-10-2007, 12:43 AM
Because:

A) They didn't WATCH the game and instead listened to cranky ol' Len Dawson (sorry, he's a cranky old man these days) or:

B) They don't know jacksh*t about football.

The offense looked like Vermiel & Saunders offense on the first drive. Excellent mix of pass and run. Medlocke's shank and the subsequent mistakes by the special teams, receivers and later, offensive line play made it impossible to the Chiefs to stick to their original game plan, especially on the ROAD.

Add to that, a Pro Bowl running back who's clearly NOT ready to carry the load and a new signed left tackle who missed training camp.

ANYONE who expected more than what we saw today is either fooling themselves or doesn't understand football.

PERIOD.

Fair enough but watching the Chiefs long enough can make someone cranky. Lenny is probably thinking "jeez are they gonna win a SB before I die?"

DaneMcCloud
09-10-2007, 12:46 AM
Fair enough but watching the Chiefs long enough can make someone cranky. Lenny is probably thinking "jeez are they gonna win a SB before I die?"

Definitely and I'm not implying that he's wrong to feel that way.

But anyone here should've realized that this was going to be a long year long before today.

For a number of reasons.

Reerun_KC
09-10-2007, 06:21 AM
ROFL

You put Huard in any NFL offense and it will be out of sync...

patteeu
09-10-2007, 06:30 AM
I don't know why everyone keeps dogging on the playcalling. I don't know where to find the ratios, but I'm sure the Pass:Run ratio was much higher this game than any game last season. Huard made a few nice throws and receivers cannot CATCH THE BALL (exempting Sammie Parker...I'm convinced we're in the Twilight Zone).

My problem with Huard is that he cannot move. If the pocket collapsed, he did not show any mobility and ate a couple of sacks he could have at least scrambled enough to throw the ball away. There are also several passes that he cannot make, but we've been over that.

One complaint that I thought was valid last year was that the Chiefs were too reliant on LJ runs on first down. Yesterday, I thought the Chiefs did a good job of mixing the pass and the run on first down. Dropped passes and penalties were killers, and there wasn't much stretching of the field, but in general I thought the plays being called were reasonable and that Huard performed well.

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 07:36 AM
22 completions, 168 yards.

Len Dawson only said about FIFTY times that the Chiefs wouldn't even attempt to throw the ball downfield.

Gee, I wonder why?

Chiefnj2
09-10-2007, 07:42 AM
This game was really the third exhibition game for KC. That's the game your starters usually play together for most of the game. KC never had that benefit with holdouts, injury and Herm shuffling the lineup.

They'll get in synch around week 3 and be able to put up 9 points a game.

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 07:43 AM
This game was really the third exhibition game for KC. That's the game your starters usually play together for most of the game. KC never had that benefit with holdouts, injury and Herm shuffling the lineup.

They'll get in synch around week 3 and be able to put up 9 points a game.

ROFL

Chiefnj2
09-10-2007, 07:58 AM
ROFL

The game just sucked. What was worse, was that as soon as it ended I flipped over to the Bills game thinking to myself "At least the Broncos will lose". I then get watch Cutler eat up the Bills D and the special teams unit calmly walk out and make a FG with no time on the board.

What was sad was the realization that the Chiefs couldn't do that. They wouldn't have moved the chains and there is no way they would have gotten the kick off, let alone make the FG.

And it wouldn't be right to talk about the Bills game and not send out wishes to that poor guy who suffered the neck injury. That was ugly.

boogblaster
09-10-2007, 08:30 AM
Huard isn't a top QB..but he didn't lose the game by hisself ....

Molitoth
09-10-2007, 08:36 AM
And a couple of times when the pocket was starting to colapse, instead of stepping up, I saw him turn around and prepare for the sack before someone was even within a couple of yards of him.

YES YES YES. This is why I hate Huard.
The dude does not even try to scramble or step up in the pocket, he just falls down like a weak declawed cat.

Reerun_KC
09-10-2007, 08:36 AM
Huard isn't a top QB..but he didn't lose the game by hisself ....


No but he didnt help any either....

Huard has no business starting for any NFL team.. Crap the guy had to fake that calf injury in preseason, otherwise he wouldnt be starting...

His performance was pathetic for an 11 year vet... How about throwing a pass down field that doesnt look like a wounded duck, you noodle arm.

Reerun_KC
09-10-2007, 08:36 AM
YES YES YES. This is why I hate Huard.
The dude does not even try to scramble or step up in the pocket, he just falls down like a weak declawed cat.


