PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Is Darren McFadden a better back for the Chiefs than LJ?


Logical
04-23-2008, 09:40 AM
Poll Forthcoming

oaklandhater
04-23-2008, 09:42 AM
better then LJ yes but not so much better that we should use our 5th pick on him.

Logical
04-23-2008, 09:44 AM
I believe he will block on passing downs thus providing more value. I won't be suprised this time if Carl picks him.

Deberg_1990
04-23-2008, 09:44 AM
Geez, at this point who arent the Chiefs interested in?? Lets throw Aqib Talib, Limas Sweed and Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie into the mix as well!

Logical
04-23-2008, 09:45 AM
better then LJ yes but not so much better that we should use our 5th pick on him.
I agree with this but Gholston is the player likely to be left otherwise and he is not a fit on our defense.

El Jefe
04-23-2008, 09:48 AM
How are you judging this? McFadden has played how many snaps in the NFL? LJ has been to a pro bowl, that would be like a Rams fan asking who would be a better LT for their team Orlando Pace or Jake Long, one is proven, and the other is not.

oaklandhater
04-23-2008, 09:48 AM
I believe he will block on passing downs thus providing more value. I won't be suprised this time if Carl picks him.

if we pick RB with our 5th pick the CP will crash 1 second after the announcement.

nychief
04-23-2008, 09:48 AM
no. LJ has lead the league in rushing and gone to pro bowls. McFadden has not played a down.

We are not drafting Darren McFadden.

vailpass
04-23-2008, 09:51 AM
IMHO unless things drastically improve along the OL it doesn't matter; both McFadden and LJ will have a tough go of it getting hit in the backfield.

The smart thing for King Carl to do would be to pull off another big trade and send LJ to Denver. The Bronco running game would go from sucky to strong as long as home boy agreed to pass block every now and again.

Baby Lee
04-23-2008, 09:53 AM
The best of all possible worlds would be McFadden and Ryan picked ahead of the Chiefs. There would then be at least one selection well worth the 5th pick left.
One can hope.

Still having two to choose from between Long, Long, Dorsey and Gholston would be wonderful.

StcChief
04-23-2008, 09:54 AM
BPA is not mcfadden at #5

siberian khatru
04-23-2008, 09:54 AM
He might be a better QB than Croyle. :p

Bowser
04-23-2008, 09:56 AM
I have nothing to back this hunch up with, but I think Felix Jones may have a better pro career than Darren McFadden.

Chest Rockwell
04-23-2008, 09:56 AM
There's too much $$$ invested in LJ to even discuss him being replaced/share time. This team can't afford to have eleventy-seven-billion dollars invested at RB either.

If circumstances were different (financially) I'd say it wouldn't be a horrible thing to have a young back pushing LJ, but in this case I just can't see it happening.

Bowser
04-23-2008, 09:57 AM
He might be a better QB than Croyle. :p

Like that's a stretch.....



:D

Baby Lee
04-23-2008, 09:59 AM
Cherry on top would be Branden Albert still being around at 17.

Logical
04-23-2008, 10:18 AM
The best of all possible worlds would be McFadden and Ryan picked ahead of the Chiefs. There would then be at least one selection well worth the 5th pick left.
One can hope.

Still having two to choose from between Long, Long, Dorsey and Gholston would be wonderful.Yes that would be sweet, but that is not what I see happening. I see all the likely BPA/needs being taken and our choice being Gholston and McFadden for BPA. Gholston may be a better player in a 3-4 but is not a fit in our 4-3 because we are maxed out at LB either choice is not going to be a fit and we are just left with the discards.

Brock
04-23-2008, 10:22 AM
"Maxed out at LB", LOL, just plain stupid.

El Jefe
04-23-2008, 10:31 AM
Yes that would be sweet, but that is not what I see happening. I see all the likely BPA/needs being taken and our choice being Gholston and McFadden for BPA. Gholston may be a better player in a 3-4 but is not a fit in our 4-3 because we are maxed out at LB either choice is not going to be a fit and we are just left with the discards.

Im sorry but LMAO.

nychief
04-23-2008, 10:34 AM
we do have the most dominating LB corp in football, us and the Bears.

penguinz
04-23-2008, 10:34 AM
Im sorry but LMAO.

His handle is Ill-Logical.

