Any Significance Today Regarding Clark Hunt's Comments From January

[AJKCFAN]

Clark Hunt likely will not be a Jerry Jones-Daniel Snyder style owner, but he IS on record of saying he wants the Chiefs to develop their own young QB through the Draft.

I don't remember him ever endorsing Croyle to be that young QB the Chiefs need to develop.

No decent QB, let alone a 1st year QB, could've done much with that protection. It is about getting results though and Croyle is 0-8

So here the Chiefs are with the chance today to get the young QB their owner wants. They choose Matt Ryan at 5, they still have 12 more picks (if not more) to address other concerns.

Even if Ryan is the pick, Croyle deserves a fair shake this year with an upgraded OL to start the season to see if he is the answer (i.e Derek Anderson last year even though they chose Quinn or Brees a few seasons back when they just drafted Rivers) or at least can fetch value. Ryan shouldn't immediately be thrown to the wolves, but should be able to start a half-season worth of games if things fall apart. No decent QB, let alone a 1st year QB, could've done much with that protection. It is about getting results though and Croyle is 0-8

Yet, if Ryan is the choice at 5 (or by a Chiefs trade up to get him), then one can tell right away Clark really was determined to have Ryan be this particular pick (or at a minimum, strongly supported the selection).

Whether it's Croyle or Ryan, the Chiefs youth movement is going to almost definitely put them back in the Top 10 of next year's Draft to continue the rebuilding process.

Chiefs are taking Matt Ryan

[pr_capone]

God I hope you are wrong.

I would rather ride the Brody wagon for 2 more seasons than take Ryan.

Brohm on the other hand would be a welcome addition.

TBH... if we did not draft a QB until the 4th rd (Brennan) and stuck with Croyle until we see some development from either or none, I would be content with that as well.

To draft a QB in the top 5 and not have him start the season seems like a waste to me. But drafting a QB in the top 5 with no one to protect him seems like an even bigger waste. No reason to let a guy who is going to have mega millions in guaranteed moneys get mangled before he even has a chance to show off what he has.

[patteeu]

Chiefs take a QB in the draft, but it won't be Matt Ryan, in my estimation. I'm expecting it to be a pick in the 3rd round or later (IOW, it won't be Brohm, Henne, or Flacco either).

[Sully]

So... let's play this out...

We give Brodie 1 or 2 more years to play with this new group of players...
Most draft picks sign 3-4 year contracts...
So we find out Croyle is what we think he is (made of balsa wood...how did the doctors not catch that?) 1 or 2 years down the line, then draft a guy. It takes new guy 1-2 years to learn to be a decent NFL QB. By then, all these rookie contracts are up, we only sign half of them, and we are back in a mini rebuild by then.

I believe the window is now. They ****ed up by not giving Brodie the whole season to judge him on last year... but sorry, it's time to move on...

[SBK]

If we take a QB today I want it to be Brohm with the 17 or 35 pick....

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Sully

So... let's play this out...

We give Brodie 1 or 2 more years to play with this new group of players...
Most draft picks sign 3-4 year contracts...
So we find out Croyle is what we think he is (made of balsa wood...how did the doctors not catch that?) 1 or 2 years down the line, then draft a guy. It takes new guy 1-2 years to learn to be a decent NFL QB. By then, all these rookie contracts are up, we only sign half of them, and we are back in a mini rebuild by then.

I believe the window is now. They ****ed up by not giving Brodie the whole season to judge him on last year... but sorry, it's time to move on...

I believe that the Chiefs current philosophy is to constantly acquire new QBs until they hit on one that has "it". I think they are willing to spend a high draft pick if they have a lot of confidence in a guy (for example, if they happen to be in position to draft Eli Manning or Carson Palmer, they will). But if they consider the guy to be a gamble (and surely that's the case with Matt Ryan), I think it's more likely that they will take a guy later in the draft. If Croyle pans out this year then great. If not, they will have Thigpen and NewDraftee grooming for the year and ready to take a shot in 2009. Meanwhile, if we are still looking for "the guy" next year, we rinse and repeat. They plan to keep a QB pipeline flowing, but it's way too expensive to fill that pipeline with a series of 1st round picks.

It's the difference between taking a gamble on this year's spotlight guy just because we happen to have a high draft spot and taking a more methodical approach to finding a QB over a period of a few years. Given the hit and miss nature of QB prospects and given the way you become married to a QB who you take early in the draft (see SF and Alex Smith for example), I think the Chiefs approach is the prudent one.

[Sully]

Originally Posted by patteeu

I believe that the Chiefs current philosophy is to constantly acquire new QBs until they hit on one that has "it". I think they are willing to spend a high draft pick if they have a lot of confidence in a guy (for example, if they happen to be in position to draft Eli Manning or Carson Palmer, they will). But if they consider the guy to be a gamble (and surely that's the case with Matt Ryan), I think it's more likely that they will take a guy later in the draft. If Croyle pans out this year then great. If not, they will have Thigpen and NewDraftee grooming for the year and ready to take a shot in 2009. Meanwhile, if we are still looking for "the guy" next year, we rinse and repeat. They plan to keep a QB pipeline flowing, but it's way too expensive to fill that pipeline with a series of 1st round picks.

