PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs just more speculation about RGIII


Pages : [1] 2

tooge
02-28-2012, 03:33 PM
Well, at least they mention the chiefs


Robert Griffin trade rumors already spinning out of control
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on February 28, 2012, 4:04 PM EST

APForget the Combine. Forget free agency. Robert Griffin III trade chatter dominates the NFL discussion these days.

And it’s still February.

Perhaps Rams COO Kevin Demoff is right: It’s getting less crazy to imagine a deal could be completed before free agency. We’ve read and heard an unprecedented amount of trade rumors about the No. 2 overall pick for this time of year.

Let’s go over the latest:

1. Mike Jones of the Washington Post writes the Redskins would give up the No. 6 overall pick and next year’s first round pick in addition to multiple picks in the mid-to-upper rounds of the draft. Consider this the starting point for negotiations.

The Rams are reportedly looking for a similar package to the one San Diego netted for Eli Manning: Two firsts (including the No. 4 overall pick), a third- and fifth-round pick. The Redskins sound ready to meet this demand.

2. Texas A&M prospect Ryan Tannehill is watching the Griffin talk closely. Jones believes the Redskins would take Tannehill at No. 6 overal if they can’t get Griffin.

3. Terry Pluto of the Cleveland Plain-Dealer believes the Browns will ultimately have to give up three first-round picks in order to land Griffin. Do I hear four, Redskins? (This reminds us of a classic article by the Onion.)

4. Demoff told Peter King of SI.com that the Rams received a feeler from a team “you would never expect.” Does Kansas City count? If not, we’ll roll with Philadelphia as our irresponsible guess for a mystery team. Enter your pick below.

5. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch considers the Redskins the early favorite to land Griffin. This sounds true based on all the reports, plus Mike Shanahan’s close relationship with Jeff Fisher.

Chocolate Hog
02-28-2012, 03:34 PM
That aint happening.

Pitt Gorilla
02-28-2012, 03:35 PM
All of those late-season wins sure were nice.

stonedstooge
02-28-2012, 03:36 PM
The only pre-draft signing can be the number `1 pick right?

Kyle DeLexus
02-28-2012, 03:36 PM
I'd say that Eli Manning trade worked out for the Giants.

Kyle DeLexus
02-28-2012, 03:37 PM
The only pre-draft signing can be the number `1 pick right?

Correct.

stonedstooge
02-28-2012, 03:39 PM
Correct.

Thanks

BigMeatballDave
02-28-2012, 03:39 PM
All of those late-season wins sure were nice.

Yes they were/RAC

Chocolate Hog
02-28-2012, 03:40 PM
This makes sense make other teams think you want to draft a QB so then the 11th pick will have more value for a team who wants Tannehill.

Guru
02-28-2012, 03:42 PM
NO way Pioli gives up the draft for one guy. No matter how good he potentially could be.

Wallcrawler
02-28-2012, 03:49 PM
It would be awesome to get him, but you cant give up an entire draft for one guy.

Of course for KC, even if it turned out to be a giant fail ala Ricky Williams, its just another fail that can be added to the nearly two decades of fail seasons theyve already racked up.

Im fine either way. I doubt we get RG3, but if we do it will certainly be exciting to see how it turns out.

I figure Manning is KC's best shot at a real QB this year and thats a huge longshot.

Chiefs should just draft as strongly as they can this year, and try to make do with Orton, Stanzi, or worst case scenario Matt Cassel if they cannot get Manning.

BossChief
02-28-2012, 03:49 PM
I wonder what the poll results would be on

A. Trade up to #2 by using a bunch of picks and throw in Bowe once he is franchised instead of a future first+....or sign Bowe in time to tag Carr and include him in the deal.

The rams need a receiver and corner backs, but they would need to cut some guys in this scenario because of their cap situation.

2. Sign Peyton and draft Tannehill. Peyton would cost a lot and that might cause us to lose a player or two in the next 2-3 years.

Both scenarios have their positives and drawbacks.

I think I'd rather sign Peyton and draft Tannehill/Richardson.

Mr. Laz
02-28-2012, 03:50 PM
st. louis is starting every rumor they can to try and drive up the price.

I hope it blows up in their face and they don't get shit

Tuckdaddy
02-28-2012, 03:51 PM
A total pipe dream. No chance in hell unless the Rams just wanted us to have the pick for some rediculous reason. It would taken more than just our picks this year.

Bowe and Carr plus our one and two? But they would have to be ours first off.

TRR
02-28-2012, 03:51 PM
KC would have to give up the entire draft to get RGIII. There isn't a player worth that much...and it truly is a gamble.

You can count KC out of the RGIII sweepstakes. There is just no way Pioli would be willing to give that much up and rightly so.
Posted via Mobile Device

Mr. Laz
02-28-2012, 03:58 PM
i seriously doubt that anything happens until the day of the draft. All these rumors is just the Rams trying to increase the price or the redskins trying to scare everyone off.

silly to worry about

keg in kc
02-28-2012, 04:04 PM
The only thing I know for sure is that he'll end up somewhere, and it probably won't be here.

salame
02-28-2012, 04:05 PM
We aren't getting him
Or Manning

Okie_Apparition
02-28-2012, 04:10 PM
May the Heisman curse be with him
'cause he won't be in KC

Fruit Ninja
02-28-2012, 04:10 PM
NO way Pioli gives up the draft for one guy. No matter how good he potentially could be.

Thats true, but if there is ever a time to do it, its RIGHT NOW. WE can fill in what we need through free agency right now.

I know it wont happen, but damn it would be nice.

Thig Lyfe
02-28-2012, 04:11 PM
No team has ever traded that much for a quarterback and gone on to win two Super Bowls with that quarterback as the Super Bowl MVP in each of them.

Fruit Ninja
02-28-2012, 04:15 PM
No team has ever traded that much for a quarterback and gone on to win two Super Bowls with that quarterback as the Super Bowl MVP in each of them.

Well, we havent been tot he Superbowl in over 40 years, somethings gotta give. lol

Ben N 58men
02-28-2012, 04:18 PM
Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill

TRR
02-28-2012, 04:19 PM
Thats true, but if there is ever a time to do it, its RIGHT NOW. WE can fill in what we need through free agency right now.

I know it wont happen, but damn it would be nice.

As you know, NFL players are one snap away from their careers being over. The time to trade your entire draft+ for one player is NEVER. There is way too much risk involved.
Posted via Mobile Device

BossChief
02-28-2012, 04:28 PM
If your goal is to win one or more CHAMPIONSHIPS, the risk is higher for NOT doing WHATEVER IT TAKES to get a bluechip quarterback prospect.

Go, look up how much NY gave up for Eli.

2 superbowls, so far.

I'd give either Carr OR Bowe in a tag/trade deal along with the whole 2012 draft to move up if that's what it takes.

We aren't gonna win a fucking thing with Cassel.

Pestilence
02-28-2012, 04:36 PM
As you know, NFL players are one snap away from their careers being over. The time to trade your entire draft+ for one player is NEVER. There is way too much risk involved.
Posted via Mobile Device

Well then....let's just draft scared and never do anything drastic. Great plan.

Pestilence
02-28-2012, 04:36 PM
If your goal is to win one or more CHAMPIONSHIPS, the risk is higher for NOT doing WHATEVER IT TAKES to get a bluechip quarterback prospect.

Go, look up how much NY gave up for Eli.

2 superbowls, so far.

I'd give either Carr OR Bowe in a tag/trade deal along with the whole 2012 draft to move up if that's what it takes.

We aren't gonna win a fucking thing with Cassel.


So my question is......what would be the feeling about Pioli if he:

1. Let Carr walk.
2. Franchised Bowe
3. Traded Bowe, our 1st this year and a 1st next year for RGIII.

Fruit Ninja
02-28-2012, 04:40 PM
As you know, NFL players are one snap away from their careers being over. The time to trade your entire draft+ for one player is NEVER. There is way too much risk involved.
Posted via Mobile Device

ill tell you what, we will NEVER EVER win a Championship with what we are doing now. We have .001 percent chance of doing anything. We have relived this no qb worth a fuck for a long long time. 0 Superbowl appearances in OVER 40 fucking years.

Chiefs need to do SOMETHING to get a qb. I dont really want to relive the 90's over again. Yes, we won over 100 games in the 10 years, but let me tell you, we were still watching the Superbowl with no horse in the race. 0-16 or 9-7 and no play off win is the same to me.

Guru
02-28-2012, 04:44 PM
So my question is......what would be the feeling about Pioli if he:

1. Let Carr walk.
2. Franchised Bowe
3. Traded Bowe, our 1st this year and a 1st next year for RGIII.

I'm not a fan of giving up the entire draft but if the guy does anything to get us a potential top tier QB I'll be much less upset by him.

Guru
02-28-2012, 04:45 PM
ill tell you what, we will NEVER EVER win a Championship with what we are doing now. We have .001 percent chance of doing anything. We have relived this no qb worth a **** for a long long time. 0 Superbowl appearances in OVER 40 ****ing years.

Chiefs need to do SOMETHING to get a qb. I dont really want to relive the 90's over again. Yes, we won over 100 games in the 10 years, but let me tell you, we were still watching the Superbowl with no horse in the race. 0-16 or 9-7 and no play off win is the same to me.

THIS X10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

stonedstooge
02-28-2012, 04:49 PM
Clark says; I've had some very good years since I inherited my team from my old man. Fuck you all

mikey23545
02-28-2012, 04:54 PM
What the fuck is wrong with some of you children? You do realize there's going to be another draft next year, right? This is not the last chance in recorded history to draft a QB in the draft.

Nobody on this board is against a reasonable trade to land a QB but this "let's trade every pick this year, next year, and the year after that and a package of Bowe, Carr, Charles, and Berry to draft RG III!" is just tiresomely stupid.

Fruit Ninja
02-28-2012, 04:59 PM
What the **** is wrong with some of you children? You do realize there's going to be another draft next year, right? This is not the last chance in recorded history to draft a QB in the draft.

Nobody on this board is against a reasonable trade to land a QB but this "let's trade every pick this year, next year, and the year after that and a package of Bowe, Carr, Charles, and Berry to draft RG III!" is just tiresomely stupid.

lol, what makes you think we wont be again 7-9 and 9-7 and again be in a position with nothing but our dicks in our hands because we are picking 11-20 again? That is another year older. THen we can say, dont trade the whole draft, we can wait til 2014, for a qb. lol when does it end? The Chiefs fans have been waiting since 1970 for another franchise qb.

TRR
02-28-2012, 05:03 PM
Well then....let's just draft scared and never do anything drastic. Great plan.

That's not what I'm saying and you know it. What I'm saying is that you don't give up an entire draft and then some for one player. That idea is simply idiotic. It has nothing to do with drafting scared...it's all about not over-reacting to the hype and having the brain to realize football is 11 on 11.
Posted via Mobile Device

TRR
02-28-2012, 05:05 PM
lol, what makes you think we wont be again 7-9 and 9-7 and again be in a position with nothing but our dicks in our hands because we are picking 11-20 again? That is another year older. THen we can say, dont trade the whole draft, we can wait til 2014, for a qb. lol when does it end? The Chiefs fans have been waiting since 1970 for another franchise qb.

I didn't realize franchise QB's were unavailable after pick 10 in the draft?? That sucks.
Posted via Mobile Device

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 05:05 PM
What the **** is wrong with some of you children? You do realize there's going to be another draft next year, right? This is not the last chance in recorded history to draft a QB in the draft.

Nobody on this board is against a reasonable trade to land a QB but this "let's trade every pick this year, next year, and the year after that and a package of Bowe, Carr, Charles, and Berry to draft RG III!" is just tiresomely stupid.

There's always next year, until it's next year, of course.

It's not entirely unreasonable to imagine moving up from 11 overall, and being averse to risk is not going to serve this franchise well in the long term.

Phobia
02-28-2012, 05:05 PM
As you know, NFL players are one snap away from their careers being over.

or freak moped accident.

Fruit Ninja
02-28-2012, 05:06 PM
I didn't realize franchise QB's were unavailable after pick 10 in the draft?? That sucks.
Posted via Mobile Device

They are, but its a bigger risk. All i am saying is 40 fucking years! When does it stop. Since what mid 80's since we have even tried. I was just a damned kid watching Transformers after i got out of grade school. lol Its been a while.

TRR
02-28-2012, 05:10 PM
They are, but its a bigger risk. All i am saying is 40 fucking years! When does it stop. Since what mid 80's since we have even tried. I was just a damned kid watching Transformers after i got out of grade school. lol Its been a while.

So drafting a QB between 11-20 is a risk but trading your entire draft+ for RG3 isn't?
Posted via Mobile Device

Otter
02-28-2012, 05:11 PM
They are, but its a bigger risk. All i am saying is 40 ****ing years! When does it stop. Since what mid 80's since we have even tried. I was just a damned kid watching Transformers after i got out of grade school. lol Its been a while.

You're forgetting the great Pat Barnes draft?

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 05:12 PM
So drafting a QB between 11-20 is a risk but trading your entire draft+ for RG3 isn't?
Posted via Mobile Device

Huge risk. If the QB pans out, however, it's well worth it.

Lock in on the prospect and don't hesitate. Not sure if RGIII is that guy, but I would certainly support the risk if Pioli believes he is.

Crush
02-28-2012, 05:13 PM
As you know, NFL players are one snap away from their careers being over. The time to trade your entire draft+ for one player is NEVER. There is way too much risk involved.
Posted via Mobile Device

Let's do nothing then, because it has worked so well for the past 40+ years.

TRR
02-28-2012, 05:16 PM
Let's do nothing then, because it has worked so well for the past 40+ years.

That's not what I'm saying.
Posted via Mobile Device

TRR
02-28-2012, 05:18 PM
Huge risk. If the QB pans out, however, it's well worth it.

Lock in on the prospect and don't hesitate. Not sure if RGIII is that guy, but I would certainly support the risk if Pioli believes he is.