PHOG
04-23-2008, 10:37 AM
Im sorry but LMAO.


Gotta agree. ROFL:LOL:LMAO

milkman
04-23-2008, 10:41 AM
I have nothing to back this hunch up with, but I think Felix Jones may have a better pro career than Darren McFadden.

I'm going on record right now.

Rashard Medenhall will have a better NFL career than McFadden.

milkman
04-23-2008, 10:43 AM
Yes that would be sweet, but that is not what I see happening. I see all the likely BPA/needs being taken and our choice being Gholston and McFadden for BPA. Gholston may be a better player in a 3-4 but is not a fit in our 4-3 because we are maxed out at LB either choice is not going to be a fit and we are just left with the discards.

The doctors have prescribed some strong drugs for you, haven't they?

Chiefnj2
04-23-2008, 10:47 AM
we do have the most dominating LB corp in football, us and the Bears.

At what age did you lose your vision?

nychief
04-23-2008, 10:47 AM
At what age did you lose your vision?

the same age you lost your sense of humor.

Son of Logical
04-23-2008, 10:48 AM
we do have the most dominating LB corp in football, us and the Bears.


No where in his post did I read most dominating LB corp in football. I believe maxed out at Linebacker pertains to being full at the position, and not a position of direct needs a la OT/DT/CB/OG and probably DE if Jared is traded. I know trying to find a mistake and laugh about it is the most important thing on this board, but for once lets think about this in terms what makes football sense.

Brock
04-23-2008, 10:48 AM
At what age did you lose your vision?

:drool:

Brock
04-23-2008, 10:50 AM
No where in his post did I read most dominating LB corp in football. I believe maxed out at Linebacker pertains to being full at the position, and not a position of direct needs a la OT/DT/CB/OG and probably DE if Jared is traded. I know trying to find a mistake and laugh about it is the most important thing on this board, but for once lets think about this in terms what makes football sense.

"What makes sense" is upgrading talent across the board. This team has one, ONE good linebacker.

nychief
04-23-2008, 10:52 AM
No where in his post did I read most dominating LB corp in football. I believe maxed out at Linebacker pertains to being full at the position, and not a position of direct needs a la OT/DT/CB/OG and probably DE if Jared is traded. I know trying to find a mistake and laugh about it is the most important thing on this board, but for once lets think about this in terms what makes football sense.

Well, technically we could field a football team, so we are maxed out all our positions. They are technically filled.

That being said, we want to have the best players on the field. If VG is the best player...draft him.

Son of Logical
04-23-2008, 10:53 AM
I really like LJ as a runner, I like the fact that he can run over you or run past you, but with all that said I wish we had let him go, and we could sign Mcfadden. From what I have seen of him there is something special there. I know he has not played a down in the NFL so I won't argue that he is better then LJ, but from the outside looking in he looks like has the potential to be.

In the end we have LJ, and we can't draft Mcfadden. At this point I am praying for Dorsey, and would be pleased with Ellis.

markk
04-23-2008, 10:59 AM
until the next walter payton comes along i'm not going to be convinced that any running back is worth a top 5 pick

nychief
04-23-2008, 11:03 AM
until the next walter payton comes along i'm not going to be convinced that any running back is worth a top 5 pick

did you watch Adrian Peterson?

Son of Logical
04-23-2008, 11:04 AM
"What makes sense" is upgrading talent across the board. This team has one, ONE good linebacker.

I think that remains to be seen, I think Williams could end up being pretty good. That could also be more hoping then knowing though. I am not convinced about Ghoulston at all, he has not impressed me enough to be a top 5 pick. So tell me this would Ghoulston be a better upgrade for us then Dorsey would be? We have so many areas of need why not take a position that compliments more positions i.e. DT makes LB's look better, and if they get pressure they make the CB's look better. Build both lines first, then pick up skill players, that is the way to build a team. The game is won in the trenches.

Frazod
04-23-2008, 11:05 AM
Dumping a top 5 pick on a RB after we just signed Johnson to a huge contract = STUPID.

Dumping a top 5 pick on a QB when we have no idea how Croyle could perform behind a decent offensive line = STUPID.

Using the obviously already lost 2008 season to evaluate Croyle's performance and Johnson's performance, and then drafting a QB or RB next year if needed = NOT STUPID.

