PDA

View Full Version : Why I do not favor going QB with the #3 overall.


Direckshun
04-07-2009, 03:45 PM
It's not that I don't love Sanchez and Stafford. I do -- especially Sanchez.

My major issue, aside from the fact that it would mean the Chiefs picking up QB with their 1st and 2nd round picks from this Draft, is Cassell.

I don't know if Cassell is the stud that he was in New England, but he probably isn't. He's a game manager, and he's a pretty tough one at that. I don't think he can win games by the pure force of his will, but he won't be the reason the Chiefs lose many games, either. He's a conservative choice.

And, well, I believe he'll succeed conservatively. I don't think he'll ever put up Pro Bowl numbers for us, but I do think he'll be a safe option at QB who can be ensured to be careful with the ball and not wilt under pressure.

I don't want a rookie stud behind him because the rookie will waste away there. Cassell may, in all likelihood, remain perfectly healthy. It will be unlikely that we ever have to play our rookie for an extended amount of time as Cassell sort-of flourishes in that Cassell-like way.

Can you see ANY NFL team abandon a sure, safe option at QB for an unknown? I can't. Not even Pioli.

Which in all likelihood means we will allow this rookie to rot on the bench, or we'll trade him away -- and if we trade him away, what are the odds we end up with a Top 5 pick? Next to zero. Lost value, for nothing.

If you see Cassell crashing and burning, than Sanchez makes sense. But if you're like me, and you see him simply play well but never spectacularly, I doubt we'll ever make the most out of our #3 overall QB.

keg in kc
04-07-2009, 03:50 PM
Why I do favor it:

If Cassell meets or exceeds expectations, the Chiefs can trade him for a king's ransom in 2 years when the rookie is ready.


I don't think there's any chance it happens.

OnTheWarpath58
04-07-2009, 03:51 PM
Why I do favor it:

Potential Franchise QB >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> game manager.

Direckshun
04-07-2009, 03:52 PM
Why I do favor it:

If Cassell meets or exceeds expectations, the Chiefs can trade him for a king's ransom in 2 years when the rookie is ready.

You honestly think the Chiefs will get better than the 34th overall pick for him in two years?

Mecca
04-07-2009, 03:53 PM
You honestly think the Chiefs will get better than the 34th overall pick for him in two years?

Possibly, look how many QB starved teams there are and the spread fixation that is taking over college.

OnTheWarpath58
04-07-2009, 03:55 PM
You honestly think the Chiefs will get better than the 34th overall pick for him in two years?

They could get better than that THIS year.

As long as he doesn't sustain a serious injury, or has a Derek Anderson-like collapse, there's no doubt in my mind that some team(s) would be willing to give up a mid/late first for him.

htismaqe
04-07-2009, 03:58 PM
Can you see ANY NFL team abandon a sure, safe option at QB for an unknown? I can't. Not even Pioli.

Isn't that EXACTLY what the Patriots did with Bledsoe and Brady?

Mecca
04-07-2009, 03:59 PM
Isn't that EXACTLY what the Patriots did with Bledsoe and Brady?

Chargers did it.

keg in kc
04-07-2009, 04:01 PM
You honestly think the Chiefs will get better than the 34th overall pick for him in two years?Will? I don't know. Can? Absolutely. I mean, seriously, if he was worth the 34th pick after 15 games as a starter, imagine what he'd bring with two more successful years under his belt. He has any degree of success and he'll bring multiple picks including a first rounder. We're talking about a 29-year old quarterback, barely into his prime...

Again, I have no idea how he'll play, and I'm not making any kind of prediction; this is just a possible scenario.

Chiefnj2
04-07-2009, 04:03 PM
Isn't that EXACTLY what the Patriots did with Bledsoe and Brady?

Not at all.

htismaqe
04-07-2009, 04:04 PM
Not at all.

Well, it was a sincere question, so please elaborate.

OnTheWarpath58
04-07-2009, 04:04 PM
Isn't that EXACTLY what the Patriots did with Bledsoe and Brady?

Whoops.

