PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft Draft Rumors


locomoulds
04-25-2012, 06:37 AM
Didn't see this posted

http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/bucs/

They say top 5 is shaping up to this:

1) Luck
2) RG3
3)Claiborne
4) Richardson
5)Kuechly

Also, Mark Barron is getting a ton of play. The Chargers and Cowboys are both interested in trading up to get him. The Bills are supposed to be real interested in taking him at 10.

Kalil just might fall to the Chiefs pick! I think that would be a no brainer in my mind.

Inmem58
04-25-2012, 06:48 AM
I'd rather have Tannehill

Hog Farmer
04-25-2012, 06:58 AM
I'd rather have Tannehill

Over Kalil.

You're Dumb !

ForeverChiefs58
04-25-2012, 07:04 AM
Did you hear that one about Michael?
some say he must be gay,
I try to argue but they say if he was straight he wouldn't move that way.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DRte0S2a_dA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Tribal Warfare
04-25-2012, 07:06 AM
and the Rams snag Kalil

htismaqe
04-25-2012, 07:30 AM
And just what are we going to do with Kalil? We have two starting tackles.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 07:38 AM
yeah, so on espn this morning McShay's latest had Claiborne going 3, Keuchly 5, and Floyd 10...he had Gilmore going 9th, I think

but what if Gilmore is there at 11? is he a no brainer pick, or a pass?

Fritz88
04-25-2012, 07:40 AM
I want Keuchly.
Posted via Mobile Device

suds79
04-25-2012, 07:45 AM
I think we should jump Miami in that #8 spot before they snag Tannehill so we can then have all the power and ability to trade back holding him for a kings ransom.

http://jeffcaliguire.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/brilliant.jpg

Frosty
04-25-2012, 07:48 AM
And just what are we going to do with Kalil? We have two starting tackles.

Move Albert to guard.


Duh

Sofa King
04-25-2012, 07:50 AM
LMAO @ this thread.

htismaqe
04-25-2012, 07:53 AM
Move Albert to guard.

Duh

I hope, for your sake, you're being sarcastic.

Frosty
04-25-2012, 08:04 AM
I hope, for your sake, you're being sarcastic.

Completely.

It's been the draft meme for the last three years.

notorious
04-25-2012, 08:07 AM
It will blow my mind if a RB is taken in the top 5.

WV
04-25-2012, 08:19 AM
LMAO @ this thread.

This....

BossChief
04-25-2012, 08:30 AM
yeah, so on espn this morning McShay's latest had Claiborne going 3, Keuchly 5, and Floyd 10...he had Gilmore going 9th, I think

but what if Gilmore is there at 11? is he a no brainer pick, or a pass?

I'd pass.

He is a good corner, but isn't elite.

He is getting pushed up boards because he is "clean"

Hoover
04-25-2012, 09:19 AM
Any WR or RB that is taken in the top 10 is a gift for the Chiefs IMO.

If Kalil drops I'd probably take him, but not over Tannenhill.

We are in the position to take the best player available despite of need.

Rain Man
04-25-2012, 09:21 AM
And just what are we going to do with Kalil? We have two starting tackles.

Bench Cassel, direct snap to Charles, run left. Repeat.

Detoxing
04-25-2012, 09:23 AM
Any WR or RB that is taken in the top 10 is a gift for the Chiefs IMO.

If Kalil drops I'd probably take him, but not over Tannenhill.

We are in the position to take the best player available despite of need.

Kalil?

:facepalm:

tredadda
04-25-2012, 10:11 AM
And just what are we going to do with Kalil? We have two starting tackles.

Although Albert is good, Kalil is a significant upgrade over him. If we have a chance at Kalil, we do it and then we try to trade Albert (who is due for an extension) for picks that we might be able to bundle for an additional 1st next year which we use to get our QBOTF.

BigMeatballDave
04-25-2012, 10:15 AM
Kalil just might fall to the Chiefs pick! I think that would be a no brainer in my mind.

Kill yourself

Mr. Arrowhead
04-25-2012, 10:19 AM
If Kalil is there at 11, maybe that will entice some teams, so we can trade down.

DJ's left nut
04-25-2012, 10:19 AM
I'd pass.

He is a good corner, but isn't elite.

He is getting pushed up boards because he is "clean"

Yup.

There's not been a single snap in months and even the combine is well in our rearview.

Yet Gilmore's gone from being an early 3rd round pick to no doubt second rounder to possible first to now a potential top 10 guy.

Why? He's the same guy as he was 5 months ago.

He's moving up boards for no reason other than attrition at this point. He's gone from undervalued in the 3rd to wildly overrated as a top 10 pick. If Gilmore's there, you see if anyone wants to deal up for him and if not, you still don't take him. He's a good player, but not a great one.

DJ's left nut
04-25-2012, 10:22 AM
Kalil?

:facepalm:

Elaborate. Kalil is a stud. He's potentially Joe Thomas good. Left Tackle is probably the 2nd most important position in football these days and if Kalil fell all the way to 11, we'd be !@#$ing insane not to grab him.

Although Albert is good, Kalil is a significant upgrade over him. If we have a chance at Kalil, we do it and then we try to trade Albert (who is due for an extension) for picks that we might be able to bundle for an additional 1st next year which we use to get our QBOTF.

Probably not a bad idea. The question then becomes - what team would want to give up a significant pick or 2 for Albert? Most of the teams that are in desperate need of a LT would probably have preferred give up that same pick to move up and take Kalil. Moreoever, any of the teams that were in front of us already had a chance at a LT and passed.

tredadda
04-25-2012, 10:24 AM
Yup.

There's not been a single snap in months and even the combine is well in our rearview.

Yet Gilmore's gone from being an early 3rd round pick to no doubt second rounder to possible first to now a potential top 10 guy.

Why? He's the same guy as he was 5 months ago.

He's moving up boards for no reason other than attrition at this point. He's gone from undervalued in the 3rd to wildly overrated as a top 10 pick. If Gilmore's there, you see if anyone wants to deal up for him and if not, you still don't take him. He's a good player, but not a great one.

Danm this review is similar to someone else, except from going from a third rounder to top 10. But the jist is still the same. To use the same argument that was used for this other guys who's name eludes me at the moment "If attrition were the reason for his rise how come it hasn't happened for all CB's?" "He is rising because of his talent".

tredadda
04-25-2012, 10:27 AM
Elaborate. Kalil is a stud. He's potentially Joe Thomas good. Left Tackle is probably the 2nd most important position in football these days and if Kalil fell all the way to 11, we'd be !@#$ing insane not to grab him.



Probably not a bad idea. The question then becomes - what team would want to give up a significant pick or 2 for Albert? Most of the teams that are in desperate need of a LT would probably have preferred give up that same pick to move up and take Kalil. Moreoever, any of the teams that were in front of us already had a chance at a LT and passed.

Albert is a top tier LT. He is not elite, but he is also not backup material either. To give up picks for our "excess" LT would cost less than moving to #11 this year most likely.

DJ's left nut
04-25-2012, 10:31 AM
Danm this review is similar to someone else, except from going from a third rounder to top 10. But the jist is still the same. To use the same argument that was used for this other guys who's name eludes me at the moment "If attrition were the reason for his rise how come it hasn't happened for all CB's?" "He is rising because of his talent".

Dunno why - but it happens every year.

There's usually one guy that just rockets up draft boards despite the fact that nothing actually changed. Generally speaking, that guy doesn't pan out, at least not in a manner that justifies the draft spot.

If it was his talent - why now? His talent's been on tape for months. His combine figures have been around for a couple months as well. It's not like NFL GMs didn't know who the kid was before - afterall he was still considered a high 3rd rounder and one of the top 75 or so prospects in the draft. There's been plenty of evaluation of him and plenty of scouts have seen him.

The talent hasn't changed at all.

It's hive-mind. One team and a couple of 'anonymous sources' started to chat him up a little bit. And then someone like Mayock starts to sing his praises. Then another team that had him listed as the #4 corner on their board thinks they won't get him if they don't bump him. They start to compare him to Janoris Jenkins or Dre Kirkpatrick and realize that he's not gonna come with the behavioral hijinks that those guys might so he moves him up to #2. That starts to get some circulation in the draft community and suddenly everyone has to move him up or know that they won't have a shot at him.

It only takes a little bit of momentum for it to happen with most of these guys. Ingram was the first major 'bump' player in the draft, then came Fletcher Cox, then Mark Barron, now Gilmore. And to be fair - they're all very good prospects.

But to see them make as massive a leap as they have, anywhere from fifteen to fifty spots in the draft order, is just bizarre to me.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 10:33 AM
albert is a better run blocker than Kalil will ever be...Kalil may eventually be a better pass blocker..but so what

QB is the problem, not LT

BigMeatballDave
04-25-2012, 10:37 AM
albert is a better run blocker than Kalil will ever be...Kalil may eventually be a better pass blocker..but so what

QB is the problem, not LT

Hey. You're going to confuse these fucking morons with facts.

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 10:38 AM
I hope, for your sake, you're being sarcastic.

I am hoping and praying and wishing that we draft Kalil and move Albert to guard, just to watch the furious backpeddling of the angry CPers.

The site would crash from people searching/editing past posts.

BigMeatballDave
04-25-2012, 10:41 AM
I am hoping and praying and wishing that we draft Kalil and move Albert to guard, just to watch the furious backpeddling of the angry CPers.

The site would crash from people searching/editing past posts.

:facepalm:

BigMeatballDave
04-25-2012, 10:42 AM
Elaborate. Kalil is a stud. He's potentially Joe Thomas good. Left Tackle is probably the 2nd most important position in football these days and if Kalil fell all the way to 11, we'd be !@#$ing insane not to grab him.



Probably not a bad idea. The question then becomes - what team would want to give up a significant pick or 2 for Albert? Most of the teams that are in desperate need of a LT would probably have preferred give up that same pick to move up and take Kalil. Moreoever, any of the teams that were in front of us already had a chance at a LT and passed.

Are you forgetting who our QB is?

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 10:44 AM
Albert is a top tier LT. He is not elite, but he is also not backup material either. To give up picks for our "excess" LT would cost less than moving to #11 this year most likely.

