Is Damon Huard likely to be the odd man out?

**RockChalk** · 06-21-2006, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz

huard wasn't the same person ... playing in the same system or playing with the same coaches back then.

all the stats from 1999 show is potiential ... huard CAN survive in the NFL.

which is more that Croyle and Printer have shown ...... but not much more imo.

Agreed, I just don't happen to believe he is a better option than croyle or printers.

Moooo · 06-21-2006, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DubbleDownBKU

Agreed, I just don't happen to believe he is a better option than croyle or printers.

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

jspchief · 06-21-2006, 01:53 PM

Quote:

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 · 06-21-2006, 01:59 PM

Quote:

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 · 06-21-2006, 02:02 PM

Quote:

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 · 06-21-2006, 02:03 PM

Quote:

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 · 06-21-2006, 02:07 PM

Quote:

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 · 06-21-2006, 02:13 PM

Quote:

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** · 06-21-2006, 02:15 PM

Quote:

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

jspchief · 06-21-2006, 02:21 PM

Quote:

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.

milkman · 06-21-2006, 02:44 PM

Quote:

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.

htismaqe · 06-21-2006, 02:14 PM

Quote:

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.

Precisely.

Manning threw for 3700 yards his first year. He also threw 2 more INT's than TD's and the team went 3-13.

Again, it comes down to how badly Green is injured. If Green goes down for just a couple of games, WHOEVER replaces him is going to throw screens and hand the ball off. However, they are going to have to throw downfield at some point to win a game. In the event, the second criteria is who is going to make the least amount of mistakes. In 99% of the cases, that WON'T be a rookie, no matter how mediocre the veteran in question is.

milkman · 06-21-2006, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Precisely.

Manning threw for 3700 yards his first year. He also threw 2 more INT's than TD's and the team went 3-13.

Again, it comes down to how badly Green is injured. If Green goes down for just a couple of games, WHOEVER replaces him is going to throw screens and hand the ball off. However, they are going to have to throw downfield at some point to win a game. In the event, the second criteria is who is going to make the least amount of mistakes. In 99% of the cases, that WON'T be a rookie, no matter how mediocre the veteran in question is.

I disagree.

Huard simply doesn't fit into this system.

The couple of games that Huard played for the Dolphins in that '99 season that I saw, he was on a leash that would make the leash that Plummer played on pale by comparison.

The reason that Huard looked so bad in last year's preseason game is that he lacks the accuracy that this offense requires, and couldn't hit a deep route if his job depended on it.