NFL Network on Trent Green... - Page 5

Hammock Parties · 03-05-2007, 06:17 PM

Said he met with Carl and they don't necessarily want to trade him. Offered him a new contract at a reduced rate.

FringeNC · 03-06-2007, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

$7.5M over 3 years is EXACTLY what a backup QB makes. He's not overpaid at all.

Seems like a 'tweener salary to me. Too low to be a starter, but higher than a backup.

**Rausch** · 03-06-2007, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FringeNC

Seems like a 'tweener salary to me. Too low to be a starter, but higher than a backup.

I know that if we get rid of Green they damned well better start Huard over Croyle.

jspchief · 03-06-2007, 09:44 AM

Keeping both Green and Huard on the roster will be bad for the Chiefs. And not just in terms of money.

Regardless of who wins that starting job, he's bound to have bad game at some point, which will instanly result in a QB controversy.

It also takes practice snaps away from the QB we spent a 3rd rnd pick on in hopes of developing.

I'm not neccessarily an advocate for Huard or Green either one, but I feel that keeping both of them is going to create more bad then good.

Brock · 03-06-2007, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

I know that if we get rid of Green they damned well better start Huard over Croyle.

Personally, I think they ought to start whoever is better.

ct · 03-06-2007, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beer me

I have all the respect in the world for Trent no matter what he decides. I'm rooting for him to stay in KC... beat out all the competetion in the pre-season and win his starting job back... and then prove on the field that he isn't finished yet.

Go Trent.

htismaqe · 03-06-2007, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

Personally, I think they ought to start whoever is better.

How much better do they need to be? And how much should the future factor in?

Starting Huard or Green is yet ANOTHER stop-gap, "let's go 9-7 and fill the seats" move.

There's very little chance that Croyle is 3 or 4 full losses worse than Huard or Green this season, but there's a very good chance that as soon as NEXT YEAR, Green is worth ZERO wins because he's RETIRED. And Huard isn't that far behind him.

It's time to think about the future for a change.

Archie Bunker · 03-06-2007, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jspchief

Keeping both Green and Huard on the roster will be bad for the Chiefs. And not just in terms of money.

Regardless of who wins that starting job, he's bound to have bad game at some point, which will instanly result in a QB controversy.

It also takes practice snaps away from the QB we spent a 3rd rnd pick on in hopes of developing.

I'm not neccessarily an advocate for Huard or Green either one, but I feel that keeping both of them is going to create more bad then good.

Couldn't agree more.

ct · 03-06-2007, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guru

OK. So we signed Huard to be 7.5 million backup? I don't think so.

$7.5M over 3 years IS backup money!!

from Rotoworld ...

Dallas picks Brad Johnson to back up Romo

Cowboys signed QB Brad Johnson to a three-year, $7.5 million contract.

Johnson had been drawing interest from Denver, but felt "a strong comfort level" with Dallas offensive coordinator Jason Garrett, his former teammate. He should be a good mentor for Tony Romo to fall back on and if Romo gets hurt, a better in-game option than Drew Bledsoe. Mar. 5 - 7:03 pm et

edit: parker beat me to it, must be a mod conspiracy...

htismaqe · 03-06-2007, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jspchief

Keeping both Green and Huard on the roster will be bad for the Chiefs. And not just in terms of money.

Regardless of who wins that starting job, he's bound to have bad game at some point, which will instanly result in a QB controversy.

It also takes practice snaps away from the QB we spent a 3rd rnd pick on in hopes of developing.

I'm not neccessarily an advocate for Huard or Green either one, but I feel that keeping both of them is going to create more bad then good.

I'm advocating keeping Huard because he's signed and it's not alot of money. We don't need a $45M backup. Trent needs to go somewhere where he can start.

Chiefs Pantalones · 03-06-2007, 10:19 AM

Start Croyle!!!

**Bowser** · 03-06-2007, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanilla Thunder

Start Croyle!!!

So are you to Croyle what Hootie is to Huard?

Chiefs Pantalones · 03-06-2007, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser

So are you to Croyle what Hootie is to Huard?

No, because starting Croyle makes more sense than starting Huard. It's time to rebuild. I say we find out what we have in Croyle sooner than later. It's time for the Chiefs to stop with the stop-gaps and risk season ticket holders not renewing. Stop thinking business and start thinking football for a change.

**Iowanian** · 03-06-2007, 10:35 AM

I don't see any way Green AND Huard are on the roster.

The Chiefs retain rights to Huard and a reasonable contract, and if they choose Green(restructured) then they have some leverage to get a pick for Huard.....or Green if he's willing to play ball.

Chiefnj · 03-06-2007, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iowanian

I don't see any way Green AND Huard are on the roster.

The Chiefs retain rights to Huard and a reasonable contract, and if they choose Green(restructured) then they have some leverage to get a pick for Huard.....or Green if he's willing to play ball.

I don't think Huard has any trade value. If he thought he could get a decent deal somewhere else he would have stuck his toes in the free agency pool. Also, didn't Huard say he was being given the chance to compete for the starting spot?

Brock · 03-06-2007, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

How much better do they need to be? And how much should the future factor in?

Starting Huard or Green is yet ANOTHER stop-gap, "let's go 9-7 and fill the seats" move.

There's very little chance that Croyle is 3 or 4 full losses worse than Huard or Green this season, but there's a very good chance that as soon as NEXT YEAR, Green is worth ZERO wins because he's RETIRED. And Huard isn't that far behind him.

It's time to think about the future for a change.

Hey, if Croyle claims the job, fine. But if he stinks it up at training camp and in preseason, I don't see any reason to just hand him the job. Earn it.

03-05-2007, 06:17 PM
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $740478	NFL Network on Trent Green... Said he met with Carl and they don't necessarily want to trade him. Offered him a new contract at a reduced rate.
Posts: 297,591

03-06-2007, 09:44 AM	#63
jspchief BAMF Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Your Face Casino cash: $9998710	Keeping both Green and Huard on the roster will be bad for the Chiefs. And not just in terms of money. Regardless of who wins that starting job, he's bound to have bad game at some point, which will instanly result in a QB controversy. It also takes practice snaps away from the QB we spent a 3rd rnd pick on in hopes of developing. I'm not neccessarily an advocate for Huard or Green either one, but I feel that keeping both of them is going to create more bad then good. __________________ Courage is not the absence of fear but rather the judgment that something is more important than fear. The brave may not live forever but the cautious do not live at all.
Posts: 27,207

03-06-2007, 10:19 AM	#70
Chiefs Pantalones GO CHIEFS!!!!!! Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Kansas City Casino cash: $6868717	Start Croyle!!! __________________ Don't be fooled by my username, I'm white.
Posts: 26,653

03-06-2007, 10:35 AM	#73
Iowanian Supporter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Utopia Casino cash: $1648454	I don't see any way Green AND Huard are on the roster. The Chiefs retain rights to Huard and a reasonable contract, and if they choose Green(restructured) then they have some leverage to get a pick for Huard.....or Green if he's willing to play ball.
Posts: 62,945