Hope this clears things for everybody.

:rolleyes:

Brock
04-23-2008, 11:07 AM
I think that remains to be seen, I think Williams could end up being pretty good. That could also be more hoping then knowing though. I am not convinced about Ghoulston at all, he has not impressed me enough to be a top 5 pick. So tell me this would Ghoulston be a better upgrade for us then Dorsey would be? We have so many areas of need why not take a position that compliments more positions i.e. DT makes LB's look better, and if they get pressure they make the CB's look better. Build both lines first, then pick up skill players, that is the way to build a team. The game is won in the trenches.

I'm not arguing Gholston vs. Dorsey. I'm arguing that not drafting whatever position because "we're all stocked up" is freaking stupid.

Son of Logical
04-23-2008, 11:29 AM
I'm not arguing Gholston vs. Dorsey. I'm arguing that not drafting whatever position because "we're all stocked up" is freaking stupid.

I am arguing that I think it is freaking stupid to draft at a position where it is not the best upgrade for your team. Especially, when the better upgrade would be a player that has proven himself to be dominant and the other player has not.

Brock
04-23-2008, 11:31 AM
I am arguing that I think it is freaking stupid to draft at a position where it is not the best upgrade for your team. Especially, when the better upgrade would be a player that has proven himself to be dominant and the other player has not.

You need to stop focusing on "best position". There is no best position. On a team this shitty, there are only "best players". If Gholston is the best player they can get where they're drafting, they should draft him.

Chief Wiggum
04-23-2008, 11:37 AM
I voted no. I agree I don't think either back will be worth $.02 if our line isn't better and LJ can't block for shite, but he's a proven commodity and has the body to work the running style Herm likes to run.

Son of Logical
04-23-2008, 11:39 AM
You need to stop focusing on "best position". There is no best position. On a team this shitty, there are only "best players". If Gholston is the best player they can get where they're drafting, they should draft him.

Number 1, I think Dorsey or Ellis is better then Ghoulston. So, I am for drafting the best player available.

Number 2, You draft the best player available that will do the most to upgrade your team. If you have two players of equal ability at different positions you draft the position that will be the best upgrade for you team. If you have mediocre LB, and suck as DT/OT/OG/CB/DE you draft a player in the latter of the group. That makes the best sense for your team.

blueballs
04-23-2008, 11:42 AM
LJ is Ill-Logical's own personal viagra

patteeu
04-23-2008, 11:42 AM
better then LJ yes but not so much better that we should use our 5th pick on him.

Same.

Brock
04-23-2008, 11:43 AM
Number 1, I think Dorsey or Ellis is better then Ghoulston. So, I am for drafting the best player available.

Number 2, You draft the best player available that will do the most to upgrade your team. If you have two players of equal ability at different positions you draft the position that will be the best upgrade for you team. If you have mediocre LB, and suck as DT/OT/OG/CB/DE you draft a player in the latter of the group. That makes the best sense for your team.

I've already explained I'm not arguing Gholston vs. Your Favorite Player. I don't care about that argument. You apparently think this team is serviceable at one or more positions. It really isn't. It just isn't. The DL is not good, the LB corps needs a lot of help, the secondary is a shambles. It literally doesn't matter what position they choose in the draft, they all suck. Stop trying to get this team back to 8-8 as quickly as possible, it isn't going to happen this year, probably not next year either.

patteeu
04-23-2008, 11:48 AM
I agree with this but Gholston is the player likely to be left otherwise and he is not a fit on our defense.

We're guaranteed to have a shot at 2 of the following: C. Long, Dorsey, Ryan, Gholston, Ellis in addition to McFadden (assuming he's still there). Even if the Chiefs decide Gholston doesn't fit our defense, which I'm not so sure is the case, that means we have another premier alternative to McFadden available. Throw in the possibility that a trade might be available and there's no reason to spend #5 on McFadden. IMO, the worst case is that we have Ryan, McFadden, and Gholston available to us which should make the #5 pick interesting to a few teams in the 6-10 range if we can't decide which of the 3 we like better.

