PDA

View Full Version : So Kevin Harlan said....


Pages : [1] 2

Mecca
09-11-2007, 05:39 PM
That Herm and Carl weren't on the same page...and that basically Herm had no idea what he was getting into coming here and what it was like to work with Carl.

I think that's pretty obvious actually seeing as Herm keeps talking going young and the team isn't...and I don't think he wanted to start Huard.

Sure-Oz
09-11-2007, 05:40 PM
He finally figured out that Carl runs this team to the ground and the coaches get no voice....

That is why Marty was run out, Carl really needs to gtfo of kc.

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:41 PM
This town needs an enema.

Ari Chi3fs
09-11-2007, 05:42 PM
Nice Batman reference by gochiefs.

Deberg_1990
09-11-2007, 05:43 PM
This town needs an enema.

Clark needs to pull a 1989

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:43 PM
Clark needs to pull a 1989

This might be closer to happening than you think...

Skip Towne
09-11-2007, 05:46 PM
This might be closer to happening than you think...
And it might not be.

Donger
09-11-2007, 05:47 PM
Clark needs to pull a 1989

What does that mean?

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:47 PM
And it might not be.

I know you are but what am I?

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:48 PM
What does that mean?

When Carl was hired in 1989 he cleaned house.

Deberg_1990
09-11-2007, 05:48 PM
This might be closer to happening than you think...


I certainly hope so. Its 10 years overdue now.

Let me guess, i have to be a premium member to get more info??

ChiefsCountry
09-11-2007, 05:48 PM
What does that mean?

Get a new GM

Mecca
09-11-2007, 05:49 PM
I certainly hope so. Its 10 years overdue now.

Let me guess, i have to be a premium member to get more info??

It'll be great when Bill Kuharic takes over and trades our entire draft for a RB.

Donger
09-11-2007, 05:49 PM
When Carl was hired in 1989 he cleaned house.

I see. You're suggesting that Hunt may be considering getting rid of Peterson or Edwards? Both?

Deberg_1990
09-11-2007, 05:50 PM
When Carl was hired in 1989 he cleaned house.

It was also one of the only times he "thought outside the box" and didnt hire one of his chums. He hired Marty, but only because his first choice of Vermeil wasnt ready to pull off his diapers.

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:50 PM
I see. You're suggesting that Hunt may be considering getting rid of Peterson or Edwards? Both?

No. Deberg is suggesting that's what we need.

I think I'd just get rid of Carl and make Herm the GM.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 05:51 PM
Herm as GM......"we drafted this corner and we will make him a Qb"

Deberg_1990
09-11-2007, 05:51 PM
I think it would be classic if Clark did something covert behind Carls back and he found out about his firing on the Internet..LOL

ChiefsCountry
09-11-2007, 05:52 PM
No. Deberg is suggesting that's what we need.

I think I'd just get rid of Carl and make Herm the GM.

Screw that - promote Thum to President and hire the best canadiate for GM to run the football side and revamp the whole franchise.

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:52 PM
I think it would be classic if Clark did something covert behind Carls back and he found out about his firing on the Internet..LOL

Carl definitely needs to be taken down a few notches. He's way too big for his britches.

Might as well dump him now...he's gonna be gone in three years anyway. Just ****ing do it already.

Skip Towne
09-11-2007, 05:52 PM
No. Deberg is suggesting that's what we need.

I think I'd just get rid of Carl and make Herm the GM.
I think we should get rid of Carl and make Herm a job applicant.

Donger
09-11-2007, 05:52 PM
No. Deberg is suggesting that's what we need.

I think I'd just get rid of Carl and make Herm the GM.

Okay, thank you. Why did you say, "This might be closer to happening than you think..."?

Mecca
09-11-2007, 05:53 PM
Let's just hire someone from New England or Indy at least they've been in organizations that know what they are doing.

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:53 PM
Okay, thank you. Why did you say, "This might be closer to happening than you think..."?

I'm not at liberty to go into specifics.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 05:54 PM
And Clayton will go back into that thing and he wonders why people dislike him.

Donger
09-11-2007, 05:54 PM
I'm not at liberty to go into specifics.

Why is that?

ClevelandBronco
09-11-2007, 05:55 PM
No. Deberg is suggesting that's what we need.

I think I'd just get rid of Carl and make Herm the GM.

You'd put Herm in charge of drafting and finding FA offensive personnel? Have you been trading bong hits with Joey in your basement or his?

Sure-Oz
09-11-2007, 05:55 PM
Why is that?
$99.99

Mecca
09-11-2007, 05:56 PM
He doesn't really know, he just says that to try to sound smart...

Woodrow Call
09-11-2007, 05:56 PM
Wouldn't surprise me. Herm wants to go young and Carl wants status quo. Basically Herm wants what we all want, a real youth movement and a flushing of the turds. If I was Herm I would get the hell out of here while I can.

2 examples from Hard Knocks.

Herm want Croyle, Carl wanted Huard

Herm seemed to want to keep Smith instead of Grigsby at FB and after Grigsby plays bad vs the Rams he makes the team. Grigsby is only on the team to satisfy a certain group of fans IMO. He is worthless.





The main thing I blame Herm for is being dumb enough to take the job and work under Carl.

Skip Towne
09-11-2007, 05:56 PM
I'm not at liberty to go into specifics.
Translation: I won't say because there might still be a few on here who think I have inside info.

Discuss Thrower
09-11-2007, 05:56 PM
He has to make something up really quick, give him a second.

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:57 PM
Why is that?

Because mum's the word.

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:58 PM
You'd put Herm in charge of drafting and finding FA offensive personnel?

Yes. He's an outstanding talent evaluator and knows how to draft. He's proven it time and time again.

Donger
09-11-2007, 05:58 PM
Because mum's the word.

Honestly, I can't go into specifics either, because I don't know anything about this 'situtation.' Are you suggesting that you do?

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 05:58 PM
I will say no more.

ClevelandBronco
09-11-2007, 05:59 PM
Yes. He's an outstanding talent evaluator and knows how to draft. He's proven it time and time again.

His blazing success thus far has apparently blinded me. Carry on.

Donger
09-11-2007, 06:00 PM
I will say no more.

My, that was quick.

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 06:01 PM
His blazing success thus far has apparently blinded me. Carry on.

He plucked a starting safety with Pro Bowl potential in the seventh round last year. The man knows what's he doing in the draft.

Skip Towne
09-11-2007, 06:03 PM
I will say no more.
...because I don't know any more.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 06:03 PM
Jarrad Page has to learn how to tackle before he has pro bowl potential.

tk13
09-11-2007, 06:08 PM
I wouldn't be surprised. To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if DV thought the same thing when he left.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 06:09 PM
I will say no more.

Because you've got zilch.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 06:09 PM
He plucked a starting safety with Pro Bowl potential in the seventh round last year. The man knows what's he doing in the draft.

Yeah, he sure knew what he was doing with Marcus Maxey.

And Justin Medlock.

HemiEd
09-11-2007, 06:11 PM
Clayton, please tell me that Nick Athan his inside info that Carl and Herm have signed extensions. Please!

Anyong Bluth
09-11-2007, 06:12 PM
I have no idea about GC's sources or what he's heard, but I heard rumblings a year and half ago that Clark very much wanted to take the team his own direction. His dad made his mark in the game, and I've long thought that Clark had his moment in the sun, and CP was simply filling the coffers. Clark wants to win.

Woodrow Call
09-11-2007, 06:13 PM
I have no idea about GC's sources or what he's heard, but I heard rumblings a year and half ago that Clark very much wanted to take the team his own direction. His dad made his mark in the game, and I've long thought that Clark had his moment in the sun, and CP was simply filling the coffers. Clark wants to win.

I would love to see it happen.

Brock
09-11-2007, 06:13 PM
At least Herm is only blowing a few second day picks, unlike the past couple of regimes.

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 06:15 PM
Yeah, he sure knew what he was doing with Marcus Maxey.

And Justin Medlock.

The draft is a crapshoot. Herm hits more than he misses.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 06:18 PM
At least Herm is only blowing a few second day picks, unlike the past couple of regimes.

It's certainly better than it was.

But better than bad does not equal good...

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 06:20 PM
It's certainly better than it was.

But better than bad does not equal good...

You act like there are teams that go 7 for 7 in the draft every year. That's unrealistic.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 06:22 PM
Well look at the Colts.....nearly the entire team was drafted by them.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 06:22 PM
You act like there are teams that go 7 for 7 in the draft every year. That's unrealistic.

Herm has had a couple of GREAT drafts, but when it comes time to play them, he falls into line with Carl every time...

dirk digler
09-11-2007, 06:23 PM
This is not surprising at all. Right now this organization has ZERO direction. Herm says on the radio after the game that we are in a transition phase but as KK pointed out yesterday this team this year is actually older than last years team if you can believe that.

Then you hear CP on Hard Knocks state he wants to start the players that give us the best chance to win now meaning no young guys.

Herm wants to go young and CP wants to win to keep filling the seats.

Donger
09-11-2007, 06:24 PM
Do the Chiefs presently have a strategic goal in mind (i.e., a Superbowl win) and if so, do you think that they have a detailed plan to achieve that goal?

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 06:26 PM
Do the Chiefs presently have a strategic goal in mind (i.e., a Superbowl win) and if so, do you think that they have a detailed plan to achieve that goal?

I think several individuals have strategic goals in mind. And I'm 100% certain that some of them are diametrically opposed...

BigRock
09-11-2007, 06:26 PM
Carl definitely needs to be taken down a few notches. He's way too big for his britches.

Might as well dump him now...he's gonna be gone in three years anyway. Just ****ing do it already.
Three years? I thought he signed a new four-year deal in 2004. That should end in 2008.

Unless it was an extension added onto the end of his existing contract. AW HELL.

BigRock
09-11-2007, 06:27 PM
Just out of curiosity, where was Harlan saying this? One of the local stations? I wish I'd heard it.

Donger
09-11-2007, 06:27 PM
I think several individuals have strategic goals in mind. And I'm 100% certain that some of them are diametrically opposed...

Well, that needs to change.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 06:28 PM
Do the Chiefs presently have a strategic goal in mind (i.e., a Superbowl win) and if so, do you think that they have a detailed plan to achieve that goal?

The people who are really in charge of the Chiefs direction is related to profits more than anything else...

Braincase
09-11-2007, 06:28 PM
I think we should get rid of Carl and make Herm a job applicant.

How about we get rid of Herm and make Carl a tackling dummy.

dirk digler
09-11-2007, 06:32 PM
So Mecca where did you hear this again?

Mecca
09-11-2007, 06:33 PM
It was on Crunch Time...then Keitzman talked about it on his show.

WilliamTheIrish
09-11-2007, 06:34 PM
Horseshiot.

I'll believe it when it actually happens. Clark has given no indication (if I'm wrong, please produce a cite) that he wants CP canned.

It's been espoused by the many talking and printing heads in this city that Clark has no love for CP. It has also been said that Clark has been the de facto face of the franchise for several seasons, especially since Lamar began his battle with prostate cancer.

Why, for the love of all things holy, would Clark sign CP to extension, only to pull the rug out now?

If it happens, (and by "happens" I mean in real recent frame of time), I'll buy GC's first hooker. Hell, I'll hold skip down while GC goes Ned Beatty on him.