He can't just "pan out.". He needs to win a few Super Bowls to be worth that type of gamble. You won't know unless you try, however I'm afraid the hype of RG3 is bigger than the payoff will be. Either way, an entire draft is not worth one player...Never will be.
Posted via Mobile Device

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 05:21 PM
He can't just "pan out.". He needs to win a few Super Bowls to be worth that type of gamble. You won't know unless you try, however I'm afraid the hype of RG3 is bigger than the payoff will be. Either way, an entire draft is not worth one player...Never will be.
Posted via Mobile Device

You're putting arbitrary distinctions on the value, much like posters who claim that, essentially, trading away a draft could set a franchise back "six years." Not five, not seven. Six.

The math is hard and fast on this fact.

If you can acquire a true franchise QB, there's damn near no price too steep. And this price sure as fuck isn't one single draft, though I know we'd desperately miss all of the McClusters and Arenaseseses of the world.

Donger
02-28-2012, 05:23 PM
Is it known that there will be a QB comparable to Luck or RGIII in next year's draft (or the next year) at this point?

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 05:25 PM
Is it known that there will be a QB comparable to Luck or RGIII in next year's draft (or the next year) at this point?

Barkley is the top prospect for '13. Not at Luck's standard. Totally different player from RGIII.

O.city
02-28-2012, 05:27 PM
Say we gave up what ever we had to give up to get this guy 3 years ago.


Over the last three years our first rounders have been Jackson, Berry, and Baldwin. We just won 7 games without Berry and with a part or less time Baldwin. Jackson had a good year but he wasn't an all pro.

Now, say you put RGIII on this team last year. If he is what they think he is or think he will be, what would the Chiefs record have been?

At this point, where the Chiefs are on both sides of the ball, where do we need to focus our drafting? We could essentially get what we need, (depth) if we were or are smart about 3 and later round picks, that we could potentially keep.

Also something to think about is that if we did trade up and give up a ton, those draft picks wouldn't have to be paid. That could give us money to keep our own guys.


I dunno, I don't think it's smart to be giving up all those picks, but if they did, you won't hear a complaint from me.

TRR
02-28-2012, 05:28 PM
You're putting arbitrary distinctions on the value, much like posters who claim that, essentially, trading away a draft could set a franchise back "six years." Not five, not seven. Six.

The math is hard and fast on this fact.

If you can acquire a true franchise QB, there's damn near no price too steep. And this price sure as fuck isn't one single draft, though I know we'd desperately miss all of the McClusters and Arenaseseses of the world.

It's a BIG "IF."
Posted via Mobile Device

Pestilence
02-28-2012, 05:30 PM
If RGIII gets us to the playoffs (or close)...our 1st round pick next year will be worth dick.

I would give up our 1st and 2nd picks this year and our 1st next year to get RGIII.

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 05:32 PM
If you sit back and think about it, where would this franchise be without Tyson Jackson and the (CP) all-world production from Baldwin, who, apparently, registered the most impressive 21-catch season in NFL ****ing history.

Bowe (and his 70 reception rookie year and consistent production)? Shit. Baldwin? Money.

Get the franchise QB. Worry about the details later.

Pestilence
02-28-2012, 05:34 PM
Sign Paul Soliai in FA.
Trade up RGIII.
Grab a RT in the 3rd round.

Epic Fail 007
02-28-2012, 05:36 PM
NO way Pioli gives up the draft for one guy. No matter how good he potentially could be.

Nore should he thats completely stupid and immature thinking.

Urc Burry
02-28-2012, 05:37 PM
We have enough cap space to compensate for losing some draft picks

Pestilence
02-28-2012, 05:38 PM
Nore should he thats completely stupid and immature thinking.

http://ph.cdn.photos.upi.com/collection/upi/8e1fbca7069f92b044472f62b1acc435/Super-Bowl-XLII-New-York-Giants-vs-New-England-Patriots-in-Glendale-Arizona_2.jpg

Detoxing
02-28-2012, 05:40 PM
Get the franchise QB. Worry about the details later.

.

Okie_Apparition
02-28-2012, 05:42 PM
No team has ever traded that much for a quarterback and gone on to win two Super Bowls with that quarterback as the Super Bowl MVP in each of them.

They had Philip RIvers
I'm not convinced they wouldn't have been better off keeping him & the draft picks
or maybe that should be no worse off..

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 05:49 PM
If you sit back and think about it, where would this franchise be without Tyson Jackson and the (CP) all-world production from Baldwin, who, apparently, registered the most impressive 21-catch season in NFL ****ing history.

Bowe (and his 70 reception rookie year and consistent production)? Shit. Baldwin? Money.

Get the franchise QB. Worry about the details later.

That's not a perfect example because based on what we've seen from Tyson Jackson and what we've seen from Mark Sanchez, it's starting to look like the Chiefs made out better. Jackson is a very good player who will be starting for the Chiefs 3 years from now. It's possible Sanchez in 3 years will either be a bench player or a QB who holds you back from doing the things you want to do. As for Baldwin... well, now you're getting into the argument about whether we need to get a top 5 QB or if we could just wait for an Andy Dalton type QB to come around.

Okie_Apparition
02-28-2012, 05:51 PM
Eli or keep Rivers next years 1st & whatever pick they took Keading with

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 05:52 PM
That's not a perfect example because based on what we've seen from Tyson Jackson and what we've seen from Mark Sanchez, it's starting to look like the Chiefs made out better. Jackson is a very good player who will be starting for the Chiefs 3 years from now. It's possible Sanchez in 3 years will either be a bench player or a QB who holds you back from doing the things you want to do. As for Baldwin... well, now you're getting into the argument about whether we need to get a top 5 QB or if we could just wait for an Andy Dalton type QB to come around.

No idea how that relates to Baldwin, who has shown precious little in KC, other than a great catch that was called back.

As for Jackson/Sanchez, it could be that TJ ends up being the better of these two. However, once Pioli made the move to Cassel, I think the selection should have been Raji, and it should have been a no-brainer.

splatbass
02-28-2012, 05:52 PM
I'd give either Carr OR Bowe in a tag/trade deal along with the whole 2012 draft to move up if that's what it takes.


And that is why you aren't an NFL GM.

aturnis
02-28-2012, 05:55 PM
So my question is......what would be the feeling about Pioli if he:

1. Let Carr walk.
2. Franchised Bowe
3. Traded Bowe, our 1st this year and a 1st next year for RGIII.

I would think the best deal for both us and them would be for us to tag and trade them Carr, our 1st/3rd/5th...

You'd have to assume we'll probably get some compensatory picks for Orton and Shaun Smith, so losing the 3rd/5th is not that bad. We'd get at least one of them back. Also, we can't keep both Bowe and Carr, so pay Bowe, tag/trade Carr, otherwise we'll just let him go. In all actuality, we're really only out the difference between our 3rd/5th, and what we receive for compensatory picks.

If they like, they can stay put and finally get a LT to protect Bradford, which might help more than a WR. Or, they can use some of their bounty to trade back up to get Blackmon if they like.

I used to be iffy on RG3. Them more I've watched him, and the more I've followed him from interviews, combine and other such things, the less questions I have about the guy. I think he's worth it.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 05:57 PM
I can't stand the Philip Rivers Eli Manning argument.
1) The Chargers gave up a first, second, third, and fifth round pick. That's one draft. If the rumors are true about Washington's compensation, the Chiefs will need to sacrifice two drafts to get him.
2) The Chargers moved up from #1 to #4. The Chiefs would need to move up from #11 to #2 AND they would need to out-compete several suitors with much better draft positions than we have
3) Look, RGIII is a great prospect. But he's not even close to Eli Manning coming out of college. Eli was an NFL-ready QB with the right frame. RGIII has largely operated off a pre-designed read offense and arguably might be slightly short for the position. Eli was even higher touted than Andrew Luck.
4) The Chargers knew if they traded down, they'd have the opportunity to draft Big Ben or Rivers. The Rams, if they traded down to us, would go from being able to draft an elite WR or elite LT, to an elite RT (a position that would often go in the 20's in many drafts)

The Chiefs are going to give up a whole lot more for RGIII than the Chargers did. They'd be doing it for a QB that is very good but isn't the surefire elite QB Eli or Luck are. And they're doing it against a whole lot more competition in a draft where outside of the top 10, you see a very significant drop in talent.

Lightrise
02-28-2012, 05:58 PM
I think the price is getting too high...take Richardson and try to pick up Weeden or Cousins and next year make the play for a QB and dump Dorsey in the deal.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 05:59 PM
No idea how that relates to Baldwin, who has shown precious little in KC, other than a great catch that was called back.

As for Jackson/Sanchez, it would be that TJ ends up being the better of these two. However, once Pioli made the move to Cassel, I think the selection should have been Raji, and it should have been a no-brainer.

Yes, I think the selection should have been Raji too. And Baldwin, it's way too soon to know what we would have gotten. But I think the point is whether we should take a risk on a QB. Yes, we should. Yes, we should be aggressive. But imagine if we traded two whole drafts to get Sanchez. There is definitely a limit to how much trade comp you give up. Frankly, I think the Rivers-Eli trade comp is a pretty good ceiling.

Okie_Apparition
02-28-2012, 06:02 PM
Adam the retard Shefter started the Manning/Rivers trade comparison
Two highly touted QBs were swoped with draft picks thrown in

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 06:03 PM
If RGIII gets us to the playoffs (or close)...our 1st round pick next year will be worth dick.

I would give up our 1st and 2nd picks this year and our 1st next year to get RGIII.

That trade comp is a joke.

That trade comp is a 3rd, 4th, 5th round pick less than the Rivers-Eli trade. And that comp was for a better QB, for only a 3-slot trade up, in a class where the trading party could easily land a good QB at #4 after a trade down, in an era when #1 QBs were less valuable because they were guaranteed monstrous contracts many teams didn't want to take on.

The comp has to match the Rivers-Eli trade, and then it has to add several big picks to that.

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 06:03 PM
Eli was not more highly touted than Luck, who has no benefit of name recognition/pedigree.

Valiant
02-28-2012, 06:06 PM
As you know, NFL players are one snap away from their careers being over. The time to trade your entire draft+ for one player is NEVER. There is way too much risk involved.
Posted via Mobile Device

I disagree, especially in todays NFL for teams that are built for a run with players in place..

Now teams that are weak in mulitple areas yes, it is bad..

Okie_Apparition
02-28-2012, 06:07 PM
& Rivers was drafted a Giant
probably by the Chargers' request

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 06:08 PM
Eli was not more highly touted than Luck, who has no benefit of name recognition/pedigree.

I think the point to be made is that Eli and Luck would at least be a head-to-head for the #1 pick. RGIII would not even come close to competing with either of those guys.

It doesn't make RGIII a bad player. But he's not nearly as valuable going into the draft as Eli was, which means his trade comp shouldn't exceed Eli's.

Hog Farmer
02-28-2012, 06:21 PM
If your goal is to win one or more CHAMPIONSHIPS, the risk is higher for NOT doing WHATEVER IT TAKES to get a bluechip quarterback prospect.

Go, look up how much NY gave up for Eli.

2 superbowls, so far.

I'd give either Carr OR Bowe in a tag/trade deal along with the whole 2012 draft to move up if that's what it takes.We aren't gonna win a fucking thing with Cassel.

I hate this ! But it's right on!

aturnis
02-28-2012, 06:35 PM
I think the point to be made is that Eli and Luck would at least be a head-to-head for the #1 pick. RGIII would not even come close to competing with either of those guys.

It doesn't make RGIII a bad player. But he's not nearly as valuable going into the draft as Eli was, which means his trade comp shouldn't exceed Eli's.

Really? RG3 is only not being picked #1 b/c Luck is considered the safest, surest thing at QB since Elway. RG3 is VERY impressive and I think he'd give Manning a run for his money for the #1 pick easy.

qabbaan
02-28-2012, 06:38 PM
1. There is no way in hell Pioli would outbid the Redskins for this pick.

2. You maybe trade a whole draft for Luck. Not for RG3.

3. Cassel is going to start in 2012. It's time we all accepted it.

4. Cassel is probably going to start in 2013, too.

5. The "competition" will be a sham.

aturnis
02-28-2012, 06:42 PM
1. There is no way in hell Pioli would outbid the Redskins for this pick.

2. You maybe trade a whole draft for Luck. Not for RG3.

3. Cassel is going to start in 2012. It's time we all accepted it.

4. Cassel is probably going to start in 2013, too.

5. The "competition" will be a sham.

Sounds like Pioli is very impressed with RG3 to me.

Barring some miracle, the Chiefs, picking 11th, won't have the chance to choose either Luck or Griffin; the pair is likely to go one-two in the first round of the draft on April 26. But that didn't stop Pioli from dreaming after he and his staff interviewed the two prospects back-to-back. "Never mind drafting these guys," Pioli said. "I wish my daughter would marry one of 'em."

Brock
02-28-2012, 06:42 PM
I think the point to be made is that Eli and Luck would at least be a head-to-head for the #1 pick. RGIII would not even come close to competing with either of those guys.

He has come close to competing with either one of those guys. He's the #2 pick. that's pretty damn close.

aturnis
02-28-2012, 06:46 PM
He has come close to competing with either one of those guys. He's the #2 pick. that's pretty damn close.

I think he could top Eli. Reality is though, it's not a fair fight. He's not only competing with the player, but the "legend" they have become. Eli for his obvious name recognition, and Luck for what he has done. Also, there is a stigma attached to a QB who can run, even if you like that, it will scare you a little.

BossChief
02-28-2012, 06:48 PM
So my question is......what would be the feeling about Pioli if he:

1. Let Carr walk.
2. Franchised Bowe
3. Traded Bowe, our 1st this year and a 1st next year for RGIII.

I would feel like we FINALLY took the correct FIRST STEP.

IMO, the only situation I like better is Manning + Tannehill.

