View Full Version : Cloud, Shehee, Hill, Jenkins, Snow, Williams,

03-13-2001, 10:25 AM
Stills, Blundin, Bartee, Elkins, Worthern, Valerio, Barnett, Dawson, Bennett, Barnes... etc. etc. etc. etc.

Why is everyone so concerned about giving up draft picks?

More often than not, Peterson SUCKS MONKEY NUTS at the draft!

That list doesn't even include the horrible picks he made in the 4th round or later.

Peterson has made 3 top tier picks in 11 years in KC; Thomas [no brainer], Shields and Gonzo. The rest have been pretty mediocre.

I am not concerned about giving up picks at all.

03-13-2001, 10:34 AM
LOL @ Cannibals verbiage!

Picturing CP mouth washing a Monkey's marbles is enough to make me shoot diet coke through my nostrils.

03-13-2001, 10:40 AM
That is a funny thought :)

Clint in Wichita
03-13-2001, 10:48 AM
Sit down, shut the f_ck up...and put your balls in my mouth?!

03-13-2001, 10:55 AM
CP probally figures that's where Beer Nuts came from !

03-13-2001, 10:57 AM
Cannibal: you forgot:

Grunhard, Szott, Woods, Tounge, Edwards, Horn, Byrd, Riley, Favors and Tait.

03-13-2001, 11:23 AM
According to Boomer’s Mock Draft, here are some of the players we could have with the #12:

· Marcus Stroud, DT
· Dan Morgan - LB
· Steve Hutchinson – G
· Chris Chambers – WR
· Damione Lewis – DL
· Shaun Rogers – DT
· Santana Moss – WR
· Chad Johnson – WR
· Richard Seymour - DT/DE

Yes, Cannibal, I care about that draft pick.

never bowled 300, but intends to keep on trying.

Mark M
03-13-2001, 11:45 AM

Reminds me of this girl I saw in Tijuana ... but I digress.

You also forgot Carter, Anders, N. Smith, Hicks, Maslowski and Shields.

Seems like a wash to me.

I do agree that Peterson sucks (insert animal's body part here) in the draft, but do you think he will be making the decision with his buddy DV at the helm? IMO, I think Carl will let Dick do the draft.

~~Willing to wait and see ... but wants to keep that #12 pick.

03-13-2001, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by KCTitus
Cannibal: you forgot:

Grunhard, Szott, Woods, Tounge, Edwards, Horn, Byrd, Riley, Favors and Tait.


Some of those players are nice, I like them. But they're just not great players.

Peterson has made three great draft picks in 11 years. The Chiefs draft picks under Peterson just aren't that valuable.

I can see that you threw Byrd in there to make your list a little bigger though :)

03-13-2001, 12:37 PM
I threw in Byrd mainly because of his contribution to the Titans run to the SB. With Dyson out, Byrd made some big time plays.

It appears to me that your definition of 'great' is pro bowl appearances. I think that a solid O-Line in Grun, Szott Shields Riley and Tait is a sign of good drafts by Peterson regardless of how many probowls they go are going to.

Szott got none mainly because of Matthews on the Titans because PB's are a popularity contest and not a basis of performance during the season.

My point was that while Peterson's/Schott and Peterson/Gun's drafts were far from spectacular, I think they are a rung or two up from 'sucks monkey nuts'.

03-13-2001, 12:47 PM
Byrd isn't even a starter in the NFL, I don't think he's ever caught more than 20 balls in one year.

Szott was a nice player, not a great player.

Grunny was/is a very good player, not a great player.

Tait looks like a bust so far, at least for the number 14 pick overall.

I'd guess that a good 80% of Petersons picks have been horrible, 17% have been average to solid players, and 3% have been outstanding franchise players.

It's a horrible record, that's why I don't mind giving up draft picks to get Green.

03-13-2001, 01:01 PM
What an interesting perspective.

Carl made some bad picks over the years, so don't worry about the draft anymore. Carl is just going to screw it up anyway, so we might as well just give those picks away in exchange for a backup QB. Who cares if we need a DT, Carl will pick the wrong one. So what if we need a featured HB, Carl is not capable of picking a good one.

