do we still want Green over Huard? - Page 17

DRU · 11-06-2006, 12:58 AM

Quote:

I don't care if our defense can't stop K-State...when the most potent offense in the NFL leads almost every game in quarter #4 and comes out of the season with 7 wins...something is wrong with the guy behind center.

this statement completely contradicts itself. How can there be something wrong with the guy behind center when he's leading the most potent offense in the NFL!?

I cannot believe Green is getting so much heat right now. This is insane. The guy has better numbers than anybody but Manning. Led the a top 3 offense for what, like 4 years in a row??? And now you're saying he choked those games away!?

This is just insane.

DRU · 11-06-2006, 01:00 AM

One thing's for sure, it's gonna be VERY interesting to see what happens when he gets back into the game. We can all bicker and fuss over this, but the fact of the matter is Herm is going to put him back in. So, are you gonna cheer for him or boo him?

Sure-Oz · 11-06-2006, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRU

One thing's for sure, it's gonna be VERY interesting to see what happens when he gets back into the game. We can all bicker and fuss over this, but the fact of the matter is Herm is going to put him back in. So, are you gonna cheer for him or boo him?

Based on what he say's he'll cheer it up! But i have a feeling trent throws an INT after completing 8 straight passes the huard bandwagon will show up, probably on every mistake he makes.

DRU · 11-06-2006, 01:04 AM

Also, back to this 2004 talk, the Chiefs avg. 30 points a game in 2004. If you actually try and say that a losing season in a year where you score 30 points a game is anything to do with anybody on the offensive side of the ball then...well...i just don't know what to say to that. Nothing can be done to sway your thoughts.

Hammock Parties · 11-06-2006, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRU

Also, back to this 2004 talk, the Chiefs avg. 30 points a game in 2004. If you actually try and say that a losing season in a year where you score 30 points a game is anything to do with anybody on the offensive side of the ball then...well...i just don't know what to say to that. Nothing can be done to sway your thoughts.

Personally I don't really like sitting here blaming any of those games on the offense. The defense was SO ****ING BAD.

Hootie · 11-06-2006, 01:34 AM

the defense was friggin' terrible...

I hate talking about 2004 in all honesty, I don't know why I even bring it up. One of my least favorite years of being a Chiefs fan. Painful.

DRU · 11-06-2006, 01:35 AM

I do remember sacks at end of some games and feeling rather sick about it. But none of feeling was meant for Green. He had done his part over and over in those games and was still asked repeatedly "just one more time, please." Well by that time you know why there were 3 man rushes..?? Cuz 8 guys were sitting down the field covering our receivers. Green had to stand and stand and hope somebody could get open. This speaks more about the ability (or lack there-of) of our receivers to get open when the other team knows we have to pass. But again, by that time there's no reason they should have been doing anything but going to a knee.

Hootie · 11-06-2006, 01:36 AM

did diddy do it!?

DRU · 11-06-2006, 01:36 AM

Quote:

I hate talking about 2004 in all honesty, I don't know why I even bring it up. One of my least favorite years of being a Chiefs fan. Painful.

I'm with ya on that one, but not because I feel like the offense ever did a single thing wrong when you look at the year as a whole. It's painful to me that we wasted one of the best offenses the NFL has ever seen. And you know what? It was led by Trent Green.

Hootie · 11-06-2006, 01:39 AM

Trent Green fed off Holmes/Blaylock/Johnson and they all fed off Roaf/Waters/Shields/Weigmann...

Green was the leader but they had a whole lot of pieces...

DRU · 11-06-2006, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Trent Green fed off Holmes/Blaylock/Johnson and they all fed off Roaf/Waters/Shields/Weigmann...

Green was the leader but they had a whole lot of pieces...

Which is exactly why I think it's crazy to blame that year on anybody on the offensive side of the football. They were a beautiful thing to watch and there's no way they were at all responsible for the 9 losses that season you're trying to pin them with.

greg63 · 11-06-2006, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hootie

do we still want Green over Huard?

Yes.

mcan · 11-06-2006, 02:54 AM

Look: Trent Green is a better quarterback than Huard. There just isn't any question about it. Anybody that thinks we should stick with Huard is only saying so because they are superstitious.

Any and all logic says: now that our Offensive line is blocking people better, and now that we've opened up the playbook, and now that Larry is running well, and now that Gonzalez is getting open over the middle...

