ChiefsPlanet
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Croyle deserves the Roethlisberger treatment (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=171252)

beach tribe 10-01-2007 01:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefsfan1963
You prove my point exactly. This why CP is still GM for the CHiefs.
What?

You think I have anything to do with the reason CP is still in office? Ive never even been to a game. Dude, you are delusional.

beach tribe 10-01-2007 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
I didn't state an opinion of Huard, did I?

I only rebuffed your egregious claims of Croyle's invincibility.
I am not the one you quoted silly.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach tribe
I am not the one you quoted silly.
My apologies.

beach tribe 10-01-2007 01:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
My apologies.
Its cool.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefsfan1963
You prove my point exactly. This why CP is still GM for the CHiefs.
This is NOT why Carl Peterson is "still" the GM for the Chiefs.

Carl Peterson is the GM for the Chiefs, not because of public opinion, but because he puts a competitive franchise on the field, year in and year out.

If the mandate from the ownership was to win a championship, then Peterson would have been fired long ago.

Peterson is the GM because the Hunt family clearly respects and likes the results under Peterson.

Regardless of fan apathy.

chiefsfan1963 10-01-2007 01:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach tribe
What?

You think I have anything to do with the reason CP is still in office? Ive never even been to a game. Dude, you are delusional.
No. When you say "I still want to get there and see what happens" you have proven my point in my last post regarding how CP teases Chief fans. You settle for the hope that by making the playoffs your team has a chance to go the distance. Instead I believe making the playoffs is not necessarily a goal but a step. The real goal of a GM is to build a championship team that wins multiple SB's in a decade.

'Hamas' Jenkins 10-01-2007 01:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
This is NOT why Carl Peterson is "still" the GM for the Chiefs.

Carl Peterson is the GM for the Chiefs, not because of public opinion, but because he puts a competitive franchise on the field, year in and year out.

If the mandate from the ownership was to win a championship, then Peterson would have been fired long ago.

Peterson is the GM because the Hunt family clearly respects and likes the results under Peterson.

Regardless of fan apathy.
Competitive for what?? The final wild card spot? If we are so consistently competitive, why was CP begging the owners to expand the playoffs? So that the 8-8 teams could get in?

We've had 4 competitive teams in Peterson's 19 years....93, 95, 97, and '03. That is not a consistently competitive team. It's not even close.

chiefsfan1963 10-01-2007 01:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
This is NOT why Carl Peterson is "still" the GM for the Chiefs.

Carl Peterson is the GM for the Chiefs, not because of public opinion, but because he puts a competitive franchise on the field, year in and year out.

If the mandate from the ownership was to win a championship, then Peterson would have been fired long ago.

Peterson is the GM because the Hunt family clearly respects and likes the results under Peterson.

Regardless of fan apathy.
You are right. I've said this as well. Lamar Family have no passion to win SB's they have better things to do.

beach tribe 10-01-2007 01:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefsfan1963
No. When you say "I still want to get there and see what happens" you have proven my point in my last post regarding how CP teases Chief fans. You settle for the hope that by making the playoffs your team has a chance to go the distance. Instead I believe making the playoffs is not necessarily a goal but a step. The real goal of a GM is to build a championship team that wins multiple SB's in a decade.
Thats the goal.

But my love for the Chiefs, and desire for them to succeed, doesnt have shit to do with CP keeping his job.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 01:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
Competitive for what?? The final wild card spot? If we are so consistently competitive, why was CP begging the owners to expand the playoffs? So that the 8-8 teams could get in?

We've had 4 competitive teams in Peterson's 19 years....93, 95, 97, and '03. That is not a consistently competitive team. It's not even close.
Hey dude, I'm not the owner.

If the Hunts were unhappy with Peterson's performance, it's within their rights to fire him.

Clearly, after 19 years, they're not ready to make that move.

Get over it.

beach tribe 10-01-2007 01:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
Competitive for what?? The final wild card spot? If we are so consistently competitive, why was CP begging the owners to expand the playoffs? So that the 8-8 teams could get in?