WhiteWhale
02-28-2012, 06:51 PM
Ummm... Based on Shanahan's close relationship with Fisher?

Are they insinuating that there will be collusion? You don't get ahead by cutting your buddies good deals. IF the skins get the pick, they'll have to put out the best offer.

Buckweath
02-28-2012, 06:57 PM
I would feel like we FINALLY took the correct FIRST STEP.

IMO, the only situation I like better is Manning + Tannehill.

I really don't see the Chiefs signing Manning and then drafting Tannehill. If you're going to get Manning, you have to give him the best supporting cast RIGHT NOW, which means drafting a Trent Richardson or an Olineman in the first round this year.

notorious
02-28-2012, 07:00 PM
I think we should just play it safe and use our picks to upgrade our weak positions and build depth.

Trading picks for an unproven QB is stupid. You should only use picks to trade for proven veterans.

It has worked great in the past, so why wouldn't it work again?

Chief_For_Life58
02-28-2012, 07:05 PM
So my question is......what would be the feeling about Pioli if he:

1. Let Carr walk.
2. Franchised Bowe
3. Traded Bowe, our 1st this year and a 1st next year for RGIII.

the thig is is that the rams wouldnt even want to go for that. why pay dbowe when they can draft blackman.
there is no way we get rg3. hes awesome. Id love to see him in a chiefs jersey but there is no way hes playing for us next year. 3 other teams have much more to offer the rams then us.

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 07:08 PM
the thig is is that the rams wouldnt even want to go for that. why pay dbowe when they can draft blackman.
there is no way we get rg3. hes awesome. Id love to see him in a chiefs jersey but there is no way hes playing for us next year. 3 other teams have much more to offer the rams then us.

Because they would know exactly what they have in Bowe, who is a front-line WR, despite what some on CP try to suggest.

VAChief
02-28-2012, 07:10 PM
KC would have to give up the entire draft to get RGIII. There isn't a player worth that much...and it truly is a gamble.

You can count KC out of the RGIII sweepstakes. There is just no way Pioli would be willing to give that much up and rightly so.
Posted via Mobile Device

You are discounting who is drafting, I would trade our whole 2009 draft for Matthew Stafford. The big draft day busts have been primarily RB's. That is foolish, someone you think is a franchise QB is worth considering particularly if you have a young team that you can patch holes through free agency. You aren't going to get a franchise QB in free agency.

Epic Fail 007
02-28-2012, 07:11 PM
http://ph.cdn.photos.upi.com/collection/upi/8e1fbca7069f92b044472f62b1acc435/Super-Bowl-XLII-New-York-Giants-vs-New-England-Patriots-in-Glendale-Arizona_2.jpg

But they did not trade the entire draft,think.

VAChief
02-28-2012, 07:15 PM
the thig is is that the rams wouldnt even want to go for that. why pay dbowe when they can draft blackman.
there is no way we get rg3. hes awesome. Id love to see him in a chiefs jersey but there is no way hes playing for us next year. 3 other teams have much more to offer the rams then us.

It doesn't hurt to ask, throw the whole draft at them. If they don't bite, nothing lost. If they do, you immediately energize your fan base and hopefully your team. If we had the history of solid mid round drafting successes recently it would different, but for the most part we are hit or miss on rounds 1, 2, and 3 as it is...even if RGIII flops, it doesn't set us much further back than we already are. I don't think it would be enough to give up our whole draft, just that it shouldn't be discounted as an option to offer.

MahiMike
02-28-2012, 07:15 PM
Peyton is better and cheaper!

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 07:18 PM
Peyton is better and cheaper!

That's only because the neck is extra.

BossChief
02-28-2012, 07:19 PM
No idea how that relates to Baldwin, who has shown precious little in KC, other than a great catch that was called back.

As for Jackson/Sanchez, it could be that TJ ends up being the better of these two. However, once Pioli made the move to Cassel, I think the selection should have been Raji, and it should have been a no-brainer.last year:

Tyson Jackson > BJ Raji

Doesn't excuse him from missing on guys like Orakpo, though.

DeezNutz
02-28-2012, 07:21 PM
last year:

Tyson Jackson > BJ Raji

Doesn't excuse him from missing on guys like Orakpo, though.

I understand what Kenpom says, and I don't care. Relative value and worth, it's not even close. Raji + Houston would be two very fine additions.

Fat Elvis
02-28-2012, 07:27 PM
If the Chiefs don't land RG3 or Peyton Manning, I will have a lot more time on my hands the next 4-5 years.

RG3 is just flat out exciting. Even if we didn't win a Super Bowl with him in the next five years, it sure would be fun to watch him play and develop.

I'm simply at the point where I would like SOMETHING exciting to happen with this franchise.

DomerNKC
02-28-2012, 07:32 PM
NO way Pioli gives up the draft for one guy. No matter how good he potentially could be.i would gladly give up our 2009 draft entirely.

BossChief
02-28-2012, 07:42 PM
I understand what Kenpom says, and I don't care. Relative value and worth, it's not even close. Raji + Houston would be two very fine additions.Well, if we are gonna do this.

How about Orakpo and Mallett (who went 4 picks later, or Demarco Murray who went at the pick after Houston)

Houston was a great pick, two years later.

Doesnt mean that Raji is better than Jackson RIGHT NOW.

He isn't and every non biased advanced stats site grades Jackson higher.

It is entirely possible that Jackson redeems Pioli for that pick at 3 if he continues to improve.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 07:42 PM
I think we should just play it safe and use our picks to upgrade our weak positions and build depth.

Trading picks for an unproven QB is stupid. You should only use picks to trade for proven veterans.

It has worked great in the past, so why wouldn't it work again?

I don't have a problem trading a draft away. But we are essentially trading two drafts away. That's just reckless. Again, if you whiff on a first round QB, that's fine. If you whiff on a first round QB you traded 2 rounds away for, you essentially set your team back 5-6 years.

qabbaan
02-28-2012, 07:42 PM
If the Chiefs don't land RG3 or Peyton Manning, I will have a lot more time on my hands the next 4-5 years.

RG3 is just flat out exciting. Even if we didn't win a Super Bowl with him in the next five years, it sure would be fun to watch him play and develop.

I'm simply at the point where I would like SOMETHING exciting to happen with this franchise.

Being exciting has little to do with this... Michael Vick has been pimped as exciting for ten years and he is never going to win anything.

Your success as a QB in the NFL who gives your team a shot at winning the super bowl depends on your ability to be a pocket passer and not much else.

Fat Elvis
02-28-2012, 07:44 PM
I don't have a problem trading a draft away. But we are essentially trading two drafts away. That's just reckless. Again, if you whiff on a first round QB, that's fine. If you whiff on a first round QB you traded 2 rounds away for, you essentially set your team back 5-6 years.

You set your team back only if you are too stupid to adjust your personel strategies to the decisions you make.

Fat Elvis
02-28-2012, 07:45 PM
Being exciting has little to do with this... Michael Vick has been pimped as exciting for ten years and he is never going to win anything.

Your success as a QB in the NFL who gives your team a shot at winning the super bowl depends on your ability to be a pocket passer and not much else.

I wanted Michael Vick coming out of Leavenworth. More fun than watching Cassel.

Chiefshrink
02-28-2012, 07:49 PM
st. louis is starting every rumor they can to try and drive up the price.

I hope it blows up in their face and they don't get shit

BINGO !!!:thumb:

Chiefshrink
02-28-2012, 07:51 PM
If the Chiefs don't land RG3 or Peyton Manning, I will have a lot more time on my hands the next 4-5 years.

RG3 is just flat out exciting. Even if we didn't win a Super Bowl with him in the next five years, it sure would be fun to watch him play and develop.

I'm simply at the point where I would like SOMETHING exciting to happen with this franchise.

Amen Fat man:thumb:

Mr. Laz
02-28-2012, 07:51 PM
http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0702/gallery.nfl.draftcombine/images/smith_7707474_.jpg

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 07:52 PM
You set your team back only if you are too stupid to adjust your personel strategies to the decisions you make.

I'm talking about if RGIII is anything less than a franchise QB.

When you make that kind of a bold trade, you HAVE to start him for 3-4 years. You have no choice. More importantly, you are giving away two drafts. Which means that the guys you formerly had for cheap like Albert, Moeaki, Houston, etc.... those guys are going to start to get paid and you wont' be able to afford all of them.

We'd have a 2-3 year window. After that, we better hope RGIII is Peyton Manning good (even Matt Ryan good wont' be good enough to carry a team built purely through free agency).

bricks
02-28-2012, 08:13 PM
If the Chiefs don't land RG3 or Peyton Manning, I will have a lot more time on my hands the next 4-5 years.

RG3 is just flat out exciting. Even if we didn't win a Super Bowl with him in the next five years, it sure would be fun to watch him play and develop.

I'm simply at the point where I would like SOMETHING exciting to happen with this franchise.

And this franchise has had a lot of excitement. Hasn't it? I don't know if anybody can argue that. We've seen this franchise field excellent defenses during the DT years. We've seen this franchise field great offenses during the Vermeil era. Can we call that excitement? I know I can. Don't get me wrong, there has been a lot of sh*tiness along the way as well ala Herm era. The Chiefs have given the fans a mix of a little bit of everything except a bowl.

What we've really seen are a lot of one dimensional teams. It either the team is good on offense or defense and hardly ever both. I want to see an actual team for once that can win it all. The excitement stage hasn't reached to the pinnacle as of yet till they can actually build a well balanced team for once.

Im with superbowl or nothing. I would like excitement to reach its ultimate peak and not just enough to lead to a heartbreak. We've experienced to many of those. It'd be nice to see a change. Never lose out on the big picture man because at the end of the day the big picture is the reason you, I and others watch this game.

Thats all I gotta say.

aturnis
02-28-2012, 08:20 PM
I don't have a problem trading a draft away. But we are essentially trading two drafts away. That's just reckless. Again, if you whiff on a first round QB, that's fine. If you whiff on a first round QB you traded 2 rounds away for, you essentially set your team back 5-6 years.

The Giants traded 2 1st round picks(Philip Rivers, '05 pick), a third rounder, and a 5th rounder. HOW ON EARTH IS THAT AN ENTIRE DRAFT?! Or even TWO for that matter?

So if you trade our first this year, a tagged Carr(who we're losing anyway), and a2nd or 3rd and a 4th or 5th. Then, receive one or two compensatory picks(from Orton and Shaun Smith), how in the hell is that TWO FULL DRAFTS?

Hell, trade our first, Carr, a 3rd and 5th this year and a 3rd next year and we still make out.

RG3, is worth it. Why don't you ask the Giants if Manning wasn't worth the risk.

tredadda
02-28-2012, 08:22 PM
But they did not trade the entire draft,think.

Two problems with this post.

1. Fewer QB hungry teams that year than this year

2. NYG traded essentially the #4 pick for the #1 pick. Not #11 for #2.

splatbass
02-28-2012, 08:23 PM
Hell, trade our first, Carr, a 3rd and 5th this year and a 3rd next year and we still make out.



I don't think that is enough to get him.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 08:26 PM
The Giants traded 2 1st round picks(Philip Rivers, '05 pick), a third rounder, and a 5th rounder. HOW ON EARTH IS THAT AN ENTIRE DRAFT?! Or even TWO for that matter?

So if you trade our first this year, a tagged Carr(who we're losing anyway), and a2nd or 3rd and a 4th or 5th. Then, receive one or two compensatory picks(from Orton and Shaun Smith), how in the hell is that TWO FULL DRAFTS?

Hell, trade our first, Carr, a 3rd and 5th this year and a 3rd next year and we still make out.

RG3, is worth it. Why don't you ask the Giants if Manning wasn't worth the risk.

You're serious? You really think a trade up from #11 to #2 is going to be even CLOSE to the compensation required to go up from #4 to #1? Especially given the enormous dropoff in talent when the Rams move that far?

And can we please stop with all the ridiculous conjecture that teams with great picks are going to want to trade for a very expensive CB?

Epic Fail 007
02-28-2012, 08:27 PM
If the Chiefs don't land RG3 or Peyton Manning, I will have a lot more time on my hands the next 4-5 years.

RG3 is just flat out exciting. Even if we didn't win a Super Bowl with him in the next five years, it sure would be fun to watch him play and develop.

I'm simply at the point where I would like SOMETHING exciting to happen with this franchise.

hmmmmmmm exciting over winning thats stupid

tredadda
02-28-2012, 08:27 PM
The Giants traded 2 1st round picks(Philip Rivers, '05 pick), a third rounder, and a 5th rounder. HOW ON EARTH IS THAT AN ENTIRE DRAFT?! Or even TWO for that matter?

So if you trade our first this year, a tagged Carr(who we're losing anyway), and a2nd or 3rd and a 4th or 5th. Then, receive one or two compensatory picks(from Orton and Shaun Smith), how in the hell is that TWO FULL DRAFTS?

Hell, trade our first, Carr, a 3rd and 5th this year and a 3rd next year and we still make out.

RG3, is worth it. Why don't you ask the Giants if Manning wasn't worth the risk.

I agree with you and this is what I don't get. Some want a championship, but won't do what it takes to do it. Any thought of trading up gets shot down because it might be too expensive because we might "fail". Granted the way we have been doing it for 40+ years is safe, but has netted us 3 playoff wins. The Giants didn't think the cost for Eli was too high even though he might "fail". Funny enough they won more playoff games THIS YEAR than we have in over 40.

tredadda
02-28-2012, 08:30 PM
You're serious? You really think a trade up from #11 to #2 is going to be even CLOSE to the compensation required to go up from #4 to #1? Especially given the enormous dropoff in talent when the Rams move that far?

And can we please stop with all the ridiculous conjecture that teams with great picks are going to want to trade for a very expensive CB?