It would cost whatever the Chiefs charge. If they could draft Kalil and move Albert to, say...the Vikings or Colts...for a 2013 first round pick, the deal would make sense. I know that seems like a reeeeally low price for a starting caliber left tackle, but keeping the price low might get the deal done.

1. You save a boat load of money on Albert's next contract.
2. I say both teams suck again this year, and are my favorites for the #1 overall pick next year.
3. you might just upgrade the LT position while simultaneously putting yourself in excellent position (with 2 firsts next year) to draft QB Wilson, even if one of your firsts isn't #1 overall.

It's not a fool-proof idea, but it would be something to consider.

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 10:45 AM
:facepalm:

Oh come on, it would be epically hilarious.

Chief Roundup
04-25-2012, 10:46 AM
If Kalil is there at 6 the Rams take him or trade down again.

Would much rather trade out than take Kalil at 11. If we draft him we are cutting ties with Albert. I don't think it would be wise at all to try and move Albert anywhere other than the bench, a trade would be nice. It would merely be a 1 year move to put him at guard and move Hudson to center. Then Albert won't be back and we can either get another guard or a center.

DJ's left nut
04-25-2012, 10:51 AM
albert is a better run blocker than Kalil will ever be...Kalil may eventually be a better pass blocker..but so what

QB is the problem, not LT

Says who?

Kalil will be an excellent run blocker. And besides - it's your LT; isn't pass-blocking paramount?

Kalil will be a better pass-blocker than Albert on day 1, IMO. I think you're really understating Kalil's ability here. If USC hadn't been declared poll/bowl ineligible, they'd have spent more time on the national radar this year and more people would understand how good this guy is.

He really does have Joe Thomas potential. And yeah, QB is certainly the problem - but what's your point? If Kalil's sitting there at 11 it will be because Tannehill went already - so why in the world do you continue to bang the QB drum?

DJ's left nut
04-25-2012, 10:52 AM
Hey. You're going to confuse these fucking morons with facts.

Because you've been a fountain of them...

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 10:54 AM
Says who?

Kalil will be an excellent run blocker. And besides - it's your LT; isn't pass-blocking paramount?

Kalil will be a better pass-blocker than Albert on day 1, IMO. I think you're really understating Kalil's ability here. If USC hadn't been declared poll/bowl ineligible, they'd have spent more time on the national radar this year and more people would understand how good this guy is.

He really does have Joe Thomas potential. And yeah, QB is certainly the problem - but what's your point? If Kalil's sitting there at 11 it will be because Tannehill went already - so why in the world do you continue to bang the QB drum?

i haven't seen a report that says he is a dominant run blocker, and their offense wasn't geared for it anyways...

i have no fucking idea what people think Albert can't do...he was damn good last year with shitty QBs and shitty RBs...

people have wanted to get rid of him since the minute he arrived, it's jsut fucking wierd...he's good and good enough

Mr. Arrowhead
04-25-2012, 10:55 AM
Albert > Kalil

Direckshun
04-25-2012, 10:56 AM
If Kalil is available, you take him.

We're talking about a potentially elite LT.

There's no other player on the board at 11 that can benefit this team as much as Kalil.

Although, I believe we'd start Kalil at LG for the season, then slide him over once Albert departs.

Count Zarth
04-25-2012, 10:57 AM
We could always trade Albert.

Direckshun
04-25-2012, 10:57 AM
Says who?

Kalil will be an excellent run blocker. And besides - it's your LT; isn't pass-blocking paramount?

Kalil will be a better pass-blocker than Albert on day 1, IMO. I think you're really understating Kalil's ability here. If USC hadn't been declared poll/bowl ineligible, they'd have spent more time on the national radar this year and more people would understand how good this guy is.

He really does have Joe Thomas potential. And yeah, QB is certainly the problem - but what's your point? If Kalil's sitting there at 11 it will be because Tannehill went already - so why in the world do you continue to bang the QB drum?

Kalil always, always got push in the run game at USC and is a superb athlete.

He needs work with technique but you're totally cooking with gas.

Direckshun
04-25-2012, 10:58 AM
We could always trade Albert.

Ideal scenario.

For a 1st rounder next year?

Thankyousoverymuchplease.

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 11:01 AM
i haven't seen a report that says he is a dominant run blocker, and their offense wasn't geared for it anyways...

i have no ****ing idea what people think Albert can't do...he was damn good last year with shitty QBs and shitty RBs...

people have wanted to get rid of him since the minute he arrived, it's jsut ****ing wierd...he's good and good enough

From scouts.inc -

Run Blocking 1 (elite) Possesses above-average quickness with first step and lateral movements and consistently gets into proper position. Sometimes will initially engage with too high of pad level but quickly resets and regains leverage. A nasty inline blocker that seems to play with more power in the run game than he does in pass protection. Shows ability to move defenders off the ball. Balanced and is rarely seen on the ground. Excels as a second level blocker. Shows good timing and angles coming off of combo blocks and easily engulfs LBs. Above-average athlete pulling in the open field and adjust well to cover up targets.

Brock
04-25-2012, 11:02 AM
Not at all a fan of replacing Albert, but that's an upgrade and a good value.

DJ's left nut
04-25-2012, 11:05 AM
i haven't seen a report that says he is a dominant run blocker, and their offense wasn't geared for it anyways...

i have no fucking idea what people think Albert can't do...he was damn good last year with shitty QBs and shitty RBs...

people have wanted to get rid of him since the minute he arrived, it's jsut fucking wierd...he's good and good enough

I've always been very pro-Albert. I think he's probably right around the 10-12 range as a LT.

He struggles with speed rushers because he his feet are only adequate. Because of that he also has to cheat a little bit to the outside and can get knocked a bit off balance with an inside swim/hump move.

I think he's a good LT. But I think Kalil can be a great one. And frankly, we have no idea what Albert will cost as a FA and if we can afford to keep him. If we end up in a situation with Albert/Bowe like we were in with Carr/Bowe this year and can only tag one of them - we're in a pretty damn tough spot, aren't we?

I'm not eager to get rid of him. I've never been one to slam him either. But in the end if Kalil were to fall, the value there would be otherwordly and you'd have a chance to upgrade on him. Why not?

But here's a true 'fact' for Dave: Kalil will not make it to 11. The Rams would be insane to pass on him. Hell, the Jags would be stupid to do so. And ultimately I think someone would trade up as soon as he starts slipping, if he even starts slipping. I still think the Vikings will take him at 3.

Direckshun
04-25-2012, 11:06 AM
Not at all a fan of replacing Albert, but that's an upgrade and a good value.

Here comes the question of questions, then, because he ain't dropping to 11.

It's more likely he drops to the Rams at 6. The Bills at 10 would want him before we get him, but he won't fall past STL.

If that's the case, do you trade up to get him at 5?

It would almost certainly cost a 2nd.

Coogs
04-25-2012, 11:07 AM
Here comes the question of questions, then, because he ain't dropping to 11.

It's more likely he drops to the Rams at 6. The Bills at 10 would want him before we get him, but he won't fall past STL.

If that's the case, do you trade up to get him at 5?

It would almost certainly cost a 2nd.

No for me. Better be Tannehill if we are moving up.

Brock
04-25-2012, 11:09 AM
Here comes the question of questions, then, because he ain't dropping to 11.

It's more likely he drops to the Rams at 6. The Bills at 10 would want him before we get him, but he won't fall past STL.

If that's the case, do you trade up to get him at 5?

It would almost certainly cost a 2nd.

I wouldn't move up for anything in this draft.

Direckshun
04-25-2012, 11:10 AM
One thing for sure, Cassel is getting the red carpet treatment if we get Kalil.

He's going to have Charles/Hillis/McCluster in the backfield.

Albert/Kalil/Hudson/Asamoah/Winston protecting him with Maneri rotating in.

Bowe, Baldwin, Breaston, Moeaki and Boss to throw to.

Mr. Laz
04-25-2012, 11:18 AM
Albert for the Hall of Fame!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DJ's left nut
04-25-2012, 11:22 AM
I wouldn't move up for anything in this draft.

I might consider moving up for Tannehill because the risk/reward for him is so great.

That said, there's a great deal of value in the 2nd and 3rd rounds this year. I'm not in love with the talent from 10-20, but from 20-50 there are a lot of guys I'd really like to get my hands on and I expect several of them to fall into the 3rd (the Taylors and Chapman's of the world). I'd really consider dealing the 2nd for a couple of 3rd rounders, to tell you the truth; it would depend on how the board falls in the 2nd.

I wouldn't move up for Kalil. I like him, but the TTC is right - Albert is a good tackle. If you have a situation where insane value falls into your lap - take it. But don't go giving up picks for an opportunity to pay retail for him.

ChiefsCountry
04-25-2012, 11:25 AM
I wouldn't move up for anything in this draft.

If the Colts whole organization went on a bender tonight and offered up Luck, I would be all over that. :p

Frosty
04-25-2012, 11:25 AM
One thing for sure, Cassel is getting the red carpet treatment if we get Kalil.

He's going to have Charles/Hillis/McCluster in the backfield.

Albert/Kalil/Hudson/Asamoah/Winston protecting him with Maneri rotating in.

Bowe, Baldwin, Breaston, Moeaki and Boss to throw to.

That sounds vaguely like a Yugo engine in a Corvette. :shake:

Okie_Apparition
04-25-2012, 11:49 AM
RichCimini Rich Cimini
At NFL event today, Trent Richardson said #Jets called him Sunday to verify correct contact info just in case they trade up for him. Hmm.
38 minutes ago

BigMeatballDave
04-25-2012, 11:53 AM
That sounds vaguely like a Yugo engine in a Corvette. :shake:LOL

Chiefnj2
04-25-2012, 12:06 PM
Biggest disappointment, KC's first round draft choice or Nike's NFL uniform redesign?

Bewbies
04-25-2012, 12:08 PM
RichCimini Rich Cimini
At NFL event today, Trent Richardson said #Jets called him Sunday to verify correct contact info just in case they trade up for him. Hmm.
38 minutes ago

Hoping to rape in trade value again?

