PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Draft Question


FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 02:46 PM
Assuming that we can't or don't trade up for a Franchise QB for whatever reason. What is our draft priority taking the following into consideration:

1. Our defense is extremely solid.
2. Sign Orton (battles in camp with Stanzi)
3. RB coming off major knee injury

Who would consider or be in favor of drafting the best RB available to keep Charles from being overworked as he recovers from his injury? We need to keep playmakers on the offense and I am in favor of drafting playmakers with 1st round picks.

Flame away but to me this would make perfect sense.

Bowser
01-10-2012, 02:47 PM
htismaqe bomb in 3...2....1.......

KC Tattoo
01-10-2012, 02:48 PM
QB is the only priority.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 02:50 PM
htismaqe bomb in 3...2....1.......We will need to regain our ability to rush and control the clock even if we get Charles back at 100%.

We have to bring him back slowely to avoid reinjuring the knee. Of course we all don't want to consider the possibility that Charles will be timid when he returns.

Hydrae
01-10-2012, 02:51 PM
I don't want to go through LJ part deux.

Bowser
01-10-2012, 02:52 PM
We will need to regain our ability to rush and control the clock even if we get Charles back at 100%.

We have to bring him back slowely to avoid reinjuring the knee. Of course we all don't want to consider the possibility that Charles will be timid when he returns.

By saying this, you are basically saying that you think Cassel is the answer at QB, and is missing just some bit pieces around him.

I wouldn't be against Richardson, but this team has too many other needs at priority positions.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 02:53 PM
Because Pioli worships at the alter of positional value.

He's already gone back on it once in the last two years with Eric Berry. Safeties, especially strong safeties, are injury prone and thus not generally worth a Top 10 selection.

For him to drop a high first on a running back (a position with a shorter shelf life and even more injury prone) that plays with a bruising style and will probably be really, really good for 5 years when we could have landed a player at a more valuable position for 10 years, just a couple years after drafting a strong safety top ten... would be incredibly unlikely.

I'm not saying no to Richardson. I think he'd drastically improve our offense.

But I'm saying Pioli will say no to Richardson.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 02:53 PM
We will need to regain our ability to rush and control the clock even if we get Charles back at 100%.

We have to bring him back slowely to avoid reinjuring the knee. Of course we all don't want to consider the possibility that Charles will be timid when he returns.

You can do that by drafting a RB in the late rounds.

If you draft Trent Richardson you're basically giving the FO a license to maintain their ultra-conservative course of action.

The ability to rush and control the clock may lead to more regular season wins but it doesn't win championships in the modern NFL.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 02:54 PM
I'm not saying no to Richardson. I think he'd drastically improve our offense.

He'll improve our offense just enough to give people hope...hope that will get CRUSHED in the playoffs by teams that can pass the ball.

Bowser
01-10-2012, 02:54 PM
Or we pick up Chris Ivory in FA, leaving our first rounder to a more sensible pick.

Zeke
01-10-2012, 02:55 PM
We need more Tight Ends.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 02:55 PM
By saying this, you are basically saying that you think Cassel is the answer at QB, and is missing just some bit pieces around him.

I wouldn't be against Richardson, but this team has too many other needs at priority positions.

Sorry, No. I am assuming that Cassel is gone! I don't want Cassel anywhere near this team.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 02:56 PM
He'll improve our offense just enough to give people hope...hope that will get CRUSHED in the playoffs by teams that can pass the ball.

Give me a first round pick you'd prefer over Richardson. I can only assume it will be a QB.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 02:56 PM
Or we pick up Chris Ivory in FA, leaving our first rounder to a more sensible pick. Possibility. I just don't want all our hopes on a RB coming off a major knee injury no matter how good he used to be.

KCUnited
01-10-2012, 02:59 PM
Exhibit A

Jacksonville: Top 10 defense. Number 1 rusher in the league. 5-11 record.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:00 PM
Exhibit A

Jacksonville: Top 10 defense. Number 1 rusher in the league. 5-11 record.

Absolute abortion of a quarterback.