We need to do whatever it takes to trade up. WTF do we have to lose? We have 3 playoff wins in 40+ years. The Giants have more playoff wins this year than we have in 40+. They were not afraid to do what it took to get Eli even though he might bust.

splatbass
02-28-2012, 08:31 PM
I agree with you and this is what I don't get. Some want a championship, but won't do what it takes to do it. Any thought of trading up gets shot down because it might be too expensive because we might "fail". Granted the way we have been doing it for 40+ years is safe, but has netted us 3 playoff wins. The Giants didn't think the cost for Eli was too high even though he might "fail". Funny enough they won more playoff games THIS YEAR than we have in over 40.

We will have to trade a lot more than the Giants had to trade.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 08:31 PM
I agree with you and this is what I don't get. Some want a championship, but won't do what it takes to do it. Any thought of trading up gets shot down because it might be too expensive because we might "fail". Granted the way we have been doing it for 40+ years is safe, but has netted us 3 playoff wins. The Giants didn't think the cost for Eli was too high even though he might "fail". Funny enough they won more playoff games THIS YEAR than we have in over 40.

I don't think anybody has a problem offering the trade comp the Chargers sent to the Giants.

You would have to be INSANE to think that that would be even close to what the Rams want for this pick.

There is absolutely a line where the trade comp is too much. Risking one full draft, I don't have a problem with that. Risking two, which is what we will likely have to do, very big problem with that.

Epic Fail 007
02-28-2012, 08:32 PM
Being exciting has little to do with this... Michael Vick has been pimped as exciting for ten years and he is never going to win anything.

Your success as a QB in the NFL who gives your team a shot at winning the super bowl depends on your ability to be a pocket passer and not much else.

Your right . I wish the clueless kids around the world who think vick and qbs like him are all that. Would see that.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 08:34 PM
We need to do whatever it takes to trade up. WTF do we have to lose? We have 3 playoff wins in 40+ years. The Giants have more playoff wins this year than we have in 40+. They were not afraid to do what it took to get Eli even though he might bust.

What do we have to lose? 5-6 years.

I've stated before... if you give up 2 years of drafts, in 2-3 years, you're going to start losing a lot of your in-house talent, you'll have no young players to replace them, and your cap becomes too stretched to sign marquee free agents from the outside. If we give up 2 years of drafts, by 2015, RGIII's supporting cast is going to look significantly worse.

So the question is, do people feel comfortable that RGIII can be Peyton Manning? That he can be a QB that can carry a team on his back? Or will we use common sense and say that his upside is much more likely to be like Matt Ryan -- a very good QB who won't make the Super Bowl unless he gets the help of a great supporting cast?

tredadda
02-28-2012, 08:35 PM
We will have to trade a lot more than the Giants had to trade.

Again, the Giants have more playoff wins this year than we have in 40 and some still want to play it safe? I just don't get it.

aturnis
02-28-2012, 08:35 PM
You're serious? You really think a trade up from #11 to #2 is going to be even CLOSE to the compensation required to go up from #4 to #1? Especially given the enormous dropoff in talent when the Rams move that far?

And can we please stop with all the ridiculous conjecture that teams with great picks are going to want to trade for a very expensive CB?

Or they could fill their gaping CB hole with a 1st, 2nd round CB who winds up busting.

Seriously, Carr is a known, he is young, he is good and he has yet to reach his ceiling.

Also, we can always give up higher picks than the 3rd, 5th. A 2nd and 5th next year and our 3rd and 5th this year...

tredadda
02-28-2012, 08:36 PM
Your right . I wish the clueless kids around the world who think vick and qbs like him are all that. Would see that.

Vick also was a dumb as a box of rocks coming out. He also had no accuracy. The only similarities between him and RGIII are they are both fast and black QBs.

tredadda
02-28-2012, 08:38 PM
I don't think anybody has a problem offering the trade comp the Chargers sent to the Giants.

You would have to be INSANE to think that that would be even close to what the Rams want for this pick.

There is absolutely a line where the trade comp is too much. Risking one full draft, I don't have a problem with that. Risking two, which is what we will likely have to do, very big problem with that.

I agree that two drafts is too much. But it won't take two whole drafts to trade up.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 08:38 PM
Or they could fill their gaping CB hole with a 1st, 2nd round CB who winds up busting.

Seriously, Carr is a known, he is young, he is good and he has yet to reach his ceiling.

Also, we can always give up higher picks than the 3rd, 5th. A 2nd and 5th next year and our 3rd and 5th this year...

Again, you are absolutely crazy if you actually think we are going to win this trade without giving up at least or first 3 picks in 2012 and 2013. At least.

And no, teams (especially like the Rams) are not interested in signing a guy like Brandon Carr. They are teams building for the future much moreso than they are today. Why would they sign a guy for $10+ million when they can use that pick instead to draft a CB like Claiborne for a few mill? It's ridiculous to suggest that the Rams are so desperate to win now that they would trade away a blue chip pick for a guy who's going to break their bank.

tredadda
02-28-2012, 08:40 PM
What do we have to lose? 5-6 years.

I've stated before... if you give up 2 years of drafts, in 2-3 years, you're going to start losing a lot of your in-house talent, you'll have no young players to replace them, and your cap becomes too stretched to sign marquee free agents from the outside. If we give up 2 years of drafts, by 2015, RGIII's supporting cast is going to look significantly worse.

So the question is, do people feel comfortable that RGIII can be Peyton Manning? That he can be a QB that can carry a team on his back? Or will we use common sense and say that his upside is much more likely to be like Matt Ryan -- a very good QB who won't make the Super Bowl unless he gets the help of a great supporting cast?

3 playoff wins in 40 years and yet you still worry about 5-6 years? I still think you are pulling a worst case scenario to justify your position. Lets put it this way, we played it safe the last 5-6 years and have what to show for it?

mcaj22
02-28-2012, 08:41 PM
even if the Rams cut that overrated o-lineman they are in no position to be overspending on a 10 mil contract on Brandon Carr

that hurts them, a rebuilding team, more than it helps. The Rams want the future they don't want high priced present day talent.

Brandon Carr has enormous value to win now/media market teams. Not a team like the Rams

tredadda
02-28-2012, 08:42 PM
Again, you are absolutely crazy if you actually think we are going to win this trade without giving up at least or first 3 picks in 2012 and 2013. At least.

And no, teams (especially like the Rams) are not interested in signing a guy like Brandon Carr. They are teams building for the future much moreso than they are today. Why would they sign a guy for $10+ million when they can use that pick instead to draft a CB like Claiborne for a few mill? It's ridiculous to suggest that the Rams are so desperate to win now that they would trade away a blue chip pick for a guy who's going to break their bank.

If Carr were 32 I would agree, but he is still young and ascending. He would be a great pickup for them. He is a proven commodity, Claiborne is not. Did you see how awful their secondary was last year? They could definitely use him him to help stabilize that secondary.

splatbass
02-28-2012, 08:43 PM
Again, the Giants have more playoff wins this year than we have in 40 and some still want to play it safe? I just don't get it.

Clearly you don't get it. WE CAN'T GET RGIII FOR WHAT THE GIANTS GAVE FOR ELI. Not even close.

tredadda
02-28-2012, 08:45 PM
Clearly you don't get it. WE CAN'T GET RGIII FOR WHAT THE GIANTS GAVE FOR ELI. Not even close.

Actually I do get it. The point is the Giants took a chance and gave up what it took to get Eli (regardless of what it would take to get RGIII this year) and were richly rewarded for it. We play it safe even though 40 years of history says that way won't work for us.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 08:49 PM
3 playoff wins in 40 years and yet you still worry about 5-6 years? I still think you are pulling a worst case scenario to justify your position. Lets put it this way, we played it safe the last 5-6 years and have what to show for it?

I have maintained my position that you build your team as if they have to support Matt Ryan, but you aggressively pursue QBs that you hope will become Peyton Manning. Taking a risk on a franchise QB is one thing. Taking a gamble that your QB will become Peyton Manning is another.

I am a big supporter of trading aggressively for RGIII. But if it means sacrificing 2+ years of marquee draft picks, then forget about it. It's stupid to take that enormous risk because we have to overcompensate in a really horrendous QB draft class. I'd rather wait until 2013. There will be deeper QBs and regardless of our draft position, it will be significantly to trade our way into a QB that has true first round value.

aturnis
02-28-2012, 08:50 PM
So you're saying our first this year, next year, and Carr would do it? I'd even sweeten that deal with a 3rd somewhere.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 08:55 PM
So you're saying our first this year, next year, and Carr would do it? I'd even sweeten that deal with a 3rd somewhere.

No, what part about "the Rams don't have the cap, nor the urgency to win now to pay that much for Carr" do you not understand?

aturnis
02-28-2012, 08:56 PM
I have maintained my position that you build your team as if they have to support Matt Ryan, but you aggressively pursue QBs that you hope will become Peyton Manning. Taking a risk on a franchise QB is one thing. Taking a gamble that your QB will become Peyton Manning is another.

I am a big supporter of trading aggressively for RGIII. But if it means sacrificing 2+ years of marquee draft picks, then forget about it. It's stupid to take that enormous risk because we have to overcompensate in a really horrendous QB draft class. I'd rather wait until 2013. There will be deeper QBs and regardless of our draft position, it will be significantly to trade our way into a QB that has true first round value.

? What? What does taking RG3 and trading for him have to do with thinking he will become Peyton Manning? He doesn't need to be Peyton Manning. Peyton never played on a team as good as the team KC has right now...

RG3 has a lot going for him. Brains like crazy, a better deep ball than Manning, and his athletic ability is just icing.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 09:01 PM
? What? What does taking RG3 and trading for him have to do with thinking he will become Peyton Manning? He doesn't need to be Peyton Manning. Peyton never played on a team as good as the team KC has right now...

RG3 has a lot going for him. Brains like crazy, a better deep ball than Manning, and his athletic ability is just icing.

Yes. So you give him a 2-3 year window to win now, which is crazy to expect out of a rookie. If you have ineffective drafts two years in a row, those young guys you have on your roster for cheap, suddenly either get overpaid or you let them loose. That means either you overly stretch your cap, or you have to let some good players go and make your team worse (and you'll have no one to replace them with).

It's not rocket science. We all know that great teams build around a franchise QB, but they also build around the draft.

aturnis
02-28-2012, 09:06 PM
No, what part about "the Rams don't have the cap, nor the urgency to win now to pay that much for Carr" do you not understand?

What makes you think that team can't be competative with good db's and an OL to keep Bradford upright? Not to mention what they get from their draft and the bounty they reap from their pick.

If you really want to cite their cap situation, then you are uninformed. They are currently under the cap, and have highly paid guys who can go, a few contracts that can and should be extended to change their current cap hit. Like 4-5 of those off the top of my head. On top of that, they don't have any FA's who can't be had back reasonably.

All of these things due to change suddenly, plus new leadership and they can't compete at all? They have an opportunity to drastically change for the better.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 09:10 PM
What makes you think that team can't be competative with good db's and an OL to keep Bradford upright? Not to mention what they get from their draft and the bounty they reap from their pick.

If you really want to cite their cap situation, then you are uninformed. They are currently under the cap, and have highly paid guys who can go, a few contracts that can and should be extended to change their current cap hit. Like 4-5 of those off the top of my head. On top of that, they don't have any FA's who can't be had back reasonably.

All of these things due to change suddenly, plus new leadership and they can't compete at all? They have an opportunity to drastically change for the better.

Tell me... when was the last time a team traded away a top 5 pick for a 2nd contract free agent?

(Jeopardy theme song)

aturnis
02-28-2012, 09:19 PM
Tell me that it matters.

Chief_For_Life58
02-28-2012, 09:29 PM
there is absolutely no way we will end up with rg3. 3 teams can all outbid us. the best chance u have of seeing him play is when we play the browns next year

Dave Lane
02-28-2012, 09:32 PM
Fuck Tannehill he has bust written all over him

I wonder what the poll results would be on

A. Trade up to #2 by using a bunch of picks and throw in Bowe once he is franchised instead of a future first+....or sign Bowe in time to tag Carr and include him in the deal.

The rams need a receiver and corner backs, but they would need to cut some guys in this scenario because of their cap situation.

2. Sign Peyton and draft Tannehill. Peyton would cost a lot and that might cause us to lose a player or two in the next 2-3 years.

Both scenarios have their positives and drawbacks.

I think I'd rather sign Peyton and draft Tannehill/Richardson.

Chief_For_Life58
02-28-2012, 09:35 PM
**** Tannehill he has bust written all over him

yeah hes such a waste of time. Great qb's dont play one year of college quarterback. Draft someone later. tannehill is NOT worth the 11th pick. jesus

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 10:03 PM
Tell me that it matters.

It matters because teams are smart enough to know that it's better to go with a young, elite, blue chip prospect, especially now at a far cheaper price, than to go with a second contract veteran.

The idea that you build through the draft and not free agency is a common sense principle that everybody knows, yet we are so firmly convinced that St. Louis would do the exact opposite... even with a blue chip pick.

chiefzilla1501
02-28-2012, 10:05 PM
yeah hes such a waste of time. Great qb's dont play one year of college quarterback. Draft someone later. tannehill is NOT worth the 11th pick. jesus

I'd rather wait until 2013. If you want a QB to test out, bring in Clausen--he's better than anyone you're going to find after Tannehill (who I think is a decent pick, but hell no if it's going to be at #11).

I think 2013 will end up being not a better class, but it's going to have a ton more second-tier first round talent (in my opinion, Tannehill is second round talent being forced into a #1 pick by desperate teams).

aturnis
02-28-2012, 10:25 PM
It matters because teams are smart enough to know that it's better to go with a young, elite, blue chip prospect, especially now at a far cheaper price, than to go with a second contract veteran.

The idea that you build through the draft and not free agency is a common sense principle that everybody knows, yet we are so firmly convinced that St. Louis would do the exact opposite... even with a blue chip pick.

They have a lot of young core players on the roster they've drafted. Taking on ONE second contract player would be the worst thing in the world...you're right. The additional picks and their own picks in this draft are obviously not enough to help build that team. They need that ONE more. They need it. They do.

