PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft Ryan Tannehill


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

jspchief
10-20-2011, 09:53 AM
I'll be closely watching him through the rest of the NCAA season. I expect him to end up a 1st round prospect, and more likely to be available in the range where KC will be picking.

He seems to have good pocket presence, throws well on the move, has a live arm, and plays smart. He's looking good. I'm not sure he's the QB I'm championing just yet, but he's on my radar and has already passed the likes of Foles and and Jones in my book.

Curious to hear what others think of him. Who's seen a lot of him? What are his downsides IYO?

Discuss.

jd1020
10-20-2011, 10:10 AM
Why would he be a 1st round prospect? There are like 5-6 QBs ranked above him. Unless 4 of them don't enter then he wont be a 1st rounder.

jspchief
10-20-2011, 10:16 AM
Why would he be a 1st round prospect? There are like 5-6 QBs ranked above him. Unless 4 of them don't enter then he wont be a 1st rounder.You mean 6 weeks into the NCAA season? Gee, I don't know why any player's draft stock might rise or fall.

Half the guys ranked above him already look like they don't deserve to be.

jd1020
10-20-2011, 10:20 AM
Not sure what Tannehill has done to all of a sudden make him top 3 QB in college. He had one breakout game against Baylor to boost his 7-5 TD:INT ratio.

jspchief
10-20-2011, 10:30 AM
Not sure what Tannehill has done to all of a sudden make him top 3 QB in college. He had one breakout game against Baylor to boost his 7-5 TD:INT ratio.I guess Landry Jones had "one breakout game" against Ball State then. Matt Barkley had "one breakout game" against Syracuse.


Have you seen him play?

I don't think it's going out on a limb to say Tannehill is playing well and his draft stock is rising.

FD
10-20-2011, 10:32 AM
I've watched most of his games and think he's pretty crappy. He did have a good one against Baylor, though.

jd1020
10-20-2011, 10:34 AM
I guess Landry Jones had "one breakout game" against Ball State then. Matt Barkley had "one breakout game" against Syracuse.


Have you seen him play?

I don't think it's going out on a limb to say Tannehill is playing well and his draft stock is rising.

How does one breakout when they are already on everyone's list (Jones and Barkley)? Tannehill is fighting for best of the rest and no one is going to take him over RG3 with the year RG3 is having.

Name me the list of teams that WILL take a QB in the first round.

I can only name 2 that will absolutely take a QB no matter who it is;

Miami
Seattle

Now, there are 2 other teams I can name that might take a QB in the first but it depends on how their new QB fairs and who is available at the position;

Denver
Washington

jspchief
10-20-2011, 11:02 AM
How does one breakout when they are already on everyone's list (Jones and Barkley)? Tannehill is fighting for best of the rest and no one is going to take him over RG3 with the year RG3 is having.

Name me the list of teams that WILL take a QB in the first round.

I can only name 2 that will absolutely take a QB no matter who it is;

Miami
Seattle

Now, there are 2 other teams I can name that might take a QB in the first but it depends on how their new QB fairs and who is available at the position;

Denver
Washington

Minnesota, Kansas City, Indianapolis, and Tennessee could all realistically be in the market for a QB.

I wouldn't be surprised to see 4 QBs taken in round 1.

Obviously Luck will go. After that I think it comes down to Jones, RG, Barkley, Foles currently. Barkley and Foles don't look all that good so far, Griffin is short. It's entirely plausible that there is movement among the current QBs ranked 2-8.

Maybe saying I "expect" him to become a 1st round prospect is over stating things, but I think he has the skill set to do it. I also think some of the early names have not lived up to the hype.

I guess I'm not surprised that there's disagreement. I'm just not buying how you act like the current guys are all locks as first rounders.

jd1020
10-20-2011, 11:06 AM
Minnesota, Kansas City, Indianapolis, and Tennessee could all realistically be in the market for a QB.

I wouldn't be surprised to see 4 QBs taken in round 1.

Obviously Luck will go. After that I think it comes down to Jones, RG, Barkley, Foles currently. Barkley and Foles don't look all that good so far, Griffin is short. It's entirely plausible that there is movement among the current QBs ranked 2-8.

Maybe saying I "expect" him to become a 1st round prospect is over stating things, but I think he has the skill set to do it. I also think some of the early names have not lived up to the hype.

I guess I'm not surprised that there's disagreement. I'm just not buying how you act like the current guys are all locks as first rounders.

Minnesota and Tennessee just spent a first on a QB last year. Tennessee isn't going to be drafting anywhere near the top so you can scratch them off your list. Minnesota may be looking for a QB, but its only 1 QB and they wont be getting the #1 pick so you can scratch them off the list.

Indianapolis isn't going to draft a QB other than Luck. They've got Manning locked up for years and if they can't get Luck you can bank on them drafting a player to protect Manning.

And the Chiefs looking for a QB is just wishful thinking.

MGRS13
10-20-2011, 11:13 AM
If luck is the meter we use to judge "worthy of a first round pick" then none of the other guys are first rounders in my opinion. Barkley is awful I wouldnt touch that guy. Jones is a system qb and so far no one from that system has proven to be a star(Bradford started well but just looks bad now, any ways Bradford is 10 times the qb jones is). RG 3 is the only other guy out there right now who i think has first round value and i put him at late late in the first round. I don't want to do what the vikes did last year and go into the draft saying we have to get a 1 round qb no matter who it is. I dont want next years Ponder.

jspchief
10-20-2011, 11:15 AM
Minnesota and Tennessee just spent a first on a QB last year. Tennessee isn't going to be drafting anywhere near the top so you can scratch them off your list. Minnesota may be looking for a QB, but its only 1 QB and they wont be getting the #1 pick so you can scratch them off the list.

Indianapolis isn't going to draft a QB other than Luck. They've got Manning locked up for years and if they can't get Luck you can bank on them drafting a player to protect Manning.

And the Chiefs looking for a QB is just wishful thinking.Ok, so I said I thought 4 could go. You already conceded Seattle and Miami, and there's a real chance of Indy taking 1 (IMO Manning's age combined with the nature of his injury has to put the QB position on the radar for them whether it's Luck or not)

I had forgotten about Locker, and it may be a stretch to say Minnesota would give up on Ponder regardless of how he plays.

I still feel Denver, Washington, and KC are real possibilities. Unlikely all of them, but entirely possible at least one of them.

I'll stand by what I said that I feel 4 QBs could go in the 1st round. Of course, there's still a lot of college football to be played, and it's realistic that there aren't 4 guys that play well enough to earn 1st round status.

SNR
10-20-2011, 12:04 PM
I'd rather have Ricky Stanzi, who had a far more impressive senior year than Tannehill is having so far.

AndChiefs
10-20-2011, 01:09 PM
I was wondering when a thread about him would pop up. It seems like he's been lost among the other "top" QB's. Being an A&M graduate I've seen every one of his games so I feel like I can speak semi-intelligently about him.

Tannehill has a good, not great, arm with above average elusiveness in the pocket. Once out of the pocket he is extremely good at reading the defense (probably due to his time as a WR). I also believe he is more accurate on the move than he is in the pocket. He delivers a solid ball and his lack of experience as a QB actually gives him a higher upside than some of the other guys that many would rate around him in the draft (Foles, Barkley).

If we miss out on Luck (we will) and RGIII I don't think there's another QB in this draft I"d rather see the Chiefs draft. I wouldn't put him top 15 but I'd be fine getting him in the mid-to-late first and elated to get him in the second.

ChiefsCountry
10-20-2011, 01:51 PM
Minnesota, Kansas City, Indianapolis, and Tennessee could all realistically be in the market for a QB.


Why would Minnesota and Tennessee be in a market for QB when they both just drafted one in the first round this year?

TEX
10-20-2011, 02:18 PM
Why would Minnesota and Tennessee be in a market for QB when they both just drafted one in the first round this year?

I bet Christian Ponder is gonna be a good one...

MGRS13
10-20-2011, 02:34 PM
I bet Christian Ponder is gonna be a good one...

Why he's never been good before? I thought if he got drafted in the 7th round he should have considered himself lucky. Huge Huge reach for the vikes.

whoman69
10-20-2011, 03:34 PM
Its hard to tell with B12 QBs. They have so many high powered offenses that leave the defenses behind, they are often overjudged. That's not to say they can't do well like the USC QB idiocy, its just they need tape from out of league games to make an intelligent decision. I can't believe a prospect who is the 3rd best out of that conference would be considered a first.

Nightfyre
10-20-2011, 04:43 PM
Rg3 is 6'2" that isn't that short for a qb. tannehill won't make the first round imo.

Sfeihc
10-20-2011, 05:16 PM
Ron Wolf took a qb every year and it seemed to work out okay for him. Stanzi maybe this or maybe that but we know what Cassel is so why not take another qb?

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 01:31 PM
http://guysnfldraftlockerroom.com/sites/default/files/category_pictures/Ryan%2BTannehill%2BT%2BCotton%2BBowl%2BLSU%2Bv%2BTexas%2Bf_sno9STgJKl.jpg

If we are drafting 8-12....Luck, RG3, and Barkley are gone, and Ryan Tannehill is sitting their; would you be happy drafting him?

Discuss...

_______________________________________

http://nfldraftmonsters.com/scouting/scouting-report-ryan-tannehill/


Ryan Tannehill really burst on to the scene last season when he replaced Jerrod Johnson as Texas A&Mís quarterback. Tannehill had been playing wide receiver, and doing it quite well, before being moved in for the ineffective Johnson. Iíve included a video cut up of Tannehillís Cotton Bowl performance against LSU (part of our new Youtube channel, check it out!) so you can get a feel for what Iím talking about.

Size: At 6í4″ Tannehill has the appropriate height to play in the NFL, he should have no problems seeing over an NFL sized offensive line. His listed weight of 219 pounds shows that he needs to put between 10-20 pounds of mass on, to be able to take the every down punishment a quarterback in the NFL takes. Likely, Tannehill was in ďreceiver shapeĒ last season, and shed some weight to increase speed and quickness while playing the wide receiver position. It will be interesting to note whether or not he comes into this season with additional weight.

Arm Strength: Tannehill posseses the arm strength to make all the throws at the next level, including the ďdeep out.Ē While he doesnít have quite the cannon of a Ryan Mallett or JaMarcus Russell, his arm should be considered just a small notch below that ďeliteĒ level, and is quite capable of delivering the ball with the requisite velocity to any spot on the field.

Accuracy: The reason I included the cut up of the LSU game with this scouting report, is that it is one of the best instances of a game last year in which the quarterback was throwing his receivers open, despite excellent defensive coverage. Though there were some timing issues in that LSU game, his accuracy is impeccable for a guy who has played the position half a season at the NCAA level.

Mechanical: Tannehill has a compact throwing motion, and quick release. He spins the ball cleanly, and only needs light correction on his throwing mechanics. Outside the pocket, his mechanics donít break down. Keeps his eye level up and down field when rolling out, and doesnít throw flat footed or off his back foot.

Mobility: Possesses strong athletic ability for the position. Started at wide receiver for the Aggies, before taking over for Jerrod Johnson at quarterback. Has good straight line speed. Will pick up the first down with his legs if needed. He isnít Michael Vick, but definitely on par with Ben Roethlisberger or Josh Freeman.

Pre/Post Snap Reads: He didnít call a lot of audibles last season. Iím not sure if he has the freedom to do it, or just didnít feel comfortable enough in that phase of the game yet. Post snap he keeps his eye level up and down field, rarely locks onto receivers, and knows when to check down.

Intangibles: Probably Tannehillís strongest area. Iíve havenít seen a kid jump out at me with the kind of ďitĒ factor that Tannehill has since Phillip Rivers (who shares the distinction with Peyton Manning of having the highest grade Iíve ever given a prospect). Tannehill is a winner, multi-dimensional athlete, intelligent, and by all accounts a strong leader in the huddle.

Character: I couldnít find anyone with anything negative to say about Tannehill. He is by all accounts an intelligent (three time all conference academic award winner), hard working, and inspiring leader. Itís a rarity this day in age to get the kind of positive feedback about, I keep getting about Tannehill everywhere I go.

