Chiefs The Chiefs shouldn't select a QB in the 1st round - Page 45

kcbubb · 01-29-2009, 10:52 AM

The Chiefs should sign a free agent QB like Ryan Fitzpatrick. Or, if the Patriots would agree to it, swap first round picks with the Patriots for Matt Cassell.

The only defense in the league that was worse than the Chiefs was the 0-16 Detroit Lions. The Chiefs need, at a minimum, three new starters on defense (2 LB's & DE) if we stay in the 4-3. The Chiefs need defensive talent.

If the Chiefs do not swap first round picks with the Patriots for Cassell, the Chiefs would benefit the most by trading down and acquiring more picks and possibly getting more value out of their first round pick instead of reaching for a player. The Chiefs need defense with their first pick.

**SAUTO** · 02-02-2009, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I don't know why some people act like drafting a quarterback is the same as sticking your dick in acid.

hell i would love to hear sanchez's name called 45 minutes into the draft

chiefzilla1501 · 02-02-2009, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I don't know why some people act like drafting a quarterback is the same as sticking your dick in acid.

Drafting a QB is one thing. Reaching for a QB because you walk into the draft with the mentality that you are drafting a QB no ifs, ands, or buts about it is moronic. If Sanchez earns a #3 pick grade from Pioli, then I'm all for the Chiefs drafting him. But there are plenty of critics who are already questioning if Sanchez is ready and I promise there will be a lot more. Case-in-point, every draftnik had the Browns taking Brady Quinn at #3. Boy did they all look like morons when he fell all the way out of the top 20.

You don't reach because you are drafting out of need. PERIOD. Sanchez has a lot of questions to answer and people are still definitively saying he's a #3 pick. That's interesting. He is not even CLOSE to the consensus top 5 pick that guys like Eli or Palmer were and he carries a HELL of a lot more question marks than Matt Ryan did.

Molitoth · 02-02-2009, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Drafting a QB is one thing. Reaching for a QB because you walk into the draft with the mentality that you are drafting a QB no ifs, ands, or buts about it is moronic. If Sanchez earns a #3 pick grade from Pioli, then I'm all for the Chiefs drafting him. But there are plenty of critics who are already questioning if Sanchez is ready and I promise there will be a lot more. Case-in-point, every draftnik had the Browns taking Brady Quinn at #3. Boy did they all look like morons when he fell all the way out of the top 20.

You don't reach because you are drafting out of need. PERIOD. Sanchez has a lot of questions to answer and people are still definitively saying he's a #3 pick. That's interesting. He is not even CLOSE to the consensus top 5 pick that guys like Eli or Palmer were and he carries a HELL of a lot more question marks than Matt Ryan did.

This.

chiefzilla1501 · 02-02-2009, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pestilenceaf23

What?!? I would go out on a limb and say that about 27 out of 32 QBs in the league could have put up better numbers than Cassell on that team.

Then you are on crack.

Cassell had a lot of help. But that is laughable to brush off an 11-win season where a guy threw for over 3,500+ yards and over 15 TDs in his first NFL season as a pro.

Cassell had a very good season. Is he a long-term answer? I don't know. But that is an absolutely ridiculous statement to claim that he is one of the bottom 5 starters in the NFL.

RustShack · 02-02-2009, 07:46 PM

Its sad how many people think just because your surrounded by greatness means your suddenly great.

Mecca · 02-02-2009, 07:52 PM

Funny I thought Roethlisberger was a better prospect than Eli Manning and the only thing that made Eli a higher pick was his last name.

I would have taken Roethlisberger with the #1 pick that year...

You go with what you personally think, there is no determining factor as to whether a QB makes it or not. Personally I think coming from a pro style offense with his top physical tools outweighs any negative. Mark Sanchez is a better prospect than anyone that will be in next years draft unless you love the spread monkeys.

chiefzilla1501 · 02-02-2009, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Funny I thought Roethlisberger was a better prospect than Eli Manning and the only thing that made Eli a higher pick was his last name.

I would have taken Roethlisberger with the #1 pick that year...