I'm not going to apologize for Cassel but there is absolutely no way he's in the worst category of QBs like Gabbert is.

Edit: Plus perhaps the worst receiving corps in the league.

KCUnited
01-10-2012, 03:02 PM
Absolute abortion of a quarterback.

I'm not going to apologize for Cassel but there is absolutely no way he's in the worst category of QBs like Gabbert is.

Edit: Plus perhaps the worst receiving corps in the league.

He's a bottom 10 QB, what's that good for, 3 more wins?

Deberg_1990
01-10-2012, 03:03 PM
Absolute abortion of a quarterback.

I'm not going to apologize for Cassel but there is absolutely no way he's in the worst category of QBs like Gabbert is.

Edit: Plus perhaps the worst receiving corps in the league.

I call Cassel "Good Enough" Hes just "Good Enough" to keep the stands full.

Pestilence
01-10-2012, 03:04 PM
If it isn't QB.....it's going to be either OT or NT.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:05 PM
He's a bottom 10 QB, what's that good for, 3 more wins?

Cassel's not a bottom ten. I'd probably put him exactly in the middle. If you give him a run game he's very effective. But he's worthless without one.

BUT THAT'S WHY I ADVOCATE GETTING A BETTER QB.

Where are you going to find one?

I support getting Manning in free agency. I support drafting Foles in the 2nd or Weeden in the 3rd.

I mildly support trading away the house for RG3 or trading a 2nd for Flynn.

I don't see how the #11/#12 pick has anything to do with upgrading the QB spot.

Because unless you're reaching by an entire round, you won't be, not with that pick.

scho63
01-10-2012, 03:09 PM
QB is the only priority.

Yeah, we should let a good QB start behind Barry Richardson

Chiefnj2
01-10-2012, 03:10 PM
wrong thread.

Chiefnj2
01-10-2012, 03:12 PM
Cassel's not a bottom ten.

You can name 10 starting QB's worse than Cassel?

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:16 PM
You can name 10 starting QB's worse than Cassel?

Only ten?

TJ Yates
Matt Moore
Ryan Fitzpatrick
Sam Bradford
Josh Freeman
Kevin Kolb
Tavaris Jackson
Blaine Gabbert
Christian Ponder
Tim Tebow

suds79
01-10-2012, 03:20 PM
Yeah, we should let a good QB start behind Barry Richardson

Barry Richardson will be replaced relax.

Just because we might not draft a RT in round 1 doesn't mean that position can't be taken care of.

There's a lot of good teams in the league with RTs not taken high.

Chiefnj2
01-10-2012, 03:20 PM
Only ten?

TJ Yates
Matt Moore
Ryan Fitzpatrick
Sam Bradford
Josh Freeman
Kevin Kolb
Tavaris Jackson
Blaine Gabbert
Christian Ponder
Tim Tebow

2 guys who just won playoff games. 2 guys who beat the crap out of KC. 2 Rookies. I'll give you Jackson.

Fritz88
01-10-2012, 03:20 PM
We need more Tight Ends.

Funny. I had a random dream that we actually drafted a TE in the first found.

Zeke
01-10-2012, 03:22 PM
Funny. I had a random dream that we actually drafted a TE in the first found.

If we do that I will gouge my eyes out with a box cutter (don't hold me to that, ala Hamas).

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 03:24 PM
I mildly support trading away the house for RG3 or trading a 2nd for Flynn.

I would also support trading for RGIII but in this thread I am assuming that we will not taking a QB with the first pick. Would taking the best RB in the draft be worth pursuing?

Zeke
01-10-2012, 03:26 PM
I would also support trading for RGIII but in this thread I am assuming that we will not taking a QB with the first pick. Would taking the best RB in the draft be worth pursuing?

Depends on who you ask. I'd much rather take a pick that will have a longer impact in the league... Running Backs simply have too short a shelf life.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:27 PM
2 guys who just won playoff games. 2 guys who beat the crap out of KC. 2 Rookies. I'll give you Jackson.

You'll give me all ten players. I don't give a shit who's a rookie, you asked me if I could name 10 starting QBs worse than Cassel.

