Why I Never Want The Chiefs To Take A QB In Round 1

[BigCatDaddy]

I'll start.

Because there will be better ones next year!

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Right now the top ranked QB's in next years class are Barkley, Wilson, Jones and Geno Smith. There might be an underclassman or two who declare, but that is never set in stone.

KC will likely draft again outside of the top 10 which means Barkley and Wilson will likely be off the board.

Do people really have a strong feeling that Jones or Smith or some other high riser will be substantially better than Tannehill?

Had Jones come out this year, Tannehill would have gone before him.

[InChiefsHeaven]

Cuz we've done that before and look where THAT got us!!!

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Right now the top ranked QB's in next years class are Barkley, Wilson, Jones and Geno Smith. There might be an underclassman or two who declare, but that is never set in stone.

KC will likely draft again outside of the top 10 which means Barkley and Wilson will likely be off the board.

Do people really have a strong feeling that Jones or Smith or some other high riser will be substantially better than Tannehill?

I actually think Geno Smith has the potential to put together a very impressive senior campaign and knock Landry Jones out of that 3rd QB spot. He's a guy who is a pretty damn accurate passer, has a great release, and is big. And obviously, he flat-out knows how to make plays on the field. Like Gabbert, Weeden, Bradford (though not as much) and others, his biggest task is going to be getting acclimated to an NFL offense.

[suds79]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Do people really have a strong feeling that Jones or Smith or some other high riser will be substantially better than Tannehill?

I think it's easy to say that Tannehill's physical gifts are much better than Jones. That seems clear to me.

[InChiefsHeaven]

Originally Posted by suds79

I think it's easy to say that Tannehill's physical gifts are much better than Jones. That seems clear to me.

Stop staring at his junk dude...jeeeez...

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by SNR

his biggest task is going to be getting acclimated to an NFL offense.

I really don't think that matters much anymore. How much did playing in an NFL offense help guys like Quinn or Clausen?

[lcarus]

We'll NEVER draft a first round QB because Pioli doesn't want to ever hurt Cassel's confidence.

[qabbaan]

Originally Posted by lcarus

We'll NEVER draft a first round QB because Matt Cassel is our franchise QB.

Fixies

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Do people really have a strong feeling that Jones or Smith or some other high riser will be substantially better than Tannehill?

I don't think there's much chance that Tannehill amounts to anything. I think there are quarterbacks available virtually every year in the 2nd and 3rd round range with better odds of being a franchise player. He's the flavor of the month and it's all based on measurables, not performance.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

He's the flavor of the month and it's all based on measurables, not performance.

Stats don't tell the whole story, but here are #'s for QBs in their first year as a starter.

Player.....Compl %......Yards........Avg.......TD.......INT
Tannehill....61.7.........3744........7.1....29-15
Luck.........56.3.........2575........8.9.....13-4
Griffin.......67............3501........7.7.....22-8
Barkley.....59.9..........2735.......7.8......15-14

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Stats don't tell the whole story, but here are #'s for QBs in their first year as a starter.

I'm not sure how that's relevant in any meaningful way, but okay.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I'm not sure how that's relevant in any meaningful way, but okay.

You took the position that Tannehill's draft position is not related to production. I'm just showing that his production in his first year as a starter was similar, and if not at times better, than the QBs being taken before him and/or projected before him.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

You took the position that Tannehill's draft position is not related to production. I'm just showing that his production in his first year as a starter was similar, and if not at times better, than the QBs being taken before him and/or projected before him.

By performance, I mean performance in games against quality opponents.

And it would be 2nd year as a starter, since he started half of 2010. In which case the comparison would be:

Player.....Compl %......Yards........Avg.......TD.......INT
Tannehill....61.7.........3744........7.1....29-15
Luck.........70.7.........3338........8.9.....32-8
Griffin.......67.0..........3501........7.7.....22-8
Barkley.....59.9..........2791.......7.4......26-12

You could also go with final year as a starter, which would be:
Player.....Compl %......Yards........Avg.......TD.......INT
Tannehill....61.7.........3744........7.1....29-15
Luck.........71.3.........3517........8.7.....37-10
Griffin.......72.7..........4293........10.7.....37-6
Barkley.....69.1..........3528.......7.9......39-7

Point being stats can be manipulated in basically any way you want.

Really, though, it's kind of silly to try to justify a subjective opinion objectively. I just don't think the odds are very good that the guy's going to be a franchise player. I think he's closer to the calibre of player you'd normally see drafted somewhere between the late 1st and early 3rd. I think his value's inflated because of the lack of quality QB candidates this year. As I've said probably 384724 times so far. My opinion on that is not going to change. And that's all it is...my opinion.

[CanadianChief]

Two words....


MATT DAMON!!!!