PDA

View Full Version : Football Late night bullshit:I think the logic of our pick at #11/#12 overall leads to tackle.


Direckshun
02-19-2012, 01:33 AM
A lot of factors pointing that way.

We only have two tackles, period, under contract. One of them is David Mims.

Huge gaping hole at right tackle. No talent in free agency, so that means Overpay City in free agency, and Reach City in the draft. So I could be totally wrong about this, but I'm guessing the value in rounds 2 through 7 will not be at tackle.

We're in luck in round one, however. Four legit Top 15 talents at offensive tackle in this year's draft, creating good value for the Chiefs if they chose to go that way.

Meanwhile, Brandon Albert is entering a contract year, and if he has a great one, there's always a chance we could have a holdout on our hands. Having a first round, high quality tackle could be good insurance just in case we have to play a game or two without Albert. We would be saved from having to deal with a Jordan Black.

My two cents. I think we're going tackle. Either Riley Reiff out of Iowa or Ohio State's Mike Adams.

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 01:38 AM
:facepalm: Quarterback pleaze.

Epic Fail 007
02-19-2012, 01:39 AM
who cares if its a tackle,we need a young tackle

KurtCobain
02-19-2012, 01:48 AM
I think Reiff is a good pick. Richardson won't be there at 11, there's no QB there, get that o line shaped up for the future.
Posted via Mobile Device

Direckshun
02-19-2012, 01:49 AM
:facepalm: Quarterback pleaze.

There are no QBs worth the #11/#12 overall pick this year, other than the two that will go well before our pick.

who cares if its a tackle,we need a young tackle

I have no idea what you're saying. You sound unstable.

Fritz88
02-19-2012, 01:51 AM
MTG10 at 11 please.
Posted via Mobile Device

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 01:57 AM
There are no QBs worth the #11/#12 overall pick this year, other than the two that will go well before our pick.



I have no idea what you're saying. You sound unstable.

Bull fucking shit & you or nobody else knows how the draft will play out. QBs drop all the time just like Arron Rodgers did the year he went late in the first round. GM players in the draft move up or down affecting value spots and it's all up in the air. Maybe I'm just holding on false hope but fuck

Fritz88
02-19-2012, 02:15 AM
Bull fucking shit & you or nobody else knows how the draft will play out. QBs drop all the time just like Arron Rodgers did the year he went late in the first round. GM players in the draft move up or down affecting value spots and it's all up in the air. Maybe I'm just holding on false hope but fuck
?
Posted via Mobile Device

tmw4h5
02-19-2012, 02:22 AM
RGIII could rape a village in Guatemala and destroy a church in Houston and he would not slip past #6.
If the Colts don't select Luck with the first pick, Mel Kiper Jr.'s hair will rape Jim Irsay, burn the body, and snort the ashes. The rest of the draft will be cancelled.

So who does that leave at 11/12 for QB? Tannehill? I'd rather just call ESPN and trade a bag of Doritos for Kordell Stewart.

bevischief
02-19-2012, 02:25 AM
MTG10 at linebacker or NT.

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 02:28 AM
?
Posted via Mobile Device

How many moch drafts are right? FA hasn't played out so neither has the draft & trades are yet to be made. Yes I am holding out hope & know good and well that the Chiefs don't have the balls to draft a QB but that's what we need before anything else. It just flustrates me not to draft one to be the guy.

bevischief
02-19-2012, 02:38 AM
BPA. I don't care who.

pr_capone
02-19-2012, 02:53 AM
RGIII could rape a village in Guatemala and destroy a church in Houston and he would not slip past #6.
If the Colts don't select Luck with the first pick, Mel Kiper Jr.'s hair will rape Jim Irsay, burn the body, and snort the ashes. The rest of the draft will be cancelled.

So who does that leave at 11/12 for QB? Tannehill? I'd rather just call ESPN and trade a bag of Doritos for Kordell Stewart.

LMAOLMAOLMAO

:clap:

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 02:54 AM
Trade up or trade down for value got damn draft a QB. 30 + years without a first round QB draft pick now that's fucking bull shit.

Fruit Ninja
02-19-2012, 03:13 AM
U cant just trade up or trade down. It has to be worth it for both teams. I have no idea who we are going to draft. If any Qb moves up it'll be tannehill Bhutan hes a very very risky pick.

Its gonna be interesting that's for sure.

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 03:38 AM
This is what we get for almost being even a mediocre team. Our GM is to stupid to see how worthless Casshole is too.

crazycoffey
02-19-2012, 03:57 AM
RGIII could rape a village in Guatemala and destroy a church in Houston and he would not slip past #6.
If the Colts don't select Luck with the first pick, Mel Kiper Jr.'s hair will rape Jim Irsay, burn the body, and snort the ashes. The rest of the draft will be cancelled.

So who does that leave at 11/12 for QB? Tannehill? I'd rather just call ESPN and trade a bag of Doritos for Kordell Stewart.

The colts will draft RG3 and Luck will either make it down to us, ala Aaron Rodgers, or get so close the draftubators spontaneously combust.