SBK
04-07-2009, 04:19 PM
I want a QB the other team has to game plan around. Game managers aren't that guy. If you believe Stafford or Sanchez are gonna be studs, and they're there when you pick, you take them.

With the lack of QB classes on the horizon Cassels value will go up if he plays well.

Chiefnj2
04-07-2009, 04:20 PM
Well, it was a sincere question, so please elaborate.

Someone said Pioli isn't going to abandon the safe option at QB. You said the Pats did it with Brady and Bledsoe. They didn't. Brady didn't get a shot until Bledsoe was bleeding to death on the field. Brady led them to the Super Bowl. They didn't abandon the safe option. The safe option got injured.

htismaqe
04-07-2009, 04:23 PM
Whoops.

Actually, I wasn't being sarcastic.

I really want to know what makes the two situations so different.

htismaqe
04-07-2009, 04:23 PM
Someone said Pioli isn't going to abandon the safe option at QB. You said the Pats did it with Brady and Bledsoe. They didn't. Brady didn't get a shot until Bledsoe was bleeding to death on the field. Brady led them to the Super Bowl. They didn't abandon the safe option. The safe option got injured.

Ok.

Saccopoo
04-07-2009, 06:07 PM
Why I do favor it:

Potential Franchise QB >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> game manager.

Serious question: What characteristics/traits do you see in Sanchez that will make him a "potential franchise quarterback" compared to Matt Cassel?

Reaper16
04-07-2009, 11:03 PM
It's not that I don't love Sanchez and Stafford. I do -- especially Sanchez.

My major issue, aside from the fact that it would mean the Chiefs picking up QB with their 1st and 2nd round picks from this Draft, is Cassell.

I don't know if Cassell is the stud that he was in New England, but he probably isn't. He's a game manager, and he's a pretty tough one at that. I don't think he can win games by the pure force of his will, but he won't be the reason the Chiefs lose many games, either. He's a conservative choice.

And, well, I believe he'll succeed conservatively . I don't think he'll ever put up Pro Bowl numbers for us, but I do think he'll be a safe option at QB who can be ensured to be careful with the ball and not wilt under pressure.

I don't want a rookie stud behind him because the rookie will waste away there. Cassell may, in all likelihood, remain perfectly healthy. It will be unlikely that we ever have to play our rookie for an extended amount of time as Cassell sort-of flourishes in that Cassell-like way.

Can you see ANY NFL team abandon a sure, safe option at QB for an unknown? I can't. Not even Pioli.

Which in all likelihood means we will allow this rookie to rot on the bench, or we'll trade him away -- and if we trade him away, what are the odds we end up with a Top 5 pick? Next to zero. Lost value, for nothing.

If you see Cassell crashing and burning, than Sanchez makes sense. But if you're like me, and you see him simply play well but never spectacularly, I doubt we'll ever make the most out of our #3 overall QB.
That's simply not good enough for me, and it shouldn't be good enough for anyone else.

ChiefsCountry
04-07-2009, 11:11 PM
That's simply not good enough for me, and it shouldn't be good enough for anyone else.

What, didn't you hear Matt Cassel threw the most beautiful pass in the history of football.

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-07-2009, 11:24 PM
It's not that I don't love Sanchez and Stafford. I do -- especially Sanchez.

My major issue, aside from the fact that it would mean the Chiefs picking up QB with their 1st and 2nd round picks from this Draft, is Cassell.

I don't know if Cassell is the stud that he was in New England, but he probably isn't. He's a game manager, and he's a pretty tough one at that. I don't think he can win games by the pure force of his will, but he won't be the reason the Chiefs lose many games, either. He's a conservative choice.

And, well, I believe he'll succeed conservatively. I don't think he'll ever put up Pro Bowl numbers for us, but I do think he'll be a safe option at QB who can be ensured to be careful with the ball and not wilt under pressure.

I don't want a rookie stud behind him because the rookie will waste away there. Cassell may, in all likelihood, remain perfectly healthy. It will be unlikely that we ever have to play our rookie for an extended amount of time as Cassell sort-of flourishes in that Cassell-like way.