It ain't happenin'. So take this, this ...... make a wish shit to a board that will eat it.

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 06:36 PM
This is not surprising at all. Right now this organization has ZERO direction. Herm says on the radio after the game that we are in a transition phase but as KK pointed out yesterday this team this year is actually older than last years team if you can believe that.

Then you hear CP on Hard Knocks state he wants to start the players that give us the best chance to win now meaning no young guys.

Herm wants to go young and CP wants to win to keep filling the seats.


Kietzman's an idiot.

Of course this team is older. That by definition is going to skew the numbers to favor his argument. Let's replace Larry Johnson. He's a year older, you know.

We're returning 15/22 starters, who are each a year older.

We lost 3 years difference in bringing in McIntosh. We could have brought in someone 38, and I would have been happy that I-65 was gone.

On defense, we got younger at DT, SS and FS.

Older at MLB and OLB.

7 of the last 14 draft picks are starting or seeing significant playing time. It should be 8, but we've beat that horse to death.

When is the last time this organization has had half of its draft picks over a 2 year span get significant playing time immediately?

blueballs
09-11-2007, 06:38 PM
Phase out Peterson
didn't they do that with Stedman

WilliamTheIrish
09-11-2007, 06:39 PM
As I understood the age question, we as a team of starters are actually older than last season. As a team, we are younger.

Regardless, we suck.

blueballs
09-11-2007, 06:39 PM
KK is a pregnant homo

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 06:39 PM
Three years? I thought he signed a new four-year deal in 2004. That should end in 2008.

Unless it was an extension added onto the end of his existing contract. AW HELL.

We still had DV in 2004 and 2005.

Herm signed a 4 year deal in 2006.

He'll have 2 years remaining on his contract AFTER this season.

dirk digler
09-11-2007, 06:39 PM
Kietzman's an idiot.

Of course this team is older.

We're returning 15/22 starters, who are each a year older.

We lost 3 years difference in bringing in McIntosh. We could have brought in someone 38, and I would have been happy that I-65 was gone.

On defense, we got younger at DT, SS and FS.

Older at MLB and OLB.

7 of the last 14 draft picks are starting or seeing significant playing time. It should be 8, but we've beat that horse to death.

When is the last time this organization has had half of its draft picks over a 2 year span get significant playing time immediately?

The problem is that is not was sold to us this year and what Herm wants. Herm said and I quote "we are a team in transition" after the game on Sunday. What are we transitioning too? We have a team that is actually older than it was last year including starting a Huard as the QB which has absolutely no upside.

It makes no sense what so ever.

Woodrow Call
09-11-2007, 06:40 PM
Do the Chiefs presently have a strategic goal in mind (i.e., a Superbowl win) and if so, do you think that they have a detailed plan to achieve that goal?

One goal 2 different strategies to get there IMO.

Herm wants to rebuild with young guys and set it up for several realistic Super Bowl runs. See Phili, NE, Indy, etc. Herm has stated this since day 1.

Carl wants to win now knowing that his era is coming to a close and that the rebuilding might not get done in time. At this point Carl doesn't have any reason to care about 2009 and beyond.

Chest Rockwell
09-11-2007, 06:40 PM
I think several individuals have strategic goals in mind. And I'm 100% certain that some of them are diametrically opposed...

So where in everyone's opinion are the battle lines drawn?

Carl is obviously the debbil by all accounts. Some folks think Clark and Herm want to win, but are being held hostage by CP. Who does everyone think is really in what camp?

And since we've got a hostage situation here, why the hell hasn't someone called the A-Team?

WilliamTheIrish
09-11-2007, 06:42 PM
Phase out Peterson
didn't they do that with Stedman

Yes. Steadman was promoted to head Nelson Bunker Hunt's cornering of the silver market. Shrewd fella, that one.

And you don't phase out CP. You turn him out. And everybody with him right down the guy who runs the screen up before PATS.

Of course at our rate of offensive production, that guy is probably already looking for work.

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 06:45 PM
The problem is that is not was sold to us this year and what Herm wants. Herm said and I quote "we are a team in transition" after the game on Sunday. What are we transitioning too? We have a team that is actually older than it was last year including starting a Huard as the QB which has absolutely no upside.

It makes no sense what so ever.

I agree 100%. Herm wants to get younger and Carl put his foot down.

And again, KK using the argument that we're OLDER is retarded when you return 15/22 starters.

What are we supposed to do, release the vets?

Sorry LJ, gotta go. You're a year older.

We have a nice mix of vets and youth.

Every position we brought in an older player is a significant upgrade.

McIntosh > Black
Harris > Mitchell
Edwards > Bell

What is bullshit is that Carl is allowing the youth movement at several positions, but not the important ones.

Because it's risky.

He's a coward.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 06:46 PM
I don't know how nice of a mix it is when it's going to win about 4 games.

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 06:47 PM
One goal 2 different strategies to get there IMO.

Herm wants to rebuild with young guys and set it up for several realistic Super Bowl runs. See Phili, NE, Indy, etc. Herm has stated this since day 1.

Carl wants to win now knowing that his era is coming to a close and that the rebuilding might not get done in time. At this point Carl doesn't have any reason to care about 2009 and beyond.


Bingo.

He cares about having 79,000 at Arrowhead every week for the next 3 years.

Beyond that? Meh.

blueballs
09-11-2007, 06:47 PM
Peterson only leaves Arrowhead in a casket
you all know that is right
phase him out of the GM/leave President

BigRock
09-11-2007, 06:47 PM
We still had DV in 2004 and 2005.

Herm signed a 4 year deal in 2006.

He'll have 2 years remaining on his contract AFTER this season.
I meant Carl, not Herm.

MichaelH
09-11-2007, 06:49 PM
This just in:


Any Chiefs Head Coach and Carl the Asshat Peterson are not quite in touch. Why is that?

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 06:50 PM
I don't know how nice of a mix it is when it's going to win about 4 games.

Not sure what people are expecting....

You go to all younger players, people bitch.

You have all vets, people bitch that the team is too old.

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 06:52 PM
I meant Carl, not Herm.

Sorry.

In that case, Carl's extension was set up to expire coinciding with the end of Herm's contract.

At the time, he said it would be his last contract.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 06:53 PM
Not sure what people are expecting....

You go to all younger players, people bitch.

You have all vets, people bitch that the team is too old.

I'd rather have a horrid year with all young guys playing to see if they got it or not than doing it with half the guys being at the end of their careers.

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 06:55 PM
I'd rather have a horrid year with all young guys playing to see if they got it or not than doing it with half the guys being at the end of their careers.


I'm with you. I would too.

Too bad our GM doesn't see it that way.

Simply Red
09-11-2007, 06:55 PM
Translation: I won't say because there might still be a few on here who think I have inside info.
ROFL not likely.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 06:57 PM
I'm with you. I would too.

Too bad our GM doesn't see it that way.

This is finally the year, no matter what CP did to patch holes to try to win 7 games, this team is horrible and he's finally going to be looking at his 3-5 win year.

the Talking Can
09-11-2007, 06:59 PM
well, if Herm had any balls he do what he wanted to do, he's the Head Coach...but he is obviously a foot shuffling porter just like Gunther....

i hate this damned franchise....

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-11-2007, 06:59 PM
The funny thing is that many of us were despondent over the Huard decision, because we thought that he'd be just safe enough, and the D would be just good enough to get us to 7 wins.

Fortunately, Huard is even worse than Croyle, and unfortunately, our defense is no better.

This is a 4 win team.

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 07:02 PM
The funny thing is that many of us were despondent over the Huard decision, because we thought that he'd be just safe enough, and the D would be just good enough to get us to 7 wins.

Fortunately, Huard is even worse than Croyle, and unfortunately, our defense is no better.

This is a 4 win team.

Even more reason to get Croyle in the and let him sink or swim.

Instead of going though all this bullshit again NEXT year.

People can cry about Brohm and Brennan all they want. It's not gonna happen. Even if we do have a Top 5 or 10 pick, we're not picking a QB.

Guaranteed.

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 07:03 PM
This is a 4 win team.

ROFL

Mecca
09-11-2007, 07:11 PM
Laugh all you want, this team is horrendous.

If they don't pick Brohm and have a chance that may be my last day as a fan of this team.

dirk digler
09-11-2007, 07:13 PM
I agree 100%. Herm wants to get younger and Carl put his foot down.

And again, KK using the argument that we're OLDER is retarded when you return 15/22 starters.

What are we supposed to do, release the vets?

Sorry LJ, gotta go. You're a year older.

We have a nice mix of vets and youth.

Every position we brought in an older player is a significant upgrade.

McIntosh > Black
Harris > Mitchell
Edwards > Bell

What is bullshit is that Carl is allowing the youth movement at several positions, but not the important ones.

Because it's risky.

He's a coward.

Sure that is exactly what the 49ers did. I realize people would bitch but you can't please everyone. LJ is still young and I thought that it was a good signing.

IMO they should gut the whole roster except the young guys and start over

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 07:13 PM
Laugh all you want, this team is horrendous.

If they don't pick Brohm and have a chance that may be my last day as a fan of this team.

I'd rather have Colt Brennan. More mobile. I want a guy like Tony Romo...

Mecca
09-11-2007, 07:14 PM
Yea lets pick the guy playing in the run n shoot Hawaii offense.

Mr. Arrowhead
09-11-2007, 07:17 PM
Im for Herm, against Carl

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 07:17 PM
Yea lets pick the guy playing in the run n shoot Hawaii offense.


No shit.

I can't understand why people think he'll be an effective NFL QB.

I'd love for someone to name 3 QB's in the history of the league who ran the run-and-shoot in college and were successful in the NFL.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 07:19 PM
We should have drafted David Klingler too.

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 07:21 PM
We should have drafted David Klingler too.

I liked Hamas' Timmy Chang reference from earlier today.....

Classic.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 07:24 PM
I still fully believe they aren't playing Croyle because they'll use it as an excuse to not take Brohm in the draft. If they are in position for that pick and right now it's not that much of a long shot...

And like I said last night, if you are friends with anyone who is not a Chiefs fan. Tell them we don't need Brian Brohm because we have Brodie Croyle. Then watch as they laugh their asses off at you for a good 5 minutes and can't hardly catch their breath.

DTLB58
09-11-2007, 07:24 PM
That Herm and Carl weren't on the same page...and that basically Herm had no idea what he was getting into coming here and what it was like to work with Carl.

I think that's pretty obvious actually seeing as Herm keeps talking going young and the team isn't...and I don't think he wanted to start Huard.

If Herm didn't want to start Huard then why the HBO scene with him supposedly sleeping on his couch at the office for 2-3 days trying to make a decision on the starting QB?

If the decision was not his to make and Huard was shoved down his throat by Carl then why bother.

I think Herm wanted Croyle also, but he did nothing in TC and Pre-season to warrant the job. If Herm wanted Brodie on the feild no matter what because of a youth movement then he should have just said from the start Brodie is the guy.

Mecca
09-11-2007, 07:25 PM
They had to make for some good TV....from the parts of the show I saw. Carl made Herm look like a little bitch as far as when deciding who got cut, starters all of that.