Dr. Facebook Fever
02-19-2012, 04:03 AM
I'm pretty much of the opinion that it doesn't even matter anymore until the current leadership is gone... for a while... and a real leadership has been in place for a while.

This team wins nothing relevant with Pioli/Cassell.

The Royals will be back in contention first.

pr_capone
02-19-2012, 04:08 AM
There is nothing in the mid rounds that holds any interest for me. TRADE THE FUCK DOWN OR TRADE THE FUCK UP.

crazycoffey
02-19-2012, 04:24 AM
There is nothing in the mid rounds that holds any interest for me. TRADE THE FUCK DOWN OR TRADE THE FUCK UP.

We will not trade up or down from the first pick. /mymeccaimpersonation

htismaqe
02-19-2012, 06:21 AM
I'm pretty much of the opinion that it doesn't even matter anymore until the current leadership is gone... for a while... and a real leadership has been in place for a while.

This team wins nothing relevant with Pioli/Cassell.

The Royals will be back in contention first.

Unfortunately, that's about where I am at too.

Gravedigger
02-19-2012, 06:40 AM
RGIII could rape a village in Guatemala and destroy a church in Houston and he would not slip past 6.

Who cares about a village in Guatemala?...

Pasta Giant Meatball
02-19-2012, 06:50 AM
...and this is why I become less and less excited about this draft every day. Fuck this Center, Guard, Middle Linebacker (we are fine here people), and Right Tackle bullshit.

Consistent1
02-19-2012, 06:53 AM
I agree with MTG10 pick as a linebacker. He hits people hard.

Hog Farmer
02-19-2012, 08:28 AM
If MGT#10 played any position on Defense for us none of the opposing offenses would even take the field. They value their spleens.

Pasta Giant Meatball
02-19-2012, 08:35 AM
If MGT#10 played any position on Defense for us none of the opposing offenses would even take the field. They value their spleens.

His ex certainly sounds like a "Wide reciever", but doesn't sound like much of a "Tight End"

the Talking Can
02-19-2012, 08:40 AM
your reasoning is sound, but if it applied to pioli we'd have drafted ol in the first by now....

one his positive qualities, imo, is that he doesn't seem to think you spend 1st rounders on OL and I bet his instinct is trade down if possible, to get better value from the pick...

that's my hope too, and i don't much care who we take if we get an extra pick in the process

Easy 6
02-19-2012, 10:17 AM
I would spend a first on lb, dt, de, fs & wr if Bowe isnt signed.. before i would blow it on a rt or g.

RustShack
02-19-2012, 10:26 AM
your reasoning is sound, but if it applied to pioli we'd have drafted ol in the first by now....

one his positive qualities, imo, is that he doesn't seem to think you spend 1st rounders on OL and I bet his instinct is trade down if possible, to get better value from the pick...

that's my hope too, and i don't much care who we take if we get an extra pick in the process

Logan Mankins approves this message.

boogblaster
02-19-2012, 10:27 AM
A QB won't be there when we pick ... ILB that can cover and tackle .. or any good OL ......

Count Zarth
02-19-2012, 10:27 AM
You're right that there are basically no good RTs in FA.

Pretty compelling argument.

I'd like to see Pioli trade a 3rd or a 4th for a RT but that's something that balla ass GMs do, not Pioli.

Mr. Flopnuts
02-19-2012, 10:28 AM
At this point, Trent Richardson is my best hope.

the Talking Can
02-19-2012, 10:44 AM
Logan Mankins approves this message.

he was the 32nd pick in the draft for a superbowl team...doesn't strike me as the pick upon which to make a claim about pioli's methods or indicative of what he'd do for the Chiefs.....but knock yourself out

qabbaan
02-19-2012, 10:52 AM
In a way I would be ok with this. Of all positions the offensive line might be our best chance at #11 to draft someone who will be here for 5-10 years, after Pioli and Cassel are gone, when we are ready to contend again.

SNR
02-19-2012, 11:01 AM
Bull fucking shit & you or nobody else knows how the draft will play out. QBs drop all the time just like Arron Rodgers did the year he went late in the first round. GM players in the draft move up or down affecting value spots and it's all up in the air. Maybe I'm just holding on false hope but fuck
Those days are over, pal. More and more teams will take QBs with high picks, even if they're slight reaches.

O.city
02-19-2012, 11:09 AM
If Richardson is there I'd take him, but if he's not I have no problem taking the best tackle available.

I do think there are some really good RT prospects that could be had in rounds 2 or 3 though.

whoman69
02-19-2012, 11:24 AM
Those days are over, pal. More and more teams will take QBs with high picks, even if they're slight reaches.

Still not buying that Ponder sets the bar.

Rausch
02-19-2012, 11:28 AM
I'd bet money that if someone wants to move up we move down.

And frankly, I have no problem with it.

O.city
02-19-2012, 11:29 AM
Richardson, IMO is too much of a difference maker on offense, potentially, to turn down if he is around when we pick.


If he's not, I think a tackle really is the best pick.

If we can sign a couple good free agents the oline could be set up for a while.

Albert, Grubbs, Hudson, Asamoah, Adams?

SNR
02-19-2012, 11:38 AM
Still not buying that Ponder sets the bar.
Fuck Ponder. I'm not talking about him.