KevB
04-25-2012, 12:13 PM
Kiper and McShay out with their latest mocks today. Kiper has us taking DeCastro (Kueckly already gone) and McShay has us taking Poe (he has Kueckly to Tampa at 5).

Chiefnj2
04-25-2012, 12:19 PM
Kiper and McShay out with their latest mocks today. Kiper has us taking DeCastro (Kueckly already gone) and McShay has us taking Poe (he has Kueckly to Tampa at 5).

Can you post the top 15 picks for both guys? Thanks.

SNR
04-25-2012, 12:22 PM
I'm actually of the camp that if Kalil is available at #11, we need to take him.

He's PERFECT for the blocking scheme that we run. Albert is good at what he does in this blocking scheme. Kalil would be insane good.

I know people hate the idea of drafting a guy to replace a guy in the same round whose contract has run out. But really, this is no worse than acquiring Brockers to replace Dorsey.

And the upgrade from Albert to Kalil > Dorsey to Brockers. By far.

People don't seem to understand that we're a team with riches at every position (besides QB). If the Chiefs don't take a QB (it appears they're not going to) then whatever guy we draft is going to upset the apple cart in the depth chart we've constructed. But it's always for the better.

And I'd rather upgrade my LT than the space-eating fatass who takes up blockers. That's a FAR more valuable position.

Kalil > Brockers.

DeezNutz
04-25-2012, 12:24 PM
I'm actually of the camp that if Kalil is available at #11, we need to take him.

He's PERFECT for the blocking scheme that we run. Albert is good at what he does in this blocking scheme. Kalil would be insane good.

I know people hate the idea of drafting a guy to replace a guy in the same round whose contract has run out. But really, this is no worse than acquiring Brockers to replace Dorsey.

And the upgrade from Albert to Kalil > Dorsey to Brockers. By far.

People don't seem to understand that we're a team with riches at every position (besides QB). If the Chiefs don't take a QB (it appears they're not going to) then whatever guy we draft is going to upset the apple cart in the depth chart we've constructed. But it's always for the better.

And I'd rather upgrade my LT than the space-eating fatass who takes up blockers. That's a FAR more valuable position.

Kalil > Brockers.

A lot of words to say "True Fan"...

Yeah, I agree, though. No way someone could bitch about taking Kalil yet justify DeCastro.

Fire Me Boy!
04-25-2012, 12:24 PM
Anyone other than me think we should put Barry Richardson at LT and just let him get Cassel killed?

Direckshun
04-25-2012, 12:25 PM
I'm actually of the camp that if Kalil is available at #11, we need to take him.

He's PERFECT for the blocking scheme that we run. Albert is good at what he does in this blocking scheme. Kalil would be insane good.

I know people hate the idea of drafting a guy to replace a guy in the same round whose contract has run out. But really, this is no worse than acquiring Brockers to replace Dorsey.

And the upgrade from Albert to Kalil > Dorsey to Brockers. By far.

People don't seem to understand that we're a team with riches at every position (besides QB). If the Chiefs don't take a QB (it appears they're not going to) then whatever guy we draft is going to upset the apple cart in the depth chart we've constructed. But it's always for the better.

And I'd rather upgrade my LT than the space-eating fatass who takes up blockers. That's a FAR more valuable position.

Kalil > Brockers.

It's not happening unless you're willing to sacrifice a 2nd to go get him.

whoman69
04-25-2012, 12:29 PM
This is what happens with the needy 24 hour instant news cycle. Sounds like everyone is running with the least rumor no matter how unfounded. The GMs must be laughing for all the misinformation that is out there.

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 12:29 PM
Can you post the top 15 picks for both guys? Thanks.

KIPER:

1.Luck
2. RG3
3. Claiborne
4. Richardson
5. Kalil
6. Blackmon
7. Cox
8. Tannehill
9. Kuechly
10. Floyd
11. DeCastro
12. Jones
13. Ingram
14. Barron
15. Gilmore

MCSHAY:

1. Luck
2. RG3
3. Claiborne
4. Richardson
5. Kuechly
6. Kalil
7. Blackmon
8. Tannehill
9. Gilmore
10. Floyd
11. Poe
12. Jones
13. Reiff
14. Barron
15. Cox

BigMeatballDave
04-25-2012, 12:29 PM
A lot of words to say "True Fan"...

Yeah, I agree, though. No way someone could bitch about taking Kalil yet justify DeCastro.

I could. Lilja sucks and Albert doesnt.

That said, I dont care what they do as long as they dont give up picks for it.

Though I'm not against moving up for Tannehill now. I dont care, I just was Cassel gone.

themanwithnoname
04-25-2012, 12:33 PM
First, been lurking for a while here so, yeah, first post, blah, blah, blah.

Here comes the question of questions, then, because he ain't dropping to 11.

It's more likely he drops to the Rams at 6. The Bills at 10 would want him before we get him, but he won't fall past STL.

If that's the case, do you trade up to get him at 5?

It would almost certainly cost a 2nd.

No. Trading up for a LT when you don't have a pressing need would be a bad idea. Even if they're Joe Thomas/Jake Long. I mean, look at how that turned out, they've played as expected but the teams still have not gotten better.

I do not think we'd get a first round pick out of trading Albert either. Teams will throw the "he's a guard" in Pioli's face. Albert will make bank regardless so it doesn't matter too much to him what teams want to call him, but I don't see teams giving up a first for him. If he has a monster year this year, then maybe as a RFA.

Pasta Giant Meatball
04-25-2012, 12:39 PM
Kuechly at 5 LMAO

DJ's left nut
04-25-2012, 12:40 PM
Kuechly at 5 LMAO

It's as though nobody learned anything from Aaron Curry.

Kuechly is essentially the same guy. I don't get it.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 12:45 PM
It's as though nobody learned anything from Aaron Curry.

Kuechly is essentially the same guy. I don't get it.

seriously...you better be Ware-level to justify that high a pick..and unless you're patrick willis, you better be a damn pass rusher

kueuchly higher than DJ, Willis, urlacher, etc...?

themanwithnoname
04-25-2012, 12:52 PM
I could. Lilja sucks and Albert doesnt.

That said, I dont care what they do as long as they dont give up picks for it.

Though I'm not against moving up for Tannehill now. I dont care, I just was Cassel gone.

I agree, Lilja is in need of an upgrade much more than Albert is.

Also, while I haven't been paying that much attention to Kalil, but I don't think I've heard anything close to the praise for him that I have seen for DeCastro. The latter seems to be getting the "once in a generation" type of praise. I'm not saying Kalil is bad, he seems to be worthy of the top tackle and I wouldn't be against him at 11 even, but DeCastro is a unique prospect.

I'm not much of a fan of trading up for anyone this year (well beyond Luck/Griffin, but they're obviously not possible). There's a bunch of players I would be ok with at 11:

Tannehill
Richardson
Barron
DeCastro
Brockers
Kalil
Kuechly

There's some others but I can't recall them of the top of my head. I don't think I'd trade up for any of them unless it was some ridiculously low amount or if we could somehow package Cassel in a trade, or other crazy scenario that would be in our favor (something like trading Dorsey and getting a late first or early second round pick or two thirds or something).

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 12:53 PM
seriously...you better be Ware-level to justify that high a pick..and unless you're patrick willis, you better be a damn pass rusher

kueuchly higher than DJ, Willis, urlacher, etc...?

Just to be fair, Kuechly is, to the inch and pound, the same size as DJ at the combine, and he was faster in all drills except 40, with a higher bench, higher vertical, longer broad jump. He has better instincts and better play recognition, with better on-field production than DJ did coming out of college.

Kuechly is 100% the total package at middle linebacker, and on paper yeah, you draft him over any of those guys.

Please note, that says ON PAPER you DRAFT. Obviously Willis is a god among ants. Some guys outplay their measurable potential, and Willis certainly has. Hindsight 20/20 and all that. Willis was slower in the 3 cone and 20 yard shuttle, with less bench reps than Kuechly. He also had less on-field production and was the same weight. So, no, I don't think you'd be hard-pressed to find teams that would consider drafting Kuechly over Willis if both came out this year.

Kuechly is one of a handful of players in this draft that are, without question, the best at their position.

luck, kalil, decastro, claiborne, kuechly, and richardson. maybe barron. Outside of that, it's generally a toss-up between at least two guys.

(No, I don't say Blackmon is clearly better than Floyd. Not at all.)

Pitt Gorilla
04-25-2012, 12:55 PM
You take the best player available at 11. Kalil? Take him. Tannehill? Take him. Blackmon? Take him.

Get the best players and everything else will work out.

Chiefnj2
04-25-2012, 12:56 PM
You take the best player available at 11. Kalil? Take him. Tannehill? Take him. Blackmon? Take him.

Get the best players and everything else will work out.

Who are your top 11?

Jerm
04-25-2012, 12:58 PM
Mayock has us taking Barron at #11...two safeties in 3 years? Can't see Pioli doing that....

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 12:58 PM
Yup.

There's not been a single snap in months and even the combine is well in our rearview.

Yet Gilmore's gone from being an early 3rd round pick to no doubt second rounder to possible first to now a potential top 10 guy.

Why? He's the same guy as he was 5 months ago.

He's moving up boards for no reason other than attrition at this point. He's gone from undervalued in the 3rd to wildly overrated as a top 10 pick. If Gilmore's there, you see if anyone wants to deal up for him and if not, you still don't take him. He's a good player, but not a great one.Quick troll edit:Yup.

There's not been a single snap in months and even the combine is well in our rearview.

Yet Tannehill's gone from being an early 3rd round pick to no doubt second rounder to possible first to now a potential top 10 guy.

Why? He's the same guy as he was 5 months ago.

He's moving up boards for no reason other than attrition at this point. He's gone from undervalued in the 3rd to wildly overrated as a top 10 pick. If Tannehil's there, you see if anyone wants to deal up for him and if not, you still don't take him. He's a good player, but not a great one.

Pitt Gorilla
04-25-2012, 12:59 PM
Who are your top 11?I honestly don't know. I LOVE the draft and will watch most every minute of it, but I'm not sure I'm qualified to rank players. Luck & RG3 are clearly the best. After that, I'm not sure. I really like Kalil, Blackmon, DeCastro, and Richardson. Outside of those, I really don't know.

