For all you football experts that wanted Croyle...it's all about the Oline - Page 4

keg in kc · 10-07-2007, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GOATSE

They are completely worthless numbers, actually. You couldn't have found a more irrelevant set of data.

It's the only set of data we have, which is what makes it pertinent.

In any case, Huard has clearly proven he's not starting material. Here's the "relevant" data:

97-149 (65.1%) for 1029 yards (6.90 ypa/10.61 ypc) , 4 TD and 6 INT.

Clearly not starting material...

...unless you're happy with a 3200 yard, 13 TD, 19 INT quarterback, which is what Huard projects out to be.

I could live with those stats from Croyle, because it would be on-the-job training. While with Huard, well, we've seen his best. 5 times this year, so far. He's as good as he'll ever be. And the myth that "he gives us the best chance to win" has been exposed for the load of crap it always was.

GarySpFc · 10-07-2007, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris

With this line, Farve, Brady, whomever, would look bad.

Forget about Croyle.

Shift your boring whining to the awful Oline.

Oh nonsense! The quarterback needs to throw slightly better than the ruptured ducks we have been seeing.

MadMax · 10-07-2007, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarySpFc

Oh nonsense! The quarterback needs to throw slightly better than the ruptured ducks we have been seeing.

BLAM! That's a fact.

ChiefaRoo · 10-07-2007, 03:31 PM

I thought Colquitt looked great though.

Sure-Oz · 10-07-2007, 03:47 PM

We can pass block just not run block worth shit

donkhater · 10-07-2007, 03:48 PM

I thought the O-line protected pretty well this game. Terry is no gem, but he wasn't a turnstile.

There is just no explosion off the ball in the run game. Those bashing Larry are only partially right. he is trying a little too hard and his selfish attitude (particulary after a win) is not the mark of a leader. But you don't produce like he did last year and suddenly go into the toilet. No I don't buy it. And you shouldn't be sellin' it.

Rather, teams are still willing to see if Damon Huard and the dynamic Edwards brain trust will take what the other team is willing to concede instead of slowly bleeding away with LJ.

Remember last season when NE went to Minnesota with the Vikings having one of the best rush defenses in the league. What did NE do? They hardley ran the ball at all and blew them out. Herm and Co. are to stubborn to do something like that. Instead it takes 2.5 quarters to figure it out.

jjjayb · 10-07-2007, 03:52 PM

Huards problem is his tunnel vision. He looks for his primary receiver and if he isn't open he dumps it too his running back. Unfortunately alot of times his primary receiver is covered and his other receiver is wide frigging open but Huard never sees him because hes going straight to the checkdown.

At least Croyle actually scans the field and looks to see if anyone is open besides his first receiver before he checks down to the running back.

Huard is a career backup. Period.

Hammock Parties · 10-07-2007, 03:53 PM

You act like there are quarterbacks that would play better with NO RUNNING GAME. I know Croyle certainly wouldn't.

Coach · 10-07-2007, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GOATSE

You act like there are quarterbacks that would play better with NO RUNNING GAME. I know Croyle certainly wouldn't.

You can't prove that Croyle certainly wouldn't, becuase he hasn't been given the chance to prove it, Mr. Goebbels.

Hammock Parties · 10-07-2007, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

You can't prove that Croyle certainly wouldn't, becuase he hasn't been given the chance to prove it, Mr. Goebbels.

This is just ridiculous. You really think it's a good idea to throw a green QB in there and make him drop back 75 percent of the time? You're just asking for disaster.

Coach · 10-07-2007, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GOATSE

This is just ridiculous. You really think it's a good idea to throw a green QB in there and make him drop back 75 percent of the time? You're just asking for disaster.

Jesus, what do you think we're in right now anyways? The Chiefs just ran smack in the middle of a ****in disaster.

Another point to make is that, other than the Raiders, the AFC West QB's are younger, except for Kansas City. I know the Raiders will more than likely will give JaMarcus his reps soon.

We just wasted a year becuase of it.

Hammock Parties · 10-07-2007, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

Jesus, what do you think we're in right now anyways? The Chiefs just ran smack in the middle of a ****in disaster.

No. What's a disaster is having your quarterback throw four interceptions and watching your team lose by 35 points.

