PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Say we do get the #1 pick...


pr_capone
08-26-2008, 07:31 PM
... and we do pick Stafford due to Croyle having to be carted off the field in game 7 with a torn vagina.

1 - Do you install him as your #1 QB right off the bat and let him learn as he goes (ala Vince Young & Russell)?

or

2 - Do you re sign Huard for one more year and have him fight it out for the starting job with Thigpen to give Stafford some time to learn the system properly?

or

3 - Do you sign some FA vet for one year (letting Huard go in the process) and have him fight it out for the starting job with Thigpen to give Stafford some time to learn the system properly?

or

4 - Sign a FA QB or take a flyer on a late rounder and have all 3 (Stafford, Thigpen, & un-named late round QB / FA) all go into camp fighting for the starting gig?

Mecca
08-26-2008, 07:34 PM
It depends, not all QB's progress the same, you have to have a feel for his handle of the offense and the team and if he's ready or not.

Rain Man
08-26-2008, 07:36 PM
I'd put my free agent money on the offensive line and let the quarterback play.

DeezNutz
08-26-2008, 07:37 PM
I close my eyes, drop to the fetal, and ****ing cry.

JASONSAUTO
08-26-2008, 07:38 PM
I close my eyes, drop to the fetal, and ****ing cry.

so you're saying that you'd be huard????

pr_capone
08-26-2008, 07:41 PM
It depends, not all QB's progress the same, you have to have a feel for his handle of the offense and the team and if he's ready or not.

While true... I am not sure we have that luxury.

I really believe we are in a similar position to the one the Raiders were in when they drafted Russell. With Croyle gone, we simply would not have a legitimate QB in our stable... hell, with Croyle here we hardly do anyhow.

*IF* we are going to develop ANY of our players, we need someone who can chuck the ball around. Shitty QB means more time on the field for the D tiring them out and making them more prone to injury.

Not saying I like Stafford... or even dislike him. To be honest, I don't like that we are in a position where we may very well *HAVE* to take the best available QB in the draft.

If it comes to that though... I would much prefer we simply install him day one and let him figure it out.

Mecca
08-26-2008, 07:48 PM
This is my view even if you take Stafford 1st overall, you bring those other 3 QB's back, you see where Stafford is all through preseason, if you feel he is ready then you let him start but if you feel he's not start the year with Croyle...

It's better to lose a couple games than ruin a guy you took #1 overalls career. When it comes to a QB taken that high and all invested at him you have to progress things at his rate he's far to important to mess up. If that means he has to sit for a year so be it, if he's ready to start from day 1 go with that.

JASONSAUTO
08-26-2008, 07:50 PM
This is my view even if you take Stafford 1st overall, you bring those other 3 QB's back, you see where Stafford is all through preseason, if you feel he is ready then you let him start but if you feel he's not start the year with Croyle...

It's better to lose a couple games than ruin a guy you took #1 overalls career. When it comes to a QB taken that high and all invested at him you have to progress things at his rate he's far to important to mess up. If that means he has to sit for a year so be it, if he's ready to start from day 1 go with that.
you think we should bring back huard also? man it sure seems as though he's lost it. i bet we find out this year. is he under contract for next year?

Mecca
08-26-2008, 07:55 PM
you think we should bring back huard also? man it sure seems as though he's lost it. i bet we find out this year. is he under contract for next year?

Tyler Thigpen is really really awful....you have to prepare yourself for the scenario that Stafford isn't ready and Croyle could get injured.

Guru
08-26-2008, 08:02 PM
Chiefs won't draft a QB with the 1st pick in the draft. Even if they do, he will NOT start at any point during the first year.

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:03 PM
Chiefs won't draft a QB with the 1st pick in the draft. Even if they do, he will NOT start at any point during the first year.

Are we of the belief that the organization is to scared to make that pick?

MahiMike
08-26-2008, 08:05 PM
geesh! season hasn't started yet and we're talking about the dumbest thing a team can do? Drafting a QB is NEVER the way to go.

