IMO, the Chiefs should trade the extra 4th round draft pick they get from the Stai trade, to the Patriots for Mike Bishop.

The precedent has been set with the Aaron Brooks trade between the Saints and Packers.

Bishop is prototype QB of the future of the same mold as McNabb and Culpepper.

There's your QB of the future.


[This message has been edited by Cannibal (edited 12-04-2000).]

Elvis Grbac

Why is that? I haven't seen him play. Brooks is proving his worth. Who is this guy? http://www.chiefsplanet.com/ubb/smile.gif

Bishop is a former K-State QB.

[This message has been edited by Robert_Dole (edited 12-04-2000).]

The fact that division rivals STILL like the idea of EG at QB shows that something is wrong, IMO.

I wouldn't be upset at all to see Grbac and his inflated salary let go.

I'm not saying we have to let Girlbac go.

We just need a good young player that can be developed and take a lot snaps in garbage time. <P>

Where's Lawrence Taylor when you need him?

I'm hearing that the Pats may let Bledsoe look for greener pastures after this season, so while that is an unsubstantiated rumor, they really like Bishop...

Bishop may indeed be the wave of the future, but he has a LONG way to go before he is ready to be a NFL QB. K-State is my college football team of choice, so I saw Bishop quite a bit. He has a true cannon for an arm and great running ability.

The bad news is that he looks to run before he looks to pass and has a reputation of being on the low side of the IQ scale.

Is that coachable? Perhaps.

Still, unless he costs us an arm and a leg [which we need to spend on Garner/Dillon/Barber, et al], it would be worth a try.

xoxo~
gaz
willing to take a chance, provided it doesn't cost too much.<BR>

I do think Bishop may be on the low side of the IQ scale in general. However, I do think he has a very good football IQ.

He has the ability score from anywhere on the field with his arm and his legs. A true impact player.

He needs to be coached in the same manner that Culpepper is right now.

I like Bishop as a project. However, I think he may be available without compensation after the season(the patties KNOW he's not too bright.) I also don't see him being in the same class as Brooks. Brooks is an incredibly bright kid, from what I've read and remember reading during that draft. Bishop, by almost ALL acounts, is not.

------------------
GO PITT!

Chief plans for QBOF,

soak Warren Moon in WD40 and oil all winter, get the rust out, and resign him to 5 year contract....that WD40 is great stuff....and actually does help arthritis.

I've heard that he has really good trade value, so i wouldn't expect to see him released (as was stated earlier). As for trading a 4th, I would probably agree if I had actually seen him play more than the handful of Patriots snaps I've seen. I wouldn't just let grbac go, though, unless he wants TOO much. Grbac is turning into a great QB and he probably hasn't peaked yet. Give him a RB and we'd be contenders right now (and maybe a D). I'd take Bishop as a project though.

As for Brooks, I thought I read recently that he WASN'T too bright, and that his test scores scared some people off.

How can everyone not like what's going on in Philly and Minnesota?

We could have the same thing here in Bishop, but at a much cheaper price.

Bishop does have the same ability as Culpepper and McNabb. I know for a fact that his arm is stronger.

[This message has been edited by Cannibal (edited 12-04-2000).]

Uh, excuse me, but if we know he's a mental doorknob and the Pats know he's a mental doorknob and if the Pats, who drafted him don't want him, why would we want him?

A million dollar arm coupled with a 5 cent head amounts to a 5 cent arm.