Give up. Hand those picks out like candy.

"Hey Rams, want to improve your D? Here, have a couple of our picks and we'll take the cap hit for your backup."

Yes, Cannibal, that is a perfectly reasonable, logical plan.

glad Carl is in charge.

03-13-2001, 01:03 PM
Tait is a bust?

I was going to actually participate until I saw that this was just another hopeless "Carl Peterson sucks" diatribe...

03-13-2001, 01:07 PM
The chances of Peterson getting franchise players with those picks are not very good.

The chances of Green being a franchise QB in a system and with coaches that he's already familiar with are better than the chances of Peterson picking a franchise player in the draft.

I would rather give up the picks [which Peterson would botch anyway] for Green, than have Troy Acheman start for the Chiefs.

03-13-2001, 01:09 PM
For the 14th pick in the draft, Tait has been a bust thus far.

03-13-2001, 01:12 PM

Qualify and quantify the statement "Tait is a bust" please...

By the way, I'll have to dig, but I know that Jeff Fisher said something about him after the 2nd game last year. Several coaches around the NFL (without Peterson ties) have had praise for Tait.

So again, I ask you to support your statement.

03-13-2001, 01:17 PM
Tait was "used" regularly by opposing D-lineman last year.

As of right now, Tait doesn't look like a # 14 overall draft pick.

Thus far he looks rather average.

I'd trade Tait for Trent Green.

03-13-2001, 01:18 PM

I think Carl's pathetic record speaks for itself. HOWEVER, this is a very high pick. Even Carl Peterson cant f uck this up. Trent Green does NOT put you in the playoffs. Bite the bullet, draft high this year and next year and build through the draft. The Chiefs have far to many holes to give up the #12 for a 30 year old QB who really hasnt proven anything.

As far as Tait goes, he is not a bust. I think he is very steady for a guy that really only has a year and a half under his belt. Trezelle Jenkins is a bust. So is Greg Hill. Tait is not.

The Chiefs best move is to keep their pick, keep the cap space, and suffer the consequences of poor drafting, poor cap management, and poor trades. Its called rebuilding.
And it should have been done a few years ago. Unfortunately, Carl Peterson is the guy in charge of rebuilding it.

03-13-2001, 01:21 PM
Building through the draft with Peterson at the helm accomplishes nothing. He simply can't do it.

03-13-2001, 01:23 PM
Ok, so you backed up a speculative statement with more speculation. I expect that from Packfan, should I begin expecting it from you?

Define "used". QUANTIFY. How many sacks did he give up? Quarterback pressures? Tackles for loss? Or maybe give some specific examples of who it was that "used" him?

Baby Lee
03-13-2001, 01:27 PM
I think they are a rung or two up from 'sucks monkey nuts'.
Please, tell me you don't have a hierarchy for acts of 'animal husbandry.'
Jeff Fisher said something about him
The same Jeff Fischer who is Gun's biggest fan?

03-13-2001, 01:27 PM
I would like to think that Tait went through his sophomore slump last year, because I did notice him stuggle toward the end of last year. If one recalls, Gonzo didnt exactly have a stellar sophomore season either.

Look, Im not saying that his drafts have been great, Im just trying to point out that it's not as bad as you'd like to make it.

03-13-2001, 01:28 PM

With the number 12 pick this year, Carl wont pull a Trezelle Jenkins. No matter how hard he tries, he wont f cuk this up. Unless of course, he panics and selects Drew Brees with the 12th pick.

Thats where the rebuilding begins. Derrick Thomas helped turn the Chiefs into regular season winners. The pick is simply to high to give up for a guy (Green) that was a free agent a few years ago. If the Chiefs want a QB, either draft one, trade for a young - minimum salary guy and develop him, or wait until next year when a new crop of FA QBs are available. DO NOT trade your 12th pick for one.

Its assinine.

