Is Damon Huard likely to be the odd man out?

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by Moooo

He has to be for this year, at least.

Name a rookie who has come into the NFL and done well? Even #1 picks play like backups their first year. This year, the way to go is Huard.

Moooo

I don't know, I thought Ben Roethlisberger's 15-1 rookie year was pretty solid.

I could go on, but the point is, a lot of rookies have come in and done better trhan Damon Huard has done in all his years combined.

[Moooo]

Originally Posted by jspchief

I don't know, I thought Ben Roethlisberger's 15-1 rookie year was pretty solid.

I could go on, but the point is, a lot of rookies have come in and done better trhan Damon Huard has done in all his years combined.

Big Ben's offense required him to throw less than 20 passes in a game...

Also, please do go on. Cause for every Big Ben, there's about 5 others who suck it up. Even Peyton Manning sucked his first year. My point is that everyone is making the backup seem like it's no big deal, but it is. I don't want some rookie being our backup, especially with the KC playbook the way it is. I don't like the idea that a 36 year old QB is the only thing between us and someone who hasn't ever taken a regular season snap.

Moooo

[rad]

Originally Posted by Moooo

Big Ben's offense required him to throw less than 20 passes in a game...

Also, please do go on. Cause for every Big Ben, there's about 5 others who suck it up. Even Peyton Manning sucked his first year. My point is that everyone is making the backup seem like it's no big deal, but it is. I don't want some rookie being our backup, especially with the KC playbook the way it is. I don't like the idea that a 36 year old QB is the only thing between us and someone who hasn't ever taken a regular season snap.

Moooo

Don't forget Moooo, our situation here, with our O-line our running game, is very good for a rookie to come in and cut his teeth on.....

[Moooo]

Originally Posted by rad

Don't forget Moooo, our situation here, with our O-line our running game is very good for a rookie to come in and cut his teeth on.....

This...is a good point.

I think this year, though, Huard will be the better QB. If there is a way we can keep all 4, we need to. Next year, I will probably be all for ditching Huard, but this year, he will be better.

Moooo

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by Moooo

Big Ben's offense required him to throw less than 20 passes in a game...

Also, please do go on. Cause for every Big Ben, there's about 5 others who suck it up. Even Peyton Manning sucked his first year. My point is that everyone is making the backup seem like it's no big deal, but it is. I don't want some rookie being our backup, especially with the KC playbook the way it is. I don't like the idea that a 36 year old QB is the only thing between us and someone who hasn't ever taken a regular season snap.

Moooo

You think we're going to throw 35 times per game with Damon Huard? If you do, I have a statue in NY to sell you.

Peyton Manning threw for 3700 yards his first year.

You act like we'll be expecting a rookie to come in and play at a Pro Bowl level or something. It's not particularly hard to imagine a rookie coming in and performing better than Huard. All he's going to do is throw screens and hand the ball off anyway.

[Moooo]

Originally Posted by jspchief

You think we're going to throw 35 times per game with Damon Huard? If you do, I have a statue in NY to sell you.

Peyton Manning threw for 3700 yards his first year.

You act like we'll be expecting a rookie to come in and play at a Pro Bowl level or something. It's not particularly hard to imagine a rookie coming in and performing better than Huard. All he's going to do is throw screens and hand the ball off anyway.

I think you'd be suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform. There's a reason they don't even allow any but the cream of the crop to do so, the others would be a JOKE. I bet you if Croyle were to start the first game this year, he would have maybe 1 TD and probably about 5 INTs.

And Peyton Manning if I'm not mistaken also had a low 70s QB rating. If that's good by your standards though...

[RockChalk]

Originally Posted by Moooo

I think you'd be suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform. There's a reason they don't even allow any but the cream of the crop to do so, the others would be a JOKE. I bet you if Croyle were to start the first game this year, he would have maybe 1 TD and probably about 5 INTs.

And Peyton Manning if I'm not mistaken also had a low 70s QB rating. If that's good by your standards though...

not too far off Prince Huard's 79 rating in the year he descended from heaven to save the dolphins

[Moooo]

Originally Posted by DubbleDownBKU

not too far off Prince Huard's 79 rating in the year he descended from heaven to save the dolphins

Don't compare Manning to Huard, please. That's just wrong. My point was if MANNING as a rookie could only muster a low 70s rating, then what makes you think Croyle could even mimic that closely?