It will be interesting to see how Tannehill does with a full season to work with, and with teams with having more film on him. Based on his body of work so far, I would have absolutely no problem spending a second round pick on him, and I could see him working his way to the top of the quarterback rankings by seasonís end.

BoneKrusher
12-17-2011, 01:35 PM
I'd rather have Ricky Stanzi, who had a far more impressive senior year than Tannehill is having so far.

This^

tk13
12-17-2011, 01:39 PM
I wasn't that excited about Locker, but I actually like what I've seen from him when he plays. He can run around and sling it. I don't think Tennessee is going to do anything, they really need to give him a shot down the road.

It's funny how rookie QBs on good teams have some success and guys on teams in shambles like Gabbert look lost.

BoneKrusher
12-17-2011, 01:47 PM
I wasn't that excited about Locker, but I actually like what I've seen from him when he plays. He can run around and sling it. I don't think Tennessee is going to do anything, they really need to give him a shot down the road.

It's funny how rookie QBs on good teams have some success and guys on teams in shambles like Gabbert look lost.

TBH, Gabbert doesn't have anyone to throw to.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 01:48 PM
TBH, Gabbert doesn't have anyone to throw to.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/17/dunta-robinson-jags-havent-had-anyone-decent-since-jimmy-smith/

BoneKrusher
12-17-2011, 01:50 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/17/dunta-robinson-jags-havent-had-anyone-decent-since-jimmy-smith/

yep and he was picked up from the Cowboys practice squad i think.
he was a good one.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 01:53 PM
This^

Understood.

Would you feel that is a wasted pick then at the point?

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-17-2011, 01:55 PM
I haven't seen much of Tannehill, but he did impress me in the Mizzou game. He made some really, really good throws. He's a notch below the top 3, but I'd take him over Jones.

Chiefnj2
12-17-2011, 01:57 PM
[IMG]

Intangibles: Probably Tannehillís strongest area. Iíve havenít seen a kid jump out at me with the kind of ďitĒ factor that Tannehill has since Phillip Rivers (who shares the distinction with Peyton Manning of having the highest grade Iíve ever given a prospect). Tannehill is a winner, multi-dimensional athlete, intelligent, and by all accounts a strong leader in the huddle.
.

What makes me question the scouting report is the claim that he hasn't seen a QB with an "it" factor better than Tannehill since Rivers. Really? He didn't think guys like Newton or Tebow had an enormous "it" factor?

BoneKrusher
12-17-2011, 01:57 PM
Understood.

Would you feel that is a wasted pick then at the point?

no.
if Haley had used common sense and used him he might still have a job in KC.

ILChief
12-17-2011, 01:57 PM
Rg3 is 6'2" that isn't that short for a qb. tannehill won't make the first round imo.

I never dreamed Christian Ponder would either. But if there is a run on QBs early I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Tannehill go in mid 1st.

SNR
12-17-2011, 01:59 PM
I haven't seen much of Tannehill, but he did impress me in the Mizzou game. He made some really, really good throws. He's a notch below the top 3, but I'd take him over Jones.This is pretty much where I'm at.

If we have to trade up in order to get one of the top three guys, then we should do that. If we don't, and we miss out on one of them, Tannehill is the guy I would want.

And stay the FUCK away from anything not a QB

Bump
12-17-2011, 02:01 PM
yes, I would draft Tannehill if the other 3 QB's are gone, which they might be. Tannehill will be a solid NFL QB. I'm still holding out hope for RG3 though

boogblaster
12-17-2011, 02:01 PM
ima kinda on the Stanzi ship ...

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 02:02 PM
What makes me question the scouting report is the claim that he hasn't seen a QB with an "it" factor better than Tannehill since Rivers. Really? He didn't think guys like Newton or Tebow had an enormous "it" factor?

Meh.

Scouting reports are as good as the people who write them. This was just one of the first ones I ran across. I wouldn't judge him off the scouting report unless you haven't had the opportunity to watch him a in a few games.

Bump
12-17-2011, 02:04 PM
ima kinda on the Stanzi ship ...

why? he couldn't even beat out Tyler Palko LMAO

I don't care who you are, if you can't beat out Tyler Palko, you don't belong in the NFL.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:06 PM
why? he couldn't even beat out Tyler Palko LMAO

I don't care who you are, if you can't beat out Tyler Palko, you don't belong in the NFL.

...

No one could beat out Tyler Palko when the coach is playing him to spite the GM/Owner.

Idiot.

ChiefsandO'sfan
12-17-2011, 02:07 PM
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oXDEzCf3C7Y?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oXDEzCf3C7Y?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>


I could see him falling to the chiefs in the 2nd round could be this year andy dalton...

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 02:13 PM
I would be more than happy picking up Tannehill given the previous scenario.

I am just scared we would end up drafting Laundry Jones instead...

SNR
12-17-2011, 02:13 PM
I could see him falling to the chiefs in the 2nd round could be this year andy dalton...The dude might have a bright future as a pro, but it would be extremely unlikely to expect him to perform at Dalton's level that early. Dalton was a 4-year starter with tons of experience. Tannehill may very well be as cerebral as Dalton is, but he simply doesn't have near the amount of experience.

Tannehill would be a sit-on-the-bench-for-a-year kind of guy most likely.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 02:18 PM
The dude might have a bright future as a pro, but it would be extremely unlikely to expect him to perform at Dalton's level that early. Dalton was a 4-year starter with tons of experience. Tannehill may very well be as cerebral as Dalton is, but he simply doesn't have near the amount of experience.

Tannehill would be a sit-on-the-bench-for-a-year kind of guy most likely.

Meh, throw him in the deep end.

doomy3
12-17-2011, 02:18 PM
Yeah, I like Tannehill quite a bit. Good size, good arm strength, accurate, mobile. I would be glad to draft him if we don't get RGIII.

FD
12-17-2011, 02:19 PM
Well, he did lead his team to an impressive 6-6 record this year.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 02:21 PM
Not sure how well Tannehill would fit here with the fans. He's still developing as a QB but will be a good one someday.

BoneKrusher
12-17-2011, 02:21 PM
...

No one could beat out Tyler Palko when the coach is playing him to spite the GM/Owner.



Yeah i agree, Haley had a boner for Palko.

ILChief
12-17-2011, 02:24 PM
I guess if we're not gonna get a top flight guy, we keep drafting second tier guys like Stanzi, Tannehill, etc and hope one of them hits. Either would be better than Cassel

Setsuna
12-17-2011, 02:26 PM
He use to be a WR so no.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:26 PM
He use to be a WR so no.

He went to A&M as a QB. He's athletic, so instead of putting him on the bench they used him at WR. And he was their #1 WR.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 02:27 PM
He use to be a WR so no.

Superb logic.

milkman
12-17-2011, 02:28 PM
I guess if we're not gonna get a top flight guy, we keep drafting second tier guys like Stanzi, Tannehill, etc and hope one of them hits. Either would be better than Cassel

I'm convinced that we, as fans, have to hope one of these late round projects turns out to be the next Tom Brady when Cassel gets Bledsoed again.

I fully expect Pioli to pass on early round QBs in favor of Cassel.

BoneKrusher
12-17-2011, 02:30 PM
I fully expect Pioli to pass on early round QBs in favor of Cassel.

knowing how Pioli works, i'd just about bet on it.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 02:31 PM
I am pretty certain Tannehill will be picked up in the 1st rnd.

So if we are looking for QBs in later rnds...See: Nick Foles Thread. http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=251123

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 02:32 PM
I'm convinced that we, as fans, have to hope one of these late round projects turns out to be the next Tom Brady when Cassel gets Bledsoed again.

I fully expect Pioli to pass on early round QBs in favor of Cassel.

I think bringing in Orton was a signal that we're done with Cassel.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:32 PM
I fully expect Pioli to pass on early round QBs in favor of Cassel.

With everything that's being said since the Haley firing, you can pretty much bank on that. He thinks he owes Cassel at least one more shot.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:33 PM
I think bringing in Orton was a signal that we're done with Cassel.

You mean the guy we claimed off waivers, after Cassel got injured, and is in the final year of his contract?

Bump
12-17-2011, 02:34 PM
...

No one could beat out Tyler Palko when the coach is playing him to spite the GM/Owner.

Idiot.

Back up that statement with something, idiot.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:34 PM
Back up that statement with something, idiot.

How about everything that's been said/happened since Haley was fired.

Retard.

milkman
12-17-2011, 02:34 PM
I think bringing in Orton was a signal that we're done with Cassel.

That's only true if Orton signs a new contract before the free agent period starts in the offseason.

BoneKrusher
12-17-2011, 02:35 PM
With everything that's being said since the Haley firing, you can pretty much bank on that. He thinks he owes Cassel at least one more shot.

plus we will have Romeo or MCdaniels as the HC for 2012,

what other HC would wanna be set up with Cassel as their starting QB?

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 02:36 PM
You mean the guy we claimed off waivers, after Cassel got injured, and is in the final year of his contract?

You mean the guy we signed for 2 million dollars when we had no hope to make the playoffs?

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:37 PM
plus we will have Romeo or MCdaniels as the HC for 2012,

what other HC would wanna be set up with Cassel as their starting QB?

I honestly can't see either of them being HC next year.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:37 PM
You mean the guy we signed for 2 million dollars when we had no hope to make the playoffs?

Actually, we did have hope when we claimed him. Then Haley went rogue.

BoneKrusher
12-17-2011, 02:43 PM
I honestly can't see either of them being HC next year.

both are from the Patriot/Parcells tree is my reason for thinking so.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:45 PM
both are from the Patriot/Parcells tree is my reason for thinking so.

Ya, but Crennel is 64 with health problems and Hunt is not going to let McDaniels become HC.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 02:45 PM
Does being a Campbell Trophy finalist make him more of a "Pioli-Type" player?

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/story/2011-11-21/campbell-trophy-finalists/51663966/1

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 02:53 PM
Actually, we did have hope when we claimed him. Then Haley went rogue.

Nope sure didn't.

ChiefsCountry
12-17-2011, 02:53 PM
I'm convinced that we, as fans, have to hope one of these late round projects turns out to be the next Tom Brady when Cassel gets Bledsoed again.

I fully expect Pioli to pass on early round QBs in favor of Cassel.

I expect him to draft Ryan Lindley in the 3rd to 5th round range.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:54 PM
Nope sure didn't.

What were we? 2 games back in a shit division with how many to go? No shot. :rolleyes:

Mr_Tomahawk
12-17-2011, 02:55 PM
I expect him to draft Ryan Lindley in the 3rd to 5th round range.

Please no.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 02:56 PM
What were we? 2 games back in a shit division with how many to go? No shot. :rolleyes:

You listen to the media way too much. We were 4-6 with the toughest part of our schedule coming up and Orton was nowhere ready to play.

ILChief
12-17-2011, 02:57 PM
With everything that's being said since the Haley firing, you can pretty much bank on that. He thinks he owes Cassel at least one more shot.

It's funny how as soon as Haley got fired, everybody started having all this inside info. I think alot of it is BS.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:58 PM
You listen to the media way too much. We were 4-6 with the toughest part of our schedule coming up and Orton was nowhere ready to play.

And we were in the game against Pittsburgh and beat the Bears with Palko... No shot.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 02:58 PM
It's funny how as soon as Haley got fired, everybody started having all this inside info. I think alot of it is BS.

Generally when people break up, the 2 parties start talking to friends about why they broke up.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 02:59 PM
And we were in the game against Pittsburgh and beat the Bears with Palko... No shot.

You are a fucking idiot.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 03:00 PM
You are a ****ing idiot.

Nothing else to say, eh?

2 games behind with our final 2 games against the teams ahead of us. I'm sure Palko was more ready to play than Orton or Stanzi. That's why he's instantly 3rd string and practically off the team as soon as Haley was fired. He's now just a "good teammate."

NJChiefsFan
12-17-2011, 03:01 PM
You listen to the media way too much. We were 4-6 with the toughest part of our schedule coming up and Orton was nowhere ready to play.

Im not sure that Haley and Co. were ready to give up. Fans knew the season was over, but he was fighting for his job. On top of that, I think Pioli didn't want to get his ass kicked the rest of the season to help himself look better.