DTLB58
09-11-2007, 07:27 PM
I still fully believe they aren't playing Croyle because they'll use it as an excuse to not take Brohm in the draft. If they are in position for that pick and right now it's not that much of a long shot...

And like I said last night, if you are friends with anyone who is not a Chiefs fan. Tell them we don't need Brian Brohm because we have Brodie Croyle. Then watch as they laugh their asses off at you for a good 5 minutes and can't hardly catch their breath.

I'm being seroius here...Why would they not want to select Brohm?

Their ego's are that big on the talent evaluation of Croyle?

Mecca
09-11-2007, 07:29 PM
Taking a QB with a top 3 pick says your team is bad and will be bad for the next 2-3 years. That is the last message Carl wants to send.

It doesn't send the "we got an impact player right now and will compete" message that he loves sending all the fans.

ClevelandBronco
09-11-2007, 07:33 PM
Great answer.

He plucked a starting safety with Pro Bowl potential in the seventh round last year. The man knows what's he doing in the draft.

But read the question again:

You'd put Herm in charge of drafting and finding FA offensive personnel? Have you been trading bong hits with Joey in your basement or his?

Now, what might you have missed the first time around?

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 07:35 PM
I'm being seroius here...Why would they not want to select Brohm?

Their ego's are that big on the talent evaluation of Croyle?

Why pick another QBOTF when you haven't given the one you have a legitimate opportunity to show if he can sink or swim?

Not to mention, you could put Jesus Christ at QB and it wouldn't mean much until you're able to get some young talent on the OL. The OL is OLD and needs an overhaul. Keep avoiding drafting linemen on the first day and watch our situation get even worse.....

Zouk
09-11-2007, 07:41 PM
In my opinion, the amount of young talent on this team at the end of 2005 was probably the worst in all of football. Dick and Carl as a team did a horrible job with personnel decisions. As a result we were left with so much deadwood to be cut through it's gonna end up taking 3 offseasons to do it, with the next offseason the last of the 3.

I expect a really good Chiefs team next season, but I think we need to see Croyle soon to see if he can lead it. Unless Huard becomes a miracle man, I'll be really upset if Croyle's not in before or soon after the bye.

Skip Towne
09-11-2007, 07:42 PM
Horseshiot.

I'll believe it when it actually happens. Clark has given no indication (if I'm wrong, please produce a cite) that he wants CP canned.

It's been espoused by the many talking and printing heads in this city that Clark has no love for CP. It has also been said that Clark has been the de facto face of the franchise for several seasons, especially since Lamar began his battle with prostate cancer.

Why, for the love of all things holy, would Clark sign CP to extension, only to pull the rug out now?

If it happens, (and by "happens" I mean in real recent frame of time), I'll buy GC's first hooker. Hell, I'll hold skip down while GC goes Ned Beatty on him.

It ain't happenin'. So take this, this ...... make a wish shit to a board that will eat it.
Ha! It would take you and your 14 brothers.

CHIEF4EVER
09-11-2007, 07:45 PM
That Herm and Carl weren't on the same page...and that basically Herm had no idea what he was getting into coming here and what it was like to work with Carl.

I think that's pretty obvious actually seeing as Herm keeps talking going young and the team isn't...and I don't think he wanted to start Huard.

Remind me again why we should give a rats furry nuts what Kevin Harlan thinks? :hmmm:

Mecca
09-11-2007, 07:54 PM
Um Kevin Harlan is usually pretty dead on when he talks about the NFL.

CHIEF4EVER
09-11-2007, 08:00 PM
Um Kevin Harlan is usually pretty dead on when he talks about the NFL.

Obviously. ROFL LMAO :rolleyes:

Coach
09-11-2007, 08:00 PM
Horseshiot.

I'll believe it when it actually happens. Clark has given no indication (if I'm wrong, please produce a cite) that he wants CP canned.

It's been espoused by the many talking and printing heads in this city that Clark has no love for CP. It has also been said that Clark has been the de facto face of the franchise for several seasons, especially since Lamar began his battle with prostate cancer.

Why, for the love of all things holy, would Clark sign CP to extension, only to pull the rug out now?

If it happens, (and by "happens" I mean in real recent frame of time), I'll buy GC's first hooker. Hell, I'll hold skip down while GC goes Ned Beatty on him.

It ain't happenin'. So take this, this ...... make a wish shit to a board that will eat it.

While Clark was a de facto owner for the franchise, I'm sure that while Lamar was still alive, that it would have to have his approval, me thinks.

There was that one snippit on the newspaper (Can't remember what newspaper it was) where a paragraph said that Clark has turned up the pressure on Carl to make it deep to the playoffs.

Of course, I'm just mearly speculating.

Anyong Bluth
09-11-2007, 08:19 PM
Remind me again why we should give a rats furry nuts what Kevin Harlan thinks? :hmmm:


Maybe you should check into his family background. The guy has some NFL ties and he's gonna hear league rumblings. Add in the fact that he was the former announcer for the team, he's still got contacts around Arrowhead, but okay?

Like I said, I know for a fact that Clark has a very different feeling towards the direction of this franchise and the criteria that CP is being evaluated on vs his father. GC's isn't wrong on this point. Fact.

KC Jones
09-11-2007, 08:20 PM
I can only hope that Clark is willing to actively pursue a rebuilding of the team and its front office. However, I suspect he is first and foremost a businessman and wants to respect/maintain his fathers vision. I believe Lamar was loyal to a fault and some of that rubbed off on Clark. We'll see if he's willing to hold the front office accountable for wins rather than just revenue.

KcMizzou
09-11-2007, 08:34 PM
Um Kevin Harlan is usually pretty dead on when he talks about the NFL.I'd take Harlan's word over most of the talking heads.

KcMizzou
09-11-2007, 08:35 PM
I can only hope that Clark is willing to actively pursue a rebuilding of the team and its front office. However, I suspect he is first and foremost a businessman and wants to respect/maintain his fathers vision. I believe Lamar was loyal to a fault and some of that rubbed off on Clark. We'll see if he's willing to hold the front office accountable for wins rather than just revenue.That's my thought as well.

Things might just be bad enough to force his hand, though.

KC Jones
09-11-2007, 08:37 PM
That's my thought as well.

Things might just be bad enough to force his hand, though.

Yes, another year or two of mediocrity and season tickets won't be such a hot item.

Skip Towne
09-11-2007, 08:40 PM
Maybe you should check into his family background. The guy has some NFL ties and he's gonna hear league rumblings. Add in the fact that he was the former announcer for the team, he's still got contacts around Arrowhead, but okay?

Like I said, I know for a fact that Clark has a very different feeling towards the direction of this franchise and the criteria that CP is being evaluated on vs his father. GC's isn't wrong on this point. Fact.
Proof? If it is fact you must have proof.

MGRS13
09-11-2007, 08:47 PM
In my opinion, the amount of young talent on this team at the end of 2005 was probably the worst in all of football. Dick and Carl as a team did a horrible job with personnel decisions. As a result we were left with so much deadwood to be cut through it's gonna end up taking 3 offseasons to do it, with the next offseason the last of the 3.

I expect a really good Chiefs team next season, but I think we need to see Croyle soon to see if he can lead it. Unless Huard becomes a miracle man, I'll be really upset if Croyle's not in before or soon after the bye.
By the bye? Are you kidding me? He should be in now. If he isn't the starter when we play against the Vikes then this season is a complete loss. I don't want him in for 8 games just so Carl can say he hasn't had time to learn how to play QB in the leage(which would be nothing but an excuse to not draft Brohm.)

KcMizzou
09-11-2007, 08:48 PM
By the bye? Are you kidding me? He should be in now. If he isn't the starter when we play against the Vikes then this season is a complete loss. I don't want him in for 8 games just so Carl can say he hasn't had time to learn how to play QB in the leage(which would be nothing but an excuse to not draft Brohm.)I'd think 8 games would be more than enough.

MGRS13
09-11-2007, 08:52 PM
I'd think 8 games would be more than enough.
Not for Carl. He needs to be starting NOW. There is not one excuse to not start him. No one that knows the slightest bit about football could make a case that this team is going any where this year. We are rebuilding so lets start Croyle.

KcMizzou
09-11-2007, 08:53 PM
Not for Carl. He needs to be starting NOW. There is not one excuse to not start him. No one that knows the slightest bit about football could make a case that this team is going any where this year. We are rebuilding so lets start Croyle.I totally agree.

Zouk
09-11-2007, 08:54 PM
By the bye? Are you kidding me? He should be in now. If he isn't the starter when we play against the Vikes then this season is a complete loss. I don't want him in for 8 games just so Carl can say he hasn't had time to learn how to play QB in the leage(which would be nothing but an excuse to not draft Brohm.)

After the Chargers game (week 4), the Chiefs have 6 of the next 8 at home. That's a stretch made to help a young QB.

KC Jones
09-11-2007, 08:55 PM
There is not one excuse to not start him. No one that knows the slightest bit about football could make a case that this team is going any where this year. We are rebuilding so lets start Croyle.

Except that by starting the kid that failed the audition when he was practically handed the reigns you lose the whole team. Yeah - try rebuilding when all of your veteran players have decided your full of shit and there's no reason to play hard.

CHIEF4EVER
09-11-2007, 08:56 PM
Not for Carl. He needs to be starting NOW. There is not one excuse to not start him. No one that knows the slightest bit about football could make a case that this team is going any where this year. We are rebuilding so lets start Croyle.

Yup. I mentioned the same thing right after preseason. We aren't going to the playoffs. Now is the time to let the youngsters get their mistakes out of their systems.

MGRS13
09-11-2007, 08:56 PM
After the Chargers game (week 4), the Chiefs have 6 of the next 8 at home. That's a stretch made to help a young QB.
0-4 with or without Croyle so we might as well start him............once again NO excuse to not play him.

Chiefnj2
09-11-2007, 09:02 PM
Some people are just pissed off that the draft picks they hyped up ended up busting out and they are directing their anger at Herm.

DaneMcCloud
09-11-2007, 09:05 PM
Some people are just pissed off that the draft picks they hyped up ended up busting out and they are directing their anger at Herm.

Why would anyone be mad that the past two years, the 5th round choices haven't panned out? Herm's done an excellent job with all of the other picks, unlike the past when only a two guys out of seven would amount to anything.

MGRS13
09-11-2007, 09:06 PM
Except that by starting the kid that failed the audition when he was practically handed the reigns you lose the whole team. Yeah - try rebuilding when all of your veteran players have decided your full of shit and there's no reason to play hard.And some how handing the job to a washed up never has ben that can't throw the ball more then 8 yards will keep the spirits up?

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:06 PM
Taking a QB with a top 3 pick says your team is bad and will be bad for the next 2-3 years. That is the last message Carl wants to send.

It doesn't send the "we got an impact player right now and will compete" message that he loves sending all the fans.

Egg-zackly.

Drafting a QB says "we're rebuilding".

It'll never happen.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:08 PM
Except that by starting the kid that failed the audition when he was practically handed the reigns you lose the whole team. Yeah - try rebuilding when all of your veteran players have decided your full of shit and there's no reason to play hard.

Shouldn't the fact that they GET PAID TO PLAY A GAME be enough reason to play hard?