I guarantee you if Huard started a few games this next year he'd be around the 70s as far as QB rating. I bet if Croyle or Printers started, it'd be low 60s, high 50s. One could keep us in a game with our running offense, the other would actually cost us the game.

Moooo

[RockChalk]

Originally Posted by Moooo

Don't compare Manning to Huard, please. That's just wrong. My point was if MANNING as a rookie could only muster a low 70s rating, then what makes you think Croyle could even mimic that closely?

I guarantee you if Huard started a few games this next year he'd be around the 70s as far as QB rating. I bet if Croyle or Printers started, it'd be low 60s, high 50s. One could keep us in a game with our running offense, the other would actually cost us the game.

Moooo

Man, I'm just being a d*ck in regards to some earlier posts in the thread regarding huard.

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by Moooo

I think you'd be suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform. There's a reason they don't even allow any but the cream of the crop to do so, the others would be a JOKE. I bet you if Croyle were to start the first game this year, he would have maybe 1 TD and probably about 5 INTs.

And Peyton Manning if I'm not mistaken also had a low 70s QB rating. If that's good by your standards though...

Your point appears to be a moving target. You said name one rookie QB that has performed well. I did, then you shifted your point.

I wouldn't be "suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform." I'm fully aware of the odds of Croyle or Printers coming in and doing well. What I would be surprised by is Huard coming in and doing any better than the average rookie QB.

This isn't a question of which back-up is capable of taking us to the Superbowl (the answer to that is likely none). It's a question of which back-up is likely to be better. I'm saying that I'll take the chance with Croyle who might suck, over Huard who has already established that he sucks.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by jspchief

Your point appears to be a moving target. You said name one rookie QB that has performed well. I did, then you shifted your point.

I wouldn't be "suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform." I'm fully aware of the odds of Croyle or Printers coming in and doing well. What I would be surprised by is Huard coming in and doing any better than the average rookie QB.

This isn't a question of which back-up is capable of taking us to the Superbowl (the answer to that is likely none). It's a question of which back-up is likely to be better. I'm saying that I'll take the chance with Croyle who might suck, over Huard who has already established that he sucks.

I wouldn't say Manning performed well.

56.7% comp, 26 TD, 28 INT, 6.5ypa, the team only won 3 games...

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I wouldn't say Manning performed well.

56.7% comp, 26 TD, 28 INT, 6.5ypa, the team only won 3 games...

Ben Roethlisberger

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I wouldn't say Manning performed well.

56.7% comp, 26 TD, 28 INT, 6.5ypa, the team only won 3 games...

Besides, if you told me right now I could have those numbers from my back-up QB if he had to come in, I would take them in an instant.

Donovan McNabb comes to mind to. Again not great numbers, but not terrible.

Like I said earlier. It's not about expecting a rookie to light the league on fire. It's about expecting a rookie to potentially be better than career bench warmer Damon Huard.

When considered with the prospect of losing one of our young QBs, It's a risk that I might be willing to take.

[RockChalk]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I wouldn't say Manning performed well.

56.7% comp, 26 TD, 28 INT, 6.5ypa, the team only won 3 games...

Based on the scores from the 1998 season, I wouldn't blame many of the losses on Manning. Looks like they had some defensive woes that we are all too familiar with.

1998 Indy results

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Moooo

I think you'd be suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform. There's a reason they don't even allow any but the cream of the crop to do so, the others would be a JOKE. I bet you if Croyle were to start the first game this year, he would have maybe 1 TD and probably about 5 INTs.

And Peyton Manning if I'm not mistaken also had a low 70s QB rating. If that's good by your standards though...

I wouldn't be at all surprised by how poorly most rookie QBs perform.

The question I would raise is how many of those rookie QBs played on a team that wasn't among the league's cellar dwellers in rebuiling mode.

Big Ben is a guy that played on a team that wasn't, and he performed as well as any rookie QB.

In most cases, QBs that suck ass in their rookie year are usually on teams that suck ass.