Regarding QBs, I really liked Weeden and Osweiler as college QBs, but I have no idea how that translates to the pros.

Edit: Yesterday was the first time I (believe I) heard of Kuechly. I don't think I've seen him play. Clearly, I'm not a draft guru.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 01:00 PM
Just to be fair, Kuechly is, to the inch and pound, the same size as DJ at the combine, and he was faster in all drills except 40, with a higher bench, higher vertical, longer broad jump. He has better instincts and better play recognition, with better on-field production than DJ did coming out of college.

Kuechly is 100% the total package at middle linebacker, and on paper yeah, you draft him over any of those guys.

Please note, that says ON PAPER you DRAFT. Obviously Willis is a god among ants. Some guys outplay their measurable potential, and Willis certainly has. Hindsight 20/20 and all that. Willis was slower in the 3 cone and 20 yard shuttle, with less bench reps than Kuechly. He also had less on-field production and was the same weight. So, no, I don't think you'd be hard-pressed to find teams that would consider drafting Kuechly over Willis if both came out this year.

Kuechly is one of a handful of players in this draft that are, without question, the best at their position.

luck, kalil, decastro, claiborne, kuechly, and richardson. maybe barron. Outside of that, it's generally a toss-up between at least two guys.

(No, I don't say Blackmon is clearly better than Floyd. Not at all.)


he's a finesse LB that doesn't create turnovers....no thanks

DJ had 19 tackles for a loss and 9 forced fumbles his senior year

you better be creating turnovers or racking up sacks if I'm drafting you at 5...and all that hot air sounds exactly like the crap spewed about Jesus Curry

buddha
04-25-2012, 01:02 PM
Just to be fair, Kuechly is, to the inch and pound, the same size as DJ at the combine, and he was faster in all drills except 40, with a higher bench, higher vertical, longer broad jump. He has better instincts and better play recognition, with better on-field production than DJ did coming out of college.

Kuechly is 100% the total package at middle linebacker, and on paper yeah, you draft him over any of those guys.

Please note, that says ON PAPER you DRAFT. Obviously Willis is a god among ants. Some guys outplay their measurable potential, and Willis certainly has. Hindsight 20/20 and all that. Willis was slower in the 3 cone and 20 yard shuttle, with less bench reps than Kuechly. He also had less on-field production and was the same weight. So, no, I don't think you'd be hard-pressed to find teams that would consider drafting Kuechly over Willis if both came out this year.

Kuechly is one of a handful of players in this draft that are, without question, the best at their position.

luck, kalil, decastro, claiborne, kuechly, and richardson. maybe barron. Outside of that, it's generally a toss-up between at least two guys.

(No, I don't say Blackmon is clearly better than Floyd. Not at all.)

Kuechly is NOT 100% the total package at Mike. Nooooooo!

He was productive, but unspectacular. Frankly, I don't want to wait several years, like we did with DJ, to have something good at LB. DJ is anything but a mauling hitter, but he is Dick Butkus compared to Kuechly.

Stop relying on the damn combine numbers and watch his film. Check out how many times he catches tackles as opposed to filling holes and making tackles for loses. Shitty tackles get counted the same as, "fill the hole and knock the jock into the third row" hits.

Think about what Curry has become in the NFL and ask yourself if that's what you REALLY want this year with the 11th pick. I sure as hell don't.

Epic Fail 007
04-25-2012, 01:12 PM
I'd rather have Tannehill

me too

Epic Fail 007
04-25-2012, 01:14 PM
Over Kalil.

You're Dumb !

I think your the dump one

Hoover
04-25-2012, 01:16 PM
Didn't DJ fall to us the year we drafted him because he ran around blockers and teams questioned his toughness?

OnTheWarpath58
04-25-2012, 01:18 PM
Quick troll edit:

Is it still considered trolling when everything you wrote is true?

Epic Fail 007
04-25-2012, 01:19 PM
Are you forgetting who our QB is?

Would you and others like you stfu?! Your just stupid and clueless.

SNR
04-25-2012, 01:21 PM
Is it still considered trolling when everything you wrote is true?Tannehill's been projected in the top 10 for almost two months now. Gilmore has been considered in that spot for about a week.

Little bit of a difference there.

KCDC
04-25-2012, 01:21 PM
If Kalil is there, you take him, or entice a lucrative trade. Albert's contract is coming up. He could be traded for a first rounder, especially when Arizona's jaw drops when we take their ideal pick from them.

We had a debate here about taking an elite guard at #11. The naysayers said guard was not a top 10 pick, but everyone acknowledges that elite LT is a top 5 pick. Do you take a non-elite QB, a potentially good 5 tech DE, or an elite LT?

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 01:22 PM
Would you and others like you stfu?! Your just stupid and clueless.

would do us all a favor and kill yourself, please?

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 01:24 PM
If Kalil is ther, you take him, or entice a lucrative trade. Albert's contract is coming up. He could be traded for a first rounder, especially when Arizona's jaw drops when we take their ideal pick from them.

We had a debate here about taking an elite guard at #11. The naysayers said guard was not a top 10 pick, but everyone acknowledges that elite LT is a top 5 pick. Do you take a mediocre QB, a potentially good 5 tech DE, or an elite LT?

trade albert for a 1st?

wtf?

Chiefnj2
04-25-2012, 01:25 PM
Jokeray (St. Louis): Alot of Lions fans want Derrick Johnson @#10..do you think he'll be available?

Nolan Nawrocki: If you put on the Oklahoma tape and watch him taking on blocks with his back, or getting abused vs. Arkansas vs. backs half his size, you would think he might be around in the second round, where some teams have him stacked. But in Detroit, he would be an excellent fit. They have big bodies there who could protect him and keep him free to run to the ball. His best chance is going to come on the weakside. If he stays in the middle, teams will run at him all day long. Despite his dislike for taking on blocks, he is very athletic, covers like a defensive back and could be gone in the Top 10. I think there's a good chance he'll be there for the Lions though.

OnTheWarpath58
04-25-2012, 01:26 PM
Tannehill's been projected in the top 10 for almost two months now. Gilmore has been considered in that spot for about a week.

Little bit of a difference there.

There's no difference. Both are being artifically overrated.

How long has the CFB season been over?

Was Tannehill considered a Top-10 pick in November - you know, when he was actually playing?

This place would have gone DefCon fucking 5 had someone suggested - back in Nov./Dec. - taking Tannehill with the 11th pick.

Now, simply because guys like Barkley and Jones went back to school, it's perfectly acceptable.

Amazing how the guy improved by a round and a half without taking a single snap.

-King-
04-25-2012, 01:28 PM
While I'm not against drafting Tannehill, its hilarious that some people think that he shot up the boards because of his play.
Posted via Mobile Device

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 01:29 PM
There's no difference. Both are being artifically overrated.

How long has the CFB season been over?

Was Tannehill considered a Top-10 pick in November - you know, when he was actually playing?

This place would have gone DefCon ****ing 5 had someone suggested - back in Nov./Dec. - taking Tannehill with the 11th pick.

Now, simply because guys like Barkley and Jones went back to school, it's perfectly acceptable.

Amazing how the guy improved by a round and a half without taking a single snap.Late risers always scare me, the guys who boom up around the senior bowl or the combine.

OnTheWarpath58
04-25-2012, 01:30 PM
Late risers always scare me, the guys who boom up around the senior bowl or the combine.

Or the time that some premier players at the position decide to return to college.

Brock
04-25-2012, 01:30 PM
There's no difference. Both are being artifically overrated.

How long has the CFB season been over?

Was Tannehill considered a Top-10 pick in November - you know, when he was actually playing?

This place would have gone DefCon fucking 5 had someone suggested - back in Nov./Dec. - taking Tannehill with the 11th pick.

Now, simply because guys like Barkley and Jones went back to school, it's perfectly acceptable.

Amazing how the guy improved by a round and a half without taking a single snap.

What are we missing out on if he busts?

OnTheWarpath58
04-25-2012, 01:33 PM
What are we missing out on if he busts?

The ability to take a legitimate QB over the next 4-5 years?

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 01:34 PM
What are we missing out on if he busts?In my perfect absolutely not real and likely impossible world, the ability to gain a first round pick by trading either into the late first or completely out of the round.

Just once I want to go into a draft with some upward mobility, particularly a draft that a year out looks strong at QB.

I don't think there's any realistic chance it happens.

BigMeatballDave
04-25-2012, 01:37 PM
Would you and others like you stfu?! Your just stupid and clueless.

:LOL:

OnTheWarpath58
04-25-2012, 01:37 PM
In my perfect absolutely not real and likely impossible world, the ability to gain a first round pick by trading either into the late first or completely out of the round.

Just once I want to go into a draft with some upward mobility, particularly a draft that a year out looks strong at QB.

I don't think there's any realistic chance it happens.

This too.

I gotta give it to this fanbase.

For years, no one has been "worth it" at the QB position.

Now people are willing to settle for an inferior prospect.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 01:38 PM
What are we missing out on if he busts?

a game changing guard?

evolve27
04-25-2012, 01:39 PM
LMAO @ this thread.

LMAO

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 01:39 PM
This is probably in one of the tannehill threads, blurb from yesterday morning, but I don't feel like digging and need to get my slacking ass to work. Like him or not, he's probably going to be one of the more interesting stories to watch tomorrow night.Where will Tannehill go? (http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d8288d590/article/2012-nfl-draft-could-turn-with-seahawks-patriots-browns)

While the early draft buildup surrounded Luck and Griffin, the passing debate recently has been about Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill. The 6-foot-4, former receiver has been a starter for less than two seasons, completing 62 percent of his passes and collecting 29 touchdowns against 15 interceptions as a senior.

He's considered the third-best quarterback, capable of going No. 4 to the Browns, No. 8 to the Miami Dolphins or who-knows-where after that? Precisely where the rangy athlete ends up could have wide-ranging ramifications.

"Wherever somebody had him, that's probably where they still have him," Browns GM Tom Heckert told reporters this week. "He is a good player and he's obviously very new to the position, having played wide receiver. He is a good football player."