The veterans on this team are a bunch of spoiled-rotten babies. That was obvious last year in Indy.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:10 PM
Some people are just pissed off that the draft picks they hyped up ended up busting out and they are directing their anger at Herm.

Which draft picks have "busted out"?

Count Alex's Losses
09-11-2007, 09:11 PM
And some how handing the job to a washed up never has ben that can't throw the ball more then 8 yards will keep the spirits up?

Eight yards?

Seriously. How can people forget last year so soon? We threw the ball down the field.

I don't know what the hell was going on last Sunday. The logical assumption is that NO ONE WAS OPEN.

KC Jones
09-11-2007, 09:12 PM
And some how handing the job to a washed up never has ben that can't throw the ball more then 8 yards will keep the spirits up?


Giving the job to the guy that won games last year will tell them you are trying to win now and putting the best players on the field. If Croyle is so ****ing great, he should have beaten out the washed up never has been.

Don't worry, this team will continue to suck and then Herm will have the teams backing to play the kid.

MGRS13
09-11-2007, 09:14 PM
Eight yards?

Seriously. How can people forget last year so soon? We threw the ball down the field.

I don't know what the hell was going on last Sunday. The logical assumption is that NO ONE WAS OPEN.
His long balls look like punts. He makes Trent greens arm look like jeff george.

MGRS13
09-11-2007, 09:17 PM
Giving the job to the guy that won games last year will tell them you are trying to win now and putting the best players on the field. If Croyle is so ****ing great, he should have beaten out the washed up never has been.

Don't worry, this team will continue to suck and then Herm will have the teams backing to play the kid.Yes this team WILL continue to suck which is why not putting in Croyle now is just wasting time. Histamage(or histwhatever) said it best if the vets don't play with heart with or without Huard at least we know who else we need to replace.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:19 PM
Yes this team WILL continue to suck which is why not putting in Croyle now is just wasting time. Histamage(or histwhatever) said it best if the vets don't play with heart with or without Huard at least we know who else we need to replace.

I said it immediately after the playoff game - cut every last one of them. They have no heart.

But alas, that's not conducive to fielding a "competitive" team that is "in the hunt".

Gotta sell tickets.

Chiefnj2
09-11-2007, 09:21 PM
Why would anyone be mad that the past two years, the 5th round choices haven't panned out? Herm's done an excellent job with all of the other picks, unlike the past when only a two guys out of seven would amount to anything.

Don't ask me, I wasn't happy when Herm was hired.

A lot of people immediately jumped ship and railed against Herm the moment the decision was made to go with Huard and their fire was stoked when Medlock was released.

MGRS13
09-11-2007, 09:25 PM
I said it immediately after the playoff game - cut every last one of them. They have no heart.

But alas, that's not conducive to fielding a "competitive" team that is "in the hunt".

Gotta sell tickets.Totally agree. This is why I hate the "veteran excuse".....Once again, again. Not one f#@king excuse to not start Croyle.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:25 PM
Don't ask me, I wasn't happy when Herm was hired.

A lot of people immediately jumped ship and railed against Herm the moment the decision was made to go with Huard and their fire was stoked when Medlock was released.

You were one of the smarter ones that saw through Herm at the time he was hired (or before in your case, since you saw him up close in NJ).

For some of us, we needed to have our eyes opened, and the two incidents you alluded to were the biggest catalysts.

Zouk
09-11-2007, 09:27 PM
I said it immediately after the playoff game - cut every last one of them. They have no heart.

But alas, that's not conducive to fielding a "competitive" team that is "in the hunt".

Gotta sell tickets.


Which guys are we talking about? All 45?

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:29 PM
Which guys are we talking about? All 45?

I'd have to go back and look.

I know one guy that I was EXTREMELY pissed at was Tony Gonzales - he was just "going through the motions".

Zouk
09-11-2007, 09:30 PM
I'd have to go back and look.

I know one guy that I was EXTREMELY pissed at was Tony Gonzales - he was just "going through the motions".

Wow.

So Herm is a fraud for cutting Medlock instead of Tony G.

I think I'm going to back slowly away from this thread.

Chiefnj2
09-11-2007, 09:34 PM
You were one of the smarter ones that saw through Herm at the time he was hired (or before in your case, since you saw him up close in NJ).

For some of us, we needed to have our eyes opened, and the two incidents you alluded to were the biggest catalysts.

Herm's going to do what Herm did in NY. Field a C+ team that will make the playoffs more often than not but not be able to hold their own with the top teams because of the conservative nature of the team.

After the last 13 years of futility I can see why people find that appealing.

I would have preferred that Croyle won the job, but man did he choke. Herm had no choice but to go with the guy that won some games last year.

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 09:34 PM
I'd have to go back and look.

I know one guy that I was EXTREMELY pissed at was Tony Gonzales - he was just "going through the motions".

Agreed.

I felt the same way about Kennison this preseason.

I'm usually not into conspiracy theories, but it can't just be coincidence that there were always "miscommunications" between him and Brodie, yet Brodie had no problems with the other receivers being where he expected them to be.

IIRC, it had been mentioned by someone else here at the time.....EK was half-assing it because he didn't want Croyle winning the job.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:35 PM
Wow.

So Herm is a fraud for cutting Medlock instead of Tony G.

I think I'm going to back slowly away from this thread.

Is that what I said?

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:39 PM
IIRC, it had been mentioned by someone else here at the time.....EK was half-assing it because he didn't want Croyle winning the job.

That would be me. :shake:

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:41 PM
Herm's going to do what Herm did in NY. Field a C+ team that will make the playoffs more often than not but not be able to hold their own with the top teams because of the conservative nature of the team.

After the last 13 years of futility I can see why people find that appealing.

I would have preferred that Croyle won the job, but man did he choke. Herm had no choice but to go with the guy that won some games last year.

Especially when that was the marching orders handed down to him by his boss.

Hard Knocks, more than anything else, soured me on this team. I saw way more than I wanted to about how "involved" Carl is in EVERY facet of this team...

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 09:41 PM
That would be me. :shake:

I thought so, but wasn't sure.

I figured whoever it was would reveal themselves soon enough.

Ebolapox
09-11-2007, 09:41 PM
Yea lets pick the guy playing in the run n shoot Hawaii offense.

sh*t, I'm all for us running the run n shoot offense anyway.

OctoberFart
09-11-2007, 09:41 PM
I certainly hope so. Its 10 years overdue now.

Let me guess, i have to be a premium member to get more GARBAGE HOMER CHEIF FLUFF FROM ONE OF CARL AND HERMS BEST FLUFFERS??
Fixed it for you.

Ebolapox
09-11-2007, 09:42 PM
We should have drafted David Klingler too.

supposedly, we almost did. carl had a hardon for klingler, and (from what I've subsequently read), wanted to trade up to get him.

KcMizzou
09-11-2007, 09:48 PM
Agreed.

I felt the same way about Kennison this preseason.

I'm usually not into conspiracy theories, but it can't just be coincidence that there were always "miscommunications" between him and Brodie, yet Brodie had no problems with the other receivers being where he expected them to be.

IIRC, it had been mentioned by someone else here at the time.....EK was half-assing it because he didn't want Croyle winning the job.For ****'s sake guys... seriously?

And Tony G wasn't trying in the playoff game???

Come the **** on...

DaneMcCloud
09-11-2007, 09:50 PM
supposedly, we almost did. carl had a hardon for klingler, and (from what I've subsequently read), wanted to trade up to get him.

I'd like to see some proof of this claim. I was living in KC at the time and a few friends on the team that I'd party with and NEVER heard this claim. Doesn't mean it's not true, I'm just not buying it.

But what does it matter anyway? Have you LOOKED at the 1992 draft?

1 (20, 20) - Dale Carter, Tennessee
2 (0, 0) - Darren Mickell, Florida (suplemental draft)
2 (12, 40) - Matt Blundin, Virginia
4 (17, 101) - Mike Evans, Michigan
6 (19, 159) - Tony Smith, Notre Dame
7 (18, 186) - Erick Anderson, Michigan
8 (17, 213) - Jim Jennings, San Diego State
9 (20, 244) - Jay Leeuwenburg, Colorado
10 (19, 271) - Jerry Ostroski, Tulsa
11 (18, 298) - Doug Rigby, Wyoming
12 (17, 325) - Corey Williams, Oklahoma State

Only Dale Carter was a productive member of that draft and he certainly had many issues and because of that didn't finish his career as Chiefs. What a waste.

David Klingler wouldn't have been any different, so who give a flying rat's ass?

KcMizzou
09-11-2007, 09:51 PM
Wow.

So Herm is a fraud for cutting Medlock instead of Tony G.

I think I'm going to back slowly away from this thread.LMAO

Yeah, now it's getting ****ing stupid.

ChiefsCountry
09-11-2007, 09:52 PM
Ostroski and Leeuwenburg were cut by the Chiefs but went on to be productive starters in the NFL for the Bills and Bengals.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 09:54 PM
For ****'s sake guys... seriously?

And Tony G wasn't trying in the playoff game???

Come the **** on...

14 years without a playoff victory. THREE DECADES without an appearance in the conference championship.

Come the **** on...

DaneMcCloud
09-11-2007, 09:57 PM
Ostroski and Leeuwenburg were cut by the Chiefs but went on to be productive starters in the NFL for the Bills and Bengals.

I remember. Key being "cut by the Chiefs".

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 09:57 PM
For ****'s sake guys... seriously?

And Tony G wasn't trying in the playoff game???

Come the **** on...

Just going on what I saw.

I think he (88) was going through the motions in Indy, as were quite a few players on offense.

RE: Kennison, it was obvious to me watching PS games.

Kennison was the ONLY receiver on the roster that Brodie was having problems with. It seemed like EK was never where Croyle thought he would be. Never seemed to be a problem with anyone else.

The way DV coddled some of these guys, nothing would surprise me.

KcMizzou
09-11-2007, 09:57 PM
14 years without a playoff victory. THREE DECADES without an appearance in the conference championship.

Come the **** on...So, clearly... Tony Gonzalez quit in the playoffs, and Kennison quit in the preseason, because he doesn't like Croyle?

Wtf?

Blaming Carl, I totally understand... this is wayyyyy the **** out of left field.

Zouk
09-11-2007, 09:59 PM
Is that what I said?

You said - "I said it immediately after the playoff game - cut every last one of them."

I asked - "Which guys?"

You said - "I'd have to go back and look. I know one guy that I was EXTREMELY pissed at was Tony Gonzales - he was just "going through the motions"

Summary part 1 - Herm should have cut Tony G

Earlier you said - "You were one of the smarter ones that saw through Herm at the time he was hired (or before in your case, since you saw him up close in NJ). For some of us, we needed to have our eyes opened, and the two incidents you alluded to (Croyle and Medlock) were the biggest catalysts."

Summary part 2 - Herm is a fraud for cutting Medlock.

I combined the two points.

In another thread you said - "I am beyond disappointed in Herm. Herm did something that neither Marty nor Vermeil did - led me to believe he was somebody that he's not. He said he was going to do something and at the end of the day, he lied. It's business as usual at 1 Arrowhead Drive, and I feel betrayed."

