Originally Posted by Baby Lee (Post 5317691)

It's over 'Hahmmy.'
You're presently arguing against points not even espoused.
I don't WANT a shitty QB, I want the QB position put in the right reference frame regarding the entire team. I want you to realize that those who have it, don't have it all the time so that success with them is a no-brainer, and those who have it, still don't have much without a great team around them.
And you're plowing on, founding your premise that we have to suck, get a super high pick and use that super high pick on a QB, on the stellar play of a cadre of second day picks and a bag boy from Hyvee.
You're plowing on insisting excellent game managers aren't game managers because you don't like the term.
You don't see me espousing Cowher, so long as he finds himself a Grbac or Slash to bring along with him, and given Schotty's history here, I'm not even all that strongly in favor of him [though I'd take it, at this point, I'd rather I got to enjoy watching him build a winner elsewhere, preferably not in the AFC].
My stances aren't code for something you wish it were so you could attack. My stance is rock solid D, rock solid lines, a potent running attack, and a QB who can perform when called on, leads the team, understands the game quicker and better than anyone else on the field, and doesn't make mistakes, wherever we get him from and however he is developed.

Originally Posted by Duplicitous Dbag

Jags are what I've long aspired for the Chiefs to be, only I'd want a D as good as the '00 Ravens to boot.
Funny they have all the hallmarks of what Marty tried to instill, right down to a mini-RBBC that is far from a laughingstock, solid low-profile QB who doesn't make mistakes, disciplined line play, etc.

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 5317690)

Oh, okay. Twice a generation. My bad.

I'm happier if we're picking #3 than #6, too. However, at this point we really don't know who's going to be here or gone at those picks. If Stafford is a twice-a-generation talent at quarterback, he's an automatic number one pick. However, if that's the case, why is he not the consensus #1 pick of all the talking heads? (And yeah, I know that many of them don't know what they're talking about, but you'd think a twice-per-generation quarterback is a no-brainer.)

If you want Stafford, I want Stafford. I want a franchise quarterback. However, things change so much between October and April that I'm not going to try to lose games for draft position. For all we know, Stafford could go into the army or get shot by Plaxico Burress or score a 2 on his Wonderlic or get caught with marijuana, and drop 20 draft spots.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5318072)

It's not just about Stafford, and he's not a twice in a generation quarterback. Stop making shit up. It's about the entire draft. The draft isn't one round. This isn't the NBA where they only thing that matters is the lottery.

Originally Posted by doomy3 (Post 5318090)

well, Palmer was drafted 6 years ago, so basically you are saying Stafford is a twice a generation QB, right?

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5318084)

He's never going to admit to the Jacksonville thing because their season makes him look like a moron.

Originally Posted by banyon (Post 5318099)

A generation is about 25 years. (Gen X, Y)

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5318059)

Actually, you're completely full of shit.

You're stance is the 2007 Jags. You've said as much on this forum. The 2007 Jags really built themselves for the future, didn't they?

Rock solid D, Rock solid line, potent running attack, "QB who doesn't make mistakes".

You're the one who is equivocating because he's on the losing end of the argument.

You've basically went from "QB is just part of the team" and "I want a QB who doesn't make mistakes" to a leader with better field awareness than anyone and can carry the team in spurts. That's a franchise QB to a T.

From earlier this year:



But please, keep spinning.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5318072)

It's not just about Stafford, and he's not a twice in a generation quarterback. Stop making shit up. It's about the entire draft. The draft isn't one round. This isn't the NBA where they only thing that matters is the lottery.

Originally Posted by Baby Lee (Post 5318134)

Actually, a duplicitous dbag would more likely fit a person who alters a quote header so it can't be linked back, and characterizes a remark from the playoffs from last year as 'for earlier this year.' True in the sense that it was January 2008, but dbagly duplicitous in that you suggest it was regarding this years jags, or a take from when the jags were sucky.
And I've already said I haven't seen enough of the jags this year to know why they've fallen off.
And this whole argument has been more about what you HAVE TO sacrifice and where you HAVE TO get a franchise QB, because he can only come from a top draft pick, way more than what skill sets he has. I want a smart, mistake-free leader from wherever we find or develop him, and a great team around him as previously outlined. You want to tank seasons for a shot at blue-chippers, who most often get their blue chip status off physique and arm strength and other attributes that belie how they'll respond to the NFL game.

Originally Posted by Captain one who sucks the penisy (Post 4505207)

Jags are what I've long aspired for the Chiefs to be, only I'd want a D as good as the '00 Ravens to boot.
Funny they have all the hallmarks of what Marty tried to instill, right down to a mini-RBBC that is far from a laughingstock, solid low-profile QB who doesn't make mistakes, disciplined line play, etc.

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 5318158)

Okay, three times a generation? Four? Seven? Does a Stafford come along every year? This was the major foundation of your initial argument for throwing games, because Stafford is an "amazingly rare prospect" http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...=palmer&page=4 - Post 49.

Would you still want to throw games if Stafford wasn't there?

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5318224)

Amazingly rare would seem to indicate a once every five year prospect. Please though, continue on this semantic distraction while you formulate another 300 response poll, though.

And would I want us to lose this year for a higher draft pick even if Stafford weren't there? Hell yes. This team needs ****ing playmakers, not Rocky Boiman and Wade Smith

Originally Posted by doomy3 (Post 5318264)

Other than Stafford, who are those playmakers this year?

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5318288)

Orakpo is a playmaker. Taylor Mays is a playmaker. Maualuga is a playmaker. Options 2 and 3 don't have top 5 value, but I believe Orakpo does. Beanie Wells will be a Larry Johnson type back (I wouldn't take him, though). And there are 3-4 franchise LTs in this draft.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5318288)

Orakpo is a playmaker. Taylor Mays is a playmaker. Maualuga is a playmaker. Options 2 and 3 don't have top 5 value, but I believe Orakpo does. Beanie Wells will be a Larry Johnson type back (I wouldn't take him, though). And there are 3-4 franchise LTs in this draft.