You know damn well what I'm talking about. Don't pretend like you didn't watch him. He had several big plays taken back.

If he's used like a scat-back, it's a stupid pick.

You don't take gimmick scat-backs at 36 overall. Those can be had a hell of a lot later and we could have taken a NT, LB, real WR or any number of other holes we had last season that we're still trying to fill.

I don't care how he's being used if he's not being used as a slot WR. You don't take freakin' scat-backs that high.

He had ONE big play taken back all year.

ONE.

Way to take my post out of context. They'll not only be using him on 3rd down. There. Better?

I agree. You may not HAVE to have a power back, but it sure would be nice. Of course, the OL is a factor in that short yardage game too, but you've got to have a short yardage capability of some kind that hopefully doesn't involve throwing the ball.

That's water under the bridge. We have him. So, now the question is: How does he get used, and where is he most effective.

A back that avg's 6.4 YPC should be able to handle 4th and 1. It's an O-line failure.

He had one play taken back, and it wouldn't have happened had there not been fouls on the play.

It's odd, I can remember the times he got blown up, or the times where he couldn't make a defender in the open field miss, but I'm struggling to remember all these "plays" some of you are claiming he made.

Hey Clayton, any chance you could produce the video of McCluster getting caught in the open field by George ****ing Selvie in the Rams game?

And if that's your position, fine. But don't sit around and say this is some knee-jerk reaction by alarmists. This isn't; it's vindication of the concerns they had all along.

And for what it's worth, there's no such thing as 'water under the bridge' in the NFL. We're still looking to fill the #2 WR, Ted Backer and NT positions even though there were excellent options available to us at all 3 positions with that pick last season. So now we're going to be using yet another pick to address them.

It's not 'water under the bridge', at best it's a sunk cost.

I'd rather have Wes Welker

Were there two? I only remember the one against Denver.

I'll see if I can find the Rams play.

"Bob Gretz suggests" doesn't sound quite as strongly worded as "definitely moving."

Say what I've always said: seems too small for RB.

It's a play-calling failure; you don't run a toss-sweep to the short side there, you simply don't.

But I'm sure that same play-caller will be able to brilliantly unlock the untapped potential of Dexter McCluster. He showed himself to be so very creative in 2009.

x2

Some people, like myself, argued that Spiller should be a consideration at #5 overall last year because of his abilities as a receiver. In fact, his skill set made him one of the most intriguing "WR" options in all of the 2010 draft.

Thus, the assumption was that DMC was filling this type of role for the Chiefs, that he was primarily selected to work out of the slot, while getting some touches out of the backfield.

The fact that this might not be the case is a ****ing joke, and Pioli should wear this one, right up next to Jackson and Cassel.