PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Chiefs have talked to Rams about pick #2


Pages : [1] 2 3

Hog Farmer
03-01-2012, 07:01 AM
Chiefs | Have talked about No. 2 pick in NFL Draft

Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:05:59 -0800

The Kansas City Chiefs have held preliminary talks with the St. Louis Rams regarding the No. 2 overall pick in the NFL Draft. The Chiefs have expressed interest in Baylor QB Robert Griffin III. Head coach Romeo Crennel gushed about Griffin during the NFL Scouting Combine, saying he is the kind of player "you go up to get."



Read more: http://www.kffl.com/team/21/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs#ixzz1nsDciPfK



I'm really, really sorry if this is a repost. But it gave me a huge boner which in turn caused a really uncomfortable wedgie.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-01-2012, 07:02 AM
I just got a chubby.

DaKCMan AP
03-01-2012, 07:02 AM
Will....not....get....hopes....up.

King_Chief_Fan
03-01-2012, 07:03 AM
smoke screen only

KILLER_CLOWN
03-01-2012, 07:04 AM
I'm not sold on RGIII yet.

DaKCMan AP
03-01-2012, 07:05 AM
smoke screen only

A smoke screen about trading up 9 picks for a QB who has zero possibility of being available at #11 doesn't make sense.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 07:05 AM
Talks probably ended when the Chiefs made an "offer."

MoreLemonPledge
03-01-2012, 07:07 AM
Won't happen. The Rams want a top-shelf guy to fill a need such as a Blackmon, Khalil, or Claiborne. All 3 will be gone by pick 11.

KILLER_CLOWN
03-01-2012, 07:07 AM
Talks probably ended when the Chiefs made an "offer."

We are prepared to offer our 7th for the next 7 years to move up 9 spots.........hello? hello?

Wallcrawler
03-01-2012, 07:08 AM
Governor's cup means too much to the Rams for them to consider deal with Chiefs.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-01-2012, 07:08 AM
Won't happen. The Rams want a top-shelf guy to fill a need such as a Blackmon, Khalil, or Claiborne. All 3 will be gone by pick 11.

That's where they turn around and make a deal with the Vikes after they've traded us the #2 pick. :D

King_Chief_Fan
03-01-2012, 07:09 AM
A smoke screen about trading up 9 picks for a QB who has zero possibility of being available at #11 doesn't make sense.

Smoke screen.....meaning Pioli has no real intent, just trying to make it look good

mlyonsd
03-01-2012, 07:09 AM
Talks probably ended when the Chiefs made an "offer."Or Pioli saying, "Could you repeat that? Oh, that's what I was afraid you said".

Deberg_1990
03-01-2012, 07:10 AM
I'm not sold on RGIII yet.

IM not sold on____________________(Insert any random top prospect at QB)



Signed Chiefsplanet, 2001-2012

MoreLemonPledge
03-01-2012, 07:11 AM
Governor's cup means too much to the Rams for them to consider deal with Chiefs.

Shit, didn't think about that.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-01-2012, 07:12 AM
Smoke screen.....meaning Pioli has no real intent, just trying to make it look good

Kinda my thought too...


Pioli: "We will offer you this years #11 pick PLUS...our 5th rnd pick. I can't go much.....hello...hello..." -If you'd like to make a call please hang up and dial the..."

Carlota69
03-01-2012, 07:12 AM
Governor's cup means too much to the Rams for them to consider deal with Chiefs.

Obviously you're kidding, but I really wonder if The Rams would prefer keeping RG3 out of The NFC.

BigRock
03-01-2012, 07:12 AM
It's a bullshit story.

The source they cite is this article, which merely mentions the Chiefs as a possible suitor based on Romeo's comment: http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/02/cleveland_browns_have_had_prel.html

The story is that the Browns have had preliminary talks, not the Chiefs.

KILLER_CLOWN
03-01-2012, 07:13 AM
IM not sold on____________________(Insert any random top prospect at QB)



Signed Chiefsplanet, 2001-2012

I'm not saying i'm against it, but he has a lot of variables.

Chiefnj2
03-01-2012, 07:13 AM
I'm not saying i'm against it, but he has a lot of variables.

Such as?

Mr_Tomahawk
03-01-2012, 07:14 AM
It's a bullshit story.

The source they cite is this article, which merely mentions the Chiefs as a possible suitor based on Romeo's comment: http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/02/cleveland_browns_have_had_prel.html

The story is that the Browns have had preliminary talks, not the Chiefs.

SHUT UP!

KILLER_CLOWN
03-01-2012, 07:15 AM
Such as?

Let's start with he's not Andrew Luck.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 07:17 AM
It really doesn't matter if the Chiefs want him or not. They can't compete with what the Browns or Redskins can offer and Shanahan appears to have a woody.

Chiefnj2
03-01-2012, 07:19 AM
Let's start with he's not Andrew Luck.

Okay, so that means he's slightly more athletic, slightly more accurate and throws down the field more.

arrowheadnation
03-01-2012, 07:20 AM
I'd do anything I can to move up and get him. He's a sure thing. I know this kind of stuff.

-Todd Blackledge

Coogs
03-01-2012, 07:20 AM
Let's start with he's not Andrew Luck.

If you dig around here a little, I'm sure you will find some who would not want Andrew Luck either. I think that was his point.

KCtotheSB
03-01-2012, 07:20 AM
Not getting my hopes up. I'll expect Cassel to suit up, our offense to suck, our defense to kick ass, and our 2012 season to end at 6-10.

Anything better than that is just gravy.

KILLER_CLOWN
03-01-2012, 07:21 AM
Okay, so that means he's slightly more athletic, slightly more accurate and throws down the field more.

Ok, i wasn't aware he is more accurate than AL. Now on to the BLack Athletic QB stigma.

DaKCMan AP
03-01-2012, 07:37 AM
Won't happen. The Rams want a top-shelf guy to fill a need such as a Blackmon, Khalil, or Claiborne. All 3 will be gone by pick 11.

Bowe + #11 + lower/later picks nets them a top WR and they can still get someone at #11.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-01-2012, 07:40 AM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8274fd24/article/rams-willing-to-trade-no-2-pick-well-before-aprils-draft

Rams willing to trade No. 2 pick well before April's draft

The St. Louis Rams are willing to move second overall pick well before April's draft, according to multiple sources involved in the process.

League sources said the Rams are willing to trade their first-round pick far earlier than the norm due to their ongoing conversations with multiple teams regarding their interest in a trade and the likelihood of significant interest in the pick with teams targeting Baylor quarterback Robert Griffin III.

NFL.com's Mock Draft Central
With the combine now in the rearview, NFL.com analysts unveil their attempts at projecting how Round 1 will go on April 26. More ...
Several of the teams interested in the second-overall pick also are monitoring the status of Peyton Manning and/or also have interest in Green Bay Packers backup quarterback Matt Flynn, who will become a free agent March 13.

The timing can be quite tricky, particularly with all of the unknowns regarding Manning's health. The Rams are willing to do a deal quickly, league sources said, if a team wants to avoid the risk in the situation and decides that Griffin is its best option, and wants to secure the pick prior to having to sort through the market for Manning and/or Flynn.

St. Louis has a strong feeling on what it believes is fair value for the pick, and the deal could come down well before the draft at the end of April if that value is met in March. Rams officials already have had preliminary talks with several teams. Those clubs must also sort through what they believe the market for Manning or Flynn will be like, the cost of signing either player, and, given the risk involved with those veterans, whether gambling on Griffin makes more sense.

While the likelihood of a deal coming together prior to the start of the league year on March 13 isn't great, it's not out of the question, either. The Rams could agree to a deal now for the right price. No trades can be fully consummated and become official until the new league year begins.

malachi47000
03-01-2012, 07:42 AM
so lets say for shits and giggles that the Chiefs offer a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd this year, and a 1st and 3rd next year and the RAMS accept. Would you be excited or pissed? Could RGIII be someone who can step in and play this year from the get go? Looking at alternative options (not including Cassel), we come to Peyton Manning, that is a whole lot of money to put into a QB for a possible 1 year return (depending on health and no guarantee that he will ever be in regular form), and the other option is Orton who is decent but he is only a bandaid that would cover next couple years. I am not even going to entertain Henne or Flynn in this scenario and the other QB's in the draft don't look like viable solutions either (not counting Luck).

If it were up to me I would pull the trigger and get RGIII. Even if he doesn't pull a "Cam Newton", I think his upside would be worth the gamble and as long as you have a reliable QB, you can afford to lose out on the draft picks it would cost to get him.

ILChief
03-01-2012, 07:44 AM
Do it

Sofa King
03-01-2012, 07:46 AM
So i guess we'll find out this weekend how much we're giving up for RGIII.

Sweet.

Sofa King
03-01-2012, 07:46 AM
so lets say for shits and giggles that the Chiefs offer a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd this year, and a 1st and 3rd next year and the RAMS accept. Would you be excited or pissed? Could RGIII be someone who can step in and play this year from the get go? Looking at alternative options (not including Cassel), we come to Peyton Manning, that is a whole lot of money to put into a QB for a possible 1 year return (depending on health and no guarantee that he will ever be in regular form), and the other option is Orton who is decent but he is only a bandaid that would cover next couple years. I am not even going to entertain Henne or Flynn in this scenario and the other QB's in the draft don't look like viable solutions either (not counting Luck).

If it were up to me I would pull the trigger and get RGIII. Even if he doesn't pull a "Cam Newton", I think his upside would be worth the gamble and as long as you have a reliable QB, you can afford to lose out on the draft picks it would cost to get him.

I'd be pissing myself in excitement.

And if we got RGIII (We won't) we better not touch any other QB unless that qb is a backup. RGIII is starting on day 1.

DaKCMan AP
03-01-2012, 08:02 AM
as long as you have a reliable QB, you can afford to lose out on the draft picks it would cost to get him.

I don't think the Giants miss Philip Rivers, Shawne Merriman, Roman Oben, and Nick Kaeding.

BigChiefFan
03-01-2012, 08:37 AM
Just so people know, RG3 has been working with Terry Shea-I think that's a feather in his cap.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-01-2012, 08:38 AM
Mel Kiper Jr. ‏ @MelKiperESPN Close
What would it take for Wash to move up from 6 to 2 for RG III? 2nd rd pick this yr and first rd pick next year.

Mel Kiper Jr. ‏ @MelKiperESPN Close
What would it take for Miami to move up from 8 to 2 to get RG III? 2nd & 3rd rd picks this yr plus first rd pick next year.

Mel Kiper Jr. ‏ @MelKiperESPN Close
What would it take for Seattle to move up from 12 to 2 to land RG III? 2nd & 3rd rd picks this yr, plus 1st & 2nd rd picks next year.

*Apparently he doesn't think it is possible for KC or something...?

Chiefs Pantalones
03-01-2012, 08:52 AM
lol not gonna happen, sorry.

KC_Connection
03-01-2012, 08:54 AM
Cassel still exists, last I checked. Can't see this happening.

DaKCMan AP
03-01-2012, 08:55 AM
Cassel still exists, last I checked. Can't see this happening.

Cassel still sucks, last I checked.

suds79
03-01-2012, 08:56 AM
Saw a headline on ESPN that the Rams would like to get a deal done sooner rather than later.

Probably would be good for everybody if this were to happen so we all could move on.

KC_Connection
03-01-2012, 08:57 AM
Cassel still sucks, last I checked.
That hasn't stopped Pioli from giving him a huge contract and allowing him to start without any thought given to how much he sucks, last I checked.

There is no reason to think the Chiefs are getting another QB for 2012.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-01-2012, 08:58 AM
Saw a headline on ESPN that the Rams would like to get a deal done sooner rather than later.

Probably would be good for everybody if this were to happen so we all could move on.

#31

Fruit Ninja
03-01-2012, 09:02 AM
That hasn't stopped Pioli from giving him a huge contract and allowing him to start without any thought given to how much he sucks, last I checked.

There is no reason to think the Chiefs are getting another QB for 2012.

Another thing to consider is Pioli has to win now. His contract is coming to en end next season. He has to cover his ass or hes a goner.

rtmike
03-01-2012, 09:46 AM
Bowe + #11 + lower/later picks nets them a top WR and they can still get someone at #11.


Yeah, my only concern is whether we've seen enough of Baldwin to be able to count on him? He looked good before he got his eye dotted.

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 09:48 AM
Yeah, my only concern is whether we've seen enough of Baldwin to be able to count on him? He looked good before he got his eye dotted.

So far the only thing we know about Bladwin is that he's dropped some easy catches and produced absolutely nothing in his first season.

The idea of trading Bowe is retarded.

DaKCMan AP
03-01-2012, 09:56 AM
So far the only thing we know about Bladwin is that he's dropped some easy catches and produced absolutely nothing in his first season.

The idea of trading Bowe is retarded.

