What I want to know is how this dumbass has green rep?

I'm sure the same people said Croyle wasn't a bust either.

But 4 SACKS!!!!!!!!!

And Chris Spleen kicked ASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://image38.webshots.com/39/6/42/...8edtghb_ph.jpg

Show of hands everyone.

Who thinks it's unfortunate that I post here?

Who thinks it's unfortunate that billay (What, too stupid to spell Billy correctly?) posts here.

I think billay is right below the forrest gump level of football comprehension.

Again all I need to know is, who thinks Glen Dorsey is already a bust? Those people I don't need to talk to. It's like an football idiot identifier.

The fact that you need to be told you aren't a doucherocket speaks volumes.


And you think I'm a dumbass why do you reply to just about all my comments? Learn to use the ignore or go home.

ROFL Yes, I'm laughing AT you...

It is my job to point out dumbassery when I see it.

I have never used ignore, and don't intend to.

And if you are so ****ing stupid that you think I'm seeking the board's approval, then you are even more ****ing stupid than I already thought you were.

That post wasn't seeking approval.
I'm an asshole and don't have any other illusions about myself.

You, on the other hand.....

Kinda hard to discuss how good or bad Dirty Sanchez is when he's yet to take a real snap. How he looks in camp is irrelevant.

ROFL

WTF?

LMAO.

Leave for a little bit, and this is what happens. Anyway, OTW provided all the evidence needed.

This belief that Pioli is a drafting god is pretty humorous. The Brady draft, without winning the ****ing world lottery in the 6th, was a complete ****ing disaster.

But, other than that, Pioli's perfect.

Billay is a colossal ****ing moron. Absurdly criticizing milkman's posting only ranks in the top 20 of stupid shit he's said, amazingly enough.

First, I do not believe this team is devoid of talent. In fact, guys like Dj and Dorsey are hugely talented.

I think some of that will show with better coaching.

I also believe that the QB position is the most important on the team. I do not believe it is a must to have a HOF QB to win games, but you need a steady dependable consistent guy.

I believe that one of the biggest, if not the biggest reason for the Chiefs horrible record over the last two years is the inconsistency at QB.

Not only the inconsistency in the QB playing, but the actual starter from week to week changed as much as any team in the league it seemed.

Talent is only one aspect of production. Then, you have the system, you have the coaching, and you have veteran leadership to help the players grow and learn.

The guys you mentioned will do as much to build this team as anyone. Because they are the examples to show the guys how to do it.

They are the leaders who will hold the younger players accountable.

Their 'imprint' on the development of the young players on this team will be felt for years to come.

I am all for going young. But, when things are as bad as they are for this franchise, you need to start working things in the right direction because losing becomes habitual.

And, there is a reason so many top draft picks at QB fail.... they go to sucka$$ teams with a losing culture and lesser talent.

Cassel will be part of the leadership that rights the ship... NO rookie can do that.... not even Sanchez.

The big thing you ignore here is that the Colts drafting Manning.... a multi year starter and very successful player.

The Chargers drafted Rivers, a multi year starter and very successful player.

The Giants drafter the other Manning, again, a mult year starter and successful player.

Other than maybe Peyton, these guys were not on teams with clearly superior talent to those around them.

And, none of them played in the weak Pac 10 against substandard competition.

Other than Stafford, there was no QB in this draft that would compare to those three coming out of college.

That is the difference.

But there was no guarantee that they would. They may have... they may have picked up a Garcia type of player to hold them over until a better QB prospect was available, if they didn't like Sanchez.

We don't know what they might have done if they hadn't traded for Cassel, but the fact is, we know that Sanchez was ther at #3, and the perception will be that we passed on Sanchez in favor of trading for Cassel.

It may not be the reality of the situation.
We will never know.

But as they say, perception is reality.

That's unfair. Some would just like a little longer college resume.

Not to mention, if my team is going to draft a QB top five... I want him to be a prototypical game changing type of QB. I want a strong arm.

Stafford would have been great, strong arm and a long resume proving that he can overcome difficulties.

Sanchez struggled to win the starting job and then was on a team vastly superior to those other teams in the Pac 10.

Sanchez may turn out to be great, but if I am picking a QB top five, I want more.

I think Cassel has similar physical ability, plus a year starting in the NFL, a history of persistence to overcome adversity, and a proven work ethic.

All at a lesser draft and paycheck price. (given that their contracts are similar now, and Sahnchez would have gotten more at the #3 spot)

I understand, but I think it is false to assume that the Chiefs front office had Sanchez rated as high as Mecca does.

Matt Stafford looking pretty dam good for Detroit against Atlanta.

Absolutely true. And, if Sanchez bombs... won't the Jets fans regret not paying more attention to the 'questions'?

