How patient will YOU be with Brodie Croyle?

[TRR]

Nearing training camp, I'm starting to wonder how soon fellow KC fans will start throwing Croyle under the bus. Last season, Croyle struggled, but had no real help to give KC fans an honest look at what he can do. This season, the line should be a bit better, a healthy LJ should give him a legitimate playmaker in the backfield, and an entire offseason of working as the starting QB could only help...

BUT...

I remember how impatient KC fans were with Trent Green. Most were ready to kill him after the 2001 season, and still weren't happy with him after the 2002 season. Even at the end, after Green became one of the great Chiefs QB's in recent memory, fans were quick to rip him apart, and resurrect the name "TrINT".

My question is, (1) how long will you give Croyle to prove himself? Half the season? All season? And (2) what does he need to do to be brought back as the starting QB for the 2009 season?

Thoughts...

[TRR]

Originally Posted by Micjones

Figures...


So is David Garrard, Joe Montana, Tony Romo, Marc Bulger and other QB's who have shown in 6 games they deserve the job...Or at least more time to lock it down.

Read my other post. Tell me a QB who's starting RB was a 3rd stringer, and their O Line was as bad as KC's....

Don't play dumb and say David Garrard when his O Line is solid, and he had two RB's that were better than KC's starting one at the time Croyle came in.

Or Tony Romo who had a solid RB, a good O Line, and Owens, Glenn, and Whitten to throw too.

Come on, make an equal comparison....

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yeah, he didn't show one big game...

First start, on the road, against the World ****ing Champions.

A 70% completion percentage, no turnovers, and a QB rating of 99.2

That's a big game? His 169 yard, 6.3 yards per pass, 1 TD day?
Gimme a break.

I'm having a hard time understanding why him being a 3rd round picks has jack shit to do with the fact that the Kansas City Chiefs are REBUILDING, and there's absolutely NO DOWNSIDE to playing this kid every snap, of every game, for the next season, at least.

Sure there is. You lose valuable time.
If you know he isn't the guy it's time to move on and make the best of the time you have left with three of your best offensive players (Waters/Gonzalez/Johnson).

You're so hell bent on riding him out of town base on his draft location.

Yeah, his play be damned...

Hasselbeck

Green Bay certainly made fools of themselves keeping the Hall of Fame guy over Hasselbeck.

Bulger, Anderson

Good examples. I can't and won't argue.
Though I would say they were released because their teams believed they had no inherent value and NOT because they played poorly. That happens all the time in the NFL. You can only keep so many guys. Every now and again a talented player will get away.

Brees

San Diego screwed that one up big time. I stand in agreement.

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by TRR

Read my other post. Tell me a QB who's starting RB was a 3rd stringer, and their O Line was as bad as KC's...

Kolby Smith was the backup.
And I think I would argue that Tom Brady's supporting cast was comparable.
He did have a reliable rusher, but his pass-catchers weren't as productive.
And again, he was sacked 41 times his rookie season. So obviously the protection wasn't there either.

Don't play dumb and say David Garrard when his O Line is solid, and he had two RB's that were better than KC's starting one at the time Croyle came in.

Or Tony Romo who had a solid RB, a good O Line, and Owens, Glenn, and Whitten to throw too.

Come on, make an equal comparison....

Hold on...
Is the argument that he hasn't had sufficient time to produce or that he doesn't have weapons to produce with?

The story seems to be changing.

If the argument is that he doesn't have enough around him...
He doesn't need more time. I can tell you now that he won't pan out.

[angelo]

I have never been sold on Croyle.

I think he is a nice kid that might be a decent back up.

I dream of being proven wrong. I pulled for him every time he lined up behind center. I hope he worked this year on finesse, on his reads, on not telescoping his passes and his overall body strength.

I am not the football guru most of you are. I can not spout off stat's like playing this little piggy.

I am willing to give him the year. We have got no one else to challenge him so let him play. I did want us to draft a QB in the draft but someone like Dennis Dixon or Josh Johnson.