Potential franchise QB >> Established top-10 NFL WR

durtyrute
03-01-2012, 10:03 AM
So far the only thing we know about Bladwin is that he's dropped some easy catches and produced absolutely nothing in his first season.

The idea of trading Bowe is retarded.

The right QB will make any WR look good. I'm not all that shook up about trading Bowe either; I just want them to make a BIG splash this year and do something that shakes me to my core, so I can say "biiiiiiiiiiitch, that's how you do it"

vailpass
03-01-2012, 10:09 AM
Bowe + #11 + lower/later picks nets them a top WR and they can still get someone at #11.

LMAO

Inmem58
03-01-2012, 10:12 AM
We won't trade Bowe


http://img.tapatalk.com/a6898eb3-adbf-111b.jpg

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 10:17 AM
Potential franchise QB >> Established top-10 NFL WR

And there are several ways to trade up. I just don't think trading away our Franchise QB's best weapon is the way to go about doing it.

Especially if we're giving up multiple high round picks.

Doing that could stunt his growth.

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 10:18 AM
The right QB will make any WR look good. I'm not all that shook up about trading Bowe either; I just want them to make a BIG splash this year and do something that shakes me to my core, so I can say "biiiiiiiiiiitch, that's how you do it"

The right QB will take a few years to become that kind of guy. The odds of him coming in and making scrub WR's look good right off the bat isn't high.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 10:19 AM
And there are several ways to trade up.

Name a realistic option without using a player.

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 10:24 AM
Name a realistic option without using a player.

Draft picks maybe?

Adding Bowe into the mix isn't going to allow you to escape multiple firsts, which means we could be looking at a 2-3 year window in finding RGIII a legit weapon if Baldwin doesn't pan out.

I'd rather trade the picks than trade the player.

L.A. Chieffan
03-01-2012, 10:25 AM
the deal is done rg111 will be here. perfect learning opportunity under cassel for a year or two

jd1020
03-01-2012, 10:27 AM
Draft picks maybe?

Adding Bowe into the mix isn't going to allow you to escape multiple firsts, which means we could be looking at a 2-3 year window in finding RGIII a legit weapon if Baldwin doesn't pan out.

I'd rather trade the picks than trade the player.

So start naming the picks you'd trade.

Keep in mind that the Redskins are ready to go all NYG for RG3 and will allow the Rams to pick 6th and possibly grab Kalil, still.

It's easy to sit here and say "I'd rather trade picks than a player."

Epic Fail 007
03-01-2012, 10:27 AM
Some of are so negative . Just see what plays out,my god.

Dr. Gigglepants
03-01-2012, 10:31 AM
Name a realistic option without using a player.

How about the earlier post from MKJr? If it will cost SEA roughly a 2, 3, and a 1, 2 next year, ours would be similar. Plus aren't the rams in a cap pinch anyway? D Bowe will want more than they can probably pay him. If Kiper is close in those projections then I'm all for it, I am starting to shy away from ditka-ing multiple drafts for him.

I'm starting to lean more towards trying to signing Orton until a more qb friendly draft comes up, like next year.
Posted via Mobile Device

jd1020
03-01-2012, 10:33 AM
How about the earlier post from MKJr? If it will cost SEA roughly a 2, 3, and a 1, 2 next year, ours would be similar. Plus aren't the rams in a cap pinch anyway? D Bowe will want more than they can probably pay him. If Kiper is close in those projections then I'm all for it, I am starting to shy away from ditka-ing multiple drafts for him.

I'm starting to lean more towards trying to signing Orton until a more qb friendly draft comes up, like next year.
Posted via Mobile Device

Kiper has lost it if he thinks thats all its going to take from a team picking 12th when a team picking 6th has been reported to be willing to offer that.

Sofa King
03-01-2012, 10:36 AM
So start naming the picks you'd trade.

Keep in mind that the Redskins are ready to go all NYG for RG3 and will allow the Rams to pick 6th and possibly grab Kalil, still.

It's easy to sit here and say "I'd rather trade picks than a player."

LMAO Kalil ain't lasting til 6.

Some of are so negative . Just see what plays out,my god.

Do something really fucking stupid so we can ban you and get rid of your stupid ass.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 10:37 AM
LMAO Kalil ain't lasting til 6.

Oh ya?

If the Vikings pick Blackmon who's going to take Kalil?

Luck
RG3
Blackmon
Richardson
Claiborne
Kalil

Even if the Vikings pick Kalil the Rams can draft Reiff.

KC Tattoo
03-01-2012, 10:40 AM
Do it

:grovel:

rtmike
03-01-2012, 10:40 AM
So far the only thing we know about Bladwin is that he's dropped some easy catches and produced absolutely nothing in his first season.




Yeah, I don't imagine Bowe likes the competition. ;)

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 10:43 AM
Oh ya?

If the Vikings pick Blackmon who's going to take Kalil?

Luck
RG3
Blackmon
Richardson
Claiborne
Kalil

Even if the Vikings pick Kalil the Rams can draft Reiff.

That's if the Vikings pick Blackmon....which I don't think they will. The Vikings know that they need a LT to protect Ponder.

Sofa King
03-01-2012, 10:45 AM
That's if the Vikings pick Blackmon....which I don't think they will. The Vikings know that they need a LT to protect Ponder.

This.

Bump
03-01-2012, 10:46 AM
RG3 would take us to the promised land.

I just got wood. This would be the best thing EVAR

Mr. Laz
03-01-2012, 10:49 AM
Smoke screen.....meaning Pioli has no real intent, just trying to make it look good

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/files/2011/12/crying-baby-300x300.jpg

jd1020
03-01-2012, 10:51 AM
That's if the Vikings pick Blackmon....which I don't think they will. The Vikings know that they need a LT to protect Ponder.

All depends on their board. They have a pretty big need at both positions.

qabbaan
03-01-2012, 11:03 AM
I think the price to get RG3 will be way too high.

That being said I really would like to see us do it. I am sick of "safe" picks that never end up being safe. We need a QB. It is better to overpay and get a franchise QB than to balk at the price and still not have one.

Unless its totally outrageous then we should do it. I don't think two firsts plus a middle founder or two is bad - if the player is a QB.

Gonzo
03-01-2012, 11:09 AM
Let us Tebow:


Dear baby Jesus, all snug in your crib with Donkeys and goats in the manger and such...

Please let the Chiefs actually pull this off, Baby Jesus... We've been through 40 years of stupidity and mediocrity and we deserve a break. Don't you think? Baby Jesus??

Little 6 lb baby Jesus???

Please???

Three7s
03-01-2012, 11:09 AM
Some of are so negative . Just see what plays out,my god.
Do you even know the concept of a forum?

jd1020
03-01-2012, 11:12 AM
Let us Tebow:


Dear baby Jesus, all snug in your crib with Donkeys and goats in the manger and such...

Please let the Chiefs actually pull this off, Baby Jesus... We've been through 40 years of stupidity and mediocrity and we deserve a break. Don't you think? Baby Jesus??

Little 6 lb baby Jesus???

Please???



Cal Naughton Jr?

Gonzo
03-01-2012, 11:15 AM
I think the price to get RG3 will be way too high.

That being said I really would like to see us do it. I am sick of "safe" picks that never end up being safe. We need a QB. It is better to overpay and get a franchise QB than to balk at the price and still not have one.

Unless its totally outrageous then we should do it. I don't think two firsts plus a middle founder or two is bad - if the player is a QB.
I don't care if we have to trade away our entire draft this year to get him. FFS we haven't had a franchise QB since Dawson.
Posted via Mobile Device

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 11:16 AM
All depends on their board. They have a pretty big need at both positions.

There are rumors that they're going to be courting Vincent Jackson pretty hard this offseason.

Bewbies
03-01-2012, 11:25 AM
BONER EnGaGed!!

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 11:29 AM
So start naming the picks you'd trade.

Keep in mind that the Redskins are ready to go all NYG for RG3 and will allow the Rams to pick 6th and possibly grab Kalil, still.

It's easy to sit here and say "I'd rather trade picks than a player."

And it's just as easy to sit here and say that we could just trade Bowe.

I doubt the Rams are drooling over the idea of landing Bowe and paying him 50M+, when they could just draft Blackmon or Floyd and pay them not even half as much.

As far as what I think is FAIR, for picks, I'd say 1st and 2nd this year and 1st and third next year. If the Chiefs traded MORE than that, i'd still be ok with, because I think this roster can be finished off in F/A and with late round picks once a QB is attained.

But trading Bowe sets the offense back immediately and we'll all be left wondering how much better RGIII would be with Bowe. It's a stupid idea.

This whole idea that Franchise WR's aren't needed is dumb. The Rams are STILL trying to find that guy going into Bradford's 3rd season.

Look at how many picks and signings the Ravens and Eagles ran through trying to find that guy for Flacco/McNabb.

There has only been one QB in this league that has consistently made shit WR's look good, and even he wasn't good enough to overcome his lack of weapons to win the SB.

Epic Fail 007
03-01-2012, 11:30 AM
nice http://blog.fourthdownstand.com/2012/02/nfl-draft-who-will-move-up-to-take.html

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 11:32 AM
So yeah, trading Bowe because you think he's so easily replaceable is a dumb idea.

I guess everyone forgot about the 90's and every year until Bowe was finally drafted.

Bowe is the one and only Legit franchise Wr this team has had in the last 20 years, but apparently, according to CP, he's easily replaceable.

CP Logic.

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 11:32 AM
nice http://blog.fourthdownstand.com/2012/02/nfl-draft-who-will-move-up-to-take.html

Jeez man.

Kansas City Chiefs
I think the Chiefs, at pick No. 11, are the "sleeper" team outside the top 10 who may make a play to move up and select Griffin at No. 2. This would provide the Chiefs with another one of those ridiculously explosive backfields with RG3 and RB Jamaal Charles, provided Charles can come back from the knee injury he suffered in week 2 of last year. If the Chiefs are able to re-sign WR Dwayne Bowe as well, they would set themselves up nicely for the future offensively. Keep in mind the Chiefs won their division 2 years ago and would be in a position to get back to that type of success with an upgrade at QB if they don't think Matt Cassel is the long-term answer. They may have to throw in extra players or picks to sweeten the deal, however, because it would be such a long drop for the Rams to make going from No. 2 to No. 11.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 11:33 AM
And it's just as easy to sit here and say that we could just trade Bowe.

I doubt the Rams are drooling over the idea of landing Bowe and paying him 50M+, when they could just draft Blackmon or Floyd and pay them not even half as much.

As far as what I think is FAIR, for picks, I'd say 1st and 2nd this year and 1st and third next year. If the Chiefs traded MORE than that, i'd still be ok with, because I think this roster can be finished off in F/A and with late round picks once a QB is attained.

But trading Bowe sets the offense back immediately and we'll all be left wondering how much better RGIII would be with Bowe. It's a stupid idea.

This whole idea that Franchise WR's aren't needed is dumb. The Rams are STILL trying to find that guy going into Bradford's 3rd season.

Look at how many picks and signings the Ravens and Eagles ran through trying to find that guy for Flacco/McNabb.

There has only been one QB in this league that has consistently made shit WR's look good, and even he wasn't good enough to overcome his lack of weapons to win the SB.

I never said that we could trade Bowe.

I'm well aware of the fact that the Rams cant afford to pay him.

But unless they are willing to make room from a contract like Bowe on the roster the Chiefs won't be trading up to #2 because unless we are going to go full retard, which Pioli wont, then we can't compete with the Browns or Redskins.

The Rams are also still trying to find a franchise QB. In case you haven't been paying attention, Bradford has been one of the worst QB's in the league.

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 11:35 AM
I don't fully get behind the argument that the Rams won't want to drop down to #11 because there won't be a player there that they can take.

They can still get a LT in Jonathan Martin out of Stanford. They can still get a WR in Michael Floyd out of Notre Dame. There will still be viable players to draft at #11.....and they'll honestly probably get more picks trading with us. Plus they could always trade back up into the top 10 if someone is looking to trade out.

Bewbies
03-01-2012, 11:35 AM
I think Cassel should be part of the trade up. Even if sending him too costs us more picks.

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 11:36 AM
I think Cassel should be part of the trade up. Even if sending him too costs us more picks.

To the Rams? Why the fuck would they want him? And if we trade up for RGIII.....I don't see the FO getting rid of Cassel. They'll let RGIII sit behind Cassel for a year unless he just completely tears Cassel a new asshole in TC and Preseason.

Mr. Laz
03-01-2012, 11:39 AM
To the Rams? Why the **** would they want him? And if we trade up for RGIII.....I don't see the FO getting rid of Cassel. They'll let RGIII sit behind Cassel for a year unless he just completely tears Cassel a new asshole in TC and Preseason.
he was just trying to be funny

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 11:39 AM
I never said that we could trade Bowe.

I'm well aware of the fact that the Rams cant afford to pay him.

But unless they are willing to make room from a contract like Bowe on the roster the Chiefs won't be trading up to #2 because unless we are going to go full retard, which Pioli wont, then we can't compete with the Browns or Redskins.