It's never been easier or cheaper for teams to draft QBs with high picks. In a bizarre economic model, the price is going down, the demand is going up (with the way the game is evolving), but the supply of franchise QBs per draft is staying the same (and in recent years, it has gone down).

You tell me what's going to happen.

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 11:42 AM
I can't wait for 2013 draft :(

O.city
02-19-2012, 11:43 AM
Eventually all the teams will have drafted their quarterback, with the chiefs being the last ones to go.


Then we will get our guy.

whoman69
02-19-2012, 12:12 PM
Eventually all the teams will have drafted their quarterback, with the chiefs being the last ones to go.


Then we will get our guy.

Or they'll pick up the guy that the other teams gave up on.

whoman69
02-19-2012, 12:32 PM
**** Ponder. I'm not talking about him.

It's never been easier or cheaper for teams to draft QBs with high picks. In a bizarre economic model, the price is going down, the demand is going up (with the way the game is evolving), but the supply of franchise QBs per draft is staying the same (and in recent years, it has gone down).

You tell me what's going to happen.

So you're saying they're going to compound their mistake by reaching for those players and paying more than they have to by drafting them a round early? Teams in spots 1-20 need the first round to add a starter to their line-ups. Drafting a guy who won't be ready for 2-3 years isn't going to help them. I think despite how it was put to the union, the NFL is going to go with younger players who are cheaper which will drive down the price vets can ask for.

Bowser
02-19-2012, 12:35 PM
I want nothing to do with Tannehill. If Richardson is gone, just go BPA and wait for the 2013 draft.

go bowe
02-19-2012, 12:38 PM
Or they'll pick up the guy that the other teams gave up on.

or that guy's backup... :huh:

jd1020
02-19-2012, 12:39 PM
I think despite how it was put to the union, the NFL is going to go with younger players who are cheaper which will drive down the price vets can ask for.

You think that someone who has never played in the NFL is going to effect what a proven vet can ask for on the market?

chiefzilla1501
02-19-2012, 12:40 PM
**** Ponder. I'm not talking about him.

It's never been easier or cheaper for teams to draft QBs with high picks. In a bizarre economic model, the price is going down, the demand is going up (with the way the game is evolving), but the supply of franchise QBs per draft is staying the same (and in recent years, it has gone down).

You tell me what's going to happen.

It's called "opportunity cost."

Burning a #11 pick on a bad QB means you give up the opportunity to land a player who has the opportunity to give you 10 years of great football. The supply of franchise QBs in this draft absolutely sucks, beyond 2 guys who are completely out of reach.

I'll tell you what's going to happen. Some team is going to sink a top 10-15 pick on a QB that is a second round pick in most years. Because they sunk a top 10 pick on Tannehill, they're going to invest the next 3 years on him as the QBOTF and nobody else, very likely they'll find out he's not going to be great, and then 4 years later, they're in the same situation we're in today.

Again, I would rather be aggressive about getting the right QB than settling for a QB in a huge reach using a valuable draft pick. I don't think we can do that this year. But in 2013, I think we'll have a very good opportunity to trade up and have our pick at SEVERAL QBs who will grade out a hell of a lot better than Tannehill.

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 12:43 PM
Those days are over, pal. More and more teams will take QBs with high picks, even if they're slight reaches.

It just sucks I root for the stupidest franchise in the NFL. I love Chiefs & will die a Chiefs fan that I can say but damn this is a dumb franchise. I've been longing for Chiefs to draft a QB in the first round just after Steve Deberg left town & I was appose to getting Joe Freaking Montana. He was old and broke when we got him, sure he gave us a good year but the fail was no Super Bowl and one playoff win from the days gone by. Flustrated here.

chiefzilla1501
02-19-2012, 12:43 PM
So you're saying they're going to compound their mistake by reaching for those players and paying more than they have to by drafting them a round early? Teams in spots 1-20 need the first round to add a starter to their line-ups. Drafting a guy who won't be ready for 2-3 years isn't going to help them. I think despite how it was put to the union, the NFL is going to go with younger players who are cheaper which will drive down the price vets can ask for.

Here's what's really interesting about what you just said.

Tannehill will take 2-3 years to develop. Guys like Aaron Murray (if he declares), Barkley, even Landry Jones, will likely be ready right away... to some level. So even if we wait a year to draft a QB, we'd still get a QB who is further along in the learning curve than Tannehill (after one full season).

SNR
02-19-2012, 12:44 PM
It's called "opportunity cost."

Burning a #11 pick on a bad QB means you give up the opportunity to land a player who has the opportunity to give you 10 years of great football. The supply of franchise QBs in this draft absolutely sucks, beyond 2 guys who are completely out of reach.

I'll tell you what's going to happen. Some team is going to sink a top 10-15 pick on a QB that is a second round pick in most years. Because they sunk a top 10 pick on Tannehill, they're going to invest the next 3 years on him as the QBOTF and nobody else, very likely they'll find out he's not going to be great, and then 4 years later, they're in the same situation we're in today.