Maybe neither of those things are true, but I think they are plausable enough where I can't take the signing of Orton as proof of Cassel being gone.

BoneKrusher
12-17-2011, 03:02 PM
Generally when people break up, the 2 parties start talking to friends about why they broke up.

The State of Missouri just wasn't big enough both for Pioli and Haley's ego's.

Texas maybe but not Missouri.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 03:05 PM
Nothing else to say, eh?

2 games behind with our final 2 games against the teams ahead of us. I'm sure Palko was more ready to play than Orton or Stanzi. That's why he's instantly 3rd string and practically off the team as soon as Haley was fired. He's now just a "good teammate."

I have a lot more to say than just parroting 810/610 talking points. The season was over after the loss to Denver. Palko started most likely because he's more experienced and out played Stanzi in preseason.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 03:05 PM
I have a lot more to say than just parroting 810/610 talking points. The season was over after the loss to Denver. Palko started most likely because he's more experienced and out played Stanzi in preseason.

And you have the balls to call other people "idiots."

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 03:08 PM
And you have the balls to call other people "idiots."

I forgot this place is objective when it comes to Ricky Stanzi. Christ it's like the Puerto Rican Day Parade around here and Ricky Stanzi is the female. Yes Tyler Palko absolutely was more productive in the preseason than Stanzi.

milkman
12-17-2011, 03:09 PM
I have a lot more to say than just parroting 810/610 talking points. The season was over after the loss to Denver. Palko started most likely because he's more experienced and out played Stanzi in preseason.

What preseason did you watch?

jd1020
12-17-2011, 03:10 PM
What preseason did you watch?

The same one Haley "watched."

milkman
12-17-2011, 03:11 PM
I forgot this place is objective when it comes to Ricky Stanzi. Christ it's like the Puerto Rican Day Parade around here and Ricky Stanzi is the female. Yes Tyler Palko absolutely was more productive in the preseason than Stanzi.

I don't give a rat's ass about Ricky Stanzi, and I have no grand illusions that he'll ever be more than a career backup.

But you are a fucking idiot.

Palko had better opportunities to out produce, but there's no way in hell he out performed Ricky Stanzi in the preseason.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 03:12 PM
What preseason did you watch?

The one where Palko was more productive against 2nd stringers than Stanzi. You want to provide some facts or stick to conspiracy theories?

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 03:13 PM
I don't give a rat's ass about Ricky Stanzi, and I have no grand illusions that he'll ever be more than a career backup.

But you are a ****ing idiot.

Palko had better opportunities to out produce, but there's no way in hell he out performed Ricky Stanzi in the preseason.

Vague statements with no facts to backup the argument. Wouldn't expect anything else from you.

milkman
12-17-2011, 03:21 PM
The one where Palko was more productive against 2nd stringers than Stanzi. You want to provide some facts or stick to conspiracy theories?

Which one was that?

Conspiracy theories?

I doubt there are any conspiracies.

A 5th round QB is not likely to see the field unless your other two QBs go down to injury.

I have no problem with that.

I do know that Stanzi, when he had time in the pocket to make reads and passes, displayed better arm strength and better awareness than did Palko.

He also showed a little moxie on a couple of plays.

He didn't show enough to make me think he's the future of the franchise, but he showed enough to make me believe, from purely a talent level that he was better than Palko.

But hell, we could probably put your dumb ass behind center and see the same thing.

And anyone who saw Palko in the preseason could see that he had nowhere near the arm strength to compete in the NFL, though he had better presence than Cassel.

milkman
12-17-2011, 03:24 PM
Vague statements with no facts to backup the argument. Wouldn't expect anything else from you.


I am doing exactly the same fuckcing thing you are you useless dumbass.

Show me where Palko out produced Stanzi.

Where's your fucking proof?

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 03:30 PM
I am doing exactly the same ****cing thing you are you useless dumbass.

Show me where Palko out produced Stanzi.

Where's your ****ing proof?

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/44229318


Palko threw for more touchdowns and had a higher completion % playing against better competition. I can recall he played very good against Baltimore, moved the ball against St.Louis, and threw a touchdown in the Green Bay game.

That's more than just rhetoric but it's all your one trick pony ass brings to the table.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 03:35 PM
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/44229318


Palko threw for more touchdowns and had a higher completion % playing against better competition. I can recall he played very good against Baltimore, moved the ball against St.Louis, and threw a touchdown in the Green Bay game.

That's more than just rhetoric but it's all your one trick pony ass brings to the table.

Palko also had the most attempts of anyone in preseason and threw for less average yards than Stanzi.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 03:37 PM
Palko also had the most attempts of anyone in preseason and threw for less average yards than Stanzi.

Yeah yards is a solid argument especially when one guy was playing 1st/2nd stringers the other was playing 3rd/ arena league players.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 03:38 PM
Yeah yards is a solid argument especially when one guy was playing 1st/2nd stringers the other was playing 3rd/ arena league players.

So is talking about a guy throwing 1 more TD than Stanzi while completing as many passes as Stanzi had attempts.

SNR
12-17-2011, 03:39 PM
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/44229318


Palko threw for more touchdowns and had a higher completion % playing against better competition. I can recall he played very good against Baltimore, moved the ball against St.Louis, and threw a touchdown in the Green Bay game.

That's more than just rhetoric but it's all your one trick pony ass brings to the table.You apparently don't remember the Tampa and Baltimore games, do you?

Stanzi was getting raped from all sides playing with the THIRD STRING offensive line, not the second string like Palko had. Stanzi was hit, sacked, and forced to escape the pocket to evade the pressure on nearly every fucking play.

When he DID get some action with the 2nd string at the end of the Green Bay game, he stood calmly in the pocket, was very cerebral in his reads and ACCURATELY (that's a key word there) delivered the ball.

You're a fucking idiot if you think Palko's preseason was better than Stanzi's.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 03:42 PM
You apparently don't remember the Tampa and Baltimore games, do you?

Stanzi was getting raped from all sides playing with the THIRD STRING offensive line, not the second string like Palko had. Stanzi was hit, sacked, and forced to escape the pocket to evade the pressure on nearly every ****ing play.

When he DID get some action with the 2nd string at the end of the Green Bay game, he stood calmly in the pocket, was very cerebral in his reads and ACCURATELY (that's a key word there) delivered the ball.

You're a ****ing idiot if you think Palko's preseason was better than Stanzi's.

This coming from the guy who thinks Stazi is a future starter. Your opinion isn't bias at all. Ricky Stanzi didn't even play in the game vs Green Bay. There goes that argument.

I recall Stanzi getting clobbered yes and I recall Palko getting clobbered as well. However Palko moved the ball well in 3 of the games.

SNR
12-17-2011, 03:45 PM
This coming from the guy who thinks Stazi is a future starter. Your opinion isn't bias at all. Ricky Stanzi didn't even play in the game vs Green Bay. There goes that argument.

I recall Stanzi getting clobbered yes and I recall Palko getting clobbered as well. However Palko moved the ball well in 3 of the games.St. Louis. What the fuck ever.

You think if Stanzi started two games this year he would generate 0 offensive TD scoring drives and be responsible for 8 turnovers? That's pretty much what you're saying.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 03:47 PM
St. Louis. What the **** ever.

You think if Stanzi started two games this year he would generate 0 offensive TD scoring drives and be responsible for 8 turnovers? That's pretty much what you're saying.

Stanzi played well against St.Louis so did Palko. Palko moved the ball and played great against Baltimore it solidified his spot as a backup IMO.

Nope that's not what I'm saying at all. I even said Stanzi should get a chance to start. What I'm saying is it's not a conspiracy that Palko was ahead of Stanzi on the depth chart like JD and Milkman are suggesting.

milkman
12-17-2011, 03:52 PM
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/44229318


Palko threw for more touchdowns and had a higher completion % playing against better competition. I can recall he played very good against Baltimore, moved the ball against St.Louis, and threw a touchdown in the Green Bay game.

That's more than just rhetoric but it's all your one trick pony ass brings to the table.

The only chance that Stanzi had with the second team usit in the preseason came against the Rams, and I'll take those stats, and his play in that game over anything Palko did in the preseason.

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2011/8/27/2387827/st-louis-rams-kansas-city-chiefs-preseason

SNR
12-17-2011, 03:54 PM
Stanzi played well against St.Louis so did Palko. Palko moved the ball and played great against Baltimore it solidified his spot as a backup IMO.

Nope that's not what I'm saying at all. I even said Stanzi should get a chance to start. What I'm saying is it's not a conspiracy that Palko was ahead of Stanzi on the depth chart like JD and Milkman are suggesting.I've said this a thousand times. It's not so much a conspiracy that Stanzi was under Palko, but a method. Stanzi was a 5th round rookie. Haley/Parcells/Patriot Way protocol says his ass goes on the bench and it stays on the bench. That's exactly what happened with Tom Brady during his rookie year.

Stanzi could have gone 20/20 with a billion yards and 20 TDs in the preseason and it wouldn't have mattered. He was going to sit on the bench this year. He was predestined to it for this season.

Also, your argument that Palko did great against Baltimore, which is why he deserved the 2nd string spot is pretty shaky. Palko was still playing with many #1 guys when he took over the game. Stanzi was left with the worst offensive line I've ever seen play in an NFL game (our 2nd/3rd/4th stringers) and fartdiarrhea for receivers.

milkman
12-17-2011, 03:54 PM
Palko also had the most attempts of anyone in preseason and threw for less average yards than Stanzi.

6 yards per attempt.

Dinked and dunked his way top the back up job.

I didn't get a chance to see that Green Bay game, but I', betting that one TD came late in the game against the scrubs the Pack were cutting.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 03:55 PM
Stanzi played well against St.Louis so did Palko. Palko moved the ball and played great against Baltimore it solidified his spot as a backup IMO.

Nope that's not what I'm saying at all. I even said Stanzi should get a chance to start. What I'm saying is it's not a conspiracy that Palko was ahead of Stanzi on the depth chart like JD and Milkman are suggesting.

I never said it was a conspiracy.

Palko started for 2 reasons...

1) He was Haley's guy.
2) Haley hated Pioli.

It's no coincidence that Palko is practically removed from the team and is now behind Stanzi, a guy who has never taken a snap in the regular season, immediately after Haley was fired.

milkman
12-17-2011, 03:59 PM
I've said this a thousand times. It's not so much a conspiracy that Stanzi was under Palko, but a method. Stanzi was a 5th round rookie. Haley/Parcells/Patriot Way protocol says his ass goes on the bench and it stays on the bench. That's exactly what happened with Tom Brady during his rookie year.

Stanzi could have gone 20/20 with a billion yards and 20 TDs in the preseason and it wouldn't have mattered. He was going to sit on the bench this year. He was predestined to it for this season.

Also, your argument that Palko did great against Baltimore, which is why he deserved the 2nd string spot is pretty shaky. Palko was still playing with many #1 guys when he took over the game. Stanzi was left with the worst offensive line I've ever seen play in an NFL game (our 2nd/3rd/4th stringers) and fartdiarrhea for receivers.

Can't remember.

Was it against the Ravens that Stanzi was under extreme pressure, with the entire D-Line busting through, he broke contain and got an underhand flip to Battle(?) that turne into a reasonable gain?

Stanzi also made throws that neither Cassel and certainly not Palko could make that were dropped by his receivers.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 04:01 PM
6 yards per attempt.

Dinked and dunked his way top the back up job.

I didn't get a chance to see that Green Bay game, but I', betting that one TD came late in the game against the scrubs the Pack were cutting.

It was in the 2nd QTR.

jd1020
12-17-2011, 04:04 PM
Stanzi could have gone 20/20 with a billion yards and 20 TDs in the preseason and it wouldn't have mattered. He was going to sit on the bench this year. He was predestined to it for this season.

He would have started if he went 50/50.

veist
12-17-2011, 04:23 PM
6 yards per attempt.

Dinked and dunked his way top the back up job.

I didn't get a chance to see that Green Bay game, but I', betting that one TD came late in the game against the scrubs the Pack were cutting.