You act as though they are in KC's situation when KC started rebuilding to the present. There is one HUGE difference between us and them. They believe they have the single most important piece to the puzzle on their roster already. We don't, and won't anytime soon unless Stanzi is it.

Your thinking is flawed. You don't want KC to jump up to get a QB b/c it could set us back. News flash. All the talent on this roster will be wasted if KC doesn't get a legit QB.

Likewise, every year St. Louis isn't trying to win, is wasting the years of their franchise QB. So they build this team for "the future", how big is their window if you throw away the next 3+ yrs?

Not every team is as lucky as Indianapolis, they don't all luck into back to back legit franchise QB's.

Bump
02-28-2012, 10:43 PM
It would be awesome to get him, but you cant give up an entire draft for one guy.

Of course for KC, even if it turned out to be a giant fail ala Ricky Williams, its just another fail that can be added to the nearly two decades of fail seasons theyve already racked up.

Im fine either way. I doubt we get RG3, but if we do it will certainly be exciting to see how it turns out.

I figure Manning is KC's best shot at a real QB this year and thats a huge longshot.

Chiefs should just draft as strongly as they can this year, and try to make do with Orton, Stanzi, or worst case scenario Matt Cassel if they cannot get Manning.

you can for a franchise QB, something we've never had.

ClevelandBronco
02-28-2012, 10:44 PM
All of those late-season wins sure were nice.

Orton was a mole.

tredadda
02-28-2012, 10:46 PM
They have a lot of young core players on the roster they've drafted. Taking on ONE second contract player would be the worst thing in the world...you're right. The additional picks and their own picks in this draft are obviously not enough to help build that team. They need that ONE more. They need it. They do.

You act as though they are in KC's situation when KC started rebuilding to the present. There is one HUGE difference between us and them. They believe they have the single most important piece to the puzzle on their roster already. We don't, and won't anytime soon unless Stanzi is it.

Your thinking is flawed. You don't want KC to jump up to get a QB b/c it could set us back. News flash. All the talent on this roster will be wasted if KC doesn't get a legit QB.

Likewise, every year St. Louis isn't trying to win, is wasting the years of their franchise QB. So they build this team for "the future", how big is their window if you throw away the next 3+ yrs?

Not every team is as lucky as Indianapolis, they don't all luck into back to back legit franchise QB's.

You create your own luck. To think Indy could have brought in either Garrard or Orton but did not is quite telling.

Epic Fail 007
02-28-2012, 10:49 PM
I'd rather wait until 2013. If you want a QB to test out, bring in Clausen--he's better than anyone you're going to find after Tannehill (who I think is a decent pick, but hell no if it's going to be at #11).

I think 2013 will end up being not a better class, but it's going to have a ton more second-tier first round talent (in my opinion, Tannehill is second round talent being forced into a #1 pick by desperate teams).

I see you already think we are going to be 2-14.:(

Jerm
02-28-2012, 10:57 PM
I wish Pioli had Dimitroff's balls...he'd do it.

I see RGIII being a very successful NFL QB and one that can win a SB so IMO the price isn't too high.

You can make the argument we're one franchise QB away from going deep in the playoffs or even contending for a Super Bowl so why not take that chance? I would be just fine if we went for it and it didn't work out as opposed to not even trying.

splatbass
02-28-2012, 11:01 PM
you can for a franchise QB, something we've never had.

Len Dawson wasn't a franchise QB? Three AFL Championships, two SBs, one SB win. NFL Hall of Fame. Not a franchise QB? Really?

Epic Fail 007
02-28-2012, 11:06 PM
Actually I do get it. The point is the Giants took a chance and gave up what it took to get Eli (regardless of what it would take to get RGIII this year) and were richly rewarded for it. We play it safe even though 40 years of history says that way won't work for us.

Idiot the chargers wanted eli .But baby ass eli said I won`t play in SD so sd traded players with the giants who already drafted rivers.So if was not for eli crying he would be a charger.So wake up.And the playing it safe crap that is clearly giving you a hardon that was all Lamar hunt. That prick cared more about his other bussinesses than the chiefs.SO whats he do he hires the ultamate playing it safe guy in Carl peterson. So you need to go smoke some crack or whatever you do and calm the fuck down and see how things play out.Now go night night.LMAO

Bewbies
02-28-2012, 11:11 PM
Len Dawson wasn't a franchise QB? Three AFL Championships, two SBs, one SB win. NFL Hall of Fame. Not a franchise QB? Really?

Yes. We've had 1. You win. LMAO

Epic Fail 007
02-28-2012, 11:16 PM
Len Dawson wasn't a franchise QB? Three AFL Championships, two SBs, one SB win. NFL Hall of Fame. Not a franchise QB? Really?

Well really dawson was just a back up in pitsburgh. Hank wanted him to come run the system and he did very well yes. However dawson yet good was very average. Yes we won the sb but the d at that time was lights out. Dawson was just a system qb. See a trend? KC has had a long history of going and getting other teams backups and making them starters.

BossChief
02-28-2012, 11:29 PM
1987

The last time a first round pick quarterback started for this team.

That can't be right, can it?

splatbass
02-28-2012, 11:36 PM
Well really dawson was just a back up in pitsburgh. Hank wanted him to come run the system and he did very well yes. However dawson yet good was very average. Yes we won the sb but the d at that time was lights out. Dawson was just a system qb. See a trend? KC has had a long history of going and getting other teams backups and making them starters.

Three AFL championships, two SBs (one win). Starter for more than ten years. That is the very definition of franchise QB.

Well really Favre was just a backup in Atlanta.

evolve27
02-28-2012, 11:44 PM
We will draft an o-lineman in my head after trading down

Bewbies
02-28-2012, 11:56 PM
Three AFL championships, two SBs (one win). Starter for more than ten years. That is the very definition of franchise QB.

Well really Favre was just a backup in Atlanta.

Favre would have drank himself out of the league in Atlanta.

RippedmyFlesh
02-29-2012, 12:04 AM
You're forgetting the great Pat Barnes draft?

He was 4th round.
The entire list is short and horrific
http://pfref.com/tiny/O1Dpx

Year Rnd Pick Player Pos Tm From To AP1 PB St CarAV G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Att Yds TD College/Univ
1964 1 2 Pete Beathard QB KAN 1964 1973 0 0 3 29 110 575 1282 8176 43 84 131 680 11 USC
1979 1 23 Steve Fuller QB KAN 1979 1986 0 0 2 29 90 605 1066 7156 28 41 186 908 11 Clemson
1983 1 7 Todd Blackledge QB KAN 1983 1989 0 0 0 12 46 424 881 5286 29 38 81 325 2 Penn St.
1968 2 48 Mike Livingston QB KAN 1968 1979 0 1 5 43 91 912 1751 11295 56 83 156 682 7 SMU
1989 2 32 Mike Elkins QB KAN 1989 1989 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 5 0 1 Wake Forest
1992 2 40 Matt Blundin QB KAN 1993 1997 0 0 0 0 3 2 9 15 0 2 Virginia
1962 3 19 Eddie Wilson QB DTX 1962 1965 0 0 1 6 56 90 186 1251 5 6 23 59 1 Arizona
1974 3 66 David Jaynes QB KAN 1974 1974 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 Kansas
2006 3 85 Brodie Croyle QB KAN 2006 2010 0 0 0 2 18 181 319 1669 8 9 10 15 0 Alabama
1978 4 104 Pete Woods QB KAN 0 0 0 Missouri
1995 4 134 Steve Stenstrom QB KAN 1996 1999 0 0 0 6 17 177 314 1895 4 12 22 100 2 Stanford
1997 4 110 Pat Barnes QB KAN 1999 1999 0 0 0 0 1 California
2011 5 135 Ricky Stanzi QB KAN 2011 2011 0 0 0 Iowa
1972 7 179 Dean Carlson QB KAN 1974 1974 0 0 0 0 1 7 15 116 0 1 2 17 0 Iowa St.
1987 7 186 Doug Hudson QB KAN 1987 1987 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Nicholls St.
1994 7 199 Steve Matthews QB KAN 1997 1998 0 0 0 1 3 28 43 299 0 0 1 10 0 Memphis
2005 7 229 James Kilian QB KAN 0 0 0 Tulsa
1965 8 61 Danny Thomas QB KAN 0 0 0 SMU
1977 10 261 Mark Vitali QB KAN 0 0 0 Purdue
1988 11 282 Danny McManus QB KAN 0 0 0 Florida St.
1981 12 319 Bob Gagliano QB KAN 1982 1992 0 0 0 13 32 249 486 3431 17 27 93 352 4 Utah St.
1971 13 328 Chuck Hixson QB KAN 0 0 0 SMU
1976 13 361 Joe Bruner QB KAN 0 0 0 La-Monroe
1964 16 122 Roger Staubach HOF QB KAN 1969 1979 0 6 8 104 131 1685 2958 22700 153 109 410 2264 20 Navy
1963 17 136 Billy Moore QB KAN 0 0 0 Arkansas
1961 21 166 Dick Thornton QB DTX 0 0 0 Northwestern
1962 24 187 Pat Trammell QB DTX 0 0 0 Alabama
1961 25 198 Ray Ramsey QB DTX 0 0 0 Adams St.
1962 26 203 Walt Rappold QB DTX 0 0 0 Duke
1961 27 214 Bob Schloredt QB DTX 0 0 0 Washington

ClevelandBronco
02-29-2012, 12:07 AM
He was 4th round.
The entire list is short and horrific
http://pfref.com/tiny/O1Dpx

Year Rnd Pick Player Pos Tm From To AP1 PB St CarAV G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Att Yds TD College/Univ
1964 1 2 Pete Beathard QB KAN 1964 1973 0 0 3 29 110 575 1282 8176 43 84 131 680 11 USC
1979 1 23 Steve Fuller QB KAN 1979 1986 0 0 2 29 90 605 1066 7156 28 41 186 908 11 Clemson
1983 1 7 Todd Blackledge QB KAN 1983 1989 0 0 0 12 46 424 881 5286 29 38 81 325 2 Penn St.
1968 2 48 Mike Livingston QB KAN 1968 1979 0 1 5 43 91 912 1751 11295 56 83 156 682 7 SMU
1989 2 32 Mike Elkins QB KAN 1989 1989 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 5 0 1 Wake Forest
1992 2 40 Matt Blundin QB KAN 1993 1997 0 0 0 0 3 2 9 15 0 2 Virginia
1962 3 19 Eddie Wilson QB DTX 1962 1965 0 0 1 6 56 90 186 1251 5 6 23 59 1 Arizona
1974 3 66 David Jaynes QB KAN 1974 1974 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 Kansas
2006 3 85 Brodie Croyle QB KAN 2006 2010 0 0 0 2 18 181 319 1669 8 9 10 15 0 Alabama
1978 4 104 Pete Woods QB KAN 0 0 0 Missouri
1995 4 134 Steve Stenstrom QB KAN 1996 1999 0 0 0 6 17 177 314 1895 4 12 22 100 2 Stanford
1997 4 110 Pat Barnes QB KAN 1999 1999 0 0 0 0 1 California
2011 5 135 Ricky Stanzi QB KAN 2011 2011 0 0 0 Iowa
1972 7 179 Dean Carlson QB KAN 1974 1974 0 0 0 0 1 7 15 116 0 1 2 17 0 Iowa St.
1987 7 186 Doug Hudson QB KAN 1987 1987 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Nicholls St.
1994 7 199 Steve Matthews QB KAN 1997 1998 0 0 0 1 3 28 43 299 0 0 1 10 0 Memphis
2005 7 229 James Kilian QB KAN 0 0 0 Tulsa
1965 8 61 Danny Thomas QB KAN 0 0 0 SMU
1977 10 261 Mark Vitali QB KAN 0 0 0 Purdue
1988 11 282 Danny McManus QB KAN 0 0 0 Florida St.
1981 12 319 Bob Gagliano QB KAN 1982 1992 0 0 0 13 32 249 486 3431 17 27 93 352 4 Utah St.
1971 13 328 Chuck Hixson QB KAN 0 0 0 SMU
1976 13 361 Joe Bruner QB KAN 0 0 0 La-Monroe
1964 16 122 Roger Staubach HOF QB KAN 1969 1979 0 6 8 104 131 1685 2958 22700 153 109 410 2264 20 Navy
1963 17 136 Billy Moore QB KAN 0 0 0 Arkansas
1961 21 166 Dick Thornton QB DTX 0 0 0 Northwestern
1962 24 187 Pat Trammell QB DTX 0 0 0 Alabama
1961 25 198 Ray Ramsey QB DTX 0 0 0 Adams St.
1962 26 203 Walt Rappold QB DTX 0 0 0 Duke
1961 27 214 Bob Schloredt QB DTX 0 0 0 Washington

So the Chiefs did draft a franchise quarterback once: Roger Staubach.

RippedmyFlesh
02-29-2012, 12:35 AM
So the Chiefs did draft a franchise quarterback once: Roger Staubach.
If you do GB's list from 1939 to present there are 2 Bart Starr and Rogers.
Denver would be 1. So you aren't lighting it up either.

SF had 3 Earl Morrall, John Brodie and Montana.
It doesn't happen often they are rare.
If your GB it's 2.
If SF 3.
It just seems like more from them but alot of qb's make it with their 2nd go round like farve and young

RippedmyFlesh
02-29-2012, 12:47 AM
Len Dawson wasn't a franchise QB? Three AFL Championships, two SBs, one SB win. NFL Hall of Fame. Not a franchise QB? Really?

He wasn't drafted by KC.
But I would bet there are a lot of teams whose best QB was not drafted by them originally.

ChiefsCountry
02-29-2012, 01:07 AM
1987

The last time a first round pick quarterback started for this team.

That can't be right, can it?

Not just start, last time a quarterback who was drafted in the first round by any team was on the roster.
Posted via Mobile Device

ChiefsCountry
02-29-2012, 01:11 AM
But I would bet there are a lot of teams whose best QB was not drafted by them originally.