The Rams are also still trying to find a franchise QB. In case you haven't been paying attention, Bradford has been one of the worst QB's in the league.

Bradford had a solid rookie season and an injury plagued sophmore slump.

And in case you haven't been paying attention, if the Rams were looking for a Franchise QB they wouldn't be trading out of the #2 spot.

And you're also assuming the Browns are willing to trade those two first round picks, which may not be the case.

We're talking hypotheticals here, so you can't pretend that the Chiefs WON'T trade an ass load of picks. And you also have to entertain the idea that the Browns may value a combo of Blackmon and Tannehill over just RGIII.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 11:40 AM
Bradford had a solid rookie season and an injury plagued sophmore slump.

<6 ypa... SOLID!!!

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 11:41 AM
<6 ypa... SOLID!!!

Not having this retarded ass argument with you AGAIN.

The Rams view Bradford as a Franchise QB, so your opinion of the matter means dick and has no relevance in this conversation, so just drop it.

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 11:42 AM
We're talking hypotheticals here, so you can't pretend that the Chiefs WON'T trade an ass load of picks. And you also have to entertain the idea that the Browns may value a combo of Blackmon and Tannehill over just RGIII.

They could go with Flynn and draft a combo of Trent Richardson and Kendall Wright.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 11:43 AM
Not having this retarded ass argument with you AGAIN.

The Rams view Bradford as a Franchise QB, so your opinion of the matter means dick and has no relevance in this conversation, so just drop it.

Pioli views Cassel as a franchise QB aswell. Whats your point?

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 11:45 AM
Pioli views Cassel as a franchise QB aswell. Whats your point?

Are you and eric007 the same person?

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 11:47 AM
Pioli views Cassel as a franchise QB aswell. Whats your point?

You cannot be this retarded.

Why am I always getting into these stupid conversations with you?

jd1020
03-01-2012, 11:49 AM
Are you and eric007 the same person?

Nope.

Bradford has been trash in the NFL.

He's David Carr right now. Someone that a team hopes their #1 pick turns out.

Not sure how anyone can say Bradford is a franchise QB.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 11:49 AM
You cannot be this retarded.

Why am I always getting into these stupid conversations with you?

Probably because you think a terrible QB is a franchise QB. Dunno. You tell me.

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 11:50 AM
Nope.

Bradford has been trash in the NFL.

He's David Carr right now. Someone that a team hopes their #1 pick turns out.

Not sure how anyone can say Bradford is a franchise QB.

The Rams can. Despite whatever you think. That's all that matters as it concerns us.

Who gives a shit what you think of Bradford. That has no bearing on RGIII or the Chiefs.

Gonzo
03-01-2012, 11:50 AM
Nope.

Bradford has been trash in the NFL.

He's David Carr right now. Someone that a team hopes their #1 pick turns out.

Not sure how anyone can say Bradford is a franchise QB.

Bradford is a franchise QB.


There, that was easy.

Dude, he had no WR's this year, had a tougher schedule, his line broke down a lot and he was injured over half the year.

He'll be just fine.

Epic Fail 007
03-01-2012, 11:51 AM
Are you and eric007 the same person?

Dude I never said cassel was a franchise qb I hate cassel.

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 11:51 AM
Bradford is a franchise QB.


There, that was easy.

Dude, he had no WR's this year, had a tougher schedule, his line broke down a lot and he was injured over half the year.

He'll be just fine.

Don't. Just don't.

Talking to JD is like talking to a wall.

RustShack
03-01-2012, 11:52 AM
Are you and eric007 the same person?

This guy has easily emerged as one of the biggest retards on the planet.

EDIT- As in the guy you quoted, not you.

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 11:53 AM
Dude I never said cassel was a franchise qb I hate cassel.

No...I meant because you're both fucking retarded.

Three7s
03-01-2012, 11:53 AM
Don't. Just don't.

Talking to JD is like talking to wall.
A wall would be an improvement. It wouldn't talk back.

RustShack
03-01-2012, 11:55 AM
Nope.

Bradford has been trash in the NFL.

He's David Carr right now. Someone that a team hopes their #1 pick turns out.

Not sure how anyone can say Bradford is a franchise QB.

Yep. Peyton Manning and all the other QB's who sucked their first few years aren't franchise QB's either.

All-Pro as a rookie and until retirement or bust!

Douche bag LMAO

kaplin42
03-01-2012, 11:57 AM
I feel like i want to have all this hope that we could actually end up wtih a QBotF, or even P. Manning that would definatly give us a shot right now.

However, deep in my heart, I just know that we will open the season with Cassel, and a few aged, overpriced free agents that are meant to give the fans hope so that they will buy tickets and gear, but ultimately will lead to nothing.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 11:59 AM
Yep. Peyton Manning and all the other QB's who sucked their first few years aren't franchise QB's either.

All-Pro as a rookie and until retirement or bust!

Douche bag LMAO

Comparing Bradford to Peyton and you think you can call other people retarded.

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 12:03 PM
Comparing Bradford to Peyton and you think you can call other people retarded.

Yeah, because he's making a direct comparison? If you can't figure out his point, then yes, you are retarded.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 12:04 PM
Yeah, because he's making a direct comparison? If you can't figure out his point, then yes, you are retarded.

Because Peyton sucked his first few years right?

RustShack
03-01-2012, 12:06 PM
Comparing Bradford to Peyton and you think you can call other people retarded.

LMAO

Point proven, retard.

jd1020
03-01-2012, 12:08 PM
LMAO

Point proven, retard.

Not sure what you have proven beyond your own stupidity.

Get back to me when Bradford is throwing for 4000+ yards and nearly 8 ypa in year 2. Oh wait...

Epic Fail 007
03-01-2012, 12:08 PM
No...I meant because you're both ****ing retarded.

Yea well fuck you prick. You don`t know me. You belittle someone for having a different opinion than you????? Really?????? This makes you the retard. This area is where alot on cp need to grow the hell up. Also on top of this you belittle people for an opinion that truely dose not matter in the grand scheme of life. Grow up.

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 12:11 PM
Yea well fuck you prick. You don`t know me. You belittle someone for having a different opinion than you????? Really?????? This makes you the retard. This area is where alot on cp need to grow the hell up. Also on top of this you belittle people for an opinion that truely dose not matter in the grand scheme of life. Grow up.

Yes.....it totally dose matter.

Sofa King
03-01-2012, 12:41 PM
Yea well **** you prick. You don`t know me. You belittle someone for having a different opinion than you????? Really?????? This makes you the retard. This area is where alot on cp need to grow the hell up. Also on top of this you belittle people for an opinion that truely dose not matter in the grand scheme of life. Grow up.


Babb truely is a cock rider hes as bad as whitlock.


SHUT UP


See what nick wright has done to u haters,made u all paranoid idiots.


Oh yes ,Im worried about what a brainless troll like you says.lol


OMG all you cry babies shut up its not like carr is or ever will be deion sanders.And callin pioli cheap is not accurate. He payed flowers 50 mil ,wake up stop being cock riders and think.

Say what you want and I will say what I want. Its as simple as that. Now shut your pie hole.JR wtf is that all about idiot?

That very mature of you.Get your head out of your ass and grow up.

OMG shut up







hmmmmmm

Sofa King
03-01-2012, 12:42 PM
Yes.....it totally does matter.

Ha. Gonzo edited your misspelled post. He clearly didn't get your joke.

whoman69
03-01-2012, 12:44 PM
You can talk about what it would take. That costs nothing. But to believe we can give up the same for the Browns to move up from #4 or the Skins to move up from #6 is ridiculous. If it is going to cost the Skins four picks it would cost us a ton more. The Phins might even get into the fray and they are also in a better spot than us. Starting off the bat, the Browns have two first this year which is worth a hell of a lot more than future #1 picks, whose value is equal to about a #2 because you never know until the season is ended where that pick will come from.

BossChief
03-01-2012, 12:44 PM
I played the role of "the bear Jew" the other day with JD1020 because he tried to say that if we tagged Carr and traded him that we would take a 15 million dollar cap hit and that would prohibit us from signing Peyton Manning.

I was civil and explained to him how things work and all the foolhad were insults and continuing to call ME the fool in the conversation.

So, I got a bat...

Seems he still hasn't learned.

See

Gonzo
03-01-2012, 12:46 PM
Ha. Gonzo edited your misspelled post. He clearly didn't get your joke.

LMAO... Shit, I actually clicked on the wrong post and my stupid phone auto-corrected. Stand-by... I'll change it back.
Posted via Mobile Device

Gonzo
03-01-2012, 12:48 PM
hmmmmmm

LMAO

I'm gonna rep you so hard for that. Nice work man.
Posted via Mobile Device

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 12:54 PM
You can talk about what it would take. That costs nothing. But to believe we can give up the same for the Browns to move up from #4 or the Skins to move up from #6 is ridiculous. If it is going to cost the Skins four picks it would cost us a ton more. The Phins might even get into the fray and they are also in a better spot than us. Starting off the bat, the Browns have two first this year which is worth a hell of a lot more than future #1 picks, whose value is equal to about a #2 because you never know until the season is ended where that pick will come from.

We have 4 teams legitimately in the market for a new QB:

Browns
Redskins
Dolphins
Chiefs

We have 3 Legit starters in F/A, all of whom would take their new teams out of the trade talks for RGIII.

Manning
Flynn
Orton

The Rams are in a rush to seal a deal, which is why they are stating they're willing to trade the pick BEFORE the draft even starts.

Think it could be because they're afraid the value of the pick may drop when some of those teams grab their F/A QB?

If the Chiefs elect not to sign Orton or Manning, we may only be competing with one or two other teams for that draft pick.

So it's not that far fetched an idea, if you really think about it. The value of that pick may indeed decline by the time draft time rolls around.

Simplicity
03-01-2012, 12:56 PM
I don't think the Giants miss Philip Rivers, Shawne "roidman" Merriman, Roman Oben, and Nick Kaeding.

Nate Kaeding... You fool.

Okie_Apparition
03-01-2012, 12:59 PM
They're like tattoo ink
Once under your skin it's going to take lazers

Chiefnj2
03-01-2012, 01:05 PM
We have 4 teams legitimately in the market for a new QB:

Browns
Redskins
Dolphins
Chiefs

We have 3 Legit starters in F/A, all of whom would take their new teams out of the trade talks for RGIII.

Manning
Flynn
Orton

The Rams are in a rush to seal a deal, which is why they are stating they're willing to trade the pick BEFORE the draft even starts.
.

I don't see why the Seahawks wouldn't fall into the same category as KC. I could be wrong, I don't see teams being all that interested in Flynn or Orton right away. I think both guys are fallback positions teams will take if Manning can't prove he's healthy right away, or if they lose out in the Griffin sweepstakes.

Simplicity
03-01-2012, 01:07 PM
Nope.

Bradford has been trash in the NFL.

He's David Carr right now. Someone that a team hopes their #1 pick turns out.

Not sure how anyone can say Bradford is a franchise QB.

Yes because Sam Bradford is complete trash... JFC you ****ing idiot.

Simplicity
03-01-2012, 01:08 PM
I don't see why the Seahawks wouldn't fall into the same category as KC. I could be wrong, I don't see teams being all that interested in Flynn or Orton right away. I think both guys are fallback positions teams will take if Manning can't prove he's healthy right away, or if they lose out in the Griffin sweepstakes.

I could see Henne going to Seattle... I don't know why though.

Detoxing
03-01-2012, 01:11 PM
I don't see why the Seahawks wouldn't fall into the same category as KC. I could be wrong, I don't see teams being all that interested in Flynn or Orton right away. I think both guys are fallback positions teams will take if Manning can't prove he's healthy right away, or if they lose out in the Griffin sweepstakes.

Yeah, I should've listed Seattle. Good point. But both Flynn and Orton will be signed before the draft. Once they're on a roster, that team won't be so desperate to trade up and will likely take themselves out of the bidding war.

There is no way Flynn & Orton don't land a team till June. They'll be off the board come draft time.

58-4ever
03-01-2012, 01:12 PM
Nope.

Bradford has been trash in the NFL.

He's David Carr right now. Someone that a team hopes their #1 pick turns out.

Not sure how anyone can say Bradford is a franchise QB.

You are an idiot. Bradford set the record for most completions by a rookie in NFL history and nearly set the completion percentage record at the same time. I would hardly call that trash.

Extra Point
03-01-2012, 01:17 PM
It's a bullshit story.

The source they cite is this article, which merely mentions the Chiefs as a possible suitor based on Romeo's comment: http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/02/cleveland_browns_have_had_prel.html

The story is that the Browns have had preliminary talks, not the Chiefs.

"Is Crennell still with them?" /Cleveland writers

DaWolf
03-01-2012, 01:53 PM
Just the Chiefs doing due diligence. If Washington, Miami, and Cleveland drop out of the running, there would be an outside opportunity. But at the moment, the price is way too high...