We've had 4 competitive teams in Peterson's 19 years....93, 95, 97, and '03. That is not a consistently competitive team. It's not even close.
Thats not very consistent.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 01:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach tribe
Thats not very consistent.
It's also inaccurate.

The Chiefs made the playoffs in 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1997, 2003 and 2006

There's only been 4 losing seasons during those 19 years.

I'd say that's fairly competitive.

Unlike their neighbors, the Royals.

The Hunts MUST be happy because he's still in charge.

Frankie 10-01-2007 01:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan
Croyle may or may not be the QBotF for this team, but we'll never know as long as he's on the sidelines.
Though this point has been made many times it seems to be totally ignored by the Huard crowd. This is the most powerful point of this whole debate. That's why I want to know if Croyle is the real thing BEFORE we go the next draft. The worst thing we can do is to waste an otherwise much needed high draft choice on another QB while we may have a good one here already.

Frankie 10-01-2007 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach tribe
WE WILL NOT DRAFT BRIAN BROHM, OR ANDRE WOODSON, OR ANY OTHER QB IN THE FIRST ROUND NEXT YEAR........END OF STORY.
How are you so sure? If Brady Quinn had fallen one more spot we would have drafted him instead of D-Bowe. I'm kinda happy that didn't happen.

beach tribe 10-01-2007 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie
How are you so sure? If Brady Quinn had fallen one more spot we would have drafted him instead of D-Bowe. I'm kinda happy that didn't happen.
I think if we wanted Queer, we could have had him.

Croyle will start in 08. Regaurdless of what he does this yr.

Frankie 10-01-2007 01:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
This is NOT why Carl Peterson is "still" the GM for the Chiefs.

Carl Peterson is the GM for the Chiefs, not because of public opinion, but because he puts a competitive franchise on the field, year in and year out.

If the mandate from the ownership was to win a championship, then Peterson would have been fired long ago.

Peterson is the GM because the Hunt family clearly respects and likes the results under Peterson.

Regardless of fan apathy.
The Hunts remember the '70s and the '80s well. Too well if you ask me. Snakebitten by Steadman's totally inept front office they are happy enough with a GM that builds the team only enough to attract the fans to their seats next season. I think the ownership is too afraid of ending up with another Steadmann-like FO.

beach tribe 10-01-2007 01:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie
The Hunts remember the '70s and the '80s well. Too well if you ask me. Snakebitten by Steadman's totally inept front office they are happy enough with a GM that builds the team only enough to attract the fans to their seats next season. I think the ownership is too afraid of ending up with another Steadmann-like FO.
Prolly

'Hamas' Jenkins 10-01-2007 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
It's also inaccurate.

The Chiefs made the playoffs in 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1997, 2003 and 2006

There's only been 4 losing seasons during those 19 years.

I'd say that's fairly competitive.

Unlike their neighbors, the Royals.

The Hunts MUST be happy because he's still in charge.
The Chiefs were legitimate threats in only four of those 19 years. In 1990, 91, 92, 94 (you forgot, WC loss to Miami), and '06 we were also-rans with no shot in hell of winning anything.

'Hamas' Jenkins 10-01-2007 01:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie
The Hunts remember the '70s and the '80s well. Too well if you ask me. Snakebitten by Steadman's totally inept front office they are happy enough with a GM that builds the team only enough to attract the fans to their seats next season. I think the ownership is too afraid of ending up with another Steadmann-like FO.
And if you end up with a Steadman, you fire the sonofabitch after 3 years, not 20.

That's on the Hunt's, and it's something that they could easily fix.

It's a results-based position, the GM isn't musing about the intangibles of string theory.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
The Chiefs were legitimate threats in only four of those 19 years. In 1990, 91, 92, 94 (you forgot, WC loss to Miami), and '06 we were also-rans with no shot in hell of winning anything.
Give me a break.

Legitimate threat?

