View Full Version : Question regarding Grbac...
12-01-2000, 03:08 PM
There seems to be a pretty even split among KC fans regarding Grbac sitting out the KC/SD with a bruised index finger.... Half claim he's a wuss... and half say he did the right thing.
My question is what if he had sat out say a KC/Denver or KC/Oakland game with playoff ramifications? ... I have no doubt what the current "Elvis is a wuss" faction would say, but what would the people who defend him sitting the SD game out say?....
If he did sit ... would his fellow players be behind his decision?
12-01-2000, 03:13 PM
He has been doing so well all season. I just can't imagine why in gods name he wouldn't play unless he felt it absolutely imparative that he bench himself. It's proposterious really. If that was the case then f*** him... but I really don't buy it. I am sure he would have a good reason considering.
[This message has been edited by bishop_74 (edited 12-01-2000).]
If he can't throw the ball effectively, he should sit PERIOD. Favre has taught us that lesson many times over. Since I'm not a dr. and haven't actually seen the finger, I don't think I can judge him either way. He's done a helluva job this season and the past several to overcome all the adversity. Far be it for me to criticize.
12-01-2000, 03:15 PM
I guess what I am saying is that I don't think he would keep himself out of a game unless he really felt it necessary and I respect his decision.
12-01-2000, 03:18 PM
Im not sure if I fit in the 'defend' category, because Im really unclear as to how the decision was made last week.
If EG had sit out a game with playoffs on the line, there obviously would have been more scrutiny/media questions about the decision and maybe we'd all have a little better idea of who ultimately made the decision.<BR>
12-01-2000, 03:19 PM
I think he sat because he thought it was best for the team for the other qb to play....hindsite 20/20..i'm guessing he may have tried...but "I" thought Moon was good enough to beat SD??...shows what I know..
I do know that I had my share of sprained/bruised/broken/jammed fingers from wrestling and bull riding...and they can be worse than some bigger owies....sometimes the small things hurt the worst...
12-01-2000, 03:21 PM
He should have sat IMO. Just because Favre plays through injuries doesn't mean he is making the right decision. Grbac overcame the boos of the fans for 2-3 seasons, as well as an ugly hit to his elbow earlier this season. So I don't feel in a position to doubt his mental or physical fortitude.
Also he has too much to play for to sit a game out (possible pro-bowl berth). I believe he would have played if he was fit to and I think I'd have the same opinion if it had been a different division rival.
[This message has been edited by Cormac (edited 12-01-2000).]
12-01-2000, 03:22 PM
Case in point...getting grazed in the nuts...
[This message has been edited by scooter (edited 12-01-2000).]
12-01-2000, 03:26 PM
"I just grazed you, it can't be that bad"...one of the worst things a woman can say IMO...
12-01-2000, 03:54 PM
I think the people throwing baseless accusations against Grbac are just doing it because they want to complain about something. There is no shred of evidence to support their claims. Gunther says today that Elvis was upset that Gun wouldn't allow him to play. Now whether you want to believe Gun or not, I'll take his word over some wuss sportswriter who wasn't even with the team. If he could have played he would have played and jumped at the chance to throw another 5 TD's against San Diego. I think that if it was an important game and not against an 0-11 team he would have fought to play and the coaches would actually have been more willing to let him play. And I also think it would have hurt our team, because he couldn't grip the ball and put any zip on it, he would get picked off 4 times and fumble it, and then fans would be all over him for hurting the team by playing injured, not praising him for gutting it out...
12-01-2000, 04:08 PM
I hate to hear any player being questioned this way. TD has been going through the same thing in Denver.
I like to think that all players play when they are capable of playing. IMO if a player sits, he should be sitting. I don't question a players heart, or desire, or motive.
IMO, if Grbac didn't play, he couldn't play, bottom line.
12-01-2000, 04:26 PM
I know alot of people have said this, but I think it warrants repeating. Why would he sit in this game? He had to be salivating at the thought of tossing 3+ TD's against these chumps. This guys has endured more from the "fans" than any one person could, would or should. He's broken bones, he's been crushed (that's for you Gaz)and he still shows up every day to give it his all for these "fans".
He sat simply because he could not play at the level needed and the organization thought grandpa could handle it. They all were wrong.