Nightfyre
03-01-2012, 01:57 PM
Just the Chiefs doing due diligence. If Washington, Miami, and Cleveland drop out of the running, there would be an outside opportunity. But at the moment, the price is way too high...

Shhh! I want to believe!

Pestilence
03-01-2012, 02:07 PM
LMAO... Shit, I actually clicked on the wrong post and my stupid phone auto-corrected. Stand-by... I'll change it back.
Posted via Mobile Device

MOD ABUSE!!!! LMAO

Setsuna
03-01-2012, 02:12 PM
Turn to NFL network for top 10 draft busts.

O.city
03-01-2012, 02:18 PM
If all it would take for hte Chiefs to get to that pick, is what Kiper says it would take the Seahawks, I'd do it in a heartbeat.


this years 1,2,3, next years 1 and 2?

BossChief
03-01-2012, 02:21 PM
That's the "take it or leave it" point, for me O.City

Dayze
03-01-2012, 02:21 PM
Chiefs would never do it. If they haven't had the onions to take a QB earlier than the 3rd round in 20 years, they sure as heck aren't moving up to do it.

....because the Chiefs are the Honda Accord of football. Nice and safe, predictable....but you'll never win any races with it.

O.city
03-01-2012, 02:23 PM
Desean Jackson just got tagged.



Bowe next?

Micjones
03-01-2012, 02:23 PM
If all it would take for hte Chiefs to get to that pick, is what Kiper says it would take the Seahawks, I'd do it in a heartbeat.


this years 1,2,3, next years 1 and 2?

That's too steep.

O.city
03-01-2012, 02:25 PM
That's too steep.

Not sure if serious?


If thats all it would take, do it.


It's only costing you 1 first round pick. If Charles is healthy next year, this team can get basically all it needs with that pick and later depth filling picks.

Coogs
03-01-2012, 02:25 PM
That's too steep.

A 1st, 2 2nds, and a 3rd. That's not too steep.

Hog Farmer
03-01-2012, 02:28 PM
So far the only thing we know about Bladwin is that he's dropped some easy catches and produced absolutely nothing in his first season.

The idea of trading Bowe is retarded.

Baldwin was wide fucking open for a touchdown on several occassions but our retart QB coulndn't see past 10 yards. I'd give up Bowe for RGIII in a heartbeat.

BigRedChief
03-01-2012, 02:31 PM
Chiefs | Have talked about No. 2 pick in NFL Draft

Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:05:59 -0800

The Kansas City Chiefs have held preliminary talks with the St. Louis Rams regarding the No. 2 overall pick in the NFL Draft. The Chiefs have expressed interest in Baylor QB Robert Griffin III. Head coach Romeo Crennel gushed about Griffin during the NFL Scouting Combine, saying he is the kind of player "you go up to get."



Read more: http://www.kffl.com/team/21/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs#ixzz1nsDciPfK



I'm really, really sorry if this is a repost. But it gave me a huge boner which in turn caused a really uncomfortable wedgie.It's all BS and draft smoke.

The Rams want and will get 3000 points for the pick. Do the math. Way out of the range of the Chiefs.

Sofa King
03-01-2012, 02:33 PM
A 1st, 2 2nds, and a 3rd. That's not too steep.

Sign me up as well.

BigRedChief
03-01-2012, 02:34 PM
Sign me up as well.Thats not even close to 3000. You are only 1/2 way there. Double the offer and then they will talk seriously.

Sofa King
03-01-2012, 02:52 PM
Thats not even close to 3000. You are only 1/2 way there. Double the offer and then they will talk seriously.

No. I'll just throw in some player on the Chiefs and call it good.

And no, it doesn't matter if the Rams actually want that player or not, it only matters that I'm willing to give that player up.

Micjones
03-01-2012, 03:02 PM
Not sure if serious?


If thats all it would take, do it.


It's only costing you 1 first round pick. If Charles is healthy next year, this team can get basically all it needs with that pick and later depth filling picks.

I'm dead serious.
A single Day One pick for each of the next two years?
No thanks.

Micjones
03-01-2012, 03:09 PM
A 1st, 2 2nds, and a 3rd. That's not too steep.

So after Griffin...we won't pick again until the 4th Round.
And next year we won't even start until the end of the first day of the Draft.

You're okay with that?
When we still need help at NT, RT, either C/G and depth at TE and Safety?

Nightfyre
03-01-2012, 03:13 PM
So after Griffin...we won't pick again until the 4th Round.
And next year we won't even start until the end of the first day of the Draft.

You're okay with that?
When we still need help at NT, RT, either C/G and depth at TE and Safety?

Most of which can be addressed via free agency.

DeezNutz
03-01-2012, 03:14 PM
So after Griffin...we won't pick again until the 4th Round.
And next year we won't even start until the end of the first day of the Draft.

You're okay with that?
When we still need help at NT, RT, either C/G and depth at TE and Safety?

Clark might disagree, but we're allowed to use FA, and the latter half of the above list can be filled in the later rounds of the draft.

ILChief
03-01-2012, 03:37 PM
So after Griffin...we won't pick again until the 4th Round.
And next year we won't even start until the end of the first day of the Draft.

You're okay with that?
When we still need help at NT, RT, either C/G and depth at TE and Safety?

What are the gaping holes we would have that couldn't be filled in free agency or mid round picks? All of those don't require high picks

Buckweath
03-01-2012, 03:43 PM
So after Griffin...we won't pick again until the 4th Round.
And next year we won't even start until the end of the first day of the Draft.

You're okay with that?
When we still need help at NT, RT, either C/G and depth at TE and Safety?

People need to realize that with a great QB, you can have holes and still be a contender.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2012, 03:44 PM
What are the gaping holes we would have that couldn't be filled in free agency or mid round picks? All of those don't require high picks

You have to look into the future. Realize that our draft picks are going to become second contract free agents.

We all know you build teams through the draft, not free agency. If we give up too many picks, we force ourselves into a model we know doesn't work very well.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2012, 03:45 PM
People need to realize that with a great QB, you can have holes and still be a contender.

No, this is the biggest fallacy and an exaggeration we keep hearing on CP.

If you are one of 5 lucky teams to get an elite QB, you can do that. Peyton Manning can carry a bad team to the Super Bowl. Matt Ryan is a good QB, but he can't do that.

I think RGIII will be more Matt Ryan than he will be Peyton Manning.

Pasta Giant Meatball
03-01-2012, 03:45 PM
No. I'll just throw in some player on the Chiefs and call it good.

And no, it doesn't matter if the Rams actually want that player or not, it only matters that I'm willing to give that player up.

MAYBE DEY TAKE CASTLE OFF ER HANDS

Setsuna
03-01-2012, 03:46 PM
Rams can trade to 11. WR class is deeper than people think.

Micjones
03-01-2012, 03:49 PM
Most of which can be addressed via free agency.

There's depth needed elsewhere. That was just a quicklist.
We'll still need someone to spell Charles.
We could also use help with the pass rush.

You're comfortable with mostly Day Two picks this year and next in filling much needed depth/role player slots on this team? I'm not.

Micjones
03-01-2012, 03:55 PM
Clark might disagree, but we're allowed to use FA, and the latter half of the above list can be filled in the later rounds of the draft.

We'll probably be in position to make three starting caliber signings this off-season. Players like Soliai, Nicks, Bell, etc.

That leaves you with ONLY Day Two picks to fill spots like RB (reasonable), TE (who may need to be starting caliber if Moeaki can't stay healthy), pass rusher and Safety (need I remind you about Sabby Piscatelli)?

Okie_Apparition
03-01-2012, 03:58 PM
If all it would take for hte Chiefs to get to that pick, is what Kiper says it would take the Seahawks, I'd do it in a heartbeat.


this years 1,2,3, next years 1 and 2?

When Clark figures in the money saved by not having to pay those salaries & a starting QB on the cheap
Or would those spaces be filled by higher salary vets

suds79
03-01-2012, 03:58 PM
Rams can trade to 11. WR class is deeper than people think.

We just don't have the ammo Washington or Cleveland has with the picks.

Tweet from Mel Kiper:
Mel Kiper Jr. ‏ @MelKiperESPN

Washington is the key to how much the Rams get for the 2nd pick. If they are competing with Cleveland, the price goes up and up and up.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2012, 04:01 PM
Most of which can be addressed via free agency.

Needs:
NT, RT, RB, RB of the Future, Center or Guard, #2 TE. We could use depth at OLB, Safety, CB. We have ZERO decent backup OTs. We will have zero depth on our interior offensive line and at TE.

This year, if we draft RGIII, we'll probably be paying him and Bowe a shitload of money. Over the next few years, we have to worry about Albert, Belcher, Houston, Kendrick Lewis, Berry, Asamoah, Moeaki. They're going to get very big pay raises.

I know we have a lot of cap space. But our cap is set to disappear really quickly. Most of those players are replaceable. The problem is, you either have to replace them with somebody very expensive, unless you somehow end up wildly successful with late round draft picks / undrafted rookies.

Micjones
03-01-2012, 04:08 PM
Needs:
NT, RT, RB, RB of the Future, Center or Guard, #2 TE. We could use depth at OLB, Safety, CB. We have ZERO decent backup OTs. We will have zero depth on our interior offensive line and at TE.

This year, if we draft RGIII, we'll probably be paying him and Bowe a shitload of money. Over the next few years, we have to worry about Albert, Belcher, Houston, Kendrick Lewis, Berry, Asamoah, Moeaki. They're going to get very big pay raises.

I know we have a lot of cap space. But our cap is set to disappear really quickly. Most of those players are replaceable. The problem is, you either have to replace them with somebody very expensive, unless you somehow end up wildly successful with late round draft picks / undrafted rookies.

I tend to agree.

Though I'm not sure all of the players who have expiring contracts will warrant extensions. From your list...I'd only expect two of those players to truly be in line for good contracts in the near future.

Pioli's also been good about extending players ahead of time. I expect that trend to continue.

Ultimately though, I think the point's been made.
We'd be relying heavily on hitting on Day Two picks the next two years.
I'm not real comfortable with that.

I'm starting to think Orton/Tannehill is the way to go.
We'll have a good QB to lead this team in the short-term, a talented young guy to groom, room for more FA's and we'll still have our draft picks.

Okie_Apparition
03-01-2012, 04:11 PM
If Houston blows up he'll want to be paid & well before the 2013 season

KCUnited
03-01-2012, 04:16 PM
You can argue that what you give up in the draft you maximize with the talent already on the team that are wasting away by spinning the wheels at the qb position.

tredadda
03-01-2012, 05:18 PM
Needs:
NT, RT, RB, RB of the Future, Center or Guard, #2 TE. We could use depth at OLB, Safety, CB. We have ZERO decent backup OTs. We will have zero depth on our interior offensive line and at TE.

This year, if we draft RGIII, we'll probably be paying him and Bowe a shitload of money. Over the next few years, we have to worry about Albert, Belcher, Houston, Kendrick Lewis, Berry, Asamoah, Moeaki. They're going to get very big pay raises.

I know we have a lot of cap space. But our cap is set to disappear really quickly. Most of those players are replaceable. The problem is, you either have to replace them with somebody very expensive, unless you somehow end up wildly successful with late round draft picks / undrafted rookies.

Issues with your post.

1. We always have and always will have holes on this team. Every team does.

2. We won't be paying a buttload of money to RGIII. The rookie cap ensures that.

3. No matter how many drafts we have, this team will always have room to improve.

4. The good teams hide their weaknesses by having a stud at QB, something we haven't had in a long, long time.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2012, 05:35 PM
Issues with your post.

1. We always have and always will have holes on this team. Every team does.
Again, people use this argument because they see Brees or Peyton Manning win with mediocre teams. There is a very small chance RGIII becomes one of these guys. These guys are once in a generation guys. If you're Matt Ryan or maybe even Eli Manning, you can't afford to have too many holes. You have to have a terrific supporting cast. Now, I get that you're not going to have superstars at every position. But you have to have enough playmakers and you can't afford to have huge talent gaps at many positions.

2. We won't be paying a buttload of money to RGIII. The rookie cap ensures that.
No, we would not. But it's still a sizeable contract that goes on our books and one of many that will quickly strain our cap. At the #2 pick, it would probably be at least $20+ Million guaranteed.

3. No matter how many drafts we have, this team will always have room to improve.
The draft is supposed to be a pipeline for cheap talent. If Albert demands the moon and all the free agent LTs who can replace Albert ask for a shitload of money, you should have a LT on the bench who you can say "I hate to lose Albert, but I feel comfortable enough with the backup. This is why building through free agency never works. Because when you have a major hole on your roster, your ONLY choice is to fill through free agency, where you're usually getting second-rate talent and overpaying them. Kendrick Lewis is a terrific example.

