Wow.

We could end up with a truly horrific draft under this approach. I mean an absolutely abysmal one.

:thumb:

That is why I am not a draftabulator....


1 BPA (WR, NT or OLB)
2 BPA (WR, NT, OLB or RB)
3-5 OL
6-7 both QB's

Hows that one for ya?

Im gonna beat the drum for OLB all off season. An upgrade in team speed and a everydown tandum at safety will make this D lethal.

I don't think our linebacker chore is as much of a need. Belcher and Studebaker sure have potential. They need the extra playing time, think Vrabel held us back some for that with Studebaker. Also I'd like to see if Cameron Shffield is going to be around next year and what he can bring.

I'd like us to draft a LB in latter rounds but, WR, C, & QB are major needs.

I'd be ok with Cassel starting the season & see how that goes. However we shouldn't have to wait around on him to be that guy he hasn't lived up to the billing to be. If it's going to be an 18 week season all the more reason to draft a QB. Wouldn't hurt to pick up fresh legs for a HB somewhere in the draft also. We should be looking at best possible players through out the draft and not settle on position of need, i kind of like that idea.

Center should be ut most top pryority for FA and draft. I'm not a FA fan for the most part, but center position you got to have a guy to rely on from start to finish.

Well if we take a RB in the 2nd round, I'll kill a kitten. And taking 3 lineman in one draft is putting a lot of eggs in one basket.

But otherwise, I suppose it's not the worst thing I've ever seen.

http://www.optimumscouting.com/scout...nebackers.html

http://nflsoup.com/?p=6258

article/rankings on 3-4 olbs. seniors only.

Granted that could all change after the FA period...

And yes, if they replace some OL in FA, then some of those wants / requests could change for sure...

But since were just counting draft and not the FA period... Then that would be my wish list for now..


We do seriously have to get another running back.. Jones is old and it showed. Charles is proving that he can not be the main man... He fumbles to easy AND is always dinged... The last thing I want some Moron to say is "give Charles more carries"

In other words, it's a pretty poor senior class of OLBs.

Just look at the top 12 players taken. It was a crappy top to the draft, one of the worst in recent years. That was understood going into the draft, and it's part of why it was basically impossible to trade down at the top for a non-quarterback. Hell, Belichick looked at the draft and traded out of the first round, because he thought the sweet spot in the draft made that the right way to go. I talked about the Chiefs taking Raji at the time, and I still think that would have been a good selection for the team, but the nonsense about living up to a draft pick is just that.

Of course it's unfair gnashing and wailing. Whether you like the pick or not, it's made. At that point, you evaluate honestly. You don't look for every single flaw and crack on a guy over it. For crying out loud, you could take any of the top 5 candidates for rookie of the year and shred them if you wanted to. That doesn't mean that it makes sense to be doing it.

Because if you did like the pick, you'd be singing Kumbaya whether or not the guy was playing like shit. The Sanchez fellatio crew have been a great example of that.

I think they both suck and studebaker in coverage is a joke.

Assuming that we are stuck with Cassel (no matter how I vote), I clicked WR, NT and OLB. If we can pickup Fitzgerald, I would go with C, NT and OLB (not necessarily in that order).

QB, NT and Center would be my top three priorities.

Since they are going to be keeping Cassel around, how about
WR
NT
Center
OL/center
OLB
OL
That being said, I just hope they go with BPA every time, but they won't.

No way. I'd make an exception for a star in his prime like Fitzgerald, but there is no way I'd build around another aging veteran like Lee Evans, Chris Chambers, or Bobby Wade.

Sleeper 2nd round outside linebacker - Mason Foster. Huge bowl game over the Huskers.

IDK looks like some good athletic prospects to me. Have to wait until the draft ramps up to see where they are slotted.

I love the way Charles was used this year. In fact, I think it was almost perfect.

And you're right, Jones aged in dog years throughout the season. He was absolutely useless by about week 12 and got no better from there.

That said - good backs slide every single season. From Foster to Blount to McClain, etc... - It's not hard to find a nice powerful runningback with a bit of speed that can go out there and run the ball a handful of times/gm.

