It's called a literary device.

I was just about to look up that list.... holy crap.

These two posts need to be put in their own thread and perma-stickied until we actually draft a playmaker at quarterback.

Just picking a team at random...The Packers have drafted 12 QBs since 1993. A team that's had two legitimate franchise QBs covering that entire period.

Hahaha, good lord.

I think we'll draft more QBs under this regime....the fact is they have brought in 4 new QBs (3 with a chance of making the team) since January... it is not as though they have not addressed the position.

Yeah, if there was ever a plan to copy, it was Seattle's... and it's not like anyone expected Russel Wilson to win the job. And I guess a true fan can say that's exactly what the Chiefs did, even though it was in the typical no risk style that's plagued the team for decades.

One can only hope.

I hear what you're saying, and I'm sure it's frustrating as hell that the team's been an afterthought for as long as it has. But spending weeks or months on "GENO!!!!' (or Sanchez in 2009) when the kid's were significantly flawed prospects, and shitting all over the organization because they don't pick those kids is stupid. Teams who need QBs and see one at #1 aren't trading out if they like the QB, so that leaves only sitting at #1 or being bad in a year with multiple good QB prospects. Since 2005, the only arguable players of that level have been

Rodgers - huge miss, but by a lot of teams. The Tedford angle and his throwing mechanics scared teams away.

Culter - LMAO (No, really, SNR listed Cutler)

Ryan - Here's the big one with a relatively easy trade up to #1 or #2 in terms of value, but that wasn't under either Pioli or Reid.

In 2012, the Redskins just weren't going to be beaten out in terms of offers for the #2 spot and RGIII, and you're welcome to think Tannehill's a top guy, but I'm not on that bandwagon.

If people want to be pissed about missed QB opportunities, 2008 makes sense, but 2009-2013 don't.

At least some of the "homegrown QB" rhetoric comes from the knowledge that other team's castoffs rarely if ever succeed elsewhere. Our own QB track record is the perfect evidence for that argument.

I would love it if Reid/Dorsey would draft a QB just to make me personally happy, but that's not why I'm pissed that they don't take a chance. I'm pissed because my experience has taught me that there is an incredibly high probability that the strategy they are trying is going to fail. It has been demonstrated repeatedly.

Even if Alex Smith is a good QB, is he better than the 49ers current QB? So basically, we're going for at best, the 2nd best possible QB? I'd rather have the hope of the unknown, boom or bust, rather than the safety of known mediocrity.

That's just me though, I can completely understand somebody else not feeling that way.

It's called a load of bullshit that you were tossing out to try buttressing a really weak argument.

If this were my opinion, wouldn't it have been easier and clearer for me to say, "There are just as many QB successes as QB failures in the first round"

Instead, I said, "For every Losman there's a Cutler..." etc.

It's called anaphora.

In any case, that wasn't what I said. Stop saying it was.

Also, do you actually believe the Chiefs are better off trading 2 2nd round picks for Alex ****ing Smith than drafting a QB clone of Jay Cutler in the first round, if there were one to draft?

I'll take Cutler 10 times out of 10 over Alex Smith.

We never draft QBs cause we have front offices afraid of offending players. Vermeil and Green, Pioli and Cassel, all about fragile egos.

Like I said (and keg, too), a lot of the frustration isn't just in the first round... Tannehill, Russel Wilson, Dalton, Kaepernick, Ryan Mallett, Clausen, McCoy, etc (of course, that's a sample of all QBs, with no opinions on potential/real success).... year to year, it's easy to say there aren't any prospects that fit the system, don't try just to try, etc; but we're talking decades of not trying at all, with the exception of Croyle and a couple of 4th rounders (and the 4th is stretching it). One one hand, it's not just drafting a QB to do it, but OTOH, that doesn't excuse a team from trying at all, for decades at a time (and when I say decades at a time, I mean all of them).

All you need to know about drafting QBs is in keg's two posts.... the Packers get it. The Chiefs don't.