4. The good teams hide their weaknesses by having a stud at QB, something we haven't had in a long, long time.
There's no doubt RGIII makes this team significantly better. And his supporting cast is pretty outstanding. But again, the window is probably 2-3 years. After that, we're probably going to see talent drop off significantly as we try to re-sign the players we are currently getting on the cheap today.

Again, people keep talking about how good teams have great QBs. Of course. But those good teams also draft consistently very, very well. And in most cases, those good teams draft so well that they aren't afraid to cut good veteran players when they become too expensive, because they have talent on the roster to backfill their position.

O.city
03-01-2012, 05:38 PM
Again, people use this argument because they see Brees or Peyton Manning win with mediocre teams. There is a very small chance RGIII becomes one of these guys. These guys are once in a generation guys. If you're Matt Ryan or maybe even Eli Manning, you can't afford to have too many holes. You have to have a terrific supporting cast. Now, I get that you're not going to have superstars at every position. But you have to have enough playmakers and you can't afford to have huge talent gaps at many positions.


No, we would not. But it's still a sizeable contract that goes on our books and one of many that will quickly strain our cap. At the #2 pick, it would probably be at least $20+ Million guaranteed.


The draft is supposed to be a pipeline for cheap talent. If Albert demands the moon and all the free agent LTs who can replace Albert ask for a shitload of money, you should have a LT on the bench who you can say "I hate to lose Albert, but I feel comfortable enough with the backup. This is why building through free agency never works. Because when you have a major hole on your roster, your ONLY choice is to fill through free agency, where you're usually getting second-rate talent and overpaying them. Kendrick Lewis is a terrific example.


There's no doubt RGIII makes this team significantly better. And his supporting cast is pretty outstanding. But again, the window is probably 2-3 years. After that, we're probably going to see talent drop off significantly as we try to re-sign the players we are currently getting on the cheap today.

Again, people keep talking about how good teams have great QBs. Of course. But those good teams also draft consistently very, very well. And in most cases, those good teams draft so well that they aren't afraid to cut good veteran players when they become too expensive, because they have talent on the roster to backfill their position.

Great post.


The Giants are a great example. They can let Osi walk if they want, they have JPP. They will likely steal another pass rusher somewhere in this draft.

I'm of hte thinking that if you overload on position on a side of the ball it can make up for others.

Manning made up for an ok oline. The Ravens dline and lbers make up for an ok secondary minus Reed. The Saints are pretty much stacked on offense, but give up points on d and can't or didn't this year when it mattered, run the ball very efficiently.

Mr. Laz
03-01-2012, 05:39 PM
Desean Jackson just got tagged.



Bowe next?
i still think tagging Carr brings us more value

lots of WR's out there, also some in the draft

Bowe's price might drop after hitting the market

O.city
03-01-2012, 05:40 PM
Probably right, but I don't want to let the guy hit the market.


Hell, he might be waiting to see what we do at the qb spot. I dunno what is going on .

whoman69
03-01-2012, 05:43 PM
Most of which can be addressed via free agency.

Which costs more, making it more difficult to add new talent under the cap.

O.city
03-01-2012, 05:46 PM
Here is something to think about. Say the Chiefs do tag and trade Carr. Get a 1 round pick for him. Still don't have enough to get RGIII though as the Skins go crazy and drive up the price to epic level.


Take those two picks and use them. You could come out with Richardson AND Decastro or Reiff and Nick Perry.


That could be great, if you add Manning, sign Bowe, test Soliai to see what he wants.

tredadda
03-01-2012, 05:59 PM
Again, people use this argument because they see Brees or Peyton Manning win with mediocre teams. There is a very small chance RGIII becomes one of these guys. These guys are once in a generation guys. If you're Matt Ryan or maybe even Eli Manning, you can't afford to have too many holes. You have to have a terrific supporting cast. Now, I get that you're not going to have superstars at every position. But you have to have enough playmakers and you can't afford to have huge talent gaps at many positions.


No, we would not. But it's still a sizeable contract that goes on our books and one of many that will quickly strain our cap. At the #2 pick, it would probably be at least $20+ Million guaranteed.


The draft is supposed to be a pipeline for cheap talent. If Albert demands the moon and all the free agent LTs who can replace Albert ask for a shitload of money, you should have a LT on the bench who you can say "I hate to lose Albert, but I feel comfortable enough with the backup. This is why building through free agency never works. Because when you have a major hole on your roster, your ONLY choice is to fill through free agency, where you're usually getting second-rate talent and overpaying them. Kendrick Lewis is a terrific example.


There's no doubt RGIII makes this team significantly better. And his supporting cast is pretty outstanding. But again, the window is probably 2-3 years. After that, we're probably going to see talent drop off significantly as we try to re-sign the players we are currently getting on the cheap today.

Again, people keep talking about how good teams have great QBs. Of course. But those good teams also draft consistently very, very well. And in most cases, those good teams draft so well that they aren't afraid to cut good veteran players when they become too expensive, because they have talent on the roster to backfill their position.

Again we have a very talented team last year and currently do and we are watching that talent waste away because we have garbage under center. That is the most important position on the team and one we constantly neglect or fill with career backups or stop gap veterans. We always make excuses or say "wait till next year" when talking about the QB position. This team and some fans keep thinking that if just bring in more talent, we will be fine ignoring the QB position. I agree that trading a bunch of picks is bad for a talent like Tannehill, or Kellen Moore. For a talent like RGIII, we need to do it as he is a rare talent.

Bewbies
03-01-2012, 06:02 PM
Anyone that thinks a team that wins the Super Bowl has a complete roster is crazy. There's no such thing in the NFL.

This year, the Giants running game sucked ass. Horrible. They had tons and tons and tons of injuries on D. But they still won because they have a great QB, and a great D-line.

Mr. Laz
03-01-2012, 06:11 PM
Here is something to think about. Say the Chiefs do tag and trade Carr. Get a 1 round pick for him. Still don't have enough to get RGIII though as the Skins go crazy and drive up the price to epic level.

Take those two picks and use them. You could come out with Richardson AND Decastro or Reiff and Nick Perry.

That could be great, if you add Manning, sign Bowe, test Soliai to see what he wants.
or maybe we get a 1st and 3rd AFTER the draft

maybe they gives us more ammo for a player next year in the draft


you don't tag the best player, you tag the guy who will get you the most value

imo that's Carr

O.city
03-01-2012, 06:13 PM
or maybe we get a 1st and 3rd AFTER the draft

maybe they gives us more ammo for a player next year in the draft


you don't tag the best player, you tag the guy who will get you the most value

imo that's Carr

Thats what I'm saying.


Just sign Bowe. He deserves it. He's worked hard for this franchise.


Tag Carr, someone will bite on him. I'd bet Jerry J would.

Chiefs Pantalones
03-01-2012, 06:21 PM
This thread needs to die. It's not happening.

keg in kc
03-01-2012, 06:23 PM
Chiefs: "So, you guys have the #2 pick huh?"
Rams: "Yep"
Chiefs: "Any interest in moving down to number 11?"
Rams: *silence*
Chiefs: "Thanks!"

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2012, 06:30 PM
Again we have a very talented team last year and currently do and we are watching that talent waste away because we have garbage under center. That is the most important position on the team and one we constantly neglect or fill with career backups or stop gap veterans. We always make excuses or say "wait till next year" when talking about the QB position. This team and some fans keep thinking that if just bring in more talent, we will be fine ignoring the QB position. I agree that trading a bunch of picks is bad for a talent like Tannehill, or Kellen Moore. For a talent like RGIII, we need to do it as he is a rare talent.

Nobody's saying we should never draft a QB. But there is a max trade value for RGIII where the trade becomes way too risky.

It has nothing to do with waiting for the perfect situation. It's just waiting for a decent enough situation. This year, our option is to make an impossible trade up or to reach for a guy we could get for a second rounder in any other year. I'm waiting for the year we can make an aggressive trade without it being impossible or to get a guy at about the right value as opposed to reaching by a full round because he was the best you can get. There is no reason we couldn't have traded up, for example, for Ponder or Gabbert last year. Even at our shitty draft position. And unlike Tannehill, at least you can justify making that trade.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-02-2012, 07:50 AM
Evan Silva ‏ @evansilva Close
Based on Combine report from @greggrosenthal, sounds like #Rams will go hard after Eric Wright if Finnegan is not on the market.





Eh...if we are going to lose Carr...too bad we can't figure out a way to tag him and include him in a package deal for the Rams #2...

jd1020
03-02-2012, 08:37 AM
Evan Silva ‏ @evansilva Close
Based on Combine report from @greggrosenthal, sounds like #Rams will go hard after Eric Wright if Finnegan is not on the market.





Eh...if we are going to lose Carr...too bad we can't figure out a way to tag him and include him in a package deal for the Rams #2...

Don't you think that if they thought they could afford Carr that there would be rumors that they would make a hard push for him instead of Wright in free agency????

Mr_Tomahawk
03-02-2012, 08:39 AM
Don't you think that if they thought they could afford Carr that there would be rumors that they would make a hard push for him instead of Wright in free agency????

No.

jd1020
03-02-2012, 08:41 AM
Delusional. Got it...

Mr_Tomahawk
03-02-2012, 08:41 AM
Delusional. Got it...

Thanks Nutjob!

tredadda
03-02-2012, 09:58 AM
Evan Silva ‏ @evansilva Close
Based on Combine report from @greggrosenthal, sounds like #Rams will go hard after Eric Wright if Finnegan is not on the market.





Eh...if we are going to lose Carr...too bad we can't figure out a way to tag him and include him in a package deal for the Rams #2...

Why not Carr
2012 1st
2012 2nd
2013 1st

The Rams give us 2012 #2

Pestilence
03-02-2012, 10:00 AM
Re-sign Bowe.

Franchise Carr and trade him to the Cowboys for their #14 overall pick.

Trade the #11 and #14 picks plus our 1st round pick next year to the Rams for the their #2.

Three7s
03-02-2012, 10:01 AM
Re-sign Bowe.

Franchise Carr and trade him to the Cowboys for their #14 overall pick.

Trade the #11 and #14 picks plus our 1st round pick next year to the Rams for the their #2.
Then the Rams can package those picks to move and take Kalil. (unless they're satisfied with Reiff)

Pestilence
03-02-2012, 10:04 AM
Then the Rams can package those picks to move and take Kalil. (unless they're satisfied with Reiff)

Or they can stay put and take Jonathan Martin at #11. Or they can take Michael Floyd if he's there. If the Rams traded down with us....they'd still have options.

Sofa King
03-02-2012, 10:05 AM
Re-sign Bowe.

Franchise Carr and trade him to the Cowboys for their #14 overall pick.

Trade the #11 and #14 picks plus our 1st round pick next year to the Rams for the their #2.

RT @ 11 and Decastro @ 14.

Then we can stop worrying about the damn O line.

Mr. Laz
03-02-2012, 10:14 AM
either way, i hope we get something for carr.

Chiefnj2
03-02-2012, 10:20 AM
The Chiefs had money available this year and have not been cheap with JC, Hali, DJ or Flowers.

It would seem unlikely that they couldn't have come to an agreement by now with Carr or Bowe and then tagged the other player if they really wanted to.

I really hope its because they are feeling out the Rams on a trade.

Setsuna
03-02-2012, 10:21 AM
either way, i hope we get something for carr.

You won't.*








*It's annoying when someone stomps on your optimism doesn't it?

Mr. Laz
03-02-2012, 10:27 AM
The Chiefs had money available this year and have not been cheap with JC, Hali, DJ or Flowers.

It would seem unlikely that they couldn't have come to an agreement by now with Carr or Bowe and then tagged the other player if they really wanted to.

I really hope its because they are feeling out the Rams on a trade.
yea, talked about this before.

1. either bowe and Carr don't want to be in KC or they are asking for crazy money.

2. The Chiefs are keeping options open for salary because of Manning or draft picks because of RGIII

i don't see anything else making sense.

whoman69
03-02-2012, 01:37 PM
Two reasons this doesn't work. Rams don't have cap money to take a player we franchise in trade. Second they don't want what is available to them at #11 and trying to trade back up isn't getting them what they could already have by trading with the Browns or the Skins.

BigChiefFan
03-02-2012, 06:43 PM
Two reasons this doesn't work. Rams don't have cap money to take a player we franchise in trade. Second they don't want what is available to them at #11 and trying to trade back up isn't getting them what they could already have by trading with the Browns or the Skins.

When you trade a franchised player, the team trading for him, usually already has a long-term contract worked out(at least agreed upon) or they wouldn't make the trade in the first place.

kysirsoze
03-02-2012, 06:58 PM
Mel Kiper Jr. ‏ @MelKiperESPN Close
What would it take for Wash to move up from 6 to 2 for RG III? 2nd rd pick this yr and first rd pick next year.

Mel Kiper Jr. ‏ @MelKiperESPN Close
What would it take for Miami to move up from 8 to 2 to get RG III? 2nd & 3rd rd picks this yr plus first rd pick next year.