03-13-2001, 01:29 PM
Calling Tait a bust at this point in his career is laughable.
I wish ALL of Petersons picks were that bad.

03-13-2001, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by Packfan

With the number 12 pick this year, Carl wont pull a Trezelle Jenkins. No matter how hard he tries, he wont f cuk this up.

We'll just see about that. I wouldn't bet on anything with Peterson.

Remember Percy Snow? He was a top 10 pick wasn't he?

03-13-2001, 01:35 PM
I think someone hacked Packfan's account, I dont believe he's actually giving CP the benefit of the doubt at this point.

03-13-2001, 01:59 PM
I think Carl has handled this situation well. Elvis choose to move on and Carl needs a QB. Green is one of the top QBs available. It is his job to explore every avenue, try to get the best deal available. He is negotiating. Just because the Rams have demanded the #12 pick does not mean they will get it. Of course they set the starting point high. Lets see what the deal is before we blast Carl. I have been one of his loudest critics but I have been impressed and reinvigorated by the Chiefs off-season.

Pitt Gorilla
03-13-2001, 02:01 PM
Bad tackles get help from tight ends. Tait had little to no help at all as a LEFT TACKLE. That speaks for itself.

03-13-2001, 02:32 PM
Why do people try to make a point without knowing what their facts? Percy Snow WAS NOT a top ten pick, he was taken #14 overall. As MOST CHIEFS FANS KNOW, Snow was well on his way to be a very solid (if not spectacular) linebacker his rookie year until he broke his ankle riding a moped during the subsequent training camp. Snow wasn't a bust; he played VERY well. His career ended with a freak injury. That's like say Robert Edwards is a bust (even though he rushed for over 1,000 yards his rookie season) because he suffered a freak injury at the Pro Bowl. Know your facts before you start point fingers.

03-13-2001, 02:41 PM

“Bust” is the standard club some folks use to bash Carl. The exact definition seems to be very fluid, as it changes when it suits the user.

read some misguided fellow call Tait a bust.

03-13-2001, 02:41 PM
What were Snow's stats his rookie year?

Didn't Snow attempt a comeback but failed?

03-13-2001, 02:45 PM

Do you think Tait has played up to the level of the # 14 overall pick?

I know he didn't.

We passed on Jevon Kearse for Tait BTW. Another example of Peterson's ineptitude as a GM.

03-13-2001, 02:45 PM
I prayed that KC would take Snow. He was a monster LB at Michigan St. I remember reading a story about his first training camp, all the veterans were making the rookies sing their school fight song. When it was Percy's turn he stood up and said something to the effect of: "I'm here to win a world championship, not to play Star-Search." If he were in this draft, I would be glad to have him @ #12.

03-13-2001, 02:58 PM

Yes he did. He held down the left Tackle position despite a gaping hole a left Guard. I don’t remember lots of sacks on Grbac. Tait did his job and did it well and will be an anchor of our OL for years to come.

Tait was the best OT in the draft and he fell into our laps when we needed an OT very badly. It was the right move. You know I love Defensive play, but we needed an OT and we got the best available at a bargain price.

I am glad that your hindsight is 20-20. That is a very useful gift when you want to criticize someone.

glad to have Tait in the R&G.

03-13-2001, 03:11 PM
Kearse did not have a very good year this last season and neither did Tait.

03-13-2001, 03:29 PM

I have to agree with you on this one. Tait is great and will be in the Pro Bowl within the next 2 years. I think he was a GREAT acquisition that will be paying dividends for a lonnnng time.

03-13-2001, 04:16 PM
Left Tackle isnt the easiest position to play. Assuming Tait stays healthy, Carl found himself a very promising LT for years to come. Tait would be further along had Carl not dicked around with him prior to the 1999 season.

The Chiefs should keep the pick, take a beating next year, draft high, and then fill holes with FAs in the off season. We all have seen what results the Chiefs have had when they take somebody else's left overs and plug them in at QB. Green, while more talented then any other QB on the KC roster, hasnt done anything noteworthy in his career. If the chiefs were drafting 20 or later, then yea, make a bid for him. Trading the 14th pick in the draft for a guy that may end up getting cut anyway is assinine.