In 2 seasons, if we draft/develop well over the next couple years, perhaps a 1st/2nd round back is a nice idea. But right now we have much bigger fish to fry.

jesus god, does the sanctimonious bullshit from you ever stop?


and to top it off, you literally don't know what you're talking about when it comes to chiefs players and their histories on this board...

you are literally ignorant on the subject


for all that is holy shut the **** up

Perfect, until the team really needed him.

That's exactly what's been done.

There are many people that think any criticism or evaluation of a rookie is unfair or dishonest because "he just needs more time!!!!" and sometimes that's just assinine.

Sometimes a bad player is just bad from the get go.

Charles appeared to have been injured when he did a dumb thing and tried to run someone over on the sideline.

Look at how he was used in the 2nd quarter. It appears to me the plan was to keep him fresh during the regular season and take the governor off a bit during the post-season. He appeared on his way to that kind of game before the Refs let the Ravens dogpile him and he made a poor decision on the sidelines.

Just because the plan didn't go to script doesn't mean it wasn't a good plan. He was fresh and at his best for the playoff run. Then he got injured - shit happens.

It was a dumb plan. **** keeping people "fresh". Do the Pats keep Brady fresh? KC got lucky San Diego floundered down the stretch.

Depending on the FA signing, But if we fill some needs in FA. Then I have no issues spending pick 2 or 3 on a RB... They are a dime a dozen and we could find another Charles in rd 3.

Its really hard to get a feeling for the draft without knowing or seeing what the FA plans are...

Once that is done, then we can hammer out the Picks and hopefully have another solid year...

i picked NT/WR/RT (though you could argue C is as needy as RT)

..i can't believe we're going in to year 3 of 3-4 with Edwards as NT....imagine our D with Raji instead of Jackson...

i would love to get Powe, but doubt he last till the low 2nd

we need a FA WR and a draft pick WR...

take the best OL/WR/3-4LB available in the 1st....



we need a late round rb, or a vet FA pickup too..jones is toast...

Yes, a quarterback and a RB are the exact same animal.

I mean no team in the league has instituted a timeshare at RB. None of them.

Did we not enter the playoffs with a rested Jamaal Charles playing some of his best football of the year? Yes, yes we did. And was Charles not a guy that was subject to getting dinged up all season? Why yes, yes he was.

So I'm flummoxed that some people seem hell-bent on ignoring the wisdom in doing what we could to ensure that our most dangerous weapon was available for the most important part of our season.

Sorry, as bad as everyone WANTS him to be the answer, Charles isnt going to be the type of back you lean on when you need him... He history is starting to prove it to us...

They might wanted to run him Herm style and rape his ass for 40 carries sunday.. But didnt happen and now we know why...

whats that have to do with Charles getting hurt? This really isnt making sense....

I am very interested in seeing if the Chiefs are going to be players in the FA period this year...

You can't run the guy 400 times a year, I get that. But, you also can't be afraid to use your best players. If he's their playmaker, he has to be ready when they need him. In the future, without one of the weakest schedules in the league, they'll need him a lot more. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like he's up to the task.

I'm calling bullshit on Charles being injured.

seems to me they have to....we need more help at WR than a rookie can provide...we need more help/depth at OL too

you could bag a vet RB for reasonable $$$

If that happens then it sets up for drafting some Line help in the first few rounds...

I think it was the Weis flu...

Then what?

As is certainly your prerogative.

But do you really believe they froze him out? I think coaches have some serious egos to them, but I don't think so poorly of them that I truly believe they were icing Charles for the sake of assuaging their own egos.

There is nothing to be gained by sitting him, especially not when they showed they would use him repeatedly early in the game (to great success no less).

If you don't like the injury explanation, what explanation do you like?

When you hear hoofprints, don't go looking for zebras. The conspiracy angles are pretty damn farfetched. Meanwhile, Charles stopped getting the rock after he put his head down and tried to lay out a tackler. Immediately afterward he was laying on the sideline for a spell, never to return to heavy usage.

Occam's razor speaks quite loudly here, IMO.