Hmmm.... how did Tebow and Yates win?

Good defense, elite run games?

Oh yes, I believe that is how they won.

suds79
01-10-2012, 03:28 PM
I'm at the point to where I don't care as long as it's QB.

Would you rather the team tread water and take some OT or NT? Ultimately somebody who doesn't matter? Or would you rather they roll the dice to be great.

Our biggest problem is Matt Cassel. Take a chance.

If you can trade up for RG3? Great. If not? Then get the next best guy.

The Bad Guy
01-10-2012, 03:30 PM
Josh Freeman worse than Cassel? Sam Bradford worse?

That's some nice reactionary bullshit on one year.

Chiefnj2
01-10-2012, 03:30 PM
You'll give me all ten players. I don't give a shit who's a rookie, you asked me if I could name 10 starting QBs worse than Cassel.

Hmmm.... how did Tebow and Yates win?

Good defense, elite run games?

Oh yes, I believe that is how they won.

How many INTs did Yates have in his first postseason appearance? How many did Cassel have?

Yates: 97.7 QB rating.
Cassel: 20.4 QB rating.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:33 PM
How many INTs did Yates have in his first postseason appearance? How many did Cassel have?

Yates: 97.7 QB rating.
Cassel: 20.4 QB rating.

Please. This is stupid.

Houston's run game was on. Ours wasn't. Yates wasn't facing the Ravens defense. And he wasn't behind at any meaningful time. Cassel was, and was.

Yates also didn't have a starting receiver plucked out of obscurity four days before the game. Cassel did.

Yates managed the game very well. But the Texans would rather have had Cassel backing up Schaub if they had the power to do so, not Yates.

Brock
01-10-2012, 03:35 PM
But the Texans would rather have had Cassel backing up Schaub if they had the power to do so, not Yates.

Nah.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:35 PM
Josh Freeman worse than Cassel? Sam Bradford worse?

That's some nice reactionary bullshit on one year.

It's reactionary bullshit on two. In Freeman's case, three.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:37 PM
Give me a first round pick you'd prefer over Richardson. I can only assume it will be a QB.

I'd take almost any position over a RB, regardless of who it is.

I'd take a C or RT before Richardson. I'd take just about anything on defense before Richardson.

I don't want this FO to have any more get-out-of-jail-free cards with Matt fucking Cassel. No more safety blankets, justifications, or excuses - cut him and cut him now.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:37 PM
Countdown to the accusation that Direckshun is a Cassel-lover: 20 posts.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:38 PM
I'd take almost any position over a RB, regardless of who it is.

I'd take a C or RT before Richardson. I'd take just about anything on defense before Richardson.

I don't want this FO to have any more get-out-of-jail-free cards with Matt ****ing Cassel. No more safety blankets, justifications, or excuses - cut him and cut him now.

Ah.

So your primary interest is not improving the team, so much as it is sticking it to Cassel.

Sane. I'm surprised the front office doesn't have you on speed dial.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:38 PM
You'll give me all ten players. I don't give a shit who's a rookie, you asked me if I could name 10 starting QBs worse than Cassel.

Hmmm.... how did Tebow and Yates win?

Good defense, elite run games?

Oh yes, I believe that is how they won.

ROFL

Tebow threw for THIRTY TWO YARDS PER ATTEMPT.

ROFL

HemiEd
01-10-2012, 03:38 PM
Josh Freeman worse than Cassel? Sam Bradford worse?

That's some nice reactionary bullshit on one year.

Yeah, I almost choked up my McRib on that one.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:39 PM
Ah.

So your primary interest is not improving the team, so much as it is sticking it to Cassel.

Sane. I'm surprised the front office doesn't have you on speed dial.

Cutting Cassel improves the team. Infinitely.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:39 PM
ROFL

Tebow threw for THIRTY TWO YARDS PER ATTEMPT.

ROFL

He's just as likely to throw for 3.2 yards per attempt.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:40 PM
Please. This is stupid.

Houston's run game was on. Ours wasn't. Yates wasn't facing the Ravens defense. And he wasn't behind at any meaningful time. Cassel was, and was.