Carl should not panic. Last time he did that he ended up with Carlton Gray.

03-13-2001, 04:27 PM

?...?...wait...yeah, I do...

Almost everybody here bitched about Grbac, and Bono, and Krieg, and even some bitched about Montana. "We're tired of taking someone else's leftovers at QB" they said...

Now we're clamoring over Trent Green? Just because he played for the Rams, maybe?


03-13-2001, 04:33 PM

If you and some of the other fans on this board werent such homers, you would see that my thoughts are usually the most sane on this board.

Take Grbac for instance. I have been bashing him all year for his lack of leadership, boneheaded plays, losing record, playoff futility, and putting up his numbers in garbage time. MOST of you guys thought I was nuts. Now that he has taken his inconsistent game elsewhere, MOST of you guys agree with what I have been saying all along.
Ditto for Gunter Cunningham.

Lots of homers on this board!

03-13-2001, 04:48 PM

Kearse may have had an off year for him, but he had an outstanding year by most other DE's standards [11.5 sacks]. I am pretty sure that Kearse has more sacks after his first two years in the league than anyone in NFL history.

Tait may become a good LT in this league, but the last two years were hardly the performances I'd expect from the # 14 overall pick that was hyped as much as he was.

I know I expected a lot more than he produced.

I'd take Kearse over Tait in a heartbeat.

03-13-2001, 04:53 PM
If not Green then who? Aikman? Frerotte? Buerline? Its easy to say "suffer now and draft/develop a QB later" but one may not come next year, or 2 years or 3 years or a decade. Look at how long teams like Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Tampa have been looking for a young franchise QB. Are they or have they wasted years with McNown, Kordell, and King? Green has far fewer question marks than any QB that is available and probably will be available next year. I think the trick is to draft and develop a young QB WHILE you already have a solid QB playing. But Elvis's psyche was too fragile to handle the comp. Draft a Griese while you have a Elway. Pick-up a Steve Young when you have a Montana. Sign a Jeff Blake and trade for a Aaron Brooks. I say sign Green and start looking high and low for his replacement now.

03-13-2001, 04:54 PM
The bottom line is that Peterson's draft record has been downright awful.

I don't think it's that big a deal to give up draft picks when the value of those picks is so low because the man making the selections can't spot talent.

BTW... well said Mr. Blond.

[Edited by Cannibal on 03-13-2001 at 04:57 PM]

Clint in Wichita
03-13-2001, 05:00 PM
Neither Grbac, Bono, or Kreig had done anything prior to coming to KC. That is, unless you count Kreig's almost miraculous number of fumbles.

Trent Green had a very good season with Washington w/ horrible "weapons" around him.

He played very well last year, but neither he or Warner was good enough to win with a middle school defense.

It makes no sense to "start Todd Collins" & probably throw the season away. Why NOT trade for Green? Take a damn chance! There isn't going to be a single player at #12 that will singlehandedly put more wins in the "W" column. Not a LB, not a DL, not a CB, defintiely not an OG, & probably not even a RB. A quality QB can.

Yes, Green is expensive, but IMO there won't be a superior player than Green at #12.

After watching a TARD play QB for 4 years, Green would seem amazing.

03-13-2001, 05:00 PM
Cannibal, you must really be down on the Chiefs right now! The Chiefs line gave up very few sacks this past season, and Jevon Kearse didn't get ANY when he faced John Tait this past season. What do you expect from left tackle? What didn't he do in his second season that you would expect from a second year left tackle? Please explain, so that others (like Gaz) can understand your thinking.

Clint in Wichita
03-13-2001, 05:03 PM
Kearse takes about 95% of the snaps at left end.

RILEY did one helluva job against him.

Tait may not be a bust, but IMO Shields is probably the best LT on the team.

03-13-2001, 05:09 PM
I watched all the games and almost all the pressure Grbac received was from the left side of the line.

