We can only hope...

Kiper on JaMarcus Russell leading up to the '07 draft. http://www.aolnews.com/2010/05/10/th...arcus-russell/

"JaMarcus Russell is going to immediately energize that fanbase, that football team -- on the practice field, in that locker room," ESPN's Mel Kiper said at the time. "Three years from now you could be looking at a guy that's certainly one of the elite top five quarterbacks in this league. ...You're talking about a 2-3 year period once he's under center. Look out because the skill level that he has is certainly John Elway-like."

Just saying....Having said, I hope Stanzi does well :thumb:

LMAO

"*Another King gem from '98 draft: " I think (Peyton) Manning is 3 percent better than Leaf and will be, long term, a better pro, but Leaf will be good too." (3% BETTER???... Manning: 216 career TD's, 92 rating, Ryan Leaf: 14 TD's 36 ints. 3 seasons....What kind of percentage is that?????......50 BAZILLION%????)

YOU DIDN'T THINK WE WOULD FORGET MEL KIPER DID YOU???

Mel Kiper in an ESPN chat April 18, 2001:

batman: How does the Chiefs running back situation look, do you think they will draft a running back like (LaDanian) Tomlinson or (Duece) McAllister, or will they sign someone like Priest Holmes?
Mel Kiper Jr.: I don't think Priest Holmes is feature back material. RB is certainly a need, as is QB. It will be interesting to see if the Trent Green situation takes place. (As a Chief, Holmes has 70 TD's and over 5,000 yards rushing in 4 seasons)

Mel on Kalimba Edwards before the 2002 draft: "Edwards flies out of the blocks, has improved his pass-rush technique over the years, will be a 10-sack type guy and always hustles on plays directed to the opposite side of the field."

Kiper on the 1998 draft debate of Manning or Leaf? "He isn't John Elway, Dan Marino or Jim Kelly, but he's as good as it gets in college football," Kiper said of Manning. "A lot of these teams in the NFL are desperate for quarterbacks and he's the best out there, with Ryan Leaf a real close second."

*Check out Mel Kiper going 0 for 31 in the 2001 NFL draft in his mock posted a week before the draft! (He got Michael Vick as the #1 pick but to the Chargers, not the Falcons...that was as close to a right pick as Mel Hair got in 2001)

*Mel got 5 right in this 2004 mock draft 3 weeks before the draft! (That's 6.4%)

*Here is SI's 1999 mock draft where they went 1 for 31 (Tim Couch to Cleveland with #1 pick...that's 0.3%) It had Lions taking Jevon Kearse with 9th pick.

I'm not making fun of these guys, the point is this: The NFL draft is one of the least understood days in sports from the GM's to the mock jockeys on the net. Take a look at the post on the blog which explains that almost 50% of top ten picks from 1990-2000 were busts! The numbers decline from there. (We'll talk about it on Thursday's SNL Show.) Teams have their boards, Mel slicks his hair with cement and ESPN makes a male soap opera out of the whole thing. It's a slick production, but it's closer to a game of Russian Roulette than anything else.

*NFL DRAFT: DID YOU KNOW?
at the 1979 Fall meetings, NFL owners unanimously (28-0) rejected the idea of allowing upstart network ESPN to televise the Draft
George Grande, Bob Ley and former NFL General Manager Joe Thomas anchored ESPN's inaugural Draft coverage in 1980
Mel Kiper, Jr. joined the ESPN crew in 1984"

Fun haiter. ROFL

I'd be fine with that so long as we make it 2-3 months instead of 2-3 years to start.

Stanzi ftw

That's impeccable logic, btw.

Considering Cassel's playing the next 32 games for us under center, I highly doubt Stanzi will have the best NFL career in that window.

I wonder if he plays pool?

I remember when Herman ****ing Edwards was the Jets coach, and later hired by the Chiefs.

Mike Greenberg used to rant about what a piss poor coach he was, and when hired by Carl, he warned Chiefs fans that we would hate this guy.

Now that he's an ESPN analyst, Mike Greenberg acts as though he's the greatest coach ever.

What a coward that useless bastard is.

part of it is.

No matter who the player is, some of you want nothing to do with a player just because of the school he went to, when it comes to Iowa.

Most of you wanted nothing to do with Moeaki last year, even though you had likely never seen the kid play to gauge how good he actually was and wouldn't listen to reason as to why he would be a great fit for our offense.

I compared him to Tony G many times and people acted like I deserved to be laughed out of town for it. I said that he would have been a first round talent if it weren't for the injuries and that all of his injuries were of the broken bone variety and wouldn't cause future concern...nobody wanted to listen to reason...now they see it with their own eyes every week.

Who's laughing now?

I say that a lot of the things Stanzi needs to improve on, can in fact be coached by a guy like Zorn and that in a couple years he will be a guy that ends up being one of the biggest steals of this draft class, but what do I know?

I like Moeki, but I still think we could have stood pat and gotten Jimmy Graham, who I think will prove to be every bit as good over the course of their careers.

as a receiver, probably right.

As a football player overall, I don't think so.

Moeaki already blocks as well as almost any tight end in the NFL and should only get better.

I also think that if Moeaki played on a team that didnt need tto keep its TEs in to block so much, he would have had an even better season catching the ball.

There wasn't a single poster worth a shit who didn't want Moeaki because he went to Iowa. Most couldn't care less about that nonsense.

The problem many had with the selection is that the dude was injured. A lot.

Honestly, no one cares enough about Iowa for there to be an anti-Iowa bias.

I think we're about ****ing due