Just because Croyle did not start week 1 does not mean that Herm is not committed to seeing him through as the Chiefs QB of the future. He will almost certainly be starting before the end of the year. This guy can have a 10 plus year career, no one will remember if he started week 1 or week 6 in his first year. I think he just wants the rest of the offense to be playing better (particularly Bowe) when Croyle gets in so that he has the best chance to succeed early. Croyle has said himself that he did not expect to be getting a legit chance to start in his 2nd year. Most 3rd round picks don't get that.

I just don't understand your opinion at all about the 5th round kicker. I think you're extrapolating way too much from that.

I understand your frustration with the last 15 years. But Herm is injecting youth, and cutting loads of deadweight. The process wil be completed by the start of next season. Give it some time.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 10:00 PM
Just going on what I saw.

I think he (88) was going through the motions in Indy, as were quite a few players on offense.

RE: Kennison, it was obvious to me watching PS games.

Kennison was the ONLY receiver on the roster that Brodie was having problems with. It seemed like EK was never where Croyle thought he would be. Never seemed to be a problem with anyone else.

The way DV coddled some of these guys, nothing would surprise me.

Yep.

I trust my own eyes, and the entire first quarter of that playoff game was an offensive "walkthrough".

KcMizzou
09-11-2007, 10:00 PM
Do you really believe that any player would half-ass it in a playoff game?

I don't. LEAST of all Tony Gonzalez, who obviously desperately wants a ring. (And gets pissed when he doesn't think things are headed that way)

I'm sorry. I generally respect both of your opinions. You both clearly know football. But I don't buy that.

KcMizzou
09-11-2007, 10:03 PM
You're out of your damned minds if you think Tony Gonzalez didn't give a shit about a playoff game at this point in his career.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 10:06 PM
Summary part 1 - Herm should have cut Tony G

I'm exaggerating to make a point. Of course, it's not real practical to just cut a whole team. But there has to be SOME repurcussions. These players are spoiled and they have been for far too long. Vermeil did it, and we were told Herm was different. Then Jets fans started showing up talking about how he WASN'T different and they cited that his special treatment of Ty Law was a source of player dissent on the New York locker room. Of course, we didn't believe them. But it sure looks like they were right.

Summary part 2 - Herm is a fraud for cutting Medlock.

I said the cutting of Medlock was ONE of the catalysts. There's also the way he's handled the offense and several other things he's done. The guy is a walking contradiction, you can't trust anything he says.

I just don't understand your opinion at all about the 5th round kicker. I think you're extrapolating way too much from that.

He was the #1-rated kicker on almost every scout's draft board. He was more accurate in college than some of the best prospects in recent years, including Nate Kaeding. Was he struggling? Absolutely. Is cutting him after ONE GAME a good move? Absolutely not. It's a panic move, and move typical of the Kansas City Chiefs in an effort to offer up a sacrificial lamb to the fans.

I understand your frustration with the last 15 years. But Herm is injecting youth, and cutting loads of deadweight. The process wil be completed by the start of next season. Give it some time.

Herm is injecting youth where it's convenient, and where Carl Peterson has concluded it's not overly risky.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 10:08 PM
Do you really believe that any player would half-ass it in a playoff game?

I don't. LEAST of all Tony Gonzalez, who obviously desperately wants a ring. (And gets pissed when he doesn't think things are headed that way)

I'm sorry. I generally respect both of your opinions. You both clearly know football. But I don't buy that.

Perhaps Tony Gonzales understood the game plan well enough to know he had NO CHANCE of getting a ring, because the coaching staff wasn't gonna get them there?

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 10:08 PM
Do you really believe that any player would half-ass it in a playoff game.

I don't. LEAST of all Tony Gonzalez, who obviously desperately wants a ring. (And gets pissed when he doesn't think things headed that way)

I'm sorry. I generally respect both of your opinions. You both clearly know football. But I don't buy that.

That's fair.

Like I said, that's just the feeling I got from those players in those particular games.

Trust me, it's tough for me to say. TG is one of, if not my favorite players. Maybe the overall lackadaisical attitude of the entire offense that game made me lump TG into the mix because I focus a lot of my attention on him when I'm at the game in person.

That being said, there are plenty of players who take plays off, for whatever reason.

Zouk
09-11-2007, 10:11 PM
Herm is injecting youth where it's convenient, and where Carl Peterson has concluded it's not overly risky.

I really think you're paranoid.

If Croyle is starting at the end of the year, will it change your opinion?

pikesome
09-11-2007, 10:12 PM
Perhaps Tony Gonzales understood the game plan well enough to know he had NO CHANCE of getting a ring, because the coaching staff wasn't gonna get them there?

Since we're talking tinfoil hats, the first thing I thought when I heard TG being asked about Huard starting was that under all of the meaningless BS players spout was "I want Huard to start because I know he'll throw me the ball". Who knows if it's true but that was my first, gut, feeling.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 10:13 PM
I really think you're paranoid.

If Croyle is starting at the end of the year, will it change your opinion?

If Croyle only gets the starting nod AFTER we're mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, will it change yours?

See, here's the thing:

I VEHEMENTLY defended Herm.

When he said he wouldn't change the offense, I believed him. And I explained to people that said he was lying why I believed him.

And then he changed the offense.

And that's just one example of where that's happened.

Chiefnj2
09-11-2007, 10:14 PM
I'm kind of sick of the Vermeil spoiled the offensive players crap. He spoiled them by forcing them through grueling camps and practices until they got plays correct and led the NFL in offense.

pikesome
09-11-2007, 10:15 PM
I really think you're paranoid.

If Croyle is starting at the end of the year, will it change your opinion?

If Huard flames out and that forces Brodie to start that's not really a "youth movement". It's more "We don't have anyone else to start, Jeff George said not only no, but hell no".

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 10:16 PM
If Huard flames out and that forces Brodie to start that's not really a "youth movement". It's more "We don't have anyone else to start, Jeff George said not only no, but hell no".

Bingo.

htismaqe
09-11-2007, 10:16 PM
I'm kind of sick of the Vermeil spoiled the offensive players crap. He spoiled them by forcing them through grueling camps and practices until they got plays correct and led the NFL in offense.

They never had to fear for their jobs. They always had their spots, regardless of performance.

Logical
09-11-2007, 10:19 PM
I really think you're paranoid.

If Croyle is starting at the end of the year, will it change your opinion?ROFL

You really are a funny guy. Why should a desperation move indicate a true commitment to youth.

OnTheWarpath58
09-11-2007, 10:19 PM
I really think you're paranoid.

If Croyle is starting at the end of the year, will it change your opinion?

This is one theory I've never understood.

There's NO REASON not to start him NOW. This team is a 9 win team AT BEST, with or without him.

The more he plays, the better idea we'll have as to whether he can truly be the QBOTF, or throw his ass on the scrap heap. Some people already want to do that after seeing meaningless PS games.

The kid faced adversity at Alabama, in the SEC, and succeeded.

I don't understand the logic behind sitting him until the "situation is better."

Frankly, the situation may never get better. And, as Kurt Warner told me once at a charity event, there is no substitute for game experience. The game is too fast to learn anythign meaningful from the sideline holding a clipboard.

I don't care if we're playing the '85 Bears. Throw him out there and see how he does......then see how he RESPONDS the following game.

They're not going to ruin the kid by throwing him out there.

pikesome
09-11-2007, 10:22 PM
This is one theory I've never understood.

There's NO REASON not to start him NOW. This team is a 9 win team AT BEST, with or without him.

The more he plays, the better idea we'll have as to whether he can truly be the QBOTF, or throw his ass on the scrap heap. Some people already want to do that after seeing meningless PS games.

The kid faced adversity at Alabama, in the SEC, and succeeded.

I don't understand the logic behind sitting him until the "situation is better."

Frankly, the situation may never get better. And, as Kurt Warner told me once at a charity event, there is no substitute for game experience. The game is too fast to learn anythign meaningful from the sideline holding a clipboard.

I don't care if we're playing the '85 Bears. Throw him out there and see how he does......then see how he RESPONDS the following game.

They're not going to ruin the kid by throwing him out there.

I like Croyle, I beleive in Croyle but if he comes out on a Sunday and wets himself against the Bears, Chargers, whoever that tells us what we need to know. We need to find Brohm's cell number and start negotiating now so we don't look like the Raiders next draft.

Chiefnj2
09-11-2007, 10:23 PM
They never had to fear for their jobs. They always had their spots, regardless of performance.

Why should you fear for your job when you are the best in the NFL?

Zouk
09-11-2007, 10:24 PM
If Croyle only gets the starting nod AFTER we're mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, will it change yours?

See, here's the thing:

I VEHEMENTLY defended Herm.

When he said he wouldn't change the offense, I believed him. And I explained to people that said he was lying why I believed him.

And then he changed the offense.

And that's just one example of where that's happened.


I agree that the whole "I won't change the offense" thing could be looked at as a lie. It's only true insofar as a lot of the plays and the terminology is the same - clearly the whole strategy of our offense has changed and gone more conservative. But I think that's the strategy that works best for the talent we have at this point - and Herm has been pretty upfront about saying that this is what he was going to do after the Green injury. He certainly talked about it again in the last few weeks in these much-derided press conferences. At this point, it's crystal clear that as an outdoor cold-weather team with no Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, Herm's vision is to build a Bears-style team. I love that.

We need to see Brodie Croyle this year in more than 1 or 2 games. If I don't get that, my opinion will change.

pikesome
09-11-2007, 10:24 PM
Why should you fear for your job when you are the best in the NFL?

Besides Rolf, Shields, TG, and Holmes who was best?

dirk digler
09-11-2007, 10:27 PM
Besides Rolf, Shields, TG, and Holmes who was best?

Brian Waters for sure

The others below were high up on the list.

Trent
Casey Weigmann - at the time
TRich

pikesome
09-11-2007, 10:29 PM
Brian Waters for sure

The others below were high up on the list.

Trent
Casey Weigmann - at the time
TRich

There's 53 guys on a roster. It'd been nice if one of those names was a WR also.

alanm
09-11-2007, 11:13 PM
I still fully believe they aren't playing Croyle because they'll use it as an excuse to not take Brohm in the draft. If they are in position for that pick and right now it's not that much of a long shot...

And like I said last night, if you are friends with anyone who is not a Chiefs fan. Tell them we don't need Brian Brohm because we have Brodie Croyle. Then watch as they laugh their asses off at you for a good 5 minutes and can't hardly catch their breath.
Most of them hardly even know who Croyle is. So it's kind of a wash as far the the laughing goes. They more or less have a befuddled look about them. But what Bronco fan doesn't?

SBK
09-11-2007, 11:18 PM
Laugh all you want, this team is horrendous.

If they don't pick Brohm and have a chance that may be my last day as a fan of this team.

The real question is, would you be missed?

Mecca
09-11-2007, 11:20 PM
Sure man everyone loves me, and I'm funny.

Mojo Rising
09-11-2007, 11:35 PM
Horseshiot.

I'll believe it when it actually happens. Clark has given no indication (if I'm wrong, please produce a cite) that he wants CP canned.

It's been espoused by the many talking and printing heads in this city that Clark has no love for CP. It has also been said that Clark has been the de facto face of the franchise for several seasons, especially since Lamar began his battle with prostate cancer.

