I was worried too until I saw how the Chiefs were going to use him. What a waste...LMAO

In that 2008 draft the Chiefs were basically one pick away from being able to draft Matt Ryan.

He went third to Atlanta and although the Raiders drafted 4th, since they had just drafted JaMarcus Russell the year before they would have passed on Ryan, leaving him available for the Chiefs to draft at 5th overall.

Where all the flacco haters at?

While I'm soundly in the "we need to draft a QB/we have to draft a QB" camp I wonder if any young QB could have survived here from 2006 on? Between the coaching staffs and the offensive lines, I'm not sure we wouldn't have doomed them all from the start. Which isn't to say we shouldn't have drafted any, but I wonder if the Joe Flacco in Baltimore would be the same player had he been here? What about Matt Ryan or Matt Stafford? I don't think Mark Sanchez could have been much worse than he was in New York, but maybe he would have been.

Then again, maybe if the organization had been evolved enough to draft a quarterback, then maybe they would have been more adept at building the roster at other spots, too.

Bad selection? Sure, in hindsight.

At the time, he was a no-brainer.

Speaking of hindsight, I'd definitely take Flacco if I could do it over.

Sometimes hindsight is 50/50...

The worst part is that iirc we were in a 3 way tie with Atlanta and Oakland for the 3 spot and lost the coin flip.

Who am I kidding...we would have probably taken a linemen anyway.

I guess the Chiefs at the time had a lot of faith in Brodie Croyle?

How do you go into a season with Damon Huard and Croyle, coming off a 4 win season and not look to draft a QB?

**** hindsight. The NFL is a get if right business and they got it wrong.

Yeeeees

Dorsey was supposed to be what Mccoy in TB is.

Chiefs don't believe QBs is what makes a team. It's the FB position.

Yes I'm sure that's it:shake::rolleyes:

LMAO Deberg on Deberg threads.

I didn't like it then or now. It was just another example of reaching for a defensive tackle like they did in 2001 and 2002.

IMO, it was not a "no brainer" because of his knee. He couldn't have passed a physical for many teams.

At the time, wasn't Dorsey considered to be the best overall player in the draft?

By whom? The media? Todd McShay?

Each and every draft in the past ten years has proven that the NFL is privy to information not available to every guy that registers an internet domain.

If Dorsey was the consensus best player, why was he available at #5?

2008 consensus was pretty much Jake Long, Chris Long, Matt Ryan, and Glenn Dorsey were all 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d. They were all pretty interchangeable.

I dunno, I don't really remember that draft, I was a sophomore in college and didn't follow it to awful close. Thought I remembered it being a surprise he fell that far but that it was due to positional something or another

I cant stand the "consensus" bullshit excuse when a player sucks ass. Basically trying to reason a mistake a way by claiming others would have done the same.

It's hard to judge guys after we know what they are as players in the leagues vs when they were prospects.

But the consensus pick who doesn't bust is just fine.

LMAO What a dumb statement.

JFC sometimes it is what it is and Dorsey was considered a damn near cant miss.

No. **** consensus all together. Do your own shit and be good at it.

The consensus was everyone giving Dallas shit for taking Martin in the 1st. They nailed that one.

"The Consensus" was Bridgewater wasn't worth a top pick because of one shitty workout. Oops!

"The Consensus" is how you end up with Eric Fisher as your left tackle, because he was one of the top 2 players in the draft.

Tired of hearing the "reaching" shit because of "x", "y", and "z". That's how guys most people know have real talent like Russel Wilson and Justin Houston drop to the third.

And Luck, Manning, Manning, Rivers, and on and on and on were all universally regarded as top 5 picks.

You can hate the consensus top 5 picks all you want and pick outside the box. I will take the top 5 guys and kick your ass with them all day long.

Moron.

I agree. Just take good football players.

But i think some of this isn't that the players picked are bad, they just aren't developed very well either.

No, sometimes players just bust because they are not very good, lazy, etc......a variety of reasons really. Every team has picks who bust. Every single one.

I just hate the "term" consensus. The "consensus" was Andy Reid was the best option on the market. You don't always have to go against the grain, but there is nothing wrong with doing your own thing without fear of criticism because "the consensus".

You don't get to have it both ways. You cant say you are fine with consensus when it works and hate it when it doesn't.

To your example, I wanted Chip Kelley as HC.

Reid was probably the 2nd best option and fact is Clark went after him because wanted to end the circus we had going on and no one should blame him. Fact is it has worked to some degree.