I saw Tait get beat numerous times one on one.

Riley clearly outplayed Tait.

03-13-2001, 05:11 PM
Clint, are you sure? Kearse plays Right defensive end, so he would match up against Tait. Do you have confirmation somewhere of that? Also, please explain to me why Tait isn't playing at a high level at one of the most difficult positions in the NFL?

03-13-2001, 05:16 PM
Kearse plays Left Defensive End, Kenny Holmes played Right Defensive End for the Titans.

Kearse has for the vast majority of his brief NFL career line up against opposing Right Tackles, and did against the Chiefs.

I remember the commentators talking about how well Riley played against Kearse.


[Edited by Cannibal on 03-13-2001 at 05:19 PM]

03-13-2001, 05:16 PM
Sometimes I feel sorry for Chief fans. After 12 years of QB merry go-round and three playoff wins, MOST Chief fans still dont understand the importance of building a team through the draft. Draft picks dont cost as much a FAs. Draft picks are committed usually for at least three years. Draft picks learn the system and learn to play with each other. So what if the Chiefs take it on the chin next year and the year after that. They have been stuck in mediocrity for some time now doing business as usual. What is Trent Green going to do for the Chiefs?? Take them to the playoffs??? Highly unlikely. He will probably get you seven to nine wins, cost the #12 pick, and 5 million a year against the cap. Then he will be gone in three years and the Chiefs will have to do this all over again. If Peterson and co. do their homework, they will get a stud with this pick. Hopefully someone they can build their defense around. Take Ray Lewis away from Baltimore and they win 8 games last year. Derrick Thomas had almost the same kind of impact. IMO, this is a good draft. The 12 pick is to damn high to give up. If Peterson insists on taking another teams leftovers for QB, wait until after next season when he can get someone without giving up picks. IMO, Trent Green will eventually be cut by the Rams.

Peterson finally needs to learn from his many mistakes: Building a team primarily through FA does not work. Getting Trent Green is very similar to getting Elvis Grbac except they have to give up something in return (the draft picks). Its not worth it. Not even close.

03-13-2001, 05:19 PM
Thanks for clearing up my confusion.

03-13-2001, 05:21 PM

Normally I would agree with that, except that we need a real talent evaluator before we can successfully build through the draft.

Right now we don't have that.

Clint in Wichita
03-13-2001, 08:04 PM
Besides, Green isn't a tard.

03-14-2001, 06:54 AM
Lets see. You're down on Tait after his second season.
Wasn't the word on him when he was drafted that he had all the tools, but he would need some time to develop?
How many people thought that Riley was a bad draft pick after the '99 season.
Now you're singing his praises.
I think that judgement on Tait should be held until after the '01 season at the least.

03-14-2001, 07:01 AM
Cannibal: Let's see, Hicks had 14 sacks in 13 games despite being lined up with, according to you and Clint, two of the worst DT's in the entire NFL while Kearse had 11.5 in 16--that's more than an 'off year'. Imagine what Hicks would have if KC actually had good inside help.

03-14-2001, 07:43 AM
I thought Riley had an excellent rookie year.

He came right in and started all 16 games.

Riley didn't take any time to develop.

03-14-2001, 07:51 AM
And hasn't missed a game since BTW.

03-14-2001, 08:14 AM
Regarding your take on Riley, let me put this as diplomaticly as I can.
That is nothing more than unadulterated bull. Riley was getting used by DEs in '99. He was overweight and out of shape. People were questioning his work habits and desire. He took time to not only develop, but to mature, as well. The only reason he was the starter, both in his rookie season and in the '99 season, is because there was no one else of any quality to plug in.

03-14-2001, 08:37 AM
I love this...

Cannibal's arguments are obviously PURE SPECULATION.

Green gives us a chance to win now? Starting Collins would be moronic?

PROVE IT. You'll find that his career winning percentage isn't that much better than Collins.

Green may yet be our QB, and he may prove to be an excellent acquisition, but to state that as fact, and condescend everyone else because you "speak the truth" is desrespectful and stupid.