You go with what you personally think, there is no determining factor as to whether a QB makes it or not. Personally I think coming from a pro style offense with his top physical tools outweighs any negative. Mark Sanchez is a better prospect than anyone that will be in next years draft unless you love the spread monkeys.

The reason Roethlisberger and Flacco fell is quite another--because of the level of competition. I like Sanchez, like I said. But I'm not convinced he's worth a #3 pick. And I think there are a lot of scouts who are currently at that same mindset, unless they are shown otherwise in their evaluations.

chiefzilla1501 · 02-02-2009, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RustShack

Its sad how many people think just because your surrounded by greatness means your suddenly great.

It's also sad how many people will rip on a guy for being surrounded by greatness. Maybe we should take away Montana's Super Bowl rings because he was surrounded by Jerry Rice, Roger Craig, John Taylor, and Brent Jones, not to mentioned coached by Bill Walsh.

You never heard the same excuses for Matt Ryan or Joe Flacco, nevermind the fact that they both QBed for teams with top 5 running games.

Cassell had a solid year. What's his upside? Who knows. But it's laughable that in this thread, we have heard that a QB who has never played an NFL snap is better than him, that he is a bottom 5 QB in the NFL, and that he is nothing more than a backup.

Give me a break.

Mecca · 02-02-2009, 08:05 PM

See the one knock he has is experience, people point that out because they feel guys are sloppy and can't read defenses and things like that..

The truth is, Sanchez is not sloppy he has better mechanics and footwork than Stafford does, his feet are NFL caliber right now. And he is very capable of reading defenses and making line checks do to the offense he was in for 4 years in college.

Even with the lack of starting experience his preparation, where he's at with the little things, and especially his intangibles, I feel he's ready from what I've seen. He does all the little things very well, those are the kind of things people want experience so the guy will learn them, he already has them.

chiefzilla1501 · 02-02-2009, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

See the one knock he has is experience, people point that out because they feel guys are sloppy and can't read defenses and things like that..

The truth is, Sanchez is not sloppy he has better mechanics and footwork than Stafford does, his feet are NFL caliber right now. And he is very capable of reading defenses and making line checks do to the offense he was in for 4 years in college.

Even with the lack of starting experience his preparation, where he's at with the little things, and especially his intangibles, I feel he's ready from what I've seen. He does all the little things very well, those are the kind of things people want experience so the guy will learn them, he already has them.

I may be in the minority, but I think Sanchez has better upside because I just see a leadership quality/fire in him that I don't see as much of in Stafford. I know Stafford is a good kid, but I just see Sanchez as a QB that players will be willing to roll over in traffic for.

But still... I think he's got a lot to prove in the combine, and I don't think you can walk into the draft with a "QB or bust" mentality. If Sanchez earns a top 5 grade, you take him. If he doesn't, you don't. That sounds simple, and yet you see so many teams take a QB in the top 5 because they have to even if he may not have graded that well according to their evaluations.

The good news is, I have a ton of trust to make that decision. I just don't think it's nearly the slam dunk everyone says it is.

Mecca · 02-02-2009, 08:13 PM

I don't know what a workout is going to tell you about Sanchez that you don't already know, he has supreme physical talent, he has a top notch arm, he doesn't have the super bazooka Stafford does but he has a 1 in a billion arm.

He has great feet, very good mechanics, intangibles that are 2nd to none, this is a guy that is the most physically gifted QB to play at SC since Palmer.

RustShack · 02-02-2009, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

It's also sad how many people will rip on a guy for being surrounded by greatness. Maybe we should take away Montana's Super Bowl rings because he was surrounded by Jerry Rice, Roger Craig, John Taylor, and Brent Jones, not to mentioned coached by Bill Walsh.

You never heard the same excuses for Matt Ryan or Joe Flacco, nevermind the fact that they both QBed for teams with top 5 running games.

Cassell had a solid year. What's his upside? Who knows. But it's laughable that in this thread, we have heard that a QB who has never played an NFL snap is better than him, that he is a bottom 5 QB in the NFL, and that he is nothing more than a backup.

Give me a break.