Palko looked terribad in the GB game, I was watching it with my GB fan friend and all we could both talk about was how terrible Palko looked playing with 1s against mostly 3s and 4s -- well, that and what a dumbass Mark Castle was for getting himself hurt and that play was on him. The lack of talent they were playing against was most obvious when the Packers had Josh Gordy going against Bowe and Bowe pretty much was open on every play. If the offense had been "throw it to Bowe" Palko probably could've gone 20/20 with 4 TDs.

milkman
12-17-2011, 04:26 PM
Ricky Stanzi and Iowa must have ass raped the Cornhuskers at some point during Stanzi's career there.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 04:32 PM
Ricky Stanzi and Iowa must have ass raped the Cornhuskers at some point during Stanzi's career there.

Iowa hasn't beaten Nebraska since I've been alive. What's that have to do with anything though? Palko played better in the preseason than Stanzi it's the truth. Ricky Stanzi is nothing more than Curtis Painter it's so annoying coming on here constantly hearing about his mediocre ass. He wasn't even a great college QB.

milkman
12-17-2011, 04:36 PM
Iowa hasn't beaten Nebraska since I've been alive. What's that have to do with anything though? Palko played better in the preseason than Stanzi it's the truth. Ricky Stanzi is nothing more than Curtis Painter it's so annoying coming on here constantly hearing about his mediocre ass. He wasn't even a great college QB.

You're the only dumbass arguing that Palko played better than Stanzi in the preseason.

Anyone with eyes saw that your "truth" is absolute bullshit.

And, again, I'm not arguing that Stanzi is the future.

I am only arguing that you are a fucking moron.

SNR
12-17-2011, 04:53 PM
Iowa hasn't beaten Nebraska since I've been alive. What's that have to do with anything though? Palko played better in the preseason than Stanzi it's the truth. Ricky Stanzi is nothing more than Curtis Painter it's so annoying coming on here constantly hearing about his mediocre ass. He wasn't even a great college QB.I asked you if Stanzi would have shit himself as thoroughly as Palko has done since starting and you said no.

So how is it that Palko is better than Stanzi again?

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 06:05 PM
I asked you if Stanzi would have shit himself as thoroughly as Palko has done since starting and you said no.

So how is it that Palko is better than Stanzi again?


I don't think I've stated anywhere that Palko is better than Stanzi other than this preseason. I think Stanzi could be a backup someday while Palko won't be in the NFL. I'm not sure why one little comment turned into such a huge debate in a thread about Ryan Tannehill.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 06:06 PM
You're the only dumbass arguing that Palko played better than Stanzi in the preseason.

Anyone with eyes saw that your "truth" is absolute bullshit.

And, again, I'm not arguing that Stanzi is the future.

I am only arguing that you are a ****ing moron.

Yeah the only one nevermind the Chiefs made him the backup.


You still haven't been able to backup your argument. I made a clear case with factual evidence. You might want to go over to LibertForest they like the Conspiracy type over there.

How the fuck could you remember who played better when you a number of times mistated things in the preseason to make your argument look better?

SNR
12-17-2011, 06:30 PM
I don't think I've stated anywhere that Palko is better than Stanzi other than this preseason. I think Stanzi could be a backup someday while Palko won't be in the NFL. I'm not sure why one little comment turned into such a huge debate in a thread about Ryan Tannehill.Uhp. I got ahead of myself. You did specify preseason. Sorry about that.

I still think you're underselling Stanzi's play and overselling Palko's play from preseason. Again, Palko had actual STARTERS on the offensive line when he was in the game. Stanzi had some in the game against the Rams, true, but he also played better than Palko in that game (stats support my case on this one). It comes down to the Baltimore game when Palko had a good few seconds of time to actually set his feet after taking his drop from the snap and then make a decision. I think you're forgetting how fucking awful of a situation Stanzi had when he was playing.

Chocolate Hog
12-17-2011, 06:45 PM
Uhp. I got ahead of myself. You did specify preseason. Sorry about that.

I still think you're underselling Stanzi's play and overselling Palko's play from preseason. Again, Palko had actual STARTERS on the offensive line when he was in the game. Stanzi had some in the game against the Rams, true, but he also played better than Palko in that game (stats support my case on this one). It comes down to the Baltimore game when Palko had a good few seconds of time to actually set his feet after taking his drop from the snap and then make a decision. I think you're forgetting how ****ing awful of a situation Stanzi had when he was playing.

I'm not denying Stanzi was put into some tough spots but I also think Palko was as well. I remember Cassel looking like complete shit then Palko got sometime with the starters and outperformed Cassel. Either way I wasn't comfortable going into the season with Stanzi or Palko as the backup I think that was a joke. Stanzi did look good against the Rams and did some other good things as well. I think he was a work in progress though as I recall he missed some guys deep a few times but yes I do think Palko played better in the preseason. No, I don't think Palko will be a better QB when it's all said and done. Yes, I think Ricky Stanzi should get a look as a starter here the last few games.

jspchief
12-17-2011, 07:01 PM
Don't know if Tannehill will go in the first or not. I could see his stock climbing after the combine.

Maybe we move down in the 1st or up in the 2nd to get him, where I'm guessing he could go.

Personally I'd prefer him over Laundry or Foles.

crossbow
12-17-2011, 07:09 PM
He realy should go in the top of the 2nd round but there are a lot of teams that want to upgrade the QB postition this year so the Chiefs may have to spend a 1st on him. It would look like a reach but he has the tools to work with. I would be pleased to get him on the team. We know he can play receiver can he play right tackle too? That would be a big plus :).

milkman
12-17-2011, 07:22 PM
Yeah the only one nevermind the Chiefs made him the backup.


You still haven't been able to backup your argument. I made a clear case with factual evidence. You might want to go over to LibertForest they like the Conspiracy type over there.

How the **** could you remember who played better when you a number of times mistated things in the preseason to make your argument look better?

I gave factual evidence with the stats from the Rams game.

And where did mistate anything?

And at the end of the day, I have also said over and over again, stats mean jack to me.

I believe what my eyes tell me, and eyes tell me that Stanzi played better when given the same the same kind of opportunity that Palko received.

He played better with the second team than Palko did, and he played better in that situation that Plako did when he played with the first team.

My eyes also tell me that you are a fucking idiot.

milkman
12-17-2011, 07:24 PM
And, ftr, Stanzi outplayed Plako by a fucking mile in that Rams game, driving the Chiefs to their only TD in that game, and he made passes in every game he played in that neither Cassel or Palko can ever dream of making.

Chiefnj2
12-17-2011, 07:38 PM
In known passing situations (3rd and long and when trailing by 8 or more points in a game) Tannehill's completion % was a lot lower than Foles and lower than Cousins.

SNR
12-17-2011, 08:02 PM
In known passing situations (3rd and long and when trailing by 8 or more points in a game) Tannehill's completion % was a lot lower than Foles and lower than Cousins.Cousins is also a lucky fucking son of a whore.

Coogs
12-17-2011, 09:24 PM
You guys are really sluffing off on the job! Tannehill's gal...

http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2011/11/25/ryan-tannehills-fiancee-is-lauren-ufer-a-budding-model/

Tribal Warfare
12-17-2011, 11:49 PM
I'd take him, they kid was nails in the K-State game.

aturnis
12-18-2011, 12:00 AM
I'm not denying Stanzi was put into some tough spots but I also think Palko was as well. I remember Cassel looking like complete shit then Palko got sometime with the starters and outperformed Cassel. Either way I wasn't comfortable going into the season with Stanzi or Palko as the backup I think that was a joke. Stanzi did look good against the Rams and did some other good things as well. I think he was a work in progress though as I recall he missed some guys deep a few times but yes I do think Palko played better in the preseason. No, I don't think Palko will be a better QB when it's all said and done. Yes, I think Ricky Stanzi should get a look as a starter here the last few games.

I remember two deep balls off the top of my head. One, fell PERFECTLY in the bread basket of the receiver, in stride, and the idiot dropped it. Might have been Horne or another one of the phuqtards this team keeps around at WR.

The other, was a TD to Cody Slate.

Overall, their stats for the preseason were really similar. Palko had the benefit of playing with the first and second teams though. Whereas Stanzi got to play behind a terrible OL with terrible receivers. The amount of quality passing outright dropped by the receivers was pretty bad considering he only threw 34 passes total...

Mr_Tomahawk
12-21-2011, 12:26 PM
Just a reminder for those who haven't seen him play much this year...

http://meinekecarcarebowloftexas.com/images/uploads/galleries/MCCBOT-announcementweb-northwestern.jpg

Sofa King
12-21-2011, 01:21 PM
You guys are really sluffing off on the job! Tannehill's gal...

http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2011/11/25/ryan-tannehills-fiancee-is-lauren-ufer-a-budding-model/

Damn.

Chiefnj2
12-21-2011, 01:23 PM
Just a reminder for those who haven't seen him play much this year...

http://meinekecarcarebowloftexas.com/images/uploads/galleries/MCCBOT-announcementweb-northwestern.jpg

People will end up liking NW's QB.

htismaqe
12-21-2011, 01:25 PM
People will end up liking NW's QB.

Persa is a baller. But he's not an NFL baller.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-25-2011, 07:53 AM
http://photoblog.statesman.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/jwj-cv-ut-09.jpg

Mr_Tomahawk
12-30-2011, 12:59 PM
Bump.

Less than 24 hours for those who haven't had a chance to watch him this year...

whoman69
12-30-2011, 01:33 PM
Does my watching them mean he's going to be more than a second or third round talent that some are pushing us to take in the first round?

jspchief
12-30-2011, 04:33 PM
Does my watching them mean he's going to be more than a second or third round talent that some are pushing us to take in the first round?A lot of people recognize that the first round QBs may all be gone, and want him to be considered in the 2nd.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-30-2011, 04:36 PM
A lot of people recognize that the first round QBs may all be gone, and want him to be considered in the 2nd.

I think he will be gone by the 2nd...

Detoxing
12-30-2011, 04:38 PM
I think he will be gone by the 2nd...

He shouldn't be. Dude is a project.

I like his size and athleticism. I also like his toughness in the pocket. But how many games has he started at QB again?

Mr_Tomahawk
12-30-2011, 04:40 PM
He shouldn't be. Dude is a project.

I like his size and athleticism. I also like his toughness in the pocket. But how many games has he started at QB again?

More than Cassel LMAO but that is besides the point....


I am just saying this due to the number of teams looking for a 1st rnd caliber QB. With Barkley and Laundry returning to school...I think teams are going to start to pick apart Tannehill and convince themselves he is worthy of a late 1st rnd grade.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-30-2011, 04:42 PM
Also with this qb class thinning out...I can see teams in need of a QB getting trigger happy and perhaps drafting him earlier than he "should" be so they do not miss out on him...

Detoxing
12-30-2011, 04:45 PM
More than Cassel LMAO but that is besides the point....


I am just saying this due to the number of teams looking for a 1st rnd caliber QB. With Barkley and Laundry returning to school...I think teams are going to start to pick apart Tannehill and convince themselves he is worthy of a late 1st rnd grade.

Possibly.

But I don't think we'll see the panic from teams like we saw this past draft. Most of the teams that were desperate for QB's already took one. I think Tannehill will go 2nd-3rd. Which is fine by me. I'd be all for taking Tannehill in the 2nd-3rd. He's shown more poise under duress than Cassel ever has.

Detoxing
12-30-2011, 04:47 PM
Also with this qb class thinning out...I can see teams in need of a QB getting trigger happy and perhaps drafting him earlier than he "should" be so they do not miss out on him...

Which teams though?

Cleveland....

Washington.....

Miami seems content enough with Moore to not make a monumental reach on a QB......

Jax isn't going to give up on Gabbert for a project like Ryan.......

Who am I missing here?

jspchief
12-30-2011, 04:47 PM
I think his stock will rise after the combine. My guess is late first at highest, late 2nd at lowest.

Detoxing
12-30-2011, 04:50 PM
All I can count is Washington, Seattle & Cleveland. With one of those 3 likely getting RGIII.

Once a QB slides by KC, I think the rest of the QB's are in for an epic slide.

HemiEd
12-30-2011, 04:51 PM
You guys have sold me. I am grabbing a seat on the Tannehill bandwagon.