Yates also didn't have a starting receiver plucked out of obscurity four days before the game. Cassel did.

Yates managed the game very well. But the Texans would rather have had Cassel backing up Schaub if they had the power to do so, not Yates.

Can we just get a pre-printed list of excuses for Matt Cassel, please?

Zeke
01-10-2012, 03:40 PM
1st round - Ryan Tannehill
2nd round - Nick Foles
3rd round - Russell Wilson
4th round - Kellen Moore
5th round - Case Keenam
6th round - Dominique Davis
7th round - Nate Montana

That should solve our problem.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:40 PM
Cutting Cassel improves the team. Infinitely.

Agreed.

But, you see, I advocate realistic solutions that improve the Chiefs.

You advocate the unrealistic solution of sabotaging Cassel's chances from here on out to accelerate his ouster.

That's the shit of Bond villains.

Come back to reality. We miss you.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:40 PM
He's just as likely to throw for 3.2 yards per attempt.

But he didn't.

He beat the Pittsburgh Steelers single-handedly.

With his ARM.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:41 PM
Can we just get a pre-printed list of excuses for Matt Cassel, please?

explanation != excuse

HemiEd
01-10-2012, 03:41 PM
Direckshun is a Cassel lover.

Sofa King
01-10-2012, 03:41 PM
Gotta be either a G or RT, NT if there was a good one....

Just not much at that spot that we need. We have to go up or down.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:42 PM
But he didn't.

He beat the Pittsburgh Steelers single-handedly.

With his ARM.

And a week ago, he got his shit pushed in by the Kansas City Chiefs.

His playoff game was a stellar performance, one for the ages. And I applaud his efforts.

But the guy is a hero one week, and a zero the next. That's the facts.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:42 PM
Agreed.

But, you see, I advocate realistic solutions that improve the Chiefs.

You advocate the unrealistic solution of sabotaging Cassel's chances from here on out to accelerate his ouster.

That's the shit of Bond villains.

Come back to reality. We miss you.

What you're advocating is giving the Chiefs FO an excuse to continue to extend this 20-year run of mediocrity.

It's not just about cutting Cassel, it's about competing for a Super Bowl.

Your plan wins 9 games a season, puts butts in the seats, and ultimately leads to postseason failure.

And not just next year but for the entirety of Trent Richardson's career.

They're just ASKING for a reason to do it, so fill the clip with bullets and BEG them to hold it to your head. That makes total sense.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:43 PM
Direckshun is a Cassel lover.

LMAO

Nicely done.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 03:43 PM
Cassel could only win with the best RB in the NFL. I would like to see Cassel gone. I believe that first round picks should be for play makers or the closest thing to the BP at any position (nothing is a sure thing in the draft). The first round is for finding the best player not the 2, 3, or 4th best at a position. So getting the best RB should give us a solid 1/2 punch out of the backfield. I hate to admit it, but Charles just shortened his shelf life with that knee injury and RB's don't have a long shelf life to begin with.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:44 PM
explanation != excuse

Until he proves he can do it WITHOUT all of the qualifiers, that's exactly what they are - excuses.

When a guy like Aaron Rodgers loses to the Chiefs, it's because he had multiple offensive linemen out of the game. That doesn't work for Cassel because he's never proven he can do jack shit.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:45 PM
What you're advocating is giving the Chiefs FO an excuse to continue to extend this 20-year run of mediocrity.

It's not just about cutting Cassel, it's about competing for a Super Bowl.

Your plan wins 9 games a season, puts butts in the seats, and ultimately leads to postseason failure.

And not just next year but for the entirety of Trent Richardson's career.

They're just ASKING for a reason to do it, so fill the clip with bullets and BEG them to hold it to your head. That makes total sense.

MY plan is to pluck Peyton Manning in free agency. And draft someone like Weeden to back him up.

What's yours?

Mile High Mania
01-10-2012, 03:45 PM
Matt Cassel is why you don't back the Brinks truck up for guys like Flynn or Fitzpatrick with only 1 good year ... or less than that on your resume.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:46 PM
MY plan is to pluck Peyton Manning in free agency. And draft someone like Weeden to back him up.