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:07 PM
geesh! season hasn't started yet and we're talking about the dumbest thing a team can do? Drafting a QB is NEVER the way to go.

Yea man, most important position on the field F that, The Colts should have never taken Manning.

Deberg_1990
08-26-2008, 08:12 PM
Are we of the belief that the organization is to scared to make that pick?

Carl would probably not make the pick since he likely wouldnt be around long enough to reap the benefits.

Its better that we bring in a new GM who is willing to start over from scratch and has a new "5 year plan"

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:13 PM
Carl would probably not make the pick since he likely wouldnt be around long enough to reap the benefits.

Its better that we bring in a new GM who is willing to start over from scratch and has a new "5 year plan"

If this team is bad enough to have the #1 pick there's a good chance everyone is fired, bringing everyone back after that sends a horrible message to fans and makes you a joke around the league...

If you really want everyone gone hope they go 1-15 and there are blackouts because that is the kind of thing that causes everyone to get fired.

OnTheWarpath58
08-26-2008, 08:14 PM
#1, sink or swim. The more experience he gets, the better.

I am sick and ****ing tired of people saying "Uh, but you'll RUIN him..."

Bullshit.

And the Houston Texans can kiss my ass for making this an issue. They took a guy #1 who had no business being that high of a pick, who had a 10-cent brain, and people claim that the Texans ruined him.

Bullshit.

You don't take a guy #1 (or even Top 5) at QB unless your convinced he has the mental toughness that's necessary to play the position. Manning and Aikman got POUNDED their rookie years, and it made them better QB's in the long run.

That high of a pick should be starting IMMEDIATELY, regardless of position.

Get his ass out there.

Deberg_1990
08-26-2008, 08:14 PM
If this team is bad enough to have the #1 pick there's a good chance everyone is fired, bringing everyone back after that sends a horrible message to fans and makes you a joke around the league...

If you really want everyone gone hope they go 1-15 and there are blackouts because that is the kind of thing that causes everyone to get fired.


It sounds bad of me to say, but if thats what it takes to get this regime sacked.......

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:16 PM
#1, sink or swim. The more experience he gets, the better.

I am sick and ****ing tired of people saying "Uh, but you'll RUIN him..."

Bullshit.

And the Houston Texans can kiss my ass for making this an issue. They took a guy #1 who had no business being that high of a pick, who had a 10-cent brain, and people claim that the Texans ruined him.

Bullshit.

You don't take a guy #1 (or even Top 5) at QB unless your convinced he has the mental toughness that's necessary to play the position. Manning and Aikman got POUNDED their rookie years, and it made them better QB's in the long run.

That high of a pick should be starting IMMEDIATELY, regardless of position.

Get his ass out there.

Both ways can work Steve McNair wasn't rushed and Carson Palmer sat a year..I think it has to do with the the time it takes the QB to progress they all don't move at the same speed. Obviously Manning was ready look at the guy and what he's capable of.

Stafford would likely be ready sooner than later he started in the SEC as a true freshman but there's no need to completely rush a guy on a bad team.

KurtCobain
08-26-2008, 08:17 PM
If we get the first pick, I want Michael Johnson.

ChiefsCountry
08-26-2008, 08:17 PM
I really dont think Stafford will be the #1 pick or even the first quarterback taken IMO.

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:18 PM
Can he throw passes?

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:18 PM
I really dont think Stafford will be the #1 pick or even the first quarterback taken IMO.

Well this year will have alot to do with it but he's top 10 at the very worst. He's going to get some better grades than Harper at certain things his arm is better and he's more mobile.

Deberg_1990
08-26-2008, 08:19 PM
Both ways can work Steve McNair wasn't rushed and Carson Palmer sat a year..I think it has to do with the the time it takes the QB to progress they all don't move at the same speed. Obviously Manning was ready look at the guy and what he's capable of.