If they had WON, you wouldn't be saying that they weren't a "legitimate" threat.

In 2006, they had a SHOT at winning. The head coach started the wrong QB (similar to the head coach in 1997). The defense played extremely well.

But I guess the Chiefs weren't a "legitimate threat" to win in San Diego yesterday, either?

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 02:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by keg in kc
Hyperbole much?

Huard was handed the job. He wasn't even given the opportunity to fail thanks to a fabricated "injury". Because, lest we forget, when he did play in the preseason, he turned the ball over After that, shockingly, he didn't play. He was "hurt".

In other words, he was protected so there wouldn't be a controversy.

The reality is that Croyle made what amounts to two bad decisions in the preseason. He also led the only scoring drive the 1's had, and looked amazing doing it.

That's called "inexperience", a problem which is not cured on the sidelines. You don't gain confidence on the sideline. You don't learn to recognize defenses at game speed on the sideline. You don't become a leader in the huddle on the sideline. You don't earn your team's respect on the sideline.

We haven't gotten anything from Huard that we wouldn't have gotten from Croyle. Poor throws into heavy coverage? Check. Receivers nearly decapitated because he regularly hangs them out to dry? Check. He hasn't done any of his vaunted "game management," throwing 5 picks, all of which were either poor throws or poor decisions.

Most of the notable plays in the second half against San Diego were balls that should never have been thrown in the first place, receivers making amazing plays to bail him out. Ditto for last week. Thank god for Dwayne Bowe, or we'd probably be sitting here at 0-4, in full meltdown mode. Because reality is that Huard is not an NFL starting calibre quarterback.

That said, you don't change QBs when you're winning. The real shame is that they started the season with him. Hopefully it's not going to set us back in '08, when we're scratching our collective heads wondering why Croyle doesn't look any better than he did in preseason '07.
Awesome.
:clap:

ChiefsCountry 10-01-2007 02:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Give me a break.

Legitimate threat?

If they had WON, you wouldn't be saying that they weren't a "legitimate" threat.

In 2006, they had a SHOT at winning. The head coach started the wrong QB (similar to the head coach in 1997). The defense played extremely well.

But I guess the Chiefs weren't a "legitimate threat" to win in San Diego yesterday, either?
You honsetly think Damon Friggin Huard could have led us to a Super Bowl. ROFL

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GOATSE
Huard's injury was not fabricated. He also played after he threw that interception. He played in two preseason games.

Croyle made a hell of a lot more than two bad decisions.

Only three of Huard's interceptions can directly be attributed to him. Two of them were on the receivers 100%. A third was meaningless, with the game already over. A fourth was a tipped ball, a freak play. The fifth was a GREAT PLAY by a defensive back. It's not like Huard is throwing blindly into coverage. NONE of his interceptions resemble the AWFUL throws Croyle made in preseason.

We HAVE to throw the ball 30 times a game right now. I don't trust Croyle. I trust Huard. He's not making dumb decisions.
Blah blah blah.

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 02:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Croyle wasn't ready. Peter King said so.
LMAO Did you really mean to type this shit? You're a tool...

Rausch 10-01-2007 02:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie
How are you so sure? If Brady Quinn had fallen one more spot we would have drafted him instead of D-Bowe.

WTF ever... :rolleyes:

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 02:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GOATSE

I don't believe we'd be 2-2 with Brodie.
I agree. I say 3-1.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 02:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigChiefDave
LMAO Did you really mean to type this shit? You're a tool...
You're an asswipe.

Thanks for picking and choosing the quotes.

Moron.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 02:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry
You honsetly think Damon Friggin Huard could have led us to a Super Bowl. ROFL
Did I state that?

NO.

What the fuck is wrong with you people?

Stating that Croyle was clearly not ready to lead the Chiefs into the 2007 season due to his poor preseason performance is NOT the same as saying that Damon Huard is anything near a Pro-Bowl, Super Bowl Quarterback.

Got it?

