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

[T-post Tom]

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.

[tmax63]

I know everyone here thinks you can pick a good RT later or in FA but before you claim that again, stop and think how long have we been b!tching about the RT spot and saying that we need a RT? I'm not an advocate of a RT at #3 but I do think it needs to be a priority to get another OL that will step in and start like Albert did last year. IMHO I'm not sure who to take at #3, would greatly prefer trading down 3-6 spots and getting another pick, but OL has been a problem for a couple of years and will continue to be until they spend some money and picks to get quality players instead of relying on finding diamonds in the late rounds to get by.

[EyePod]

Originally Posted by Claythan

You can HAVE bookend tackles without committing $100 million in contracts and two first-round draft picks to the position.

The Colts have Ryan Diem - 4th round

The GREATEST PASSING OFFENSE EVER - the 1999 Rams - featured 5th rounder Fred Miller at RT.

Do you know where the Bills got Howard Ballard? THE 11TH ****ING ROUND! THEY HAD THE TOP RANKED OFFENSE IN 1993!

Guess where they drafted their left tackle? Where you draft left tackles. THE FIRST ROUND.

Get a right tackle someplace else. They are spare parts. You give one $50 million and you're wasting money.

LOL, I agree with you but I want to play devil's advocate... what about last year's arizona cardinals? Levi Brown... 5th pick.... lol I still can't believe they picked him there and that he's finally starting to become serviceable now (and that's just serviceable, he's not good yet).

[the Talking Can]

Originally Posted by Ralphy Boy

Our top 5 pick last year was Dorsey, not Albert.

Who's ****ing stupid?

eh, amend it to first round


silly noobs

[SenselessChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by T-post Tom

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.

Unlike the fans, Scott Pioli will be looking for the best player that fits with the team.

Could Monroe be the pick? Absolutely. Would it excite me? No.

We can make an argument against ANY player that will be available.

If they took Monroe, the Chiefs suddenly have (at least on Paper) the best young bookend tackles in the NFL.

It isn't just about the starters either. If they draft Monroe, and Albert got hurt, they have another top level LT starter.

Again, I am not really in favor of this... but it isn't like they are talking about drafting a punter here.

[SenselessChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by KCDC

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.

I agree about the injury thing, but never, at any time would I want my OT's to switch positions in a game.

[KCUnited]

Originally Posted by EyePod

LOL, I agree with you but I want to play devil's advocate... what about last year's arizona cardinals? Levi Brown... 5th pick.... lol I still can't believe they picked him there and that he's finally starting to become serviceable now (and that's just serviceable, he's not good yet).

Levi Brown was picked as a left tackle. Right tackle protecting a left handed qb.

[SenselessChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by Claythan

Herb Taylor is more than adequate as a backup left tackle.

The league is too talent-thin for any team to have a first-round backup left tackle. That's ridiculous.

It doesn't work this way unless they are both Hall of Famers, like Will Shields, who played 3 or 4 positions on the line if memory serves and never missed a beat.

But the best argument is we have too many holes elsewhere.



Great idea. Let's play Hali at DT. Equally reeruned.

While the pick isn't my favorite, you are foolish not to see the value of having two premier tackles. Clearly, I don't think that you draft a pure backup in the first round. But, a guy that will be a starter, and would be able to fill in at LT without missing much of a beat has at least some value.

I would prefer the Chiefs trade down. But, you aren't even considering the fact that the Chiefs would have two legit LT's.

I actually would prefer Curry here, because he fills a bigger hole. But, you can find linebackers late. You can find ANY position late. There is someone at every single position that has made pro bowls that has been drafted past the fifth round, or even undrafted.

The reality is that you should set up your draft board according to the demands of the offense and defense that you want to use.

DV's offense worked a lot better when they had Roaf and Tait in there.

What so many in here fail to realize is that most RT's get help for most of the game. And, most offenses are fine doing that.

But, imagine how much better the offense becomes if you can get one more guy out in a pattern. (without worrying about your QB getting killed)

Again, so that we are clear, I would prefer to trade down and work on our linebackers first. But, to act like there is no reasonable side to this argument is foolish.

[LaChapelle]

Runs with scissors.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

While the pick isn't my favorite, you are foolish not to see the value of having two premier tackles. Clearly, I don't think that you draft a pure backup in the first round. But, a guy that will be a starter, and would be able to fill in at LT without missing much of a beat has at least some value.

I would prefer the Chiefs trade down. But, you aren't even considering the fact that the Chiefs would have two legit LT's.

I actually would prefer Curry here, because he fills a bigger hole. But, you can find linebackers late. You can find ANY position late. There is someone at every single position that has made pro bowls that has been drafted past the fifth round, or even undrafted.

The reality is that you should set up your draft board according to the demands of the offense and defense that you want to use.

DV's offense worked a lot better when they had Roaf and Tait in there.

What so many in here fail to realize is that most RT's get help for most of the game. And, most offenses are fine doing that.

But, imagine how much better the offense becomes if you can get one more guy out in a pattern. (without worrying about your QB getting killed)

Again, so that we are clear, I would prefer to trade down and work on our linebackers first. But, to act like there is no reasonable side to this argument is foolish.