Again, I would rather be aggressive about getting the right QB than settling for a QB in a huge reach using a valuable draft pick. I don't think we can do that this year. But in 2013, I think we'll have a very good opportunity to trade up and have our pick at SEVERAL QBs who will grade out a hell of a lot better than Tannehill.
Fuck Tannehill. I'm not talking about him.

I'm saying this is going to be the trend in the NFL for the next several years. For example, next draft you'll have Barkley, Jones, and some other good but not great QBs in the 1st. Those guys are going to fly off the board. If you're the Chiefs drafting probably around 15 and above, you're going to miss out on a guy AGAIN.

BigMeatballDave
02-19-2012, 12:46 PM
MTG10 at 11 please.
Posted via Mobile Device

LMAO

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 12:46 PM
For me drafting a QB in the first round may as well be the Super Bowl it's self. I won't believe it until then.

chiefzilla1501
02-19-2012, 12:49 PM
**** Tannehill. I'm not talking about him.

I'm saying this is going to be the trend in the NFL for the next several years. For example, next draft you'll have Barkley, Jones, and some other good but not great QBs in the 1st. Those guys are going to fly off the board. If you're the Chiefs drafting probably around 15 and above, you're going to miss out on a guy AGAIN.

No, I completely disagree. The trend we've seen and I have no reason to believe the trend will stop is that once you invest in a first round pick QB, you don't draft another first round QB for another few years. There is a run on QBs right now because there are a lot of bad teams with no first round QB or quality starting QB on their roster. This season, you expect that list to be cut at least in half, if not moreso.

There will be less teams desperate for a QB. And in 2013, I expect that while the elite QB class, like Barkley, will be difficult to trade into, there will be a MUCH better second-tier first round class the Chiefs can trade into. And they'll have to give up a LOT less picks than they would have trading for RGIII and Luck.

2013 will probably be a MUCH better NFL draft QB market for the Chiefs. By a mile. Even if they end up with a significantly worse pick.

Bowser
02-19-2012, 12:49 PM
For me drafting a QB in the first round may as well be the Super Bowl it's self. I won't believe it until then.

If it's not Luck or RGIII, then skip it this year. Say no to Tannehill. He guy has more snaps in college at receiver, for crying out loud.

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 01:14 PM
If it's not Luck or RGIII, then skip it this year. Say no to Tannehill. He guy has more snaps in college at receiver, for crying out loud.

I agree, next years draft class is looking a bit better but this team just doesn't put stock in first round QBs and continue to live in Todd Suckledge fear, & we have suffered for this fact. So I don't expect to draft a QB next year in the first either. Just the way it is I guess? I would love to trade up for RGIII but I know Chiefs won't do it or have the forsight to think of the possibilities that could do for us. Meanwhile the Panthers are primed to go to Super Bowl with Cam under center or at least will win a playoff game before the Chiefs draft a QB to be our guy. I don't even think that is going out on a limb to say that. Worst team in NFL to playoff & continders for championships from there first over all pick and we are forever cursed with the Blackledge pick of the 80's.

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 01:18 PM
It's funny cus we can end up this season at 8-8 or 9-7 and actually win this Tebow forsaken division and the Chiefs won't feel the need to draft a QB to replace alla Casshole. So we will be in the same river raft that we are in come draft 2013.

O.city
02-19-2012, 01:19 PM
So is the life of a Chiefs fan.

KC Tattoo
02-19-2012, 01:39 PM
Then really our best hope is for Stanzi to upstage Casshole during the preseason. I think Stanzi can do that but still won't get the starting nod but could give some controversy into the season and hope he gets to start sooner than later. We can then see how he does and still draft a hopeful prospect in 2013 if Pioli and this franchise grow a set of balls.

Bowser
02-19-2012, 01:43 PM
We'll probably overpay to have Orton come back here to "compete" with Cassel, unless Orton can find a job where he will be uncontested as the starter (or if Chicago comes calling again).

BossChief
02-19-2012, 01:43 PM
1) If Richardson is there, you take him....otherwise known as BPA

2) Trade down....maybe even twice. Especially if we can add a future first round pick in the process...we are gonna need one next year if we want to move up.

3) Take Rieff and solidify the OL for some time with only an interior linemen needed to round out what could be developing into one of the leagues best OL units. If Rieff is off the board, you can probably put Kontz in this spot...but Id rather have him after a trade down of about 10 draft slots.

4) Draft the best pass rusher available. If Hali or Houston go down for an extended period, it would really hurt the defense.

5) Draft Donatari Poe. He is really raw, but lucky for us we have a guy that would be perfect to develop those tools as the HC. This option may well move up to #2 or #3 if he shows up well at the combine and workouts. Very intriguing prospect for us.

Buckweath
02-19-2012, 01:47 PM
As far as drafting a QB in the 1st round, there is not much hope IMO for this team. We had the chance to do it in the last few years but Pioli thought Cassell was the answer.

Now, Tannehill is a longshot to ever become a top 10 NFL QB and next year, I expect this team to be drafting much lower than this year, even with Cassell as our starting QB.

Bowser
02-19-2012, 01:50 PM
Seriously, I'd rather take Kellen Moore in the fourth than to blow our first on Tannehill.

SNR
02-19-2012, 02:06 PM
No, I completely disagree. The trend we've seen and I have no reason to believe the trend will stop is that once you invest in a first round pick QB, you don't draft another first round QB for another few years. There is a run on QBs right now because there are a lot of bad teams with no first round QB or quality starting QB on their roster. This season, you expect that list to be cut at least in half, if not moreso.

There will be less teams desperate for a QB. And in 2013, I expect that while the elite QB class, like Barkley, will be difficult to trade into, there will be a MUCH better second-tier first round class the Chiefs can trade into. And they'll have to give up a LOT less picks than they would have trading for RGIII and Luck.

2013 will probably be a MUCH better NFL draft QB market for the Chiefs. By a mile. Even if they end up with a significantly worse pick.Meanwhile new teams get added to the "have not" list every year. Just look at Indianapolis. And look at teams that "have" QBs now but will need to turn to other solutions in the coming years: Miami, Seattle, Arizona, NYJ, Buffalo

If the QB market were just a matter of, "Wait your turn, you'll get one eventually" the Chiefs would have drafted a QB since 1983. We haven't. We had the chance from 2007-2009 but we apparently weren't bad enough. So now we're in purgatory until the gods bless us with some luck, or we're going to have to wait until this team sinks deep into the cellar and loses all of its talent again.

SNR
02-19-2012, 02:10 PM
What about teams that are sick of their bust QBs should that happen to be busts?

Minnesota, St. Louis, Tennessee, Jacksonville

What about teams with old QBs like Manning who might be at the end of their careers in the case of injury?

New Orleans, New England

What if shit happens and a team like Houston finds themselves drafting in the top 3? You think they'd be satisfied with Schaub when they can possibly get an all star?

Like I said, demand for a quality QB is going up, and it just doesn't affect current teams that don't have their guy yet. It affects ANY team.

jd1020
02-19-2012, 02:16 PM
Demand for the most important position on the team is never going to decrease.

chiefzilla1501
02-19-2012, 02:56 PM
What about teams that are sick of their bust QBs should that happen to be busts?

Minnesota, St. Louis, Tennessee, Jacksonville

What about teams with old QBs like Manning who might be at the end of their careers in the case of injury?

New Orleans, New England

What if shit happens and a team like Houston finds themselves drafting in the top 3? You think they'd be satisfied with Schaub when they can possibly get an all star?

Like I said, demand for a quality QB is going up, and it just doesn't affect current teams that don't have their guy yet. It affects ANY team.

You're really reaching here. About half of the teams have stable QB situations. In most of those cases, those teams have huge money on their starting horse and they're usually not going to make an aggressive move for a QB unless, like Peyton, they know their QB's career is over. And many of those teams are going to draft behind the Chiefs anyway. Second, you're adding teams who just drafted a QB in the first round to the mix? How many teams have drafted more than one first round QB in a 3-year span? The Rams are probably sticking with Bradford. And Tennessee, Minnesota, and Jacksonville are NOT going to draft 2 first round QBs in a 3-year span.

That leaves you with 12 teams who will likely be looking in 2013. A few of those will have QBs who play well enough to keep their job or at least keep a team from taking a QB, unless a good QB falls to them. That could include the Jets, Cardinals, 49ers and Bucs. A few of those teams, despite having a less than great QB, could end up with a good enough record (see Denver, Oakland, Jets, 49ers) to make them nothing to worry about in terms of draft position. Many of those teams will secure a starting QB this season--Matt Flynn, Jason Campbell, Andrew Luck, RGIII, maybe even Kyle Orton. Maybe even Peyton. That should knock Cleveland, Miami, Washington, Indianapolis, and maybe 1 or 2 more teams off that list.

So... while you can't predict the future, how many teams with bad records AND bad QB situations are going to be in a prime position to take a QB? Maybe a handful. There will be less teams in the QB market, and probably 2-4 times more quality QBs in that market.

No matter what the Chiefs' draft position in 2013, they're in a MUCH better position to get a QB than in 2012.

SNR
02-19-2012, 02:59 PM
You're really reaching here. About half of the teams have stable QB situations. In most of those cases, those teams have huge money on their starting horse and they're usually not going to make an aggressive move for a QB unless, like Peyton, they know their QB's career is over. And many of those teams are going to draft behind the Chiefs anyway. Second, you're adding teams who just drafted a QB in the first round to the mix? How many teams have drafted more than one first round QB in a 3-year span? The Rams are probably sticking with Bradford. And Tennessee, Minnesota, and Jacksonville are NOT going to draft 2 first round QBs in a 3-year span.

That leaves you with 12 teams who will likely be looking in 2013. A few of those will have QBs who play well enough to keep their job or at least keep a team from taking a QB, unless a good QB falls to them. That could include the Jets, Cardinals, 49ers and Bucs. A few of those teams, despite having a less than great QB, could end up with a good enough record (see Denver, Oakland, Jets, 49ers). Many of those teams will secure a starting QB this season--Matt Flynn, Jason Campbell, Andrew Luck, RGIII, maybe even Kyle Orton. Maybe even Peyton. That should knock Cleveland, Miami, Washington, Indianapolis, and maybe 1 or 2 more teams off that list.