Why, for the love of all things holy, would Clark sign CP to extension, only to pull the rug out now?

If it happens, (and by "happens" I mean in real recent frame of time), I'll buy GC's first hooker. Hell, I'll hold skip down while GC goes Ned Beatty on him.

It ain't happenin'. So take this, this ...... make a wish shit to a board that will eat it.

I agree. CP's contract runs the term of the Arrowhead remodel. That means status quo for 3 more years.

If Clark cared about winning so much he would be making changes now.

I am hoping to see some sort of hint that things will be run with more focus on winning.

I have lived in SF for 11 years and have been a die hard Chief fan. I have no intention on moving back to KC.

After Lamar died I decided that unless I see a desire to win it all instead of just being mediocre I was going to start a slow conversion process to the local club, that 1 day when I am converted I will become a season ticket holder.

I am now an 80% Chief fan and 20% Niner fan. Until this offseason the new Niner owner did not care about winning. He has made changes so I am now converting.

If in 3 years when CP is gone and Clark has the drive and focus to build a Champion (after bulding a new cash cow) and makes changes I might reverse the process.

I don't think it's happening though.

Ebolapox
09-11-2007, 11:50 PM
I'd like to see some proof of this claim. I was living in KC at the time and a few friends on the team that I'd party with and NEVER heard this claim. Doesn't mean it's not true, I'm just not buying it.

But what does it matter anyway? Have you LOOKED at the 1992 draft?

1 (20, 20) - Dale Carter, Tennessee
2 (0, 0) - Darren Mickell, Florida (suplemental draft)
2 (12, 40) - Matt Blundin, Virginia
4 (17, 101) - Mike Evans, Michigan
6 (19, 159) - Tony Smith, Notre Dame
7 (18, 186) - Erick Anderson, Michigan
8 (17, 213) - Jim Jennings, San Diego State
9 (20, 244) - Jay Leeuwenburg, Colorado
10 (19, 271) - Jerry Ostroski, Tulsa
11 (18, 298) - Doug Rigby, Wyoming
12 (17, 325) - Corey Williams, Oklahoma State

Only Dale Carter was a productive member of that draft and he certainly had many issues and because of that didn't finish his career as Chiefs. What a waste.

David Klingler wouldn't have been any different, so who give a flying rat's ass?

the source was an interview of carl before the draft (yeah, I know, not the best source, as it may have been a smoke screen), but if I recall right, carl always had glowing things to say about klingler pre draft, I believe we worked him out, etc. for what it's worth, the 1992 draft was really the first draft that I really got 'into' the draft process (pre internet, even)... sadly enough, klingler was the first qb I really wanted us to draft (and was convinced we'd get him, as carl was glowing about him... it's funny, pretty much every qb I want us to draft in the first round tanks... harrington, leftwich, cade mcnown, klingler, the list goes on and on)

RustShack
09-11-2007, 11:52 PM
BRING IN DICK VERMIEL TO BE OUR GENERAL MANAGER!!! KEEP HERMAN AS OUR HEAD COACH!!! BOTH WILL HAVE A SAY SO THEN WE HAVE A GREAT OFFENSE AND A DARN GOOD DEFENSE!!!

Mecca
09-11-2007, 11:53 PM
Let's bring a guy that sucks at drafting to be GM, hey just like we have now.

RustShack
09-12-2007, 12:10 AM
Herman is fine at drafting, let him choose who he wants for defense and when we are looking at drafting offense, Dick has his pick. ITS A GREAT IDEA! We could of won the super bowl if we had a defense with Dick, we could win a super bowl if we had an offense with Herm, so you add them together, and you "PLAY TO WIN THE GAME" then shed some tears after we win the big one!

Ari Chi3fs
09-12-2007, 12:35 AM
this thread is recockulous.

kregger
09-12-2007, 12:42 AM
Huard will bomb in Chicago. I give him till halftime in the Minnesota game to produce anything before Herm will pull the switch and put Croyle in for the rest of the year.

ferrarispider95
09-12-2007, 12:47 AM
Look at Denver, they pulled Plummer in the middle of a playoff race and it looks like it will probably pay dividends for this year.

I wouldn't put it past Carl and Herm to keep Huard even if we start the first 6 games winless.

mcan
09-12-2007, 12:53 AM
Look at Denver, they pulled Plummer in the middle of a playoff race and it looks like it will probably pay dividends for this year.

I wouldn't put it past Carl and Herm to keep Huard even if we start the first 6 games winless.


I think you should take a look at video of Cutler playing in the preseason last year, and Croyle playing in the preseason this year.

Anyong Bluth
09-12-2007, 01:03 AM
I'm exaggerating to make a point. Of course, it's not real practical to just cut a whole team. But there has to be SOME repurcussions. These players are spoiled and they have been for far too long. Vermeil did it, and we were told Herm was different. Then Jets fans started showing up talking about how he WASN'T different and they cited that his special treatment of Ty Law was a source of player dissent on the New York locker room. Of course, we didn't believe them. But it sure looks like they were right.



I said the cutting of Medlock was ONE of the catalysts. There's also the way he's handled the offense and several other things he's done. The guy is a walking contradiction, you can't trust anything he says.



He was the #1-rated kicker on almost every scout's draft board. He was more accurate in college than some of the best prospects in recent years, including Nate Kaeding. Was he struggling? Absolutely. Is cutting him after ONE GAME a good move? Absolutely not. It's a panic move, and move typical of the Kansas City Chiefs in an effort to offer up a sacrificial lamb to the fans.



Herm is injecting youth where it's convenient, and where Carl
Peterson has concluded it's not overly risky.


As for Crosby v. Medlock. I followed Crosby quite a bit since he was at Colorado. Don't take the %'s as gospel as a reason to take Medlock in the 5th. Crosby was out there kicking retarded distance FG's simply b/c he was both in CO and had the leg strength that the coach felt it was worth taking a shot at where many other kickers would have no chance. I wanted things to work out, but my initial shock of us taking a kicker in the 5th, and then to find out it wasn't Crosby shocked me. I actually remember thinking how much I was impressed by the guy that I would have entertained the thought of using a 4th on him. If the guy would have had a good combine he would have had a serious shot at 4th, and maybe even a day 1 pick. As heralded as Jankowski was, who ended up a 1st rounder, Crosby was the only kicker that comes to mind I've seen in college that really impressed me. If we would have taken him, this staff would have been 2 for 2 in validating their thought process of "over-reaching" on kickers and punters based on the traditional draft value status.

I for one don't fully buy that status any longer. Field position has become such a premium in the NFL these days, that having a money guy is key. Don't tell me there aren't a number of fans on here that don't love having DQ, b/c the guy booms punts- both for distance and height, and is uncanny in his ability to lay it inside the 20 w/out overkicking his coverage. The colts didn't spend good money to get AV for no reason. Lastly, Big Tuna and Gibbs spoke about this just a bit ago; talking about how the NFL has changed so much and that field position / special teams has become so vital in today's game, but whatever... .


As for who asked why Harlan has a bit more info than most commentators, like I said to begin with, the guy still has sources within the Chiefs org, and on top of that his family has NFL ties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Harlan

But, hey don't let me dissuade you otherwise. This is a sad culmination of a number of factors. 1st, you have a GM that was also the team President, and had to balance the financial interests of team with player personnel. 2nd, you have a conservative coach that inherited a team completely to his disliking in almost every way, minus a power running game. Herm is a firm believer in grooming young talent and letting them take their lumps on the field, so long as they learn from those mistakes and keep developing. 3rd, this team was ancient and had a number of players brought in w/ the hope of getting us over the hump, but that did not materialize. What was left was a number of players that no longer had any future and a major overhaul was needed.

That beings said:
CP is not the devil. Lamar entrusted him with a job, and he has outperformed what was asked across the board, no matter what the fanbase may think. As a fan, I understand the frustration, but CP was entrusted to both produce a profit and put butts in the stands, and handle the day to day duties of the GM. That's nearly impossible to expect top grades in both aspects from one person. He has clearly reshaped the enthusiasm for the team and made them very profitable, while still putting out a few very high caliber teams with a very long string of serviceable squads. Serving 2 masters will never gain the best results.

All in all, you wanna blame anyone for a lot of the mediocrity- look no further than Lamar. He had his moment in the sun, and firmly est. himself as a vital NFL man. In his advanced age, he became complacent with his achievements and simply looked at his franchise as an investment. Is it any wonder that he would only open up his purse strings in the years when the fanbase became disenfranchised, sacrificing some signing bonus money in order to offer up the ideal of promise to the fans in the season to come?

Herm:
The guy has an above average knack for smelling out talent on the D side, esp. D-backs. His system is actually very sound in a number of ways towards being successful in the league, but of course its not without fault. He also inherited a old, crap-ass squad w/ a number of holes to fill both right away, and by the time he addressed some immediate needs, a number of others that would need to be addressed b/c the players that were performing prior would now be on their last legs. I don't know if Herm is the the answer? Clearly, many here would not pick him as their top choice. When we were looking for a coach, my 1st choice was Jeff Fisher. I will say, Herm has had to deal with a major roster overhaul, lack of complete control both in hiring his coaches in full, and had his hands tied on some player personnel decisions.

Lastly, the fans are a bit to blame. So many want change, but refuse to endure a poor season or 2 in order to groom young players and talent, and it only makes the process that much harder. People will bitch and whine about being tired of finishing middle of the pack and tired of mediocrity, but in truth, they will tune out and refuse to enjoy any part of watching a young team learn from their mistakes and grow as opposed to watch a team that clearly doesn't have all the parts in place and can flirt with some opportunistic ideal of going on a hotstreak to win it all.

ferrarispider95
09-12-2007, 01:16 AM
I think you should take a look at video of Cutler playing in the preseason last year, and Croyle playing in the preseason this year.

How is going to get any better standing on the sidelines? Might as well throw him out there and see if he shows improvement or continues to struggle. Atleast at the end of the year, we will have a better idea of what we have and where we need to go with our 1st pick, which could be high.

We know what Huard is about. This is not a playoff team and the AFC looks tougher this year than ever.

I do think if they are going to put Croyle in, they need to do it at home.

ferrarispider95
09-12-2007, 01:18 AM
Also I would rather watch Croyle though some great passes downfield with the occasional pick, than to watch Huard dump it off 5 yards at a time.

DenverChief
09-12-2007, 01:27 AM
Lastly, the fans are a bit to blame. So many want change, but refuse to endure a poor season or 2 in order to groom young players and talent, and it only makes the process that much harder. People will bitch and whine about being tired of finishing middle of the pack and tired of mediocrity, but in truth, they will tune out and refuse to enjoy any part of watching a young team learn from their mistakes and grow as opposed to watch a team that clearly doesn't have all the parts in place and can flirt with some opportunistic ideal of going on a hotstreak to win it all.


Medlock

I don't care that he misses FG's right now the point is that he gets calmed down and at some point in the season he starts making them like TG earns money

Croyle

same deal I don't care that he throws some Int's or gets sacked for holding on to the ball for too long....I just wanna know that at some point in the season he improves and gradually makes fewer and fewer mistakes

Bowe & Sippio

In with the new and out with the OLD! Gawd please let them play ...I know I know mistakes - running the wrong route - dropping passes....what is different from Parker and Kennison?

