ChiefsPlanet
Page 15 of 51 « First 511121314 15 1617181925 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Todd Haley is the "Mystery of Pittsburgh" (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=261647)

Hammock Parties 07-23-2012 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lcarus (Post 8760721)
Either that, or he doesn't give a shit about being a starter or competing for a starting gig, in which case, **** Kyle Orton.
I never thought this was the case.

There are 32 of these jobs in the world. Who wouldn't want to be an NFL starting QB?

And even if it was the case, sign Orton, bench Cassel, and tell Kyle to deal with it. What's he gonna do? Throw games?

lcarus 07-23-2012 12:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toad King (Post 8760724)
I never thought this was the case.

There are 32 of these jobs in the world. Who wouldn't want to be an NFL starting QB?

And even if it was the case, sign Orton, bench Cassel, and tell Kyle to deal with it. What's he gonna do? Throw games?
Beats me. I don't understand the situation. Orton is clearly better than Cassel. Something tells me Pioli made it clear that Cassel was "the man" in KC so Orton said **** you then.

DaneMcCloud 07-23-2012 12:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lcarus (Post 8760721)
It's kind of odd. Orton had to have known he could beat out Cassel for the starting job right? Unless he was led to believe Cassel would be the starter no matter what. In which case he'd rather backup a QB that actually deserved to be a starter.

Either that, or he doesn't give a shit about being a starter or competing for a starting gig, in which case, **** Kyle Orton.
Well, if you read that article, in short, Orton says he's done competing for a starting job. He likes the notion of being the backup only. The starter should be clearly defined.

It sounds to me like he was sick of competing against Tebow and didn't want to compete against Cassel. So, he took the next best thing which was to back up Romo and collect a fat paycheck.

I can't blame him for that but I'm glad he's not on the Chiefs roster.

Titty Meat 07-23-2012 12:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 8760719)
First off, the team competed far more under Crennel than they did under Haley. That much was evident by the naked eye.

Secondly, I don't think that any reasonable person would expect immediate miracles, especially when the roster still consisted of Jackie Battle, Barry Richardson, Kyle Orton, Sabby Piscatelli, etc. and so on.



If you want to blame someone, blame Steve Hoffman. BTW, he was fired.



So it's GREAT when Haley does it (oh, he's so daring) but when Crennel does it, it's a bad decision? Bullshit. When going for it on fourth down works, the coach is a genius. When it doesn't, he's an imbecile.




Is that what you just did?



Laughable. Just ****ing laughable.

Name ONE season in Cleveland where Crennel had a defense as talented as the Chiefs. Cleveland has NEVER had perimeter weapons like Bowe, Baldwin, Breaston, Moeaki and Boss simultaneously, along with a running back like Charles.

The Browns and Chiefs may be equal in terms of QB suckage during Crennel's tenure, but that's about the only parallel that should be drawn.
1. You just said Haley was an awful coach so that's not saying much.

2. Hoffman was a scape goat. Is it a coincidence that Clevelands special teams sucked when Crennel was the coach?

3. Find a post where I said it was great that Haley went for it on 4th downs. I believe I talked about this in another thread where I said Haley was a moron for going for it on 4th down on the 28 yard line against Denver.

4. Laughable? The QB position is the most important position. Crennel sucked in Cleveland because of bad coaching and shitty QB's how is that different here?

mdchiefsfan 07-23-2012 12:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lcarus (Post 8760721)
It's kind of odd. Orton had to have known he could beat out Cassel for the starting job right? Unless he was led to believe Cassel would be the starter no matter what. In which case he'd rather backup a QB that actually deserved to be a starter.

Either that, or he doesn't give a shit about being a starter or competing for a starting gig, in which case, **** Kyle Orton.
It sounds to me like he wanted to know his place, his role. By going to Dallas he put that decision in his own hands. He wanted stability and certainty, the fact that he found that as a backup tells me what kind of competitor he is.

lcarus 07-23-2012 12:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 8760728)
Well, if you read that article, in short, Orton says he's done competing for a starting job. He likes the notion of being the backup only. The starter should be clearly defined.

It sounds to me like he was sick of competing against Tebow and didn't want to compete against Cassel. So, he took the next best thing which was to back up Romo and collect a fat paycheck.

I can't blame him for that but I'm glad he's not on the Chiefs roster.
I can't blame him for that either I guess. Doesn't matter though. He's not our answer anyway. I'd rather see what Stanzi can do if Cassel goes down. If that doesn't work out, then we're back to square one.

DaneMcCloud 07-23-2012 12:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 8760729)
2. Hoffman was a scape goat. Is it a coincidence that Clevelands special teams sucked when Crennel was the coach?
Hoffman was a scape goat? What? Succop was not good last year, at all and he wasn't "great" the year before. Coupled with the blocked field goals, it was time for him to go.

I said it in 2009 and I'll say it again now: It was a mistake to cut Connor Barth in favor of Succop. Succop was Pioli's 7th round draft choice and he's hardly been special.

Meanwhile, Barth just signed a 4 year, $13 million dollar deal in Tampa.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 8760729)
4. Laughable? The QB position is the most important position. Crennel sucked in Cleveland because of bad coaching and shitty QB's how is that different here?
So, Crennel sucks because he doesn't have a QB? What the **** kind of logic is that?

