Green = Grbac?

[The Rick]

According to Jeffrey Flanagan he does...statistically anyway.

Uh-oh! Grbac and Green have eerily similar statistics

JEFFREY FLANAGAN

Perhaps Elvis Grbac never really left the building.

Elvis Grbac is Trent Green.

Seriously, their statistics are frighteningly similar — virtually identical in some areas.

• Grbac was here four years and was 26-22 as a starter. Green is in his fourth year and is 30-29 as a starter.

• Both quarterbacks started one playoff game here, both losses. Grbac had a 94.4 passer rating in his loss; Green had a 92.6 passer rating in his loss.

• Grbac threw for a touchdown once in every 23.45 passes here. Green has thrown for a touchdown once in every 23.02 passes.

• Grbac threw an interception once in every 32 passes. Green has thrown an interception once in every 32 passes.

• Grbac completed 58 percent of his passes here. Green has completed 61 percent of his passes.

• Green's cumulative numbers for touchdowns and yards are higher than Grbac's, simply because he has played more games. Green averages 7.7 yards per attempt, Grbac 6.9.

One can easily argue that Green has had more weapons, too. Grbac didn't have Priest Holmes or what some say is the league's best offensive line.

Grbac also didn't benefit from the imaginative play-calling of Al Saunders. Grbac was stuck with Paul Hackett and Jimmy Raye.

There is one other striking similarity. Both quarterbacks have a signature end-of-the-game play.

For Grbac, it was throwing the ball 15 yards short of the first down, hoping the receiver could miraculously break 20 tackles to keep the drive alive. For Green, it's taking a sack.

We will allow Green this much: He's never taken a cheap shot at his receivers, like Grbac did.

***

People still refer to NFL schedules as “soft” or “hard,” when in reality it's been years since each divisional team's schedule fluctuated much.

For example, the Chiefs, Broncos, Raiders and Chargers all play the same opponents, except for two.

This year, the Chiefs, based on winning the AFC West last year, had to play the champs of the AFC East (New England) and the AFC North (Baltimore). It just so happens that those two teams have a combined 17-5 record.

The Raiders drew Pittsburgh and Buffalo, who are a combined 15-7.

The Broncos drew Miami and Cincinnati, both having disappointing years while combining for a 7-15 mark.

The Chargers had the Browns and Jets, who are a combined 11-11.

***

Former Chief Nick Lowery didn't make the recent cutdown from 90 to 25 in the voting for the Pro Football Hall of Fame, and that doesn't sit well with those who appreciate the skill of kicking in the NFL.

The Hall of Fame has just one kicker inducted — Jan Stenerud — and zero punters, not even Ray Guy.

Lowery finished his career with 383 field goals, third most in NFL history behind Gary Anderson (533) and Morten Andersen (515).

The best kicker in the game today, New England's Adam Vinatieri, strongly believes it's time that kickers and punters start literally kicking down the doors of the Hall.

“Guy should be in there,” Vinatieri told the Boston Globe. “Lowery should be in there. Both the Andersons (sic) should be, too. You play over 20 years and score 2,000 points and there's no place for you in the Hall of Fame? Maybe in the back somewhere? Come on, now.”

To reach Jeffrey Flanagan call (816) 234-4492 and leave a message or email jflanagan@kcstar.com

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansas...s/10307642.htm

[RedNFeisty]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Geez, one bad season in 10. Wonder how that matches up with DV's tenure. And even then, even after the Monday Night Meltdown, I was not as embarrassed to be a CHiefs fan as I am today. We get pity from Cardinal, Bengal, Redskin, and Browns fans nowadays fer chrissake.

If you want to talk about the over all picture, with Marty we were almost guaranteed a one and out at the playoffs. The Chiefs may not be having an outstanding year, but their offense is ranked number three right now. I could complain that every year under Marty we knew we would probably have a par year, enough to make the playoffs, but we also knew that we wouldn't get past them. I think is all a matter of who are willing to put with. With hopes being so high after DV arrived of going to the SB, it is a bigger let down to people that we haven't, and I think there lies the problem.

[morphius]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Geez, one bad season in 10. Wonder how that matches up with DV's tenure. And even then, even after the Monday Night Meltdown, I was not as embarassed to be a CHiefs fan as I am today. We get pity from Cardinal, Bengal, Redskin, and Browns fans nowadays fer chrissake.

Odd, I remember that being a pretty embarrassing year. The first three years with DV were not embarrasssing to me at all. The first two we expected to be better faster, but hey, he found this great guy Priest Holmes and we were still a blast to watch. This year is basically a replay of the 98 for me, superbowl bound and nothing to show for it.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Ah, yes. The stat comparisons are crap. But the 'what ifs' are iron-clad cinches.

Somebody's a little grumpy this morning aren't they?

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

Or significantly better with Saunders/Priest/and todays Oline.

I highly doubt it. Grbac always found a way to choke. Green may have choked a few times this year, but that certainly wasn't the norm last season.

