That will explain why the Oakland QBs all looked great.

And look I'm not against trading down if they decide they want to go with an OT for the right side you just don't do that in the top 10.

If the Chiefs really believe Cassel is their guy than they should give him things to work with and this is also a really bad defensive draft. If the Chiefs came out traded down and took a OT a Center and a WR I'd understand why.

It's the trenches thhat make pr break NFL QBs. Many thought Trent Green was a system QB. He was in a system that lead the league if thats the case. Cassel has shown that he can learn on the run, He's worth the effort. Especially after giving up the 2nd for him. Had we not traded for him, the arguement would carry more weight. Though I am not sold on Sanchez in particular.

Cassel is our boy. Let's give him the bast chance to succeed by putting talent around him on both sides of the ball.

No place for buyers remorse now. Time to get behind him, like we did Green.

Oh please we all know that Randy didn't give 2 shits when he was there, it's not remotely the same.

That line was a bit overblown...no one should need that to succeed.

By the way, I started this thread because, you're right, the hype was affecting me.....still is. I was looking for some good Cassel arguments to make me feel better about where we are. Cause I'm not sure that I do.

....as if it mattered.

Absolutely not. He still hasn't done nothing. And it looks like he's the next Jeff George.

I never said he couldn't throw the ball. I said he's done nothing in the NFL. He still hasn't. He may even wind up being the next TO. His own equalizer. Stay tuned.

lol...really good point. Still...like the argument.

I didn't feel that great about Priest Holmes.

So there ya go.

Ya never know. Sanchez certainly doesn't make me feel more confident than a player who has shown he can play at an NFL level.

Hasn't done anything, meaning what? Hasn't won a superbowl or a playoff game? Cause, he peformed excellent last year. TO doesn't count that much. If this guy plays for any other team than the Broncos you would see him differently. Stay tuned.

Ywo words

Jamarcus Russell

And we didn't win squat with Green and that line.

I'm not interested in building a good team. I'm interested in building a championship team.

Great QBs transcend systems.

Joe Montana may not have been as great if not in San Farn, but we saw what he did for the Chiefs in his short time there.

Tom Brady has evolved as the system in NE has evolved.

Give me a great QB and I'll take my chances, regardless of system.

You're right. That's what I'm hoping for. Again, not against Cassel.

Montana did good in KC...He was great in San Francisco behind that line, within that system. Steve Young was also great there. Even Grbac looked good there and look how stellar he was for us.

Really? Do you think moss had a moment after Brady went down that he thought, the season's over, might as well phone in the rest of the season? I'm not saying this happed but it's possible, and as the season went along Moss and the rest of the team saw that Cassel could play well?

I watched Cassel play, and I don't think he was a "system" player, or just relying on the talent around him. He made plays work that weren't working. He wasn't just throwing to wide open receivers all day. He was making accurate passes sometimes on the run, because the o-line wasn't that good for them last year.

He choked down the stretch last year. Probably the hangover. Cost Shanny his job.

He's a loose cannnon.

His offense was top 2 or 3 in moving the ball but 16th in scoring.

Great quartebacks can sometimes transcend systems. I personally think that there are quarterbacks that could have been great, but the systems killed them before they ever had the opportunity.

Ah yes, hurry up and wait. The great crutch argument of our time.


That's quite "Tebowish" of you Sauto, and it inspires miles of confidence in my football-loving soul. :rolleyes:


At this point, I would like to take a moment to thank Carl Peterson for single-handidly creating quite possibly the most jello-brained, ass-backward fan base in the History of Professional Sports.
I would also like to acknowledge his lasting, herpes-like effect on the Chiefs Nation. We're chugging along, starting to think straight and cleansing ourselves of two decades of idiocy, and then our Carl-Herpes kicks in.
The brain shuts down, and we're getting in a tizzy over a ****ing lineman;
A LINEMAN!
So thank you Carl, and may your balls be roasted over a fire while a lost Amazon Rain Jungle Tribe shrinks your worthless ****ing head for use as a spear ornament.

:spock:

When he started all of 5 games in '95 and 4 games in '96? And he wasn't really worth a shit in '96, too.

Championship teams have to play defense. Ask any great QB.

OK, point well made. But he's a pro bowl quarterback. Don't throw him away as a no-count. The whole scenario is not played out. You may very well be right.

I don't think that having a stout defense and a franchise QB are mutually exclusive.

Kinda made my point about Cutler here. I'm also for drafting Curry now, by the way.