ILChief
12-30-2011, 05:05 PM
He seems ok but is he really any better than Stanzi?

Three7s
12-30-2011, 05:08 PM
He seems ok but is he really any better than Stanzi?
We'll never know because all this organization cares about is Cassel and his mediocrity.

Frankie
12-30-2011, 06:06 PM
Which teams though?

Cleveland....

Washington.....

Miami seems content enough with Moore to not make a monumental reach on a QB......

Jax isn't going to give up on Gabbert for a project like Ryan.......

Who am I missing here?Seattle too.

Miami may not be interested in Tannehill with their first pick, but their 2nd will be before our 2nd and if Tannehill is there I don't think they'll pass on him.

Rudy lost the toss
12-30-2011, 06:11 PM
I root for the aggies. The guy was the anti-clutch all year and he routinely missed easy throws. Maybe it was the Senior curse for the A&M QB, but I wouldn't spend a 2nd on him.

EDIT: My QB evaluation is generally awful

King_Chief_Fan
12-30-2011, 06:45 PM
He seems ok but is he really any better than Stanzi?

It is clear Stanzi sucks. He couldn't crack getting to dress out with team

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 08:18 AM
Less than 3 hours.

Chiefnj2
12-31-2011, 08:19 AM
Tannehill can't possibly look any less impressive than Jones did last year (1st half that I saw).

ILChief
12-31-2011, 08:30 AM
It is clear Stanzi sucks. He couldn't crack getting to dress out with team

Because Haley had a man crush on Palko

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 09:58 AM
About 1 hour to kickoff.

If I am understanding those who follow him weekly....it would be ideal to see him be down in the 4th and orchestrate a solid drive downfield?

beach tribe
12-31-2011, 10:54 AM
It is clear Stanzi sucks. He couldn't crack getting to dress out with team

^knows jack shit about how Parcells disciples treat late round QBs.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 10:57 AM
Game time

Pasta Giant Meatball
12-31-2011, 11:02 AM
About 1 hour to kickoff.

If I am understanding those who follow him weekly....it would be ideal to see him be down in the 4th and orchestrate a solid drive downfield?

I'd rather see him play well all game, but that's just me. I have no ambition to watch a guy "Tebow" the first 3 quarters away.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 11:06 AM
Nice to see a QB play from under center for a change...

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 11:23 AM
Should have been a TD

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 11:24 AM
Midway thru the 1st.

7/10 for 78 yards. 0 td - 0 int

Saul Good
12-31-2011, 11:36 AM
One of those incompletions was a TD. The officials blew it.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 11:38 AM
One of those incompletions was a TD. The officials blew it.

Agreed.

Edit: A nice pass I might add also...

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 11:40 AM
3 drops by A&M receivers.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 11:41 AM
End of 1st half.

Tannehill 8/14 for 88 yards. 0 tds - 0 ints

KcMizzou
12-31-2011, 11:49 AM
End of 1st half.

Tannehill 8/14 for 88 yards. 0 tds - 0 intsAre you posting from the future?

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 11:51 AM
Are you posting from the future?

Lol.


My done gon fuqtarded! Durp.

Sent from my MB612 using Tapatalk

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 11:53 AM
For those who are as slow as myself...that was suppose to be end of 1st qtr...not half.

Sent from my MB612 using Tapatalk

jspchief
12-31-2011, 12:19 PM
Looked good on that drive. Nice touch on that TD throw.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 12:28 PM
NOW...end of the half.

17/24 for 195 yards 1 td* - 0 ints

*should be 2 tds.

A career day for Cassel.

Chocolate Hog
12-31-2011, 12:39 PM
End of 1st half.

Tannehill 8/14 for 88 yards. 0 tds - 0 ints

But folks on Chiefsplanet says he sucks!

jspchief
12-31-2011, 12:48 PM
But folks on Chiefsplanet says he sucks!

What I've seen today isn't going to leave a RG3 impression, but he's not that type of QB. He has shown good poise in the pocket, the ability to look downfield while scrambling, and nice touch on a range of throws. He also has the tangibles that I think will appeal to a lot of NFL GMs.

Chocolate Hog
12-31-2011, 12:49 PM
What I've seen today isn't going to leave a RG3 impression, but he's not that type of QB. He has shown good poise in the pocket, the ability to look downfield while scrambling, and nice touch on a range of throws. He also has the tangibles that I think will appeal to a lot of NFL GMs.

Only his 2nd year playing QB in college too. Like I said give this guy a year to develop and I think he'll be a very good QB. If we decide not to trade up for RGIII I would love to draft him.

O.city
12-31-2011, 01:07 PM
Could tannehill be this years rothlisberger

jspchief
12-31-2011, 01:09 PM
Could tannehill be this years rothlisberger

In what way?

O.city
12-31-2011, 01:15 PM
In what way?

Fall down the draft board to us in the teens and lead us to a sb

jspchief
12-31-2011, 01:17 PM
Fall down the draft board to us in the teens and lead us to a sb

Teens wouldn't be a fall. More likely a good jump.

But I like the way you think.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 01:33 PM
End of 3rd qtr.

22/32 for 260 yards. 1 tds - 0 ints

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 01:37 PM
Tannehill with a poor pass from his endzone. Pass is intercepted.

BWillie
12-31-2011, 01:48 PM
I would be really pissed if we picked Tannehill.

Setsuna
12-31-2011, 02:10 PM
I would be really pissed if we picked Tannehill.

Oh can it already. You aren't in a position to pick who you want anymore. Chiefs are nothing without a competent QB. You don't want Tannehill, so you'd rather draft no QB right? Get out.

chiefzilla1501
12-31-2011, 02:14 PM
Could tannehill be this years rothlisberger

No.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 02:17 PM
Player of the Game: Ryan Tannehill

27/40 for 329 yards. 1 td - 1 int

Bewbies
12-31-2011, 02:18 PM
Tannehill doesn't follow the Parcells QB rules, we won't draft him.

Chocolate Hog
12-31-2011, 02:18 PM
Player of the Game: Ryan Tannehill

27/40 for 329 yards. 1 td - 1 int

Would you draft him in the 1st?

chiefzilla1501
12-31-2011, 02:18 PM
Oh can it already. You aren't in a position to pick who you want anymore. Chiefs are nothing without a competent QB. You don't want Tannehill, so you'd rather draft no QB right? Get out.

Jfc. So we're so stuck on drafting a qb in the first round that we would reach even if we force a qb we don't necessarily want onto our roster?

This place has gone haywire. First round picks are important. If you're not excited about the qbs there then either trade up or down. If you cant do that then pick somebody you're excited about.

I hate this rigid thinking. And now, we are going to have a bazillions threads that are going to make mediocre qbs look like superstars. Or at least convince ourselves of this.

If tannehill grades as a top 20 pick then take him. Somehow, I think we are the o ly people who would grade him as such.

Setsuna
12-31-2011, 02:21 PM
Jfc. So we're so stuck on drafting a qb in the first round that we would reach even if we force a qb we don't necessarily want onto our roster?

This place has gone haywire. First round picks are important. If you're not excited about the qbs there then either trade up or down. If you cant do that then pick somebody you're excited about.

I hate this rigid thinking. And now, we are going to have a bazillions threads that are going to make mediocre qbs look like superstars. Or at least convince ourselves of this.

If tannehill grades as a top 20 pick then take him. Somehow, I think we are the o ly people who would grade him as such.
I didn't say pick him in the first round. I'm saying you can't be picky anymore because you won too many games and your GM is an idiot. Outside of Tannehill, who else is better that won't be in the first round?

SNR
12-31-2011, 02:22 PM
Jfc. So we're so stuck on drafting a qb in the first round that we would reach even if we force a qb we don't necessarily want onto our roster?

This place has gone haywire. First round picks are important. If you're not excited about the qbs there then either trade up or down. If you cant do that then pick somebody you're excited about.

I hate this rigid thinking. And now, we are going to have a bazillions threads that are going to make mediocre qbs look like superstars. Or at least convince ourselves of this.

If tannehill grades as a top 20 pick then take him. Somehow, I think we are the o ly people who would grade him as such.Teams need QBs. Look at Locker and Ponder last year.

How much do you want to bet that Tannehill gets drafted in the top 20 this year?

chiefzilla1501
12-31-2011, 02:29 PM
Teams need QBs. Look at Locker and Ponder last year.

How much do you want to bet that Tannehill gets drafted in the top 20 this year?

Ponder soared on the draft boards because he had an incredible combine and was highly regarded anyway. Locker was a ginormous reach. Horrible pick.

Just because other teams are stupid doesn't mean we need to be.

Mr_Tomahawk
12-31-2011, 02:30 PM
Would you draft him in the 1st?

I'd go for it. I feel we can fill all the "other" holes in later rounds.

chiefzilla1501
12-31-2011, 02:35 PM
I didn't say pick him in the first round. I'm saying you can't be picky anymore because you won too many games and your GM is an idiot. Outside of Tannehill, who else is better that won't be in the first round?

I'd agree with you if I felt we were reaching for a legit top 20 prospect. Minnesota was right to reach for ponder. With tannehill, it feels like we are forcing him into that class of qbs even if he doesn't belong there.

It sucks. But we're basically stuck with a second rate qb class. If we want a guy like tannehill, unless he has a remarkable senior bowl and combine, we should trade down our first or, more ideally, trade up our second. If we don't get him, then we go with someone like foles.

SNR
12-31-2011, 02:36 PM
Ponder soared on the draft boards because he had an incredible combine and was highly regarded anyway. Locker was a ginormous reach. Horrible pick.

Just because other teams are stupid doesn't mean we need to be.The Chiefs ARE stupid. Whether we need to be or not is irrelevant. Tyson Jackson ring a bell?

Also, Locker wasn't that massive of a reach. He was a notch below Newton and Gabbert on draft day for sure, but he had ability that teams want in a franchise QB. A team like Tennessee likely assumed he wouldn't be there in the 2nd, so they took him in the first.

When it comes to QBs, you worry much less about pick-to-pick value and go by round-to-round.

As for other teams, your ass better be prepared to see teams "reach" on QBs a lot more often with this new slotting. High contracts aren't that big of a deal, so you'll see a lot more top 10 teams roll the dice on QBs in an effort to find that magic guy. The "DRAFT A QB!!!!!!1111" crowd is neurotically adamant, sure, but they have good reason to be. The stakes are so high right now for the Chiefs to acquire a really good QB. It's going to take some risk to find one since they fucked everything up with Cassel for 3 seasons.

Setsuna
12-31-2011, 02:39 PM
I'd agree with you if I felt we were reaching for a legit top 20 prospect. Minnesota was right to reach for ponder. With tannehill, it feels like we are forcing him into that class of qbs even if he doesn't belong there.

It sucks. But we're basically stuck with a second rate qb class. If we want a guy like tannehill, unless he has a remarkable senior bowl and combine, we should trade down our first or, more ideally, trade up our second. If we don't get him, then we go with someone like foles.

Understood. I hope the Chiefs rise again.

chiefzilla1501
12-31-2011, 02:48 PM
The Chiefs ARE stupid. Whether we need to be or not is irrelevant. Tyson Jackson ring a bell?

Also, Locker wasn't that massive of a reach. He was a notch below Newton and Gabbert on draft day for sure, but he had ability that teams want in a franchise QB. A team like Tennessee likely assumed he wouldn't be there in the 2nd, so they took him in the first.

When it comes to QBs, you worry much less about pick-to-pick value and go by round-to-round.

As for other teams, your ass better be prepared to see teams "reach" on QBs a lot more often with this new slotting. High contracts aren't that big of a deal, so you'll see a lot more top 10 teams roll the dice on QBs in an effort to find that magic guy. The "DRAFT A QB!!!!!!1111" crowd is neurotically adamant, sure, but they have good reason to be. The stakes are so high right now for the Chiefs to acquire a really good QB. It's going to take some risk to find one since they ****ed everything up with Cassel for 3 seasons.

Locker was a massive reach by an organization who has no idea what they're doing. You can't teach accuracy. Locker is horribly inaccurate. Just because dumb teams do dumb things doesn't mean we follow suit.