No moxy, heart or leadership...

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 09:44 AM
Huard isn't a top QB..but he didn't lose the game by hisself ....

THREE POINTS.

How can anybody sit here now, after the fact, and say that the fact that Huard doesn't throw INT's in ANY WAY outweighs the fact that he CAN'T SCORE?

Chris Meck
09-10-2007, 12:25 PM
Well, he does throw interceptions. And he can't stretch the field, so the defense sits 8 and 9 in the box. He folds at the first sign of a rush. He dumps passes out to receivers that aren't even open and are unlikely to gain a yard. (Wilson-again I ask, why even make that throw?) He's got no zip on the ball.

I don't think Huard gives you any more chance to win at all than Brodie. And worse, Huard gives you no chance to win NEXT YEAR either.

I don't think there's anything wrong with running more than you throw. Dallas in the SB years ran nearly 60 percent of the time. But when you pass, you have to scare them. Huard scares nobody.

Chiefnj2
09-10-2007, 12:30 PM
THREE POINTS.

How can anybody sit here now, after the fact, and say that the fact that Huard doesn't throw INT's in ANY WAY outweighs the fact that he CAN'T SCORE?

In Herm's eyes Huard hasn't proved that he can't score. Receivers dropped balls and some guys coughed it up.

That's one of the misleading natures about Herm coached teams. You'll look at the stats and things don't look bad. Pennington threw for a ton of yards and had some good QB ratings with Herm. You look at the box score today and see not-so-bad numbers for Huard.

That's what was hard to get across to so many people when Herm was hired. Yeah, he made the playoffs more often than not, but there's just something not right about it. There are always big problems lurking underneath the acceptable stats.

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 12:40 PM
In Herm's eyes Huard hasn't proved that he can't score. Receivers dropped balls and some guys coughed it up.

That's one of the misleading natures about Herm coached teams. You'll look at the stats and things don't look bad. Pennington threw for a ton of yards and had some good QB ratings with Herm. You look at the box score today and see not-so-bad numbers for Huard.

That's what was hard to get across to so many people when Herm was hired. Yeah, he made the playoffs more often than not, but there's just something not right about it. There are always big problems lurking underneath the acceptable stats.

I don't consider Huards numbers "not-so-bad".

There is zero reason in the modern NFL to finish a game with more than 30 attempts but under 200 yards.

Chiefnj2
09-10-2007, 12:45 PM
I don't consider Huards numbers "not-so-bad".

There is zero reason in the modern NFL to finish a game with more than 30 attempts but under 200 yards.

1 reason = that's what was called by the OC.

At this point Solari is damned if he does and doesn't. He's got a poor OL that can't block that long which makes deep passing difficult. He lost his #1 receiver on the first play which meant his #1 draft choice (who spent weeks on PUP b/c the head coach didn't want to rush things) had to unexpectedly carry the load. He's got a QB that can't get zip on anything past 12 yards. Maybe if he had a pocket to step into he could throw it a little better, but he doesn't. And he doesn't have a great run game because the HB had a contract dispute and missed 99.8% of the offseason.

Like I said previously, these first few weeks are like the preseason that should have been.

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 12:58 PM
1 reason = that's what was called by the OC.

At this point Solari is damned if he does and doesn't. He's got a poor OL that can't block that long which makes deep passing difficult. He lost his #1 receiver on the first play which meant his #1 draft choice (who spent weeks on PUP b/c the head coach didn't want to rush things) had to unexpectedly carry the load. He's got a QB that can't get zip on anything past 12 yards. Maybe if he had a pocket to step into he could throw it a little better, but he doesn't. And he doesn't have a great run game because the HB had a contract dispute and missed 99.8% of the offseason.

Like I said previously, these first few weeks are like the preseason that should have been.

According to the radio guys yesterday, the OC called several plays downfield and Huard didn't even look their way.

kaplin42
09-10-2007, 01:07 PM
But when you pass, you have to scare them. Huard scares nobody.


I beg to differ sir. Huard scares the crap out of me. And the proof of it was the last offensive series the Chiefs had. Three times you pick to dump off to LJ that is standing 5 to 10 yards straight upfield from you, WTF. This isn't powder puff, players and coaches are going to pick up on this just a bit.

Vegas_Dave
09-10-2007, 01:20 PM
Lenny is probably thinking "jeez are they gonna win a SB before I die?"