Shut the **** up, you flip-flopping douchebag. I know what I'm talking about regarding what's happened since I've been here, which is what I was referring to, and what DJ's and I were posting about.

I still they they paniced....

Dude, he didn't sit. That's the thing.

You're telling me was was too injured to get the ball - while getting it 3 times, including on the most important play of the game to that point - but he was OK enough to be used EIGHT times in pass protection, picking up the blitz 3 times and fanning once?

If he was hurt, as Haley has implied, he shouldn't have been on the field. He certainly shouldn't have been used in pass protection.

But he was on the field. Quite a bit, in fact.

We just quit using him for anything productive.

No, it's not. Come on, you know that. Jackson and Cassel never stood a chance with a group here, and the bitching about McCluster has been like that, although to a lesser extent.

I agree with this. One extreme is as bad as the other.

I'm saying we stopped using him heavily.

If you've got a guy out there nursing a stinger, a concussion or a bum hip (who the hell knows what he hurt), then you don't stop using him entirely - you just stop using him as heavily.

I ask again - what's your explanation? Are you really just going to say "They were too stupid to know he's good..." -- seriously? C'mon, they ran the guy heavily during their offense's most productive period. Oh, and he nearly set a record for YPC. The staff knows he's good. Alternatively -- do you believe Weis and/or Haley were trying to prove a point? Because I'm pretty sure you don't prove anything by pissing down your leg in a playoff game. I don't think icing Charles proves anything.

If you're going to say the simplest explanation is inaccurate, you have to proffer a reasonable alternative. To this point, I've yet to see one. What I know is that he was used heavily for a spell of effective football. Then he lowered his should to deliver a hit against a bigger guy, got treatment on the sideline and was not used nearly as frequently for the rest of the game (nor was he as effective when he was being used).

If he was out there in pass pro, perhaps it was a decoy effect. If he was getting the ball on the 4th down, perhaps it was because that was one of those times where you go to your ace, even if you think he only has a carry or two left in him.

The alternatives just don't make a lot of sense.

I've said it often and I'll say it again, give me Von Miller.

yup, just have to wait and see.

Not true at all.

How many folks came around over the last 4-5 weeks and said "Y'know - maybe Cassel isn't that bad. I apologize, I'm on the wagon", etc, etc....

A lot of people got into Cassel's corner when he performed. Had he performed early, they'd have gotten in there even sooner. Had he continued to perform, they wouldn't have left.

When the man plays quarterback like an NFL player - he gets credit for it. When he shit the bed, well that was called what it was.

As for Jackson - who the hell knows? He's sucked for his entire career, except for spits and starts of productivity which are usually noted in a game thread or a post-game thread. If he does that for any appreciable period of time, it will be commended as well.

I'm just not interested in this argument - it's simply not supportable. Guys that come in here and perform tend to get credit for it. Players that do not, don't. And there's no shortage of crow eaten either.

DN is right - you're painting with a broad brush, and not even doing that very well.

I'm going with QB, NT, WR (in that order). I don't care what anyone says about "never gonna happen." I feel we need to get a quality QB and not someone thats gonna be drafted in the 4th or later round to backup a backup. This draft is also stacked with WR's so its not the end of the world to pick up a sleeper like Pettis. Pittsburgh seems to be in a pickle with extending Woodley with the CBA situation and he could very likely end up a FA.

If he's so injured that there's no use for him, get him off the field. Don't play 10 on 11.

I'm not saying Haley's stupid. I'm not saying they don't know how good JC is.

I'm saying they panicked in a tight game, and followed mistakes by making bigger mistakes. You just raped a team for 100 yards rushing in the first half, then start slinging the ball all over the yard.

Like I said, he guy played after said "injury."

If he was hurt badly enough to not be a factor, he shouldn't have been on the field.

But he was. Quite a bit. But on 8 of his 15 snaps after, he was used in pass protection - something he's not real good at to begin with.

If he's healthy enough to be on the field, then he's healthy enough to be used as a weapon, not ignored.