So... while you can't predict the future, how many teams with bad records AND bad QB situations are going to be in a prime position to take a QB? Maybe a handful. There will be less teams in the QB market, and probably 2-4 times more quality QBs in that market.

No matter what the Chiefs' draft position in 2013, they're in a MUCH better position to get a QB than in 2012.There's a list of teams that need QBs RIGHT NOW. Indy, Cleveland, Washington, Arizona, Seattle, KC, Miami and maybe one or two more. Luck and RGIII get drafted this year. Okay, so take off Indy and let's say Cleveland. The next year how many QBs in the first round? How many teams will get added to the list who need QBs?

The year after that? How many QBs? How many teams will get added?

How many teams who drafted bust QBs from years ago will be in a position to take a new QB 3, 4, or 5 years down the line?

You see that pool of teams steadily decreasing. I see it staying the same.

chiefzilla1501
02-19-2012, 03:06 PM
There's a list of teams that need QBs RIGHT NOW. Indy, Cleveland, Washington, Arizona, Seattle, KC, Miami and maybe one or two more. Luck and RGIII get drafted this year. Okay, so take off Indy and let's say Cleveland. The next year how many QBs in the first round? How many teams will get added to the list who need QBs?

The year after that? How many QBs? How many teams will get added?

How many teams who drafted bust QBs from years ago will be in a position to take a new QB 3, 4, or 5 years down the line?

You see that pool of teams steadily decreasing. I see it staying the same.

Did you not read any of what I wrote?

About 12 teams need a QB this season. Flynn, RGIII, Luck, Campbell, maybe Orton and Peyton will knock out 4-6 of those QB situations. You'll have a few teams with less than great QBs that lead a team to a decent record. And you'll have other teams with a QB that maybe steps up this year when you didn't expect it, like the Jets or the Bucs or the 49ers.

Again.... let me repeat this. The demand next year for QBs will be strong, because it always will be, but it will be significantly less competitive next year as it is this year. And there is good potential for the 2013 QB class to have probably 2-4 times as many QBs with a first round grade.

Greater supply. Much lower demand. That = wait for 2013.

the Talking Can
02-19-2012, 03:38 PM
this 'we can get one next year' schtick is older than history....

SNR
02-19-2012, 03:48 PM
Did you not read any of what I wrote?

About 12 teams need a QB this season. Flynn, RGIII, Luck, Campbell, maybe Orton and Peyton will knock out 4-6 of those QB situations. You'll have a few teams with less than great QBs that lead a team to a decent record. And you'll have other teams with a QB that maybe steps up this year when you didn't expect it, like the Jets or the Bucs or the 49ers.

Again.... let me repeat this. The demand next year for QBs will be strong, because it always will be, but it will be significantly less competitive next year as it is this year. And there is good potential for the 2013 QB class to have probably 2-4 times as many QBs with a first round grade.

Greater supply. Much lower demand. That = wait for 2013.I did read. You're not accounting for the number of teams that enter the "need a QB" field every offseason.

And let's face it. With Orton, Flynn, Campbell, Peyton, you're talking about short term solutions. It's pretty unlikely that a team will add one of those QBs to their roster and be set with a quality starter for several seasons. I see Luck and RGIII tiding two teams over for several years, or at least will force them to be patient and wait for them to get acclimated to the pros. That's it. Flynn will be a nice Cassel for a team. Orton will go to a city and then booted out when that team wants a young franchise QB. Campbell is more Orton than Orton. Peyton Manning... don't get me started.

A Drew Brees in New Orleans can be as rare as a Tom Brady/Tony Romo/Kurt Warner story. It's not a dependable way of affecting change in the QB markets long-term.

SNR
02-19-2012, 03:50 PM
this 'we can get one next year' schtick is older than history....Next year's class should be much better with Barkley, Jones, Wilson, Bray, and possibly Aaron Murray all entering the first round.

That is, it should be better until it isn't. Then NEXT year's class will be better!

jd1020
02-19-2012, 04:05 PM
Next year's class should be much better with Barkley, Jones, Wilson, Bray, and possibly Aaron Murray all entering the first round.

That is, it should be better until it isn't. Then NEXT year's class will be better!

Bray and Murray are both underclassmen.

If Barkley and Jones didn't go back to school, Wilson wouldn't have been thought of as a potential first round QB this year.

chiefzilla1501
02-19-2012, 04:06 PM
I did read. You're not accounting for the number of teams that enter the "need a QB" field every offseason.

And let's face it. With Orton, Flynn, Campbell, Peyton, you're talking about short term solutions. It's pretty unlikely that a team will add one of those QBs to their roster and be set with a quality starter for several seasons. I see Luck and RGIII tiding two teams over for several years, or at least will force them to be patient and wait for them to get acclimated to the pros. That's it. Flynn will be a nice Cassel for a team. Orton will go to a city and then booted out when that team wants a young franchise QB. Campbell is more Orton than Orton. Peyton Manning... don't get me started.