What's yours?

Wait a sec.

You just accused me of not being realistic.

Yet you want to get Peyton Manning in free agency and take a 28-year old developmental prospect in the draft?

ROFL ROFL ROFL

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:46 PM
Until he proves he can do it WITHOUT all of the qualifiers, that's exactly what they are - excuses.

Mm... nope.

The explanation only becomes an excuse once I'm using the explanation to justify retaining Matt Cassel.

I'm not.

But. You know. Facts.

Mile High Mania
01-10-2012, 03:46 PM
MY plan is to pluck Peyton Manning in free agency. And draft someone like Weeden to back him up.

What's yours?

Ah, so you're on the early 90s plan... Joe Montana Part Deux. That plan has an incredibly short window with a very narrow runway.

Zeke
01-10-2012, 03:47 PM
MY plan is to pluck Peyton Manning in free agency. And draft someone like Weeden to back him up.

What's yours?

Hope Tyler Wilson declares for the draft.

Chiefnj2
01-10-2012, 03:47 PM
Wait a sec.

You just accused me of not being realistic.

Yet you want to get Peyton Manning in free agency and take a 28-year old developmental prospect in the draft?

ROFL ROFL ROFL

I'll take Weeden over Cassel.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:47 PM
Wait a sec.

You just accused me of not being realistic.

Yet you want to get Peyton Manning in free agency and take a 28-year old developmental prospect in the draft?

ROFL ROFL ROFL

There's a difference between my plan and what's the FO's plan.

There's nothing wrong with determining my own personal preferences in both realms.

But that's a nuance that escapes your Cassel-hatin' heart.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:48 PM
Ah, so you're on the early 90s plan... Joe Montana Part Deux. That plan has an incredibly short window with a very narrow runway.

Yup.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:48 PM
Mm... nope.

The explanation only becomes an excuse once I'm using the explanation to justify retaining Matt Cassel.

I'm not.

But. You know. Facts.

ROFL

You're all over the place.

durtyrute
01-10-2012, 03:48 PM
Because Pioli worships at the alter of positional value.

He's already gone back on it once in the last two years with Eric Berry. Safeties, especially strong safeties, are injury prone and thus not generally worth a Top 10 selection.

For him to drop a high first on a running back (a position with a shorter shelf life and even more injury prone) that plays with a bruising style and will probably be really, really good for 5 years when we could have landed a player at a more valuable position for 10 years, just a couple years after drafting a strong safety top ten... would be incredibly unlikely.

I'm not saying no to Richardson. I think he'd drastically improve our offense.

But I'm saying Pioli will say no to Richardson.

Where do you get this from?

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:48 PM
Yup.

Way to be realistic.

Saccopoo
01-10-2012, 03:49 PM
You'll give me all ten players. I don't give a shit who's a rookie, you asked me if I could name 10 starting QBs worse than Cassel.

Hmmm.... how did Tebow and Yates win?

Good defense, elite run games?

Oh yes, I believe that is how they won.

Denver's defense isn't good. I don't know how they won, but it sure as shit isn't with that god awful defense. And I don't know if I'd call McGahee elite. They have a really nice offensive line from the center to the left, but you got to credit Tebow with a lot of the success that they have had, especially in the playoff win. And that's with both his legs and arm.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 03:49 PM
Direckshun.....there's no way you don't realize that Cassel has to go. He has had too many opportunities to win and shit the bed. It's pointless to argue otherwise. Whether or not the FO brings him back is another story but anyone watching the Chiefs know that he can't get it done.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:50 PM
ROFL

You're all over the place.

Propositions by themselves do not constitute arguments.

You've got to string them together by gathering a bevy of grounding and then warranting the data to a particular claim, which I can then rebut.

But emoticons will do, I suppose.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:51 PM
Where do you get this from?

I think he wants better positional value than a bruiser at #12 overall.

Saccopoo
01-10-2012, 03:51 PM
Cutting Cassel improves the team. Infinitely.