Great QBs dont throw picks in the red zone. Or get hammered before games. Nor do they throw team mates under the bus after a loss. You dont expect much from your QB I can see. Just throw a fast ball and your "one of the greats".

I would like us to draft Curry if we stay at 3.

Now that we have signed Zack Thomas or LB needs are solved.:rolleyes:

What's that all about?

Brett Favre got hammered before games...

I was being sarcastic.....

Didn't know that. I certainly dont see that as an arguement for success as an NFL QB. It's a problem. That only means he could have been better.

Maybe Cutler will be the next Favre. He definately hasn't "arrived" up to this point. He's looking like the next Jeff George to me. But I've been wrong before.

It's a reach to pick any 3-4 ILB in the top 5. I don't understand why people think Curry is a no-brainer. The Chiefs are obviously transitioning into a 3-4 and will probably play it exclusively within the next 2-3 years. Curry is a borderline top 5 pick in a 4-3, but he's an enormous reach in a 3-4.

I realize the options are limited. But I think you get a lot better value with an average nose tackle like Raji or an average 3-4 OLB like Everett Brown than you do with a terrific 3-4 ILB like Curry.

I don't think I every said he was "one of the greats".... Just that he was a pro bowler. He's not a bust.

I'm still on board for Curry too. I don't get the Zack Thomas signing at all unless they are looking for a player coach, which may very well be. That would be actually brilliant. Ok, we'll go with that.

Oh **** me with a broken bottle
Posted via Mobile Device

The problem is that people assume that because Brady excelled in the system, that means anybody can.

Brady makes that system great. The Pats' o-line is not good. Brady makes them look better because he makes lightning fast reads and can read a blitz from a mile away.

Yes, it's true that players like Moss and Welker are outstanding receivers. But the Pats' o-line is fairly average behind any quarterback not named Tom Brady.

#3 is too high of a pick for a nose tackle. It's got to be a game changer type player risk to me, or franchise left tackle, which we may already have like some have said. Curry is a game changer type athlete.

I see the talent. But think he's over rated. Phillip Rivers should have went to the pro bowl in his place. But there's no doubt Cutler has talent. If he can get his ego under control, you may very well be right. If not, he'll self destruct.

Rajis position is much more valuable to the 3-4 than Currys is.

LMAO:LOL:

THESE.

The Lord and Savior Jesus Curry is now off of the Chiefs board, and is of no consequence.

Never really was either.

Uhhhh you're almost 200 comments late to chime in with that one. but thanks.

Bullshit.

ILBs are not game changers.

Thanks for playing.

Try again.

You are definitely right about both of those points.

This doesn't matter. You pick one guy and look only at his positives. You looked at Tyler Thigpen and continually said that he was too short to be an NFL QB. He's 6'1". Your Mark "I WANT TO LICK YOUR TESTICLES-From Mecca" Sanchez is a whole inch taller.

He started 16 games.

This is my biggest detraction against him. This is one of the most statistically relevant things for a QB coming out of college. He needs to improve completion percentage each season, and start at least 3 seasons in college to have a much better chance to succeed in the NFL. This is a fact, and anyone who goes against this is an anomaly.

Assuming we're headed toward running the 3-4, what do you think a DT in this scheme is?

You still here? I thought you were bored with comment #2. Thanks for still playing.

But damn do I love thinking about that tool bag getting snubbed. What an ass-hat. I hate Phil Rivers a lot.

He may not have him pigeon holed as an ILB.

And any player can be a game changer. To say any different is short sighted.

Are you saying Mark Sanchez has bad completion percentage numbers...

And here we are again with this whole Curry can play outside crap.

Excuse the tired cliche but
THIS
Posted via Mobile Device

I didn't say I was bored with.

My comment had to do with the way you presented as a whole new ****ing idea.

My comment had to do with the fact that your revelation was so important that you had to start a new thread to let everyone know that one of your brain cells finally clicked on.

That confuses me too.

The nose tackle is the most important defender in a 3-4. The reason they're not picked higher is usually because most teams will never let a good nose tackle go, and because only a fraction of teams actually run a 3-4.

If he could be a disruptive pass rusher, why didn't he in college?

There are logical reasons for some players. Albert as case in point. What's the logic from Curry backers for why their boy is going to suddenly become something he hasn't been?

Ok....I'm talking about a consistent game changer.

I have to agree, and I'm wondering if that's who we might be looking at.

Curry is a big kid and fast. I think he could be successful on the outside as well.

I'll pray that your life get's better. Things have to be tough, to be that big a prick. Focus on the good things friend. This is just football. Take a deep breath.

Yeah, that Ngata guy makes a difference only once in awhile. He's clearly not the most important cog for that defense.

Great in this years draft you probably aren't gonna get one. Atleast not on defense.

If you're trying to compare the importance of a DT to any other position in the 3-4, I don't think you have a solid grasp of the topic.

Curry's going to make an outstanding OLB... in a 4-3. The worst idea in the world is to take an OLB who is outstanding in coverage and moving in space, and forcing him to gain 20 lbs so that he can be more effective at shedding blocks and winning battles in the trenches. Because that's the only way the Curry experiment works at OLB in a 3-4.

I want to know why people that like Curry immediately go into the "he can play outside" argument.

Odds are he can't, argue for what his strengths are not what he probably won't be able to do.

Can he shed blocks as well as a DE could? Does he have experience consistently putting his hand on the ground?

Curry's strength is moving in space and coverage. By putting him in a 3-4, you're asking him to do more pass rushing than what he's best at. It's a complete misuse of his talents.

Which one of the Currybators wants to carry the water for this one?

Any player can make game chaning plays, but to be a game changer, you have to do it consistently.

He's not a pass rusher, and on defense pass rushers ar the game changers.

LT, DT, Reggie White, Bruce Smith, Dwight Freeny, etc. are game changers.

Ask Cunnigham why we didn't rush the passer last season. We didn't even try. Instead we always played zone and let the worst LB corp in the league chase plays. You dont blame a player for something a coach doesn't try to do. Curry made a lot of plays behind the line but didn't rush the QB.

Sounds more like a scheme or play calling issue. He has shown he can get in the backfield.

I was being sarcastic originally.

A 3-4 defense can't function without an outstanding nose tackle.

Is that game-changing enough?

Just because nose tackles don't get 15 sacks doesn't meant they're game changing. The nose tackle is the most important position in a 3-4 defense. Therefore, they are game changers.

When you are far and away the best player on your college team, if you can rush the passer they'd have you doing it.

I don't even dislike Curry I just get tired of reading this arguments that have no merit. Guy is not pass rusher, argue his strengths don't give him one that he doesn't have.

Listen...when one of my brain cells kicks in...it's an event. Can you make a point without an insult?

Well, a coaching staff would have to be monumentally stupid to have a pass-rushing freak of nature and decide not to use him.

This is making an assumption that pretty much defies common sense.

But you are making an assumption that he can rush the passer based on minimal evidence to support that assuption.

You don't use the #3 on a player with the hope that he has a skillset that you want to use him for,

That's not true. The Chiefs blitzed more than Gun will have you believe. And they were equally unsuccessful. But more importantly, Curry is NOT a natural pass rusher. He is an OLB who can occasionally rush the passer. But his strength is in his ability to move around the field.

It's more important for 4-3 OLBs to move around the field. It's much more important for 4-3 OLBs to be able to shed blocks and rush the passer. It's not saying Curry can't rush the passer. But it's not his strength. Everett Brown and Aaron Maybin are a lot more qualified to be pass rushers than Curry is.

Why do you want me to change?

Well, let's see....he's fast, big, good instincts, agile.....sounds like all of the characteristics of a good pass rusher to me. "OK, the guy with the ball about to pass....go hit him!" It doesn't take a genius to be a pass rusher.

If you think Curry can play outside in a 3-4 this is all I ask..

Give me one example of a traditional 4-3 backer that also played outside in the 3-4, the outside backers in the 3-4 are converted defensive ends..I can not think of 1 example of a traditional LB that stayed outside in the 3-4.

DEs are the only game changers on defense, and QBs are the only game changers on offense. You've got football all figured out.

Thanks for the education.

Actually rushing the passer is very difficult and it is in many ways a science if it was as easy as just being athletic they wouldn't be at such a premium. You have to know how to use proper leverage, use your hands, stay balanced know when to use moves, how to set up a tackle, it's not an easy thing to do especially against top of the line NFL OT's.

Is that all it takes?

Good pass rushers study film and break down their opponents. There is a definite mental side to it.

Well, ****, sounds like we should be able to get a handful of these guys. Why haven't we already?

Sounds easy enough.

I don't sit and meditate long on my "presentation" to start a thread. Was just thinking about the whole Sanchez/Cassel deal and wanted to have a discussion about it. You stepped in, slammed it and have been interested ever since....just sayin.