POSNANSKI: Edwards has to go with Huard to save team

[dirk digler]

There should be no doubt that Chiefs coach Herm Edwards wanted Brodie Croyle to win the starting quarterback job this preseason. The Chiefs spent one uncomfortable offseason dangling longtime starter Trent Green. Why? One reason.

Herm Edwards had seen the future, and its name was Croyle.

It wasn’t just that Edwards had fallen in love with Croyle’s arm, his enthusiasm, his energy, his charisma. No, Edwards wants to jolt the Chiefs out of their stupor. For 12 seasons now, the Chiefs have not won a playoff game, even though at different times over that span they’ve had the league’s best offense, they’ve had the league’s best defense and they’ve had the league’s best special teams. So what was missing?

Edwards says two things:

1. Balance.

2. A quarterback to call their own.

Edwards, as you no doubt know, has harped constantly about balance ever since he arrived in town. He is always telling his players that the offense needs to help the defense (longer drives, more first downs, play the field-position game) and the defense needs to help the offense (force more turnovers, play big on third downs, create field position). He thinks that in the past, Chiefs offenses and defenses were too much about themselves and their stats and not enough about winning championships.

The second part, the quarterback, is touchier. It is possible (not likely, but possible) to win with someone else’s discarded quarterback. Baltimore and Tampa Bay won Super Bowls with Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson, respectively. Oakland went to the Super Bowl with Rich Gannon. But those teams tend to collapse quickly. Your consistent winners, generally speaking, are teams with their own quarterbacks. Indianapolis has Peyton Manning. New England has Tom Brady. Philadelphia has Donovan McNabb. Edwards wants the Chiefs to be one of those teams.

So, yes, Edwards is ready for the Chiefs to make that quarterback jump. He’s more than ready. One of the consistent themes of the Carl Peterson era has been to go into the season with a veteran quarterback bought, borrowed or stolen from other teams. That strategy took the Chiefs so far. But it never took them all the way.

So you better believe Edwards wanted Croyle to win the job. He wasn’t alone. Lots of Chiefs fans wanted Croyle to win the job. Heck, I wanted Croyle to win the job. Why not? He represented something new, something potentially exciting. Damon Huard, the likeable and sturdy veteran quarterback, seemed like more of the same.

Here’s the trouble, though: Croyle did not win the job. And this past weekend, Herm Edwards did exactly what he had to do. He named Huard the starter. I know there are people out there who were upset by his move, people who thought Edwards wimped out and went with the safe and uninspired choice. I disagree. I think naming Huard now wasn’t just the right choice, it was the only choice.

The most important thing about coaching or managing a team — something that matters more than strategy, philosophy and inspiration — is keeping your players’ respect. When you lose their respect, you lose everything. You can be the most brilliant X’s and O’s coach who ever lived, you can know exactly how to prepare a team, you can be Knute Rockne, Vince Lombardi and George Patton all rolled up into one at halftime. But if you lose the players, you lose the fight, end of story.

Here’s one sure way to lose players: Give someone a job he doesn’t deserve. I am convinced that former Royals general manager Allard Baird lost the team the day he inexplicably brought up a non-prospect named Eduardo Villacis to pitch against the New York Yankees in 2004. Villacis got rocked, of course, and every player on the team had unshakable doubts about Allard Baird and the direction of the Royals from that day on.

Same thing here. Croyle has been brutal in the preseason games. Yes, he has had a moment or two — the guy has talent — but all in all, he has looked confused and raw. This hasn’t been entirely his fault. He has been getting crushed. If the Chiefs’ offensive line doesn’t shore up, this will be a disastrous season no matter who is playing quarterback. But that does not take away from the simple fact that Croyle, so far anyway, has looked overmatched.

And there’s only so much a coach can do. This isn’t fantasy football, where you can start whoever you want anytime you have a hunch. No, here, the choice has been made already. You cannot start Brodie Croyle. The quarterback is, by far, the most important position on the football team. You send a few dozen messages to your players, none of them good, if you start Croyle now. You are telling them you play favorites — he clearly has not won the job. You are telling them that this is a rebuilding season (i.e. “a season to develop a quarterback”). You are telling them that all that talk about how “the best players play,” was just that: Talk.

No, Edwards has no choice at all. He wanted Croyle to win the job, he really did, but at some point there’s only so much a coach can do. The kid didn’t win it. He wasn’t ready. For now, Edwards’ choice is to go with Huard, who played so well last year when given the chance. With him, the Chiefs can try to win games the old-fashioned way: Run the ball, play defense, punt well, don’t turn the thing over. That gives something for everybody on the team to rally around.