He performed all year long. People finally gave him credit in week 16. They then proceeded to shit on him all over again right after that. That's just covering their asses and then bashing all over again.

I don't know who DN is, but this has been going on for the past 2 years, and I'm not painting with a broad brush at all. It's been obvious to witness, and the board split over it.

However, this stuff is not the topic here, so I'll drop it.

Don't be coy; you know DeezNutz.

10/22 - 68 yards - 1 TD - 0 INT

16/28 - 176 yards - 0 TD - 2 INT

16/29 - 156 yards - 0 TD - 0 INT

14/26 - 152 yards - 1 TD - 0 INT

17/31 - 196 yards - 1 TD - 0 INT

11/33 - 115 yards - 0 TD - 2 INT

9/18 - 70 yards - 0 TD - 3 INT



Yeah, he performed all year long.

Some games he performed poorly, some he performed pretty average, some games he performed well.

That's only 41% of the games this season. Too little to worry about. Luckily, '09 was stellar, but that's everyone else's fault.

LMAO

He doesn't fit the mold for an OLB in the Patriots style of defense.

Also how come a dumbass Patriot fan defends Cassel more than any Chief fan. It just puzzles the hell out of me. I guess we all should go to PhinHaven and just tell them how lucky they are to have Thigpen.

He'll probably be going earlier than expected anyways with the Texans hiring Phillips.

As long as we don't have a Nose, it doesn't really matter who we have at OLB because he's going to have to cover for our NT instead of being used to his potential.

STEPHEN PAEA, DT, OREGON ST.

Well, one in five agree with you...so you aren't alone that's for sure.

Since the Chiefs are obviously set at QB for years and at WR they need to either draft a defensive tackle or draft a left tackle and move Albert to right tackle.

#1 is QB
#2 is NT
#3 is OLB/WR, they really are interchangeable needs. We don't need a 16 sack guy or a 100 catch WR, we need an 8-10 sack guy or a burner who will catch 55 balls and average about 17 YPC.

Yeah who wants 16 sacks when you can have 8 or 100 catches when you can have 55? Wait........WHAT???????

By your logic, I guess we need a 200 catch guy and a 50 sack guy.

I'm not saying you'd pass those up, I'm saying those needs aren't as pressing as the need for a QB. Not even close really.

We need a #2 WR with deep speed and a LOLB in the LaMarr Woodley mold.

NT is a bigger need than either one of those, and QB is the biggest by far.

No No No. The Chiefs need a solid guy who can get them a guaranteed 3 sacks and a 30 catch guy who will get 53.5 Yards a catch. And a shiticle qb who you can bet your bottom dollar will get 3,000 yards every ****ing season NO MATTER WHAT!

I actually agree. You have to have a solid NT to even think playing a 3-4. In a perfect world they are Vince Wilfork,Larry Fitzgerald, and a decent QB away from greatness.

:thumb:

Well, QB would be my draft priority every year until we get an elite one. Unfortunately, I don't believe the Chiefs will a) be in a position to get an elite prospect nor b) be inclined to do so.

Second biggest priority would be a WR to replace Dwayne "No Show" Bowe.

Third priority would be a legit NT.

First of all, this should have been a public poll. Second, I am VERY surprised there weren't more votes for OLB. One of our top two needs if you ask me.

1. WR
2. OLB
3. C/NT/OT

I'm not saying we don't need a QB, b/c even if one were in the Cassel camp, we still obviously need to replace Brodie. Plus, we all know Cassel will get another year. I don't think we take a QB early and I definitely don't think we should, mostly b/c I don't like many of the top guys at all in this draft, and the guys who MIGHT be alright, will not be around.(Gabbert, Newton) I'd really rather take a guy later. WR/OLB are my interchangeable 1 and 2. A guy like Foles won't be there in the 3rd. So I say QB, for me, would be 4th round or later.

Yes, I am an Iowa fan, but I also know we could do A LOT worse(Mallet) than Stanzi. As a backup and a guy to groom, he offers a lot of potential. I'd love to see us take him late if he's sure to get drafted. If not, I pray they get him as a UDFA.