Anytime a pick fails, fan lament the choice...even if the majority of them agreed at the time.

That's fine. I understand your points about Sanchez.

But let's be frank. There's no perfect prospect. Thus, you've just set up a straw man. For Sanchez, it's arm strength and the "superior" talent that was around him.

When it looked like Stafford might be a legit option for the Chiefs, there were countless posts criticizing his decision-making ability and inability to win with "superior" SEC talent.

It will never end. There will always be an excuse to avoid the n00b QB. Why do I say this? Because this fanbase is not used to drafting and really trying to develop a legit young QB, since we haven't done it since '83. 1980mother****ing3.

And, surprise, we didn't do it, again. Fine. Let's hope Cassel kicks supreme ass.

But let's not play this ****ing game about trying to claim that Sanchez wasn't a fantastic prospect. Key word, "prospect."

Oops.... spoke too soon. LOL.

I loved Stafford. When the Chiefs were losing last year, the one consolation I had was that they may be able to get Stafford.

The one thing that bothers me is that rumors were that the Lions would have liked to trade for Cassel. If so, I think Stafford 'may' have fallen to the Chiefs.

I still don't think so, because he was clearly (IMO) the best QB prospect in the draft and I think the Rams would have been tempted to take him, or someone would have traded up to get him at #2.

and of course i jinx him ... throws a pick right after i posted how good he was looking. :doh!:

First, regardless of any pick, there will be critics. Be it QB, DE, LB, K, P, etc.

Now, you can look at all my posts. I was on the Stafford bandwago early. Yes, every prospect has questions.

With that said, I felt like the Sanchez backers just just wanted a young QB... any young qb will do.

I feel like he was built up to be more of a talent than he really is. I could be way off... I am just not impressed with him.

I just don't see enough there to be 'excited' about.

He isn't a Stafford/Elway kind of prospect.

Heck, he reminds me of Chad Pennington... and to me, that isn't good enough for a top five pick.

It appears the dumbassery in this thread doesn't belong to Billay alone.

:clap:

Wait, what? :spock:

Yet, you posted a link to Sanchez's first throw as some sort of validation to your point.

I think the general fan feels more comfortable with Cassel because Pioli knows Cassel better than any draft pick.

I also think that the general fan would have been more comfortable with Stafford than Sanchez.

I don't give a shit what the general fan thinks because the general fan is clueless.

Hey, no problem. If you or anyone else watched the kid extensively and came to the conclusion that you wanted no part of him. Great. I respect that opinion.

As it pertains to most fans, however, I don't think that's anywhere close to the case. Many want to avoid a rookie QB, regardless. As one small example, before the '08 draft, many on this board, when asked whom they wanted KC to select, would have responded, "Not Matt Ryan."

Oops. And this board is dominated by knowledgeable fans. But fans who had probably seen Ryan play between 0 and *maybe* ****ing maybe 2 games. I think there's a similar approach to the QBs in this most recent draft, be it Stafford or Sanchez.

I don't give a rats ass about Durty Sanchez one way or the other.

I posted it for people that didn't see it...

Also honest question the Chiefs haven't used a 1st round pick on a QB since 83...is there any other team that has gone remotely that long? Even the expansion teams have used a first on a QB since then.

I don't understand this really.

You can have a favorite team but I have favorite players that have nothing to do with the Chiefs. I watch more teams play than just the Chiefs I enjoy the sport in general not just the Chiefs.

I don't understand it either. I love the Chiefs, well above all other teams. The difference in my fandom for the Chiefs and that of any other team for me is enormous. But I enjoy following the entire league, too. And there are some specific players that I really enjoy watching.

Ok after doing some research on the QB draft pick question this is what I came up with.

The Chiefs haven't selected a first round QB since 1983 the only other AFC team with such a streak is the Dolphins who haven't taken a 1st round QB since Marino in 83, but of a different situation but theirs is still the same number of years.

By going to the NFC I found there are a few teams with even longer streaks than the Chiefs some so long it is dumbfounding.

The New Orleans Saints have not selected a QB in the first round since Archie Manning in 71, the Rams haven't selected one since Bill Munson in 64.

So the Chiefs may like to avoid taking QB's in the 1st round but they are only tied for 3rd when it comes to having a long running streak of avoiding it.

Yep.

Not sure how one can be a football fan and not enjoy watching AP run, Ossiossimahugga cover, Willis tackle, or Big Ben lead.

Well I'm a huge fan of Randy Moss which right away will not endear me to some...

Depends what we're talking about.

As a person, all indications are that he's a waste of ****ing oxygen. As a football player, he's spectacular.