When we put Trent in, our offense could very well be every bit as good as it was under Vermeil and Saunders. And as good as Damon has been playing, there is no doubt that our offense still isn't the same. We aren't consistant. We have too many three and outs. We get balls batted down at the line of scrimmage too often. We've had about 6 interceptions dropped by linemen and linebackers who've been surprised to be HIT IN THE CHEST WITH THE BALL!!!! When was the last time you saw Trent hit a defensive lineman in the chest with the ball? Just because they dropped the easy pick, doesn't mean that bad throw didn't happen.

greg63 · 11-12-2006, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hootie

do we still want Green over Huard?

I reiterate:

Quote:

Originally Posted by greg63

Yes.

tk13 · 11-06-2006, 03:22 AM

Can somebody tell me why the heck 2004 comes up in any of these discussions? Five years of great play and we're gonna pick out 4 or 5 games from a miserable season two years ago? Does that have any lick of logic at all? Why not just pick some of the terrible games from 01. That's like saying Wham is the best musical group ever because they had a #1 hit in 1985 or whenever. Just completely random.

11-06-2006, 01:00 AM	#2
DRU To the Game Join Date: Oct 2003 Casino cash: $6793516	One thing's for sure, it's gonna be VERY interesting to see what happens when he gets back into the game. We can all bicker and fuss over this, but the fact of the matter is Herm is going to put him back in. So, are you gonna cheer for him or boo him?
Posts: 2,124

11-06-2006, 01:34 AM	#6
Hootie Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Casino cash: $10004900	the defense was friggin' terrible... I hate talking about 2004 in all honesty, I don't know why I even bring it up. One of my least favorite years of being a Chiefs fan. Painful.
Posts: 56,356

11-06-2006, 01:35 AM	#7
DRU To the Game Join Date: Oct 2003 Casino cash: $6793516	I do remember sacks at end of some games and feeling rather sick about it. But none of feeling was meant for Green. He had done his part over and over in those games and was still asked repeatedly "just one more time, please." Well by that time you know why there were 3 man rushes..?? Cuz 8 guys were sitting down the field covering our receivers. Green had to stand and stand and hope somebody could get open. This speaks more about the ability (or lack there-of) of our receivers to get open when the other team knows we have to pass. But again, by that time there's no reason they should have been doing anything but going to a knee.
Posts: 2,124

11-06-2006, 01:36 AM	#8
Hootie Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Casino cash: $10004900	did diddy do it!?
Posts: 56,356

11-06-2006, 01:39 AM	#10
Hootie Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Casino cash: $10004900	Trent Green fed off Holmes/Blaylock/Johnson and they all fed off Roaf/Waters/Shields/Weigmann... Green was the leader but they had a whole lot of pieces...
Posts: 56,356

11-06-2006, 01:04 AM	#4
DRU To the Game Join Date: Oct 2003 Casino cash: $6793516	Also, back to this 2004 talk, the Chiefs avg. 30 points a game in 2004. If you actually try and say that a losing season in a year where you score 30 points a game is anything to do with anybody on the offensive side of the ball then...well...i just don't know what to say to that. Nothing can be done to sway your thoughts.
Posts: 2,124

11-06-2006, 02:54 AM	#13
mcan Apr 13,1949 – Dec 15, 2011 Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Kansas City, MO Casino cash: $9996085	Look: Trent Green is a better quarterback than Huard. There just isn't any question about it. Anybody that thinks we should stick with Huard is only saying so because they are superstitious. Any and all logic says: now that our Offensive line is blocking people better, and now that we've opened up the playbook, and now that Larry is running well, and now that Gonzalez is getting open over the middle... When we put Trent in, our offense could very well be every bit as good as it was under Vermeil and Saunders. And as good as Damon has been playing, there is no doubt that our offense still isn't the same. We aren't consistant. We have too many three and outs. We get balls batted down at the line of scrimmage too often. We've had about 6 interceptions dropped by linemen and linebackers who've been surprised to be HIT IN THE CHEST WITH THE BALL!!!! When was the last time you saw Trent hit a defensive lineman in the chest with the ball? Just because they dropped the easy pick, doesn't mean that bad throw didn't happen.
Posts: 3,761

11-06-2006, 03:22 AM	#15
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $-1737500	Can somebody tell me why the heck 2004 comes up in any of these discussions? Five years of great play and we're gonna pick out 4 or 5 games from a miserable season two years ago? Does that have any lick of logic at all? Why not just pick some of the terrible games from 01. That's like saying Wham is the best musical group ever because they had a #1 hit in 1985 or whenever. Just completely random.
Posts: 56,639

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode