well if Orton plays like he did against Green Bay I see no reason why he can't be a winning QB...and I see no reason why he can't start next year and still draft a QB in an early round.

Looking forward to seeing what he does against Oakland.

I get the idea... but I guess I just didn't think anybody was going to trade out of RG III. He's too dynamic of a player. I still think there's a chance he would've jumped Barkley. There are personnel people who like RG III over Luck. That might have something to do with this decision today.

And the flipside is, if you want to trade up that badly, you'll get it done. When the Jets wanted Sanchez or the Falcons wanted Julio Jones, they got it done. Of course there's no guarantee, but this whole thing is us playing around in fantasy land anyway.

I'm just happy I have something to watch for...

Those Palko weeks were the least watchable Chiefs games in the history of me being a fan.

My thoughts exactly.

Additionally - if he continues to progress at USC next season like he did this season, he'll be next year's Andrew Luck.

Barkley has serious momentum right now.

Or he could end up Leinerting himself.

I'd have gone, but he's evidently willing to gamble on himself and there's something to be said for that. The good news is that this really did appear to be a shallow QB class at the top anyway. Maybe his addition to next year's draft pool will help us more than being in this year's pool would have.

If he could play like he did last week, we'd have our franchise QB. He had over a 100 rating.

But we know that's not who he is. Kyle is a hot/cold guy. He's good for a 3 Int day sooner or later.

He's okay for now. And better than Cassel for sure. But not the answer.

All I know is that looking at the remaining QB's on the board to draft, and the free agent class available, when some of your top options to probably hit the market are going to be Kyle Orton and David Garrard and Jason Campbell, the GM's who have Matt Flynn and Ryan Mallet on their roster probably became a lot more attractive to QB needy teams...

19 points against the worst defense in football is hardly something to write home about. If he gets credit for all his yards and the win, then he needs to the one that you pin the lack of effective scoring on.

Why would anyone want Manning? Old, hurt, and same old same old.

My suspicion is that they aren't really the worst defense in football. When your offense is always giving you an enormous lead, I suspect you're giving up lots of yards due to catchup football and due to playing a "let them take 10 plays to get downfield when you're ahead by 28" type of prevent.

Yes and no.

There was a missed TD pass that was simply dropped by McClain. Another that Baldwin probably should have had and another that was just a timing issue between a QB and brand new receivers on a back-shoulder throw.

Those are 2 TDs that weren't his fault and another that was more a product of short prep time. There's reason to believe that a lot of that will either firm up or iron out over time.

The problem has never been 'Good Orton'. Everyone agrees that when Orton is right, he can be a very good quarterback. The problem is 'Bad Orton'. When Orton's not right, he's a turnover machine that can kill any team he's leading.

The key for Orton will be to cut back on the number of 'Bad Orton' games while also lessening just how bad he is when that guy emerges.

I don't see that as an impossible task, to be honest. He's definitely a viable option as a 2-3 year stop-gap while we take a stab or two at a 10-year option. Overpay the man if need be, but get a damn quarterback in here.

Barkley is a dumbass.

That's definately possible, but we also marched up and down the field on them at will even when we had the lead. We just could not punch it in, except for a late TD. I have heard playcalling and dropped passes as the reasons for it, but it was the same playcalling and recievers that allowed for us to march up and down the field. So to blame playcalling and the recievers for the 1 TD then one must also say that it was GB's weak defense that allowed for us to move the ball so effortlessly and not the players or play calling.

We might have to go that route although it makes me sick to think about. I highly doubt Pioli will trade up enough to get Luck or RGIII which are the only two QBs worth trading up for. No one else is in my opinion worth a first round selection. I don't want us to draft a second round caliber or later talent at QB in the first just for the sake of drafting a first round QB. That would be counter productive. For what it's worth, if I was in Pioli's position I would give up as many picks as needed to draft either Luck or RGIII.

well that sucks he wont have a chance to get him this year

If we could get Manning for reasonable compensation we'd immediately be a super bowl contender...

so why wouldn't we get Manning?

This but forget about Luck, I`m thinking if ever the 1st overall pick is available, it could cost a lot more than some fans around here think.

We definitly have to trade up for Griffin if possible.

Especially since it seems pretty likely that the Colts can't really trade him due to a poison pill in his deal.

More likely that they'd simply have to cut him. At that point, all he costs is money. Well shit - money's just money and I agree that this team is absolutely SB caliber with a healthy Manning.

The only question is whether or not he's actually healthy. We simply don't know the answer to that question.

If Manning checks out physically, throw a bunch of money at him for 3 years, get him a new RT (sorry, gonna go true-fan there; RT is easily our biggest need position on this team right now) and go after Tannehill, Foles or another toolsy quarterback in the 2nd round that you can develop behind him for 2 or 3 years.