Mel Kiper Jr. ‏ @MelKiperESPN Close
What would it take for Seattle to move up from 12 to 2 to land RG III? 2nd & 3rd rd picks this yr, plus 1st & 2nd rd picks next year.

*Apparently he doesn't think it is possible for KC or something...?

He just knows we're signing Manning so it isn't worth the tweet.

whoman69
03-02-2012, 07:03 PM
When you trade a franchised player, the team trading for him, usually already has a long-term contract worked out(at least agreed upon) or they wouldn't make the trade in the first place.

If they can't take the cap hit for a franchise, pretty doubtful they have enough cap space to sign someone looking for a franchise type contract. They still would have to have the cap space to take on the contract as its given because they can't sign someone under contract to another team. Still a $8.8 million cap hit.

Rams Fan
03-02-2012, 07:13 PM
Rams don't have cap money to take a player we franchise in trade.

I've been saying this for the past month or two.

The Rams have about $10 mil. in cap space.

If they aren't able to renegotiate with Smith, they'll cut him and take some dead cap this season.

They have to re-sign players like Long, Laurinaitis, etc. after this season.

Chocolate Hog
03-02-2012, 08:12 PM
I've been saying this for the past month or two.

The Rams have about $10 mil. in cap space.

If they aren't able to renegotiate with Smith, they'll cut him and take some dead cap this season.

They have to re-sign players like Long, Laurinaitis, etc. after this season.

So really they have no money to take a franchise player.

whoman69
03-02-2012, 10:33 PM
The Chiefs had money available this year and have not been cheap with JC, Hali, DJ or Flowers.

It would seem unlikely that they couldn't have come to an agreement by now with Carr or Bowe and then tagged the other player if they really wanted to.

I really hope its because they are feeling out the Rams on a trade.

Don't give up the fantasy.

beach tribe
03-02-2012, 11:12 PM
or maybe we get a 1st and 3rd AFTER the draft

maybe they gives us more ammo for a player next year in the draft


you don't tag the best player, you tag the guy who will get you the most value

imo that's Carr

I'm still of the belief that we should trade down this year, get an extra 1st, and prepare for a QB rich draft next season.

BossChief
03-03-2012, 12:04 AM
WE can't stomach another year of Matt Cassel embarrassing us.

Fuck that "next year" bullshit.

It doesn't get better than Peyton Manning or RG3... and Orton as plan b.

This is the NFL, go big or go home...I don't want to hear the cost is too high.

Of course the cost is "high"...as well it should be.

4 years of an elite, blue chip quarterback prospect at cheap money...sign me up for the "whatever it takes" fanclub, please.

Also, the way of the NFL is... a head coach = new quarterback

It would be a bitch move to hire Crennel at his age and have his swan song be wasted with Matt Cassel...even for one year.

The guy has been a "tree" coach for 30 years, sign Manning or draft RG3 and give the guy a chance to win a championship as a head coach before he retires.

Psyko Tek
03-03-2012, 12:10 AM
I stopped at a car dealership this week to ask the price of a 69 fire bird with a 326 last week
yeah can't afford it

aturnis
03-03-2012, 09:22 AM
So really they have no money to take a franchise player.

Actually, if they resigned Long, Lariniatus, and Bradford to extensions this year, they could completely chanhe yhose players salaries for this year, saving them money against the cap.

Cutting Smith would actually cost them money against the cap, they could do that. They could try to restructure, or just let him ride pine.

Also, just b/c a team is in cap hell this year, doesn't mean they will be again next year. A lot of these teams have loads pf dead money on the books. That debt is eventually paid, and will go away.

aturnis
03-03-2012, 09:42 AM
Again, people use this argument because they see Brees or Peyton Manning win with mediocre teams. There is a very small chance RGIII becomes one of these guys. These guys are once in a generation guys. If you're Matt Ryan or maybe even Eli Manning, you can't afford to have too many holes. You have to have a terrific supporting cast. Now, I get that you're not going to have superstars at every position. But you have to have enough playmakers and you can't afford to have huge talent gaps at many positions.


No, we would not. But it's still a sizeable contract that goes on our books and one of many that will quickly strain our cap. At the #2 pick, it would probably be at least $20+ Million guaranteed.


The draft is supposed to be a pipeline for cheap talent. If Albert demands the moon and all the free agent LTs who can replace Albert ask for a shitload of money, you should have a LT on the bench who you can say "I hate to lose Albert, but I feel comfortable enough with the backup. This is why building through free agency never works. Because when you have a major hole on your roster, your ONLY choice is to fill through free agency, where you're usually getting second-rate talent and overpaying them. Kendrick Lewis is a terrific example.


There's no doubt RGIII makes this team significantly better. And his supporting cast is pretty outstanding. But again, the window is probably 2-3 years. After that, we're probably going to see talent drop off significantly as we try to re-sign the players we are currently getting on the cheap today.

Again, people keep talking about how good teams have great QBs. Of course. But those good teams also draft consistently very, very well. And in most cases, those good teams draft so well that they aren't afraid to cut good veteran players when they become too expensive, because they have talent on the roster to backfill their position.

You all act like we will be in cap hell.

You realize the Chiefs initial cap number this year was 61mil right? The only reason that dropped to 37mil, was b/c players earned more than 24mil in escalators that pay out this season. Between those escalators not counting against the cap next year, and more guaranteed money being paid out this year, the Chiefs actually won't be in cap hell at all.

Seriously, the window won't close in 2-3 years. A savvy team can work the books favorably for awhile. Pioli seems to be very savvy thus far.

The Packers, Steelers, Saints, Chargers, Ravens and pretty much any good team has made it work no problem. Until finally, this year the Steelers can't stand to lose Wallace, so they are sacrificing some vets to keep him in town.

BigChiefFan
03-03-2012, 10:02 AM
If they can't take the cap hit for a franchise, pretty doubtful they have enough cap space to sign someone looking for a franchise type contract. They still would have to have the cap space to take on the contract as its given because they can't sign someone under contract to another team. Still a $8.8 million cap hit.You know they can structure a contract anyway they want to. They could have LOW BASE SALARY and give a big bonus, which gets them around that problem. They could also back-load the contract. They could easily make it happen, if the should choose to do so.

jd1020
03-03-2012, 10:04 AM
When you trade a franchised player, the team trading for him, usually already has a long-term contract worked out(at least agreed upon) or they wouldn't make the trade in the first place.

Except that the WR tag is 9.5M and Bowe is probably looking at 9M+ per year.

BigChiefFan
03-03-2012, 10:05 AM
Except that the WR tag is 9.5M and Bowe is probably looking at 9M+ per year.

Again, you work out a LONG-TERM CONTRACT before making that trade-all teams do it that way.

jd1020
03-03-2012, 10:06 AM
Again, you work out a LONG-TERM CONTRACT before making that trade-all teams do it that way.

Again, you don't have a clue what you are talking about. The Rams have around 4.5M in cap space. Thats barely enough to sign their ****ing draft picks.

BigChiefFan
03-03-2012, 10:12 AM
Again, you don't have a clue what you are talking about. The Rams have around 4.5M in cap space. Thats barely enough to sign their ****ing draft picks.

You make me laugh, because it's you that are a pretender. Teams work the contracts before they make a trade-that's the way it works. PERIOD.


...and again, you structure a contract anyway you want, to get around the cap. Signing bonuses are SPREAD OUT over the life of the contract, as far as the salary cap is concerned. Players get the money, upfront, but the bonus is SPREAD out over the life of the contract. Low base salary, plus big signing bonus means low cap implication.

Get back to me when you can actually have a fucking clue.

Mr. Laz
03-03-2012, 10:12 AM
Again, you don't have a clue what you are talking about. The Rams have around 4.5M in cap space. Thats barely enough to sign their ****ing draft picks.
Just stop, teams create cap room ALL THE TIME

shit ... hear about some of them that are 40 million over and suddenly they are signing players again.

jd1020
03-03-2012, 10:13 AM
You make me laugh, because it's you that are a pretender. Teams work the contracts before they make a trade-that's the way it works. PERIOD.


...and again, you structure a contract anyway you want, to get around the cap. Signing bonuses are SPREAD OUT over the life of the contract, as far as the salary cap is concerned. Players get the money, upfront, but the bonus is SPREAD out over the life of the contract. Low base salary, plus big signing bonus means low cap implication.

Get back to me when you can actually have a ****ing clue.

You are fucking retarded beyond belief.

THE RAMS CANT AFFORD BOWE AT ANY FUCKING PRICE!

They have around 4.5M in cap room. They have something like 21 free agents and draft picks to sign.

Get back to me when you get a clue.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 10:16 AM
You all act like we will be in cap hell.

You realize the Chiefs initial cap number this year was 61mil right? The only reason that dropped to 37mil, was b/c players earned more than 24mil in escalators that pay out this season. Between those escalators not counting against the cap next year, and more guaranteed money being paid out this year, the Chiefs actually won't be in cap hell at all.

Seriously, the window won't close in 2-3 years. A savvy team can work the books favorably for awhile. Pioli seems to be very savvy thus far.

The Packers, Steelers, Saints, Chargers, Ravens and pretty much any good team has made it work no problem. Until finally, this year the Steelers can't stand to lose Wallace, so they are sacrificing some vets to keep him in town.

The reason why the Steelers don't care about losing Wallace or Aaron Smith or James Farrior is that they use the draft to find a cheap replacement for them. All those teams, except for the Chargers (who aren't exactly a model we should be following) have built their teams through years and years and years of consistently good drafting.

Which goes back to the original point. The best teams in the league have a franchise QB AND they've built their team through consistently good drafting.

BigChiefFan
03-03-2012, 10:17 AM
You are ****ing retarded beyond belief.

THE RAMS CANT AFFORD BOWE AT ANY ****ING PRICE!

They have around 4.5M in cap room. They have something like 21 free agents and draft picks to sign.

Get back to me when you get a clue.

Whatever, kid. I tried to explain it to you, but I can't get through to you, if you refuse to listen.

You keep on thinking, they can't even sign their rookies and I'll keep dealing with the reality of the situation.

There is a rookie pool that the money is already alloted for rookies to be signed, dingy.

Also, I already explained the way around the cap and you refused to even acknowledge it, but came back with insults-yeah you showed me. Hah.

jd1020
03-03-2012, 10:18 AM
Whatever, kid. I tried to explain it to you, but I can't get through to you, if you refuse to listen.

I don't listen because, apparently, you must think Bowe is going to make the league minimum.

BigChiefFan
03-03-2012, 10:22 AM
I don't listen because, apparently, you must think Bowe is going to make the league minimum.:banghead:

Jesus Christ.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 10:24 AM
Actually, if they resigned Long, Lariniatus, and Bradford to extensions this year, they could completely chanhe yhose players salaries for this year, saving them money against the cap.

Cutting Smith would actually cost them money against the cap, they could do that. They could try to restructure, or just let him ride pine.

Also, just b/c a team is in cap hell this year, doesn't mean they will be again next year. A lot of these teams have loads pf dead money on the books. That debt is eventually paid, and will go away.

You don't see the ridiculousness of suggesting that a team that has a young QB and a brand new coach starts mortgaging their entire future to win in a 3-year window? Signing Long, Laurinaitis, and Bradford to extensions does save money against the cap today, if you want it to. But all you'd be doing is buying on credit. It's going to hit your cap hard in 2-3 years.

The situation you're laying out is one that desperate teams do when they think they are very close to winning a Super Bowl. It's not something a team does when they're trying to build something new.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 10:26 AM
Simple point:
To justify the wild trade ideas for RGIII, people are now starting to believe that the best way to build a team is through free agency, not the draft.

Maybe and hopefully the Rams truly believe that. My guess is, they're smarter than that.

BigChiefFan
03-03-2012, 10:26 AM
Simple point:
To justify the wild trade ideas for RGIII, people are now starting to believe that the best way to build a team is through free agency, not the draft.

Maybe and hopefully the Rams truly believe that. My guess is, they're smarter than that.

How is getting a rookie in the draft building through FA?

Rams Fan
03-03-2012, 10:48 AM
Whatever, kid. I tried to explain it to you, but I can't get through to you, if you refuse to listen.

You keep on thinking, they can't even sign their rookies and I'll keep dealing with the reality of the situation.

There is a rookie pool that the money is already alloted for rookies to be signed, dingy.

Also, I already explained the way around the cap and you refused to even acknowledge it, but came back with insults-yeah you showed me. Hah.

That isn't his point.

The Rams have a various amount of needs, and they need to worry about keeping their core in place.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 11:04 AM
How is getting a rookie in the draft building through FA?

I'm talking about the people who think the Rams are eager to trade for Bowe, rather than use a blue chip pick to pick up young, cheap talent. And people justifying it by saying... "it makes sense. They have the cap room."

