ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   NFL Draft Landry Jones > Geno Smith (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=266743)

keg in kc 12-14-2012 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR (Post 9206792)
Name me some "true" #1 picks in this year's draft.

There ARE none outside of the top QBs.

No player who isn't a lineman can ever be a "true" #1 pick.

BryanBusby 12-14-2012 01:07 AM

lmfao

NJChiefsFan 12-14-2012 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Austin Ed (Post 9206779)
They wouldn't draft Jones in the Top Ten. No one would The whole point is that he may be available at the top of Round Two and would be a great value pick there. I would rather have Jones and a true #1 pick than Smith at #1 or 2.

I couldn't disagree more. This isn't about value in a round. This is about the FUTURE OF THE FRANCHISE. Yeah, it is exactly that important and exactly that dramatic. You can't win without a great QB. Maybe your team can have 1 run here and there, but that's it. You get the best QB you believe is out there, period. You don't pass on them to take the "better player" because a decent QB is waiting later.

I would rather take the best QB in the draft and have a failure in round 2 then take the best player available with the first pick and Jones in round 2 due to value. The first one actually gives a chance of being a SB contender one day.

keg in kc 12-14-2012 02:45 AM

You want the best QB. Not the best bargain at QB. The Tom Brady's and Drew Brees' of the world are the exceptions that prove the rule. The only time you trade out of the top 5 is when you don't need a star QB. Teams that are already set can afford to gamble. But when you do need one, and you're sitting there in range to take your shot, you'd be ****ing insane to do anything else.

RealSNR 12-14-2012 02:45 AM

Back when I and many others were still trying to convince folks that Matt Cassel was ****ing dogshit, I made the comparison of QBs to watches. It still works.

If Andrew Luck is a gold-plated Rolex valued at $40,000 (or however much a brand new one goes for), then Matt Cassel is a $200 nickel-plated Seiko. Nothing against Seikos. They can be stylish, and they get the job done. But nobody is ever going to be impressed by one. They won't stick out. And they won't get you laid. Matt Cassel in particular was a Seiko that developed a faulty mechanism, the hands kept falling off, and wasn't water-proof. After two years it was evident the Chiefs had bought a piece of shit.

So what does this franchise (and its fans apparently) keep doing? They keep trying to find a "value" watch. This time they have an opportunity to get a nicer one, but they're still not looking at the ultra-expensive Rolexes. Even now they're looking at cheaper, not as high quality watches to see if they can find a bargain.

What the Chiefs need and have never had is a 24-karat gold monstrous ****er with diamonds, platinum, and a bunch of other expensive shit on it. Even now they're saying, "Gee, this knockoff Rolex brand has everything the more expensive real model does... well, at least it looks like it does from afar. And it's way less expensive!"

RealSNR 12-14-2012 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 9206891)
You want the best QB. Not the best bargain at QB. The Tom Brady's and Drew Brees' of the world are the exceptions that prove the rule. The only time you trade out of the top 5 is when you don't need a star QB. Teams that are already set can afford to gamble. But when you do need one, and you're sitting there in range to take your shot, you'd be ****ing insane to do anything else.

Or... what keg said.

NJChiefsFan 12-14-2012 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 9206891)
You want the best QB. Not the best bargain at QB. The Tom Brady's and Drew Brees' of the world are the exceptions that prove the rule. The only time you trade out of the top 5 is when you don't need a star QB. Teams that are already set can afford to gamble. But when you do need one, and you're sitting there in range to take your shot, you'd be ****ing insane to do anything else.

Well said. Less wordy then my post. It doesn't matter where the QB ranks compared to the other players on the board. If you need a QB, no other position should matter until you find one.

AussieChiefsFan 12-14-2012 05:34 AM

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mLj2hIz59o...600/Hahaha.gif

htismaqe 12-14-2012 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Austin Ed (Post 9206779)
They wouldn't draft Jones in the Top Ten. No one would The whole point is that he may be available at the top of Round Two and would be a great value pick there. I would rather have Jones and a true #1 pick than Smith at #1 or 2.

You want a "true" #1 pick.

Who is he? Name him.

the Talking Can 12-14-2012 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Austin Ed (Post 9206779)
They wouldn't draft Jones in the Top Ten. No one would The whole point is that he may be available at the top of Round Two and would be a great value pick there. I would rather have Jones and a true #1 pick than Smith at #1 or 2.

and i'd rather shoot your pets in the face

htismaqe 12-14-2012 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR (Post 9206792)
Name me some "true" #1 picks in this year's draft.

There ARE none outside of the top QBs.

I see you already asked.

And you're still waiting.

I want to know who this "true" #1 is.

Is it Jarvis Jones, who has spinal stenosis?

Or maybe Luke Joeckel, who is being compared to Jake Long?

Maybe it's Star Lotulelei, who would be the THIRD 3-4 defensive lineman we've drafted in the last 6 years?

How about Manti Te'o, who is the highest-rated ILB prospect since Aaron Curry?

The simple fact is that, if you're going by the talking heads and looking for "value", THERE ISN'T ANY. Every single one of these guys have question marks that make them bad value at #1 overall.

The Chiefs have a VOLCANIC need for a QB. If they pick anything else, they're the dumbest franchise in the history of sports.

the Talking Can 12-14-2012 07:40 AM

30 years without a QB, and Chiefs fans are still worried about 'value'....


but we can get a six pack of 16oz Bud light AND a sixer of Michelob instead of the Three Floyds Zombie Dust!

keg in kc 12-14-2012 07:45 AM

Luke Joeckel is nowhere close to Jake Long, who never should've gone anywhere close to #1. Talk about a team reaching for a position of need. But I guess that's only okay for left tackles and other impact positions who always have the ball in their hands.

007 12-14-2012 07:50 AM

There are no true number 1s in this draft. That is why the Chiefs need to just get the best QB with their pick.

htismaqe 12-14-2012 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 9206988)
Luke Joeckel is nowhere close to Jake Long, who never should've gone anywhere close to #1. Talk about a team reaching for a position of need. But I guess that's only okay for left tackles and other impact positions who always have the ball in their hands.

So you think Luke Joeckel is worth the 1st overall pick?

He's not Orlando Pace or Joe Thomas. Not even close.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.