Chiefs LT Eugene Monroe in round 1? Pioli-Haley-Groh-Albert-Monroe

T-post Tom · 01:16 AM

Holy six degrees of separation Batman. So Charlie Casserly thinks the Chiefs are going with E. Monroe out of Virgina. I know some of you despise that idea, but I'm just repeating what he said. His theory on why Monroe makes sense:

1) Monroe has value at #3. Stud player. (Awesome Pro Day & Combine.)
2) Continuity as Albert/Monroe played together at UVA.
3) Albert/Monroe = bookends to to protect Cassel (& big $$ investment).
4) Pioli, Haley & Groh (HC at Virgina) all coached at Jets together. Groh loves Monroe. Pioli/Haley respect Groh's opinion & will listen.
5) Chiefs might be able to trade down a position or so and still get Monroe while picking up an extra pick(s).

My apologies in advance if this is a repost.

Hammock Parties · 04-10-2009, 01:20 AM

How is there any continuity if Albert isn't playing guard?

Then there's the money issue.

T-post Tom · 04-10-2009, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan

How is there any continuity if Albert isn't playing guard?

Then there's the money issue.

The offensive line plays as a unit. All offensive linemen will wax poetic about the importance of playing with the same guys over time. We heard it here in KC for so many years as we consistently had one of the best lines in the NFL.

Money? There's no money issue. Come on bro, quit throwing rocks.

Hammock Parties · 04-10-2009, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T-post Tom

The offensive line plays as a unit. All offensive linemen will wax poetic about the importance of playing with the same guys over time.

Yes, but we're talking about continuity.

Albert played left guard with Monroe at left tackle at Virginia.

There's ZERO continuity ON THE FIELD if that is changed up.

Quote:

Money? There's no money issue. Come on bro, quit throwing rocks.

There most definitely is a money issue. Monroe is going to want top 10 money. Albert signed a sizable contract last year as the #18 (?) pick. He's already proven he can play left tackle. He's going to want left tackle money for his next contract.

Too much money and too many draft resources tied up in two tackle spots.

It's just a bad idea. A good personnel department can find a right tackle anywhere. Free agency, later in the draft, a trade.

Bad ones (Carl) don't, and make fans think you have to spend another first-round pick on another tackle.

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-10-2009, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T-post Tom

We heard it here in KC for so many years as we consistently had one of the best lines in the NFL.

Yeah, what did it get the Chiefs? Nothing. Not jackshit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by T-post Tom

Money? There's no money issue. Come on bro, quit throwing rocks.

Yeah, let's go ahead and have $80 million dollars wrapped up in TWO left tackles. That way, when the Chiefs have to address other needs, they won't be able to because the majority of their cap is taken by two left tackles.

Brilliant.

T-post Tom · 04-10-2009, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Yeah, what did it get the Chiefs? Nothing. Not jackshit.

Yeah, let's go ahead and have $80 million dollars wrapped up in TWO left tackles. That way, when the Chiefs have to address other needs, they won't be able to because the majority of their cap is taken by two left tackles.

Brilliant.

Get your facts straight, Albert's salary was apt for a #15 pick, not a top five. GFC, pay attention.

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-10-2009, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T-post Tom

Get your facts straight, Albert's salary was apt for a #15 pick, not a top five. GFC, pay attention.

Again, Dummy, does that make it okay to pay Monroe $50 million? So in the next four years, you're going to have upwards of $80 million invested in 2 left tackles?

T-post Tom · 04-12-2009, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Yeah, what did it get the Chiefs? Nothing. Not jackshit.
Brilliant.

The more you post, the more I realize how little you know about football.

Ultra Peanut · 04-10-2009, 01:48 AM

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-10-2009, 02:12 AM

Hey Casserly

KCDC · 04-10-2009, 02:24 AM

I agree with T-Post, for what its worth. Claythan (and others) has done a good job explaining why a LB should not be a top 5 pick. Curry is good and would be a good pick, but LBs are available later in the draft. A franchise LT is available to a team once per generation (unless you are the Rams or Lions and will suck for years to come).

We lucked out and may have gotten one last year. We have a rare chance to get another if we can't trade the pick. Bookend tackles allow every kind of offensive play calling, and allow even mediocre recievers to get open and runners to have good seasons. If Mike Shanahan taught us one thing, it is that if you have a great OL, any mediocre RB can look like a star. Joe Gibbs taught that to the NFL with the "Hogs" in the 80s.

Also, what happens if Albert is injured for a few games, or is having a tough time with a particular DE in a game. Imagine the luxury of swapping Monroe in (or vice versa) and not missing a beat. Yeah, yeah, yeah, you can pick up RTs later in the draft. You can get a younger version of McIntosh. Then, when Albert is hurt, don't come moaning that the season is over because we have to play a McIntosh Jr. at LT.

A team can survive without one of its 3 or 4 LBs. It can't without a QB or a top quality LT. That is why these are money positions and are the most common positions drafted in the first three picks. We have our QB and we have half of an OL. Let's lock up the other half (so that Albert and Monroe can be interchangeable at LT or RT. Albert should not become a guard. Excellent guards are available in FA, or late in the draft. We got Goff for no draft picks, and he'll be very solid at guard. Put McIntosh in as RG and let Albert play RT.

**DaKCMan AP** · 04-10-2009, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCDC

A franchise LT is available to a team once per generation (unless you are the Rams or Lions and will suck for years to come).

We lucked out and may have gotten one last year. We have a rare chance to get another if we can't trade the pick.

You don't need two LT's and you don't spend a top-5 pick on a RT. (Even if Monroe plays LT and Albert is moved to RT, you're essentially spending a top-5 pick on a RT)

aturnis · 04-10-2009, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

You don't need two LT's and you don't spend a top-5 pick on a RT. (Even if Monroe plays LT and Albert is moved to RT, you're essentially spending a top-5 pick on a RT)

This is the most reeruned argument I've heard yet. I'm only playing devils advocate here, but you are not "essentially spending a top 5 pick on a RT". You are spending the #3 on a LT and a #15 on a RT. Stop saying this you ****ing clones.

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-10-2009, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aturnis

This is the most reeruned argument I've heard yet. I'm only playing devils advocate here, but you are not "essentially spending a top 5 pick on a RT". You are spending the #3 on a LT and a #15 on a RT. Stop saying this you ****ing clones.

What's the difference? You still have a shit ton of money wrapped up in TWO left tackles! Name a successful team that's drafted TWO left tackles in consecutive years, especially when the current left tackle played brilliantly in his first season?

The idea of drafting Monroe is so monumentally ****ing stupid that only a ****ing moron would support it.

JohnnyV13 · 04-10-2009, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

What's the difference? You still have a shit ton of money wrapped up in TWO left tackles! Name a successful team that's drafted TWO left tackles in consecutive years, especially when the current left tackle played brilliantly in his first season?

The idea of drafting Monroe is so monumentally ****ing stupid that only a ****ing moron would support it.

Dane, right now we can afford it. And, Albert's contract is a mid first round contract. Its not so prohibitive that he can't be traded.

THAT is the true value. We can use the two LT's to build a great O line right now. (IF personnel people are right).

When we have too much $$$ tied up in LTs, we can then TRADE a young, in his prime, LT. Those guys almost NEVER hit the market and we could demand a bushel of picks. Something like a 1st and 2 2nds.

This move might be the best way to max value on the draft. It all depends on the exact terms of Albert's and the new LTs contracts and how our personnel people rate the talent.

Your thinking about budgeting is generally correct. The Chiefs, however, are in a somewhat unusual cap position and can contemplate unusual long term strategy.

04-10-2009, 01:11 AM	Topic Starter
T-post Tom Threepeat! Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Milk/Honey/Gazland Casino cash: $4287293	LT Eugene Monroe in round 1? Pioli-Haley-Groh-Albert-Monroe Holy six degrees of separation Batman. So Charlie Casserly thinks the Chiefs are going with E. Monroe out of Virgina. I know some of you despise that idea, but I'm just repeating what he said. His theory on why Monroe makes sense: 1) Monroe has value at #3. Stud player. (Awesome Pro Day & Combine.) 2) Continuity as Albert/Monroe played together at UVA. 3) Albert/Monroe = bookends to to protect Cassel (& big $$ investment). 4) Pioli, Haley & Groh (HC at Virgina) all coached at Jets together. Groh loves Monroe. Pioli/Haley respect Groh's opinion & will listen. 5) Chiefs might be able to trade down a position or so and still get Monroe while picking up an extra pick(s). My apologies in advance if this is a repost. Last edited by T-post Tom; 04-10-2009 at 01:16 AM..
Posts: 20,370

04-10-2009, 01:20 AM	#2
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4220478	How is there any continuity if Albert isn't playing guard? Then there's the money issue. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 279,473

04-10-2009, 01:48 AM	#9
Ultra Peanut v^V^v^V^v^V^ Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Holland* Casino cash: $10005177	what __________________
Posts: 39,518

04-10-2009, 02:12 AM	#10
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7919572	Hey Casserly __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 74,860

04-10-2009, 02:24 AM	#11
KCDC Starter Join Date: Mar 2009 Casino cash: $9716110	I agree with T-Post, for what its worth. Claythan (and others) has done a good job explaining why a LB should not be a top 5 pick. Curry is good and would be a good pick, but LBs are available later in the draft. A franchise LT is available to a team once per generation (unless you are the Rams or Lions and will suck for years to come). We lucked out and may have gotten one last year. We have a rare chance to get another if we can't trade the pick. Bookend tackles allow every kind of offensive play calling, and allow even mediocre recievers to get open and runners to have good seasons. If Mike Shanahan taught us one thing, it is that if you have a great OL, any mediocre RB can look like a star. Joe Gibbs taught that to the NFL with the "Hogs" in the 80s. Also, what happens if Albert is injured for a few games, or is having a tough time with a particular DE in a game. Imagine the luxury of swapping Monroe in (or vice versa) and not missing a beat. Yeah, yeah, yeah, you can pick up RTs later in the draft. You can get a younger version of McIntosh. Then, when Albert is hurt, don't come moaning that the season is over because we have to play a McIntosh Jr. at LT. A team can survive without one of its 3 or 4 LBs. It can't without a QB or a top quality LT. That is why these are money positions and are the most common positions drafted in the first three picks. We have our QB and we have half of an OL. Let's lock up the other half (so that Albert and Monroe can be interchangeable at LT or RT. Albert should not become a guard. Excellent guards are available in FA, or late in the draft. We got Goff for no draft picks, and he'll be very solid at guard. Put McIntosh in as RG and let Albert play RT.
Posts: 876