Can you see ANY NFL team abandon a sure, safe option at QB for an unknown? I can't. Not even Pioli.

Which in all likelihood means we will allow this rookie to rot on the bench, or we'll trade him away -- and if we trade him away, what are the odds we end up with a Top 5 pick? Next to zero. Lost value, for nothing.

If you see Cassell crashing and burning, than Sanchez makes sense. But if you're like me, and you see him simply play well but never spectacularly, I doubt we'll ever make the most out of our #3 overall QB.

Someone get this guy an ID badge and an IV, STAT. He's showing advanced symptoms of TFS.

DeezNutz
04-07-2009, 11:25 PM
Serious question: What characteristics/traits do you see in Sanchez that will make him a "potential franchise quarterback" compared to Matt Cassel?

How many times does this question need to be answered?

Saccopoo
04-07-2009, 11:39 PM
How many times does this question need to be answered?

Once would be nice. And make sure it's a well-thought out, objective answer.

Reaper16
04-07-2009, 11:45 PM
Once would be nice. And make sure it's a well-thought out, objective answer.
Because scouting is ever objective. Get real.

SBK
04-08-2009, 12:23 AM
Someone get this guy an ID badge and an IV, STAT. He's showing advanced symptoms of TFS.

LMAO

I read his post and wondered if he'd been hijacked or something.

ChiefsCountry
04-08-2009, 12:25 AM
LMAO

I read his post and wondered if he'd been hijacked or something.

Direction is a little bit of a post whore come draft time.

Saccopoo
04-08-2009, 02:28 AM
Because scouting is ever objective. Get real.

Good answer, and one that I fully expected. Excellent insight to why Sanchez is going to be a better quarterback than Cassel, who's already had a winning record in the NFL.

Reaper16
04-08-2009, 08:01 AM
Good answer, and one that I fully expected. Excellent insight to why Sanchez is going to be a better quarterback than Cassel, who's already had a winning record in the NFL.
Using the nifty search feature that Chiefsplanet has, I was able to find this post in like three seconds. I happen to agree with it http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=5546677&postcount=31


That aside, Sanchez has a better arm, elite intangibles, phenomenal footwork, he's four years younger, he operates very well under center (Cassel was far more effective from Shotgun), and he didn't have to have the best offense in the NFL in order to have slightly above average production.

milkman
04-08-2009, 09:09 AM
I've discussed numerous times why I like Sanchez and Stafford better than Cassel, but here's another reason.

Because half of you dumbfucks don't even fucking know how to spell our brand new QBs name correctly.

OnTheWarpath58
04-08-2009, 09:13 AM
I've discussed numerous times why I like Sanchez and Stafford better than Cassel, but here's another reason.

Because half of you dumbfucks don't even fucking know how to spell our brand new QBs name correctly.

ROFL

htismaqe
04-08-2009, 10:27 AM
Serious question: What characteristics/traits do you see in Sanchez that will make him a "potential franchise quarterback" compared to Matt Cassel?

From http://www.draftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/qb/Mark-Sanchez.php.

I removed the physical stuff because alot of guys have what it takes physically. When I look at a QB, I want to know if he has "it". Here's what Scott Wright says:

Really anticipates well and displays nice touch and timing...
Intelligent with a high football IQ...
Recognizes blitzes, can read coverages and go through his progressions...
Is tough, fiery and super competitive...
Truly loves the game...
Excellent work ethic...
A team leader and field general...

And here's his complete list of negatives, physical and mental:

Limited starting experience...Doesn't have the ideal height that you look for...Durability is a concern...Does not always throw a tight spiral...Has some trouble with the deep ball...Can get flustered by a strong pass rush...Makes some bad decisions...Won't run away from people...Had an issue off-the-field...Was surrounded by a lot of talent.

Notice that, other than "Had an issue off-the-field" he has ZERO emotional negatives? The only mental negatives he has between the lines is dealing with overwhelming rushes and making a few bad decisions. Otherwise, they're all physical.

I'm 100% convinced this guy has "it".