As fans, too often we get too hung up on the former. Personally, I don't give a **** if my team is comprised of a bunch of "good guys." Give me spectacular to nice every day of the week.

i could give a **** less about the "person" but as a football player he is amazing when he WANTS to be, other times hes lazy, thats what makes ME hate him. if he played all out every play like jerry rice i would be a fan

Well what about TO? He plays hard and people hate him just the same.

Oh, I agree that he takes plays off. Wish he wouldn't, but when you're arguably the most naturally gifted WR to play the game, you can do these kinds of things.

Ideal? Nope.

But I'd take Moss on my team every single day of the ****ing week.

But this still falls under the "person" category for me. He's not a hard worker. For many folks, not being a hard worker = not being a good person (in certain contexts).

he divides the team, he says stuff outloud to reporters that should be private. he does this to make it look like the losses arent in any way is fault and the wins are because of him. hence telling people that mcnabb was throwing up that last SB drive. shit like that HURTS THE TEAM. thats why i dont like him. if it was his non player friends that he did that way i (and most fans) wouldnt give two shits. but its teammates which kills your teams

thats whats ****ed up about it. he IS VERY TALENTED why not try to be all you can?

Don't know. He just doesn't have a great work ethic. Lots of people fit this description, but it just so happens that this aspect of Moss's character is exposed on national television every week.

People resent this b/c of the money he makes, but I know a lot of lazy mother****ers who don't make a fraction of the paycheck. Bet you do, too. Should we also hate them?

it's the waste of talent that makes me hate, and yeah i dont really like lazy mother****ers that leech off the system:D and really its not about the money that shit aint mine.

Oh, it's definitely a shame. But the ****ed up thing is that Moss is a lock HOFer.

Again, I'll take this kind of talent on my team any day.

I bet a certain starting QB would, too.

Not to hi-jack, but if Bowe is an effective player but not a "practice guy", do you think Haley will give him some leeway?

As a first-year coach, he's in a tough spot. Bowe is definitely one of the bright spots, talent-wise, on the offensive side. Yet he's not even in the same area code as the top WRs in the league (Moss, Fitz, etc.). He might get there, but it's currently not close.

That said, I think Haley lays down the law. If Bowe won't conform, they'll ship his ass out. He hasn't earned the right to be treated differently, yet.

I believe you are correct.

That made me laugh.

If you're talking about me then tell me that you believe the Jets will be better than 8-8 THIS SEASON with Sanchez starting. Otherwise instead of trying to address me, STFU instead.

To answer your question, yes.

And now a question of my own:

Do the entrance gates at the Hall of Dumbassery really require a Guardian?

There are many GM's that don't feel drafting a Qb in round one is a necessity... especially if a good prospect isn't sitting there. Just drafting one to say you did it is pointless.

I don't necessarily need choir boys, but I want players on my team that are hardworking, give 100% effort every day and every play, and who aren't cancerous and devisve in the locker room.

Randy Moss is not a player like that, and for that reason, I want no part of him.

If the Chiefs had signed Michael Vick as an offensive weapon (not to specifically play QB), I would have had no problem with that, because for all of his flaws as a QB, and his off field issues, he is reputedly hard working.

Discussed already.

He's a divisive, cancerous player.

Pioli disagrees, so you must be wrong. :D

Really, if Moss gave 100% effort every play, went all out to do everything to help his team play in and play out, would the Raiders have been as terrible in his last season there as they were?

I think not.

And in watching the Patriots last year, until he began to feel as though Cassel was a legitimate NFL QB, his effort, or lack thereof, hurt them in a couple of games, most notably the Steeler game.

Absolutely not.

Moss at 100% is the single most disruptive force in the NFL.

Yeah, Randy Moss has really ****ed up the Patriots. I bet Belichick would like to cut him.
Posted via Mobile Device

Did anyone say he ****ed up the Pats?

He's a worthless bastard when he plays for a bad team.

He could help every team if he gave his all, even bad teams.

But if he doesn't think his team has much chance and fails to give it his all, he hurts his team, as he did with lacadasical effort in the game against the Steelers last year.

You don't make the playoffs every year without drafting good. Are you really going to deny the Patriots didn't draft good players?

Of course they have drafted some good players...and so have the Chiefs. On the whole, NE has been better, but not unbelievably so. The Chiefs have been rather pathetic, whereas NE has been rather average. Both have years where they've been a complete train wreck in the draft.

The single biggest difference between the two organizations is that one hit the mega jackpot one year.

The Patriots have been one of the top 5 teams drafting in the NFL this decade.

The Pats catch flack for drafts because their recent ones have been highly questionable.

A couple years ago they had 9 picks and Merriweather is the only guy still on the team...then they had the Maroney, Chad Jackson draft which is basically abysmal.

Wow. Ok.

If they're top 5 I'd think they're on the borderline.