Heck, I'm 27 and wonder the same thing!

Chiefs Pantalones
09-10-2007, 01:29 PM
There is zero reason in the modern NFL to finish a game with more than 30 attempts but under 200 yards.

It's Butt Sex football at its finest!

Herm Edwards has arrived!!

Crashride
09-10-2007, 01:30 PM
seems many of the dumbasses gathered in this thread. Hes not the one who dropped all these passes and fumbled. He threw one pick on a two minute drill that didnt matter, big shit. Talk your crap when lj gets more than 10 touches and we start catching

Baby Lee
09-10-2007, 01:35 PM
No moxy, heart or leadership...
???????
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/01/02/photos/wk-film-chicago2.jpg

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 01:37 PM
seems many of the dumbasses gathered in this thread. Hes not the one who dropped all these passes and fumbled. He threw one pick on a two minute drill that didnt matter, big shit. Talk your crap when lj gets more than 10 touches and we start catching

ROFL

You just set yourself up to get roasted all season. Unless you REALLY believe that Huard is good QB...

Chief Faithful
09-10-2007, 01:37 PM
Huard isn't a top QB..but he didn't lose the game by hisself ....

Agreed, this lose was a team loss. The only part of the team that held up their end was defense. In this game offense sucked, special teams sucked, and coaching sucked.

They looked like a team that did not use their preseason to get ready as they were completely out of sync and full of mental errors. It was a repeat of last year when it was game three before the team started to come out of its slumber on offense.

Maybe Herm spent too much energy looking at the new guys in training camp and not enough time getting the first team ready to play a real game.

Crashride
09-10-2007, 02:50 PM
ROFL

You just set yourself up to get roasted all season. Unless you REALLY believe that Huard is good QB...

No one said he was a good qb, your just hearing what you want to here. What im saying is you cant blame him for this games loss when its sooooo clear that we cant catch for SHIT. When this team turns the corner dont be one of the guys thats all like "I knew they were gonna get better all along!"

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 03:02 PM
No one said he was a good qb, your just hearing what you want to here. What im saying is you cant blame him for this games loss when its sooooo clear that we cant catch for SHIT. When this team turns the corner dont be one of the guys thats all like "I knew they were gonna get better all along!"

You can blame the receivers all you want. If they hang onto the ball we have 4th and 2 instead of 4th and 10. What good does it do to catch the ball when Huard never throws beyond the first down marker?

As for this team "turning the corner"...ROFL

Rick
09-10-2007, 03:11 PM
I don't know why everyone keeps dogging on the playcalling. I don't know where to find the ratios, but I'm sure the Pass:Run ratio was much higher this game than any game last season. Huard made a few nice throws and receivers cannot CATCH THE BALL (exempting Sammie Parker...I'm convinced we're in the Twilight Zone).

My problem with Huard is that he cannot move. If the pocket collapsed, he did not show any mobility and ate a couple of sacks he could have at least scrambled enough to throw the ball away. There are also several passes that he cannot make, but we've been over that.

It's not the ratio (Gonzalez 25yds on 5 catches????)
Why the heck are we so obssessed with out patterns? Tony needs to go down middle of the field deeper. Where are our square-ins? And by the way, enough of the quick-slants already.
I thought Huard looked like crap---yes he completed his passes, but he throws enough 2 yarders to make me puke. I thought he got rid of the ball too quick on many of the screens and such.
And you're correct, he will not make any plays on his own---which leaves it up to the play-calling (oh crap)

Count Zarth
09-10-2007, 03:14 PM
It's weird, because this team threw the ball down the field last year. We were ninth in the NFL in yards per attempt. I honestly don't know what the hell we were doing. It's like they wanted to throw out some kind of short passing game since they couldn't hand Larry the rock 30 times. Who knows. Buttsex offense would have been fine yesterday.

Tribal Warfare
09-10-2007, 03:20 PM
The offense looked like Vermiel & Saunders offense




This where I disagree bigtime, Huard was checking off to the dunks so often that he got intercepted by a F*CKIN D-Tackle. Huard is only a caretaker, but not one who can win one when the pressure is on

Crashride
09-10-2007, 03:27 PM
You can blame the receivers all you want. If they hang onto the ball we have 4th and 2 instead of 4th and 10. What good does it do to catch the ball when Huard never throws beyond the first down marker?