As long as he takes Orton with him.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 03:51 PM
How many INTs did Yates have in his first postseason appearance? How many did Cassel have?

Yates: 97.7 QB rating.
Cassel: 20.4 QB rating.

Denver's defense isn't good. I don't know how they won, but it sure as shit isn't with that god awful defense. And I don't know if I'd call McGahee elite. They have a really nice offensive line from the center to the left, but you got to credit Tebow with a lot of the success that they have had, especially in the playoff win. And that's with both his legs and arm.Pittsburgh was without their starting RB and their QB was injured and immobile. Denver didn't need a good defense. They just managed to score enough. I would be interested in seeing the time of possession.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:52 PM
Denver's defense isn't good. I don't know how they won, but it sure as shit isn't with that god awful defense. And I don't know if I'd call McGahee elite. They have a really nice offensive line from the center to the left, but you got to credit Tebow with a lot of the success that they have had, especially in the playoff win. And that's with both his legs and arm.

Tebow is a part of the run game. His pairing with McGahee gave the Broncos, I believe, the best statistical run game in the NFL.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:53 PM
Direckshun.....there's no way you don't realize that Cassel has to go. He has had too many opportunities to win and shit the bed. It's pointless to argue otherwise. Whether or not the FO brings him back is another story but anyone watching the Chiefs know that he can't get it done.

Here comes the Cassel-lover bullshit.

:rolleyes:

I do realize Cassel has to go. I'm going to call a spade a spade though.

He's not Hitler in a helmet.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 03:55 PM
Way to be realistic.

Alright, let me give this another shot.

What is your ideal plan for the QB position? How do we fix that position?

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:56 PM
Propositions by themselves do not constitute arguments.

You've got to string them together by gathering a bevy of grounding and then warranting the data to a particular claim, which I can then rebut.

But emoticons will do, I suppose.

Flowery prose doesn't help make you look any smarter...

HemiEd
01-10-2012, 03:56 PM
Ah, so you're on the early 90s plan... Joe Montana Part Deux. That plan has an incredibly short window with a very narrow runway.

That has been the plan since Carl Peterson got to KC. DeBerg, Montana, Bono, Grbac, Kreig, Gannon, Green, Huard, Cassel and Orton.

Pioli is perpetuating it.

But it just MIGHT WORK THE NEXT TIME!!!!!

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 03:57 PM
He's not Hitler in a helmet.

Who said he was?

Mile High Mania
01-10-2012, 03:57 PM
Pittsburgh was without their starting RB and their QB was injured and immobile. Denver didn't need a good defense. They just managed to score enough. I would be interested in seeing the time of possession.

Geez... Denver was also without Dawkins at S, they lost Kuper (their young starting RG the week before)... they lost Decker in the game. McGahee has been injured and not playing 100%.

We can all play the injury game, my friend.

the Talking Can
01-10-2012, 04:00 PM
we should draft whoever can best assure a 9-7 record and no shot at drafting a QB...

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 04:00 PM
Flowery prose doesn't help make you look any smarter...

Flowery prose.

I love it.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 04:02 PM
That has been the plan since Carl Peterson got to KC. DeBerg, Montana, Bono, Grbac, Kreig, Gannon, Green, Huard, Cassel and Orton.

Pioli is perpetuating it.

But it just MIGHT WORK THE NEXT TIME!!!!!

Ain't none of them Peyton Manning.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 04:03 PM
Alright, let me give this another shot.

What is your ideal plan for the QB position? How do we fix that position?

That wasn't the original argument. The original argument was about whether or not to draft a "stud" RB, ie. Trent Richardson.

To answer your question, the only immediate change I would make is to cut Cassel. If that means signing Orton, so be it.

But getting back to the original argument, I don't see any realistic long-term solutions to the QB problem coming to us this offseason. Not Cassel, not Orton, not Manning, or Luck. Next year will be a lost year when it comes to QBs. Hopefully, a solution will emerge between now and April 2013.

