PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Gholston theory


tooge
04-24-2008, 01:03 PM
I have heard the rumors that Herm is really high on Gholston. I think it is a complete smokescreen. Herm has talked about drafting guys for their system for the last 2 years, and Gholston just plain doesn't fit the chiefs 4-3/cover 2 system. I dont think they have any interest at all in him. It is just a play to try to get NE, whose system he fits perfectly, to be a potential trade partner. Will the trade happen? Who knows, it all depends if Long is there or not. If so, certainly they take him, if not, I bet they are trying real hard to trade back 2 spots where they will end up taking Clady or Albert and gain an extra 2nd rounder. I will absolutely shit my shorts if Gholston is a chief.

Sure-Oz
04-24-2008, 01:06 PM
I think we can do much worse than gholston at 5

Woodrow Call
04-24-2008, 01:07 PM
Hopefully you'll need clean shorts.

OnTheWarpath58
04-24-2008, 01:07 PM
I think we can do much worse than gholston at 5

Yep, and their names are Clady, Albert and Otah.

tooge
04-24-2008, 01:15 PM
Yep, and their names are Clady, Albert and Otah.

those guys are reaches but at least they fit the chiefs system. I would rather they get Ellis, clady, or Albert or trade back. I have just read so many reports on Gholston that say that he is a one trick pony and a workout warrior. If the chiefs ran a 3-4 I would be fine with him, but Hali isn't that big, and with Gholston on the other side, you end up with two run liabilities. If the Cheifs do select Gholston, I hope I am totally wrong, but it doesn't get me excited at all.

OnTheWarpath58
04-24-2008, 01:20 PM
those guys are reaches but at least they fit the chiefs system. I would rather they get Ellis, clady, or Albert or trade back. I have just read so many reports on Gholston that say that he is a one trick pony and a workout warrior. If the chiefs ran a 3-4 I would be fine with him, but Hali isn't that big, and with Gholston on the other side, you end up with two run liabilities. If the Chiefs do select Gholston, I hope I am totally wrong, but it doesn't get me excited at all.


Clady is better suited for a zone blocking scheme, not the power downhill blocking scheme we run.

And regarding Gholston, he's the same size as Jared Allen.

Allen played at 265 last year (listed at 270) and Gholston's combine weight is 266.

Brock
04-24-2008, 01:24 PM
If Gholston doesn't fit the system, then neither does Jared Allen. Good thing we got rid of him.

StcChief
04-24-2008, 01:37 PM
Gholston would be fine....I don't think HERM is blowing smoke here. like we need more draft picks that Carl will have trouble arm twisting to sign by TC

tomahawk kid
04-24-2008, 01:38 PM
Clady is better suited for a zone blocking scheme, not the power downhill blocking scheme we run.

And regarding Gholston, he's the same size as Jared Allen.

Allen played at 265 last year (listed at 270) and Gholston's combine weight is 266.

I thought Gailey's system used a form of zone blocking.

Am I totally wrong here?

penguinz
04-24-2008, 01:42 PM
Gholston fits the Cover 2 scheme perfectly.

Redcross
04-24-2008, 01:45 PM
I also heard that the Chiefs are going to adopt the zone blocking scheme. Clady would be perfect for that.

OnTheWarpath58
04-24-2008, 02:04 PM
I also heard that the Chiefs are going to adopt the zone blocking scheme. Clady would be perfect for that.

A three month old rumor that has never come to fruition.

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-24-2008, 02:06 PM
I have heard the rumors that Herm is really high on Gholston. I think it is a complete smokescreen. Herm has talked about drafting guys for their system for the last 2 years, and Gholston just plain doesn't fit the chiefs 4-3/cover 2 system. I dont think they have any interest at all in him. It is just a play to try to get NE, whose system he fits perfectly, to be a potential trade partner. Will the trade happen? Who knows, it all depends if Long is there or not. If so, certainly they take him, if not, I bet they are trying real hard to trade back 2 spots where they will end up taking Clady or Albert and gain an extra 2nd rounder. I will absolutely shit my shorts if Gholston is a chief.

Like f*cking clockwork.

Anyone else who sees this post over the next two days, and you will ad infinitum, please refer them to this:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4706184&postcount=166

SBK
04-24-2008, 02:11 PM
I think you've heard so much about the Chiefs wanting Ryan, perhaps a few of the other guys as well, is because they want Gholston to fall.

You never make people think you like a guy so they'll trade with you to get him, you do it so they'll trade ahead of you so that who you want will actually be there.

Molitoth
04-24-2008, 02:19 PM
We better take Long if he is there !

El Jefe
04-24-2008, 02:21 PM
Yep, and their names are Clady, Albert and Otah.

Man one heck of a QFT and a side of REP for you good sir.:thumb:

El Jefe
04-24-2008, 02:22 PM
Like f*cking clockwork.