Clint in Wichita
03-14-2001, 08:44 AM
Trent Green DOES give us a **chance** to win. That is a fact.

BTW, starting Todd Collins would be the worst possible move KC could make. He also gives KC a chance to win, just a much smaller chance.


Are you saying that Hicks is better than Kearse, or are you giving credit for Hicks' performance to the recently RELEASED McGlockton?

03-14-2001, 08:50 AM
Neither, Clint, but I'm not suprised by your question.

If Hicks actually HAD support from the interior line, would he have more or fewer sacks?

I anxiously await your answer. {sarcasm}

03-14-2001, 09:07 AM
a "FACT"?


Why do I find myself saying this over and over again? It's
because you can't.

Constantly passing off your opinions as fact is what it is. Get over yourselves...

I'm exiting this thread...I enjoy participating in debates, not listening to proclamations...

03-14-2001, 09:12 AM

I like facts too. FACT is, Trent Green hasnt accomplished much in his career. My opinion is that the is not worth the 12th pick in the draft. There will be plenty of Trent Greens available at this time next year. The Chiefs passed on Hasslebeck, Flutie, Brad Johnson, ect. Now they are left to ponder Green, Banks, Aikman, Dilfer or Cunningham. IMO, they should not sign any of them and let Collins give it a shot. In all likelihood, a top five pick would be waiting for the Chiefs next year. They need that more than anything else. If the Chiefs insist on getting a better QB right now, then they should sign Troy Aikman. The Chiefs dont have to give anything up, they protect the QB very well, and the Chiefs have weapons for Aikman to throw to.

BTW, there would be mass season ticket cancellations if the Chiefs signed Banks or Dilfer. Thats a FACT.

03-14-2001, 09:17 AM
Todd Collins is not a legitimate QB and even the dumbest chief fans recognize that. - I agree with this statement, but I guess even the 'smartest' packer fans dont recognize this.

Clint in Wichita
03-14-2001, 09:18 AM
ANY QB gives a team a CHANCE to win...some more than others.

03-14-2001, 09:50 AM
How did the Chiefs 'Miss' Hasselbeck? He has even less experience than Collins. Wasn't that a big gamble by the Walrus?

Clint in Wichita
03-14-2001, 10:28 AM
I could handle Aikman as the starter, with Dilfer as the backup.

03-14-2001, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by milkman
Regarding your take on Riley, let me put this as diplomaticly as I can.
That is nothing more than unadulterated bull. Riley was getting used by DEs in '99. He was overweight and out of shape. People were questioning his work habits and desire. He took time to not only develop, but to mature, as well. The only reason he was the starter, both in his rookie season and in the '99 season, is because there was no one else of any quality to plug in.

Riley's rookie year was ten fold better than Tait's.

Riley actually got to camp on time started every game. He has not missed a game since. Riley has been a dependable player. Tait has not, he's missed games due to injury and holding out for more money. Riley has more than lived up to his draft status while Tait has a lot of work to do to attain the level of the # 14 overall pick and the hype that was placed on him.

03-14-2001, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by htismaqe
I love this...

Cannibal's arguments are obviously PURE SPECULATION.

Green gives us a chance to win now? Starting Collins would be moronic?

PROVE IT. You'll find that his career winning percentage isn't that much better than Collins.

Green may yet be our QB, and he may prove to be an excellent acquisition, but to state that as fact, and condescend everyone else because you "speak the truth" is desrespectful and stupid.

I haven't stated Green being an "excellent acquisiton" as "fact" anywhere in this thread.

I do however think that Collins is a complete scrub who deserves no more than emergency QB status on any NFL roster. He couldn't even beat out an 87 year old Warren Moon for a freaking backup spot.

Starting Collins means that the Chiefs are tanking the season in order to get a high draft pick. Is that what you want?

As long as the Chiefs win I don't really give a **** who plays for them [to a point], and Green gives the Chiefs a much better chance to win, than Collins does, even if we do give up the picks IMO.

