Quote:
Originally Posted by gordonelloyd
What an interesting, long and complicated set of arguments that concludes the obvious: if Humphrey can play well enough, then the Chiefs will use him at LT and keep Thuney where he naturally belongs at LG . If they think Humphrey won’t play well enough, they will go with Thuney at LT and Caliendo at LG. Our games with Thuney at LT showed we are better using that approach if our alternative is to have a turn still at LT. I think in the Denver game Humphrey showed he can probably meet that standard. But there seem to be some doubts if you can do it long time on a lengthy drive or for the full game. Hard to understand why that is an issue as we had the ball for under 20 minutes in the Denver debacle. If that turns out to be the case, they may switch back-and-forth using Thuney or Humphrey depending how tired Humphrey is.
I don’t think it will matter against either Houston or Pittsburgh. And from that game, we will have a clearer idea of our best option for Buffalo or Baltimore – or even Denver if a miracle occurs and we play them again.
|
I think the sticking point for a lot of people (myself included) is whether people think Humphries will be ready or not, and what constitutes that. Basically, the pro Humphries camp thinks the Denver game and two weeks of prep time is enough for him to be ready, and the pro-Thuney camp thinks that's not enough time to be game ready and he might come out gassed.
I lean more on the pro-Thuney side because I'm more risk averse. I also believe the "we can switch Humphries out if he's not playing well" philosophy is a lot more risky than others seem to believe, but that's all just me.
It really has nothing to do with Caliendo, I think we all understand the ceiling is higher with Humphries and want Thuney back at G, it's just whether or not you think it's worth the risk.