The draft a qb crowd is adamant. But like all things, they can also take it to an extreme. Unless tannehill gets a legit top 20 grade, it is a tremendous reach to draft him. You don't just throw awa first round picks. If don't believe he deserves a top 20 grade, then trade up your second, trade down hour first, or just pick someone else in the second.

Saul Good
12-31-2011, 03:29 PM
We need to find a team that always collapses in the fourth quarter and draft their QB.

whoman69
12-31-2011, 05:10 PM
We need to find a team that always collapses in the fourth quarter and draft their QB.

So we should draft Matt Cassel?

milkman
12-31-2011, 05:18 PM
So we should draft Matt Cassel?

The team with Matt Cassel at QB collapses in the first qtr.

Frankie
01-01-2012, 06:49 PM
I didn't say pick him in the first round. I'm saying you can't be picky anymore because you won too many games and your GM is an idiot. Outside of Tannehill, who else is better that won't be in the first round?

I would love for the Chiefs to trade down and still pick him later in the first. He will NOT be available to us in the 2nd.

Frankie
01-01-2012, 06:54 PM
Matt Flynn had a monster day today. Like Milkman suggested someone ahead of us might sign him and "solve" their QB problem, making our options better regarding a QB like Tannehill.

Mr_Tomahawk
01-09-2012, 10:16 AM
Now that Black Monday has passed, several teams in the top 10 of the draft are going to be run by new general managers or at least have new coaches who will have a major voice in the selection process.

These teamsóin particular, the Colts and Ramsóneed a lot of talent and the new men in charge will have little allegiance to the current players on the team. So donít be shocked to see a number of well-known veterans cut or traded by these bad teams.

Texas A&M QB Ryan Tannehill will benefit from some his peers' decisions. (AP Photo)
No matter what happens with Colts coach Jim Caldwell, whose status is still up in the air, look for Indy to take Andrew Luck with the first pick. There was more evidence on Saturday, as ESPN reported that the Colts plan to select Luck.

Meanwhile, with Oklahomaís Landry Jones and USCís Matt Barkley staying in school, you can bet Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehillís stock is rising and will continue to climb right up until draft day.

There are still a number of underclassmen who have yet to make their intentions known, but based on the information we have now, hereís how our newest mock draft shakes out:

1. Indianapolis Colts: Andrew Luck*, QB, Stanford. Regardless of the fact that Bill and Chris Polian are no longer running the team, the Colts must make the smart choice by drafting Andrew Luck because no one knows whether Peyton Manning will be able to play at his pre-injury level.

2. St. Louis Rams: Justin Blackmon*, WR, Oklahoma State. With a new head coach (expected to be Jeff Fisher) on board, the Rams will likely trade this pick to a team that wants Baylor quarterback Robert Griffin III. If they keep the pick, they will have a hard time passing on Blackmon, who showed he is an elite talent in Oklahoma Stateís Fiesta Bowl win over Stanford.

3. Minnesota Vikings: Matt Kalil*, OT, USC. The Vikings know that if Christian Ponder is going to develop, they have to find a left tackle to upgrade their pass protection. Kalil is the best offensive tackle in the draft and should be able to start as a rookie.

4. Cleveland Browns: Robert Griffin III*, QB, Baylor. The Browns will likely have to trade up if they want to secure Griffin. They know they need to find a long-term solution at quarterback because Colt McCoy has not shown the goods in his two seasons.

5. Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Jonathan Martin*, OT, Stanford. The Bucs need to think long and hard about taking Trent Richardson to upgrade their rushing attack. But without quality pass protection, Josh Freeman will never become a top-level quarterback. So Martin is the logical choice.

6. Washington Redskins: Ryan Tannehill, QB, Texas A&M. Tannehill is still developing after switching from wideout to quarterback in 2010. With his elite athleticism, size (6-4, 225) and strong arm, he fits the mold of a Mike Shanahan quarterback.

7. Jacksonville Jaguars: Quinton Coples, DE, North Carolina. Aaron Kampman hasnít played much in two seasons with the Jaguars because of injuries, and that has hindered the Jaguarsí ability to pressure the quarterback. Coples is a strong, physical end who could upgrade their pass rush quickly.

8. (tie) Carolina Panthers: Devon Still, DT, Penn State. Throughout much of the 2011 season, the Panthers started two rookie defensive tacklesóand the inside pass rush was weak. Still is a powerful man who can control blockers, shoot gaps and disrupt running plays in the backfield.

8. (tie) Miami Dolphins: Zach Brown, OLB, North Carolina. Considering Cameron Wake is the Dolphins' only established pass rusher, Brown brings the skills this team needs. He has the explosiveness and edge pass-rush ability to be an ideal fit rushing from outside linebacker in the Dolphinsí 3-4 scheme.

10. Buffalo Bills: Riley Reiff*, OT, Iowa. Ryan Fitzpatrick struggled greatly over the second half of 2011, and if the Bills canít provide better pass protection in 2012, their passing attack will not improve.

11. (tie) Kansas City Chiefs: David DeCastro*, G, Stanford. The Chiefs had offensive line issues for much of 2011, and though they would prefer to get a young offensive tackle, they grab DeCastro here to shore up their interior line.

11. (tie) Seattle Seahawks: Michael Floyd, WR, Notre Dame. Sidney Rice had injury problems in his first season in Seattle, and the Seahawksí offense needs a high-level receiver to open things up and help Tarvaris Jackson make the next step as a starting quarterback.

13. Arizona Cardinals: Alshon Jeffery*, WR, South Carolina. Without Anquan Boldin, the Cardinals' passing attack struggled with consistency the past two seasons as defenses were able to focus on Larry Fitzgerald. Grabbing Jeffery who has rare size (6-4, 233), makes perfect sense because he would be a nice complement to Fitzgerald.

14. Dallas Cowboys: Morris Claiborne*, CB, LSU. Dallas' secondary was exposed over and over again in 2011, and veteran corner Terence Newman really struggled. That leads Dallas to select the most physically gifted cornerback in the draft.

15. Philadelphia Eagles: Luke Kuechly*, LB, Boston College. The Eagles donít have many glaring needs, but linebacker is definitely one. So they take Kuechly, who would provide needed playmaking ability at the second level.

16. New York Jets: Trent Richardson*, RB, Alabama. Shonn Greene has not developed into a top back, so they grab Richardsonóan elite prospect who slid down to them because the value of running backs has fallen in this pass-first league.

17. Cincinnati Bengals (From Oakland), Mark Barron, S, Alabama. The Bengals have not received consistent play from their safeties, and Barron would fill that need. He is a smart, instinctive defender who consistently makes good decisions and is in the right spot to make impact plays.

18. San Diego Chargers: Nick Perry*, OLB, USC. San Diego's defense didnít make enough impact plays, and too often could not get off the field. So they grab Perry, who should fit in well in the Chargersí 3-4 scheme.

19. Chicago Bears: Dre Kirkpatrick*, CB, Alabama. Though the Bears want to upgrade their offensive line, there arenít any top-level linemen left on the board. They select the 6-3 Kirkpatrick, who excels in tight man coverage and has the long arms and ball skills to break up and intercept passes.

20. Tennessee Titans: Juron Criner, WR, Arizona. Kenny Britt had major knee surgery in September, and the Titans want to shore up the position. They choose the underrated Criner, who can make an immediate impact as a big-play wideout.

21. Denver Broncos: Alfonzo Dennard, CB, Nebraska. The Broncos may consider drafting a quarterback in the first round. But in the end, they add a cornerback because Champ Bailey is not getting any younger.

22. Cincinnati Bengals: Doug Martin, RB, Boise State. Cedric Benson will be a free agent this offseason, and the Bengals will likely draft a potential starting back rather than pay Benson big bucks.

23. New York Giants: Zebrie Sanders, OT, Florida State. With Kareem McKenzie nearing the end of a long career, the Giants jump at the chance to grab Zanders as their future right tackle.

24. Houston Texans: Dontari Poe*, NT, Memphis. The Texansí 3-4 defense was very good in 2011 even though it didnít have a big nose tackle. Houston gambles that Poe (6-5, 350) will fulfill his considerable potential after not being a dominant producer at Memphis.

25. Cleveland Browns (from Atlanta): Kendall Wright, WR, Baylor. After grabbing their quarterback of the future early in the draft, they take the man he threw the ball to at Baylor to be a big-play receiver.

26. Detroit Lions: Janoris Jenkins, CB, North Alabama. The Lions have struggled to find high-quality starting cornerbacks and are willing to take a gamble on Jenkins. If he can take care of his business off the field, he has tools to be a playmaking cornerback.

27. Baltimore Ravens: Vontaze Burfict*, ILB, Arizona State. Burfict decided to come out early despite not having a great junior season. If he gets back on track, he would be an ideal replacement for Ray Lewis down the road.

28. Pittsburgh Steelers: Brandon Thompson, NT, Clemson. Longtime nose tackle Casey Hampton is 34 and had injury problems this season, so Pittsburgh continues its D-line youth movement by grabbing Thompson. He can learn under Hampton for a season or two before taking over as the starter.

29. New England Patriots (from New Orleans): Fletcher Cox*, DT, Mississippi State. The Patriotsí defense struggled big-time this season, and Cox would be an excellent addition in an under-tackle role next to nose tackle Vince Wilfork.

30. San Francisco 49ers: Dwight Jones, WR, North Carolina. The 49ers need receiving help to work with top wideout Michael Crabtree. They jump at the chance to grab Jones, who has the size (6-4), strength and run-after-catch ability that the 49ers desperately need.

31. New England Patriots: Melvin Ingram, DE, South Carolina. Andre Carter, the Patriotsí best pass rusher in 2011, is 32 and had season-ending quadriceps surgery last month. The Pats have to find other pass rushers, and Ingram has the tools to be effective off the edge.

32. Green Bay Packers: Jerel Worthy*, DT, Michigan State. Worthy did not play like a first-rounder in 2011. But he has top-10 talent and the Packers are willing to gamble here because they need to upgrade their defensive line.



Read more: http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/feed/2011-10/nfl-mock-draft/story/mock-draft-with-barkley-jones-staying-put-ams-tannehill-moves-into-top-10#ixzz1iyiQqhNb

Pasta Giant Meatball
01-09-2012, 10:18 AM
A fucking guard :facepalm: How many years in a row are they going to project the Chiefs taking a RT or interior lineman?

Mr_Tomahawk
01-09-2012, 10:18 AM
It'd be really nice if Tyler Wilson declared...

ChiTown
01-09-2012, 10:23 AM
A ****ing guard :facepalm: How many years in a row are they going to project the Chiefs taking a RT or interior lineman?

I don't see us taking an OG with the 11th pick.

Detoxing
01-09-2012, 10:25 AM
I don't see us taking an OG with the 11th pick.

Nope.

Taking an OL in the first is a yearly Mock draft tradition. Pretty sure they do it just to fuck with us fans.

royr17
01-09-2012, 10:51 AM
I wouldnt mind us taking a guard in the first and a tackle in the second. those are two weak spots on our offensive line. lilja is a liability and richardson is a major liability i'd be happy with either a guard or a tackle in the first.

ChiefsandO'sfan
01-10-2012, 11:51 AM
TonyPaulineTony Pauline


Multiple sources have told me Ryan Tannehill/QB/Tex A&M suffered a significant foot injury last week during training in Florida. More later

Mr_Tomahawk
01-10-2012, 11:55 AM
TonyPaulineTony Pauline


Multiple sources have told me Ryan Tannehill/QB/Tex A&M suffered a significant foot injury last week during training in Florida. More later

http://bbsimg.ngfiles.com/1/21701000/ngbbs4c79e0ab3f88c.jpg

Chiefnj2
01-10-2012, 12:13 PM
I guess he won't be at the Senior Bowl.

Micjones
01-10-2012, 12:16 PM
TonyPaulineTony Pauline


Multiple sources have told me Ryan Tannehill/QB/Tex A&M suffered a significant foot injury last week during training in Florida. More later

Riley Reiff? Come on down.

:banghead:

BigChiefFan
01-10-2012, 01:45 PM
No way does Claiborne falls that far.