Stafford would likely be ready sooner than later he started in the SEC as a true freshman but there's no need to completely rush a guy on a bad team.

Matt Ryan appears to be another fast learner.

pr_capone
08-26-2008, 08:19 PM
If we get the first pick, I want Michael Johnson.

Thanks for playing

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:20 PM
Matt Ryan appears to be another fast learner.

Not surprised by that, it was his biggest plus out of college. He played in a pro style system with a head coach that was an NFL OC, Ryan is a student of the game, he doesn't have great physical talent but he has the mind for the position.

He's 'ready" for it Atlanta made him show that, that's the same thing every team should do when drafting a QB.

JASONSAUTO
08-26-2008, 08:21 PM
Tyler Thigpen is really really awful....you have to prepare yourself for the scenario that Stafford isn't ready and Croyle could get injured.

AGreed on thigpin but huard looks equally bad right now so should we look for a stop gap vet? what about one of the browns qb's

Deberg_1990
08-26-2008, 08:22 PM
Not surprised by that, it was his biggest plus out of college. He played in a pro style system with a head coach that was an NFL OC, Ryan is a student of the game, he doesn't have great physical talent but he has the mind for the position.

He's 'ready" for it Atlanta made him show that, that's the same thing every team should do when drafting a QB.

and yet, there were alot of wizards on this board that were adamantly opposed to us drafting him because we already had the great savior Croyle. hahahahah

KurtCobain
08-26-2008, 08:22 PM
I think Stafford is highly overrated. No QB next year will be worth taking in rounds 1 or 2. And watching the season unfold will not change my opinion.

OnTheWarpath58
08-26-2008, 08:22 PM
Both ways can work Steve McNair wasn't rushed and Carson Palmer sat a year..I think it has to do with the the time it takes the QB to progress they all don't move at the same speed. Obviously Manning was ready look at the guy and what he's capable of.

Stafford would likely be ready sooner than later he started in the SEC as a true freshman but there's no need to completely rush a guy on a bad team.

You're going back 13 years? That's relevant.

And the Bengals HAD a good QB already in Kitna. They had no reason to put Palmer in right away.

If the Chiefs feel the need to take a QB with a Top 5 pick, then they won't be in the position to have an alternative.

Much like Atlanta this year.

JASONSAUTO
08-26-2008, 08:23 PM
I really dont think Stafford will be the #1 pick or even the first quarterback taken IMO.

who would you pick as #1 qb?

ChiefsCountry
08-26-2008, 08:24 PM
Well this year will have alot to do with it but he's top 10 at the very worst. He's going to get some better grades than Harper at certain things his arm is better and he's more mobile.

I still think Harper will pass him.

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:25 PM
If Kitna was good why did they take Palmer #1 overall? How's that make any sense with what you said "if the Chiefs feel they have to pick a QB in the top 5" isn't that arguing against yourself in a way?

Also for the guy who said no QB's in the 1st 2 rounds, that's nuts there will be atleast 4 QB's with 1st round grades, could be more considering who comes out. You really need to go study the college game if you think that about the QB's.

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:26 PM
I still think Harper will pass him.

I know you like Harper and all and he has the size and talent but he's also playing on a team that has a better RB tandem than half of the NFL, I think that may be a question with him, I doubt any team prepares for him they prepare for those RB's.

KurtCobain
08-26-2008, 08:29 PM
Harper won't make an elite QB, but a good starter for the right squad.

ChiefsCountry
08-26-2008, 08:31 PM
I know you like Harper and all and he has the size and talent but he's also playing on a team that has a better RB tandem than half of the NFL, I think that may be a question with him, I doubt any team prepares for him they prepare for those RB's.

Stafford has probally the second best backfield behind him as well. Also it might depend what Florida decides to do with Tebow, if they put him in the pocket and let him throw instead of run he might jump up big time.

