PDA

View Full Version : Jake Scott making the rounds...


melbar
03-06-2008, 11:25 AM
Visiting the Titans and the Broncos!
per KFFL
Wasnt this guy supposed to be a target? Best OL left out there and we're not even giving him a sniff? :shake:

DaKCMan AP
03-06-2008, 11:26 AM
He probably smells bad.

Iowanian
03-06-2008, 11:28 AM
You know.

I don't mind if the Chiefs aren't throwing money wildly into the FA market, but by their own standards, guys like Scott, and Bell and Johnston have all fit that definition, and to not even have them in for a look pisses me off a little bit.

"Get over it".

blueballs
03-06-2008, 11:39 AM
Carl's in France
or Jamaica
Philly ect

Woodrow Call
03-06-2008, 11:49 AM
Got to wonder why the Chiefs have no interest. Maybe Herm is looking for bigger, mauler type offensive lineman. :shrug:

CupidStunt
03-06-2008, 11:54 AM
He's just a name. Anyone study the guy? No team has even sniffed him until now. He probably just isn't very good. The Colts took care of Ryan Lilja but have NO interest in Scott whatsoever. Tells you all you need to know.

Our RG (whoever that is) sucks? No shit. But better than bad does not equal good. Draft a guard on the second day, play him, develop the f**ker and lock HIM up in four years time.

Zouk
03-06-2008, 11:58 AM
I just think NFL teams that actually look at tape of every play made an evaluation that these players are not as good as we fans think they are. The most damning aspect of this is that as their prices go down their orginial teams are still not biting. That tells you something.

BigChiefFan
03-06-2008, 12:01 PM
At this point, I think the team is keying in on the draft. We could still get some quality
O-Lineman iin the draft, who will be younger and fit into a long-term plan for us better-that is, if our coaches can develop them.

Brock
03-06-2008, 12:01 PM
He's just a name. Anyone study the guy? No team has even sniffed him until now. He probably just isn't very good. The Colts took care of Ryan Lilja but have NO interest in Scott whatsoever. Tells you all you need to know.

Our RG (whoever that is) sucks? No shit. But better than bad does not equal good. Draft a guard on the second day, play him, develop the f**ker and lock HIM up in four years time.

Yeah, this happens every year here. "I've never really heard of the guy but he's supposed to be good why aren't we signing him blah blah blah". Tiresome.

blueballs
03-06-2008, 12:14 PM
Teams are better at keeping the good players
the ones in FA appear to be less and less quality from past years

CoMoChief
03-06-2008, 12:18 PM
Carl's in France
or Jamaica
Philly ect

Then Denny Thum must be with him.

blueballs
03-06-2008, 12:18 PM
Some one with time on their hands needs to check FAs the last couple years
Porter -$$$ bust / Moss - trade / Kiwi - meh

Pitt Gorilla
03-06-2008, 12:23 PM
Yeah, this happens every year here. "I've never really heard of the guy but he's supposed to be good why aren't we signing him blah blah blah". Tiresome.Very true. I doubt most people have dissected his film to see what kind of player he is. He's not a mauler for sure.

Iowanian
03-06-2008, 12:32 PM
If the Chiefs are truely going to a zone blocking scheme, they don't really need a "mauler" at OG.

Micjones
03-06-2008, 12:32 PM
Jake Scott's an above-average pass blocker and fairly solid in run blocking.
He'd be one hell of an upgrade at Guard.

Pitt Gorilla
03-06-2008, 12:38 PM
If the Chiefs are truely going to a zone blocking scheme, they don't really need a "mauler" at OG.Exactly. I was simply pointing out the little bit that I actually know about Scott. Other than that, I have no idea what kind of player he is.

CupidStunt
03-06-2008, 12:50 PM
He'd be one hell of an upgrade at Guard.

I know you're one of the types that just don't see this, but better than bad does NOT equal good.

I'm sure Scott is mildly better than the scrub backup Indy has lined up to play guard, but are they rushing to sign Scott up? No. Look at the Giants and all the apparent holes they're creating by letting players get paid elsewhere. Do you see them rushing out to sign another mediocre LB?

No. DRAFT a player, PLAY him, DEVELOP his skills and pay him when he's good enough. Jesus f**king Christ.

Woodrow Call
03-06-2008, 12:57 PM
Exactly. I was simply pointing out the little bit that I actually know about Scott. Other than that, I have no idea what kind of player he is.

I'm in the same boat. To me he is just a name of a FA list from a good team and that is why I'm not getting worked up about this.

Trust me when I watch the Colts I'm not breaking down Scott or any other guy on the OL. I'm too busy watching Peyton work his magic.

RustShack
03-06-2008, 01:09 PM
It sounds like the Chiefs want big maulers, meaning we wont be using zone blocking. I think the whole zone blocking thing was going to be if we got that one coach from Denver that went to Housten.