If Tannehill is left for the Dolphins at No. 8, perhaps they reunite him with former Texas A&M coach and current Dolphins offensive coordinator Mike Sherman. The former Aggies head man hasn't returned calls from opposing scouts recently to discuss his prospect, forcing the league to guess about his feelings for Tannehill.

"The one that's gonna shake things up is Tannehill," one high-ranking AFC personnel chief said. "I don't think a lot of teams think of him as a first-round pick. I can see a situation where he doesn't go at all in the top 20. That's really going to change things. You got a guy who started for a year and a half. He hasn't really been, from a team perspective, a winning quarterback. He's got good numbers, there's a lot of things there (to like). But they lost a lot of games in the fourth quarter. Why is he not pulling things out? Why are they losing games?"

The official doesn't list Tannehill as a top-20 prospect, and neither does at least one other AFC team. Do the Dolphins? Maybe. But what if Sherman isn't as big a fan as it seems?

One decision maker, who would not be named, painted an interesting scenario, where the mercurial Dolphins pass on Tannehill. What then?

"If Miami doesn't grab him, and they got Mike Sherman there, the teams behind them are going to start questioning, what the hell are we doing taking him?" he said. "If his own coach won't take him, why are we taking him?Maybe a bit of uncertainty there, in terms of who has him where on their board.

On the flip side, one team values him in the top 10, and it can change things dramatically.

SNR
04-25-2012, 01:42 PM
There's no difference. Both are being artifically overrated.

How long has the CFB season been over?

Was Tannehill considered a Top-10 pick in November - you know, when he was actually playing?

This place would have gone DefCon fucking 5 had someone suggested - back in Nov./Dec. - taking Tannehill with the 11th pick.

Now, simply because guys like Barkley and Jones went back to school, it's perfectly acceptable.

Amazing how the guy improved by a round and a half without taking a single snap.Desperation's the new name of the game. It elevated Christian Ponder 10-15 slots. But at least Ponder was a late first/early second round guy after the college football season ended.

How long were we talking about Andy Dalton in the 4th round? How long did it take for people to suggest that teams take him in the late 1st/early 2nd? It took way longer for that to happen than it took for teams to overrate Tannehill.

Colin Kaepernick? Some people thought he was 5th/6th round material. He probably still is. Went in the early 2nd to Jim fucking Harbaugh and San Francisco.

That doesn't mean the guy is poison. It just means teams are desperate. Tannehill was considered late first round very early on in the draft process. His meteoric rise to the top 10 was fueled by Barkley and Jones staying in school, sure, but that doesn't mean teams were going to forget about the guy and not scout him out. There's a reason why lots of teams like him, and it's not just because he's lucky to be the 3rd best guy.

You'd rather take the projected 3rd round CB over the projected late 1st round QB in the top 10?

SNR
04-25-2012, 01:46 PM
This too.

I gotta give it to this fanbase.

For years, no one has been "worth it" at the QB position.

Now people are willing to settle for an inferior prospect."Next year's QB class is much better"

Where have I heard that before?

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 01:46 PM
I have a terrible, terrible feeling we are going to draft Dontari Poe. Michael Lombardi on the Border Patrol this morning and wouldn't stop talking up Poe.

Anyone else worried Lombardi is out spewing propaganda for his BFF Pioli? Please don't let it be true.

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 01:47 PM
"Next year's QB class is much better"

Where have I heard that before?

next year's draft class is much better than Tannehill, sure. Not better than this class as a whole.

I mean, who cares about Luck and RG3? they don't count.

Brock
04-25-2012, 01:48 PM
The ability to take a legitimate QB over the next 4-5 years?

Picking at 10-20 every year for the next 5? Yeah, I don't think so.

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 01:51 PM
"Next year's QB class is much better"

Where have I heard that before?Probably most recently in 2010 when it was Bradford and nobody else, back when half of us (including myself) were in love with Jimmy Clausen as the "well, he's not Bradford (Luck/RGIII) but he'll do" guy. So yes, I would have to say that this does feel familiar in some ways.

And in that case, you might concede that next year's qb class was much better.

I don't think you heard much of it last year. There were a lot of us who wanted to take one of those QBs, although there was a lot of disagreement over which.

Frosty
04-25-2012, 01:51 PM
Every year, people pound the table for a QB that is going to be out of reach to the Chiefs and then shred the guys they could actually take.

As for next year - Jones? Barkley? No thanks. I would rather take a shot with Tannehill.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 01:52 PM
next year the QB we won't pick will be Landry Jones...

but don't worry, the next year after next year there is totally going to be this legit QB...that we won't be in a position to pick either, but the next year after next year after next year...NOW we're talking...

Frosty
04-25-2012, 01:52 PM
"Next year's QB class is much better"

Where have I heard that before?

It does seem faintly familiar. :hmmm:

SNR
04-25-2012, 01:57 PM
And you know what? I'm just crazy enough to believe the hype about next year's class. Even if Tyler Bray and Aaron Murray (who I predict to be college football's two best NFL prospect QBs next year) stick around for another year, there will still be Barkley, Wilson, Jones, and Geno Smith. Four legit QBs out to be enough for one of them to fall to us, right?

Oh, but then Wilson won't have a very good year, and teams will question his toughness. 3rd round pick like his compadre Ryan Mallett.

And Jones will be a piece of shit as usual. Nobody will want him, but he'll be a 1st round QB anyway.

So it will be down to Barkley and Geno Smith. The Chiefs will make the playoffs and won't want to dole out the ammo to trade up and grab one of those guys. We'll be left out in the cold yet again on getting the REAL QB.

But then NEXT YEAR is when the REALLY good QBs show up. We should just wait and grab one of those guys.

Good thing we didn't draft that clown Tannehill! He might have been a bust!

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 01:58 PM
Didn't the team take the QB that the majority of the board wanted last year? There seemed to be an awful lot of people in love with the idea of Stanzi in the 2nd round. Do people not want him now because he happened to go in the 5th and not the 2nd? Does that taint him somehow, not make him the same player that some people were all but begging the team to draft?

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 01:59 PM
I'm not really familiar with Landry Jones - what's the hate on him?

Because it can't be his name. That's a black-belt, afro-sporting, private investigator who doesn't put down his Courvoisier for less than two chicks at once.*




*I know he's white. But still.

Micjones
04-25-2012, 01:59 PM
Let's keep holding out until we stumble across a once in 10 year prospect at QB.

SNR
04-25-2012, 02:00 PM
Probably most recently in 2010 when it was Bradford and nobody else, back when half of us (including myself) were in love with Jimmy Clausen as the "well, he's not Bradford (Luck/RGIII) but he'll do" guy. So yes, I would have to say that this does feel familiar in some ways.

And in that case, you might concede that next year's qb class was much better.

I don't think you heard much of it last year. There were a lot of us who wanted to take one of those QBs, although there was a lot of disagreement over which.Andy Dalton with our 1st rounder would have made the most sense. But like Tannehill, he saw an astronomical rise in his draft stock after combine and private workouts! People would have bitched about that.

Hell, I was one of them. I didn't want to take Dalton until the 2nd round, because I thought that's where he belonged.

themanwithnoname
04-25-2012, 02:00 PM
Mayock has us taking Barron at #11...two safeties in 3 years? Can't see Pioli doing that....

I don't either, but I see it as more than just two safeties. With Berry and Barron, you're not losing much if anything against the run compared to having a linebacker out there, and I expect they're both better at covering receivers/TEs than linebackers. So, you could leave those two in almost every snap. You can even blitz with either of them.

Because of the pretty high injury rate for safeties (especially if you use them all over), if one gets hurt you're not with a glaring step down in talent like we were last year. Barron should be quite a bit cheaper than Berry too and while I'm hoping and even expecting him to come back stronger, Berry is coming off a significant injury.

I also think there's something to be said for competition. Like how Flowers and Carr fed off each other, I think we'd see Berry and Barron do the same thing. Even Pollard and Paige I think fed off each other and played better because of it.

All of that being said, I'm very doubtful of it too.

I honestly don't know. I LOVE the draft and will watch most every minute of it, but I'm not sure I'm qualified to rank players. Luck & RG3 are clearly the best. After that, I'm not sure. I really like Kalil, Blackmon, DeCastro, and Richardson. Outside of those, I really don't know.

Regarding QBs, I really liked Weeden and Osweiler as college QBs, but I have no idea how that translates to the pros.

Edit: Yesterday was the first time I (believe I) heard of Kuechly. I don't think I've seen him play. Clearly, I'm not a draft guru.

Honestly, I'm just so ready to move on from Cassel that I'd be ok with way too many QBs, but none of them that we'd be considering really impress (I'd say I was more hopeful/impressed with Stanzi last year than most of the guys this year). I think Tannehill is the best, but he still needs development but he's young enough that it wouldn't be a problem. Age is obviously the big issue with Weeden, but there's something about his demeanor that I like. Yeah, its cheesy, but on the Gruden QB show, like Weeden said, he "wins games".

Osweiler reminds me too much of Cassel, even the attitude/demeanor. I would hope he has much more upside though. He did actually start in college, and he is young so there's time to develop him, and he's even bigger than Cassel and I would guess a stronger arm. He actually showed noticeable improvement in college too, so there's more hope that he'll develop. I wouldn't hate Osweiler, but I'm seeing too much Cassel in him for me to be crazy about him.

he's a finesse LB that doesn't create turnovers....no thanks

DJ had 19 tackles for a loss and 9 forced fumbles his senior year

you better be creating turnovers or racking up sacks if I'm drafting you at 5...and all that hot air sounds exactly like the crap spewed about Jesus Curry

I'm not big on Kuechly. To me, he's DJ without the playmaking ability (INTs/FFs/Sacks). I realize that DJ actually got better as he stopped focusing on trying to be a playmaker and just being a consistently good, but you know those plays he makes where he just slips by the lineman and gets the running back? I don't think I saw anything like that from Kuechly. I think our defense needs playmakers more, to help keep them pumped up and playing hard. There's enough other guys that are playmakers as well as being solid players that I don't know why you'd just settle.

