just more speculation about RGIII
 

Well, at least they mention the chiefs


Robert Griffin trade rumors already spinning out of control
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on February 28, 2012, 4:04 PM EST

APForget the Combine. Forget free agency. Robert Griffin III trade chatter dominates the NFL discussion these days.

And it’s still February.

Perhaps Rams COO Kevin Demoff is right: It’s getting less crazy to imagine a deal could be completed before free agency. We’ve read and heard an unprecedented amount of trade rumors about the No. 2 overall pick for this time of year.

Let’s go over the latest:

1. Mike Jones of the Washington Post writes the Redskins would give up the No. 6 overall pick and next year’s first round pick in addition to multiple picks in the mid-to-upper rounds of the draft. Consider this the starting point for negotiations.

The Rams are reportedly looking for a similar package to the one San Diego netted for Eli Manning: Two firsts (including the No. 4 overall pick), a third- and fifth-round pick. The Redskins sound ready to meet this demand.

2. Texas A&M prospect Ryan Tannehill is watching the Griffin talk closely. Jones believes the Redskins would take Tannehill at No. 6 overal if they can’t get Griffin.

3. Terry Pluto of the Cleveland Plain-Dealer believes the Browns will ultimately have to give up three first-round picks in order to land Griffin. Do I hear four, Redskins? (This reminds us of a classic article by the Onion.)

4. Demoff told Peter King of SI.com that the Rams received a feeler from a team “you would never expect.” Does Kansas City count? If not, we’ll roll with Philadelphia as our irresponsible guess for a mystery team. Enter your pick below.

5. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch considers the Redskins the early favorite to land Griffin. This sounds true based on all the reports, plus Mike Shanahan’s close relationship with Jeff Fisher.

That aint happening.

All of those late-season wins sure were nice.

The only pre-draft signing can be the number `1 pick right?

I'd say that Eli Manning trade worked out for the Giants.

Correct.

Thanks

Yes they were/RAC

This makes sense make other teams think you want to draft a QB so then the 11th pick will have more value for a team who wants Tannehill.

NO way Pioli gives up the draft for one guy. No matter how good he potentially could be.

It would be awesome to get him, but you cant give up an entire draft for one guy.

Of course for KC, even if it turned out to be a giant fail ala Ricky Williams, its just another fail that can be added to the nearly two decades of fail seasons theyve already racked up.

Im fine either way. I doubt we get RG3, but if we do it will certainly be exciting to see how it turns out.

I figure Manning is KC's best shot at a real QB this year and thats a huge longshot.

Chiefs should just draft as strongly as they can this year, and try to make do with Orton, Stanzi, or worst case scenario Matt Cassel if they cannot get Manning.

I wonder what the poll results would be on

A. Trade up to #2 by using a bunch of picks and throw in Bowe once he is franchised instead of a future first+....or sign Bowe in time to tag Carr and include him in the deal.

The rams need a receiver and corner backs, but they would need to cut some guys in this scenario because of their cap situation.

2. Sign Peyton and draft Tannehill. Peyton would cost a lot and that might cause us to lose a player or two in the next 2-3 years.

Both scenarios have their positives and drawbacks.

I think I'd rather sign Peyton and draft Tannehill/Richardson.

st. louis is starting every rumor they can to try and drive up the price.

I hope it blows up in their face and they don't get shit

A total pipe dream. No chance in hell unless the Rams just wanted us to have the pick for some rediculous reason. It would taken more than just our picks this year.

Bowe and Carr plus our one and two? But they would have to be ours first off.

KC would have to give up the entire draft to get RGIII. There isn't a player worth that much...and it truly is a gamble.

You can count KC out of the RGIII sweepstakes. There is just no way Pioli would be willing to give that much up and rightly so.
Posted via Mobile Device

i seriously doubt that anything happens until the day of the draft. All these rumors is just the Rams trying to increase the price or the redskins trying to scare everyone off.

silly to worry about

The only thing I know for sure is that he'll end up somewhere, and it probably won't be here.