I have no complaints about the Defense...yet....one observation though I wonder if Patterson or Brackenridge will see more playing time with the Surtain injury?


Anywho

DenverChief
09-12-2007, 01:28 AM
Also I would rather watch Croyle though some great passes downfield with the occasional pick, than to watch Huard dump it off 5 yards at a time.

and throw picks

Smed1065
09-12-2007, 01:54 AM
Totally agree. This is why I hate the "veteran excuse".....Once again, again. Not one f#@king excuse to not start Croyle.

Which team do you coach?

Not one, one team and you have all the answers? Glad you have the answers and the Cleo perspective.

Guess you knew the SB teams last year and and the year before. Hell, why be mad with the money you bet on the SB winners every year in the NFL.

I would be happy.

MGRS13
09-12-2007, 01:57 AM
Which team do you coach?

Not one, one team and you have all the answers? Glad you have the answers and the Cleo perspective.

Guess you knew the SB teams last year and and the year before. Hell, why be mad with the money you bet on the SB winners every year in the NFL.

I would be happy.
You done? You still can't come up with a good excuse to not start Croyle.

DaneMcCloud
09-12-2007, 02:33 AM
You done? You still can't come up with a good excuse to not start Croyle.

How about this?

No matter how young or old Croyle was in the preseason, he still SUCKED.

I don't care if his name was Mike Elkins or Matt Blundin or Steve Matthews or Pats Barnes or James Killian - he still SUCKED.

He may or may NOT be the QBOTF, but one thing's for sure: HE SUCKED.

I wonder if the Cowboys fans clamored and begged for Tony Romo in 2003? Or 2004? Or 2005? Or early 2006? And you know what? IT DIDN'T F*CKING MATTER. Bill Parcells KNEW when his young QB was ready.

If the Chiefs start Croyle before game 4, it will absolutely REEK of desperation.

Much like the waiving of Medlock.

Fruit Ninja
09-12-2007, 02:36 AM
Romo is a great QB to compare Brodie too in regards to him being ready.

Damon Huard is Drew Bledsoe with Trent Green's arm right now. IF his first or 2nd read isnt open, its an automatic sack. One thing i learned with Damon is he has 0 freaking mobility.

DaneMcCloud
09-12-2007, 02:40 AM
Romo is a great QB to compare Brodie too in regards to him being ready.

Damon Huard is Drew Bledsoe with Trent Green's arm right now. IF his first or 2nd read isnt open, its an automatic sack. One thing i learned with Damon is he has 0 freaking mobility.

Thank you.

How did it take Romo to be a starter? 3.5 SEASONS. Not 3.5 games, not season two but 3.5 SEASONS. And he became a Pro Bowler.

Croyle will play when he's ready. Let's just hope he good...and ready.

penchief
09-12-2007, 05:59 AM
It'll be great when Bill Kuharic takes over and trades our entire draft for a RB.

I don't see where Kuharic has done so bad. We've had two pretty good drafts in a row. If we can hang our hopes on anything it's that we have a lot of good young players.

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 07:10 AM
Why should you fear for your job when you are the best in the NFL?

Like Dexter McCleon?

Or William Bartee?

Or Eric Hicks?

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 07:14 AM
Thank you.

How did it take Romo to be a starter? 3.5 SEASONS. Not 3.5 games, not season two but 3.5 SEASONS. And he became a Pro Bowler.

Croyle will play when he's ready. Let's just hope he good...and ready.

The BIG difference is that those Cowboys teams had HOPE.

This team has NONE.

We need a spark, and Damon Huard simply CAN'T provide one.

It's time to go to the kid with the big arm. Plain and simple.

You can't do worse than 2 INT's and 0 points. You simply can't.

the Talking Can
09-12-2007, 07:51 AM
Sitting Romo behind Bledsoe was stupid, and a waste, as is perfectly clear now.

the Talking Can
09-12-2007, 07:52 AM
Does any other fanbase fight kick and scream to remain mediocre like the Chiefs?

Chiefnj2
09-12-2007, 07:54 AM
December 2006 - Huard was the spark.
September 2007 - Huard has no spark.

Rausch
09-12-2007, 08:06 AM
The BIG difference is that those Cowboys teams had HOPE.

This team has NONE.


It's not even week 2 yet.

It seems as though you're not only dead set on hating this team/season but you feel compelled to make everyone else's year miserable as well...

TEX
09-12-2007, 08:11 AM
It's not even week 2 yet.

It seems as though you're not only dead set on hating this team/season but you feel compelled to make everyone else's year miserable as well...

Oh, he'll be fine once Croyle starts and Medlock gets back on the roster. (YIKES!)

Tribal Warfare
09-12-2007, 08:11 AM
well, if Herm had any balls he do what he wanted to do, he's the Head Coach...but he is obviously a foot shuffling porter just like Gunther....

i hate this damned franchise....



You are correct :banghead:

TEX
09-12-2007, 08:12 AM
Sitting Romo behind Bledsoe was stupid, and a waste, as is perfectly clear now.

Maybe. But Romo had been around awhile.

TEX
09-12-2007, 08:13 AM
The BIG difference is that those Cowboys teams had HOPE.

This team has NONE.

We need a spark, and Damon Huard simply CAN'T provide one.

It's time to go to the kid with the big arm. Plain and simple.

You can't do worse than 2 INT's and 0 points. You simply can't.

Wanna bet? The kid could be ruined. I don't mind Brodie starting, I just want to wait until the OL, WR, and LJ are ready. Maybe not wait for all 3 but at least for two out of the thrww. I want him to have the best chance for success. Or if he fails, there will be no doubt that he can't play. I so don't want to be saying that Brodie has "potential" 3 years from now...

stevieray
09-12-2007, 08:15 AM
It's not even week 2 yet.

It seems as though you're not only dead set on hating this team/season but you feel compelled to make everyone else's year miserable as well...

right, becuase he's done with it....

Just once I'd like to see someone have some conviction with that phrase.

the Talking Can
09-12-2007, 08:17 AM
Maybe. But Romo had been around awhile.

so what?

Bledsoe was a wasted piece of crap just like Huard. He only played because Parcells like veterans and wanted to "win now." And they had jack shit to show for playing that stiff.

Just like us.

win now!

TEX
09-12-2007, 08:19 AM
Thank you.

How did it take Romo to be a starter? 3.5 SEASONS. Not 3.5 games, not season two but 3.5 SEASONS. And he became a Pro Bowler.

Croyle will play when he's ready. Let's just hope he good...and ready.

:clap: :clap: :clap: Let the voice of reason reign!

TEX
09-12-2007, 08:21 AM
so what?

Bledsoe was a wasted piece of crap just like Huard. He only played because Parcells like veterans and wanted to "win now." And they had jack shit to show for playing that stiff.

Just like us.

win now!

So what? - Brodie isn't ready - that's what. And the team isn't ready for him either. Ruin him just so he can play now? Brilliant!
He'll get his chance when things settle down.

Dave Lane
09-12-2007, 08:21 AM
I'm not at liberty to go into specifics.


OK Clayton without being specific have you actually heard ANYTHING from Clark or his circle that this a possibility. I know how to protect my sources and I'm sure you do to. So if this grumbling or a real possiblity?

Dave

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 08:22 AM
right, becuase he's done with it....

Just once I'd like to see someone have some conviction with that phrase.

So what are you suggesting? What would show "conviction" in your eyes?

I won't be going to a game this year, and I got a Chiefs jersey for my birthday that I returned for a refund.

What else would prove my "conviction"?

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 08:23 AM
Wanna bet? The kid could be ruined. I don't mind Brodie starting, I just want to wait until the OL, WR, and LJ are ready. Maybe not wait for all 3 but at least for two out of the thrww. I want him to have the best chance for success. Or if he fails, there will be no doubt that he can't play. I so don't want to be saying that Brodie has "potential" 3 years from now...

Well you will be.

Because the Chiefs are too scared to break in a new QB.

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 08:24 AM
It's not even week 2 yet.

It seems as though you're not only dead set on hating this team/season but you feel compelled to make everyone else's year miserable as well...

It's been that way since this board began. How am I any different than the MULTITUDE of people that have done this for seven years?

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 08:24 AM
So what? - Brodie isn't ready - that's what. And the team isn't ready for him either. Ruin him just so he can play now? Brilliant!
He'll get his chance when things settle down.

Damon Huard isn't ready either. Why is he playing?

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 08:26 AM
So what? - Brodie isn't ready - that's what. And the team isn't ready for him either. Ruin him just so he can play now? Brilliant!
He'll get his chance when things settle down.

When things settle down?

Right now, it's not "when" it's "if". And a BIG "if" at that.

This team has zero leadership and even less direction.

el borracho
09-12-2007, 08:34 AM
Why are people so convinced that quarterbacks get "ruined" if they play early and lose a lot of games? Where did this idea come from and what evidence supports this theory?

p.s. I bet we can name examples of QBs who played on terrible teams early in their careers and weren't "ruined."

Chiefnj2
09-12-2007, 08:39 AM
Why are people so convinced that quarterbacks get "ruined" if they play early and lose a lot of games? Where did this idea come from and what evidence supports this theory?

p.s. I bet we can name examples of QBs who played on terrible teams early in their careers and weren't "ruined."

I think it comes from the ill-conceived and unprovable notion that if guys like Harrington, Leaf, Smith, Carr, etc., weren't thrown into the fire they would have panned out and been great QBs.

OnTheWarpath58
09-12-2007, 08:40 AM
Why are people so convinced that quarterbacks get "ruined" if they play early and lose a lot of games? Where did this idea come from and what evidence supports this theory?

p.s. I bet we can name examples of QBs who played on terrible teams early in their careers and weren't "ruined."

It's a convenient excuse for people that don't want to see him play.

It's not like the kid played at Northern Idaho State and never saw quality opponents.

He played in the toughest college conference, the SEC.

He has faced adversity in the form of injuries and lack of talent around him and STILL found a way to lead an average Crimson Tide team to a 10-2 record his senior year.

OnTheWarpath58
09-12-2007, 08:43 AM
I think it comes from the ill-conceived and unprovable notion that if guys like Harrington, Leaf, Smith, Carr, etc., weren't thrown into the fire they would have panned out and been great QBs.

Or it could just be that those guys didn't have the mental makeup to play in the NFL......

But people aren't willing to consider that possibility.

It's easier to say they were ruined.

Rausch
09-12-2007, 08:50 AM
It's been that way since this board began. How am I any different than the MULTITUDE of people that have done this for seven years?

I don't remember you ever being this negative. Perhaps it was just the break I had from here and my memory is cloudy, but I doubt it.

And as far as the whole Croyle issue I like the way McNair was brought along. I though they did a wonderful job taking their time and held him out until they thought he was ready.

It worked.

chiefsfan1963
09-12-2007, 08:52 AM
I have no idea about GC's sources or what he's heard, but I heard rumblings a year and half ago that Clark very much wanted to take the team his own direction. His dad made his mark in the game, and I've long thought that Clark had his moment in the sun, and CP was simply filling the coffers. Clark wants to win.


Man I hope you are right. An owner that wants to win would be really nice for the Chiefs. THe end of the CP era would be a great start!