SNR
04-25-2012, 02:02 PM
Didn't the team take the QB that the majority of the board wanted last year? There seemed to be an awful lot of people in love with the idea of Stanzi in the 2nd round. Do people not want him now because he happened to go in the 5th and not the 2nd? Does that taint him somehow, not make him the same player that some people were all but begging the team to draft?Did you see the Stanzi in the 2nd round thread? People laughed at Boss and aturnis for most of the college regular season. Stanzi gained some supporters after the senior bowl, but I don't think the majority of this board wanted him in the 2nd.

I didn't get on the Stanzi wagon until very late in the draft season, and even then I wouldn't have been happy with him in the 2nd.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 02:02 PM
Didn't the team take the QB that the majority of the board wanted last year? There seemed to be an awful lot of people in love with the idea of Stanzi in the 2nd round. Do people not want him now because he happened to go in the 5th and not the 2nd? Does that taint him somehow, not make him the same player that some people were all but begging the team to draft?

stanzi in the 2nd?

bosschief...and ?

he's a a 5th round pick that people keep trying to claim was a 1st rounder...

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 02:03 PM
And you know what? I'm just crazy enough to believe the hype about next year's class. Even if Tyler Bray and Aaron Murray (who I predict to be college football's two best NFL prospect QBs next year) stick around for another year, there will still be Barkley, Wilson, Jones, and Geno Smith. Four legit QBs out to be enough for one of them to fall to us, right?This is why I'm fantasizing about trading down/out of the round. You can't count on a guy falling to you. You have to either have a high pick or find a way to get one.

So in that light, yes, if Tannehill's on the board at 11, I would do my god-damnest to trade out of the position, for nothing less than a 2013 first rounder, and use whatever it takes next year to move up into the position to take the next Luck/RGIII. That to me is much more appealing than setting for Tannehill because he's the best we can do this year amongst the also-ran's.

Ain't gonna happen, but a guy can dream.

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 02:03 PM
Did you see the Stanzi in the 2nd round thread? People laughed at Boss and aturnis for most of the college regular season. Stanzi gained some supporters after the senior bowl, but I don't think the majority of this board wanted him in the 2nd.

I didn't get on the Stanzi wagon until very late in the draft season, and even then I wouldn't have been happy with him in the 2nd.Which sounds awfully reminiscent of Tannehill this offseason.

(I was maybe being too subtle).

SNR
04-25-2012, 02:05 PM
This is why I'm fantasizing about trading down/out of the round. You can't count on a guy falling to you. You have to either have a high pick or find a way to get one.

So in that light, yes, if Tannehill's on the board at 11, I would do my god-damnest to trade out of the position, for nothing less than a 2013 first rounder, and use whatever it takes next year to move up into the position to take the next Luck/RGIII. That to me is much more appealing than setting for Tannehill because he's the best we can do this year amongst the also-ran's.

Ain't gonna happen, but a guy can dream.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/HKh6XxYbbIc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Direckshun
04-25-2012, 02:05 PM
stanzi in the 2nd?

bosschief...and ?

he's a a 5th round pick that people keep trying to claim was a 1st rounder...

I had him graded out as a second rounder.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 02:07 PM
I had him graded out as a second rounder.

ok, so there's 2 people....

SNR
04-25-2012, 02:07 PM
Which sounds awfully reminiscent of Tannehill this offseason.

(I was maybe being too subtle).You should have used Ryan Mallett instead of Ricky Stanzi. Half this board STILL thinks the sun shines out of his asshole. They would have gladly spent our 1st rounder on him last year.

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 02:07 PM
You should have used Ryan Mallett instead of Ricky Stanzi. Half this board STILL thinks the sun shines out of his asshole. They would have gladly spent our 1st rounder on him last year.Yeah, but we didn't draft Mallett.

SNR
04-25-2012, 02:09 PM
Yeah, but we didn't draft Mallett.We're not going to draft Tannehill, either.

Chiefnj2
04-25-2012, 02:09 PM
If the Chiefs take Tannehill that gives Pioli 3 years of job security.

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 02:10 PM
We're not going to draft Tannehill, either.I would tend to agree with you.

I think it's DeCastro, which I'm going to like even less than Tannehill. And you know how much I like Tannehill.

Micjones
04-25-2012, 02:11 PM
If the Chiefs take Tannehill that gives Pioli 3 years of job security.

I think he'll get three years either way, but good point.

chiefzilla1501
04-25-2012, 02:15 PM
I'm a Branden Albert fan. But if Kalil projects to be good or better, and he's the BPA at the time, then absolutely draft him. If Kalil becomes a good NFL player, it gives you enormous flexibility. You can move Albert to Guard, trade him, or if you cut him you save the $100M contract you'd have to pay him to stay. In which case, you can use that $100M on another player who can help you.

People are so close-minded to think just because we have a starter at the position, we're good.

(I haven't followed the prospects. So it's possible Kalil just isn't any good. I have no idea).

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 02:16 PM
I think we're all just kidding ourselves if we think it's anything other than Brockers or Poe. It sucks, but reality is setting in.

All of these brilliant ideas. All of these master plans.

They're all just poop on the street now.

:(

SNR
04-25-2012, 02:23 PM
I'm a Branden Albert fan. But if Kalil projects to be good or better, and he's the BPA at the time, then absolutely draft him. If Kalil becomes a good NFL player, it gives you enormous flexibility. You can move Albert to Guard, trade him, or if you cut him you save the $100M contract you'd have to pay him to stay. In which case, you can use that $100M on another player who can help you.

People are so close-minded to think just because we have a starter at the position, we're good.

(I haven't followed the prospects. So it's possible Kalil just isn't any good. I have no idea).How long has it been that fans have wanted BPA regardless of position to be our draft strategy?

We've got good-to-great level starters at every position now except QB. If Kalil fell, he would absolutely be the BPA. But it's funny that so many people would say no to him just because he's a tackle.

This isn't Russell Okung or Bryan Bulaga we're talking about. This is a man who was BORN to play on our offensive line in this system.

Chiefnj2
04-25-2012, 02:29 PM
I'd rather not talk about the first round of the draft until 2015 and have Robert Griffin.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 02:31 PM
I'm a Branden Albert fan. But if Kalil projects to be good or better, and he's the BPA at the time, then absolutely draft him. If Kalil becomes a good NFL player, it gives you enormous flexibility. You can move Albert to Guard, trade him, or if you cut him you save the $100M contract you'd have to pay him to stay. In which case, you can use that $100M on another player who can help you.

People are so close-minded to think just because we have a starter at the position, we're good.

(I haven't followed the prospects. So it's possible Kalil just isn't any good. I have no idea).

albert is getting a 100mill contract?


jesus...lmao

Bootlegged
04-25-2012, 02:33 PM
I'd be happy with

1st: Barron - Slide Lewis to 3rd S
2nd: Click - DE to replace Bust #1 or Bust #2
3rd: Champman - DT
4th: Top QB left
5th: Top RB left
6th: Top CB left
7th: Top WR left
7th: Top FULLBACK left. Oh yeah. Fullback.

Ebolapox
04-25-2012, 02:39 PM
The ability to take a legitimate QB over the next 4-5 years?

yeah, like we were doing that anyway.

DJ's left nut
04-25-2012, 02:41 PM
I'd be happy with

1st: Barron - Slide Lewis to 3rd S
2nd: Click - DE to replace Bust #1 or Bust #2
3rd: Champman - DT
4th: Top QB left
5th: Top RB left
6th: Top CB left
7th: Top WR left

Crick will never be a better player than either Jackson or Dorsey. His absolute upside is Dorsey and nowhere near Jackson's ability.

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 02:45 PM
This draft is going to come down to whether or not anyone wants to trade up to 11. If no one does, the Chiefs are absolutely, positively, 100% drafting a player that at least half of us hate.

Brockers, Poe, Tannehill, DeCastro, Kuechly, Floyd, Barron...they all have people who hate them.

There just isn't anyone at 11 that is a consensus great pick. part of that is the dropoff after Claiborne, and part of it is that we don't have the glaring needs of years past. You think an upgrade at safety is important, and I think replacing Lilja is important.

We're all gonna be effed when it's another LSU lineman.

KCDC
04-25-2012, 02:46 PM
As far as rumors, it is going to be fun for the next 24 hours. Pioli, Romeo, Clark, Dallas (Pioli's wife) and the Big Tuna (Pioli's father-in-law) know we are taking Brockers. He is the elite 5 tech guy he wants to replace TJax, at a decent salary hit.

So, our last minute strategy is to whisper in Mayock's ear that we are taking Barron. That will cause Dallas to trade up to #10 or our spot to take him. We let people think we are interested in Keuchly. This will force Seattle to trade up to get him, maybe with us. We whisper we want a LT and Arizona will trade up to get in front of us, or trade with us.

That is great for Pioli because Brockers is made more safe with each of these guys trading up. Brockers is safe until the 15th pick. He has to hope Philly will jump up in a trade for Cox, because it won't trade up for Brockers most likely. If Philly jumps up to take someone other than Brockers, then he might be safe until the early 20s, meaning we can fall back to then.

BossChief
04-25-2012, 02:55 PM
Tannehill has better tools than Sanchez in almost every way and they both had the inexperience knock.

BossChief
04-25-2012, 02:57 PM
Schefter just said there is "no way Barron makes it to Dallas pick at 14. If they want him, they will need to move up to get him"

Seriously, guys.

If we aren't moving for Tannehill, Barron needs to be the pick.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 02:59 PM
Schaffer just said there is "no way Barron makes it to Dallas pick at 14. If they want him, they will need to move up to get him"

imagine a scenario where Barron falls to us at 11, everyone knows/thinks we want him, and Dallas calls and asks 'how much to get him?"

dreaming...

pr_capone
04-25-2012, 03:00 PM
TRADE THE FUCK DOWN PIOLI!

Go grab Konz later in the 1st and get an extra pick for the trouble. Move Hudson back over to his natural G and the O-Line is set for the next 5-7 years.

saphojunkie
04-25-2012, 03:53 PM
imagine a scenario where Barron falls to us at 11, everyone knows/thinks we want him, and Dallas calls and asks 'how much to get him?"

dreaming...

One of maybe a handful of scenarios where we can actually trade out of 11.

