|
It's funny to see what one win will do for the mood on ChiefsPlanet. It's true that one can make the argument that the team is headed in the right direction. We were last Sunday, that's for sure. Still, a young team is going to look good one week and absolutely horrible the next. It's fair to say that inconsistency is the only consistent attribute of a squad that's this inexperienced. And, that makes the quarterback decision even more convoluted. Does Downfield provide more consistency at a key position? Does his play help the other skill players develop faster? If so, why even consider starting Thiggy in Atlanta?
At this point, I would pay money to find out what modifications (if any) the coaches make to the game plan or in-game playcalling when Downfield is in the game as compared to Croyle. I know they have to forget about the boots and rollouts, but (although I can't prove it) it seems as though they allow Downfield to fling that dang rock a little more often and a little further. Not to mention the fact that they let him curl up in a little ball a ton more. Are these situational reads or calls or is Downfield simply more willing to take the risk whereas Croyle has been taught differently?
If so, I have to wonder what their overall approach to the quarterback position really is. I know they want to win as quickly as possible, but they can't do that if they don't get the ball downfield once in awhile. That, of course, depends on the run game, the pass protection, the WR routes and their ability to get open, timing with the receivers, etc. Were they waiting for the o-line to prove they can pass-protect? Were they waiting for the run game to develop? Were they waiting for Croyle to demonstrate he could handle the little stuff before cutting him loose? Were they simply a'skeered that Croyle would turn it over?
We may be heading in the right direction but, so far as the quarterback position is concerned, that direction doesn't seem to be very clear.
FAX
|