I would say that is false.
Posted via Mobile Device

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 05:41 AM
I see you already think we are going to be 2-14.:(

We have zero chance at Barkley next year. If either bray or Murray declare next year, we have a great shot at trading up to get one of those guys or Wilson. People have to realize that it's not hard to trade from 25 to the top 10. It's Very very tough to trade from outside the top 10 into the top 3.

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 05:45 AM
I wish Pioli had Dimitroff's balls...he'd do it.

I see RGIII being a very successful NFL QB and one that can win a SB so IMO the price isn't too high.

You can make the argument we're one franchise QB away from going deep in the playoffs or even contending for a Super Bowl so why not take that chance? I would be just fine if we went for it and it didn't work out as opposed to not even trying.

Again, if you're trade comp is too high, you are betting the farm that rgIII is the answer. Again, if we have to sacrifice two drafts... People are really undermining how much that hurts us. I think rgIII is a good qb, but I also think he is a qb who will need a lot of help to win a super bowl.

Chiefnj2
02-29-2012, 05:54 AM
People are really undermining how much that hurts us. I think rgIII is a good qb, but I also think he is a qb who will need a lot of help to win a super bowl.

Exactly, if the Chiefs miss they are looking at not winning a playoff game in 20 years. Something like that would never happen barring a team going all out for a franchise QB.

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 06:04 AM
Exactly, if the Chiefs miss they are looking at not winning a playoff game in 20 years. Something like that would never happen barring a team going all out for a franchise QB.

Look, I know the chiefs need a qb. But trading into an ultra competitive pick in a very shallow qb class is bot the way to do it. People keep saying there isn't a price. There absolutely is. If the rams are willing to take the ticky tack trade bait proposed in this thread then it's a great trade. But the reality is, the chiefs will have to trade not just the moon, but the sun the moon and the stars to get rgIII.

Wait one year. Again, regardless of our record next year, there's a very good chance we can trade up to get a good qb for significantly less.

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 06:06 AM
For the record... This thread clearly shows that people are so stuck on getting a franchise qb that they truly believe the draft means nothing. Teams have to win both by having a franchise qb and drafting well. Indy is a rare exception.

htismaqe
02-29-2012, 06:23 AM
For the record... This thread clearly shows that people are so stuck on getting a franchise qb that they truly believe the draft means nothing. Teams have to win both by having a franchise qb and drafting well. Indy is a rare exception.

They want to trade a Brinks truck full of picks to DRAFT a QB. Obviously, the draft means A LOT. :rolleyes:

InChiefsHell
02-29-2012, 06:34 AM
I had no idea Staubach was drafted by the Chiefs...

Sofa King
02-29-2012, 07:31 AM
I don't have a problem trading a draft away. But we are essentially trading two drafts away. That's just reckless. Again, if you whiff on a first round QB, that's fine. If you whiff on a first round QB you traded 2 rounds away for, you essentially set your team back 5-6 years.

this shit just kills me.

What exactly are we setting ourselves back from???? From our current Superbowl winning team? Oh wait. Our playoff game winning team? Nope.

We are shit. You can't set yourself back from shit.

There's 1 position to blame for us being shit, and that's the QB. Griffin's worth an entire draft, at least.

Bane
02-29-2012, 07:42 AM
this shit just kills me.

What exactly are we setting ourselves back from???? From our current Superbowl winning team? Oh wait. Our playoff game winning team? Nope.

We are shit. You can't set yourself back from shit.

There's 1 position to blame for us being shit, and that's the QB. Griffin's worth an entire draft, at least.

We've only sucked for 30 years man.....We'll take a QB some other time BRAH!!!ROFL

Brock
02-29-2012, 07:43 AM
Wait one year.

LMAO

This gets said every year.

Sofa King
02-29-2012, 07:45 AM
We've only sucked for 30 years man.....We'll take a QB some other time BRAH!!!ROFL

It's hard to match your pick up with Mel Kipers ratings. I mean, if he has a QB rated as the 10th best player, and you have the 15th pick, it's game over man. Better try again next year. It's not worth trading extra picks to trade up. What if he busts! We'll be out that backup TE and backup S we would have drafted with those 4th and 5th round picks.

Good news though. You'll probably have the 15th pick again since your super deep, super talented team was able to carry some shitty QB to a 7-9 record again. HOORAY!!!

I sure hope one of those second tier non-franchise changing QB's is still there next year!! (But they have to be rated by mel to be picked there. I'm NOT reaching for a QB. This isn't Madden.)

Fat Elvis
02-29-2012, 07:52 AM
I'd rather wait until 2013. If you want a QB to test out, bring in Clausen--he's better than anyone you're going to find after Tannehill (who I think is a decent pick, but hell no if it's going to be at #11).

I think 2013 will end up being not a better class, but it's going to have a ton more second-tier first round talent (in my opinion, Tannehill is second round talent being forced into a #1 pick by desperate teams).

Those two words sum up the Chiefs (and yours) philosophy the past 40 years. As long as asses are in the seats, it is OK to be second tier.

Guess what? People are sick and tired of KC being second tier.

7-9 is no longer going to cut it for the fan base--well, except for you.

Bane
02-29-2012, 07:55 AM
It's hard to match your pick up with Mel Kipers ratings. I mean, if he has a QB rated as the 10th best player, and you have the 15th pick, it's game over man. Better try again next year. It's not worth trading extra picks to trade up. What if he busts! We'll be out that backup TE and backup S we would have drafted with those 4th and 5th round picks.

Good news though. You'll probably have the 15th pick again since your super deep, super talented team was able to carry some shitty QB to a 7-9 record again. HOORAY!!!

I sure hope one of those second tier non-franchise changing QB's is still there!! (But they have to be rated by mel to be picked there. I'm NOT reaching for a QB. This isn't Madden.)

Yeah but we have Matt Fucking Cassel.....Downfield,dagger throwing demon from hell and Scott Pioli pulling the strings.That's much better than a good,young QB that can actually play the position.

TRR
02-29-2012, 07:57 AM
Those two words sum up the Chiefs (and yours) philosophy the past 40 years. As long as asses are in the seats, it is OK to be second tier.

Guess what? People are sick and tired of KC being second tier.

7-9 is no longer going to cut it for the fan base--well, except for you.

That's not what he is saying at all. He's saying that RG3 is not worth 10-14 picks or whatever its going to take to move up to #2. Add in the fact that the 2013 draft has more depth at QB than this year. This year is truly a shallow draft at the QB position. You have Luck who is as good as gone, RG3 who will be taken #2 by a team that morgages the farm, and a converted college WR that started one year in college. In 2013 there will be 4-5 QB's worthy of a true first round grade.
Posted via Mobile Device

Bane
02-29-2012, 07:58 AM
That's not what he is saying at all. He's saying that RG3 is not worth 10-14 picks or whatever its going to take to move up to #2. Add in the fact that the 2013 draft has more depth at QB than this year. This year is truly a shallow draft at the QB position. You have Luck who is as good as gone, RG3 who will be taken #2 by a team that morgages the farm, and a converted college WR that started one year in college. In 2013 there will be 4-5 QB's worthy of a true first round grade.
Posted via Mobile Device

Maybe but I'm so tired of hearing WELL NEXT YEAR...........

TRR
02-29-2012, 08:02 AM
Maybe but I'm so tired of hearing WELL NEXT YEAR...........

You and me both.
Posted via Mobile Device

Sofa King
02-29-2012, 08:24 AM
That's not what he is saying at all. He's saying that RG3 is not worth 10-14 picks or whatever its going to take to move up to #2. Add in the fact that the 2013 draft has more depth at QB than this year. This year is truly a shallow draft at the QB position. You have Luck who is as good as gone, RG3 who will be taken #2 by a team that morgages the farm, and a converted college WR that started one year in college. In 2013 there will be 4-5 QB's worthy of a true first round grade.
Posted via Mobile Device

10-14 picks?????

Fat Elvis
02-29-2012, 08:30 AM
That's not what he is saying at all. He's saying that RG3 is not worth 10-14 picks or whatever its going to take to move up to #2. Add in the fact that the 2013 draft has more depth at QB than this year. This year is truly a shallow draft at the QB position. You have Luck who is as good as gone, RG3 who will be taken #2 by a team that morgages the farm, and a converted college WR that started one year in college. In 2013 there will be 4-5 QB's worthy of a true first round grade.
Posted via Mobile Device

I understand EXACTLY what he is saying. The detractors seem to be the only ones who don't understand what EVERYONE else is saying.

Yes, we are saying push all the chips in. And push them in for RG3.

We think RG3 is the perfect QB for KC. If there is any team in the NFL that already has the pieces in place for RG3 to thrive, it is KC. With RG3, we believe that KC is turned into a perennial winner.

We get it.

We may lose with that bet.

We get it.

Guess what? We can all live with that bet. The detractors can't.

We get it.

Fat Elvis
02-29-2012, 08:30 AM
10-14 picks?????

I know, right? It goes from 4-6 picks yesterday to 10-14 picks today....

Bewbies
02-29-2012, 08:32 AM
I wouldn't trade away 10 years worth of draft picks for one player. I also think naming rights to Arrowhead is a bit much.

Okie_Apparition
02-29-2012, 08:33 AM
IS this thread a Stuart Smalley skit

TRR
02-29-2012, 08:41 AM
I understand EXACTLY what he is saying. You two seem to be the only ones who don't understand what EVERYONE else is saying.

Yes, we are saying push all the chips in. And push them in for RG3.

We think RG3 is the perfect QB for KC. If there is any team in the NFL that already has the pieces in place for RG3 to thrive, it is KC. With RG3, we believe that KC is turned into a perennial winner.

We get it.

We may lose with that bet.

We get it.

Guess what? We can all live with that bet. You two can't.

We get it.

Haha! Oh I can live with it for sure. That doesn't make it the smart thing to do. I would challenge you to ask why you think RG3 is that QB to morgage the future on other than he's a first round QB but I really don't want to waste the time...

Drafting a QB in the first round is the new trendy CP thing to do...Damn the cost! I get your stance.

Bottom line is...KC trading up for RG3 will NEVER happen.
Posted via Mobile Device

milkman
02-29-2012, 08:41 AM
That's not what he is saying at all. He's saying that RG3 is not worth 10-14 picks or whatever its going to take to move up to #2. Add in the fact that the 2013 draft has more depth at QB than this year. This year is truly a shallow draft at the QB position. You have Luck who is as good as gone, RG3 who will be taken #2 by a team that morgages the farm, and a converted college WR that started one year in college. In 2013 there will be 4-5 QB's worthy of a true first round grade.
Posted via Mobile Device

I've been talking about the fact that next year is perceived as a deeper class than this year, but the reality is that we don't know.

We hear every year that next year is going to be deeper, and it rarely actually ever happens.

TRR
02-29-2012, 08:43 AM
I know, right? It goes from 4-6 picks yesterday to 10-14 picks today....

It depends on what or who you believe. KC would have to, without a doubt, give up the entire 2012 draft (7 picks) at minimum to jump from 11 to 2. Would that be enough?
Posted via Mobile Device

milkman
02-29-2012, 08:43 AM
Any time Chiefzilla throws in Jimmy Clausen as a potential free agent QB that is better than any of the QBs in this draft after the top 2, he should be laughed at and verbally bitch slapped mercilessly.

You, zilla, are a fucking moron.

Pasta Giant Meatball
02-29-2012, 08:46 AM
They had Philip RIvers
I'm not convinced they wouldn't have been better off keeping him & the draft picks
or maybe that should be no worse off..

Who would you take with the game on the line? I know who I'm taking and it isn't Rivers.

Pasta Giant Meatball
02-29-2012, 08:47 AM
If RGIII gets us to the playoffs (or close)...our 1st round pick next year will be worth dick.

I would give up our 1st and 2nd picks this year and our 1st next year to get RGIII.

I think many would do that, but what if it takes another 1st?

Brock
02-29-2012, 08:51 AM
Any time Chiefzilla throws in Jimmy Clausen as a potential free agent QB that is better than any of the QBs in this draft after the top 2, he should be laughed at and verbally bitch slapped mercilessly.

You, zilla, are a fucking moron.

I still remember the time he called Matthew Stafford "essentially a healthier Brodie Croyle". ROFL

Okie_Apparition
02-29-2012, 08:51 AM
Who would you take with the game on the line? I know who I'm taking and it isn't Rivers.

THe only reason Schefter chose to use the Eli/Philip trade comparison. Is because Shanahan is picking #4 (area-oops) like the Giants did. A QB trade & picks doesn't fit this situation as far as I can see it.

RIvers was better earlier & longer than Eli was. Who knows how it would have turned out. I don't think they'd be pissed about not making the costly move

htismaqe
02-29-2012, 08:51 AM
There's no way in hell we can outbid everybody. It isn't happening.

Go get Manning, draft Richardson, and draft a 1st round QB next year (assuming we're not picking 1-32 because of Manning :evil:)...

Bane
02-29-2012, 08:54 AM
I think many would do that, but what if it takes another 1st?

With what I expect the Browns and Skins to throw at St Louis I'd have to say it takes at least 5 KC picks..I'd say 2012's 1st,2nd,3rd and then a 1 and 2 from next year.

Pipe dream either way IMHO.Cassel it is boys.

O.city
02-29-2012, 08:54 AM
htis is starting to come aboard.

TRR
02-29-2012, 08:57 AM
There's no way in hell we can outbid everybody. It isn't happening.

Go get Manning, draft Richardson, and draft a 1st round QB next year (assuming we're not picking 1-32 because of Manning :evil:)...

I like this idea. Or throw a MASSIVE poison pill type of deal at Drew Brees after he is franchised as it sounds NO and Brees are not close to a deal.