I think Herm is a very good evaluator of talent, but like anyone you can't pick them all, i.e. Medlock, Maxey. In the end I am not a fan of his game planning and mindset regarding winning. Way too conservative on O. Happy that the D is better, but don't like what we have to pay on O for it. Herm must go too.

bobbything
09-12-2007, 08:54 AM
He plucked a starting safety with Pro Bowl potential in the seventh round last year. The man knows what's he doing in the draft.
Well, Herm may have pulled the trigger on this, but Cunningham was the one lobbying hard for Page.

The Rick
09-12-2007, 09:11 AM
Why are people so convinced that quarterbacks get "ruined" if they play early and lose a lot of games? Where did this idea come from and what evidence supports this theory?

p.s. I bet we can name examples of QBs who played on terrible teams early in their careers and weren't "ruined."
Peyton Manning started every game as a rookie and wasn't exactly all-world:

28 INTs
71.2 QB rating

pikesome
09-12-2007, 09:11 AM
I think it comes from the ill-conceived and unprovable notion that if guys like Harrington, Leaf, Smith, Carr, etc., weren't thrown into the fire they would have panned out and been great QBs.

QBs are people and people respond to pressure differently. Maybe some of them would have turned out better or even great if they had some more time. That's on the coaching staff though, developing is the operative word. If your QB prospect needs time then a good coach should be able to identify that and make it happen. Still, all factors being equal, sooner is better. Nothing is a good stand in for playing time.

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 09:12 AM
I don't remember you ever being this negative. Perhaps it was just the break I had from here and my memory is cloudy, but I doubt it.

And as far as the whole Croyle issue I like the way McNair was brought along. I though they did a wonderful job taking their time and held him out until they thought he was ready.

It worked.

I haven't ever been this negative.

I finally "broke".

Interestingly enough, I usually go to one game a year with my dad and a large group of people from my hometown. I told my Dad I wasn't interested in going this year and he told the organizer. The organizer said it was OK because they likely wouldn't be going this year anyway - too many people don't want to go.

FringeNC
09-12-2007, 09:16 AM
Damon Huard isn't ready either. Why is he playing?


bu...bu...but Damon Huard is a proven veteran. He was the second highest-rated passer in the league last year.

The Rick
09-12-2007, 09:17 AM
As for who asked why Harlan has a bit more info than most commentators, like I said to begin with, the guy still has sources within the Chiefs org, and on top of that his family has NFL ties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Harlan

Wow...I had no idea that Kevin Harlan was the son of Bob Harlan of the Green Bay Packers.

Chiefnj2
09-12-2007, 09:36 AM
After deciding which way to go this year, the biggest mistake Herm has made was in how he handled that 4th preseason game. He should have played the potential starters to get them in some type of rhythm.

Huard, LJ and the line all looked like they hadn't played together all preseason.

LT sat out all preseason and look how he fared in his first game.

el borracho
09-12-2007, 09:38 AM
QBs are people and people respond to pressure differently. Maybe some of them would have turned out better or even great if they had some more time. That's on the coaching staff though, developing is the operative word. If your QB prospect needs time then a good coach should be able to identify that and make it happen. Still, all factors being equal, sooner is better. Nothing is a good stand in for playing time.
"Maybe" (but no concrete evidence) is a pretty weak argument, IMO. I'm not picking on you- just picking on the idea that a quarterback will automatically be ruined if he plays early on bad teams. There just isn't any evidence to support the idea. It is a ridiculous argument being used to justify keeping Croyle on the bench.

Would Croyle make mistakes?-Of course.
Would the Chiefs lose more games this year if Croyle were the starter?-Probably.
Would the extra losses be an overall wise investment?-Definitely, because we would learn what we have in Croyle and, if we decided to keep him, he would gain a ton of real NFL experience.
What are we gaining by starting Huard?-Likely win a couple of extra games but still have a losing season and miss the playoffs.

KCFalcon59
09-12-2007, 09:40 AM
LT sat out all preseason and look how he fared in his first game.

LT played against Chicago. You might have heard, they have a stout defense.

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 09:46 AM
"Maybe" (but no concrete evidence) is a pretty weak argument, IMO. I'm not picking on you- just picking on the idea that a quarterback will automatically be ruined if he plays early on bad teams. There just isn't any evidence to support the idea. It is a ridiculous argument being used to justify keeping Croyle on the bench.

Would Croyle make mistakes?-Of course.
Would the Chiefs lose more games this year if Croyle were the starter?-Probably.
Would the extra losses be an overall wise investment?-Definitely, because we would learn what we have in Croyle and, if we decided to keep him, he would gain a ton of real NFL experience.
What are we gaining by starting Huard?-Likely win a couple of extra games but still have a losing season and miss the playoffs.

Um, I don't like your answers to two of those questions in light of what we saw against Houston.

Would the Chiefs lose more games if Croyle were the starter? Maybe, but maybe not

What are we gaining by starting Huard? NOTHING

Rausch
09-12-2007, 09:54 AM
Um, I don't like your answers to two of those questions in light of what we saw against Houston.

Would the Chiefs lose more games if Croyle were the starter? Maybe, but maybe not

What are we gaining by starting Huard? NOTHING

I think a lot of this loss was due to playcalling. LJ didn't run bad at all, ****ING USE HIM! That's what he's getting paid to do, run the football.

This last week looked very similar to the Colts playoff game. Not much running the ball (Herm's fault) so we have to pass. Nearly everyone drops a pass early. QB gets nerved out after getting down and doesn't play well the entire 2nd half. Defense gets tired and the other team gobbles up the clock to end it.

Huard is supposed to be in there because he gives us the better chance to win. If we don't win we might as well lose with the younger guy, I agree. If we start off 0-3 or 1-4 we aren't going to the playoffs anyway, not with this schedule...

el borracho
09-12-2007, 09:57 AM
Well, that is debatable I suppose. In any case, I see no real advantage to starting Huard which is the real issue. Huard is not taking us anywhere. At best a few more wins but those (few potential) wins are worthless in the grand scheme of things. It is assinine to start Huard. If/ when we do go 0-4 we had better see Croyle.

Chiefnj2
09-12-2007, 09:58 AM
LT played against Chicago. You might have heard, they have a stout defense.

A stout defense that gave up 191 net yards rushing in the Super Bowl.

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 10:00 AM
I think a lot of this loss was due to playcalling. LJ didn't run bad at all, ****ING USE HIM! That's what he's getting paid to do, run the football.

This last week looked very similar to the Colts playoff game. Not much running the ball (Herm's fault) so we have to pass. Nearly everyone drops a pass early. QB gets nerved out after getting down and doesn't play well the entire 2nd half. Defense gets tired and the other team gobbles up the clock to end it.

Huard is supposed to be in there because he gives us the better chance to win. If we don't win we might as well lose with the younger guy, I agree. If we start off 0-3 or 1-4 we aren't going to the playoffs anyway, not with this schedule...

LJ isn't going to have any long-term success against the 10-man fronts we will invariably face.

Huard = short controlled passing game. Plain and simple.

htismaqe
09-12-2007, 10:00 AM
A stout defense that gave up 191 net yards rushing in the Super Bowl.

I remember the "stout" Chiefs defense completely STONING LT in 2003, either the 1st or 2nd game. Look how that turned out.

pikesome
09-12-2007, 10:16 AM
"Maybe" (but no concrete evidence) is a pretty weak argument, IMO. I'm not picking on you- just picking on the idea that a quarterback will automatically be ruined if he plays early on bad teams. There just isn't any evidence to support the idea. It is a ridiculous argument being used to justify keeping Croyle on the bench.

Would Croyle make mistakes?-Of course.
Would the Chiefs lose more games this year if Croyle were the starter?-Probably.
Would the extra losses be an overall wise investment?-Definitely, because we would learn what we have in Croyle and, if we decided to keep him, he would gain a ton of real NFL experience.
What are we gaining by starting Huard?-Likely win a couple of extra games but still have a losing season and miss the playoffs.

I agree with you on the "automatic" part. The problem, and it's been touched on a bunch, is that it seem so often that a player is drafted and expected to go somewhere from day one. Maybe game time is the best for some new QBs but others might need acclimation or who knows what. That's the job of the FO/coaching staff to identify and make it happen. Leaf was a great prospect but was completely unable to handle the pressure of being the savior for a long suffering team. For him time on the bench might have been exactly what he needed to fulfill his promise. There's no 100% answer because Qbs are different and so is their situation.

Still, they need to play Croyle. Sink or swim, we need to know if it's a QB or a LT or whatever in next years draft.

DaneMcCloud
09-12-2007, 10:34 AM
The BIG difference is that those Cowboys teams had HOPE.

This team has NONE.

We need a spark, and Damon Huard simply CAN'T provide one.

It's time to go to the kid with the big arm. Plain and simple.

You can't do worse than 2 INT's and 0 points. You simply can't.

Really? Hope?

2003: 10-6 (Quincy Carter)
2004: 6-10 (Vinny Testaverde)
2005: 9-7 (Drew Bledsoe)
2006: 9-7 (Drew Bledsoe & Tony Romo)

So, I guess you think that Parcells should have started Romo back in 2004 instead of letting him mature and grow? Don't you think that if he HAD started, he would be out of the league by now?

I do, because that's EXACTLY what Parcells said last year.

Just because this season's a "waste" doesn't mean that the Chiefs should "waste" Croyle's career by starting him too soon. Regardless of what some fans want to see.

ottawa_chiefs_fan
09-12-2007, 10:44 AM
A stout defense that gave up 191 net yards rushing in the Super Bowl.

...they were on the field virtually the entire game....

HemiEd
09-12-2007, 10:52 AM
I remember the "stout" Chiefs defense completeling STONING LJ in 2003, either the 1st or 2nd game. Look how that turned out.

You meant LT, right?

shaneo69
09-12-2007, 11:18 AM
Really? Hope?

2003: 10-6 (Quincy Carter)
2004: 6-10 (Vinny Testaverde)
2005: 9-7 (Drew Bledsoe)
2006: 9-7 (Drew Bledsoe & Tony Romo)

So, I guess you think that Parcells should have started Romo back in 2004 instead of letting him mature and grow? Don't you think that if he HAD started, he would be out of the league by now?

I do, because that's EXACTLY what Parcells said last year.

Just because this season's a "waste" doesn't mean that the Chiefs should "waste" Croyle's career by starting him too soon. Regardless of what some fans want to see.

People who want Croyle to sit and learn right now are citing Romo and McNair as examples of guys who sat a couple years before starting and becoming solid QB's.

FYI...Romo played at Eastern Illinois (Div I-AA) and McNair at Alcorn State (Div I-AA). Croyle played at Alabama. SEC. Cutler is the player I would compare Croyle with, as far as how long it should take for him to sit and then play.

Some people want to wait and start Croyle at home. I disagree. If he plays bad at home, he gets booed. I would rather have him start on the road. Yeah the Bears are a tough defense, but they aren't really known for having a great home field advantage.

Baby Lee
09-12-2007, 11:20 AM
Wow...I had no idea that Kevin Harlan was the son of Bob Harlan of the Green Bay Packers.
Field Goal!!! Kan - sas City!! Doesn't have the same ring. . . ROFL ROFL

Dump pass!! Kan sas City!! Nope. . .