Originally Posted by Wonton Prejudice (Post 9557403)

And neither of them were the reason we went 2-14.

You are obtuse, and probably trolling.

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP (Post 9555550)

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/i...0403222105.jpg



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...?mod=djemITP_h

Originally Posted by ndws (Post 9555676)

lets revolutionize the game and play without a QB

Originally Posted by Kaepernick (Post 9557622)

So you are saying to use Tebow?

Originally Posted by KCDC (Post 9557056)

The difference is that Kolb, Palmer and Flynn were acquired for very little consideration surrendered. So, even if they prove to be useless, it cost the team nothing but salary.

With the Chiefs, we gave up the equivalent of a low first round pick. So, Alex failure will have double the sting (as well as a triple sting in passing up drafting a good QB as well potentially).

Originally Posted by Fat Elvis (Post 9555666)

To be fair, using their methodology, drafting a QB in the first round really doesn't help either. Only 7 out of 48 QBs drafted in the first round since 1994 lead their teams to the playoffs in their first year. Two of those were last year, Luck and RG3, which everyone is saying are once in a generation QBs. Otherwise, '08 is the only other standout year when both Ryan and Flacco led their teams to the playoffs.

Before folks start their bitchfest and give themselves an aneurysm, understand I am only using the apparent methodology used by the article. I'm not saying that first round QBs don't develop into franchise QBs (ie the Mannings); I'm just using the same criteria as the article when they say that trading for a QB doesn't really help. Using their criteria, drafting a QB in the first round doesn't really help either.

Originally Posted by RunKC (Post 9556199)

These guys say hi.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...Ei8LXfteOA9gcg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-86dvaeHl8S...1600/image.jpg

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...dmIscdkrwBYYhQ

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tcu9uirAvM...John+Elway.jpg

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images...jpg?1273154694

And these QB's were traded from the teams that drafted them originally and then went on to have success.

http://www.profootballhof.com/assets...on_180-220.jpg

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images...jpg?1285405559

And there are other QB's like Fran Tarkenton and Bobby Lane who were also traded and had success, not to mention Phillip Rivers, even though he hasn't won a SB, but I'm just too lazy to put them up.

Originally Posted by el borracho (Post 9558807)

Most of those guys were traded before any significant playing time. Gannon is the only QB I can think of (in modern times) to have significant success after losing his job elsewhere. Alex Smith has years of mediocre play on his resume and lost his job. It is incredibly unlikely that he will all-of-a-sudden become the franchise QB that we all want.

Originally Posted by TEX (Post 9558817)

Drew Brees...

Originally Posted by el borracho (Post 9558829)

I guess we would have to define "significant playing time". IIRC, Brees played only a few seasons in San Diego and then got hurt. Brees didn't bust, the Chargers gave up on him too early and I'm guessing they would do that differently if they had the chance.

Originally Posted by philfree (Post 9559092)

I guess a question could be when was the last time a QB was benched and then traded when he was leading the league in QB rating? When was the last time a QB who had put up a 97 rating in his last 30 games traded period?

I'm not in love with Alex Smith but this situation is a little unusual. I don't hate Alex either it's not his fault he was traded but at this point I'm going to root for the guy.

Originally Posted by TEX (Post 9558817)

Drew Brees...