Probably all pipe-dreams.
Posted via Mobile Device

Okie_Apparition
02-29-2012, 08:58 AM
Two years of Peyton
Two years of Tom Terrific
get use to it

milkman
02-29-2012, 09:00 AM
THe only reason Schefter chose to use the Eli/Philip trade comparison. Is because Shanahan is picking #4 (area-oops) like the Giants did. A QB trade & picks doesn't fit this situation as far as I can see it.

RIvers was better earlier & longer than Eli was. Who knows how it would have turned out. I don't think they'd be pissed about not making the costly move

Bottom line is that the Giants have won two SBs, and a huge reason for that is that Eli has come through in the clutch several times in playoff games.

Meanwhile the Chargers haven't won jack, and a big reason for that is that Rivers has not.

Numbers mean shit.

What matters is what you do when the chips are in.

Okie_Apparition
02-29-2012, 09:04 AM
I'd kept Rivers & the next year's #1, 3 & 5. Whatever the haul
The Giants didn't get hurt at all. The comparison doesn't fit unless the Rams draft RGIII & trade him for another player drafted & a cornucopia of draft picks

Pasta Giant Meatball
02-29-2012, 09:09 AM
I'd kept Rivers & the next year's #1, 3 & 5. Whatever the haul
The Giants didn't get hurt at all. The comparison doesn't fit unless the Rams draft RGIII & trade him for another player drafted & a cornicopia of draft picks

Then I guess you'd be 2 Super Bowls short. Rivers has been ass in the playoffs and definately part of the reason they've come up short time and time again.

Extra Point
02-29-2012, 09:10 AM
6-8 wins per year will keep us in draft limbo. Welcome, 2015. Unless Pioli chooses to trade out either Bowe and/or Carr. Pioli better have some good trades lined up.

New slogan: "Awesome Hope: Stay Used to It. "

Okie_Apparition
02-29-2012, 09:11 AM
That's the sweet nectar of the CHiefsplanet endzone
it can't be proven either way

~don't care for the taste

Fat Elvis
02-29-2012, 09:11 AM
Haha! Oh I can live with it for sure. That doesn't make it the smart thing to do. I would challenge you to ask why you think RG3 is that QB to morgage the future on other than he's a first round QB but I really don't want to waste the time...

Drafting a QB in the first round is the new trendy CP thing to do...Damn the cost! I get your stance.

Bottom line is...KC trading up for RG3 will NEVER happen.
Posted via Mobile Device

Unfortunately, that is all but a certainty.

If I am Clark Hunt, however, and look at it from a strictly business decision-- I'd have Pioli draft RG3 in a heartbeat. RG3 is exciting. RG3 creates buzz. RG3 would fill Arrowhead. RG3 would have Chiefs merchandise fly off the shelves. The Chiefs become relevant again.

Michael Vick did that in Atlanta. RG3 would do that here.

The value of the FRANCHISE would skyrocket.

Bane
02-29-2012, 09:15 AM
Unfortunately, that is all but a certainty.

If I am Clark Hunt, however, and look at it from a strictly business decision-- I'd have Pioli draft RG3 in a heartbeat. RG3 is exciting. RG3 creates buzz. RG3 would fill Arrowhead. RG3 would have Chiefs merchandise fly off the shelves. The Chiefs become relevant again.

Michael Vick did that in Atlanta. RG3 would do that here.

The value of the FRANCHISE would skyrocket.

That does not compute.Post makes too much sense!

Sofa King
02-29-2012, 09:15 AM
I'd kept Rivers & the next year's #1, 3 & 5. Whatever the haul
The Giants didn't get hurt at all. The comparison doesn't fit unless the Rams draft RGIII & trade him for another player drafted & a cornucopia of draft picks

So. By your standards.


Eli Manning (2 rings) < Philip Rivers (0 rings), Shawne Merriman (after getting busted for roids, he became busted and SHOULD be out of the league because he's worthless), Nate Kaeding (a fucking kicker), and Roman Oben (SD traded the 5th for this aging veteran, he's retired now).

Okie_Apparition
02-29-2012, 09:18 AM
The Chargers would have kept Eli
THe Giants would have kept Philip
I have no clue who the Giants would have drafted with the picks they kept

Sofa King
02-29-2012, 09:19 AM
The Chargers would have kept Eli
THe Giants would have kept Philip
I have no clue who the Giants would have drafted with the picks they kept

They would have drafted those exact guys.

Mel Kiper says so.

Okie_Apparition
02-29-2012, 09:21 AM
I can't argue with the hairdo

Epic Fail 007
02-29-2012, 09:22 AM
I wish Pioli had Dimitroff's balls...he'd do it.

I see RGIII being a very successful NFL QB and one that can win a SB so IMO the price isn't too high.

You can make the argument we're one franchise QB away from going deep in the playoffs or even contending for a Super Bowl so why not take that chance? I would be just fine if we went for it and it didn't work out as opposed to not even trying.

rg3 is a 3 yr project,every expert is saying that.

Okie_Apparition
02-29-2012, 09:22 AM
but :evil:
I don't know that Eli could over come Norf

Sofa King
02-29-2012, 09:22 AM
I can't argue with the hairdo

I quietly question whether or not it's real.

Bane
02-29-2012, 09:22 AM
rg3 is a 3 yr project,every expert is saying that.

That beats Matt Cassel being a lifetime project.

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 09:23 AM
We've only sucked for 30 years man.....We'll take a QB some other time BRAH!!!ROFL

We had a franchise qb. Trent green. You don't ever wonder what this team could have been if we had any kind of success in drafting during the vermeil era? You don't remember how piss poor drafting decisions led us to 5 years of excruciatingly painful rebuild?

You have to have a franchise qb. And you have to draft consistently well. It is absolutely ridiculous to claim that any team abandon one of those things in pursuit of the other. This team hasn't had a franchise qb. Piss poor drafting is also to blame. But you know what? For the first time in years, I feel like our drafting is getting the job done.

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 09:26 AM
So. By your standards.


Eli Manning (2 rings) < Philip Rivers (0 rings), Shawne "roidman" Merriman (after getting busted for roids, he became busted and SHOULD be out of the league because he's worthless), Nate Kaeding (a ****ing kicker), and Roman Oben (SD traded the 5th for this aging veteran, he's retired now).

The question is and always has been... Could Philip rivers win a super bowl with that supporting cast with Tom coughlin as a coach? Yes I think he could. Coaching is a huge culprit in San Diego's lack of success.

Sofa King
02-29-2012, 09:27 AM
We had a franchise qb. Trent green. You don't ever wonder what this team could have been if we had any kind of success in drafting during the vermeil era? You don't remember how piss poor drafting decisions led us to 5 years of excruciatingly painful rebuild?

You have to have a franchise qb. And you have to draft consistently well. It is absolutely ridiculous to claim that any team abandon one of those things in pursuit of the other. This team hasn't had a franchise qb. Piss poor drafting is also to blame. But you know what? For the first time in years, I feel like our drafting is getting the job done.

0 Playoff Wins.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/images/1030-02.jpg

Bane
02-29-2012, 09:28 AM
We had a franchise qb. Trent green. You don't ever wonder what this team could have been if we had any kind of success in drafting during the vermeil era? You don't remember how piss poor drafting decisions led us to 5 years of excruciatingly painful rebuild?

You have to have a franchise qb. And you have to draft consistently well. It is absolutely ridiculous to claim that any team abandon one of those things in pursuit of the other. This team hasn't had a franchise qb. Piss poor drafting is also to blame. But you know what? For the first time in years, I feel like our drafting is getting the job done.

I stand by my claim from day 1 on CP.You draft and develop your own QB to win consistently.Having said that if Green had any help from the D while he was here,his legacy would be much different.I have no doubt that we would have won several playoff games with the way the O came around under DV.Ya cant win scoring 40 points on O if the D allows 41.LMAO

BigCatDaddy
02-29-2012, 09:32 AM
I stand by my claim from day 1 on CP.You draft and develop your own QB to win consistently.Having said that if Green had any help from the D while he was here,his legacy would be much different.I have no doubt that we would have won several playoff games with the way the O came around under DV.Ya cant win scoring 40 points on O if the D allows 41.LMAO

They just scored too quickly/ Herm

Bane
02-29-2012, 09:35 AM
They just scored too quickly/ Herm

We played to win too early /herm

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 09:35 AM
Any time Chiefzilla throws in Jimmy Clausen as a potential free agent QB that is better than any of the QBs in this draft after the top 2, he should be laughed at and verbally bitch slapped mercilessly.

You, zilla, are a ****ing moron.

If you're going to invest in a 1st round qb make sure it's the right one. The chiefs can get tannehill or osweiller. Both of them would be tremendous reaches. Outside those 2 guys, clausen has better upside than all of them.

My proposal has always been... Bring clausen in for a year. Aggressively draft a qb in 2013. Neither of are statements that clausen is a franchise qb. It is a statement that clausen is a guy you can being in for nothing that allows you to groom a young qb with upside and still devote 2013 to aggressively draft a qb in the first round.

milkman
02-29-2012, 09:36 AM
The question is and always has been... Could Philip rivers win a super bowl with that supporting cast with Tom coughlin as a coach? Yes I think he could. Coaching is a huge culprit in San Diego's lack of success.

Yes coaching plays a part, idiot, but the fact is that Rivers has been a consistent choker in the biggest moments.

But you're a fucking idiot, and the obvious is lost on you.

milkman
02-29-2012, 09:37 AM
If you're going to invest in a 1st round qb make sure it's the right one. The chiefs can get tannehill or osweiller. Both of them would be tremendous reaches. Outside those 2 guys, clausen has better upside than all of them.

My proposal has always been... Bring clausen in for a year. Aggressively draft a qb in 2013. Neither of are statements that clausen is a franchise qb. It is a statement that clausen is a guy you can being in for nothing that allows you to groom a young qb with upside and still devote 2013 to aggressively draft a qb in the first round.

I'm not wasting time arguing with you about this.

You're a fucking idiot.

Your take on Clausen is all anyone needs to see as proof of that fact.

Let me me repeat.

You are a fucking idiot.

Epic Fail 007
02-29-2012, 09:38 AM
I would rather draft Ryan Tannehill than rg3. What you kids don`t understand the street ball style of vick and others like him yes is fun to watch .But in the end that not win you games. Or draft weeden.

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 09:39 AM
D0 Playoff Wins.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/images/1030-02.jpg

We have zero playoff wins because under vermeil we had a terrific qb but piss poor drafts. We had zero playoff wins under Marty because we had a very good supporting cast but no qb.

Atop acting like the only reason we have struggled is because of the qb. Our problem is that we have never had a good qb and a great draft presence at the same time.

milkman
02-29-2012, 09:39 AM
I would rather draft Ryan Tannehill than rg3. What you kids don`t understand the street ball style of vick and others like him yes is fun to watch .But in the end that not win you games. Or drat weeden.

Oh Jesus.

:banghead:

MIAdragon
02-29-2012, 09:40 AM
I would rather draft Ryan Tannehill than rg3. What you kids don`t understand the street ball style of vick and others like him yes is fun to watch .But in the end that not win you games. Or draft weeden.

http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/1009/beyond-epic-facepalm-facepalm-stupid-fail-dumb-death-demotivational-poster-1284049056.jpg

Brock
02-29-2012, 09:41 AM
We had a franchise qb. Trent green.

No.

Bane
02-29-2012, 09:42 AM
I would rather draft Ryan Tannehill than rg3. What you kids don`t understand the street ball style of vick and others like him yes is fun to watch .But in the end that not win you games. Or draft weeden.

Yeah drafting like a bunch of scared little bitches (QB wise) has paid off so well for the Chiefs thus far.:rolleyes:

Epic Fail 007
02-29-2012, 09:42 AM
Oh Jesus.

:banghead:

Shake your head all you want its a fact.

BigCatDaddy
02-29-2012, 09:42 AM
I would rather draft Ryan Tannehill than rg3. What you kids don`t understand the street ball style of vick and others like him yes is fun to watch .But in the end that not win you games. Or draft weeden.

:facepalm:

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 09:43 AM
I'm not wasting time arguing with you about this.

You're a ****ing idiot.

Your take on Clausen is all anyone needs to see as proof of that fact.

Let me me repeat.

You are a ****ing idiot.

Your take is that a highly touted prospects career is over because he failed in a few games as a rookie under shitty circumstances. I'm advocating clausen as a throwaway option because we can get him for cheap and this qb class sucks.

Stop exaggerating my opinion on clausen. I have never waveredvfrom the opinion that we have to draft a first round qb in the next 3 years. Period.

milkman
02-29-2012, 09:43 AM
Shake your head all you want its a fact.

Tell us all about the "street ball" that RGIII plays in, you dumbass.

milkman
02-29-2012, 09:46 AM
Your take is that a highly touted prospects career is over because he failed in a few games as a rookie under shitty circumstances. I'm advocating clausen as a throwaway option because we can get him for cheap and this qb class sucks.

Stop exaggerating my opinion on clausen. I have never waveredvfrom the opinion that we have to draft a first round qb in the next 3 years. Period.

My take is that you are fucking moron.

Clausen's circumstances weren't the reason he sucked so hard and showed abssolutely nothing.

Even in the worst of situations, kids with talent show flashes.

He sucked, pure and simple.

You are a fucking moron.

qabbaan
02-29-2012, 09:46 AM
Manning is our best option. It's just money, and we are so far under the cap that money can't be an excuse.

We are not going to trade up in the draft or do anything but make a safe pick. Pioli says they want to draft QBs every year, but he means they want to draft low round QBs and experiment with them.

Manning is our only hope with this administration!

Pasta Giant Meatball
02-29-2012, 09:46 AM
Sooo much fail in this thread. Wow. Now RG3 is a "punk", next they'll say he should be moved to wideout.

Saccopoo
02-29-2012, 09:47 AM
If you're going to invest in a 1st round qb make sure it's the right one. The chiefs can get tannehill or osweiller. Both of them would be tremendous reaches. Outside those 2 guys, clausen has better upside than all of them.