This crap about Favre is just that - CRAP. Hasselbeck should have been playing half of last year and this year. Favre is not the Favre of the SB teams!
[This message has been edited by WisChief (edited 12-01-2000).]
12-01-2000, 04:27 PM
I think it's unfair to judge him as a ***** when nobody knows what the injury is. He took a pretty good shot to his elbow earlier in the year. I didn't hear anyone praising his toughness then for playing through it. Since he did play with that injury, I would believe that he's not just being a *****, and that this injury actually would hamper his play. If his play is going to hurt the team, then, absolutely, sit yourself down.
[This message has been edited by G_Man (edited 12-01-2000).]
12-01-2000, 04:31 PM
I've watched this guy for years. Had season tickets to the Michigan games when we was there - never forget that throw to Desmond Howard against Notre Dame.
Bottom line is Elvis is no *****. This is one tough sumb*tch physically. Mentally - well look at all the crap he's taken in KC - not to mention scumbag Willie Brown.
If he sat - it was with good reason.
12-01-2000, 07:23 PM
For all of you who think Elvis is tough I have two questions for you.
1. When was the last time you saw Grbac run for a first down and take a hit going for it rather than sliding or running out of bounds short of the marker?
2. When have you ever seen Elvis attempt to tackle someone who just picked him off?<P>
12-01-2000, 07:33 PM
It wasn't for a 1st down but he ran for a touchdown against Oakland. Of course I don't suppose that counts for anything does it?
Hopefully after throwing an int the QB doesn't get close enough to make the tackle. That means the DB has made a big return.
Let me ask you a question or two.
1. EG is slow afoot. Now do you really want him running around like a sitting duck for LBs?
2. Everyone says how tough Farve is. It's also widely agreed that Farve's 'toughness' has cost his team games when he should have let the backup play. So exactly what has Farve proved?<BR>
12-01-2000, 07:49 PM
San Diego was must-win. He's a wuss.
12-01-2000, 08:01 PM
He WANTED to play in the San Diego game and the coaches sat him. So he's a wuss, right?
As far as running around, when he has had to he does do it. I still vividly remember a play against San Diego at Arrowhead a few years back where he got hit late out of bounds, was shaken up and had to come out for one play, then went back in the next play and ran it in for the touchdown. But not only is it not in the offensive gameplan, but the coaches have told him not to do it because they know the guys behind him suck and they can't afford injury. He is a drop back passer. You guys probably never pay attention to all the times he gets hit after the ball is thrown and he comes back to the huddle.
As far as Favre, he's so tough he got addicted to painkillers. What a stud...
12-01-2000, 08:12 PM
To answer your questions:
1. Do I want him running? Yes. I want him to run for a first down if his receivers are covered. Elway wasn't fast by any means at the end of his career, but I vividly remember him getting spun around 360 degrees in the air.
2. What has Favre proved? He proved that he was one of the best QB's in the league for a couple of years and has a ring to show for it. He was and still is well respected by his teammates and proved he was a tough SOB. A person that a team could rally around when things were bad.
12-01-2000, 08:31 PM
And as has been pointed out he does run on occasion. He doesn't make a habit of it because: 1. He's slow. 2. His coaches have told him not to. 3. He's not a RB, he's a QB and thus makes his mark by throwing the ball.
Farve has proven that he has more guts then sense (intelligence). His 'gutting it out' has cost his team games, perhaps even another ring.
There's football, there's smart football and there's dumb football. Playing hurt and costing your team a game is dumb football. It's especially dumb when you're playing an 0-11 team that you should thump easily when Denver is coming to town in two weeks.
12-01-2000, 08:38 PM
Let me ask you all something, and answer it honestly if you can. If Elvis goes out there with the finger and has no zip on the ball and throws 3 INT's and fumbles it, would you who are ripping him now be posting here about how tough and gutty he is?
[This message has been edited by DaWolf (edited 12-01-2000).]
12-01-2000, 08:56 PM
In the next Denver game we just may find out if he reinjures the finger.
First, I bet in a true playoff implication game such as last Decembers he and Gun decide to make the attempt to play. The fallacy here is that last week was not a true playoff implication game, the Chiefs had virtually no chance of making the playoffs, and certainly it would have been as lame ducks.
