Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 8284522)

We have a need for RB. Jamaal cannot carry the load.

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 8284524)

Don't think Pioli would fall in love with Tannehill. He'd probably just take a guy later and develop him along with Stanzi. Tannehill offers nothing more than Stanzi.

Originally Posted by Rausch (Post 8284542)

He doesn't have to.

We need to resign McClain, Dump 2Yrd Thomas, keep Battle, and draft another "banger" in the later (4-7) rounds.

That will give us our 5-7 touches a game to McCluster, 12-15 to Charles, and short yardage/4th quarter stuff to Battle and the draft pick...

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan (Post 8284470)

We need to trade UP and get the best QB prospect in the draft.


It's not going to ham-string our team long-term.

Grow a set of balls and quit justifying just going through the motions.

40 years of nothing-40 years of zero franchise QBs...this is a no-brainer, folks.

Originally Posted by Setsuna (Post 8284418)

htidmaqe.....it seems like everyone else knows what they're talking about but you. You seem to like to argue and that's it. I think a power RB would do wonders for the Chiefs. Having a good running game can cover up a not so stellar OL when a PA pass only takes about 3 sec to pull off, they can at least hold that long. I like that idea a lot. The goal is to try and find depth so something like this year's injuries doesn't decimate the team as much.

Originally Posted by tyler360 (Post 8284460)

I agree with what you are saying.

I think what H is after is the fact that he would be a band aid on a broken leg. Just a cover up to the real problem of a qb and not having one.

Cassel did not have to win games last year, and it would be very tempting to do the whole ground and pound approach with defense again.

It would win us quite a few games but we have all seen what happens against a real qb. We lose.

That is what he is worrying about more than the player I think.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 8284816)

I know EXACTLY what I'm talking about.

Trent Richardson is a curtain - it all looks good up front but what's behind him still STINKS.

If you like going 10-6 and losing in the playoffs every year, by all means, draft him.

I'd prefer to see a Super Bowl in my lifetime.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 8284813)

Trading up for a QB who subsequently busts will only set us back for the length of time he's here. Matt Cassel's CONTRACT didn't hurt us, his PLAY did. And once he's gone, there won't be any residual effect.

However, if we draft Trent Richardson, you can bet your ass it will set this franchise back. Visions of Okoye and Word, 3 yards and a cloud of dust - Clark would have us back to 1991 in about 2 minutes. And it would take 10 years to dig out of it.

Originally Posted by Setsuna (Post 8285091)

Ok man. Let's just say, Chiefs D is stout as hell. Receivers are leet. You have a sick 2 RB tandem and you have a serviceable QB that limits TO. How is that not a recipe for a Superbowl or a deep playoff team? Don't make me laugh.

And don't even think I'm calling Cassel serviceable.

Originally Posted by the Talking Can (Post 8285118)

because Superbowls are won by great QBs, not serviceable QBs....

I can't even believe I'm reading this from a Chiefs fan...is this Carl?

Originally Posted by Setsuna (Post 8285132)

I think Chiefs have the swag necessary to win a SB without an elite QB. You need to recognize and not be reeruned.

Originally Posted by Setsuna (Post 8285132)

I think Chiefs have the swag necessary to win a SB without an elite QB. You need to recognize and not be reeruned.

Originally Posted by the Talking Can (Post 8285145)

jesus true fan christ....

hilarious....ly stupid shit

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry (Post 8285136)

we have been down this road more times than you have been alive.