Anyone else who sees this post over the next two days, and you will ad infinitum, please refer them to this:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4706184&postcount=166

Typical draft week crap. Talk about the same thing in 15 different threads.

PhillyChiefFan
04-24-2008, 02:37 PM
If Long is there and we don't take him over Gholston I'll be upset. Gholston, IMO, is smaller than what I would like in a pass rushing DE, which is what we need.

OnTheWarpath58
04-24-2008, 02:38 PM
If Long is there and we don't take him over Gholston I'll be upset. Gholston, IMO, is smaller than what I would like in a pass rushing DE, which is what we need.

So you didn't like Jared Allen?

tooge
04-24-2008, 03:07 PM
I guess I am not saying that I wouldn't want him on the team. I just dont want him with the 5th pick. And, I have read too many places (not just one internet report loser) that they are going to a zone scheme on O. Clady fits fine there.

Brock
04-24-2008, 03:08 PM
If Long is there and we don't take him over Gholston I'll be upset. Gholston, IMO, is smaller than what I would like in a pass rushing DE, which is what we need.

:banghead:

Sure-Oz
04-24-2008, 03:30 PM
If Long is there and we don't take him over Gholston I'll be upset. Gholston, IMO, is smaller than what I would like in a pass rushing DE, which is what we need.

He is the same size as ALLEN, hello???

Ultra Peanut
04-24-2008, 03:37 PM
I'm just going to share this, the best scouting report ever, to explain why we must draft Gholston:

2. Vernon Gholston, Ohio State

6-2, 263; Round 1

Overview: Junior entry with immense physical talent but questionable football character. Started at defensive end the last two years, and last season had 14 sacks and 15 tackles for a loss. Has an impressive physique and moved into a possible top-five pick with a superb workout at the scouting combine, where he ran the 40 in 4.58 seconds, had an amazing 42-inch vertical jump and did a defensive-tackle like 37 reps on the 225-pound bench press. Has the rarest of explosive talent, but some scouts are greatly concerned by his spotty effort on game videotape.

The talk: "He's a dog. He's embarrassing. He embarrasses himself and his coach," said one longtime scout. "But about three times a game, he goes like no one's gone in about five years. He's got supernatural stuff, he really does. I don't see anybody in the last five years that has what he has. I'd have to really think back to (Dwight) Freeney or (Julius) Peppers to have the stuff he has. But he's absolutely a dog, and anybody that tells you different should be fired immediately from their job. If we were up there, I'd be scared to death and, at the same time, I'd feel my adrenalin rushing thinking maybe we could turn him on. I confronted him. I said, 'You're about the laziest SOB I've ever seen.' He didn't know how to explain it. He couldn't come back on it. He didn't get mad. I don't know. He was taken by surprise, I guess. Are you going to spend a top 10 pick on a guy? I don't know. But he's got real, real stuff. On a scale of 1 to 10, he's 10. He had 14 sacks. He should have had 30. He'd have set the world's record. They shouldn't be able to block him. He just doesn't care." … "I'd have to agree that there's periods during the game when the guy will disappear," the college scouting director for an AFC team said. "But even saying that, the guy had 14 sacks, and pass rushers are at a premium and so hard to find. If you can push his buttons just a little bit, maybe that 5 or 10 percent of the game, he plays a little harder. I think you've got something. Even saying that, I think he'll come in the league and be a double-digit sack guy, he's got that kind of ability." … "I think the guy's learning how to play a little bit," a third scout countered. "You have to know what they're being taught and what the defense is asking them to do. Because you get a lot of guys that grade tape, and if a guy's not chasing everything like crazy from the get go, they're dogging it. Well, a lot of times they're told to hang back in certain games against certain people because of tendencies. So you've got to be careful about some of that stuff."

Count Alex's Losses
04-24-2008, 03:38 PM
He is the same size as ALLEN, hello???

He's actually shorter, which means he's a bit stouter.

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-24-2008, 03:46 PM
He's actually shorter, which means he's a bit stouter.

And he whipped God's ass in a street fight outside of Babylon in 954 B.C.

Chiefmanwillcatch
04-24-2008, 03:48 PM
GHOLSTON isn't strong against the run. He could only play D-end like DT. Only 3rd down.

I am sure Herm didn't care for JA.

Chris LONG!

BigRock
04-24-2008, 04:01 PM
He's actually shorter, which means he's a bit stouter.
There's a 3-4 inch difference in their heights. I don't say that to support the idea that Gholston can't play our scheme, but people are acting like Gholston and Allen are twins or something.

Chiefmanwillcatch
04-24-2008, 04:06 PM
His tape says he can't shed and has difficulties with the run.

IF HERM says he can play end then it's ok.