Luck's a pipe dream; he's just not happening. And RGIII, while talented as all hell, is going to cost an entire draft and I just don't think he's worth that. Bringing Manning in to take advantage of the prime years of these guys while developing a young QB behind him to extend the prime of others is really a pretty good route.

Jones/Foles/Tannehill here we come.

I get this franchise QB or bust argument. However, saying that any wins are pointless because it takes us out of discussion for (player A) right now is absurd.

The QB is stocked with 2 franchise QBs now. There are too many variables that can happen in the draft where even if we lost both those weeks that those players wouldn't be available due to either someone in the top 3 taking Griffin after Luck, or a team trading up and giving a king's ransom to do so.

I just can't buy any argument that says wins are damaging to a franchise.

I agree with this take. At this point Manning/Tannehill > Orton/Cassel

Really spot on.

I'm pissed as anyone that this draft sucks for qbs, but it's not a death blow.

If Manning is out there, pay him for 2 years and grab a guy the following year. We just can't sit idle though if he is with the potential to waste the prime years of the true superstars we have on this team.

Coming from USC with the new NFL CBA, he would likely be taking a pay cut.

yes to luck .. no to rg3 .. yes to manning .. maybe to a 3rd rounder .. but still need sumone to lead a youngster .. ok with lookin to see what our youngster can do ......

Why? He knows he's got a very good shot at being drafted #1 overall.

Smart move, IMO

Whats the point? With the new salary cap, the top 5 players made about the same amount of money. And since he's a QB, he'd likely get more money that the other non-QBs drafted ahead of him.

I don't see why he'd want to go back just to be drafted #1 overall. Don't see the benefit.

yep.

Contracts for the top 5 last year

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="443"><tbody><tr height="12"><td align="right" height="12">1</td> <td>Carolina Panthers</td> <td>Cam Newton</td> <td>QB</td> <td>4 yrs, $22 M; $22 G</td> </tr> <tr height="12"> <td align="right" height="12">2</td> <td>Denver Broncos</td> <td>Von Miller</td> <td>LB</td> <td>4 yrs, $21 M; $21 G</td> </tr> <tr height="12"> <td align="right" height="12">3</td> <td>Buffalo Bills</td> <td>Marcell Dareus</td> <td>DL</td> <td>4 yrs, $20.4 M; 20.4 G</td> </tr> <tr height="12"> <td align="right" height="12">4</td> <td>Cincinnati Bengals</td> <td>A.J. Green</td> <td>WR</td> <td>4 yrs, $19.6 M; $19.6 G</td> </tr> <tr height="12"> <td align="right" height="12">5</td> <td>Arizona Cardinals</td> <td>Patrick Peterson</td> <td>CB</td> <td>4 yrs, $19.5 M; $19.5 G</td></tr></tbody></table>

Indeed, not the same money at all.

Matt Stafford got $42 mil guaranteed

I still think its money related.

Or, maybe he just feels he's not quite ready for the NFL.

So did Cam Newton.

Sincerely,

Miss State
Tenn
every other team that bid under Auburn...

That 2.5 million or what ever the $, trial balloon on Orton looks alot better this afternoon

1. RGIII (if available...he won't be)
2. Resign Orton for next year
3. Stanzi as backup

Green Bay is not the worst D in football...not even ****ing close.

The only thing that interests me about Barkley is seeing how interested people actually are in him. The guy is a total toad. I would hate it if we drafted this prag.

Seems he just appreciates in the moment how awesome his college life is. Its a risk of getting hurt, but I guess he figures the $ will be there next year and from then on.

Better hope Orton is the answer for a few years and Stanzi becomes QBOTF because this ****ed our chances at a 1st round QB.

I'd imagine he has some kind of insurance policy.

:spock:

Ryan Tannehill in the 1st.

Stupid

Tyson Jackson

Not sure what that had to do with anything.

Tannehill in the 1st is a reach.

Tyson Jackson

Turd herder

At this point, who would you rather have? Tyson Jackson or Mark Sanchez? (not implying that Tyson was a good pick by any means....but having Sanchez as your projected QBOTF would be frustrating as hell)... but still, Sanchez > Cassel. If they went to college at the same time.... I wonder who would have started????

I've watched a lot of Barkley. I'm not impressed. It's just more USC hype. Sanchez, Cassel, Leinhart...... he will end up fitting in with them. And via interviews, he seems very baggadoucheous to me.

Next year's draft class has to offer something better than him. Look at the strides RG3 made this year... coming into the season he was barely cracking some analysts top 10 lists.

cause everybody remembers the #1 pick, even if you bust, you won't be forgotten.

Pioli better ****ing trade up to get RG3 God Damnit. There is zero chance he will be there when we pick now.