But if you draft Richardson, it's no longer about just THIS year. Richardson is a guy you build an offense around and it's not the kind of offense that wins in the postseason. Drafting Richardson gives the FO the license to go with Cassel/Orton/whoever not just this next year but for the length of Richardson's contract/career. It's not a risk I want to take.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 04:03 PM
Ain't none of them Peyton Manning.

Certainly not. None of them had limited mobility in their neck!

Bewbies
01-10-2012, 04:04 PM
If we are too pussy to go QB early maybe we can find the balls to take Kellen Moore late...

This draft kind of sucks for me, the only position of dire need is the one we have our GM's $60,000,000 butt buddy holding shit down.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 04:05 PM
.No not at all. I realize you are trying to look at the big picture which is the point of this thread. I don't believe we are going to trade up for RGIII. Therefore, in my opinion, I would prefer to keep Orton or at least give Stanzi a shot and have some hope to be better. With that being said, I would pick the best playmaker on the board with our pick. We need a RB to spell Charles to bring him back slowely. A young set of legs. We might have to trade up a few spots to get the best RB but.

If RGII is there and we can make a play for him then I would go that route but I started the thread with the assumption we will not be drafting a 1st round QB.

Chiefnj2
01-10-2012, 04:05 PM
Ain't none of them Peyton Manning.

The Peyton Manning that you are thinking of doesn't exist. Plus, he's not coming to KC.

Bewbies
01-10-2012, 04:05 PM
Also I would support a move down far enough to get another #1 next year for QB ammo if we are too pussy to grab one with our #1.

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 04:06 PM
That wasn't the original argument. The original argument was about whether or not to draft a "stud" RB, ie. Trent Richardson.

I agree. But then I made the heretical remark of claiming Cassel wasn't total and utter shit.

To which, on CP, the subject promptly hijacks the thread.

You all opened this can. So let's eat it all:

the only immediate change I would make is to cut Cassel. If that means signing Orton, so be it.

Then you've jumped from one sick, hobbling horse onto the back of another.

Orton is every bit as mediocre as Cassel. It's a different kind of mediocre, but it's still mediocre.

So all this piss and vinegar over a relative non-change...

dannybcaitlyn
01-10-2012, 04:06 PM
We should draft BPA. IF Richardson falls to us more then likely he will be the BPA. I wouldn't be against adding a pro bowl type talent to this team.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 04:06 PM
If we are too pussy to go QB early maybe we can find the balls to take Kellen Moore late...

This draft kind of sucks for me, the only position of dire need is the one we have our GM's $60,000,000 butt buddy holding shit down.The fact that we are in the position that we are with Cassel makes me want to throw up!

Direckshun
01-10-2012, 04:07 PM
Certainly not. None of them had limited mobility in their neck!

Meh. My plan, of course, assumes a relative return to health by Manning.

At this point, that's an unknown. If it comes back negative, my plan probably changes.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 04:07 PM
No not at all. I realize you are trying to look at the big picture which is the point of this thread. I don't believe we are going to trade up for RGIII. Therefore, in my opinion, I would prefer to keep Orton or at least give Stanzi a shot and have some hope to be better. With that being said, I would pick the best playmaker on the board with our pick. We need a RB to spell Charles to bring him back slowely. A young set of legs. We might have to trade up a few spots to get the best RB but.

If RGII is there and we can make a play for him then I would go that route but I started the thread with the assumption we will not be drafting a 1st round QB.

We won't won't draft a QB this year.

If we take Trent Richardson, we won't take one next year or the year after either.

HemiEd
01-10-2012, 04:07 PM
Ain't none of them Peyton Manning.

Montana was every bit as good as Manning IMO, maybe better, and the injury situation is very similar.

I brought this up about 6 months ago, that I am confident Manning is exactly what they are going to do, and I still believe it.

It just fits with the history perfectly.

The team was finally rebuilt then, just like it is now.

The Chiefs will win a playoff game, he will get hurt, then they are done.

Lets just keep doing this, its who we are!!

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 04:08 PM
Then you've jumped from one sick, hobbling horse onto the back of another.

Orton is every bit as mediocre as Cassel. It's a different kind of mediocre, but it's still mediocre.

So all this piss and vinegar over a relative non-change...