Besides, apart from his last year here, Grbac had one of the league's better running games and offensive lines. He also had better wide receivers (man how the hell did Derrick Alexander go from 1,300 yards to shitty? )

[Baby Lee]

FTR - I am not as down on Green as it probably appears in reaction to this thread. I am simply trying to get my head around the schizophrenic nature of some Chiefs fans.
Schottenheimer gave us consistently quality results, and a philosophy at least I could be proud of, but not the ultimate results. So he's a loser and has to go.
But when it comes to DV and Trent, just being telegenic and flashing all those 'intangibles' is just fine, regardless of how crappy a team we have.
Do we have standards or don't we? And are those standards tied to the traditional markers for success in competitive sport, or merely a warm feeling in the belly?

[RedNFeisty]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

FTR - I am not as down on Green as it probably appears in reaction to this thread. I am simply trying to get my head around the schizophrenic nature of some Chiefs fans.
Schottenheimer gave us consistently quality results, and a philosophy at least I could be proud of, but not the ultimate results. So he's a loser and has to go.
But when it comes to DV and Trent, just being telegenic and flashing all those 'intangibles' is just fine, regardless of how crappy a team we have.

With hopes being so high after DV arrived of going to the SB, it is a bigger let down to people that we haven't, and I think there lies the problem.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

FTR - I am not as down on Green as it probably appears in reaction to this thread. I am simply trying to get my head around the schizophrenic nature of some Chiefs fans.
Schottenheimer gave us consistently quality results, and a philosophy at least I could be proud of, but not the ultimate results. So he's a loser and has to go.
But when it comes to DV and Trent, just being telegenic and flashing all those 'intangibles' is just fine, regardless of how crappy a team we have.

I'd say you hit the nail on the head.

Basically the only difference between Marty's Chiefs and DV's Chiefs is the former incarnation gave you bonafide reasons to hate them (other than being losers).

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by UserName

I highly doubt it. Grbac always found a way to choke. Green may have choked a few times this year, but that certainly wasn't the norm last season.

Besides, apart from his last year here, Grbac had one of the league's better running games and offensive lines. He also had better wide receivers (man how the hell did Derrick Alexander go from 1,300 yards to shitty? )

Better running games? All I remember was RBBC. But, we digress here. It's all water under the bridge. I'm still convinced it's mostly timing though.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by UserName

I'd say you hit the nail on the head.

Basically the only difference between Marty's Chiefs and DV's Chiefs is the former incarnation gave you bonafide reasons to hate them (other than being losers).

I dunno, I pretty much hate knowing that, regardless of the level of talent in our opposition, we're gonna be tied or leading in the fourth and piss it away, most regularly in a game ending sack.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

But when it comes to DV and Trent, just being telegenic and flashing all those 'intangibles' is just fine, regardless of how crappy a team we have.
Do we have standards or don't we? And are those standards tied to the traditional markers for success in competitive sport, or merely a warm feeling in the belly?

No, I'm at the "That aint going to work so WTF can we do now to fix it?" stage.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

FTR - I am not as down on Green as it probably appears in reaction to this thread. I am simply trying to get my head around the schizophrenic nature of some Chiefs fans.
Schottenheimer gave us consistently quality results, and a philosophy at least I could be proud of, but not the ultimate results. So he's a loser and has to go.
But when it comes to DV and Trent, just being telegenic and flashing all those 'intangibles' is just fine, regardless of how crappy a team we have.
Do we have standards or don't we? And are those standards tied to the traditional markers for success in competitive sport, or merely a warm feeling in the belly?

That's not necessarily true.

I like Green, and I would like to see how he fares with a complete team.

I don't like Dick, and he needs to be shown the door.

If Green, with a new coach, and a better team, doesn't get better results, then in the end, he is no better than GrBac.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

Better running games? All I remember was RBBC. But, we digress here. It's all water under the bridge. I'm still convinced it's mostly timing though.

The Chiefs were consistently ranked in the top 10 in rushing yards almost every year Marty was here.

[memyselfI]

Originally Posted by UserName

I'd say you hit the nail on the head.

Basically the only difference between Marty's Chiefs and DV's Chiefs is the former incarnation gave you bonafide reasons to hate them (other than being losers).

Hey, I was not a big fan of Marty but I believed HE should have stayed and CP go...

and given the choice between Marty and DV I'd choose Marty hands down even with his lack of SB win. His product, not to mention his personality, is more stable (Greg Hill issues not withstanding) and I believe Carl was riding Marty's success more than the other way around.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

I dunno, I pretty much hate knowing that, regardless of the level of talent in our opposition, we're gonna be tied or leading in the fourth and piss it away, most regularly in a game ending sack.

What's even more hard to swallow is that last year that WASN'T happening to the team.

And it was ALOT of fun to watch.

[philfree]

There is no worthy comparison between the two.


PhilFree