Logical
04-23-2008, 03:19 PM
We're guaranteed to have a shot at 2 of the following: C. Long, Dorsey, Ryan, Gholston, Ellis in addition to McFadden (assuming he's still there). Even if the Chiefs decide Gholston doesn't fit our defense, which I'm not so sure is the case, that means we have another premier alternative to McFadden available. Throw in the possibility that a trade might be available and there's no reason to spend #5 on McFadden. IMO, the worst case is that we have Ryan, McFadden, and Gholston available to us which should make the #5 pick interesting to a few teams in the 6-10 range if we can't decide which of the 3 we like better.

I do not consider Ryan a value pick or a BAA at #5 so I eliminate him. The best situation for us is someone above us does a major reach and takes him otherwise I see Dorsey, Long, Long and Ellis going in the top 4 picks leaving us choosing between those three (blyech) so I eliminated Ryan (personal bias) and Gholston (does not fit our scheme) and ended up asking this question.

Brock
04-23-2008, 03:21 PM
Gholston does fit our scheme. He's the prototype in fact.

Lzen
04-23-2008, 03:28 PM
I hope we stay as far away from McFadden as possible. He has to many gang/thug ties. We don't need a Pac Man in Kc.

Logical
04-23-2008, 03:30 PM
No where in his post did I read most dominating LB corp in football. I believe maxed out at Linebacker pertains to being full at the position, and not a position of direct needs a la OT/DT/CB/OG and probably DE if Jared is traded. I know trying to find a mistake and laugh about it is the most important thing on this board, but for once lets think about this in terms what makes football sense.

You read well for comprhension Padiwan. I meant that we have 4 serviceable linebackers, while we have definite needs at all other positions except TE. Given the high value picks that will be gone (or at least likely are to be gone) it is my opinion it comes down to picking one of those two or praying for someone to want to jump up and trade us for our pick.

Logical
04-23-2008, 03:32 PM
Gholston does fit our scheme. He's the prototype in fact.
How many 265 lbs fit as prototype 4-3 lbs? I agree he is the prototypical OLB in a 3-4 as a backer who can also rush the passer on passing downs.

Brock
04-23-2008, 03:33 PM
How many 265 lbs fit as prototype 4-3 lbs?

How much does Jared Allen weigh?

Lzen
04-23-2008, 04:25 PM
How much does Jared Allen weigh?

Somewhere between 265-280 last I knew.

BigMeatballDave
04-23-2008, 04:37 PM
Stupid thread...

milkman
04-23-2008, 04:42 PM
Somewhere between 265-280 last I knew.

Dwight Freeny?

Mark Anderson?

KCChiefsMan
04-23-2008, 04:43 PM
personally I think McFadden will be a bust. I believe he will fumble the ball and get tackled at or behind the line of scrimmage a lot. He also has Pacman Jones potential as far as his personal life goes.

Deberg_1990
04-23-2008, 04:43 PM
If your a good player you can play in any scheme.

A good pass rusher is a good pass rusher.

Count Alex's Wins
04-23-2008, 04:44 PM
Look around at Cover 2 DEs. Most are 260-270.

Logical
04-23-2008, 06:15 PM
Stupid thread...Hard to say it was a stupid thread when it was nothing more than a poll. There was not even a thread post.

BigMeatballDave
04-23-2008, 09:06 PM
Hard to say it was a stupid thread when it was nothing more than a poll. There was not even a thread post.Whatever. Drafting McFadden would be crazy stupid. I still wish Carl would have traded LJ last year.

Logical
04-23-2008, 09:55 PM
Whatever. Drafting McFadden would be crazy stupid. I still wish Carl would have traded LJ last year.Yup, his trade value is shit now.

keg in kc
04-23-2008, 10:28 PM
LJ's contract says he's the best back for us the next couple years, whether we like it or not.

Mr. Laz
04-23-2008, 11:14 PM
with the grade school offense we run we need someone that get the shite knocked out of them on a regular basis ....... so No, Mcfad wouldn't be better for us.

although we don't know if he's a diick like LJ is ROFL

blueballs
04-25-2008, 04:46 PM
4/25
...ESPN is reporting the Oakland Raiders are prepared to take Darren McFadden with their pick.

Mr. Laz
04-25-2008, 07:22 PM
4/25
...ESPN is reporting the Oakland Raiders are prepared to take Darren McFadden with their pick.

good

KcMizzou
04-25-2008, 07:58 PM
good
Yeah, that's great news.