Edwards still believes in Croyle. He should. The kid does have talent. Croyle still looks like a good bet to be the Chiefs’ quarterback of the future. It’s just that the future isn’t here yet.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by el borracho

Hyperbole?- Maybe, but we are near the bottom. Our line has been a disaster this preseason. I don't expect McIntosh to make a huge difference; do you?

Yes. Svitek has been the major downfall, as I-65 was last season. That's why they went out and paid big money for McIntosh. I expect him to solidify the position.

Also, when Jason Dunn was back last game the run game had a little more success. With a full-strength O-Line, Dunn, LJ & a FB, I expect our line to be better than advertised thus far this preseason.

There are several teams with lines worse than ours - Oakland, Miami, Houston, Green Bay, Buffalo, Arizona to name a few.

[FAX]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

The only time Huard started a game and played with the first unit he was 3/5 with 0 INTs and 0 TDs. His stats as a "starter" are better than Croyle's although he really wasn't given much of a chance.

I have no doubt you are correct, Mr. Chiefnj2. And thank you for pointing this out. Keep in mind, however, that both Downfield and Croyle played with 1st and 2nd string players. When the dust had cleared, and after all the sacks, pressures, dropped balls, and crappy calls, Brodie's statistics were better. Plus, one could argue all day long that Brodie's passes are more catchable and that he gives us options that Downfield doesn't.

Actually, I'm not saying that starting Downfield is the worst decision in the world. I have no idea how things will work out. I'm saying that this is a well-crafted article based on an emotional argument (how the players would "feel" about the decision to start Brodie). No one seems to care how the players "feel" about starting Samie The Oopsie, Medlock The Shank and Terry The Turnstile. Why? Because it doesn't sell news. The quarterback position does.

I've meditated on this and was told by the Muse of Truth that this is an after-the-fact justification for Herm's decision that really isn't supported by reality.

FAX

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Looks like the myth that we have the worst offensive line in football is still alive and well.

The line we have put out there in these preseason games has an argument.

[Otter]

.

[el borracho]

Well, I hope you are correct, Dackman....... but I doubt it. We may add a few mediocre pieces but we will also face more pressure. I think teams are going to blitz our QB into the dirt. If our line struggles to handle preseason pressure (vanilla) how do you think they will do against regular season packages (stunts and blitzes)?

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by FAX

. Plus, one could argue all day long that Brodie's passes are more catchable and that he gives us options that Downfield doesn't.

Actually, I'm not saying that starting Downfield is the worst decision in the world. I have no idea how things will work out. I'm saying that this is a well-crafted article based on an emotional argument (how the players would "feel" about the decision to start Brodie). No one seems to care how the players "feel" about starting Samie The Oopsie, Medlock The Shank and Terry The Turnstile. Why? Because it doesn't sell news. The quarterback position does.


FAX

Yes, Huard's passes are often high and Brodie's are generally more catchable. Unfortunately, Croyle's passes are often more catchable by opposing CB's than the intended WRs.

My own .02 cents on the other items you mentioned:

As far as Medlock is concerned, I honestly believe it was about getting the snapper and holder accustomed to a left footed kicker and not confusing matters with a right footed kicker or another left footed kicker with perhaps a different approach to the ball, or how the ball is held.

Parker continuing to start sucks. What sucks even more is that no other receiver has stepped up to the plate to unseat him. See my other post about Craphonso Thorpe having better stats than just about the entire Chiefs WR roster. Herm may have cut the wrong DV leftover.

Terry the turnstile - again there is nobody better than him on the roster at the moment. Herm and Carl should have addressed the position better in the draft, FA and supplemental draft but didn't. Sadly, Herm appears to be playing the best player on the roster at RT and has had an open competition at the spot (Sampson, Turley and Terry).

[keg in kc]

This message brought to you in part by Carl Peterson.

[BigRock]

Originally Posted by FAX

1. The claim that Herm will lose the team if he starts a player who hasn't "earned" the job is inconsistent with other decisions Hermoine has made.

2. Based on statistics alone, Brodie played better than Downfield in pre-season. Mistakes and all.

I'm not saying that the best decision is to start Brodie if he isn't ready to take the reins. Maybe he doesn't know the playbook, maybe he has failed to go to the number one receiver, maybe he put salt in Herm's coffee, I don't know.