:facepalm: You aren't getting it. "Consensus" is bullshit and not a valid excuse for a **** up. You ****ed up.. plain and simple. What's the point of having your own guys if you want to blame the "consensus"?

Pioli was the "consensus" top guy. Clark ****ed up. I don't want to hear Clark went out and got the top consensus guy ever

Andy Reid was the "consensus" best head coach available in 2013, yet Bruce Arians has had more success.

He has? How so?

Arizona has no QB issues at least. Oh wait.

Are you joking?

No. Arians made the playoffs once in two years and lost his first playoff game. Same as Reid.

In what real way is Arizona better off then KC right now?

Arians, IMO, is a better head coach. He forces the ball down field, his offense and defensive philosophy is aggressive, aggressive and more aggressive.

He had the NFC West locked up before Carson Palmer was lost for the season, yet he continued to win with Drew Stanton. The main reason they failed to win more than 11 was due to their QB position and let's face it, not many, if any, NFL teams are going to win with a 3rd stringer. Furthermore, like KC, the Cardinals lost two of their best defenders for the season in Daryl Washington and Darnell Dockett.

And as far as being better off? Well, they actually have receivers that can catch the ball and stretch the field.

Oh yeah, and score touchdowns.

Yes!!!!
Posted via Mobile Device

I'd definitely take Bruce over Andy.

Arians was the exact guy I was pimping to hopefully be our next head coach.

Oh what could have been.

That should be the Chiefs permanent slogan.

I would rather have taken Dorsey over Flacco than read another one of your threads..... Shit I gotta put up with both!!!

Arians has accomplished very little as a head coach at this point. This sounds like one of those CP legend before the legend being born again.

For the record I wanted Chip Kelley, that being said neither Kelley or Arians has the resume Reid has at this point.

4 straight championship games is nothing to sneeze at and is rare air.

We will see how much of it was Reid but the fact is he took a 2-14 team to its first back to back winning seasons in a decade.

The dichotomy is he alone probably cost us 2 games this season. He gives and he takes. We will see if its worth it in the end.

Well, I didn't think that highly of Arians when he was hired. Thought he was too much of a player's coach and a guy with the Martz pass-happy scheme that gets QBs gets killed. He's proven me wrong. Been one hell of a coach so far.

What's so bizarre about this year is that in the only year where he's learned to protect his QB (I think this is 1 of the only seasons his entire HC/OC career where his QB took less than 40 sacks), it also happens to be the year where he loses 2 QBs to injury. Funny how that works sometimes.

The Chiefs are in a MUCH better place going forward than the cardinals. Literally half of their starters are over 30 years old. and we have a lot more young talent than they do.

Bump

How do you feel about Flacco now?

If he won a SB, surely Alex Smith is good enough as well right??
Posted via Mobile Device

Man thread necromancy on this forum is ridiculous.

Absolutely would've taken the QB because ya took an lineman and should've taken the QB to build around.

Yes we should have taken Flacco but this was a dumb bump for attention to bump your own thread.

Dorsey was a bad pick because of his knee problem and still took him. Flacco would have been a great pick at the time for a quarterback.

They went BPA. Dorsey was a fine pick but needed to stay in the 43 style he was drafted for.

No to Average Joe

Oh and the Cards look old as ****

Nutthooks?

Flacco was risky and if he bust we would never recover as a franchise. Dorsey was the safe pick / true fan

That is just ridiculous. Dorsey was widely regarded as an easy top 5 pick, which is where we got him. Flacco wasn't rated that high. In fact, I believe that he was considered to be a reach when Ravens took him at 18. Many draft experts thought he was a second round talent. So don't give me this crap about being too risky. Nobody with a top 5 pick reaches on a second round rated player. Should they have traded up for Matty Ice? Maybe. But Flacco would have been crazy at that point based on scouting reports at that time.

Did you really bump your stupid thread after Flacco put up ok numbers against the worst team in the league? Quick revisit of your idiotic first post. No, they shouldn't have drafted Flacco. The Chiefs were coming off of a 4-12 season where they were devastated on D by the run. Dorsey was the best projected interior D-Lineman at the time. The Chiefs also had Croyle, who at the time, was still considered to be a possible franchise program.

Asking your moronic question is the equivalent of every single team in the NFL complaining that they didn't draft Tom Brady.

All I've ever seen from you is negative posts....maybe you should find a new team.