Furthermore, he fired key members of Haley's staff and replaced them with his own choices. Condemning him to failure based on the Raiders game is ridiculously premature.

Titty Meat 07-23-2012 12:10 AM
There's talk that Orton didn't want to compete but that doesn't make sense.

When has Pioli ever paid a backup QB (besides Cassel) 5 million dollars per year?

mcaj22 07-23-2012 12:10 AM
he probably thought the odds were stacked against him in KC to even compete. If you think he would ever have a chance to legit beat out Cassel no matter how he looked in practice or what media said in training camp, he would have still been the backup opening day anyway, just like with Tebow.

So he took more money to do the same thing in Dallas behind an actual QB that is better than him, so his role looks more legitimate, because I'm sure to Kyle Orton, he knows and thinks he's better than Cassel.

DaneMcCloud 07-23-2012 12:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lcarus (Post 8760736)
I can't blame him for that either I guess. Doesn't matter though. He's not our answer anyway. I'd rather see what Stanzi can do if Cassel goes down. If that doesn't work out, then we're back to square one.
I'd prefer that Stanzi be brought along slowly. As I previously mentioned, he wasn't privy to OTA's and Mini Camps in 2011, which would have put him further along last year. This year, he's participated in both, although they've been greatly reduced over prior years due to the new CBA.

If Cassel is hurt or is absolutely abysmal, I expect to see Quinn for at least a few games, if not the rest of the season. Unless Stanzi makes an enormous jump this year, I'm betting he won't be a contender for the starting job until 2013.

Titty Meat 07-23-2012 12:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 8760738)
Hoffman was a scape goat? What? Succop was not good last year, at all and he wasn't "great" the year before. Coupled with the blocked field goals, it was time for him to go.

I said it in 2009 and I'll say it again now: It was a mistake to cut Connor Barth in favor of Succop. Succop was Pioli's 7th round draft choice and he's hardly been special.

Meanwhile, Barth just signed a 4 year, $13 million dollar deal in Tampa.



So, Crennel sucks because he doesn't have a QB? What the **** kind of logic is that?

Furthermore, he fired key members of Haley's staff and replaced them with his own choices. Condemning him to failure based on the Raiders game is ridiculously premature.
Succop must not be that bad they extended himl.

Read what I said man. Cleveland had shit for QB AND CRENNEL WAS A SHITTY COACH.

Awesome. He fired members of Haley's staff and hired Brian Daboll who's offenses have sucked and the Rams ST coach whos special teams sucked. Like I said these aren't improvements.

DaneMcCloud 07-23-2012 12:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 8760740)
There's talk that Orton didn't want to compete but that doesn't make sense.
Talk? Orton says it plain as day in the interview I linked. There was no other way to interpret his words. He did not want to compete.

"Well I’ve kind of been in that situation the last three or four years just going into camp and competing. To be honest with you I don’t think that situation has worked for me. I don’t think it’s worked out for the club. I think you need to know who your guy is going to be going right into the season and backing that guy. I don’t think that’s been the situation that I have been in and I really didn’t want to get into that situation again. I’m fine with knowing my role as the backup on this team."

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/...llas-tony-romo

DaneMcCloud 07-23-2012 12:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 8760751)
Succop must not be that bad they extended himl.

Read what I said man. Cleveland had shit for QB AND CRENNEL WAS A SHITTY COACH.

Awesome. He fired members of Haley's staff and hired Brian Daboll who's offenses have sucked and the Rams ST coach whos special teams sucked. Like I said these aren't improvements.
Daboll's offense sucked in Miami? I guessed I missed the last half of their 2011 season.

Extending Succop was a mistake, IMO. He's nothing more than average, at best.

Titty Meat 07-23-2012 12:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 8760752)
Talk? Orton says it plain as day in the interview I linked. There was no other way to interpret his words. He did not want to compete.

"Well I’ve kind of been in that situation the last three or four years just going into camp and competing. To be honest with you I don’t think that situation has worked for me. I don’t think it’s worked out for the club. I think you need to know who your guy is going to be going right into the season and backing that guy. I don’t think that’s been the situation that I have been in and I really didn’t want to get into that situation again. I’m fine with knowing my role as the backup on this team."

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/...llas-tony-romo
That doesn't mean he doesn't want to compete for a job. It could mean the "competition" was lopsided. We all know the only reason they played Tebow was because he was a first round pick. Do you honestly think Orton would be given a fair chance to compete against Cassel? Yeah right. Cassel is Pioli's boy. I bet the Chiefs didn't offer Orton 5 mil per either.

Titty Meat 07-23-2012 12:19 AM
Peter King on the signing of Orton:

I'm amazed that the Dallas Cowboys paid Orton -- who I consider the best of the available backups, and not by a small amount -- a $5 million signing bonus for a five-year deal that will likely void to three years. I understand sleeping better at night, which the Cowboys will do now that they have maybe the best backup quarterback in football as insurance for Tony Romo instead of the iffy Stephen McGee. But I've never heard of paying a guy you hope will never play a $5 million signing bonus.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:09 AM.
Page 15 of 51 « First 511121314 15 1617181925 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.