We aren't getting him
Or Manning

May the Heisman curse be with him
'cause he won't be in KC

Thats true, but if there is ever a time to do it, its RIGHT NOW. WE can fill in what we need through free agency right now.

I know it wont happen, but damn it would be nice.

No team has ever traded that much for a quarterback and gone on to win two Super Bowls with that quarterback as the Super Bowl MVP in each of them.

Well, we havent been tot he Superbowl in over 40 years, somethings gotta give. lol

Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill Tannehill

As you know, NFL players are one snap away from their careers being over. The time to trade your entire draft+ for one player is NEVER. There is way too much risk involved.
Posted via Mobile Device

If your goal is to win one or more CHAMPIONSHIPS, the risk is higher for NOT doing WHATEVER IT TAKES to get a bluechip quarterback prospect.

Go, look up how much NY gave up for Eli.

2 superbowls, so far.

I'd give either Carr OR Bowe in a tag/trade deal along with the whole 2012 draft to move up if that's what it takes.

We aren't gonna win a ****ing thing with Cassel.

Well then....let's just draft scared and never do anything drastic. Great plan.

So my question is......what would be the feeling about Pioli if he:

1. Let Carr walk.
2. Franchised Bowe
3. Traded Bowe, our 1st this year and a 1st next year for RGIII.

ill tell you what, we will NEVER EVER win a Championship with what we are doing now. We have .001 percent chance of doing anything. We have relived this no qb worth a **** for a long long time. 0 Superbowl appearances in OVER 40 ****ing years.

Chiefs need to do SOMETHING to get a qb. I dont really want to relive the 90's over again. Yes, we won over 100 games in the 10 years, but let me tell you, we were still watching the Superbowl with no horse in the race. 0-16 or 9-7 and no play off win is the same to me.

I'm not a fan of giving up the entire draft but if the guy does anything to get us a potential top tier QB I'll be much less upset by him.

THIS X10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Clark says; I've had some very good years since I inherited my team from my old man. **** you all

What the **** is wrong with some of you children? You do realize there's going to be another draft next year, right? This is not the last chance in recorded history to draft a QB in the draft.

Nobody on this board is against a reasonable trade to land a QB but this "let's trade every pick this year, next year, and the year after that and a package of Bowe, Carr, Charles, and Berry to draft RG III!" is just tiresomely stupid.

lol, what makes you think we wont be again 7-9 and 9-7 and again be in a position with nothing but our dicks in our hands because we are picking 11-20 again? That is another year older. THen we can say, dont trade the whole draft, we can wait til 2014, for a qb. lol when does it end? The Chiefs fans have been waiting since 1970 for another franchise qb.

That's not what I'm saying and you know it. What I'm saying is that you don't give up an entire draft and then some for one player. That idea is simply idiotic. It has nothing to do with drafting scared...it's all about not over-reacting to the hype and having the brain to realize football is 11 on 11.
Posted via Mobile Device

I didn't realize franchise QB's were unavailable after pick 10 in the draft?? That sucks.
Posted via Mobile Device

There's always next year, until it's next year, of course.

It's not entirely unreasonable to imagine moving up from 11 overall, and being averse to risk is not going to serve this franchise well in the long term.

or freak moped accident.

They are, but its a bigger risk. All i am saying is 40 ****ing years! When does it stop. Since what mid 80's since we have even tried. I was just a damned kid watching Transformers after i got out of grade school. lol Its been a while.

So drafting a QB between 11-20 is a risk but trading your entire draft+ for RG3 isn't?
Posted via Mobile Device

You're forgetting the great Pat Barnes draft?

Huge risk. If the QB pans out, however, it's well worth it.

Lock in on the prospect and don't hesitate. Not sure if RGIII is that guy, but I would certainly support the risk if Pioli believes he is.

Let's do nothing then, because it has worked so well for the past 40+ years.

That's not what I'm saying.
Posted via Mobile Device

He can't just "pan out.". He needs to win a few Super Bowls to be worth that type of gamble. You won't know unless you try, however I'm afraid the hype of RG3 is bigger than the payoff will be. Either way, an entire draft is not worth one player...Never will be.
Posted via Mobile Device

You're putting arbitrary distinctions on the value, much like posters who claim that, essentially, trading away a draft could set a franchise back "six years." Not five, not seven. Six.

