Is Damon Huard likely to be the odd man out?

[jAZ]

Sounds like it...

"Both of them (Printers and Croyle) will make this team" (Shea)
"(Printers is) going to be a backup for us..." (Peterson)

http://www.tsn.ca/cfl/news_story/?ID=169275&hubname=cfl

Printers impresses Chiefs; likely to stick
TSN.ca Staff

6/20/2006 7:47:27 PM

It appears that Casey Printers will not be returning to the Candian Football League this season.

Terry Shea, the quarterbacks coach for the Kansas City Chiefs, told CKNW in Vancouver that he expects Printers will stick with the NFL club.

Kansas City is set with Trent Green as the starter and Damon Huard as the primary back-up, and the Chiefs entered their off-season workouts expecting a battle for the third spot between Printers and third round draft pick Brodie Croyle.

Green, who will be 36 this season, has been resting his arm in camp, which has given the Chiefs a lot of good looks at the newcomers. Shea said Printers and Croyle are simply too good to let go.

"Both of them will make this team," Shea told CKNW. "They've done a nice job of picking up the offence."

The only problem for the Chiefs now is figuring out how to carry four quarterbacks. League rules permit clubs to carry three, but another can be signed to the practice squad.

The Chiefs' training camp opens July 28.

Printers signed with the Chiefs in January after a short, but stellar, career with the B.C. Lions. He was the league MVP in 2004 after throwing for 5,000 yards, 35 touchdowns and only 10 interceptions. He also ran for almost 500 yards and nine touchdowns.

Printers, though, did not start the Grey Cup game, which the Lions lost. Injuries hampered him in 2005, and he lost the starting job to veteran Dave Dickenson.

After the 2005 season, Printers started to explore his options and signed with the Chiefs.

"We've had some good fortune with Canadian players," Chiefs president/general manager Carl Peterson told the Kansas City Star after Printers signed.

"I look at it this way: It's like having an additional draft choice. And this draft choice has pro football experience, albeit the CFL. It’s a bigger, wider field and so on. But I think he's got a chance to come in and help us. He’s going to be a backup for us and learn what we do and what this offense is all about."

After a workout last May, Printers told KCChiefs.com that his CFL experience will help him make the Chiefs.

"Well it definitely prepared me for this because in the CFL you have five receivers going out on every play," Printers said. "Here it’s kind of similar and we were running the same kind of stuff up there. It prepared me a bunch. I was able to play a bunch up there and I'm just prepared for the opportunity when it's given."

After watching him practice this spring, Shea has high hopes for the former B.C. Lions pivot.

"Eventually, Casey has a chance to compete as a starting quarterback in the NFL," Shea said.

[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.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by rad

Now I'm confused. What question?

Just answer this: Do you WANT Huard to backup Green?

jspchief's question

What has Huard done in the last five years to make anyone believe he's worth a shit?

And this will be the third time I've answered YOUR question in THIS thread. I even quoted you once, not 25 minutes ago.

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Well, to be honest, I don't see why any team would keep two QBoTF. If Green sprains an ankle and is going to miss the last 2 quarters, but will be back the following week, play Huard. If Green is down for 3 or 4 games, start Huard for the first couple of games and see how it goes, replace him with Croyle if he struggles. If Green goes down for the season, play Croyle. I see no reason to keep Printers on this team.

That being said, I care about Green and Croyle. I could really care less what they do with the other two.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by DubbleDownBKU

No outside opinions please...

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Here's a hint:

It's not what you post, it's how you post it.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by jspchief

Well, my answer to your question would be that I've seen all three of these guys throw passes in the last year, and Huard looked the least capable of the three.

Do I know that Printers or Croyle are better than Huard? No. But I'm pretty confident in my opinion that Huard will be completely worthless.

It's all about expectations. If Green goes down for a couple of games, a vet - ANY VET - should be the solution. You don't throw a rookie to the dogs with the playoffs on the line.

If Green goes out for an extended period of time, get the rook some playing time and accelerate the dawning of a new era.

[FAX]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

It's all about expectations. If Green goes down for a couple of games, a vet - ANY VET - should be the solution. You don't throw a rookie to the dogs with the playoffs on the line.

If Green goes out for an extended period of time, get the rook some playing time and accelerate the dawning of a new era.

That's all well and good, Mr. htismaqe. But, what if Green goes out for an extended period of time?

FAX

[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 htismaqe

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Here's a hint:

It's not what you post, it's how you post it.

Thanks for the tip.

[htismaqe]

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.

[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

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by FAX

That's all well and good, Mr. htismaqe. But, what if Green goes out for an extended period of time?

FAX

What?

[JBucc]

Originally Posted by FAX

That's all well and good, Mr. htismaqe. But, what if Green goes out for an extended period of time?

FAX

[tk13]

I want to keep Huard around. Not sure if I want him to play much. But these other guys are still rookies. There have been rookies who have played well, and there have been rookies who were TOTALLY in over their head. See Alex Smith, or Ryan Leaf, etc, etc. Probably way more rookie failure stories than succcess stories. I actually think Croyle could do better than that though, he seems poised.

If... and a big if, Trent were to go down. If Croyle is ready let him play. But if he's not ready, if he is in over his head, I don't want him to go out there and get totally beat up and throw a bunch of picks and ruin his confidence. Same with Printers. If somebody is going to get his brains beat in, I want it to be Huard. I don't feel real comfortable having two rookies be the only guys behind Green.

[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

[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.