I think outside of QB or offensive linemen, WR takes the longest to develop into a dependable starter. While there are exceptions, most the good ones break out in year 3.

cam thomas lol

Lucky? I would submit Clark Hunt got lucky in his wallet and he was the only one. KC got exposed badly.

Wide receiver has to be addressed. Theres just no way around it. Bowe was completely invisible in the biggest game of the season and there was absolutely nobody else to throw the football to. The offense cant be as one dimensional as it was this season and have success next year. We need a guy, (or two) that can help open up this passing attack and actually get some separation from the defenders.


Defensively, we need a pure nosetackle. A big, badass, pocket collapsing nosetackle that is going to take away that ability for the opposing QB to step up when Hali comes screaming off the edge to destroy him albeit in the clutches of a full on sleeper hold. A guy who commands two blockers in the running game and helps protect for our linebackers. We get that, this defense improves immensely, immediately.


The third for me is a tossup. I selected OLB to get another pass rusher to complement Hali, but just as badly is the need for a Center. Wiegmann had a good run, but its over.

We don't need one to breakout next year. Plenty of guys are good enough to be a solid #2 as rookies before developing into #1s in their second or third years. There are numerous examples of this in the last few seasons.

You can argue that with this teams offensive gameplan we dont need one to sit a year.

I'm not convinced Cassel is the answer, but given the dearth of quality proven QBs in the NFL in general....I don't think "replacing" him will be easy. I think it's more likely that better protection, and a threat opposite Bowe can make him a legitimate NFL quarterback--not unlike Trent Green.

A year ago, our Oline was dogshit; and our receivers were abysmal. This year, the Oline improved to mediocre/serviceable....and our recieving corp remained abysmal, or got worse. Yet as a team we made progress (though not a real 6 game improvement.) I'm convinced it is easier to find another legit WR or two, and a couple of O-linemen....than it would be to find a franchise QB.

It's not as hard to find a QB as some think. Until you have a QB who can put a team on his back and win the game when all the chips are on the table, that's the biggest need on your team.

I voted for OLB, but I could see pursuing one in free agency. Actually my dream acquisition would be Manny Lawson assuming SF doesn't lock him up. It's my understanding he'll be a UFA, but I may not be up to date on his contract status.

I also voted for QB, only because it's what I wish would happen, not because it's realistic. It will take Cassel being exposed by a brutally tough schedule to get him off his throne, IMO. Here's hoping for a miracle year of development or QBOTF 2012.

If Luck changes his mind and falls to us, pick him. Until then, let's focus on building a team that doesn't force the QB to win by himself.

If Newton falls I bite the bullet and take him. Let him sit a year while someone works with making him more of a pocket QB.

There are only so many franchise QBs: Peyton Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Rothlesberger, Ryan, maybe Rivers and Bradford...and there's a drop off to the Flacco, (young) Hasselbeck, Vick, Romo, Sanchez, Eli Manning, Freeman level....and a bigger drop off after that. I think Cassel can belong in the second group, with another WR and better protection.

On a brighter note, if Cassel is as bad as critics think and our schedule as tough as it initially seems it could be (and our "improvement" this year as much of a fraud as some claim,) then we could be in a position to draft Luck (or a top ten pick, anyway) next year, afterall. Heh.

Unless Cassel gets hit by truck or something between now and April, I see zero chance of the Chiefs drafting anything other than a late round development QB.

With teams like the 49ers, Titans, and Vikings drafting ahead of us, realistically, the only QB I see falling to us would be Gabbert/Locker. I can hope that the Vikings end up with Orton and Gabbert falls to us with the Dolphins picking Locker.

Mallet - 49ers
Newton - Titans
Gabbert/Locker - Vikings/Dolphins

I think either Gabbert/Locker fall farther than expected. Gabbert is getting really overrated right now. He's got the arm and scrambles well but his accuracy and footwork suck. Locker just plain sucked this year.

Gabbert is really the only QB I like as a first round pick. He plays in a spread offense and has work to do but he isnt a gimmick QB like Newton/Locker and Mallet shits himself just alittle bit less than Cassel.