The math is hard and fast on this fact.

If you can acquire a true franchise QB, there's damn near no price too steep. And this price sure as **** isn't one single draft, though I know we'd desperately miss all of the McClusters and Arenaseseses of the world.

Is it known that there will be a QB comparable to Luck or RGIII in next year's draft (or the next year) at this point?

Barkley is the top prospect for '13. Not at Luck's standard. Totally different player from RGIII.

Say we gave up what ever we had to give up to get this guy 3 years ago.


Over the last three years our first rounders have been Jackson, Berry, and Baldwin. We just won 7 games without Berry and with a part or less time Baldwin. Jackson had a good year but he wasn't an all pro.

Now, say you put RGIII on this team last year. If he is what they think he is or think he will be, what would the Chiefs record have been?

At this point, where the Chiefs are on both sides of the ball, where do we need to focus our drafting? We could essentially get what we need, (depth) if we were or are smart about 3 and later round picks, that we could potentially keep.

Also something to think about is that if we did trade up and give up a ton, those draft picks wouldn't have to be paid. That could give us money to keep our own guys.


I dunno, I don't think it's smart to be giving up all those picks, but if they did, you won't hear a complaint from me.

It's a BIG "IF."
Posted via Mobile Device

If RGIII gets us to the playoffs (or close)...our 1st round pick next year will be worth dick.

I would give up our 1st and 2nd picks this year and our 1st next year to get RGIII.

If you sit back and think about it, where would this franchise be without Tyson Jackson and the (CP) all-world production from Baldwin, who, apparently, registered the most impressive 21-catch season in NFL ****ing history.

Bowe (and his 70 reception rookie year and consistent production)? Shit. Baldwin? Money.

Get the franchise QB. Worry about the details later.

Sign Paul Soliai in FA.
Trade up RGIII.
Grab a RT in the 3rd round.

Nore should he thats completely stupid and immature thinking.

We have enough cap space to compensate for losing some draft picks

.

They had Philip RIvers
I'm not convinced they wouldn't have been better off keeping him & the draft picks
or maybe that should be no worse off..

That's not a perfect example because based on what we've seen from Tyson Jackson and what we've seen from Mark Sanchez, it's starting to look like the Chiefs made out better. Jackson is a very good player who will be starting for the Chiefs 3 years from now. It's possible Sanchez in 3 years will either be a bench player or a QB who holds you back from doing the things you want to do. As for Baldwin... well, now you're getting into the argument about whether we need to get a top 5 QB or if we could just wait for an Andy Dalton type QB to come around.

Eli or keep Rivers next years 1st & whatever pick they took Keading with

No idea how that relates to Baldwin, who has shown precious little in KC, other than a great catch that was called back.

As for Jackson/Sanchez, it could be that TJ ends up being the better of these two. However, once Pioli made the move to Cassel, I think the selection should have been Raji, and it should have been a no-brainer.

And that is why you aren't an NFL GM.

I would think the best deal for both us and them would be for us to tag and trade them Carr, our 1st/3rd/5th...

You'd have to assume we'll probably get some compensatory picks for Orton and Shaun Smith, so losing the 3rd/5th is not that bad. We'd get at least one of them back. Also, we can't keep both Bowe and Carr, so pay Bowe, tag/trade Carr, otherwise we'll just let him go. In all actuality, we're really only out the difference between our 3rd/5th, and what we receive for compensatory picks.

If they like, they can stay put and finally get a LT to protect Bradford, which might help more than a WR. Or, they can use some of their bounty to trade back up to get Blackmon if they like.

I used to be iffy on RG3. Them more I've watched him, and the more I've followed him from interviews, combine and other such things, the less questions I have about the guy. I think he's worth it.