What I do know is that the justification for the decision as proferred by this article isn't really supported by facts or evidence.

Trying to equate the position of kicker to the position of starting quarterback is really just a "gotcha" type game with the way Joe phrased a particular line. Tynes made it more than clear last season that he can't be counted on, so who on the team would be "lost" by seeing him get replaced? To use Medlock as a counter to Joe's point is like saying that if we'd drafted a left tackle, someone on the team might go "this rookie didn't compete against I-65, so Herm will lose me if he makes the new guy the starter". What are the odds of anyone actually saying that? Probably in the "billion to one" range.

Huard played well last year, so he's a different situation altogether.

[MGRS13]

Originally Posted by BigRock

Huard actually played well last year, so he's a different situation altogether.

Yea he's clearly earned the job in the preseason this year I mean hes been, what would you say, like 100% or 120% better then Croyle. Last week when he was standing on the sideline and they showed him on camera I could sorta imagine what his bust is gonna look like in the HOF. He is so awesome! I will feel so much better about this team if its Huard throwing INTs instead of Croyle. HERM RULES....YEA CARL!

[BigRock]

Originally Posted by MGRS13

Yea he's clearly earned the job in the preseason this year I mean hes been, what would you say, like 100% or 120% better then Croyle. Last week when he was standing on the sideline and they showed him on camera I could sorta imagine what his bust is gonna look like in the HOF. He is so awesome! I will feel so much better about this team if its Huard throwing INTs instead of Croyle. HERM RULES....YEA CARL!

How you took "Huard played well last year" to mean anything resembling what you just wrote is a complete mystery. But thanks for playing!

[FAX]

Your words of iron are truthy, Mr. Chiefnj2.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that you agree with The Pos that, with the exception of quarterback, Herm won't "lose the players" because they are okay with starting incompetent boobs if we don't have anyone better at that position.

Well, if true, that's good. However, the argument that Herm's rationale for starting Downfield is based on how the team "feels" about it is still pretty weak since they can somehow find a way to tolerate crappy play from other teammates.

I'm just speculating, of course, but I think Herm's motivations are different. I don't believe that he made this move because he's worried about "losing" the team. I think he chose Downfield because it reflects his conservative nature and he doesn't "lose" Carl.

FAX

[the Talking Can]

like moths to a 9-7 flame....

[FAX]

Originally Posted by BigRock

Trying to equate the position of kicker to the position of starting quarterback is really just a "gotcha" type game with the way Joe phrased a particular line. Tynes made it more than clear last season that he can't be counted on, so who on the team would be "lost" by seeing him get replaced? To use Medlock as a counter to Joe's point is like saying that if we'd drafted a left tackle, someone on the team might go "this rookie didn't compete against I-65, so Herm will lose me if he makes the new guy the starter". What are the odds of anyone actually saying that? Probably in the "billion to one" range.

Huard played well last year, so he's a different situation altogether.

Good point, Mr. BigRock. Still, I'm sitting here trying to figure out how you develop a young quarterback by sitting his ass on the bench. Maybe Downfield could mind-meld with him in the locker room.

If Pos had said, Brodie didn't win the job because he still doesn't have the playbook down, doesn't make his reads, or farts in the huddle, I would said, "It's okay!". Instead, the justification seems to be that Herm was concerned that he would "lose" the team. Personally, I don't buy it.

FAX

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by FAX

Your words of iron are truthy, Mr. Chiefnj2.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that you agree with The Pos that, with the exception of quarterback, Herm won't "lose the players" because they are okay with starting incompetent boobs if we don't have anyone better at that position.

Well, if true, that's good. However, the argument that Herm's rationale for starting Downfield is based on how the team "feels" about it is still pretty weak since they can somehow find a way to tolerate crappy play from other teammates.

I'm just speculating, of course, but I think Herm's motivations are different. I don't believe that he made this move because he's worried about "losing" the team. I think he chose Downfield because it reflects his conservative nature and he doesn't "lose" Carl.

FAX

Ahh, now I get your point - and I agree.

The main motivation for Herm going with Huard, IMO, is Herm's conservative nature and fear of turnovers. I do agree with Pos that Croyle was given the chance to win the job and didn't, and that Herm has been (for the most part) going with the best player wins the job approach.

[MGRS13]

Originally Posted by BigRock

How you took "Huard played well last year" to mean anything resembling what you just wrote is a complete mystery. But thanks for playing!

No what you are saying is there never was a competition this year, it was Huards job all he had to do was show up......awesome great way to build a team.