Montana was great with those players. Brady was great with these players. Like you said, Cassel was just solid. OK now you take away all the talent, does the solid player get better or worse? Cassel + KC = FAIL

chiefzilla1501 · 02-02-2009, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RustShack

Montana was great with those players. Brady was great with these players. Like you said, Cassel was just solid. OK now you take away all the talent, does the solid player get better or worse? Cassel + KC = FAIL

Montana's numbers with Rice/Taylor is not much different from Cassell's numbers with Moss/Welker.

I'm not saying Cassell is Joe Montana. Montana is my boyhood idol and I still think he's the best in history (before Manning and Brady came along). But the argument that Cassell's numbers should be downplayed because of his supporting cast is pretty brutal, especially given that it was his first season as a starter in the NFL.

For his experience level, Cassell had an outstanding season. Whether he's a long-term starter has yet to be seen, but it amazes me that people would use last season as a knock against his abilities.

RustShack · 02-02-2009, 09:20 PM

Montana also played in a day when passing wasn't nearly as big as it is now.

**The Franchise** · 02-02-2009, 09:27 PM

Cassell doesn't play in the West Coast offense.

01-29-2009, 10:52 AM
kcbubb Veteran Join Date: Nov 2008 Casino cash: $6056719	The Chiefs shouldn't select a QB in the 1st round The Chiefs should sign a free agent QB like Ryan Fitzpatrick. Or, if the Patriots would agree to it, swap first round picks with the Patriots for Matt Cassell. The only defense in the league that was worse than the Chiefs was the 0-16 Detroit Lions. The Chiefs need, at a minimum, three new starters on defense (2 LB's & DE) if we stay in the 4-3. The Chiefs need defensive talent. If the Chiefs do not swap first round picks with the Patriots for Cassell, the Chiefs would benefit the most by trading down and acquiring more picks and possibly getting more value out of their first round pick instead of reaching for a player. The Chiefs need defense with their first pick.
Posts: 2,369

02-02-2009, 07:46 PM	#665
RustShack **** That Noise Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Jack Trice Casino cash: $4546954	Its sad how many people think just because your surrounded by greatness means your suddenly great. __________________
Posts: 15,052

02-02-2009, 07:52 PM	#666
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2087050	Funny I thought Roethlisberger was a better prospect than Eli Manning and the only thing that made Eli a higher pick was his last name. I would have taken Roethlisberger with the #1 pick that year... You go with what you personally think, there is no determining factor as to whether a QB makes it or not. Personally I think coming from a pro style offense with his top physical tools outweighs any negative. Mark Sanchez is a better prospect than anyone that will be in next years draft unless you love the spread monkeys.
Posts: 111,280

02-02-2009, 08:05 PM	#669
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2087050	See the one knock he has is experience, people point that out because they feel guys are sloppy and can't read defenses and things like that.. The truth is, Sanchez is not sloppy he has better mechanics and footwork than Stafford does, his feet are NFL caliber right now. And he is very capable of reading defenses and making line checks do to the offense he was in for 4 years in college. Even with the lack of starting experience his preparation, where he's at with the little things, and especially his intangibles, I feel he's ready from what I've seen. He does all the little things very well, those are the kind of things people want experience so the guy will learn them, he already has them.
Posts: 111,280

02-02-2009, 08:13 PM	#671
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2087050	I don't know what a workout is going to tell you about Sanchez that you don't already know, he has supreme physical talent, he has a top notch arm, he doesn't have the super bazooka Stafford does but he has a 1 in a billion arm. He has great feet, very good mechanics, intangibles that are 2nd to none, this is a guy that is the most physically gifted QB to play at SC since Palmer.
Posts: 111,280

02-02-2009, 09:20 PM	#674
RustShack **** That Noise Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Jack Trice Casino cash: $4546954	Montana also played in a day when passing wasn't nearly as big as it is now. __________________
Posts: 15,052

02-02-2009, 09:27 PM	#675
The Franchise Most Valuable Villain Join Date: Dec 2006 Casino cash: $2575047	Cassell doesn't play in the West Coast offense.
Posts: 92,316