As for this team "turning the corner"...ROFL

I guess this type of comment comes out after being a chiefs fan for so long :)

Your not accounting for YAC, which is another thing our recievers cant produce. To me its ALL about recievers and O line

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 04:06 PM
[/B]

I guess this type of comment comes out after being a chiefs fan for so long :)

Your not accounting for YAC, which is another thing our recievers cant produce. To me its ALL about recievers and O line

With most fans it's about the WR's and OL. Nobody wants to recognize Huard for what he is - a career backup that shouldn't be starting.

Crashride
09-10-2007, 04:12 PM
With most fans it's about the WR's and OL. Nobody wants to recognize Huard for what he is - a career backup that shouldn't be starting.

and no matter what you say hes still the best weve got

Mecca
09-10-2007, 04:13 PM
Damon Huard was Jay Fiedlers backup that's all that needs to be said about him.

Count Zarth
09-10-2007, 04:14 PM
Huard is only a caretaker, but not one who can win one when the pressure is on

I think people are being unfair. Huard brought us back against:

Arizona
Seattle
San Diego

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 04:59 PM
and no matter what you say hes still the best weve got

No, he isn't.

Brodie Croyle could have EASILY thrown for O TD's and 2 INT's, and he could have also thrown the ball downfield, backing the safeties off and getting some space for LJ.

Crashride
09-10-2007, 05:01 PM
No, he isn't.

Brodie Croyle could have EASILY thrown for O TD's and 2 INT's, and he could have also thrown the ball downfield, backing the safeties off and getting some space for LJ.

Yea with his AMAZING accuracy and decision making, and LJ being limited to 10 touches...please save it Croyle isnt exactly a Jay Cutler...yet

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 05:04 PM
Yea with his AMAZING accuracy and decision making, and LJ being limited to 10 touches...please save it Croyle isnt exactly a Jay Cutler...yet

Nice spin.

Part of the reason LJ was limited to 10 touches was because Downfield Damon can't challenge the secondary. You can't run against 10 guys in the box.

Damon Huard posted a 53.6 QB rating yesterday. There's no way to defend that - unless of course, you're happy with yesterday's results.

the Talking Can
09-10-2007, 05:09 PM
please save it Croyle isnt exactly a Jay Cutler...yet

but with another season sitting on the bench he will be?

Jay Cutler gets to play....some teams think that playing is essential to getting better...

some teams like the Chiefs that is just crazy Arena Football talk...

Woodrow Call
09-10-2007, 05:11 PM
Damon Huard was Jay Fiedlers backup that's all that needs to be said about him.

Pretty much all that needs to be said.

Put in Croyle, bring in Leftwich, I really don't care. Huard has never been a starter for a reason and the reasons should be clear to everyone. Starting Huard serves no purpose.

Crashride
09-10-2007, 05:12 PM
Nice spin.

Part of the reason LJ was limited to 10 touches was because Downfield Damon can't challenge the secondary. You can't run against 10 guys in the box.

Damon Huard posted a 53.6 QB rating yesterday. There's no way to defend that - unless of course, you're happy with yesterday's results.

Lj was limited because he was limited to that many until herm thinks hes "in shape." 2. Lj ran against 10 in the box all last year, the result? 1700 yards once again.

As far has Huards rating, given the recievers catch the ball, it goes up. You can point anywhere around the league in the FIRST WEEK and find GOOD qbs with low ratings.

Am I happy? **** NO. Im just more angry that we sat back hoping croyle would be the second coming of montana in his sophmore year.

PunkinDrublic
09-10-2007, 05:13 PM
All I was trying to say is that Huard needs more time to work with this offense. Last year when Huard was thrown into the game against Cincy he struggled. I think the offense will do better once they have more time to gel. One thing that was encouraging was that Bowe was at least getting open. I for one thought he caught that ball on third down that the ref ruled incomplete, but then I was watching from the other side of the field.

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 05:17 PM
Lj was limited because he was limited to that many until herm thinks hes "in shape." 2. Lj ran against 10 in the box all last year, the result? 1700 yards once again.

As far has Huards rating, given the recievers catch the ball, it goes up. You can point anywhere around the league in the FIRST WEEK and find GOOD qbs with low ratings.

Am I happy? **** NO. Im just more angry that we sat back hoping croyle would be the second coming of montana in his sophmore year.

22 completions, 168 yards.

Blame that on the WR's.

Crashride
09-10-2007, 05:23 PM
22 completions, 168 yards.

Blame that on the WR's.