Ang

[JuicesFlowing]

I think Solari's shit playcalling screwed our offense up last year. I would give Croyle this entire season before making any judgments ... I thought Croyle played better than Huard last season, despite losing every game.

[Mecca]

This is it, if he's awful this season or gets hurt numerous times/misses significant time due to injury, time to move on.

You can't keep running him back out there time after time. Even if he shows slight development if he can't stay on the field, the story of his career, that means he's a backup.

[FAX]

In all fairness, Croyle needs another full year under his belt. And a heck of a lot more protein.

FAX

[Mecca]

If after this year, he is either the same or marginally better and got hurt again I guarantee there will be people still saying he's the guy he just needs more....you can't commit year after year to a guy.

[OnTheWarpath15]

According to Mic, here's 3 recent 3rd rounders who should be released immediately from their respective teams. They've shown nothing, yet continued to get playing time after their first 6 starts...what gives?

Trent Edwards: 102/157, 65% completion percentage, 1TD/5INT, 1047 yards. Stats declined rapidly after those six games, save on big game against Miami. Yet, he's the starter in Buffalo.

Tarvaris Jackson: 75/152, 49% completion percentage, 3TD/8 INT, 800 yards. Started another 8 games after that debacle, and is still the starter in Minnesota.

Chris Simms: 103/175, 59% completion percentage, 5TD/5INT, 1242 yards. Debatable that barring injury, he might STILL be the starter in Tampa.



Croyle played no worse than any of these 3, yet has the least amount of playing time of the group.

[rad]

Originally Posted by Micjones

That's a big game? His 169 yard, 6.3 yards per pass, 1 TD day?
Gimme a break.





Sure there is. You lose valuable time.
If you know he isn't the guy it's time to move on and make the best of the time you have left with three of your best offensive players (Waters/Gonzalez/Johnson).



Yeah, his play be damned...



Green Bay certainly made fools of themselves keeping the Hall of Fame guy over Hasselbeck.



Good examples. I can't and won't argue.
Though I would say they were released because their teams believed they had no inherent value and NOT because they played poorly. That happens all the time in the NFL. You can only keep so many guys. Every now and again a talented player will get away.



San Diego screwed that one up big time. I stand in agreement.

Yes, that is a big game.

[CupidStunt]

I would say about 12 games. That gives four to a guy like Thigpen. No use in wasting them if Croyle does NOTHING. Now, if Croyle stinks for six and then shows some mild to moderate improvement over the next six, I'd give him the rest of the season and go from there.

[OnTheWarpath15]

This thread is amusing.

I'd like to watch the NFL some of you are apparently watching, where if a QB doesn't produce in his first full year, he must be a bust.

Wonder how many HOFers, Super Bowl Champions or MVP's of the league would have never existed under these conditions.

[blueballs]

Mike Solari - Dick Curl - Herm Edwards
McIntosh - Turley - Sivteck
Smith - Boomer - some guy washing tractors the week before

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by rad

Yes, that is a big game.

Not in Mic's world, because he didn't have ridiculous SportsCenter worthy numbers.

Nevermind it was his first NFL start, on the road, against the defending Champs, and all Croyle did was march his team down the field late, and kept them in the game - which they should have won, against a vastly superior opponent.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by lj4mvp

I would say about 12 games. That gives four to a guy like Thigpen. No use in wasting them if Croyle does NOTHING. Now, if Croyle stinks for six and then shows some mild to moderate improvement over the next six, I'd give him the rest of the season and go from there.

No offense, but what the hell would we be wasting?

If people aren't willing to give Croyle, a 3rd round pick more than 14 games, I guess we'll only need the 4 you're speaking of to know if Thigpen is a bust...

We wouldn't be wasting any time by playing Croyle over the next year and a half.

We ALREADY wasted half of a season by playing Captain Fetal Position instead of giving Croyle that experience.