There is no value in having two premiere left tackles unless you're suggesting we're going to win the Super Bowl in the next 24 months.

A championship team doesn't build that way, EVER.

We went through this yesterday, and not only could nobody name a Super Bowl team with 2 1st-round left tackles, we ended up producing a list of teams that were LOADED on the offensive line and couldn't combine to win ONE PLAYOFF GAME.

There is no reasonable side to the argument, unless you're more concerned with 9-7 than winning it all.

[SenselessChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

There is no value in having two premiere left tackles unless you're suggesting we're going to win the Super Bowl in the next 24 months.

A championship team doesn't build that way, EVER.

We went through this yesterday, and not only could nobody name a Super Bowl team with 2 1st-round left tackles, we ended up producing a list of teams that were LOADED on the offensive line and couldn't combine to win ONE PLAYOFF GAME.

There is no reasonable side to the argument, unless you're more concerned with 9-7 than winning it all.

Well, lets say five years since the Chiefs would have them both under contract for about the next five years.

As far as what Championship teams do.... this kind of makes me laugh.

While I understand the point, every year is different. And, just because it 'hasn't' happened, doesn't mean that it won't.

I am sure that when 'most' of these teams were drafting, there were other players that were as good as the OT's availalble.

And, other than maybe Curry, I don't see anyone as good as Monroe. Do you?

Again, this isn't my 'favorite' option. This isn't something that I desperately want to do, but I don't think it is 'foolish' as some have claimed.

We can sit here and say drafting a RT is stupid. Drafting a LB is stupid.

But who has ever built a championship trading away a second round pick for a QB and then drafting one in the top five?

At some point, we have to concede that this is not the ideal situation for the Chiefs with the needs they currently have.

So then, it becomes who is worth the pick? Not what position is worth the pick, but what PLAYER is worth the pick.

And, the Chiefs will likely take a player that doesn't fit from a positional value perspective. I have come to accept that. But, I don't think there will be someone there that fits as a top five pick talent, in a positon that the Chiefs need and at a position that typically gets drafted top five.

I try not to convince myself that a player is better than he is merely to justify taking a player at a certain position. That is why I have never been a huge Sanchez or Raji supporter.

Now, I could be totally wrong on both of those guys. But, I think that the majority of the fans in here are 'justifying' players that will be available at positions they want, rather than looking at actual talent.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

Well, lets say five years since the Chiefs would have them both under contract for about the next five years.

I didn't read beyond this. Albert isn't under contract for the next five years. And if we replace him one offseason after he played better than any other rookie left tackle, he might posture to leave before his contract is up.

Drafting a LT is dumb on so many levels it's not even worth talking about.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

The combined record of teams that had more than 1 first round pick on their offensive line last year was 56-72. Those teams had 0 playoff wins.

Would you want the Royals to spend a top flight draft pick on a middle reliever?

Drafting a guy and paying him LT money is ****ing reeruned when we already have someone on the roster who is, for all intents and purposes, the same age, and who has proven he can play the position at a very high level when the other hasn't.

[King_Chief_Fan]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

Levi Brown was picked as a left tackle. Right tackle protecting a left handed qb.

How hard is it really for a guy to switch from one side to the other? LTvs.RT? I know McInsuck did terrible on both sides. Can't a good LT be a good RT?

[TheGuardian]

My second ever post here -

Haley already said that "Branden Albert is not one of the problems on this football team."

We are not drafting a left tackle with the #3 pick overall. Period. Write it down.

The defense just set an NFL record for fewest sacks in a season, gave up 300+ yards rushing in a game and set other inept records against the run, and has possibly the worst overall front 7 in the league.

Anyone who thinks it's a good idea or ever was a good idea to take another left tackle, especially in the first round when we don't have a second round pick, is galactically stupid and should remove the ability from their body to discuss football related topics via some kind of surgery.

First off, Albert is a franchise left tackle. The guy missed most of camp, then gave up 4.5 sacks all season and owned some very good pass rushers along the way. He's only going to get better if you just leave him out there. Yet some would be ok with taking him and moving him to a lesser position at right tackle, where his footwork and initial sets would completely change and he would have a learning curve all over again? Not to mention, Albert is not a typical mauling right tackle. He might actually not be that great there for a lot of reasons.

Having bookend tackles is not required for having a great offense. The right tackle position can be handled by an average without much thought. Most Chief fans just love to find them some players they can hate on, but after about midseason McIntosh was actually pretty solid at RT once his footwork became more natural to him. I'm not saying we couldn't upgrade at RT, but switching Albert to RT is incredibly stupid. The offense was good enough at times near the end of the season to win games but the defense couldn't stop the run or pass, and some people think it wouldn't be a bad idea to take a left tackle? Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.

This team should take no less than 5 defensive players in this draft.

[Fansy the Famous Bard]

We need a DE. Too bad this years DE Crop is not worth a top 10 pick.

Luck of the draw. Unfortunately we drew facing the wrong direction this year.