Did you even see how bad our wr corps were? Any stat you bring up from the game doesnt matter. The fact is for this ONE game you cant put it all on Huard like you are.

Craqhead
09-10-2007, 05:27 PM
Well I have to reserve my comments untill I have 10k posts or what eva. At this rate its gonna take me a very long time to get that many posts, as I will have nothing to post about.

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 05:33 PM
Did you even see how bad our wr corps were? Any stat you bring up from the game doesnt matter. The fact is for this ONE game you cant put it all on Huard like you are.

Of course, there's no stat from the game that matters. Huard can do no wrong.

For the record, I'm not "putting the whole game" on Huard. But mark my words, even IF the WR's could catch, and the OL could block, and LJ could run 25 times, Damon Huard is still Damon Huard.

See, we have Huard's entire TEN YEAR career to draw upon. And what's that? Oh yeah, he's NEVER been a starter without somebody being injured.

Woodrow Call
09-10-2007, 05:47 PM
Of course, there's no stat from the game that matters. Huard can do no wrong.

For the record, I'm not "putting the whole game" on Huard. But mark my words, even IF the WR's could catch, and the OL could block, and LJ could run 25 times, Damon Huard is still Damon Huard.

See, we have Huard's entire TEN YEAR career to draw upon. And what's that? Oh yeah, he's NEVER been a starter without somebody being injured.

:clap:

FringeNC
09-10-2007, 05:50 PM
I thought Huard's performance was on par what he did last year -- the difference in outcomes was that the clock has struck midnight and the Cinderella story is over.

Last year, Huard was the beneficiary of some incredible luck -- incredible catches by Kennison and Gonzalez, dropped INTs all over the place, played some of the weakest defenses in the league, etc.

Those of us who have been down on Huard observed last season, and came to a conclusion those numbers were a total fluke. Huard is terribly immobile, fumbles a lot, is not particularly accurate, has a below average arm. Now he is a savvy veteran that makes the most of his skills. Problem is, those skills are very limited. These is a reason he always has been a backup.

petegz28
09-10-2007, 05:58 PM
I don't know why everyone keeps dogging on the playcalling. I don't know where to find the ratios, but I'm sure the Pass:Run ratio was much higher this game than any game last season. Huard made a few nice throws and receivers cannot CATCH THE BALL (exempting Sammie Parker...I'm convinced we're in the Twilight Zone).

My problem with Huard is that he cannot move. If the pocket collapsed, he did not show any mobility and ate a couple of sacks he could have at least scrambled enough to throw the ball away. There are also several passes that he cannot make, but we've been over that.


It's not the pass vs. run ratio, it's the plays themselves. Nothing downfield, nothing deep really at all. Not even just fling one to stretch the d.

More of that sideways crap if you ask me.

Crashride
09-10-2007, 06:10 PM
Of course, there's no stat from the game that matters. Huard can do no wrong.

For the record, I'm not "putting the whole game" on Huard. But mark my words, even IF the WR's could catch, and the OL could block, and LJ could run 25 times, Damon Huard is still Damon Huard.

See, we have Huard's entire TEN YEAR career to draw upon. And what's that? Oh yeah, he's NEVER been a starter without somebody being injured.

All you doing is bashing huards career to justify.... oh wait NOTHING. Whats your arguement? To keep croyle in there im guessing, for his "big arm." News flash we dont have a wr to go out there and catch that deep ball, assuming it was on target. Huard sucks. Croyle sucks worse. Huard the career back-up has taken us to the play-offs.

Crashride
09-10-2007, 06:12 PM
I thought Huard's performance was on par what he did last year -- the difference in outcomes was that the clock has struck midnight and the Cinderella story is over.

Last year, Huard was the beneficiary of some incredible luck -- incredible catches by Kennison and Gonzalez, dropped INTs all over the place, played some of the weakest defenses in the league, etc.

Those of us who have been down on Huard observed last season, and came to a conclusion those numbers were a total fluke. Huard is terribly immobile, fumbles a lot, is not particularly accurate, has a below average arm. Now he is a savvy veteran that makes the most of his skills. Problem is, those skills are very limited. These is a reason he always has been a backup.

:clap: Exactly. Given what you said makes him more qualified than Brodie. These hard ons for the kid need to go down already

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 06:17 PM
All you doing is bashing huards career to justify.... oh wait NOTHING. Whats your arguement? To keep croyle in there im guessing, for his "big arm." News flash we dont have a wr to go out there and catch that deep ball, assuming it was on target. Huard sucks. Croyle sucks worse. Huard the career back-up has taken us to the play-offs.