My proposal has always been... Bring clausen in for a year. Aggressively draft a qb in 2013. Neither of are statements that clausen is a franchise qb. It is a statement that clausen is a guy you can being in for nothing that allows you to groom a young qb with upside and still devote 2013 to aggressively draft a qb in the first round.

Clausen has no upside. Never has. Never will. You are completely deranged (other than realizing that Tannehill and Osweiller are both fourth round guys at best).

(I still am utterly fascinated by this boards obsession with Tannehill. What the hell has he ever done to merit first round consideration? He went into the tank against every single decent defense he played against this past season.)

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 09:48 AM
No.

As I have always said, there are elite qbs. And there are franchise qbs. Ben, Brady, brees, peyton, Rodgers. They are elite. Qbs like Green and Matt Ryan are franchise qbs. They are very good qbs who can win you super bowls if you give them a good supporting cast. Our lack ofbpkayoff success almost certainly would have Ben reduced if we were even bad at drafting (as opposed to flat out terrible)
If we are building our team on the 10% chance we get an elite qb, we are screwed.

penguinz
02-29-2012, 09:50 AM
D

We have zero playoff wins because under vermeil we had a terrific qb but piss poor drafts. We had zero playoff wins under Marty because we had a very good supporting cast but no qb.

Atop acting like the only reason we have struggled is because of the qb. Our problem is that we have never had a good qb and a great draft presence at the same time.:spock:

Pasta Giant Meatball
02-29-2012, 09:51 AM
Clausen has no upside. Never has. Never will. You are completely deranged (other than realizing that Tannehill and Osweiller are both fourth round guys at best).

(I still am utterly fascinated by this boards obsession with Tannehill. What the hell has he ever done to merit first round consideration? He went into the tank against every single decent defense he played against this past season.)

Hooray, a Sac post I can agree with. 1 year starter...no thanks. The track record is as bad as picking a late rounder and expecting them to pan out.

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 09:52 AM
My take is that you are ****ing moron.

Clausen's circumstances weren't the reason he sucked so hard and showed abssolutely nothing.

Even in the worst of situations, kids with talent show flashes.

He sucked, pure and simple.

You are a ****ing moron.

He didn't have his starting rb. His left tackle was Jordan black bad. He had one legit receiver in Steve Smith who was mailing it in. His career isn't over. It has a downward arrow bit that's not something I care about if we are talking about a throwaway option. Indeed zero potential in cousins or foles, who are the next best options.

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 09:53 AM
:spock:

You get what I meant.

Saccopoo
02-29-2012, 09:53 AM
Manning is our best option. It's just money, and we are so far under the cap that money can't be an excuse.

We are not going to trade up in the draft or do anything but make a safe pick. Pioli says they want to draft QBs every year, but he means they want to draft low round QBs and experiment with them.

Manning is our only hope with this administration!

Manning hasn't thrown a ball in over a year. There were the rumors that he's left with a noodle arm because of the nerve damage in his neck.

Besides the fact that he's 36, and coming off of, let's count them, one, two, three and four, neck surgeries.

I love the guy. One of the best ever. But he's 36 years old (as of March 24th) and has had multiple neck surgeries.

What do you think you are going to get from this guy at this point? Besides a massive salary cap hit and another two year delay in drafting and developing a young quarterback?

MoreLemonPledge
02-29-2012, 10:03 AM
Manning hasn't thrown a ball in over a year. There were the rumors that he's left with a noodle arm because of the nerve damage in his neck.

Besides the fact that he's 36, and coming off of, let's count them, one, two, three and four, neck surgeries.

I love the guy. One of the best ever. But he's 36 years old (as of March 24th) and has had multiple neck surgeries.

What do you think you are going to get from this guy at this point? Besides a massive salary cap hit and another two year delay in drafting and developing a young quarterback?

Pocket presence, reading defenses, and anticipating receiver routes don't go away with neck surgeries. If he's healthy enough to play, he's far and away the best option.

Saccopoo
02-29-2012, 10:24 AM
Pocket presence, reading defenses, and anticipating receiver routes don't go away with neck surgeries. If he's healthy enough to play, he's far and away the best option.

Barry Richardson is our right tackle.

You can scratch pocket presence. You can probably add another neck injury to it as well.

Manning has never worked with our receivers or with Daboll.

So much for anticipating routes.

They guy can definitely read defenses though.

Manning hasn't thrown in over a year. He hasn't worked with a team in over a year. He's behind the curve on conditioning.

He's effectively six games away from being "Peyton Manning" given a full off-season with a new team - providing that he can even still play after this latest neck surgery.

Manning, the 2012 free agent, bringing Chiefs playoff glory, is a bigger pipe dream than us trading up for Bobbie Griffin.

Brock
02-29-2012, 10:31 AM
As I have always said, there are elite qbs. And there are franchise qbs. Ben, Brady, brees, peyton, Rodgers. They are elite. Qbs like Green and Matt Ryan are franchise qbs. They are very good qbs who can win you super bowls if you give them a good supporting cast. Our lack ofbpkayoff success almost certainly would have Ben reduced if we were even bad at drafting (as opposed to flat out terrible)
If we are building our team on the 10% chance we get an elite qb, we are screwed.

No. A franchise QB isn't somebody you get a few good years out of. Green doesn't compare to Matt Ryan, who will probably still be playing 8-10 years from now.

carlos3652
02-29-2012, 10:33 AM
Qb's drafted in first round since 2000+

2000 - 1-18 - Chad Pennington (Jets)
2001 - 1-1 - Mike Vick (Falcons)
2002 - 1-1 - David Carr (Texans)
2002 - 1-3 - Joey Harrignton (Lions)
2002 - 1-32 - Patrick Ramsey (Redskins)
2003 - 1-1 - Carson Palmer (Bengals)
2003 - 1-7 - Byron Leftwich (Jaguars)
2003 - 1-19 - Kyle Boller (Ravens)
2003 - 1-22 - Rex Grossman (Bears)
2004 - 1-1 - Eli Manning (Giants)
2004 - 1-4 - Philip Rivers (Chargers)
2004 - 1-11 - Ben Roethlisberger (Steelers)
2004 - 1-22 - JP Losman (Bills)
2005 - 1-1 - Alex Smith (49ers)
2005 - 1-24 - Aaron Rodgers (Packers)
2005 - 1-25 - Jason Campbell (Redskins)
2006 - 1-3 - Vince Young (Titans)
2006 - 1-10 - Matt Leinart (Cardinals)
2006 - 1-11 - Jake Cutler (Broncos)
2007 - 1-1 - JaMarcus Russell (Raiders)
2007 - 1-22 - Brady Quinn (Browns)
2008 - 1-3 - Matt Ryan (Falcons)
2008 - 1-18 - Joe Flacco (Ravens)
2009 - 1-1 - Mathew Stafford (Lions)
2009 - 1-5 - Mark Sanchez (Jets)
2009 - 1-17 - Josh Freeman (Bucs)
2010 - 1-1 - Sam Bradford (Rams)
2010 - 1-25 - Tim Tebow (Broncos)
2011 - 1-1 - Cam Newton (Panthers)
2011 - 1-8 - Jake Locker (Titans)
2011 - 1-10 - Blaine Gabbert (Jaguars)
2011 - 1-12 - Chris Ponder (Vikings)

Notables Drafted outside 1st.

2000- Marc Bulger 6-168
2000- Tom Brady 6-199
2001- Drew Brees 2-33
2003 - Tony Romo - Undrafted
2004 - Matt Schaub 3-90
2011 - Andy Dalton 2-35

Ok, so how many Franchise Qb's from this list? Also, how many of these QB's were so called sure things to excel in the NFL. How many have panned out.

Let me know if having to get RGIII is worth trading away 3 firsts and multiple picks in the next 2 drafts. I think not.

Regardless of the last 40 year history we have had to endure- Its stupid to trade away too much for an unknown. If we could give up 2 firsts and a 3rd and a 5th id do it in a heartbeat. I wont be pissed if the redskins or browns actually give up what they are saying they will. And yes, do I feel "Next year we will do something about the QB situation" will piss people off - but if you are smart (and I think Pioli is) being Cap friendly and having young quality pieces in place year in and year out - we will eventually hit on a QB that we can call franchise in the future and we will be GREAT for 10+ years. Its not worth creating cap hell, losing pieces in the future for a gamble.

Again, I expect us to start using our first rounders for QB's - but im not willing to trade the farm on gambles, because if we countinue doing what we are doing, if we make a mistake on the gamble, we can try again, and still be in the same friendly (Cap and young pieces) situation we were when we tried the first time.

Anyways, my 2 cents. And i really do think this is what we are building towards.

suds79
02-29-2012, 10:34 AM
Barry Richardson is our right tackle.

You can scratch pocket presence. You can probably add another neck injury to it as well.

We can all pretty much stop talking about Barry Richardson right now. He won't be back and we'll have an upgrade. So he's a non factor.

BossChief
02-29-2012, 10:35 AM
Peyton was throwing to backs and receivers after practice since week 11 of last season and now throws the whole route tree.

Stick to the facts.

Sofa King
02-29-2012, 10:37 AM
Peyton was throwing to backs and receivers after practice since week 11 of last season and now throws the whole route tree.

Stick to the facts.

Why?

Guessing and making shit up is so much more fun. Paired with assuming the worst in all situations, and you've got yourself some golden posts.

tredadda
02-29-2012, 10:38 AM
I would rather draft Ryan Tannehill than rg3. What you kids don`t understand the street ball style of vick and others like him yes is fun to watch .But in the end that not win you games. Or draft weeden.

Does RGIII owe you money? I swear your dislike of him is hilarious. You keep comparing him to Vick even though the only similarities between the two are the fact they are both fast and black. So is it because he is fats that you have issues with him?

Sofa King
02-29-2012, 10:40 AM
Does RGIII owe you money? I swear your dislike of him is hilarious. You keep comparing him to Vick even though the only similarities between the two are the fact they are both fast and black. So is it because he is fats that you have issues with him?

Eric's a troll. Don't sweat him. His posts are always opposite of the popular thought.

How he's still around here though, that's the mystery.

suds79
02-29-2012, 10:42 AM
Eric's a troll. Don't sweat him. His posts are always opposite of the popular thought.

How he's still around here though, that's the mystery.

Classic contrarian. If everybody hated RG3, he'd say "How can you deny this man's talent? You all are blind."

Fat Elvis
02-29-2012, 10:43 AM
Manning hasn't thrown a ball in over a year. There were the rumors that he's left with a noodle arm because of the nerve damage in his neck.

Besides the fact that he's 36, and coming off of, let's count them, one, two, three and four, neck surgeries.

I love the guy. One of the best ever. But he's 36 years old (as of March 24th) and has had multiple neck surgeries.

What do you think you are going to get from this guy at this point? Besides a massive salary cap hit and another two year delay in drafting and developing a young quarterback?

Here are couple a sobering facts: During Peyton Manning's LIFETIME, the Chiefs have a regular season record, on average, of 7-9. Peyton Manning has had as many playoff victories in ONE YEAR as the Chiefs have had during his ENTIRE LIFE.

People wonder why a lot of us want to draft RG3? That's why.

chiefzilla1501
02-29-2012, 10:48 AM
No. A franchise QB isn't somebody you get a few good years out of. Green doesn't compare to Matt Ryan, who will probably still be playing 8-10 years from now.

You're arguing semantics. Regardless of label, Ryan and gren are good ABS who likely need a good supporting cast to get to the next level. For most qbS, even franchise qbs, you have to also be effective in the draft to support him.

Chiefnj2
02-29-2012, 10:51 AM
You're arguing semantics. Regardless of label, Ryan and gren are good ABS who likely need a good supporting cast to get to the next level. For most qbS, even franchise qbs, you have to also be effective in the draft to support him.

Every QB needs a good supporting cast to get to the next level.

tredadda
02-29-2012, 10:56 AM
Here are couple a sobering facts: During Peyton Manning's LIFETIME, the Chiefs have a regular season record, on average, of 7-9. Peyton Manning has had as many playoff victories in ONE YEAR as the Chiefs have had during his ENTIRE LIFE.

People wonder why a lot of us want to draft RG3? That's why.

Also lets not forget the Giants with Eli (whom they had to give up picks for) have more playoff wins this year than we have had since SB IV. Also they have as many SB rings with Eli (whom they again gave up picks for), as we have SB appearances. But lets not go big and get us a franchise QB. Lets keep doing it the way we always have and play it safe. Don't want to jeopardize the future.

Some say "wait till next year for our QB" Some problems with that though

1. We finished 7-9 minus Moeaki, Berry, and Charles with Cassel and Palko under center with one of the toughest schedules in the NFL. We get them back (hopefully not Cassel or Palko) and have an easier schedule, hard to think we will draft #11 next year.

2. This year's QB class was supposed to be deep, till it wasn't. Barkley and Jones went back to school making this QB very weak outside of the top 2 (hell Tannehill is looking like a Top 10-15 pick). Everyone thinks next years will be deep as well, but what if the underclassmen don't declare? Then it becomes weak again and we are right back in this situation again, except this time we might be trying to trade up from the 20's instead of #11.

No more excuses, this is the year to take the gamble. We have nothing to lose as the old ways do not work as our history has shown. Oh and I am agreeing with everything you have said. This response is not directed at you, just using your post to caveat on what you have been saying.

Epic Fail 007
02-29-2012, 11:06 AM
Eric's a troll. Don't sweat him. His posts are always opposite of the popular thought.

How he's still around here though, that's the mystery.

No sofa,Erics not a troll your one to talk. Im not here to be a robot and post the in popular thing.

Fat Elvis
02-29-2012, 11:19 AM
You're arguing semantics. Regardless of label, Ryan and gren are good ABS who likely need a good supporting cast to get to the next level. For most qbS, even franchise qbs, you have to also be effective in the draft to support him.

I doubt it. Its hard to argue semantics with someone spewing gibberish.