Quote:
Originally Posted by Mecca
We can have a logical conversation about it but when someone is just jumping around yelling Pioli like a parrot or acting like all ability to reason left them or cussing at me I'm not going to be nice or friendly with them.
I don't think it's a good draft no matter who was doing the picking. I think we left alot of value on the board.
The draft had alot of depth at OL TE and WR, so we proceeded to take a bunch of defenders in what was acknowledged as a weak defensive year. I understand they think it's a great idea to shoehorn in this defensive scheme and all but um they just traded for Cassel and said he's the guy.
If you're going to do that you have to give him enough to let him have a chance. We didn't upgrade our putrid OL and we didn't get him anyone else to throw to after trading Gonzalez, it's just begging for him to fail.
I don't think it was fair to Matt Cassel he doesn't deserve to get his brains beat in or get injured but the front office may after what they did to him over the course of this weekend.
|
I am fine with Tyson Jackson. I wish they could have traded back and got him, but I don't they could have. I don't think the Jets gave them the same offer, but if they did, I don't think that he would have been on the board at 17.
Magee and Washington were both value picks.
After this draft, the Chiefs defensive line should be solid. The Chiefs have versatility and quality along their defensive front.
Dorsey can play end or NT in the 3-4. Jackson, Boone, and Magee can all play inside or outside.
Edwards and Tank Tyler are the 1st/2nd down NT's.
The Chiefs have a ton of options up front now. I don't see this as a bad thing.
As far as Cassel goes, sometimes the most help you can give a young QB is a defense that will take the pressure off of him.
Honestely, I think Curry would have made a bigger impact. I would have rather had Curry. If not Curry, I would have preferred a trade back.
With that said, Jackson plays a position that is harder to fill.