ChiefsCountry 10-01-2007 02:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Did I state that?

NO.

What the fuck is wrong with you people?

Stating that Croyle was clearly not ready to lead the Chiefs into the 2007 season due to his poor preseason performance is NOT the same as saying that Damon Huard is anything near a Pro-Bowl, Super Bowl Quarterback.

Got it?
I wasnt talking about Croyle, go look at the post that I quoted that from.

headsnap 10-01-2007 02:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Did I state that?

NO.

What the fuck is wrong with you people?
yup, you pretty much implied that:

Quote:
In 2006, they had a SHOT at winning. The head coach started the wrong QB (similar to the head coach in 1997). The defense played extremely well.

:shake:

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 02:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry
I wasnt talking about Croyle, go look at the post that I quoted that from.
Cool. But still, the question remains:

Why is it that by stating Croyle wasn't ready to start the 2007 season is automatically to be interpreted as Damon Huard is a great QB?

Is that those people can't read? Won't read? Or that they're just plain fucking stupid?

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 02:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by headsnap
yup, you pretty much implied that:




:shake:
Really? Then you're just friggin' DUMB.

'Hamas' Jenkins 10-01-2007 02:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Really? Then you're just friggin' DUMB.
The only dumb one, is the sonofabitch who thinks that having a SHOT equates to being competitive for a title.

I have a shot to fuck Scarlett Johannsen. It's probably 1 in 500 or so million, but it doesn't mean that I'm in a competition to be her next bedmate.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 02:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
The only dumb one, is the sonofabitch who thinks that having a SHOT equates to being competitive for a title.

I have a shot to fuck Scarlett Johannsen. It's probably 1 in 500 or so million, but it doesn't mean that I'm in a competition to be her next bedmate.
Give me a break. Friggin' A, Hamas. I thought you were smarter than this.

I don't think there was ANYONE on this forum last September that thought the Chiefs would even be competitive after the loss of Willie Roaf on opening day and Trent Green in game one.

But guess what? THAT'S WHY THEY PLAY THE GAME.

If you're so damn certain this team is going nowhere and won't amount to anything, why bother watching or attending the games? Why waste your time as a fan?

THAT to me is a dumb sonofabitch.

PS - I think you're over-estimating your chances with Scarlett Jo

Chiefnj2 10-01-2007 02:45 PM
Croyle doesn't "deserve" anything. If he didn't melt down in preseason he'd "deserve" a shot. Right now, Herm needs to make up his mind.

headsnap 10-01-2007 02:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Really? Then you're just friggin' DUMB.

that was YOUR quote dumbass!!!!


:shake:




I'm going to go DL some new music...

'Hamas' Jenkins 10-01-2007 02:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Give me a break. Friggin' A, Hamas. I thought you were smarter than this.

I don't think there was ANYONE on this forum last September that thought the Chiefs would even be competitive after the loss of Willie Roaf on opening day and Trent Green in game one.

But guess what? THAT'S WHY THEY PLAY THE GAME.

If you're so damn certain this team is going nowhere and won't amount to anything, why bother watching or attending the games? Why waste your time as a fan?

THAT to me is a dumb sonofabitch.

PS - I think you're over-estimating your chances with Scarlett Jo
So I should just be a fairweather fan and only watch whenever we are winning...

:spock:

Is your Colts Starter jacket restricted airflow to your brain??

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 02:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by headsnap
that was YOUR quote dumbass!!!!


:shake:




I'm going to go DL some new music...
Explain to me how stating that the Chiefs would have had a better shot at winning in Indy circa 2006 with Damon Huard at quarterback is the same as saying "The Chiefs would have won the Super Bowl with Huard at QB"?

I guess you're a reerun. That *might* explain your reading comprehension.

But maybe not.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 02:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
So I should just be a fairweather fan and only watch whenever we are winning...

:spock:

Is your Colts Starter jacket restricted airflow to your brain??
I never thought I'd say this to Mr. Hamas Jenkins, the self-proclaimed genius of Chiefsplanet.