I would MUCH rather have RG3 than Iran Barkley.

hell ya, it just means that another team is gonna take RG3 that probably woulda taken Barkley. I want RG3 bad, he's gonna be God-like.

The bust factor is probably a tad higher for RG3.

What does that even mean? A bad pick means any other bad pick is something we should do? I really don't understand how Tyson Jackson has anything to do with Tannenhil being a bad first round pick.

As you say, the difference is that we would be stuck suffering through Sanchez pains for 2 more years before dumping him. Although since Pioli may still have rocks in his head, we may be stuck with that situation anyway.

I don't think it was realistic to expect to see him anyway. There are 5 teams ahead of us that possibly want a QB. Even with Barlkey we were never going to see RG3.

The potential bidding war for trading up for a QB among the dozen plus NFL teams in need of QB upgrade could produce silliness beyond what was possible when the top picks got twice what they are now getting $$$$ in contract.

There are some good QB prospects this year. None is in the Elway/Manning class.

The whole concept that "whatever rookie QB we get will be our savior" has a historically high probability of ending up like Tampa Bay with Steve Young... and then Vinnie... and then Dilfer...

Barkley plays at USC. His "bust" potential is off the charts.

I'll take the Steve Young option.

But Luck is the best prospect to come out since Manning, he's in that class.

This is good news. Now we can draft Aaron Rodgers' brother next year or whenever he comes out.

I agree. Drafting a QB is out the window now, IMO. It's time to go stop gap. Again. But at least we can take advantage of the talent we have now and continue to get better in the mean time as well. I was against going after a guy like Manning but we really don't have any other options now. I wouldn't mind Orton staying but if Manning is healthy get him. Or we could go another year with Cassel and that would most definitely get us a top QB next year in the draft...

Heh, very true.

Yeah, Jordan has one year left, and wouldn't grade as first round or even close yet. But he made great strides for Vandy this year, is working hard and, well, doing the best he can with some rather shoddy pass protection. Fun prospect for next year...

Steve Young is a lesson for everyone here. When you say "the QB wins or loses" and the other 45 actives don't matter, you get results like Tampa dumping Steve Young on the Niners...

Steve Young was not the problem in Tampa. The supporting cast was, as it was for Vinnie after...

And no, that is not any assessment or comparison to any current Chief QB...

ESPN ticker says Bob Stoops has a gut feeling that Landry Jones is going to stay in college too.

That would be smart for him. His stock dropped big time after Broyles went down.

Tottally disagree. Now is the time or never to draft the best Qb prospect we can trade up for.

This team with the return of Berry, Charles and Moeaki (well obviously there will be some other injured players next year but we'll probably be a bit more lucky) will be better next year even if Cassell is our starting QB and that will give us a 1st round draft pick even lower than this year.

I sincerely don't understand any fan saying let's not force things and let's wait to see if we'll be in a better spot next year to draft a top QB prospect.

This team is stacked of talent and is a decent QB away from a superbowl run and that for many years if we can actually find one.

If the Colts beat Jacksonville and either Rams or Vikings get the pick Ponder or Bradford wouldn't be bad options for the Chiefs to go get. Even though I full expect Cleveland would be the leader in that hunt.
Posted via Mobile Device

I wouldn't pay higher than a 2nd for either of them.

From what looked like a strong draft at QB with four first round choices, is now looking pretty weak with only two.

I wouldn't mind.. Orton, Stanzi and Bradford (:

Bradford wouldn't be brought in to be the backup. I wouldn't give up a first for him. I just don't see him thriving in an offense that isn't the WCO.

The price is too steep to get a QB this year. Who will come in and save this franchise in this year's draft after Luck and RG3? I don't see Pioli trading up to get any player.

I think the Luck potential for busting is just like any other high draft pick.


Let's not forget who his coach was in college for a few years. It's the same coach that manages to cover most of Alex Smith's faults, and I wouldn't be surprised if Luck fails if he goes to a team with shitty coaching.

The media hype is so blinding that we have failed to notice his slight dropoff since Harbaugh left.

His stats are damn near identical this year compared to last year.

2010 - 263 372 70.7 3338 9.0 32 81 8
2011 - 261 373 70.0 3170 8.5 35 62 9

Including a few bone-crushing pick-6's?


I'm not saing he's bad, he's just not the automatic elixir that people are painting him to be.

And I'm saying your Harbaugh theory is bullshit.

EDIT: BTW, which "bone-crushing pick-6's" are you talking about? The one against USC that put them up late? After which Luck led a game tying drive and eventual win. Or, the one against Oregon where he put the ball in his receivers gut?

We shall see.

Translation: I just got taken to task for making a bullshit post and I've got nuthin'.