RedThat · 10-07-2007, 04:08 PM

I thought the O-line was decent in pass protecting, but horrible in runblocking.

It's not a great O-line we have, nor good either...It's a very below average one.

Our running game sucks for 2 reasons: 1. The runblocking is awful, and 2. LJ isn't running with much confidence. I noticed on most runs, LJ doesn't run with authority. So when your O-line isn't blocking well, and your RB is doing that, that's a pretty bad combination if you ask me?

*The last drive in the game, there was that one play that had me convinced Croyle should start over Huard...Yeah, I think it's time. I like the fact that Croyle is much faster then Huard, he has more of an ability to scramble and flush himself out of the pocket, and frikk'n throw that ball down the field with great spin and pretty much accuracy. Great pass to Bowe that got us in Jacksonville territory. Now, had that been Huard, that play wouldn't have happened.

Chiefs would have been shutout.

donkhater · 10-07-2007, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GOATSE

You act like there are quarterbacks that would play better with NO RUNNING GAME. I know Croyle certainly wouldn't.

You just don't get it do you? DAMON HUARD PITCHED A SHUTOUT!!!!!!

As in 0, na-da, points. What the the world does KC have to lose by putting in Croyle????

I don't think negative points are possible in the NFL.

jjjayb · 10-07-2007, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GOATSE

You act like there are quarterbacks that would play better with NO RUNNING GAME. I know Croyle certainly wouldn't.

You ever stop to think Huard is part of the reason for the bad running game? He isn't a threat so teams can tee up on our running game. How can you be scared of a quarterback that can't throw more than 20 yard down the field.

10-07-2007, 03:31 PM	#4
ChiefaRoo MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Austin,TX Casino cash: $5017505	I thought Colquitt looked great though.
Posts: 11,859

10-07-2007, 03:48 PM	#6
donkhater Brilliant!! Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Indiana, USA Casino cash: $10014051	I thought the O-line protected pretty well this game. Terry is no gem, but he wasn't a turnstile. There is just no explosion off the ball in the run game. Those bashing Larry are only partially right. he is trying a little too hard and his selfish attitude (particulary after a win) is not the mark of a leader. But you don't produce like he did last year and suddenly go into the toilet. No I don't buy it. And you shouldn't be sellin' it. Rather, teams are still willing to see if Damon Huard and the dynamic Edwards brain trust will take what the other team is willing to concede instead of slowly bleeding away with LJ. Remember last season when NE went to Minnesota with the Vikings having one of the best rush defenses in the league. What did NE do? They hardley ran the ball at all and blew them out. Herm and Co. are to stubborn to do something like that. Instead it takes 2.5 quarters to figure it out. __________________ The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants
Posts: 3,994

10-07-2007, 03:52 PM	#7
jjjayb MVP Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Back in K.C. baby!!!! Casino cash: $6103433	Huards problem is his tunnel vision. He looks for his primary receiver and if he isn't open he dumps it too his running back. Unfortunately alot of times his primary receiver is covered and his other receiver is wide frigging open but Huard never sees him because hes going straight to the checkdown. At least Croyle actually scans the field and looks to see if anyone is open besides his first receiver before he checks down to the running back. Huard is a career backup. Period.
Posts: 7,015

10-07-2007, 03:53 PM	#8
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4160478	You act like there are quarterbacks that would play better with NO RUNNING GAME. I know Croyle certainly wouldn't. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 279,749

10-07-2007, 04:08 PM	#13
RedThat Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Earth Casino cash: $10004900	I thought the O-line was decent in pass protecting, but horrible in runblocking. It's not a great O-line we have, nor good either...It's a very below average one. Our running game sucks for 2 reasons: 1. The runblocking is awful, and 2. LJ isn't running with much confidence. I noticed on most runs, LJ doesn't run with authority. So when your O-line isn't blocking well, and your RB is doing that, that's a pretty bad combination if you ask me? *The last drive in the game, there was that one play that had me convinced Croyle should start over Huard...Yeah, I think it's time. I like the fact that Croyle is much faster then Huard, he has more of an ability to scramble and flush himself out of the pocket, and frikk'n throw that ball down the field with great spin and pretty much accuracy. Great pass to Bowe that got us in Jacksonville territory. Now, had that been Huard, that play wouldn't have happened. Chiefs would have been shutout.
Posts: 6,666