I can't stand the Philip Rivers Eli Manning argument.
1) The Chargers gave up a first, second, third, and fifth round pick. That's one draft. If the rumors are true about Washington's compensation, the Chiefs will need to sacrifice two drafts to get him.
2) The Chargers moved up from #1 to #4. The Chiefs would need to move up from #11 to #2 AND they would need to out-compete several suitors with much better draft positions than we have
3) Look, RGIII is a great prospect. But he's not even close to Eli Manning coming out of college. Eli was an NFL-ready QB with the right frame. RGIII has largely operated off a pre-designed read offense and arguably might be slightly short for the position. Eli was even higher touted than Andrew Luck.
4) The Chargers knew if they traded down, they'd have the opportunity to draft Big Ben or Rivers. The Rams, if they traded down to us, would go from being able to draft an elite WR or elite LT, to an elite RT (a position that would often go in the 20's in many drafts)

The Chiefs are going to give up a whole lot more for RGIII than the Chargers did. They'd be doing it for a QB that is very good but isn't the surefire elite QB Eli or Luck are. And they're doing it against a whole lot more competition in a draft where outside of the top 10, you see a very significant drop in talent.

I think the price is getting too high...take Richardson and try to pick up Weeden or Cousins and next year make the play for a QB and dump Dorsey in the deal.

Yes, I think the selection should have been Raji too. And Baldwin, it's way too soon to know what we would have gotten. But I think the point is whether we should take a risk on a QB. Yes, we should. Yes, we should be aggressive. But imagine if we traded two whole drafts to get Sanchez. There is definitely a limit to how much trade comp you give up. Frankly, I think the Rivers-Eli trade comp is a pretty good ceiling.

Adam the reerun Shefter started the Manning/Rivers trade comparison
Two highly touted QBs were swoped with draft picks thrown in

That trade comp is a joke.

That trade comp is a 3rd, 4th, 5th round pick less than the Rivers-Eli trade. And that comp was for a better QB, for only a 3-slot trade up, in a class where the trading party could easily land a good QB at #4 after a trade down, in an era when #1 QBs were less valuable because they were guaranteed monstrous contracts many teams didn't want to take on.

The comp has to match the Rivers-Eli trade, and then it has to add several big picks to that.

Eli was not more highly touted than Luck, who has no benefit of name recognition/pedigree.

I disagree, especially in todays NFL for teams that are built for a run with players in place..

Now teams that are weak in mulitple areas yes, it is bad..

& Rivers was drafted a Giant
probably by the Chargers' request

I think the point to be made is that Eli and Luck would at least be a head-to-head for the #1 pick. RGIII would not even come close to competing with either of those guys.

It doesn't make RGIII a bad player. But he's not nearly as valuable going into the draft as Eli was, which means his trade comp shouldn't exceed Eli's.

I hate this ! But it's right on!

Really? RG3 is only not being picked #1 b/c Luck is considered the safest, surest thing at QB since Elway. RG3 is VERY impressive and I think he'd give Manning a run for his money for the #1 pick easy.

1. There is no way in hell Pioli would outbid the Redskins for this pick.

2. You maybe trade a whole draft for Luck. Not for RG3.

3. Cassel is going to start in 2012. It's time we all accepted it.

4. Cassel is probably going to start in 2013, too.

5. The "competition" will be a sham.

Sounds like Pioli is very impressed with RG3 to me.

He has come close to competing with either one of those guys. He's the #2 pick. that's pretty damn close.

I think he could top Eli. Reality is though, it's not a fair fight. He's not only competing with the player, but the "legend" they have become. Eli for his obvious name recognition, and Luck for what he has done. Also, there is a stigma attached to a QB who can run, even if you like that, it will scare you a little.

I would feel like we FINALLY took the correct FIRST STEP.

IMO, the only situation I like better is Manning + Tannehill.

Ummm... Based on Shanahan's close relationship with Fisher?

Are they insinuating that there will be collusion? You don't get ahead by cutting your buddies good deals. IF the skins get the pick, they'll have to put out the best offer.

I really don't see the Chiefs signing Manning and then drafting Tannehill. If you're going to get Manning, you have to give him the best supporting cast RIGHT NOW, which means drafting a Trent Richardson or an Olineman in the first round this year.