It's a far different kind of mediocre. It's one that's actually WATCHABLE for the next season or so.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 04:11 PM
Orton is every bit as mediocre as Cassel. It's a different kind of mediocre, but it's still mediocre... I disagree, Orton throws downfield! If Orton makes a mistake it is a downfield mistake. We have better receivers for Orton to throw to than Denver. He will have a lot of weapons available. I could actually see this team become more of a passing team with Orton opening up bigger holes for the running game by making the safeties back off.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 04:13 PM
I disagree, Orton throws downfield! If Orton makes a mistake it is a downfield mistake. We have better receivers for Orton to throw to than Denver. He will have a lot of weapons available. I could actually see this team become more of a passing team with Orton opening up bigger holes for the running game by making the safeties back off.

If that's the case, why do we need another stud RB? There won't be enough carries for either him or Charles to get into a game rhythm.

Take an OL and actually make a solid short and long-term impact on the team.

FRCDFED
01-10-2012, 04:16 PM
If that's the case, why do we need another stud RB? There won't be enough carries for either him or Charles to get into a game rhythm.

Take an OL and actually make a solid short and long-term impact on the team.Charles will not be 100%. Getting a good value pick in round 1 is very important and the rookie salary cap facilitates trading up if necessary.

dannybcaitlyn
01-10-2012, 04:16 PM
I agree also. Orton can at least keep the defense honest in the passing game where teams gave cassel no respect. The LSU offense last night reminded me of when we had cassel at the helm.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 04:17 PM
Charles will not be 100%. Getting a good value pick in round 1 is very important and the rookie salary cap facilitates trading up if necessary.

Trent Richardson is not a value pick, not in Kansas City.

Trent Richardson is a "yet another 10 years of no Super Bowl" pick.

HemiEd
01-10-2012, 04:18 PM
I agree also. Orton can at least keep the defense honest in the passing game where teams gave cassel no respect. The LSU offense last night reminded me of when we had cassel at the helm.

Did you watch the whole game or shut it off?

dannybcaitlyn
01-10-2012, 04:20 PM
Trent Richardson is not a value pick, not in Kansas City.

Trent Richardson is a "yet another 10 years of no Super Bowl" pick.

He'll be our Emmit Smith.

htismaqe
01-10-2012, 04:27 PM
He'll be our Emmit Smith.

The Cowboys took Troy Aikman BEFORE Emmitt Smith, not after.

Again, Clark is not much older than me. The "glory days" of Chiefs football, for him, are the early 90's of Okoye and Word.

Don't kid yourself, if they take Emmitt Smith now, they'll NEVER take Troy Aikman.

DTLB58
01-10-2012, 04:47 PM
NT, RT

Bump
01-10-2012, 04:50 PM
Peyton Manning is gonna hit FA and Pioli better go get him! I'd take Flynn as a consolation prize FA too. We have to do something though! But I'd much rather go into 2012 with Orton than Cassel at the very least.

BossChief
01-10-2012, 04:54 PM
My top three preferences...

1) trade whatever the cost to trade up for luck or RG3

2) trade down and add a 2013 first rounder in the process (ammo to make a qb move next year) and take the best player available.

3) stand pat and hope one of the top talents drops.

cabletech94
01-10-2012, 07:08 PM
My top three preferences...

1) trade whatever the cost to trade up for luck or RG3

2) trade down and add a 2013 first rounder in the process (ammo to make a qb move next year) and take the best player available.

3) stand pat and hope one of the top talents drops.


1) i'd love to see this happen (realistically, prolly won't happen)

2) this might make the most sense. i mean added ammo for next year. wow.

3) probably the best chance of happening IMO.

Brock
01-10-2012, 07:18 PM
He'll be our Emmit Smith.

Welcome to the 80s.

KC Tattoo
01-10-2012, 08:15 PM
Peyton Manning is gonna hit FA and Pioli better go get him! I'd take Flynn as a consolation prize FA too. We have to do something though! But I'd much rather go into 2012 with Orton than Cassel at the very least.

What part of broke neck or neck surgery don't "true fans" understand?