If they're top 5, it shows that most teams are very average when it comes to the draft.

Frankly, if they don't strike gold with Brady, which is HUGE, the entire perception of the Pats as this miraculously great drafting organization wouldn't exist.

Meh I think the Patriots draft was more then they just hit a mega jackpot. They won a super bowl with a WR playing CB. And they won 11 games last year with a Qb who hadn't played in 7 years. Anyway what Mecca was orginally saying is the difference is teams like San Diego & Indy build through the draft and don't really sign players where as New England does.

San Diego and Indy have hardly any FA's at all, I think Indy has 3 guys on their roster that have played for other teams it's some ridiculous number like that.

Personally I think the Giants are the model I would follow in todays league, I really like how they do things.

Building like Indy would take this team years. Though I will say Tyson Jackson looked good yes it's only pre-season but he's overlooked by fans.

2006 draft:

When Maroney's been healthy, he's been a good back.
Jackson blew out his ACL during his rookie season and is trying to make the Broncos.
Dave Thomas is still on the team, although he's fighting for a job and could end up with the Chiefs.
Mills was expected to be a project when he was drafted, was snagged by the Vikings when Belichick tried to slip him onto the practice squad, is in Minnesota, and he started getting playing time last season.
Gostkowski is an All-Pro kicker.
O'Callaghan was challenging Kaczur for the right tackle position, but concussion problems and other injuries have hampered his career, and he's likely to be a backup for the rest of it.
Mincey busted out of the first camp. He is now on the Jaguars
Stevenson went to Houston, where he was injured, made a public stink about it, got cut, and is probably physically unable to play in the NFL now.
Smith gets rotation snaps as a backup on the Patriots D-line.
Andrews was a top special teams player until he got arrested and the Patriots cut him.

Is it a "great" draft? No. But, considering the injury factor, it's nowhere near 'abysmal', either.

As for 2007, Richardson is also still on the team, although he may well not make the cut this season, and the team did not have a second (Welker, with a 7th thrown in) or third round pick, and also lost a fourth (for Moss) as well.

Meriweather, Welker, Moss, Richardson.... that's a pretty successful draft, I'd say.

Also, Brown (is currently on the Jets, trying to convert to tight end. Oldenburg in in Broncos camp, Hairston was in Bills camp before suffering an injury, Hilliard's in Colts camp


2005

Mankins, Hobbs, Kaczur, Sanders, Cassel

2004

Wilfork, Watson, Hill (2nd rounder, drowned)

2003

Warren, Wilson, Samuel, Koppen (Banta-Cain just re-signed with the team)

2002

Graham, Branch, Greene, Givens

2001

Seymour, Light


That's quite a bit better than average.

OTW posted the complete list earlier in the thread. And, yes, it looks pretty average.

They drafted a few guys who could play. Yeah? Only in KC would we consider this well above average.

Brady is who tips the scales. And all involved admit that this was a very lucky turn of events.

What the Pats have done an excellent job of doing is using the draft AND free agency. That's where they've excelled. In this respect, they are a complete franchise.

Name another "average" drafting team, then name a great one. As for luck, it's always lucky when a player pans out. People who try downplaying what New England has done overplay the 'lucky' angle. Hell, I didn't even count the Brady draft.

The Patriots.

The Patriots.

The Patriots.

Jesus ****ing Christ I'm tired of seeing and hearing that word.

You might want to avoid the transaction wire as the camps wind down and cut days come, then. The Patriots are stacked at some positions and will be cutting some NFL quality players that teams like the Chiefs will likely try to grab.

I don't have time to look up the complete draft history of various teams right now, but off the top of my head, here are the teams I would rank above NE:

Baltimore
San Diego
Indy
Giants
Pitt.

After this, probably NE. Then, you get into the rest. And then you get into the teams that ****ing suck at the draft.

How many of those teams have more championships? Where does NE rank then?

Meh, tough conversation to get into.

I think there are teams that draft better than the Pats, but I also think the Pats are head and shoulders above the rest in Free Agency.

In terms of overall talent evaluation, they are most definitely top 5, probably 1 or 2.

I think you don't include coaching in there, because BB is their engine, not just using the parts they have.

In no particular order, I look at San Diego, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh and the Patriots as the four best drafting teams in the NFL. However, given that you're ranking the Patriots 6th (which is well above average) when I said top 5, we really don't have any reason to continue this on any serious level.

However, if you think that the Giants and Ravens draft better than New England, you really need to take a look at their draft boards.

Did you miss my point about the Pats excelling at using the draft AND FA?

That's why they were a dynasty. They weren't the best drafting team. Far from it. What they were was the best organization.

I put the Pats in a large group with a Brady asterisk. Aside from him, lots of teams have a comparable number of hits.