Count Alex's Losses
04-24-2008, 04:11 PM
His tape says he can't shed and has difficulties with the run.


To be honest that describes a lot of Cover 2 defensive ends.

ChiefGator
04-24-2008, 04:21 PM
According to Whitlock, he is too muscular. I want some flabby sumbitch.

BigDaddyChief
04-26-2008, 02:33 AM
Alot of you guys seem to know quite a bit about Gholston and these other prospects, but the fact of the matter is non of us are pro scouts and even those guys don't know how a player will be in the next level. I do however know about the Chiefs and I have a few thoughts on some of the points I read in this thread: Gholston may be a physical freak, but do we really want someone who takes more plays off than he doesn't! Chris Long sounds like a safe bet (if he's there), with a motor that doesn't quit first play to last. Hmmm, sounds like another great player I love. Speaking of Jared, people in here saying he's the same size as Gholston. Uhhh...no. Jared's 6'6", and he was 280, I don't care what they listed him at. Lastly, does anyone else in here think we should take Matt Ryan if possible? Before you jump down my throat let me explain why we should:
A) He's the right value at #5
B) He's physically gifted and a prototypical size
C) We haven't had a good franchise QB since Len Dawson (Joe doesn't count, Trent was pretty good but benefited from system)
D) We haven't had the opportunity to draft a potentially great QB in a long time
E) He has a great head on his shoulders. I've been following his blog and interviews. Great attitude, smart kid. A good mind is the most important attribute for a QB
F) QB is the most important position in professional sports! Jury's still out on Brodie

Tribal Warfare
04-26-2008, 02:44 AM
mind is the most important attribute for a QB
F) QB is the most important position in professional sports! Jury's still out on Brodie


It will be on Matt Ryan too

Mecca
04-26-2008, 02:58 AM
Look with Gholston, people need to understand he played something called a "Leo" position alot, which is a mix LB/DE which means he's suppose to hang back and play his responsiblity.

People just don't look at this crap logically/

Ultra Peanut
04-26-2008, 03:29 AM
Lastly, does anyone else in here think we should take Matt Ryan if possible? Before you jump down my throat let me explain why we should:
A) He's the right value at #5I abso-****ing-lutely disagree. He's far too iffy to be worth going after when there are actual elite-level talents available, and spending #5 QB money on him is just crazy. He may be the best of a weak crop (I still think Brohm is more likely to be a solid NFL QB than Ryan), but that doesn't mean you should just cross your fingers and wish for the best.

C) We haven't had a good franchise QB since Len Dawson (Joe doesn't count, Trent was pretty good but benefited from system)
D) We haven't had the opportunity to draft a potentially great QB in a long timeWe don't this year, either. Again, if you want to take a QB, that's fine, but do it at a reasonable spot. Take Brohm at 17 or later, but don't turn down the very rare chance to get someone like Gholston or Dorsey just because you're jonesing for a QB and there's a warm body who plays the position around.

E) He has a great head on his shoulders. I've been following his blog and interviews. Great attitude, smart kid. A good mind is the most important attribute for a QBJoey Harrington was beyond clutch in college and is a smart, charming, laid-back guy. That didn't make him the stud I wanted him to be.

Mojo Rising
04-26-2008, 03:44 AM
Harrington was a system QB. Ryan has the skills to be a Pro. Ryan should be the pick. CP was never able to develop a QB. Maybe his lasting legacy will be to get 1 on his way out.

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-26-2008, 06:50 AM
Alot of you guys seem to know quite a bit about Gholston and these other prospects, but the fact of the matter is non of us are pro scouts and even those guys don't know how a player will be in the next level. I do however know about the Chiefs and I have a few thoughts on some of the points I read in this thread: Gholston may be a physical freak, but do we really want someone who takes more plays off than he doesn't! Chris Long sounds like a safe bet (if he's there), with a motor that doesn't quit first play to last. Hmmm, sounds like another great player I love. Speaking of Jared, people in here saying he's the same size as Gholston. Uhhh...no. Jared's 6'6", and he was 280, I don't care what they listed him at. Lastly, does anyone else in here think we should take Matt Ryan if possible? Before you jump down my throat let me explain why we should:
A) He's the right value at #5
B) He's physically gifted and a prototypical size
C) We haven't had a good franchise QB since Len Dawson (Joe doesn't count, Trent was pretty good but benefited from system)
D) We haven't had the opportunity to draft a potentially great QB in a long time
E) He has a great head on his shoulders. I've been following his blog and interviews. Great attitude, smart kid. A good mind is the most important attribute for a QB
F) QB is the most important position in professional sports! Jury's still out on Brodie

1) STFU n00b
2) Allen played at 265 last year
3) Gholston takes plays off but apparently has a "relentless" "outstanding" and "superb" motor. Ok...
4) Die, n00b, die.