DeezNutz
03-03-2012, 11:08 AM
I'm talking about the people who think the Rams are eager to trade for Bowe, rather than use a blue chip pick to pick up young, cheap talent. And people justifying it by saying... "it makes sense. They have the cap room."

Guaranteed, high-level production at a position of dire need + a first rounder (and more)? This would be a no-brainer from Rams' position.

Fat Elvis
03-03-2012, 11:12 AM
Simple point:
To justify the wild trade ideas for RGIII, people are now starting to believe that the best way to build a team is through free agency, not the draft.

Maybe and hopefully the Rams truly believe that. My guess is, they're smarter than that.

No one has said that the best way to build a team is through free agency. You're the only one who doesn't understand that the draft and free agency COMPLIMENT each other. That is why some folks (me included) believe that it is OK to give up a lot of draft picks for RGIII. We have the core team that was built through the draft; what we are missing now is the franchise QB. We can get one in the draft. We want him. To move up to an elite draft positiion, we will have to give up middling draft picks to do so. To compliment the loss of middling draft picks, we can fill the void with Free Agents. We do that anyway because not all draft picks pan out. You just can't seem to get that through no matter how many times people tell you otherwise.

Buckweath
03-03-2012, 11:19 AM
No one has said that the best way to build a team is through free agency. You're the only one who doesn't understand that the draft and free agency COMPLIMENT each other. That is why some folks (me included) believe that it is OK to give up a lot of draft picks for RGIII. We have the core team that was built through the draft; what we are missing now is the franchise QB. We can get one in the draft. We want him. To move up to an elite draft positiion, we will have to give up middling draft picks to do so. To compliment the loss of middling draft picks, we can fill the void with Free Agents. We do that anyway because not all draft picks pan out. You just can't seem to get that through no matter how many times people tell you otherwise.

I agree with your stance but it`s very unlikely the Chiefs can outbid the Browns, the Redskins and the Dolphins. Chiefs fans need to forget about Griffin despite how great he could be for this franchise.

Rams Fan
03-03-2012, 11:30 AM
Guaranteed, high-level production at a position of dire need + a first rounder (and more)? This would be a no-brainer from Rams' position.

They can re-sign Lloyd and draft Kalil or whoever if they wanted to sign or trade for a FA WR.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 11:36 AM
No one has said that the best way to build a team is through free agency. You're the only one who doesn't understand that the draft and free agency COMPLIMENT each other. That is why some folks (me included) believe that it is OK to give up a lot of draft picks for RGIII. We have the core team that was built through the draft; what we are missing now is the franchise QB. We can get one in the draft. We want him. To move up to an elite draft positiion, we will have to give up middling draft picks to do so. To compliment the loss of middling draft picks, we can fill the void with Free Agents. We do that anyway because not all draft picks pan out. You just can't seem to get that through no matter how many times people tell you otherwise.

We are not talking about giving up "middling" draft picks. We are talking about possibly giving away 6 or 7 marquee picks. Any good drafting team will turn that into 3 or 4 quality starters. Possibly 1 or 2 or 3 superstars. And those 3 or 4 quality starters combined will cost LESS than the price of one Dwayne Bowe.

Branden Albert makes about $2.5M today. To re-sign him, you'll probably need to pay $7-8M per year. That's just one player. You seem to gloss over the pretty important detail that our "core" of drafted players are going to become second contract players in the next 2-3 years.

You are not talking about a complementary strategy. A complementary strategy is building through the draft, and using free agency to fill in gaps. You are talking about for 2 years, completely replacing our draft for free agency. That is NEVER a winning equation. The best teams in the NFL build through consistently good drafting. Period.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 11:38 AM
Guaranteed, high-level production at a position of dire need + a first rounder (and more)? This would be a no-brainer from Rams' position.

Why is that a no-brainer? How many teams trade away the chance to draft a top 3 rookie for an expensive veteran? If it's such a no-brainer, then why is there practically no precedence for this happening?

whoman69
03-03-2012, 12:48 PM
Guaranteed, high-level production at a position of dire need + a first rounder (and more)? This would be a no-brainer from Rams' position.

except the Rams don't have the cap room for it.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-03-2012, 12:48 PM
They can re-sign Lloyd and draft Kalil or whoever if they wanted to sign or trade for a FA WR.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/03/rams-wont-be-tagging-brandon-lloyd/

Rams won’t be tagging Brandon Lloyd

Posted by Evan Silva on March 3, 2012, 2:32 PM EST

AP
Ten players have already received franchise tags around the NFL, and as many as 25 are expected by Monday’s deadline for tags to be assigned.

Rams free agent receiver Brandon Lloyd won’t be getting one.

Jim Thomas of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch confirmed Saturday that the Rams “haven’t used their [tag]” on Lloyd and “aren’t expected to do so” ahead of March 5.

While Rams COO Kevin Demoff recently told TurfShowTimes.com that the club had “initial discussions” with Lloyd’s representatives at the NFL Scouting Combine, there has been no sign of an impending contract agreement and Lloyd seems much more likely to enter free agency.

As a top four or five available receiver, Lloyd won’t struggle to generate immediate interest on the open market.

Fat Elvis
03-03-2012, 01:05 PM
We are not talking about giving up "middling" draft picks. We are talking about possibly giving away 6 or 7 marquee picks. Any good drafting team will turn that into 3 or 4 quality starters. Possibly 1 or 2 or 3 superstars. And those 3 or 4 quality starters combined will cost LESS than the price of one Dwayne Bowe.

Branden Albert makes about $2.5M today. To re-sign him, you'll probably need to pay $7-8M per year. That's just one player. You seem to gloss over the pretty important detail that our "core" of drafted players are going to become second contract players in the next 2-3 years.

You are not talking about a complementary strategy. A complementary strategy is building through the draft, and using free agency to fill in gaps. You are talking about for 2 years, completely replacing our draft for free agency. That is NEVER a winning equation. The best teams in the NFL build through consistently good drafting. Period.

Sorry, but the #11 pick is a "middling" pick. Next year, given that we have a franchise QB (finally) the middling picks are more likely "meh" picks in the mid to late 20s range.

You talk about a "winning equation" yet you consistently refuse to accept facts. As pointed out time and time again, during Peyton Manning's LIFETIME the Chiefs have, on average, a 7-9 record employing the very strategy you espouse. My math may be fuzzy, but 7-9 is NOT A WINNING RECORD. It would be worse if not for the fact that the average was skewed by the years when we TRADED AWAY DRAFT PICKS for the services of Joe Montana and Trent Green.

We are not giving up marquee picks, and the probability of selecting 1-3 superstars where we pick is rather remote. You're full of crap, everyone knows it.

DeezNutz
03-03-2012, 01:26 PM
Why is that a no-brainer? How many teams trade away the chance to draft a top 3 rookie for an expensive veteran? If it's such a no-brainer, then why is there practically no precedence for this happening?

Because this "expensive veteran" is still a very young player, entering the prime of his career. The Rams already have a player whom the organization believes is a franchise QB (and who should be ready to take a step forward), and most teams at the top of the draft need a QB. Not STL, though.

Bowe would answer an immediate, glaring need. No speculation/worry about what a player like Blackmon "may become." Bowe is a #1 WR, and young players in this category aren't often available.

Finally, moving back to #11 would still put the Rams in great position to address the OL, or to draft someone like Richardson to replace an aging and overused Jackson.

Simply put, it's a no-brainer because of a lot of unusual circumstances.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 03:09 PM
Sorry, but the #11 pick is a "middling" pick. Next year, given that we have a franchise QB (finally) the middling picks are more likely "meh" picks in the mid to late 20s range.

You talk about a "winning equation" yet you consistently refuse to accept facts. As pointed out time and time again, during Peyton Manning's LIFETIME the Chiefs have, on average, a 7-9 record employing the very strategy you espouse. My math may be fuzzy, but 7-9 is NOT A WINNING RECORD. It would be worse if not for the fact that the average was skewed by the years when we TRADED AWAY DRAFT PICKS for the services of Joe Montana and Trent Green.

We are not giving up marquee picks, and the probability of selecting 1-3 superstars where we pick is rather remote. You're full of crap, everyone knows it.

The fact that are picks are "middling" just goes to justify how much more trade value we're going to have to give up. As I said before, I highly doubt the Rams are sticking to a specific trade chart. If we're talking about 2013 picks, I'm sure they're well aware that we're probably going to be at least 10 picks lower than the Browns next year.

"Superstars" may be the wrong word to use. But it's definitely very distinctly possible that we pick up 1-3 (probably closer to 3) players who play well enough that, if offered in the open market, they would be paid up to 4 times more than they get in their rookie contract. Probably very likely that more than half of those end up being contributors, given that those picks are mostly going to be first day picks.

As I've said before, if Cle or Wash are at all in the mix, we're probably going to have to give up AT LEAST 3 years worth of first day picks. My guess is it starts with 3 firsts and has a few seconds and thirds sprinkled in.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 03:15 PM
Because this "expensive veteran" is still a very young player, entering the prime of his career. The Rams already have a player whom the organization believes is a franchise QB (and who should be ready to take a step forward), and most teams at the top of the draft need a QB. Not STL, though.

Bowe would answer an immediate, glaring need. No speculation/worry about what a player like Blackmon "may become." Bowe is a #1 WR, and young players in this category aren't often available.

Finally, moving back to #11 would still put the Rams in great position to address the OL, or to draft someone like Richardson to replace an aging and overused Jackson.

Simply put, it's a no-brainer because of a lot of unusual circumstances.

Let's put this simply. You are making the argument that teams would rather sign an expensive free agent than use a top 5 pick. You are saying that it is a no-brainer to use free agency over the draft. That's a decision a team who is a few players away from being dominant does. That's not a decision a team like the Rams make in this stage of their team build.

Draft > Free agency. Unless you're the Steelers or Packers, etc....
Their #1 priority is to clean up their cap so they can compete for 5 years. It is NOT to add even more weight to their current cap so that their cap becomes maxed out in 3 years.

Pasta Giant Meatball
03-03-2012, 03:18 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/03/rams-wont-be-tagging-brandon-lloyd/

Rams won’t be tagging Brandon Lloyd

Posted by Evan Silva on March 3, 2012, 2:32 PM EST

AP
Ten players have already received franchise tags around the NFL, and as many as 25 are expected by Monday’s deadline for tags to be assigned.

Rams free agent receiver Brandon Lloyd won’t be getting one.

Jim Thomas of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch confirmed Saturday that the Rams “haven’t used their [tag]” on Lloyd and “aren’t expected to do so” ahead of March 5.

While Rams COO Kevin Demoff recently told TurfShowTimes.com that the club had “initial discussions” with Lloyd’s representatives at the NFL Scouting Combine, there has been no sign of an impending contract agreement and Lloyd seems much more likely to enter free agency.

As a top four or five available receiver, Lloyd won’t struggle to generate immediate interest on the open market.

Pats will snatch him up the second he hits free agency.

aturnis
03-03-2012, 10:42 PM
The reason why the Steelers don't care about losing Wallace or Aaron Smith or James Farrior is that they use the draft to find a cheap replacement for them. All those teams, except for the Chargers (who aren't exactly a model we should be following) have built their teams through years and years and years of consistently good drafting.

Which goes back to the original point. The best teams in the league have a franchise QB AND they've built their team through consistently good drafting.

You're wrong. The Steelers have always kept their talent around as long as possible. Very seldom do they ever lose one of their core guys. A lot of that is b/c those players want to be there and sign reasonable contracts without getting too greedy.

Also, they care VERY MUCH about losing Wallace. That is why they are cutting guys who are past their prime. I.E. Farrior, Ward, and Smith. They aren't losing anyone important to them now...

aturnis
03-03-2012, 10:50 PM
except the Rams don't have the cap room for it.

GO join jdphuqtard in the corner.

Rams Fan
03-03-2012, 10:55 PM
GO join jdphuqtard in the corner.

They don't have the cap room. They can add potentially one good FA.

aturnis
03-03-2012, 11:02 PM
Let's put this simply. You are making the argument that teams would rather sign an expensive free agent than use a top 5 pick. You are saying that it is a no-brainer to use free agency over the draft. That's a decision a team who is a few players away from being dominant does. That's not a decision a team like the Rams make in this stage of their team build.

Draft > Free agency. Unless you're the Steelers or Packers, etc....
Their #1 priority is to clean up their cap so they can compete for 5 years. It is NOT to add even more weight to their current cap so that their cap becomes maxed out in 3 years.

No, you seem confused. A team with a franchise QB builds to start winning now. They don't waste 4-5 yrs. of their franchise QB's career when he's already wasted the first couple in order to build for a future that does not involve him.

This 2-3 year window bullshit of yours is ridiculous. Teams press the cap every year, and the next season, they find a way to shed dead weight, and continue signing/drafting/developing players. As long as they don't go full retard(Raiders), they'll be fine.

