next year's draft class is much better than Tannehill, sure. Not better than this class as a whole.

I mean, who cares about Luck and RG3? they don't count.

Picking at 10-20 every year for the next 5? Yeah, I don't think so.

Probably most recently in 2010 when it was Bradford and nobody else, back when half of us (including myself) were in love with Jimmy Clausen as the "well, he's not Bradford (Luck/RGIII) but he'll do" guy. So yes, I would have to say that this does feel familiar in some ways.

And in that case, you might concede that next year's qb class was much better.

I don't think you heard much of it last year. There were a lot of us who wanted to take one of those QBs, although there was a lot of disagreement over which.

Every year, people pound the table for a QB that is going to be out of reach to the Chiefs and then shred the guys they could actually take.

As for next year - Jones? Barkley? No thanks. I would rather take a shot with Tannehill.

next year the QB we won't pick will be Landry Jones...

but don't worry, the next year after next year there is totally going to be this legit QB...that we won't be in a position to pick either, but the next year after next year after next year...NOW we're talking...

It does seem faintly familiar. :hmmm:

And you know what? I'm just crazy enough to believe the hype about next year's class. Even if Tyler Bray and Aaron Murray (who I predict to be college football's two best NFL prospect QBs next year) stick around for another year, there will still be Barkley, Wilson, Jones, and Geno Smith. Four legit QBs out to be enough for one of them to fall to us, right?

Oh, but then Wilson won't have a very good year, and teams will question his toughness. 3rd round pick like his compadre Ryan Mallett.

And Jones will be a piece of shit as usual. Nobody will want him, but he'll be a 1st round QB anyway.

So it will be down to Barkley and Geno Smith. The Chiefs will make the playoffs and won't want to dole out the ammo to trade up and grab one of those guys. We'll be left out in the cold yet again on getting the REAL QB.

But then NEXT YEAR is when the REALLY good QBs show up. We should just wait and grab one of those guys.

Good thing we didn't draft that clown Tannehill! He might have been a bust!

Didn't the team take the QB that the majority of the board wanted last year? There seemed to be an awful lot of people in love with the idea of Stanzi in the 2nd round. Do people not want him now because he happened to go in the 5th and not the 2nd? Does that taint him somehow, not make him the same player that some people were all but begging the team to draft?

I'm not really familiar with Landry Jones - what's the hate on him?

Because it can't be his name. That's a black-belt, afro-sporting, private investigator who doesn't put down his Courvoisier for less than two chicks at once.*




*I know he's white. But still.

Let's keep holding out until we stumble across a once in 10 year prospect at QB.

Andy Dalton with our 1st rounder would have made the most sense. But like Tannehill, he saw an astronomical rise in his draft stock after combine and private workouts! People would have bitched about that.

Hell, I was one of them. I didn't want to take Dalton until the 2nd round, because I thought that's where he belonged.

I don't either, but I see it as more than just two safeties. With Berry and Barron, you're not losing much if anything against the run compared to having a linebacker out there, and I expect they're both better at covering receivers/TEs than linebackers. So, you could leave those two in almost every snap. You can even blitz with either of them.

Because of the pretty high injury rate for safeties (especially if you use them all over), if one gets hurt you're not with a glaring step down in talent like we were last year. Barron should be quite a bit cheaper than Berry too and while I'm hoping and even expecting him to come back stronger, Berry is coming off a significant injury.

I also think there's something to be said for competition. Like how Flowers and Carr fed off each other, I think we'd see Berry and Barron do the same thing. Even Pollard and Paige I think fed off each other and played better because of it.

All of that being said, I'm very doubtful of it too.

Honestly, I'm just so ready to move on from Cassel that I'd be ok with way too many QBs, but none of them that we'd be considering really impress (I'd say I was more hopeful/impressed with Stanzi last year than most of the guys this year). I think Tannehill is the best, but he still needs development but he's young enough that it wouldn't be a problem. Age is obviously the big issue with Weeden, but there's something about his demeanor that I like. Yeah, its cheesy, but on the Gruden QB show, like Weeden said, he "wins games".

Osweiler reminds me too much of Cassel, even the attitude/demeanor. I would hope he has much more upside though. He did actually start in college, and he is young so there's time to develop him, and he's even bigger than Cassel and I would guess a stronger arm. He actually showed noticeable improvement in college too, so there's more hope that he'll develop. I wouldn't hate Osweiler, but I'm seeing too much Cassel in him for me to be crazy about him.

I'm not big on Kuechly. To me, he's DJ without the playmaking ability (INTs/FFs/Sacks). I realize that DJ actually got better as he stopped focusing on trying to be a playmaker and just being a consistently good, but you know those plays he makes where he just slips by the lineman and gets the running back? I don't think I saw anything like that from Kuechly. I think our defense needs playmakers more, to help keep them pumped up and playing hard. There's enough other guys that are playmakers as well as being solid players that I don't know why you'd just settle.

Did you see the Stanzi in the 2nd round thread? People laughed at Boss and aturnis for most of the college regular season. Stanzi gained some supporters after the senior bowl, but I don't think the majority of this board wanted him in the 2nd.

I didn't get on the Stanzi wagon until very late in the draft season, and even then I wouldn't have been happy with him in the 2nd.

stanzi in the 2nd?

bosschief...and ?

he's a a 5th round pick that people keep trying to claim was a 1st rounder...

This is why I'm fantasizing about trading down/out of the round. You can't count on a guy falling to you. You have to either have a high pick or find a way to get one.

So in that light, yes, if Tannehill's on the board at 11, I would do my god-damnest to trade out of the position, for nothing less than a 2013 first rounder, and use whatever it takes next year to move up into the position to take the next Luck/RGIII. That to me is much more appealing than setting for Tannehill because he's the best we can do this year amongst the also-ran's.

Ain't gonna happen, but a guy can dream.