Nothing? You think that the FACT that Huard has been in the league 10 years and the CHIEFS are the first team to give him a shot at starting is "nothing"? You think that the FACT that Huard oversaw one of the most pathetic opening day performances in recent memory is "nothing"?

Carl Peterson and Herm Edwards are perfect for what you want. You've bought into every bit of ridiculous crap they've fed you.

It has nothing to do with Brodie, and everything to do with Huard being inadequate.

Enjoy your moral victory. After all, he took us to the playoffs!!!

FringeNC
09-10-2007, 06:21 PM
:clap: Exactly. Given what you said makes him more qualified than Brodie. These hard ons for the kid need to go down already

I think you missed the point. Huard is not a starting-caliber type QB. Croyle may or may not be -- what's the downside of finding out?

OnTheWarpath58
09-10-2007, 06:22 PM
Exactly as I predicted....

Croyle has WR's dropping balls and OL block like shit in the PS, and all we hear is how bad Croyle is.

WR's drop balls yesterday, and for the most part, Huard had ALL DAY to throw, and it's not his fault.

I love the double standard.

htismaqe
09-10-2007, 06:26 PM
Exactly as I predicted....

Croyle has WR's dropping balls and OL block like shit in the PS, and all we hear is how bad Croyle is.

WR's drop balls yesterday, and for the most part, Huard had ALL DAY to throw, and it's not his fault.

I love the double standard.

Saint Huard can do no wrong.

This team is a walking double-standard.

The kicker gets cut and fans rejoice, because he just wasn't getting it done.

But the MLB-turned- FB can't even DRESS, let alone get on the field, and he's a fan favorite. Helll, he should be starting!

donkhater
09-10-2007, 06:30 PM
Exactly as I predicted....

Croyle has WR's dropping balls and OL block like shit in the PS, and all we hear is how bad Croyle is.

WR's drop balls yesterday, and for the most part, Huard had ALL DAY to throw, and it's not his fault.

I love the double standard.
Forget that. What I can't believe I'm reading is people are actually advocating that Huard needs more time to get in sync with his team and improve.

WTF?????

So this fan base will be patient with an 11-year veteran with limited upside but not a gun-slinging second year player (who, BTW looked BETTER in preseaon)??????.

It's official. Carl's work is done. The brainwashing of the fanbase is complete.

OnTheWarpath58
09-10-2007, 06:31 PM
Saint Huard can do no wrong.

This team is a walking double-standard.

The kicker gets cut and fans rejoice, because he just wasn't getting it done.

But the MLB-turned- FB can't even DRESS, let alone get on the field, and he's a fan favorite. Helll, he should be starting!

I'm with you, man. I'm with you.

I can handle losses. I don't like them, but I can handle them. Provided I think there's a light at the end of the tunnel and we're getting something out of the losses.

But I'll be one pissed off SOB if/when we go 6-10 and Croyle plays in a whopping 2 games.

Something I had realized last year, but being there in person really drove it home.....Every pass Huard throws looks like he's throwing into a 30 MPH headwind.....

Buehler445
09-10-2007, 06:33 PM
I think we need to recognize that not many people think Brodie will be fantastic. If he sucks, then we have to deal with it. Almost all quarterbacks go through a rough patch at the beginning. What these guys are saying is we need to start Croyle now for the following reasons

1. Brodie will take time to develop. Now or later. Now is better than later.

2. Damon Huard is not good enough to put Brodie's development on hold.

Nobody is saying Huard did a bad job this year, lost the game by himself, or ****ed your mother. Over the next 5-10 years, Brodie has more upside for the team than Huard does.

OnTheWarpath58
09-10-2007, 06:37 PM
I think we need to recognize that not many people think Brodie will be fantastic. If he sucks, then we have to deal with it. Almost all quarterbacks go through a rough patch at the beginning. What these guys are saying is we need to start Croyle now for the following reasons

1. Brodie will take time to develop. Now or later. Now is better than later.

2. Damon Huard is not good enough to put Brodie's development on hold.

Nobody is saying Huard did a bad job this year, lost the game by himself, or ****ed your mother. Over the next 5-10 years, Brodie has more upside for the team than Huard does.

Yep.

And all the Pro-Huard, Pro- 8-8 folks will be first in line to bitch when we have to go through the growing pains of Croyle NEXT year, instead of having them behind us by a season.