Mr_Tomahawk
01-10-2012, 04:20 PM
Tony Pauline @TonyPauline
Ryan Lindley/QB/San Diego St will play in the Senior Bowl. I hear Tannehill's replacement

ChiefsandO'sfan
01-11-2012, 12:53 PM
evansilvaEvan Silva

Sources tell @TonyPauline that #TexasA&M QB Ryan Tannehill could end up as a top-15 overall pick. "Has scouts giddy."

Detoxing
01-11-2012, 12:55 PM
Tony Pauline @TonyPauline
Ryan Lindley/QB/San Diego St will play in the Senior Bowl. I hear Tannehill's replacement

Good for Lindley.

I think the dude has an arm that you just can't teach and I'd be all for taking him in the 2nd-3rd.

Detoxing
01-11-2012, 12:57 PM
evansilvaEvan Silva

Sources tell @TonyPauline that #TexasA&M QB Ryan Tannehill could end up as a top-15 overall pick. "Has scouts giddy."

If the Chiefs scouts think he's the man to lead this franchise, I'd be on board the bandwagon.

The lack of time he's spent at the position has me worried, but from what i've seen, his poise in the pocket is outstanding. And that's crucial in the NFL.

QB's who don't turn into mush in the NFL can have success.

YayMike
01-11-2012, 01:42 PM
so wtf was his inury?

Mr_Tomahawk
01-23-2012, 03:59 PM
Evan Silva @evansilva
Mayock's top 3 quarterbacks for the 2012 draft: 1) Stanford's Andrew Luck 2) Baylor's Robert Griffin III 3) Texas A&M's Ryan Tannehill.

Mr_Tomahawk
01-23-2012, 04:14 PM
Evan Silva @evansilva
Mayock: Tannehill is pretty entrenched as No. 3 QB in draft. Says Weeden, Foles, Osweiler, Cousins, Lindley competing for spots 4-5.

Micjones
01-23-2012, 04:17 PM
The Chiefs should strongly consider taking him once they assess that injury.

seaofred
01-23-2012, 04:41 PM
If the Chiefs can trade back to 20-25 and he's on the board, they have to take him.

Detoxing
01-23-2012, 04:52 PM
If the Chiefs can trade back to 20-25 and he's on the board, they have to take him.

OR

Take Richardson in the 1st

and then trade UP from the 2nd for him....JIMP

Frankie
01-23-2012, 04:59 PM
If the Chiefs can trade back to 20-25 and he's on the board, they have to take him.

Denver might take him ahead of that, IMO. If the foot injury is not a bad enough one to drop him to when we pick in the 2nd then we should not drop down past Denver.

Simplicity
01-23-2012, 05:01 PM
Meh, don't know about Tannehill. Stanzi is better then Tannehill ATM. Understands the game better.

Frankie
01-23-2012, 05:07 PM
Denver might take him ahead of that, IMO. If the foot injury is not a bad enough one to drop him to when we pick in the 2nd then we should not drop down past Denver.

OK I just checked. Denver picks 25th. I didn't remember that when I posted my post. But I'll qualify what I said by saying that if Tannehill's foot is properly healed and he's still there around 20, I bet Elway will try to trade up a few positions to get him. If we really want him our strategy should be to drop down to no lower than 17 +/-.

Detoxing
01-23-2012, 05:09 PM
OK I just checked. Denver picks 25th. I didn't remember that when I posted my post. But I'll qualify what I said by saying that if Tannehill's foot is properly healed and he's still there around 20, I bet Elway will try to trade up a few positions to get him. If we really want him our strategy should be to drop down to no lower than 17 +/-.

No he wouldn't. There would be a freaking Mutiny in Denver if they didn't try to build around Tebow with their 1st. They're far more likely to pick a QB in the later rounds.

chiefzilla1501
01-23-2012, 05:18 PM
Evan Silva @evansilva
Mayock: Tannehill is pretty entrenched as No. 3 QB in draft. Says Weeden, Foles, Osweiler, Cousins, Lindley competing for spots 4-5.

There is a significant drop in talent from #2 and #3. Being 3rd ranked in a ridiculously shallow QB class is nothing to get fired up about.

If this were the 2011 draft, I'd be shocked if he graded that far above Kaepernick.

seaofred
01-23-2012, 05:24 PM
OR

Take Richardson in the 1st

and then trade UP from the 2nd for him....JIMP

That would be great, but we have more pressing needs that a 1st round RB plus the picks it would take to move back into the 1st.

If we move back, we get more picks and and can address the RT position and NT.

Fritz88
01-23-2012, 05:27 PM
Stanzi > Tan

chiefzilla1501
01-23-2012, 05:27 PM
That would be great, but we have more pressing needs that a 1st round RB plus the picks it would take to move back into the 1st.

If we move back, we get more picks and and can address the RT position and NT.

I'd rather get one playmaker in a key role than two good players at lower positional value positions.

We can get a Nose Tackle in the second round. Trade up, if need be.

The Chiefs don't have a guy like Trent Richardson. You want to limit Charles' snaps anyway, and a 1-2 punch around those 2 guys would be simply unstoppable. Richardson turns this team into a serious playoff threat. Riley Reiff makes the Chiefs maybe just barely good enough to make the playoffs.

seaofred
01-23-2012, 05:40 PM
I'd rather get one playmaker in a key role than two good players at lower positional value positions.

We can get a Nose Tackle in the second round. Trade up, if need be.

The Chiefs don't have a guy like Trent Richardson. You want to limit Charles' snaps anyway, and a 1-2 punch around those 2 guys would be simply unstoppable. Richardson turns this team into a serious playoff threat. Riley Reiff makes the Chiefs maybe just barely good enough to make the playoffs.

While Charles and Trent Richardson would be a dangerous 1-2 punch, who is going open holes on the right side for them, or protect the QB on the right side? I would love to see a FA take that spot, but Pioli has shown he is not willing to address positions of need in FA, so we have to address those needs in the draft. That is why we would be better suited trading back and picking up a QBOF and a RT/NT. NT is a need, because Gregg is most likely retiring and even if Powe proves to be a good to above average NT he will still need someone to rotate with. Amon Gordon had a good year for us, but he has been a journeymen for a reason.

Micjones
01-23-2012, 05:41 PM
I'd rather get one playmaker in a key role than two good players at lower positional value positions.

We can get a Nose Tackle in the second round. Trade up, if need be.

The Chiefs don't have a guy like Trent Richardson. You want to limit Charles' snaps anyway, and a 1-2 punch around those 2 guys would be simply unstoppable. Richardson turns this team into a serious playoff threat. Riley Reiff makes the Chiefs maybe just barely good enough to make the playoffs.

We can't spend a #1 on a backup RB.
That's one of the easiest positions to fill in this league.
We can certainly draft a RB, but only if he's taken in the middle or late rounds. The #1 needs to go towards either Tackle, Nose Tackle or QB.

Mr_Tomahawk
01-23-2012, 05:43 PM
Meh, don't know about Tannehill. Stanzi is better then Tannehill ATM. Understands the game better.

Homer.

Tannehill has been a starting QB for less than 2 seasons and wont make it past the 2nd rnd.

Stanzi dropped to the 5th rnd....5th round.

Last years QB class wasn't THAT great either...

chiefzilla1501
01-23-2012, 05:52 PM
While Charles and Trent Richardson would be a dangerous 1-2 punch, who is going open holes on the right side for them, or protect the QB on the right side? I would love to see a FA take that spot, but Pioli has shown he is not willing to address positions of need in FA, so we have to address those needs in the draft. That is why we would be better suited trading back and picking up a QBOF and a RT/NT. NT is a need, because Gregg is most likely retiring and even if Powe proves to be a good to above average NT he will still need someone to rotate with. Amon Gordon had a good year for us, but he has been a journeymen for a reason.

Here's what I've said for a while. People obsess over finding a QBOTF. And they should--it's critical. But out of 32 teams, over a 10-year span, 25+ teams are going to whiff on a franchise QB... maybe multiple times. Often many of them are first round picks. That doesn't mean you give up trying, but you can't build an entire team around the idea that you're going to have a franchise QB. You have to build as if you will never get one, and aggressively go after a franchise QB in the meantime. To me, what that means is... if you think there's a good chance the QB will be franchise, you do whatever it takes to get him (without going overboard on price). If the QB you're thinking about is a longshot, you don't pass up on superstars (see Eric Berry) or reach more than 10 spots to get him.

What Richardson does, for me, is he makes this team very competitive if they don't find a franchise QB, unstoppable if they do find one. Not having a RT isn't going to kill our running game. In fact, Richardson is adequate in run blocking and given that they're grooming Hudson to be our starting Center, our left side is going to be a very good run blocking group. And let's not forget, it's not like we have to get a RT this year. If we draft Richardson in 2012 and get a star in 2013 at RT, we're that much better. The difference is, a guy like Richardson probably won't be available in 2013 when we draft. There will be plenty of good RTs.

Chiefs Pantalones
01-23-2012, 05:56 PM
Trent Dilfer says if Nick Foles played in the SEC he would've been a Heisman candidate, he's that good. He had no help from his teammates. He'll climb up the draft.

chiefzilla1501
01-23-2012, 05:57 PM
We can't spend a #1 on a backup RB.
That's one of the easiest positions to fill in this league.
We can certainly draft a RB, but only if he's taken in the middle or late rounds. The #1 needs to go towards either Tackle, Nose Tackle or QB.

He wouldn't be a backup. Thomas Jones had 250 carries in 2010. Richardson will get that many too. Safety is one of the easiest positions to fill too, but nobody complained when we took Berry, even though Safeties are rarely ever taken in the top 10. RBs are easy to find, but surefire playmakers are a different story.

Richardson alone turns this team into a serious playoff threat in 2012. Next to the QB, the Chiefs' biggest weakness by far is that we are horrendous at short yardage running, red zone efficiency, and goal line. And that's not just bad blocking, that's RBs who can't build an initial head of steam the way Richardson can.

And you figure, if we start Orton, we're going to run the ball a lot (and we should). If we start a rookie, for at least 1-2 years, we're going to run the ball a lot more (and we should). In both scenarios, Richardson plays a very key role and, meanwhile, we don't have to hold our breath and worry that our season is over if Charles limps off the field.

Frankie
01-23-2012, 06:05 PM
No he wouldn't. There would be a freaking Mutiny in Denver if they didn't try to build around Tebow with their 1st. They're far more likely to pick a QB in the later rounds.

I don't know where you got that information. But I disagree with it.

We can't spend a #1 on a backup RB.
That's one of the easiest positions to fill in this league.
We can certainly draft a RB, but only if he's taken in the middle or late rounds. The #1 needs to go towards either Tackle, Nose Tackle or QB.

I agree with EVERY WORD of this post. :thumb:

Detoxing
01-23-2012, 06:21 PM
I don't know where you got that information. But I disagree with it.





So you honestly think denver will look to take a QB in rnd 1?

SNR
01-23-2012, 06:21 PM
What are the odds that Ricky Stanzi is a franchise QB? 1/5? 1/10? 1/20? 1/1000?

I'm just wondering how many Ricky Stanzis/Kick Cousins/Ryan Tannehills we have to draft before we're statistically assumed to have a franchise guy.

Dicky McElephant
01-23-2012, 06:25 PM
Trent Dilfer says if Nick Foles played in the SEC he would've been a Heisman candidate, he's that good. He had no help from his teammates. He'll climb up the draft.

I don't know if I'd go as far as being a Heisman candidate....but it's true that his team did nothing to help him.

I'd be fine with Tannehill, Foles or Lindley coming out of this draft.

Frankie
01-23-2012, 06:30 PM
So you honestly think denver will look to take a QB in rnd 1?

If they get a whiff of a good value in their vicinity. What's Tebow's passing average? Forty some percent? You can't sell that shit to most fans. And I doubt Elway has any incentive to do so.

BossChief
01-23-2012, 06:44 PM
If they get a whiff of a good value in their vicinity. What's Tebow's passing average? Forty some percent? You can't sell that shit to most fans. And I doubt Elway has any incentive to do so.

This post just about broke apart in mid air.

Since when does Elway have to sell the fans on Tebow?

Frankie
01-23-2012, 07:18 PM
This post just about broke apart in mid air.

Since when does Elway have to sell the fans on Tebow?