The ones I think are possible:

1. Tannehill slides out of top 10. Cleveland has Richardson or Blackmon, and decides it's worth trading back up for their QB, since the year 5 escalator money no longer kicks in. We move back to 22 and draft the best available defender. Probably Mercilus or McClellin.

2. Barron makes it past Buffalo. There is a bidding war between Philly and Dallas for the top safety on the board. We move down to 14 or 15 and take DeCastro, picking up an extra 2nd or 3rd

3. Kalil slides, Reiff becomes a wanted man. More than one team needs a tackle, including Philly (again), Chicago, and Arizona. Again, we move down, picking up an extra Day 2 pick, and then get either Brockers or DeCastro or a pass rusher.

4. Michael Floyd becomes a hot commodity, either drafted ahead of Blackmon or piquing someone's interest enough to move up. Again, Cleveland could take Richardson and decide that they want another weapon for either McCoy or a QB to come in the 2nd. Or perhaps you get a team like Arizona or the Jets trying to make damn sure they get their guy.

5. Patriots go all in on a player you'd never expect. They package both first rounders to move up for someone totally random, like Courtney Upshaw or Cordy Glenn. It's always someone weird. Anyway, Pioli is happy to move back to the end of RD 1 where he can hedge his bets with two defensive pickups.

Direckshun
04-25-2012, 03:57 PM
Schefter just said there is "no way Barron makes it to Dallas pick at 14. If they want him, they will need to move up to get him"

Seriously, guys.

If we aren't moving for Tannehill, Barron needs to be the pick.

If Barron's at our pick, it's more likely we trade down and get picks.

Setsuna
04-25-2012, 04:03 PM
Trade down and clean up!

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 04:22 PM
One of maybe a handful of scenarios where we can actually trade out of 11.

The ones I think are possible:

1. Tannehill slides out of top 10. Cleveland has Richardson or Blackmon, and decides it's worth trading back up for their QB, since the year 5 escalator money no longer kicks in. We move back to 22 and draft the best available defender. Probably Mercilus or McClellin.

2. Barron makes it past Buffalo. There is a bidding war between Philly and Dallas for the top safety on the board. We move down to 14 or 15 and take DeCastro, picking up an extra 2nd or 3rd

3. Kalil slides, Reiff becomes a wanted man. More than one team needs a tackle, including Philly (again), Chicago, and Arizona. Again, we move down, picking up an extra Day 2 pick, and then get either Brockers or DeCastro or a pass rusher.

4. Michael Floyd becomes a hot commodity, either drafted ahead of Blackmon or piquing someone's interest enough to move up. Again, Cleveland could take Richardson and decide that they want another weapon for either McCoy or a QB to come in the 2nd. Or perhaps you get a team like Arizona or the Jets trying to make damn sure they get their guy.

5. Patriots go all in on a player you'd never expect. They package both first rounders to move up for someone totally random, like Courtney Upshaw or Cordy Glenn. It's always someone weird. Anyway, Pioli is happy to move back to the end of RD 1 where he can hedge his bets with two defensive pickups.

ed werter (?) espn just reported that dallas has talked to KC about the #11 pick

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 04:22 PM
ed werter (?) espn just reported that dallas has talked to KC about the #11 pickDon't tease me like that.

(ps - I think his name's Ed Werner)

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 04:24 PM
Don't tease me like that.

(ps - I think his name's Ed Werner)

you're right...werner

he said it without hedging...he said 'Dallas has talked to Kansas City about the eleventh pick"

after pointing out that Jones has traded in the first round 75% of the time

edit - he's the cowboys guy for espn

siberian khatru
04-25-2012, 04:25 PM
FWIW, it's "Werder."

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 04:26 PM
fuck it, i'll call him wurthers...

anyways, it looks like we'll have an offer if barron is there

Jerm
04-25-2012, 04:28 PM
So if we trade back with Dallas, what would we realistically get? An extra 3rd? Maybe a late round pick too?

siberian khatru
04-25-2012, 04:29 PM
**** it, i'll call him wurthers...

anyways, it looks like we'll have an offer if barron is there

<img class="image_thumbnail enlarged" alt="" id="thumbnail_photo_16734390625" onclick=" if (this.src.indexOf('_100') != -1) { this.style.backgroundColor = 'transparent'; this.src='http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lykfxnd9W01qj63roo1_500.jpg'; } if ($(this).hasClassName('enlarged')) { this.style.width = '150px'; this.style.height = '99px'; $(this).removeClassName('enlarged'); if ($('photo_info_16734390625')) $('photo_info_16734390625').hide(); if ($('photo_exif_flipper_16734390625')) $('photo_exif_flipper_16734390625').hide(); $('post_content_16734390625').style.clear = 'none'; } else { $('post_content_16734390625').style.clear = 'both'; if ($('photo_info_16734390625')) $('photo_info_16734390625').show(); if ($('photo_exif_flipper_16734390625')) $('photo_exif_flipper_16734390625').show(); this.style.width = '500px'; this.style.height = '329px'; $(this).addClassName('enlarged'); } this.blur(); return false; " style="cursor: pointer; background-color: transparent; width: 500px; height: 329px; " width="150" height="99" src="http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lykfxnd9W01qj63roo1_500.jpg" onload="if (this.src.indexOf('_100') != -1) { this.style.backgroundColor = 'transparent'; this.src='http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lykfxnd9W01qj63roo1_500.jpg'; }">

Mr. Laz
04-25-2012, 04:29 PM
I just hope for once we are in some kind of position of power to get offers.

I hope to hell that Barron and Tannehill are both there when we pick and a couple of teams start bidding.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 04:31 PM
So if we trade back with Dallas, what would we realistically get? An extra 3rd? Maybe a late round pick too?

depends how horny they are...but probably a 3rd, i'd think

whoman69
04-25-2012, 04:35 PM
As far as rumors, it is going to be fun for the next 24 hours. Pioli, Romeo, Clark, Dallas (Pioli's wife) and the Big Tuna (Pioli's father-in-law) know we are taking Brockers. He is the elite 5 tech guy he wants to replace TJax, at a decent salary hit.

So, our last minute strategy is to whisper in Mayock's ear that we are taking Barron. That will cause Dallas to trade up to #10 or our spot to take him. We let people think we are interested in Keuchly. This will force Seattle to trade up to get him, maybe with us. We whisper we want a LT and Arizona will trade up to get in front of us, or trade with us.

That is great for Pioli because Brockers is made more safe with each of these guys trading up. Brockers is safe until the 15th pick. He has to hope Philly will jump up in a trade for Cox, because it won't trade up for Brockers most likely. If Philly jumps up to take someone other than Brockers, then he might be safe until the early 20s, meaning we can fall back to then.

Brockers is replacing TJax or Dorsey, who can't rush the QB, with another guy from the same school that can't rush the QB. Its the move that helps us out the least of all the picks we could have. At least with the other moves you could say we're getting an upgrade.

KCDC
04-25-2012, 04:39 PM
I'd trade down to #14 for an extra 3rd in a heartbeat.

If Pioli really wanted Keuchly or Barron, they would not be available at #14

If you wanted DeCastro or Brockers (or Tannehill) they would likely be available at #14.

BigMeatballDave
04-25-2012, 04:42 PM
I'd trade down to #14 for an extra 3rd in a heartbeat.

If Pioli really wanted Keuchly or Barron, they would not be available at #14

If you wanted DeCastro or Brockers (or Tannehill) they would likely be available at #14.

Tannehill is NOT getting past Miami.

KCDC
04-25-2012, 04:43 PM
Brockers is replacing TJax or Dorsey, who can't rush the QB, with another guy from the same school that can't rush the QB. Its the move that helps us out the least of all the picks we could have. At least with the other moves you could say we're getting an upgrade.

I don't disagree. I'm not pushing Brockers at all; but, it has become apparent he is the pick if you look at all the factors. If you read the threads here describing why he will be an "elite" 5 Tech (size, arms, motor, etc.) and you factor in the restructuring of TJax's contract, Brockers was the only 1st rounder Pioli interviewed (other than Poe and Tannehill) and the premium that Pioli seems to put on DEs, the picture becomes clear.

keg in kc
04-25-2012, 04:44 PM
FWIW, it's "Werder."You are correct sir.

KCDC
04-25-2012, 04:45 PM
Tannehill is NOT getting past Miami.

I think it is 50/50. Depends what WR is available for them. If they pass on him, he will fall like Brady Quinn to the lower part of the first round, when they could trade back into the first round to get him. If his own coach takes a pass (ala Weiss taking a pass on Clausen) who will touch him in the midround?

BryanBusby
04-25-2012, 04:46 PM
Brockers is replacing TJax or Dorsey, who can't rush the QB, with another guy from the same school that can't rush the QB. Its the move that helps us out the least of all the picks we could have. At least with the other moves you could say we're getting an upgrade.

The job of a 5 technique in the two-gap is to control gaps and eat up blockers, not shoot through the gap.

the Talking Can
04-25-2012, 04:48 PM
I'd trade down to #14 for an extra 3rd in a heartbeat.

If Pioli really wanted Keuchly or Barron, they would not be available at #14

If you wanted DeCastro or Brockers (or Tannehill) they would likely be available at #14.

agree re: availability of decastro/brockers

if we trade down, i won't really care who we take

i still don't care for a guard in the first, but DeCastro+Chapman(3rd) is fine by me

jspchief
04-25-2012, 04:50 PM
The job of a 5 technique in the two-gap is to control gaps and eat up blockers, not shoot through the gap.Exactly. We aren't going to ask that guy to rush the passer, whether it's Brockers, Tjax, Dorsey, or anyone else.

OnTheWarpath58
04-25-2012, 05:18 PM
Exactly. We aren't going to ask that guy to rush the passer, whether it's Brockers, Tjax, Dorsey, or anyone else.

Which is why that position should never be filled with an early pick.

You can find one-dimensional slapdicks to be space eaters anywhere.

BossChief
04-25-2012, 05:35 PM
Which is why that position should never be filled with an early pick.

You can find one-dimensional slapdicks to be space eaters anywhere.

This.

Shit, you can probably get Crick in the 3rd or 4th round and have a good player that does everything this defense asks of it's 5-techs

BigMeatballDave
04-25-2012, 05:43 PM
Which is why that position should never be filled with an early pick.