Second, our chances of beating Denver or Oakland would be virtually nil without Grbac. We should have been able to not only beat SD but dominate them with any QB. The fact we did not I blame on two things, the coaches did a lousy job on offense (why I want them gone, including Gun) and they did not have the guts to replace Moon with Collins when clearly Moon was not having any kind of a game at all.
Finally, I would rather have a backup who could throw the ball properly than a starter who would be throwing lame passes for interception fodder. The whole argument would be different today if Elvis had played and thrown four interceptions. We would have the same Grbashers on saying he is no good in the clutch, why did Gun play someone who was obviously injured, and why did we not have a qualified backup. The last two would have been very legitimate questions, but instead the proper action was taken and people who have no clue are questioning Grbac's toughness in a basically meaningless game.
By the way congrats on your Raiders, the fade definitely did not happen. I predicted 11-5 for them, it looks like they might just exceed that. Hopefully some serious mgmt changes will happen for the Chiefs and the once great rivalry can resume from both sides. This one side being dominant while the other is basically pathetic is getting old. It has been going on since the 80s, one way or the other.
If I were a Democrat I would surely be a sore loser!
12-01-2000, 09:59 PM
If you think Grbac is a better player than Favre, so be it. I'd like to see him win a single playoff game before being compared to a great QB like Favre. I think Favre's toughness sure as hell helped Green Bay win many more games than it cost them.
I don't see how people can say "we should have easily beaten San Diego even with a backup QB." Some facts entering the SD game: 1) SD had played their last 5 games very close and showed a lot of heart in each of them, 2) KC looked like utter crap in their previous two games and showed no emotion whatsoever, 3) Moon and Collins both suck, 4) our coaching staff is completely clueless. How in the world can someone conclude or assume that we could beat San Diego last week especially with a 44 year old backup?
You can't play afraid. Elvis is 6'5" and close to 240 lbs, he should be able to run and take a hit if necessary.
I'm sure Grbac gained a lot of respect from his teammates sitting out with a BRUISED finger.
12-01-2000, 10:02 PM
I think that we shouldn't speculate on a situation that we are not fully informed about. I have a question for everyone. If we would of won the game would it still be a big deal that Grbac sat out? No matter who's choice it was.
12-01-2000, 10:11 PM
Judging from the way they greeted him back in practice, they sure do have a lot more respect for him after watching Warren Moon. And the injury was probably more severe than this little weenie bruised finger you guys are making it out to be...
12-01-2000, 10:22 PM
How severe could the injury have been if he was ready to play 3 days later?
12-01-2000, 10:50 PM
Congrats to Jim Reynolds... he gets the gold star for being the only one to answer the hypothetical question posed.
No wonder KC's offense and defense aren't on the same page, hehe.
BTW thanks for the props Logical... I thought I was just being a wise *** this summer when I predicted 12-4 for Oakland and 6-10 for KC... The way Denver's hanging around, it may take 13-3 to win the division.
For what its worth KC is not that far away. A RB would be a good start. I also think KC will send more players to the Pro Bowl than Oakland will.
12-01-2000, 11:05 PM
No problem on the props, I may have a long history of hate for the Raiders but there also was a deepseated respect that was always there as well. At least this decades version does not contain the thugs that made me hate the 60s and 70s Raiders (JMO).
I agree that a RB would be a huge step, but coaching changes in my opinion are even more important. By the way you may not remember but I was one of the first to pay attention to your point on Willie Shaw and was telling some people such as KCJ that the guy had me worried. Well guess what soft zone, Hasty on one side of the field almost all the time, pretty much what you warned us about. I hate Defense played this way, especially when we do not have the right players for these schemes. I think that the Chiefs match up well against the Donks and expect we will be taking care of your concern. This is beyond the weakness, this is rivalry on home turf with us matching up in the right ways. I will predict now a 10 pt margin of victory against the Broncos no matter what happens in between (short of Grbac or Gonzalez being injured).
12-02-2000, 08:48 AM
JQ, Logical or anyone else in the know:
Much has been discussed about Shaw's soft/prevent defense ideas. As most everyone says, it obviously does not work - at least with the Chiefs or the Raiders (btw - my highschool coach 15 years ago didn't use it either :D) My question is: Does it work ever and why use it? What is he thinking?<P>
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.