Your and idiot.

Thanks for playing.

headsnap 10-01-2007 02:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Explain to me how stating that the Chiefs would have had a better shot at winning in Indy circa 2006 with Damon Huard at quarterback is the same as saying "The Chiefs would have won the Super Bowl with Huard at QB"?

I guess you're a reerun. That *might* explain your reading comprehension.

But maybe not.
Retart, nobody said ANYTHING on this thread about the Chiefs winning the 06 SB with Huard...



why don't YOU try a little reading comprehension.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 03:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by headsnap
Retart, nobody said ANYTHING on this thread about the Chiefs winning the 06 SB with Huard...



why don't YOU try a little reading comprehension.
Really? How about this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry
You honsetly think Damon Friggin Huard could have led us to a Super Bowl. ROFL

'Hamas' Jenkins 10-01-2007 03:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
I never thought I'd say this to Mr. Hamas Jenkins, the self-proclaimed genius of Chiefsplanet.

Your and idiot.

Thanks for playing.
You said:

If you're so damn certain this team is going nowhere and won't amount to anything, why bother watching or attending the games? Why waste your time as a fan?


How is that not a plea to be a fairweather fan??

Frankie 10-01-2007 03:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
I have a shot to fuck Scarlett Johannsen. It's probably 1 in 500 or so million, but it doesn't mean that I'm in a competition to be her next bedmate.
Trust me. She's not all that in bed.

headsnap 10-01-2007 03:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Really? How about this:
I don't see the word 'WIN'... :p

jettio 10-01-2007 03:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by keg in kc
Hyperbole much?

Huard was handed the job. He wasn't even given the opportunity to fail thanks to a fabricated "injury". Because, lest we forget, when he did play in the preseason, he turned the ball over After that, shockingly, he didn't play. He was "hurt".

In other words, he was protected so there wouldn't be a controversy.

The reality is that Croyle made what amounts to two bad decisions in the preseason. He also led the only scoring drive the 1's had, and looked amazing doing it.

That's called "inexperience", a problem which is not cured on the sidelines. You don't gain confidence on the sideline. You don't learn to recognize defenses at game speed on the sideline. You don't become a leader in the huddle on the sideline. You don't earn your team's respect on the sideline.

We haven't gotten anything from Huard that we wouldn't have gotten from Croyle. Poor throws into heavy coverage? Check. Receivers nearly decapitated because he regularly hangs them out to dry? Check. He hasn't done any of his vaunted "game management," throwing 5 picks, all of which were either poor throws or poor decisions.

Most of the notable plays in the second half against San Diego were balls that should never have been thrown in the first place, receivers making amazing plays to bail him out. Ditto for last week. Thank god for Dwayne Bowe, or we'd probably be sitting here at 0-4, in full meltdown mode. Because reality is that Huard is not an NFL starting calibre quarterback.

That said, you don't change QBs when you're winning. The real shame is that they started the season with him. Hopefully it's not going to set us back in '08, when we're scratching our collective heads wondering why Croyle doesn't look any better than he did in preseason '07.
Huard's TD passes were throws that should have been thrown. Gonzalez was ready to make the catch and the Chargers players never came close to playing the ball on that play.

Bowe's TD was 3rd and 19. 3rd and 19. 3rd and 19. If you have press coverage on Dwayne Bowe as your outside receiver on 3rd and 19 and you can zip a pass in there before any safety help, that is what you do. Huard's pass was so accurate that Bowe caught it with his right arm only and did not have to break stride.

What Damon Huard have you been watching the last two years? This is another case of Gannon syndrome. Gannon and Huard got results for the Chiefs when each had a chance to play, but people did not give Gannon credit because of his throwing style, and the same for Huard.

Printers outplayed Croyle in the preseason. All of the geniuses around here write off Daunte Culpepper, who was damn near MVP a couple of years ago, and it looks like he is recovered from a serious injury. Croyle who has a much worse injury history gets all of this praise and love and he has not accomplished anything.