You can find one-dimensional slapdicks to be space eaters anywhere.

Heh. Try telling that to DJs left nut and a few others.

Chocolate Hog
04-25-2012, 05:58 PM
This.

Shit, you can probably get Crick in the 3rd or 4th round and have a good player that does everything this defense asks of it's 5-techs

This.

qabbaan
04-26-2012, 08:25 AM
Floyd would be an interesting pick. But again, I'm never going to get excited about drafting ILBs or interior linemen with high first round choices.

DJ's left nut
04-26-2012, 08:44 AM
You guys are exactly right.

There is no difference between what RAC did with Richard Seymour and Ty Warren vs. what he does with Glen Dorsey at all.

None.

We don't ask Dorsey to do more than take up space because he can't do more than take up space. If he could, we'd absolutely use him differently. He still wouldn't be asked to split gaps, but he would be asked to push the pocket back and collapse it through force or otherwise.

The only way you can make the argument that 'all it takes is a slapdick to run the 5-tech for RAC' is to ignore everything he's ever done when he's actually had talented 5-techs.

But try asking Dave to actually engage his brain and make an argument for himself...

Direckshun
04-26-2012, 08:49 AM
I don't understand why some people on this board devalue the DE in this defense.

The DE has to occupy bigger, stronger, more athletic OL and is responsible for more space than the NT is.

The defensive line in absolutely every defensive scheme is the second-most important position on a football team other than QB (maybe LT, too). To think our defense is the exception to that rule is assinine.

DJ's left nut
04-26-2012, 09:24 AM
I don't understand why some people on this board devalue the DE in this defense.

The DE has to occupy bigger, stronger, more athletic OL and is responsible for more space than the NT is.

The defensive line in absolutely every defensive scheme is the second-most important position on a football team other than QB (maybe LT, too). To think our defense is the exception to that rule is assinine.

3 years ago I did the same thing. It was the cool thing to do.

But I don't see how anyone can have watched this defense operate for 3 seasons and still not realize the importance of the position. The more I watch it operate, the more I realize that having a strong pair of DEs in this system is probably just as important as the NT. I'd have never thought that had I not seen it in action.

Is everyone really just going to ignore the fact that our defense was easily at its best when Jackson really got up to speed in the 2nd half? Or that Houston didn't truly take off until Jackson was being more aggressive?

I'm not saying you have to have a bunch of superstar DEs in this defense to succeed - you can make due with a Dorsey or a Crick. But as Saul (I think...maybe SNR) has pointed out several times now - the Chiefs have a legitimate starting caliber player at virtually every single position on the team except QB (and potentially NT). There isn't a truly critical 'need' that is able to be addressed in this draft unless Tannehill falls.

It's a matter of finding players that are optimal fits for this defense and upgrades on what we have. Kuechly isn't that guy. Barron is closer in that he does fit the defense, but I don't see Lewis as a weak point in the D. Brockers, OTOH, fits the defense even better than Barron and can upgrade on Dorsey who I do see as a weak point in the defense.

Direckshun
04-26-2012, 09:26 AM
3 years ago I did the same thing. It was the cool thing to do.

But I don't see how anyone can have watched this defense operate for 3 seasons and still not realize the importance of the position. The more I watch it operate, the more I realize that having a strong pair of DEs in this system is probably just as important as the NT. I'd have never thought that had I not seen it in action.

Is everyone really just going to ignore the fact that our defense was easily at its best when Jackson really got up to speed in the 2nd half? Or that Houston didn't truly take off until Jackson was being more aggressive?

I'm not saying you have to have a bunch of superstar DEs in this defense to succeed - you can make due with a Dorsey or a Crick. But as Saul (I think...maybe SNR) has pointed out several times now - the Chiefs have a legitimate starting caliber player at virtually every single position on the team except QB (and potentially NT). There isn't a truly critical 'need' that is able to be addressed in this draft unless Tannehill falls.

It's a matter of finding players that are optimal fits for this defense and upgrades on what we have. Kuechly isn't that guy. Barron is closer in that he does fit the defense, but I don't see Lewis as a weak point in the D. Brockers, OTOH, fits the defense even better than Barron and can upgrade on Dorsey who I do see as a weak point in the defense.

I gotta spread rep around before I can give any to you again.

So, stop saying things I agree with wholeheartedly until I do.

King_Chief_Fan
04-26-2012, 09:28 AM
Tannehill is NOT getting past Miami.

I hope you are right

kchero
04-26-2012, 09:30 AM
I hope you are right

x2

BigMeatballDave
04-26-2012, 10:13 AM
I hope you are right

I'd be shocked if they pass on him.

King_Chief_Fan
04-26-2012, 10:15 AM
I'd be shocked if they pass on him. me too. that is why I hope he will be gone

Bewbies
04-26-2012, 10:16 AM
I don't think Pioli would be drafting 5 techs high if the value of the position to our team wasn't off the charts. They took 5 techs high in NE as well.

Von Dumbass
04-26-2012, 10:20 AM
Hearing #Broncos have Lamar Miller much higher on their board than anyone else. Keep an eye on him.

https://twitter.com/#!/nfldraftscout/status/195547381046054912

beach tribe
04-26-2012, 10:31 AM
Oh come on, it would be epically hilarious.

You really are this dumb.

Brock
04-26-2012, 10:33 AM
I don't understand why some people on this board devalue the DE in this defense.

The DE has to occupy bigger, stronger, more athletic OL and is responsible for more space than the NT is.

The defensive line in absolutely every defensive scheme is the second-most important position on a football team other than QB (maybe LT, too). To think our defense is the exception to that rule is assinine.

It's really a product of the Tyson Jackson deal. If that pick had been made ten spots later, nobody would be complaining about it, but since it happened at #3, everybody hates that pick anywhere in the first round.

Direckshun
04-26-2012, 10:38 AM
It's really a product of the Tyson Jackson deal. If that pick had been made ten spots later, nobody would be complaining about it, but since it happened at #3, everybody hates that pick anywhere in the first round.

You're exactly right.

DaKCMan AP
04-26-2012, 10:44 AM
Hearing #Broncos have Lamar Miller much higher on their board than anyone else. Keep an eye on him.

https://twitter.com/#!/nfldraftscout/status/195547381046054912

I would be ecstatic for Dungver to waste another 1st round pick on a RB.

SuperChief
04-26-2012, 10:44 AM
It's really a product of the Tyson Jackson deal. If that pick had been made ten spots later, nobody would be complaining about it, but since it happened at #3, everybody hates that pick anywhere in the first round.

Fact. The same goes if Jackson had been producing Seymour-esque numbers.

Von Dumbass
04-26-2012, 11:54 AM
Patriots talk to Seahawks about trading up to 12

Patriots coach Bill Belichick may be thinking about packaging his own first-round draft pick (No. 31) and the Saints’ pick (No. 27) to trade to the Seahawks to move up to No. 12.

Albert Breer of NFL Network reports that the Patriots have inquired with the Seahawks to see what it would take to move up to 12.

Moving way up doesn’t seem like the type of move Belichick likes to make, but that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t do it if he believes a player at 12 can make the kind of impact that the last player he drafted early in the first round, Jerod Mayo, made. One player Belichick might consider at 12 is Alabama safety Mark Barron.

The old NFL draft trade chart is somewhat outdated these days, but it does suggest that packaging No. 27 and No. 31 for No. 12 would be a fair trade. The chart gives the 12th pick a value of 1,200 points, the 27th pick a value of 680 points and the 31st pick a value of 600 points.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/26/patriots-talk-to-seahawks-about-trading-up-to-12/

suds79
04-26-2012, 11:56 AM
Patriots talk to Seahawks about trading up to 12

Patriots coach Bill Belichick may be thinking about packaging his own first-round draft pick (No. 31) and the Saints’ pick (No. 27) to trade to the Seahawks to move up to No. 12.

Albert Breer of NFL Network reports that the Patriots have inquired with the Seahawks to see what it would take to move up to 12.

Moving way up doesn’t seem like the type of move Belichick likes to make, but that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t do it if he believes a player at 12 can make the kind of impact that the last player he drafted early in the first round, Jerod Mayo, made. One player Belichick might consider at 12 is Alabama safety Mark Barron.

The old NFL draft trade chart is somewhat outdated these days, but it does suggest that packaging No. 27 and No. 31 for No. 12 would be a fair trade. The chart gives the 12th pick a value of 1,200 points, the 27th pick a value of 680 points and the 31st pick a value of 600 points.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/26/patriots-talk-to-seahawks-about-trading-up-to-12/

Bill should call his old buddy Scott if he wants to work a deal out. They're so good at it.

A win, win.

DJ's left nut
04-26-2012, 11:56 AM
Would seem that Pioli has his eye on someone he doesn't expect to fall to 27, then, otherwise I figure the Pats would just move up to 11 with the same package.

DaKCMan AP
04-26-2012, 12:05 PM
StaceyDales #StaceyDales
Pats tell me there has been NO discussion with seattle about the 12th pick. Not with Coach, Caserio, or anyone else.
Retweeted by Jason La Canfora

OmahaChief
04-26-2012, 12:17 PM
I would be ecstatic for Dungver to waste another 1st round pick on a RB.

Miller is a home run hitter at RB. I do not want them with a guy like that.

Von Dumbass
04-26-2012, 12:42 PM
I would be ecstatic for Dungver to waste another 1st round pick on a RB.

Drafting a RB at 25 is pretty good value. I wouldn't be surprised if the Donks did draft Doug Martin or Lamar Miller at 25.

Pasta Giant Meatball
04-26-2012, 12:45 PM
Drafting a RB at 25 is pretty good value. I wouldn't be surprised if the Donks did draft Doug Martin or Lamar Miller at 25.

Hope it works out as well as Slowshon Moreno.

whoman69
04-26-2012, 01:44 PM
It's really a product of the Tyson Jackson deal. If that pick had been made ten spots later, nobody would be complaining about it, but since it happened at #3, everybody hates that pick anywhere in the first round.

Nobody in those days wanted to trade into the top 5.

whoman69
04-26-2012, 01:45 PM
Smokescreen