That's what I said. Read the exchange. When you try to be a smart-ass these are the first two rules:

1- Be informed.

2- Don't be lame.

aturnis
01-23-2012, 07:27 PM
That's what I said. Read the exchange. When you try to be a smart-ass these are the first two rules:

1- Be informed.

2- Don't be lame.

You're an idiot. Denver fans LOVE Tebow. That's Boss's point. Even intelligent Denver fans will not dismiss the fact that he wins games, and they love him for it.

They love him so much that they get plaster cast molds made of their T-Boners so they can remember just how hard he makes them in the offseason. Get a clue.

Mr_Tomahawk
01-23-2012, 07:47 PM
From another thread.

I would be happy with this draft. OL can be addressed in later picks or FA.


Mock Draft by Charlie Campbell (a writer on Walterfootball.com)

11. Ryan Tannehill, QB, Texas A&M
Chiefs quarterback Matt Cassel will turn 30 just after the 2012 NFL Draft and he is not a difference maker. Kansas City could groom the new quarterback for a year or two behind Cassel.

With Matt Barkley and Landry Jones returning to school, I agree with Walt that Ryan Tannehill will move up and get drafted well ahead of where he should go because of the demand at the position. Tannehill could be this year's Blaine Gabbert/Christian Ponder.

The 6-foot-4, 222-pound Tannehill is a good athlete who can make big plays with his feet and has a strong arm. This season, he completed 62 percent of his passes for 3,744 yards with 29 touchdowns and 15 interceptions. The senior also rushed for 355 yards with four touchdowns. Tannehill was inconsistent and is still developing at the position. He played well versus Baylor and Missouri, but struggled against Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas.

Tannehill has only played one full season at quarterback (20 total starts at QB), so he will need time to develop at the pro level. As a wide out in 2008, Tannehill caught 55 passes for 844 yards and five touchdowns. He switched to quarterback in 2010 and played well in the last half of the season as the Aggies' starter. Tannehill completed 65 percent of his passes for 1,638 yards with 13 touchdowns and six interceptions.

44. Lamar Miller, RB, Miami
The Chiefs could use another running back as Thomas Jones is at the end of a line after a good career. Plus, Jamaal Charles is coming off an injury.

Miller had a breakout 2011 season with 1,272 yards and nine touchdowns rushing while averaging 5.46 yards per carry. He was the most consistent weapon for Miami. The redshirt sophomore has an excellent skill set. Miller (5-11, 212) has the size and strength to handle the pounding of a large amount of carries. What makes him stand out is his speed. He has the quickness to hit a hole quickly and the straight-line speed to score on any carry. Miller wanted to hear that he would be a first-rounder in order to declare for the draft. After consulting the advisory board, Miller entered the draft and signed with Drew Rosenhaus.

75. Alameda Ta'amu, NT, Washington
Kelly Gregg is 35, and the Chiefs have some late-rounders as backups. Adding Ta'amu would provide a young nose tackle for the Kansas City defense.

This season, Ta'amu had 30 tackles with seven tackles for a loss and 3.5 sacks. He had a good game against Colorado with five tackles, 1.5 tackles for a loss and .5 sacks. The 6-foot-3, 337-pounder had a terrible performance against Stanford. Ta'amu was a non-factor as the Cardinal was able to run through him and the Huskies' defense with ease. He also played poorly against Baylor in the Alamo Bowl shootout. Still, Ta'amu remains one of the better nose tackles in the draft class, and he is perfect to play the nose in a 3-4 defense (plus remains one of the few genuine candidates available).

Ta'amu was a tough run stuffer as a junior in 2010. He recorded 39 tackles with five tackles for a loss and 1.5 sacks. In his second year as a starter, Ta'amu was an All-Pac-10 honorable mention. Usually, he is a powerful force at the point of attack who is nearly impossible to move.

108. Ryan Broyles, WR, Oklahoma
If the Chiefs are unable to agree to an extension with Dwayne Bowe, they could use another receiver to pair with Jonathan Baldwin.

Broyles' season ended early after sustaining a torn ACL against Texas A&M. Even though the 5-foot-10, 188-pounder is on the smaller side, he was extremely productive and durable prior to that injury. Broyles finished 2011 with 83 receptions for 1,157 yards and 10 touchdowns. WalterFootball.com has learned from sources that he has become a hard working and a high-character individual who should impress teams in the interview and rehab process.

When you watch tape of Broyles, the yards after the catch are undeniable along with his toughness. He recorded 131 receptions for 1,622 yards and 14 touchdowns in 2010. A year earlier, Broyles had 89 catches for 1,120 yards and 15 scores. The senior is a big-time playmaker who is an excellent route-runner, plus he has fabulous hands and good body-control.

BossChief
01-23-2012, 07:54 PM
That's what I said. Read the exchange. When you try to be a smart-ass these are the first two rules:

1- Be informed.

2- Don't be lame.

159, please.

chiefzilla1501
01-23-2012, 08:03 PM
From another thread.

I would be happy with this draft. OL can be addressed in later picks or FA.

Per Walter Football:
"[Tannehill] should be a second-day pick, but the demand for the position has seen his stock rise significantly. "

Awesome.

aturnis
01-23-2012, 08:09 PM
Per Walter Football:
"[Tannehill] should be a second-day pick, but the demand for the position has seen his stock rise significantly. "

Awesome.

Exactly.

MIAdragon
01-23-2012, 08:45 PM
That's what I said. Read the exchange. When you try to be a smart-ass these are the first two rules:

1- Be informed.

2- Don't be lame.

http://i40.tinypic.com/2up8lky.gif

jaa1025
01-23-2012, 09:14 PM
If a GM is dumb enough to draft Tannehill in the 1st it might not only cost him his job but it will likely end his career as a GM.

BossChief
01-23-2012, 09:24 PM
I'm gonna be pissed if we finally take a quarterback in the first round and he is the one guy that I didn't see play in a single game.

Is there a place I can download a game or two of his?

Simplicity
01-23-2012, 09:35 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oXDEzCf3C7Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
There you go, BossChiefs. Not a whole game but all his throws :D

durtyrute
01-23-2012, 09:41 PM
WTF? Why are people so eager to take a first round pick that they overlook the fact that this kid has only played one year? If you're going to have to groom the guy for 2-3 years, you might as well groom the guy you already have first, or draft a guy in a later round. Hell, this kid hasn't even been a QB for that long.

Mr_Tomahawk
01-23-2012, 09:46 PM
WTF? Why are people so eager to take a first round pick that they overlook the fact that this kid has only played one year? If you're going to have to groom the guy for 2-3 years, you might as well groom the guy you already have first, or draft a guy in a later round. Hell, this kid hasn't even been a QB for that long.

We have Cassel and Stanzi under contract. Who else do you bring in to challenge Cassel for a starting position...another 5th rnd qb?

chiefzilla1501
01-23-2012, 09:53 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oXDEzCf3C7Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
There you go, BossChiefs. Not a whole game but all his throws :D

If I'm judging by the video, I see a QB with a quick, compact delivery, pretty nice accuracy on his passes, and a strong enough arm to get the ball into tight spaces. I also see a guy who's surprisingly very good at throwing an accurate ball on the run, even rolling left.

What I'm also seeing (and have seen in other games) is a shotgun QB and a guy who throws a whole lot of quick screen passes. It seemed pretty obvious that he was a 1-read guy--he knows exactly what read he's going to the minute he snaps the ball, which worries me a ton. I see a ton of throws to the outside, which means he's pretty much running a pure spread offense and isn't going through his progressions. I see a guy who doesn't seem too move much in the pocket unless it's by design or unless he tucks the ball under and runs.

Sorry, but this looks like a huge project. That kind of QB is not the type of QB you take in the top 15 let alone the first round. It's not even like he has Jay Cutler like arm strength. If we're going to take a chance on a QB like that, I'd rather wait until later to draft Foles or Cousins at value rather than tremendously reach and waste a first rounder.

chiefzilla1501
01-23-2012, 09:55 PM
WTF? Why are people so eager to take a first round pick that they overlook the fact that this kid has only played one year? If you're going to have to groom the guy for 2-3 years, you might as well groom the guy you already have first, or draft a guy in a later round. Hell, this kid hasn't even been a QB for that long.

Because people are so stuck on the idea of taking a franchise QB that they're pigeonholing themselves into a pick at all costs.

I like the kid enough that I'd be willing to reach for him. I'm not totally against a trade down and then using a late first on him. But that's not going to happen because: a) we won't do that; b) somebody's going to reach embarrassingly high for him.

I agree 100% with you. I don't think there's a huge dropoff between Tannehill and the next best options. It's not like we can throw away a first round pick every single year.

durtyrute
01-23-2012, 09:58 PM
We have Cassel and Stanzi under contract. Who else do you bring in to challenge Cassel for a starting position...another 5th rnd qb?

First off, I'd dump Cassel, but for your question, that mock says he'd have to wait some years to learn. It almost seems like he'd be the guy you would settle for, instead of being the guy you target. And if that's the case we already have a settle for, project guy in Stanzi. If they believe he has first round or even second round talent, then cool, but if he is the guy, because the guy or two or three that you wanted are gone, you might as well stick with what you have and go BPA in position of need.

Mr_Tomahawk
01-23-2012, 10:00 PM
If I'm judging by the video, I see a QB with a quick, compact delivery, pretty nice accuracy on his passes, and a strong enough arm to get the ball into tight spaces. I also see a guy who's surprisingly very good at throwing an accurate ball on the run, even rolling left.

What I'm also seeing (and have seen in other games) is a shotgun QB and a guy who throws a whole lot of quick screen passes. It seemed pretty obvious that he was a 1-read guy--he knows exactly what read he's going to the minute he snaps the ball, which worries me a ton. I see a ton of throws to the outside, which means he's pretty much running a pure spread offense and isn't going through his progressions. I see a guy who doesn't seem too move much in the pocket unless it's by design or unless he tucks the ball under and runs.

Sorry, but this looks like a huge project. That kind of QB is not the type of QB you take in the top 15 let alone the first round. It's not even like he has Jay Cutler like arm strength. If we're going to take a chance on a QB like that, I'd rather wait until later to draft Foles or Cousins at value rather than tremendously reach and waste a first rounder.

That is a good break-down.

A lot of people complain how he has only started one entire season. I understand the concern with this. That said, I see a guy who has developed a lot as a QB in such a short time... He is an intelligent guy who I feel can grow as a QB exponentially under the right guidance.

Mr_Tomahawk
01-23-2012, 10:02 PM
First off, I'd dump Cassel, but for your question, that mock says he'd have to wait some years to learn. It almost seems like he'd be the guy you would settle for, instead of being the guy you target. And if that's the case we already have a settle for, project guy in Stanzi. If they believe he has first round or even second round talent, then cool, but if he is the guy, because the guy or two or three that you wanted are gone, you might as well stick with what you have and go BPA in position of need.

Right.

But assuming Pioli does not dump Cassel...which is probably the reality of the matter, who do you bring in to compete with him or Stanzi?

It has been brought up that Cassel has had no competition for the starting job. Are we going to find someone in FA or on the second day of the draft who can compete for the starting job?

jd1020
01-23-2012, 10:55 PM
Right.

But assuming Pioli does not dump Cassel...which is probably the reality of the matter, who do you bring in to compete with him or Stanzi?

It has been brought up that Cassel has had no competition for the starting job. Are we going to find someone in FA or on the second day of the draft who can compete for the starting job?

I would hope that all 3 QBs went into camp competing for the job. I don't buy into that bullshit about sitting a QB and developing him. What better way is there to learn the game than actually playing it?

There isn't a QB on the Chiefs that has showed they deserve the starting job.

Wishful thinking, though.

Frankie
01-23-2012, 11:56 PM
You're an idiot. Denver fans LOVE Tebow. That's Boss's point. Even intelligent Denver fans will not dismiss the fact that he wins games, and they love him for it.

They love him so much that they get plaster cast molds made of their T-Boners so they can remember just how hard he makes them in the offseason. Get a clue.

An idiot is one who makes baseless speculative statements as facts. Guess who just did?! :shake:

Frankie
01-24-2012, 12:01 AM
159, please.

You didn't read #2 did you?