Croyle made a couple of routine throws on a single preseason drive, there was nothing "amazing" looking about it. Both of Huard's TD throws yesterday were 10X better than any throw Croyle has made for the Chiefs, even any on that so-called "amazing" preseason TD drive that was nothing special at all.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 03:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by headsnap
I don't see the word 'WIN'... :p
ROFL

Tribal Warfare 10-01-2007 03:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jettio
Huard's TD passes were throws that should have been thrown. Gonzalez was ready to make the catch and the Chargers players never came close to playing the ball on that play.


.


There were a shitload of saves that Bowe and Gonzalez gave Huard too. If they didn't have superhumans as targets he would've had at least 3 INTs in that game.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 03:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
You said:

If you're so damn certain this team is going nowhere and won't amount to anything, why bother watching or attending the games? Why waste your time as a fan?


How is that not a plea to be a fairweather fan??
I guess it's a plea to give up being a fan, whatsoever.

I don't like the direction the Chiefs have taken since Marty left. I wasn't happy with the Gunther hire, I wasn't happy with the Vermeil hire and I wasn't really all that stoked with the Edwards hire.

For whatever reason and despite the glaringly stupid play-calling and poor decisions regarding the starting QB's, the Chiefs are winning under Edwards. It's baffling.

But constantly complaining, over and over and over about the direction of the team is tiresome, isn't it? At some point, don't you just say "Screw it? I'm done?".

I'm not there but it sure appears that there are several members who unknowingly seem to be there.

No offense, but you appear to be one of those members as well.

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by donkhater
New life as in how? A 10-6 team that gets bounced in the first round again instead of a 6-10 or 7-9 team that has information in which to build the team?

Insert veteran free agents (especially at QB), scrape through the season, win most of your home games, barely make or miss the playoffs, get embarrassed in the playoffs, rinse, repeat.

Ahh, the life of a Chiefs fan.
:clap:

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

We've had 4 competitive teams in Peterson's 19 years....93, 95, 97, and '03. That is not a consistently competitive team. It's not even close.
Its ****ing sad, is what it is.

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
You're an asswipe.

Thanks for picking and choosing the quotes.

Moron.
Ha. I didn't pick and choose. You said Peter King.
ROFL

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 04:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigChiefDave
Ha. I didn't pick and choose. You said Peter King.
ROFL
Whatever, asswipe.

I also said the local media, the coaching staff, the front office, etc.

Thanks for picking and choosing.

It's clear to EVERYONE but "BigChiefDave" that the Croyle wasn't ready to begin the season as the Chiefs starting QB.

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jettio
Huard's TD passes were throws that should have been thrown. Gonzalez was ready to make the catch and the Chargers players never came close to playing the ball on that play.

Bowe's TD was 3rd and 19. 3rd and 19. 3rd and 19. If you have press coverage on Dwayne Bowe as your outside receiver on 3rd and 19 and you can zip a pass in there before any safety help, that is what you do. Huard's pass was so accurate that Bowe caught it with his right arm only and did not have to break stride.

What Damon Huard have you been watching the last two years? This is another case of Gannon syndrome. Gannon and Huard got results for the Chiefs when each had a chance to play, but people did not give Gannon credit because of his throwing style, and the same for Huard.

Printers outplayed Croyle in the preseason. All of the geniuses around here write off Daunte Culpepper, who was damn near MVP a couple of years ago, and it looks like he is recovered from a serious injury. Croyle who has a much worse injury history gets all of this praise and love and he has not accomplished anything.