Try not to get your panties in such a bunch next time.

03-14-2001, 01:13 PM
Thanks for providing, yet again, the condescention we've come to expect.

At least you put "IMO" at the end of one statement. Of course, if you had done that up front, it would have been alot easier.

Starting Collins means that the Chiefs are tanking the season in order to get a high draft pick. Is that what you want?

Here you go again...starting Collins DOES NOT mean they are tanking the season. Maybe, just maybe, he turns out to be good. Better than Trent Green even. You are once again speculating.

What I want is to DRAFT SOMEONE (other than Drew Brees) AT #12. Period.

03-14-2001, 01:50 PM

C'mon, you know that if the Chiefs hand the QB job to Todd Collins, then they are tanking the season. We both know that. Hell, even Titus agrees with that! The Chiefs could use a top five draft more than any other team out there, IMO. They have so many holes its sickening.

Dont pull this Chief fan homer crap on me. Todd Collins is a disaster waiting to happen. He will get the Chiefs no more than five wins (which is 2 games less than Elvis Grbac, another BAD quarterback).

If the Green Bay Packers, or better yet, the Oakland Raiders were considering starting Todd Collins at QB, you and the rest of the homers on here would be having a field day.

Clint in Wichita
03-14-2001, 01:54 PM
IMO a game-winning type of player will not be available at #12. Linebackers, defensive tackles & corners do not add Ws to the win column, unless the guy is the next Lawrence Taylor, Derrick Thomas, Warren Sapp, Deion Sanders, etc.

However, a talented QB with smarts & heart can win games.

We threw away 4 years waiting for Grtard to "mature". Why not risk one more year on a QB that has actually put together a good season with poor weapons around him?

03-14-2001, 02:10 PM
Warren Sapp was a #12 overall pick. Tony Gonzalez 14. It can be done.

However, I agree with Cannibal: Collins starting will prove that we're rebuilding.

Starting Collins DOES NOT mean that they are tanking the season

Yeah, you're right Parker. Just like trading for Rob Johnson & signing Doug Flutie DOES NOT mean the Bills weren't convinced that a change at QB was needed, but I sure did get that feeling.

Clint in Wichita
03-14-2001, 02:15 PM
I agree, it definitely can be done, but I don't think it can in this particular draft.

Pitt Gorilla
03-14-2001, 02:44 PM
Kenny Holmes drew more double teams last year than Kerse. Tait single blocked Holmes. The transitive law does apply.

Clint in Wichita
03-14-2001, 02:51 PM
To use one of htismaqe's favorite terms:

That is pure speculation, not fact.

Holmes drew more double-teams than Kearse? I don't think so.

03-14-2001, 03:11 PM

While I may agree that starting Todd Collins will cause the season to tank, that's not what was said.

Let me paraphrase:

Starting Collins means that the Chiefs are tanking the season in order to get a high draft pick
Starting Collins means that the Chiefs' staff, coaches, and players are giving up on the 2001 season in order to get a high draft pick.

Like I said, starting Collins most likely means we'll only win 5-6 games. It certainly does not mean that that is the intention of the team by starting him.

It always ends up being an argument of semantics because so many words get put in so many mouths. If people wouldn't be so pushy about their OPINIONS, it sure as hell would be alot friendlier around here.


Yes, you are right. It's all speculation. Unfortunately, some people like to pass off their speculating as fact...

Pitt Gorilla
03-14-2001, 03:51 PM
"Holmes drew more double-teams than Kearse? I don't think so."
Not thinking so is pure speculation, or something. Why do you not think so? I watched quite a few Titans games this last season and listened to several reports that had mentioned this fact. Kearse was often singled up, allowing him to attack most plays from the back side. The only evidence I can find near the topic is this:

Clayton: Holmes a better fit

Here's why the Giants invested $21 million in Kenny Holmes and not Simeon Rice when they looked to improve their pass rush: They remember how they had to commit two blockers on Holmes in their game with the Titans last October and let tackle Luke Petitgout single block The Freak, Jevon Kearse.