Stanzi Supporters Need To Apologize

[Titty Meat]

For the past 2 seasons you wasted our time discussing someone more irrelevant than Mr. Irrelevant.

Hows the comparison to Curtis Painter look now?


BossChief lost

[buddha]

When he has time, Stanzi throws a very pretty ball. The problems come when there is ANY pressure near him. I have no dog in this fight...I really don't care who KC's QB is and who it isn't. I honestly don't think that Stanzi has the courage or the fortitude required to be a full-time QB in the NFL.

He has the ability/talent...which is why this is frustrating.

[Reerun_KC]

This thread needs to die in a fire. Its completely infected with suck...

[buddha]

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

This thread needs to die in a fire. Its completely infected with suck...

Thanks for dragging it down further, Beaker Boy.

[Bewbies]

Originally Posted by BlackBob

We don't need a project QB. We are in position to make a run right now. Put him on the practice squad. If a better prospect gets cut, pick them up like we did Thigpen a few years back.

Who is going to make the roster in the place of the 3rd string QB that will put this team over the edge?

A team should always have a young QB in the 3 spot that they are developing. Always.

[Reerun_KC]

Originally Posted by buddha

Thanks for dragging it down further, Beaker Boy.

Pound sand.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

All teams need a developmental QB - at least all SMART teams do. If you want to try and hide him on the PS, go ahead. I'm pretty sure they won't. They like him. They actually like him alot.

Exactly.

Just ask Adam Schefter.

[Black Bob]

Originally Posted by Bewbies

Who is going to make the roster in the place of the 3rd string QB that will put this team over the edge?

A team should always have a young QB in the 3 spot that they are developing. Always.

A kickoff specialist? J/K No seriously, who cares? Half the league only goes with two QBs. It only makes since to keep three if you have three good ones.

The truth is that project QBs are a thing of the past. Nobody waits long and guys don't get much time. Most of the teams that have three QBs have veterans. At least half of them do. That means only about 1/4 of teams have project QBs on the active roster.

Look at Pittsburgh. They dropped the kid from Oregon and kept old ass Charlie Batch and Leftwich. Would Chase Daniel be in New Orleans if Mark Brunnell was 5 years younger? The Pats won two superbowls with Flutie and Huard. I guess my point is that most teams that have a project QB are doing so because they have to.

KC is a good team and they are not in a position to need a project QB. Stanzi can sit on the practice squad and work his ass off and maybe one day he will get one more chance.

If Cassel or Quinn don't work out, they will address QB next year. If we get down to our 3rd stringer this year, we are ****ed.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by BlackBob

A kickoff specialist? J/K No seriously, who cares? Half the league only goes with two QBs. It only makes since to keep three if you have three good ones.

Or if you finished the previous season starting a guy you got on the waiver wire 2/3 of the way through the season...

[CoMoChief]

the ideal QB situation..

1. Franchise QB
2. Veteran backup
3. Young project w/ upside

If the veteran QB is getting too old, or can't be resigned/decides to go elsewhere, then you replace him with another veteran QB if there is any indication that your 3rd string young project is not quite ready to take snaps with the starters should the #1QB go down.

[Black Bob]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Or if you finished the previous season starting a guy you got on the waiver wire 2/3 of the way through the season...

Yep. Then you would be very lucky like we were. This regime isn't thinking about project QBs. We are trying to win.

[pimpchief]

I want tanney as our third qb.

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by pimpchief

I want tanney as our third qb.

I'd like to see what he could do. Apparently you can't tell the difference between him and Stanzi on the practice field. Maybe you can tell the difference in the game.

[pimpchief]

Originally Posted by jd1020

I'd like to see what he could do. Apparently you can't tell the difference between him and Stanzi on the practice field. Maybe you can tell the difference in the game.

I really want him to get a chance. Why won't they play him?

[aturnis]

3

Originally Posted by BlackBob

Maybe not that one game, but when you look at the other five, I can see it. Remember when we drafted McGee in the 3rd round a couple of years ago and then quickly traded him Tampa after one season? This is the same thing imo. We need to cut our losses and move on. He should be better at this point and he honestly hasn't shown anything. What has he learned? Has he gotten better?

I can't believe some guys say it wasn't that bad! I'm sorry but it was terrible. It's not even Thursday yet and some of you Stanzi sympathizers are already getting beer goggles again. He caused the sacks because he held the ball to long. The pick wasn't flukey at all. He's lucky Copper knocked it away and tried to save him. Otherwise, it might have been gone for a pick six because Copper was double covered and Stanzi blatently stared down the receiver all the way.

In the end, Stanzi doesn't move the ball. You have to move the ball. Thigpen moved the ball. Palko and Croyle did not. Thigpen is still in the league. It's really that simple. If Stanzi is going to make it, he needs to move the damn chains.

You're an idiot. They traded McGee b/c he was a pot head and got busted, not to mention his poor play. Football wasn't important enough to him. There was no place for him on this young roster.

[whoman69]

Originally Posted by BlackBob

A kickoff specialist? J/K No seriously, who cares? Half the league only goes with two QBs. It only makes since to keep three if you have three good ones.

The truth is that project QBs are a thing of the past. Nobody waits long and guys don't get much time. Most of the teams that have three QBs have veterans. At least half of them do. That means only about 1/4 of teams have project QBs on the active roster.

Look at Pittsburgh. They dropped the kid from Oregon and kept old ass Charlie Batch and Leftwich. Would Chase Daniel be in New Orleans if Mark Brunnell was 5 years younger? The Pats won two superbowls with Flutie and Huard. I guess my point is that most teams that have a project QB are doing so because they have to.

KC is a good team and they are not in a position to need a project QB. Stanzi can sit on the practice squad and work his ass off and maybe one day he will get one more chance.

If Cassel or Quinn don't work out, they will address QB next year. If we get down to our 3rd stringer this year, we are ****ed.

Cassel and Quinn are already pretty much proven failures. That's why we need a developmental QB. What's the difference between KC and the teams you mention? They have a franchise QB. As you pointed out with your examples, they have 3 QBs even though they don't have a developmental guy on their roster. If any team needs a project QB, its KC.