Croyle made a couple of routine throws on a single preseason drive, there was nothing "amazing" looking about it. Both of Huard's TD throws yesterday were 10X better than any throw Croyle has made for the Chiefs, even any on that so-called "amazing" preseason TD drive that was nothing special at all.
Well stated, Carl... :rolleyes:

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
It's clear to EVERYONE but "BigChiefDave" that the Croyle wasn't ready to begin the season as the Chiefs starting QB.
Explain to me how Huard was. He hardly played. And when he did he looked like shit. Huard got the job by default.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jettio
Printers outplayed Croyle in the preseason. All of the geniuses around here write off Daunte Culpepper, who was damn near MVP a couple of years ago, and it looks like he is recovered from a serious injury. Croyle who has a much worse injury history gets all of this praise and love and he has not accomplished anything.
Hey, I got into an extensive argument with Parker about Culpepper. I think the Chiefs really missed out on this deal. I dare say that Culpepper is better than ANY QB on our current roster and he could have been signed for nothing.

But the myopic Chiefs front office (and many of their fans) thought it was a bad idea to bring in a former MVP of the league who's coming off a knee injury (hello, Croyle?) who in his second start this season, scored 5 touchdowns.

Post count does not equal football intelligence.

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 04:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Hey, I got into an extensive argument with Parker about Culpepper. I think the Chiefs really missed out on this deal. I dare say that Culpepper is better than ANY QB on our current roster and he could have been signed for nothing.

But the myopic Chiefs front office (and many of their fans) thought it was a bad idea to bring in a former MVP of the league who's coming off a knee injury (hello, Croyle?) who in his second start this season, scored 5 touchdowns.

Post count does not equal football intelligence.
WTF? He was 5-12 for 75 yards. Whoa, he really lit it up.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 04:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigChiefDave
Explain to me how Huard was. He hardly played. And when he did he looked like shit. Huard got the job by default.
I don't have to explain anything to you.

The Chiefs made their decision based on OTA's, training camp and pre-season. Any "Professional" journalist who reported on the Chiefs training camp felt that Croyle wasn't ready. The Chiefs thought Croyle wasn't ready. The overwhelming majority of fans SAW that Croyle wasn't ready.

Why is this so fucking difficult for you to understand?

BigMeatballDave 10-01-2007 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
I don't have to explain anything to you.

The Chiefs made their decision based on OTA's, training camp and pre-season. Any "Professional" journalist who reported on the Chiefs training camp felt that Croyle wasn't ready. The Chiefs thought Croyle wasn't ready. The overwhelming majority of fans SAW that Croyle wasn't ready.

Why is this so fucking difficult for you to understand?
The majority of this board wanted Croyle right before the season started.

DaneMcCloud 10-01-2007 05:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigChiefDave
The majority of this board wanted Croyle right before the season started.
Big deal. The majority of this board wants to see Boomer start. Or Brian Shay. Or Marc Boerigter. Or the other myriad of "fan favorites". Does that make the "majority" of the board correct? Hell no.

People here get offended that their favorite team isn't mentioned in the national media but when they are, the media is "wrong" and "against" them.

Many of the same people who bitch about Croyle not starting didn't see the pre-season games, don't have the NFL Sunday ticket nor do they watch every game. Many threaten to turn off the TV when things are going bad (see the Official Game Thread for evidence).

So whose opinion are you going to believe? The coaching staff, front office and national football writers? Or a few disgruntled guys on an internet forum who do not have all of the pertinent information?

I'll go with the former.

chiefsfan1963 10-01-2007 05:15 PM
pretty freakin hilarious... no one really knows what Croyle can do. He certainly didn't wow the coaching staff during the pre-season enough to make him Chief's starting QB. That being the case then it really doesn't matter if he gets in or not b/c Huard is doing the job sufficiently enough for Herm football.

We all can agree this is not a special team that is going anywhere near the SB. Our OL challenges will have to be addressed during the offseason both in the draft and free agency. If we can get at least a Top 10 but preferably a Top 5 next year then we can pick some strong OL players. If we do what we usually do and win enough games to push us in the high teen's low 20's then we'll continue to get "scraps" and just get by.

If by some miracle we do get a Top 5 it will be interesting to see what we do. I can't imagine that we wouldn't focus on OL but can a potential franchise QB change our strategy?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:21 AM.
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.