A Drew Brees in New Orleans can be as rare as a Tom Brady/Tony Romo/Kurt Warner story. It's not a dependable way of affecting change in the QB markets long-term.

You didn't read. I clearly accounted for teams that enter the "need a QB" field. In painstaking detail. If you have a starting QB, especially an expensive one, or a young QB with upside (or who was a first round draft pick), sure... those teams might draft a QB if he falls to them, but they're not going to aggressively try to trade up. Flynn is going to a team like Miami and he's going to get PAID.

Like I said, in every offseason, you have teams that will always be looking for a QB. But this offseason is one of those rare years where lots of teams are completely desperate for a QB. It seems very likely that pool of desperate teams are going to get cut in half.

This year, you have to trade into the top 3 to get a first round QB. I don't think it's ridiculous at all to expect that for the Chiefs to get a solid first round QB, they can afford to trade into the top 10 or top 15 in 2013.

SNR
02-19-2012, 04:08 PM
Bray and Murray are both underclassmen.

If Barkley and Jones didn't go back to school, Wilson wouldn't have been thought of as a potential first round QB this year.Well, look at that! Five potential first round QBs in 2013's supposed QB cornucopia. Two of them probably won't declare, and one of them will probably have a 2nd round grade.

Suddenly we're down to only two "worthy" QBs again. And one of them is Landry goddamn Jones.

Tell me about how 2014 is the REAL QB year, chiefzilla.

jd1020
02-19-2012, 04:13 PM
The Chiefs are too talented right now to end up with a top pick in the draft, discounting injuries (and that didn't even work for this year).

We are going to be looking at "the best of the rest" year in and year out. We should be picking out of "the best of the rest" as often as we can until we find at least a Flacco.

Waiting on next year is retarded.

chiefzilla1501
02-19-2012, 04:13 PM
Well, look at that! Five potential first round QBs in 2013's supposed QB cornucopia. Two of them probably won't declare, and one of them will probably have a 2nd round grade.

Suddenly we're down to only two "worthy" QBs again. And one of them is Landry goddamn Jones.

Tell me about how 2014 is the REAL QB year, chiefzilla.

Last time I checked, 5 QBs is a hell of a lot better than 2.

Look, in 2012 or 2013, we're NOT going to get an elite QB. I don't even care about Luck, RGIII, or Barkley. We simply do not have the ammo to get any of those guys. What I care about are the second-tier QBs we have a realistic chance of getting. Tannehill is not second-tier. He's a 3rd tier QB being forced into a 2nd tier because of how shoddy the QB class is.

There will be a lot more 2nd tier QBs the Chiefs can take in 2013, and that tier should be pretty deep. As I've said a million times, it will be a hell of a lot easier for us to trade from 25 to the top 10 than it will be to trade from 11 to 2.

SNR
02-19-2012, 04:21 PM
You didn't read. I clearly accounted for teams that enter the "need a QB" field. In painstaking detail. If you have a starting QB, especially an expensive one, or a young QB with upside (or who was a first round draft pick), sure... those teams might draft a QB if he falls to them, but they're not going to aggressively try to trade up. Flynn is going to a team like Miami and he's going to get PAID.

Like I said, in every offseason, you have teams that will always be looking for a QB. But this offseason is one of those rare years where lots of teams are completely desperate for a QB. It seems very likely that pool of desperate teams are going to get cut in half.

This year, you have to trade into the top 3 to get a first round QB. I don't think it's ridiculous at all to expect that for the Chiefs to get a solid first round QB, they can afford to trade into the top 10 or top 15 in 2013.Call it desperation if you want. I personally don't see any discernible difference between the teams without real QBs this year and past years. I also don't buy your theory that the pool of these teams will get cut in half, since NFL teams aren't stupid and know that signing Orton or Campbell shouldn't be viewed as a long-term solution until success has been legitimately proven.

And by legitimately proven, I don't mean like what Buffalo did with Ryan Fitzpatrick this year. Fitz didn't prove shit, and still has a long way to go. If that team passes on a QB in the draft just because they think Ryan is the future, then they're more screwed than we are with Cassel.

jd1020
02-19-2012, 04:25 PM
And by legitimately proven, I don't mean like what Buffalo did with Ryan Fitzpatrick this year. Fitz didn't prove shit, and still has a long way to go. If that team passes on a QB in the draft just because they think Ryan is the future, then they're more screwed than we are with Cassel.

I doubt they think that. Unless I'm mistaken there is an "out-clause" in Fitz's deal and they can release him with nothing to lose sleep over.

SNR
02-19-2012, 04:27 PM
Last time I checked, 5 QBs is a hell of a lot better than 2.

Look, in 2012 or 2013, we're NOT going to get an elite QB. I don't even care about Luck, RGIII, or Barkley. We simply do not have the ammo to get any of those guys. What I care about are the second-tier QBs we have a realistic chance of getting. Tannehill is not second-tier. He's a 3rd tier QB being forced into a 2nd tier because of how shoddy the QB class is.