OnTheWarpath58
08-26-2008, 08:31 PM
If Kitna was good why did they take Palmer #1 overall? How's that make any sense with what you said "if the Chiefs feel they have to pick a QB in the top 5" isn't that arguing against yourself in a way?

Also for the guy who said no QB's in the 1st 2 rounds, that's nuts there will be atleast 4 QB's with 1st round grades, could be more considering who comes out. You really need to go study the college game if you think that about the QB's.


Kitna was more than serviceable, and was also in his early-mid thirties, IIRC. (33, maybe?)

Why would you NOT take Palmer there?

And I think you confused what I'm trying to say.


The Bengals situation back in 2003 and our situation in 2009 are COMPLETELY different. They took Palmer knowing that Kitna was still going to play another year or two.

Under this scenario, there wouldn't be anyone WORTH playing ahead of Stafford. IN OUR CASE, the whole reason you're drafting him is because Croyle has failed.

Again, don't compare the two situations, they are nothing alike.

Mecca
08-26-2008, 08:34 PM
Ok that's fine but I don't think it's wise to put a guy out there before he's ready, if he's Matt Ryan and shows he's ready then he starts right away, if he doesn't maybe it comes in week 4 or 6 or whatever. I just wouldn't throw him out there before he felt comfortable and looked ready.

JASONSAUTO
08-26-2008, 08:43 PM
i feel that it depends on the mental makeup of the player, some are screwed if they take a beating they get their spirit broke so to say, some rise above and become far better players from it. the problem is you dont know until it happens. its not something you can grade out at the combine

Toad
08-26-2008, 09:54 PM
geesh! season hasn't started yet and we're talking about the dumbest thing a team can do? Drafting a QB is NEVER the way to go.

To quote cousin Eddie, "You serious about that Clark?!" If Croyle is not the answer, we have got to hit on a QB next year. FA QB's rarely ever pay off.

Mecca
08-26-2008, 09:58 PM
and yet, there were alot of wizards on this board that were adamantly opposed to us drafting him because we already had the great savior Croyle. hahahahah

Don't ask me why cause I've yet to figure that out.

Mr. Flopnuts
08-27-2008, 01:30 AM
As long as Chan Gailey is around, I say throw him in there and let him learn to dance. Chan will work the game around him, much like I expect him to do with BC.

StcChief
08-27-2008, 10:20 AM
To quote cousin Eddie, "You serious about that Clark?!" If Croyle is not the answer, we have got to hit on a QB next year. FA QB's rarely ever pay off.
Yep... Lenny, Trent, Montana were all bums for the Chiefs:(

Coogs
08-27-2008, 10:34 AM
Yep... Lenny, Trent, Montana were all bums for the Chiefs:(

Trent and Montana really were not free agents. We spent a #1 draft pick for each of them.

The reason I brought this up is because there may be some options out there next season like this one. Anderson from Cleveland possibly. I'm not sure if this option interests me very much at this time, but who knows by next April.

Otis99
08-27-2008, 03:28 PM
...carted off the field in game 7 with a torn vagina.

How long would such an injury take to heal? Perhaps we should wait it out and have that hymen back in top form by the start of the 09 season.

CupidStunt
08-27-2008, 03:47 PM
Russell wasn't thrown in by any definition. He was brought along pretty slowly, really, getting a little game action for a few weeks before getting a good amount to finish out the season and head into year two. I really like how Oakland handled him, and I'd probably do the same. Increase the workload as the QB develops, along with the OL, etc.

Redrum_69
08-27-2008, 04:09 PM
K I C K E R

penguinz
08-27-2008, 04:13 PM
2 - Do you re sign Huard for one more year and have him fight it out for the starting job with Thigpen to give Stafford some time to learn the system properly?
Huard is under contract through the end of the 2009 season.

Mr. Laz
08-27-2008, 05:25 PM
first of all, we don't know what is going to happen this year so any kind of decision right now is absurd.

2nd .... it's more about how good the player is as it is whether Croyle is carted off the field with a torn vagina :rolleyes: