Chiefs Crennel pondering offer to become Chiefs D.C. - Page 12

Just Passin' By · 02-28-2009, 11:12 PM

I didn't see this posted anywhere, so I thought I'd pass it on:

Quote:

Waiting on Romeo: Former Browns coach Romeo Crennel is convalescing from successful hip replacement surgery and weighing an offer to become the defensive coordinator of the Kansas City Chiefs.

The Chiefs are holding the position open for Crennel, who is waiting to learn exactly how long his rehabilitation process will keep him out. The Chiefs may have enticed Crennel a little bit more by trading for New England linebacker Mike Vrabel.

Whether or not Crennel accepts, he has decided not to remain with the Browns in an unspecified role offered by Mangini.

Crennel previously declined an offer to rejoin Charlie Weis as Notre Dame's defensive coordinator. Crennel and Weis were Belichick's coordinators during New England's three Super Bowl championship seasons.

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/inde...ssion_bro.html

Chiefless · 03-01-2009, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I'm not a huge fan of taking a LB in the first round either way to tell you the truth but I just don't see Curry being a good fit for our position. I think Curry is a better fit for a 4-3 team to be honest.

I just want KC to draft a player who has the best possible chance to dominate a position of need. There are so many positions of need...so many

**DaneMcCloud** · 03-01-2009, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefless

I just want KC to draft a player who has the best possible chance to dominate a position of need. There are so many positions of need...so many

Which is why they should abandon the "Draft Chart" and get what they can get to trade back.

**SAUTO** · 03-01-2009, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Which is why they should abandon the "Draft Chart" and get what they can get to trade back.

maybe, are you serious?

Mecca · 03-01-2009, 01:24 AM

If I was in a stuck spot where I didn't want any of the players on the board and my targeted player could still be had, if it was the difference in say 10+ mill I would take what I could get...

Saccopoo · 03-01-2009, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Which is why they should abandon the "Draft Chart" and get what they can get to trade back.

I agree Dane. But the problem is, at least in this year, I don't know if the Black & White Draft Chart applies. It's going to be one of those odd years where the slot specific numbers get thrown out because there is no pre-determined number one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine or ten. This is just one of those freaky years where the bold, set-in-stone draft value numbers get thrown out the window. Especially when the Chiefs get their quarterback and linebacker in a single trade. (Everyone who knew anything said that the #3 pick was going to determine the slant of the draft, at least the early rounds, and now that's a complete mess.)

Saccopoo · 03-01-2009, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saccogoo

I agree Dane. But the problem is, at least in this year, I don't know if the Black & White Draft Chart applies. It's going to be one of those odd years where the slot specific numbers get thrown out because there is no pre-determined number one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine or ten. This is just one of those freaky years where the bold, set-in-stone draft value numbers get thrown out the window. Especially when the Chiefs get their quarterback and linebacker in a single trade. (Everyone who knew anything said that the #3 pick was going to determine the slant of the draft, at least the early rounds, and now that's a complete mess.)

And I guess I missed out where you said to throw out the chart...

**DaneMcCloud** · 03-01-2009, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saccogoo

I agree Dane. But the problem is, at least in this year, I don't know if the Black & White Draft Chart applies. It's going to be one of those odd years where the slot specific numbers get thrown out because there is no pre-determined number one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine or ten. This is just one of those freaky years where the bold, set-in-stone draft value numbers get thrown out the window. Especially when the Chiefs get their quarterback and linebacker in a single trade. (Everyone who knew anything said that the #3 pick was going to determine the slant of the draft, at least the early rounds, and now that's a complete mess.)

That's why I favor throwing out the "baby with the bathwater" and taking what you can get.

There's NO WAY the Chief enter the 2009 season with Sackintosh, Niswanger and Jones on the line after trading for Cassel.

This is a GREAT year for offensive lineman and the Chiefs need (and will) take advantage of that overage.

**DaneMcCloud** · 03-01-2009, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

maybe, are you serious?

Yes.

See #172

Chiefless · 03-01-2009, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Which is why they should abandon the "Draft Chart" and get what they can get to trade back.

Can you clarify that a little?

I think I get what you are saying...It's a convoluted set of circumstances. Isn't this a down draft? If so, I think it's really complicating matters...Just seems to me that it's going to be difficult to find a trading partner this year. For all we know NE didn't want to swap firsts and took KCs 2nd instead. A lot of money will HAVE to be spent on whoever gets drafted. If the talent is suspect it will be difficult to find a suitor...Just thinkin out loud here.

I'm think this is not a great draft for the team holding the third card.

**DaneMcCloud** · 03-01-2009, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefless

I'm think this is not a great draft for the team holding the third card.

Exactly.

And knowing that the Chiefs have so many needs that can be filled this draft offensively, I think they throw out the "Point System" associated with the JJ's system and take what they can get.

Because in the long run, 3 offensive lineman that are with the Chiefs for the next 10 years are worth far more than a Cover linebacker.

unlurking · 03-01-2009, 01:44 AM

What's going to be really interesting is waiting for the top 10 to sign this year. With so much discussion about how weak this draft is, are teams going to be more frugal with the checks?

Frosty · 03-01-2009, 01:46 AM

The Packers have three thirds. I wonder if they could be enticed to move up for a second and a third for Curry or Raji? They could get their guy and still have two high 3rds.

JohnnyV13 · 03-01-2009, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

And I know enough to know that if this team is going 3-4 which it looks like and takes a guy who has to play in the middle of that with the 3rd pick I'm just going to shake my head...

No mecca, they are likely to trade down with someone with a hard-on for Crabtree or one of the quarterbacks. Then they will get Orakpo or Brown to be their hybrid DE/LB pass rusher.

Mecca · 03-01-2009, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arc

The Packers have three thirds. I wonder if they could be enticed to move up for a second and a third for Curry or Raji? They could get their guy and still have two high 3rds.

From 8 to 3 it's gotta be atleast 2 picks.

Saccopoo · 03-01-2009, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

That's why I favor throwing out the "baby with the bathwater" and taking what you can get.

There's NO WAY the Chief enter the 2009 season with Sackintosh, Niswanger and Jones on the line after trading for Cassel.

This is a GREAT year for offensive lineman and the Chiefs need (and will) take advantage of that overage.

I actually thought that Rudy had a decent year all things considered. He would be my reclamation project on the Chiefs offensive line at this point. Otherwise, yeah, the right side has got to go, and Waters, after his run to Whitlock episode, is on the block as well.

03-01-2009, 01:24 AM	#169
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2117050	If I was in a stuck spot where I didn't want any of the players on the board and my targeted player could still be had, if it was the difference in say 10+ mill I would take what I could get...
Posts: 111,263

03-01-2009, 01:44 AM	#176
unlurking MVP Join Date: Aug 2003 Casino cash: $7737309	What's going to be really interesting is waiting for the top 10 to sign this year. With so much discussion about how weak this draft is, are teams going to be more frugal with the checks? __________________
Posts: 10,620

03-01-2009, 01:46 AM	#177
Frosty Go Beavers! Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Warshington Casino cash: $5368243	The Packers have three thirds. I wonder if they could be enticed to move up for a second and a third for Curry or Raji? They could get their guy and still have two high 3rds.
Posts: 14,502