OnTheWarpath58
03-06-2008, 03:06 PM
In all honesty, I think Indy's linemen benefit greatly from Manning and the WR's.

Wonder why Peyton doesn't get sacked often?

The ball is usually on its way to its intended receiver within 2.5 seconds.

Guys get open, and Peyton gets them the ball.

Quickly.

Micjones
03-06-2008, 04:06 PM
I know you're one of the types that just don't see this, but better than bad does NOT equal good.

Please don't put words in my mouth.
I believe Scott is a quality Guard. Not just some cheap substitution for the pedestrian Guards that currently occupy the roster.

I'm sure Scott is mildly better than the scrub backup Indy has lined up to play guard, but are they rushing to sign Scott up? No. Look at the Giants and all the apparent holes they're creating by letting players get paid elsewhere. Do you see them rushing out to sign another mediocre LB?

No. DRAFT a player, PLAY him, DEVELOP his skills and pay him when he's good enough. Jesus f**king Christ.

Because by drafting a player you're guaranteed quality?
And we're the poster child organization for developing Offensive Linemen talent. Problem solved.

sheesh...

Brock
03-06-2008, 04:07 PM
I believe Scott is a quality Guard.

Why do you think that?

melbar
03-06-2008, 04:21 PM
I admit to not having seen any tape on the guy, but this is the type of guy we were supposed to be going for. 2nd tier guys who are young and have room to grow. His name was thrown out there as one of those guys. Maybe they saw the tape and didnt like what they saw, but there not bringing ANYBODY! We dont have enough draft picks to fill all of our needs. Why not bring in guys, who like draft picks, are young and havent had a chance to prove themselves? I thought that was the plan? Young-unproven-cheap. How many 6th and 7th rounders are gonna be quality starters? Unfortunately for us the Chiefs late rounders have tended to be better than the early guys.

Micjones
03-06-2008, 04:25 PM
Why do you think that?

He's a player that takes good angles, pass protects very well, and is slightly better than adequate as a run blocker. He's strong at the point of attack, moves well laterally...

Pitt Gorilla
03-06-2008, 04:39 PM
I admit to not having seen any tape on the guy, but this is the type of guy we were supposed to be going for. 2nd tier guys who are young and have room to grow. His name was thrown out there as one of those guys. Maybe they saw the tape and didnt like what they saw, but there not bringing ANYBODY! We dont have enough draft picks to fill all of our needs. Why not bring in guys, who like draft picks, are young and havent had a chance to prove themselves? I thought that was the plan? Young-unproven-cheap. How many 6th and 7th rounders are gonna be quality starters? Unfortunately for us the Chiefs late rounders have tended to be better than the early guys.First of all, we have no idea what kind of contract it would take to get him, if he actually was a legit target (so we don't know that he would be cheap). Also, how does he compare to the young talent already on our roster? How much better is he than Taylor?

Brock
03-06-2008, 04:40 PM
First of all, we have no idea what kind of contract it would take to get him, if he actually was a legit target (so we don't know that he would be cheap). Also, how does he compare to the young talent already on our roster? How much better is he than Taylor?

Well, I hear He's a player that takes good angles, pass protects very well, and is slightly better than adequate as a run blocker. He's strong at the point of attack, moves well laterally...

melbar
03-06-2008, 04:43 PM
I admit I am assuming that since the initial frenzy of FA is over he's not gonna break the bank. This is the kinda guy who needs a few years starting to earn a big payday.---unless he signs with the Faiders that is.:)

CupidStunt
03-06-2008, 04:44 PM
Please don't put words in my mouth.
I believe Scott is a quality Guard. Not just some cheap substitution for the pedestrian Guards that currently occupy the roster.


He'd be gone by now if he was a quality guard.


Because by drafting a player you're guaranteed quality?
And we're the poster child organization for developing Offensive Linemen talent. Problem solved.

Times are changing. That's not to say the Chiefs will hit on every draft pick they make, but we as fans should hope that they have the type of confidence to rely mostly on the draft and the eye for talent to get the right guys.

I'd rather take my chances with them draftin a guard in RD3-5 than sign Scott to any kind of decent deal, unless there's a legitimate reason for why no team has even considered the guy to this point.

Micjones
03-06-2008, 06:48 PM
He'd be gone by now if he was a quality guard.

He's being courted now...
And we're less than 2 weeks into Free Agency.

He won't be available much longer...
If he were signed in May I might agree.

Times are changing. That's not to say the Chiefs will hit on every draft pick they make, but we as fans should hope that they have the type of confidence to rely mostly on the draft and the eye for talent to get the right guys.

I'd rather take my chances with them draftin a guard in RD3-5 than sign Scott to any kind of decent deal, unless there's a legitimate reason for why no team has even considered the guy to this point.

Indeed, but I don't think we should depend solely on the Draft.
Mostly? Sure... Solely? No...