ChiefsPlanet
Page 4 of 14 123 4 5678 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs LT Eugene Monroe in round 1? Pioli-Haley-Groh-Albert-Monroe (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=205678)

DaneMcCloud 04-10-2009 10:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-post Tom (Post 5656823)
We heard it here in KC for so many years as we consistently had one of the best lines in the NFL.
Yeah, what did it get the Chiefs? Nothing. Not jackshit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by T-post Tom (Post 5656823)
Money? There's no money issue. Come on bro, quit throwing rocks.
Yeah, let's go ahead and have $80 million dollars wrapped up in TWO left tackles. That way, when the Chiefs have to address other needs, they won't be able to because the majority of their cap is taken by two left tackles.

Brilliant.

DaneMcCloud 04-10-2009 10:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-post Tom (Post 5657342)

RTs are spare fookin' parts? I have but four points to make:

1) Trezelle Jenkins
2) Jeff Criswell (Hwy 69)
3) Kyle Turley
4) Damien McIntosh

Case closed.
JFC.

Garcia Bronco 04-10-2009 10:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5657037)
Yeah. Branden Albert, Chris Long, and D'Brickashaw Ferguson have all proven to be complete ****ing bums.
Exactly.

MTG#10 04-10-2009 10:50 AM
Hopefully the Lambs take him and we wont have to worry about it.

Deberg_1990 04-10-2009 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 5657437)
Bullshit.

This draft sucks for defensive talent. It would be a colossal mistake to take guys just to take guys.

2010 is the year for defense in the draft. Not 2009.
It would be unpopular, but for the Chiefs to get the best value for their $$$ in this draft, they should take Stafford or Sanchez whoever is left at #3.

Hammock Parties 04-10-2009 10:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan (Post 5656905)

DV's offense worked a lot better when they had Roaf and Tait in there.
Tait was drafted BEFORE DV.

They traded for Roaf because he wasn't good enough to play LT for DV. He just HAPPENED to fit at RT.

Hammock Parties 04-10-2009 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King_Chief_Fan (Post 5657011)
How hard is it really for a guy to switch from one side to the other? LTvs.RT? I know McInsuck did terrible on both sides. Can't a good LT be a good RT?
It can work, but actually McIntosh was better at left tackle.

Saying "oh they can flip flop at any time!" is reeruned. It's tough to make that switch during the middle of a season.

DaneMcCloud 04-10-2009 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 5657481)
It would be unpopular, but for the Chiefs to get the best value for their $$$ in this draft, they should take Stafford or Sanchez whoever is left at #3.
I've been saying this for months.

Brock 04-10-2009 11:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 5657481)
It would be unpopular, but for the Chiefs to get the best value for their $$$ in this draft, they should take Stafford or Sanchez whoever is left at #3.
I don't think it would be unpopular. It would mean the people in charge of this team finally understand football in the 21st century.

DaneMcCloud 04-10-2009 11:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock (Post 5657498)
I don't think it would be unpopular. It would mean the people in charge of this team finally understand football in the 21st century.
Oh, I think all the dummies that actually listen to KK and his ilk for information wouldn't like it.

**** 'em.

Micjones 04-10-2009 11:23 AM
Not on board with drafting Monroe at #3.

I hope they're able to trade down.

DeezNutz 04-10-2009 11:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock (Post 5657498)
I don't think it would be unpopular. It would mean the people in charge of this team finally understand football in the 21st century.
Yeah, I think the people wanting immediate gratification would be deeply distraught.

How are we going to be 9-7 this season?!!!?

Soupnazi 04-10-2009 11:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 5657481)
It would be unpopular, but for the Chiefs to get the best value for their $$$ in this draft, they should take Stafford or Sanchez whoever is left at #3.
It's probably the best move at 3, if they can't trade out of it.

suds79 04-10-2009 11:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 5657481)
It would be unpopular, but for the Chiefs to get the best value for their $$$ in this draft, they should take Stafford or Sanchez whoever is left at #3.
Yep I agree.

Imagine if they drafted Sanchez at #3. You know they'd be able to deal him for a 1st and some change (what other picks I don't know) to somebody. And if we don't get exactly equal value in terms of the chart? Who cares. We'll still get a 1st and probably our 2nd back. Just need more picks.

With the salary structure now a days, it's a curse to be drafting this high. Not a blessing and that's messed up.

RustShack 04-10-2009 11:39 AM
I really don't care anymore, Albert was one of the best OG prospects to come out, he proved he can be a great LT so I'm assuming he can be an even better guard(I'd rather him play guard than RT). His contract isn't too big to play OG or RT, while he was a first round pick he wasn't a top 10 pick. This is really like Curry for me, not my top choice.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:44 AM.
Page 4 of 14 123 4 5678 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.