By the way, the Jets are in a worse cap situation than the Rams, but they're still being seriously talked about as a landing spot for Manning, who could cost twice what Bowe will...

aturnis
03-03-2012, 11:09 PM
They don't have the cap room. They can add potentially one good FA.

Duh. I've already addressed this. There are AT LEAST 3 contracts they can restructure to lessen their cap number. Also, guys who CAN go and save them cap space.

Also, have you looked at their FA list? They might want to resign 2.

Add the haul of draft pick they will get who will be plenty cheap and they aren't in as bad of shape as that number you see now says they are.

Do you know how much of that cash is dead money? If it's a significant amount, they could be well under the cap as soon as next offseason.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 11:11 PM
You're wrong. The Steelers have always kept their talent around as long as possible. Very seldom do they ever lose one of their core guys. A lot of that is b/c those players want to be there and sign reasonable contracts without getting too greedy.

Also, they care VERY MUCH about losing Wallace. That is why they are cutting guys who are past their prime. I.E. Farrior, Ward, and Smith. They aren't losing anyone important to them now...

The Steelers draft consistently well. Every year. How am I wrong on that?

Why do you think they get to keep their core guys? Because they have core draft guys that can come in and step in when the veterans leave. The Chargers and Colts have tried the same strategy. The difference is, those teams didn't do very well drafting the past few years and the supporting cast has been increasingly worse.

You have to draft well in order to be successful in this league. Why is this such a hard concept to grasp? The teams you keep talking about have some expensive free agents, but they also have a tremendous draft track record.

chiefzilla1501
03-03-2012, 11:12 PM
Duh. I've already addressed this. There are AT LEAST 3 contracts they can restructure to lessen their cap number. Also, guys who CAN go and save them cap space.

Also, have you looked at their FA list? They might want to resign 2.

Add the haul of draft pick they will get who will be plenty cheap and they aren't in as bad of shape as that number you see now says they are.

Do you know how much of that cash is dead money? If it's a significant amount, they could be well under the cap as soon as next offseason.

If there was anybody who knows about the Rams, it's Starbucks Fan. You're preaching to the wrong person.

Direckshun
03-03-2012, 11:18 PM
Who in the history of the NFL has traded away an entire draft's worth of value for a QB?

Why do you think that is?

Do you think it's because you're so fucking ahead of the curve, that the NFL has yet to catch up with you?

Or do you think it's a stupid idea.

aturnis
03-03-2012, 11:32 PM
The Steelers draft consistently well. Every year. How am I wrong on that?

Why do you think they get to keep their core guys? Because they have core draft guys that can come in and step in when the veterans leave. The Chargers and Colts have tried the same strategy. The difference is, those teams didn't do very well drafting the past few years and the supporting cast has been increasingly worse.

You have to draft well in order to be successful in this league. Why is this such a hard concept to grasp? The teams you keep talking about have some expensive free agents, but they also have a tremendous draft track record.

It's not hard to grasp and I never said you were wrong about the Steelers drafting well. Things is, their defense is not young, at all. Their star second and third contract players, who make up the majority of their team, cost them just as much as a second or third contract player in free agency. They may get a small hometown discount, b/c they're Pittsburgh, but not that much. To say they're fine b/c they build through the draft is silly. Eventually, your homegrown talent will cost you, especially if it's so good you don't want to lose it. Pittsburgh's window is closing, even though they've built primarily through the draft. Same thing will happen to the Packers, and eventually, the Chiefs. It's the nature of the NFL, the "circle of life" that is the salary cap league. Eventually, you will fall under your own weight and will have to rebuild.

Also, Colts are a VERY bad example. They drafted receivers well and Peyton Manning made the offense tick. They never had a complete team with a solid defense. Keeping Manning receivers and oline around cost them too much. So they couldn't just sign FA help for the defense. The only real hits they've drafted on defense are Freeney and Mathis. The rest is mainly Peyton. If he had been healthy this past year, they would have been just as good of a team as they always have been.

-King-
03-04-2012, 07:27 AM
Who in the history of the NFL has traded away an entire draft's worth of value for a QB?

Why do you think that is?

Do you think it's because you're so fucking ahead of the curve, that the NFL has yet to catch up with you?

Or do you think it's a stupid idea.

This.
Posted via Mobile Device

TheGuardian
03-04-2012, 07:41 AM
This.
Posted via Mobile Device

X2

This board gets chock fucking full of stupid when it comes to drafting a QB. It does.

Give away the entire draft to move up and take one? 100% fucktard idiotic. nonsense.

chiefzilla1501
03-04-2012, 07:51 AM
It's not hard to grasp and I never said you were wrong about the Steelers drafting well. Things is, their defense is not young, at all. Their star second and third contract players, who make up the majority of their team, cost them just as much as a second or third contract player in free agency. They may get a small hometown discount, b/c they're Pittsburgh, but not that much. To say they're fine b/c they build through the draft is silly. Eventually, your homegrown talent will cost you, especially if it's so good you don't want to lose it. Pittsburgh's window is closing, even though they've built primarily through the draft. Same thing will happen to the Packers, and eventually, the Chiefs. It's the nature of the NFL, the "circle of life" that is the salary cap league. Eventually, you will fall under your own weight and will have to rebuild.

Also, Colts are a VERY bad example. They drafted receivers well and Peyton Manning made the offense tick. They never had a complete team with a solid defense. Keeping Manning receivers and oline around cost them too much. So they couldn't just sign FA help for the defense. The only real hits they've drafted on defense are Freeney and Mathis. The rest is mainly Peyton. If he had been healthy this past year, they would have been just as good of a team as they always have been.

The Steelers can afford to cut those players because they draft well every year. The key is to have good bench strength ,that when you have a player who demands too much money, you can let him walk. We've discussed this. The Steelers are going to be fine. That's why the Ravens, Pats, and Steelers are good consistently.

The Colts are a perfect example. And it shows why your concept of building a team is so flawed. You're saying that the Colts haven't been able to surround Manning with talent because they haven't had money to spend in free agency. Duh, this is why you use the draft to round out your roster. Because when your roster gets too expensive, you need good cheap talent to churn regularly. The Colts have been horrendously bad in the draft. Their last good first round pick was in 2003 (9 years ago), when they drafted Dallas Clark. The Colts are basically the Vermeil Chiefs. A great team with a solid core of players, but utter failures in drafting failed to put the team over the top. If they were even "below average" at drafting in the Vermeil era, the Chiefs could have won a Super Bowl. Instead, the team relied on free agency and the team was put in cap hell when Vermeil left.

In the end, we've seen lots of teams go through cap hell quickly, in the way you describe. The problem is, you seem to think only the Raiders do this. They aren't. The Cowboys, Redskins and Jets do too. In the end, free agency only works if you complement it with a very good draft strategy. A good draft allows you to replace expensive players. It gives you bench depth when your good players get injured. It assures your team can compete not just today, but 5 years from today too. It allows you to potentially find a superstar, as opposed to overpaying for players most teams didn't try hard enough to protect (remember, the past few free agency seasons have been horrendous. The only reason good players are hitting the market this year is because the cap is a little lower than owners expected. That should change next year).

Von Dumbass
03-04-2012, 08:00 AM
#Browns are unwilling to trade their No. 22 pick to the Rams at this point, league sources told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

https://twitter.com/#!/MaryKayCabot/status/176307092595023873

KCChiefsFan88
03-04-2012, 08:10 AM
X2

This board gets chock ****ing full of stupid when it comes to drafting a QB. It does.

Give away the entire draft to move up and take one? 100% ****tard idiotic. nonsense.

Apparently there are dumbshits on this message board who fail to grasp how important drafting a franchise caliber QB is.

It is the most valuable commodity in all of sports to be in a position to draft a franchise caliber QB.

aturnis
03-04-2012, 08:17 AM
The Steelers can afford to cut those players because they draft well every year. The key is to have good bench strength ,that when you have a player who demands too much money, you can let him walk. We've discussed this. The Steelers are going to be fine. That's why the Ravens, Pats, and Steelers are good consistently.

The Colts are a perfect example. And it shows why your concept of building a team is so flawed. You're saying that the Colts haven't been able to surround Manning with talent because they haven't had money to spend in free agency. Duh, this is why you use the draft to round out your roster. Because when your roster gets too expensive, you need good cheap talent to churn regularly. The Colts have been horrendously bad in the draft. Their last good first round pick was in 2003 (9 years ago), when they drafted Dallas Clark. The Colts are basically the Vermeil Chiefs. A great team with a solid core of players, but utter failures in drafting failed to put the team over the top. If they were even "below average" at drafting in the Vermeil era, the Chiefs could have won a Super Bowl. Instead, the team relied on free agency and the team was put in cap hell when Vermeil left.

In the end, we've seen lots of teams go through cap hell quickly, in the way you describe. The problem is, you seem to think only the Raiders do this. They aren't. The Cowboys, Redskins and Jets do too. In the end, free agency only works if you complement it with a very good draft strategy. A good draft allows you to replace expensive players. It gives you bench depth when your good players get injured. It assures your team can compete not just today, but 5 years from today too. It allows you to potentially find a superstar, as opposed to overpaying for players most teams didn't try hard enough to protect (remember, the past few free agency seasons have been horrendous. The only reason good players are hitting the market this year is because the cap is a little lower than owners expected. That should change next year).

I completely agree that the draft is the best way to build your team. I'm just arguing that your examples suck. They are majorly flawed.

And now I poked huge holes in your theory that the Colts are great drafters. So to save face, you change your entire argument for them. First they were an example of great drafting and sustained success, now, they're the perfect example of how NOT to build through free agency?

Every team you've mentioned is generally cap strapped, b/c it costs big money to keep your own talent. The wheels will eventually fall off. The only team who can "buck' that trend, is a team with a truly elite QB, the Patriots and the Colts have been the only two to do it I can think of. I wouldn't doubt that Aaron Rodgers and the Packers are able to do the same in a few years.

aturnis
03-04-2012, 08:19 AM
Apparently there are dumbshits on this message board who fail to grasp how important drafting a franchise caliber QB is.

It is the most valuable commodity in all of sports to be in a position to draft a franchise caliber QB.

Not often I find myself agreeing with this mouthbreather...

chiefzilla1501
03-04-2012, 08:20 AM
Apparently there are dumbshits on this message board who fail to grasp how important drafting a franchise caliber QB is.

It is the most valuable commodity in all of sports to be in a position to draft a franchise caliber QB.

Who doesn't get that?

The franchise QB is important.
The draft is important.
Making SMART free agency moves, moreso as a last resort than as your primary tactic, is important

In our obsession for a franchise QB, we've started to act like that's the only piece that's important. Unless you are one of the 5 lucky teams in an entire DECADE who get an elite QB, you have to do the other 2 things very well.

KCChiefsFan88
03-04-2012, 08:27 AM
Who doesn't get that?

The franchise QB is important.
The draft is important.
Making SMART free agency moves, moreso as a last resort than as your primary tactic, is important

In our obsession for a franchise QB, we've started to act like that's the only piece that's important. Unless you are one of the 5 lucky teams in an entire DECADE who get an elite QB, you have to do the other 2 things very well.

Every team since 2003 that has won a Super Bowl has won with a franchise QB.

Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers.

Those are the QB's on the Super Bowl winning teams the past 9 years.

carlos3652
03-04-2012, 08:36 AM
Every team since 2003 that has won a Super Bowl has won with a franchise QB.

Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers.

Those are the QB's on the Super Bowl winning teams the past 9 years.

And only 2 of them have been picked in the top 5 of a draft.

Bewbies
03-04-2012, 08:41 AM
https://twitter.com/#!/MaryKayCabot/status/176307092595023873

The article also says STL wants an Eli type deal, which was 1,3 and 1,5...

chiefzilla1501
03-04-2012, 08:44 AM
Every team since 2003 that has won a Super Bowl has won with a franchise QB.

Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers.

Those are the QB's on the Super Bowl winning teams the past 9 years.

Yes. And guess what. Those are 5 QBs in an entire decade. We can't build our franchise under the lucky chance that we get a once in a generation QB like those guys. We have to assume that no matter how hard we tried, we're probably going to end up with a QB like Matt Ryan. Unfortunately, Luck is probably going to be one of those QBs, and he's unattainable.

And by the way, it could easily be argued that Big Ben and Eli Manning were franchise QBs in a system filled with tremendous players.

chiefzilla1501
03-04-2012, 08:44 AM
The article also says STL wants an Eli type deal, which was 1,3 and 1,5...

If that's the case, then it's a no-brainer. I can't imagine that's even remotely true. They're going to get a lot more than that.

carlos3652
03-04-2012, 08:45 AM
I said this once in another thread about RGIII -

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 continue doing what we are doing, if we make a mistake on the gamble (Matty Ice - lol), 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.

Add Manning to the mix, and I feel we start being competitive now for 3/4 years - get that QB in the first to learn under Manning and continue drafting well, we will be contenders for a very long time.

PS I drink Pioli's (Moorish) long term plan cool aid.