There will be a lot more 2nd tier QBs the Chiefs can take in 2013, and that tier should be pretty deep. As I've said a million times, it will be a hell of a lot easier for us to trade from 25 to the top 10 than it will be to trade from 11 to 2.You're missing out on my sarcasm. I'm basically saying there are two legitimate QBs in 2013 who should be labeled as franchise leaders. And unless Wilson improves by leaps and bounds, I'm not comfortable with Landry Jones in the slightest. I'd rather have Tannehill this year than take Jones next year.

I don't know what 2nd tier means, but are you telling me that there were no 2nd tier QBs in the 2008-2010 drafts? If that's the direction we should have gone, then why the hell didn't we just take our guy and move on?

SNR
02-19-2012, 04:28 PM
I doubt they think that. Unless I'm mistaken there is an "out-clause" in Fitz's deal and they can release him with nothing to lose sleep over.So they're in the market for drafting a QB if the right guy falls to them, then?

According to chiefzilla the Bills have their guy and won't be in competition with the Chiefs for any of these QBs in the near future.

RustShack
02-19-2012, 04:29 PM
QB's that fall tend to be better it seems like. This year since there are only two it won't happen, but maybe next year we will get lucky and that third good QB falls to us.

SNR
02-19-2012, 04:30 PM
Also, I give football dap to Direckshun all the time, but I'm going to do it again. I love Late Night Bullshit threads. Even though the topic has veered away into a different conversation, these threads are usually guaranteed to get good football talk going.

CoMoChief
02-19-2012, 04:36 PM
FA
QB - re-sign Kyle Orton
NT - Paul Soliai
S - Anyone's better than McGraw and Piscatelli

Draft
ILB - Dont'a Hightower
Oline depth

chiefzilla1501
02-19-2012, 04:38 PM
Call it desperation if you want. I personally don't see any discernible difference between the teams without real QBs this year and past years. I also don't buy your theory that the pool of these teams will get cut in half, since NFL teams aren't stupid and know that signing Orton or Campbell shouldn't be viewed as a long-term solution until success has been legitimately proven.

And by legitimately proven, I don't mean like what Buffalo did with Ryan Fitzpatrick this year. Fitz didn't prove shit, and still has a long way to go. If that team passes on a QB in the draft just because they think Ryan is the future, then they're more screwed than we are with Cassel.

You're talking about teams who might be interested in a QB vs. teams who will aggressively go after a QB at all costs + have a terrific draft position to crowd out everyone else.

In many of the QB situations you speak of, those teams will not have a huge trade advantage over the Chiefs. Largely because a guy like Campbell or Orton can easily take a team to 7-9 and in a significantly less attractive draft position. So the Chiefs can easily out-bid them. In many of those QB situations, you have teams who might be interested in a QB, but only if he falls close to their draft spot. In many of those QB situations, you have an owner too dumb to realize the importance of a QB. And in yet other situations, you have a coach who is clinging on to his job and isn't going to want to start a rebuild (Seattle... Buffalo... for example).

If the Chiefs aren't aggressive in 2013 for a QB, they're not going to get a franchise QB. However, if they are, because you expect that maybe several first round QBs will fall out of the top 5, the Chiefs can easily out-bid any team to get a good QB. What really fucked everything up this year was both Barkley and Wilson waiting one year to declare. Even in a desperate QB market, the Chiefs could have had ammo to trade up for those guys. There will most definitely be less teams competing for more QBs.

chiefzilla1501
02-19-2012, 04:53 PM
You're missing out on my sarcasm. I'm basically saying there are two legitimate QBs in 2013 who should be labeled as franchise leaders. And unless Wilson improves by leaps and bounds, I'm not comfortable with Landry Jones in the slightest. I'd rather have Tannehill this year than take Jones next year.

I don't know what 2nd tier means, but are you telling me that there were no 2nd tier QBs in the 2008-2010 drafts? If that's the direction we should have gone, then why the hell didn't we just take our guy and move on?

What I mean by 2nd tier is "would be a first round QB in any good QB class, but not a consensus top 3 pick."

Interestingly, in years where the Chiefs had prime draft positions, the QB classes weren't very good. Sucks, big time. But to answer your question, yes, in previous years we were in MUCH better position to get 2nd-tier talent than we are in 2012. In hindsight, would I have reached for Flacco or Sanchez even now knowing they're not QBs I like very much? Absolutely. Would I have traded up for Ryan? Absolutely. And yes, I was on the Clausen bandwagon, I would have loved to see the Chiefs trade up for a guy like Ponder (regardless of how he's struggled), and not drafting Dalton or hell, even Kaepernick... big mistake. Those were bad decisions made because they were egotistically married to Cassel. So even if the QB classes in 2008-2010 weren't very good, you're not going to get an argument out of me that we absolutely should have been more aggressive.

As for 2nd tier talent... like I said, I'd actually rather Tannehill over Landry Jones or Jake Locker. Those guys were so ridiculously overvalued. But some team will stupidly reach for Jones. Let them. The guys I like are Aaron Murray and Tyler Wilson. I also think there's a lot of potential for a guy like Tyler Bray or EJ Manuel to play well next year. This class, to me, is shaping up to not have as much talent as previous classes, but will have the most first round depth than we've seen in a while. Legit first round depth, not the kind in 2011 where some players were grossly over-ranked.