It's the difference between taking a gamble on this year's spotlight guy just because we happen to have a high draft spot and taking a more methodical approach to finding a QB over a period of a few years. Given the hit and miss nature of QB prospects and given the way you become married to a QB who you take early in the draft (see SF and Alex Smith for example), I think the Chiefs approach is the prudent one.

I keep hearing this argument, and at best it's chickenshit.
Every player, no matter position, has the chance to be a bust. But you have to pick someone in the draft. Just because you hide him at a not-so-glamourous position doesn't mean that bust hurts the team any less. If they are going to be so "cautious" then they are playing scared... and that's crap. Shit or get off the pot.
If they feel that Ryan is the best player, then they should draft him, rather than playing "cautious" and trading down for "less" of a risk, or picking a lesser player at a "position of need." (as if all the positions on this team aren't positions of need)

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Chiefs take a QB in the draft, but it won't be Matt Ryan, in my estimation. I'm expecting it to be a pick in the 3rd round or later (IOW, it won't be Brohm, Henne, or Flacco either).

I'm guessing it will be someone more like Josh Johnson, Erik Ainge, Ryan O'Hara or Dennis Dixon. Maybe Andre Woodson.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Sully

I keep hearing this argument, and at best it's chickenshit.
Every player, no matter position, has the chance to be a bust. But you have to pick someone in the draft. Just because you hide him at a not-so-glamourous position doesn't mean that bust hurts the team any less. If they are going to be so "cautious" then they are playing scared... and that's crap. Shit or get off the pot.
If they feel that Ryan is the best player, then they should draft him, rather than playing "cautious" and trading down for "less" of a risk, or picking a lesser player at a "position of need." (as if all the positions on this team aren't positions of need)

If they feel that Ryan is the best player, I think they *will* draft him. I think it's highly unlikely that they will feel he's the best player available when it's their turn to draft. The only reason to elevate Ryan in terms of value is to factor in the fact that he plays, by far, the most important position on the field.

You're completely wrong about how much a miss on a position player hurts the team compared to how much a miss on a QB. If you draft a QB high, you are married to that guy for years. We missed on Ryan Sims, but he ended up being a contributing member of a rotation rather than a single point of failure bust who we would have to completely bench in order to replace. It was a bust just the same, but it had a much less significant impact.

I keep hearing the argument that you're making and at best, IMO, it's putting all your dough on the roulette wheel and hoping you get a lucky spin.

[pr_capone]

We draft Ryan.... I will be *pissed*.

We have no business drafting someone who will only get murdered behind that chess club we have playing OL.

[Sully]

Originally Posted by patteeu

If they feel that Ryan is the best player, I think they *will* draft him. I think it's highly unlikely that they will feel he's the best player available when it's their turn to draft. The only reason to elevate Ryan in terms of value is to factor in the fact that he plays, by far, the most important position on the field.

You're completely wrong about how much a miss on a position player hurts the team compared to how much a miss on a QB. If you draft a QB high, you are married to that guy for years. We missed on Ryan Sims, but he ended up being a contributing member of a rotation rather than a single point of failure bust who we would have to completely bench in order to replace. It was a bust just the same, but it had a much less significant impact.

I keep hearing the argument that you're making and at best, IMO, it's putting all your dough on the roulette wheel and hoping you get a lucky spin.

A lucky spin?
Picking a top 5 QB is roulette?
If you personally judge Ryan to not be that good, that's one thing, and I disagree. That's fine.
I'm not sure I understand you, but it seems you are arguing tha the onyl reason Ryan is ranked so high is because he plays QB. If that is what you are saying, it's also horseshit, as several other QBs who were,a t one time rated as 1st rounders are now far further down the draft. If it's a choice between Ryan and some 2nd tier O-Lineman, or a D-Lineman who is, at best, rated by many scouts as equal, then make the damn pick!
The Sims pick KILLED us and is part of the reason we are where we are. Could he play in a rotation? Yeah, if you want to throw a guy out there, he did... but the fact that we had to chase DT for several year afterwards made his pick just as damaging as any QB pick would have. We DiD (and still DO) have to replace that position. We are still reeling from it, and we WERE married to him for years. We find ourselves in a position this year to pick another DT if he's the best guy, where we could have more options if Sims had worked out. The Trezelle Jenkins pick KILLED us because, even though he could contribute to an O-Line, we had to chase that position in later drafts. And we WERE married to him for several years.

ANY 1st round pick is someone you are married to for several years (3 minimum).

You act like a girl jilted you, and because of that, you are afraid to date again. It's okay to draft a QB. It's not your fault... It's not your fault...It's not your fault...

[Friendo]

Originally Posted by patteeu

I believe that the Chiefs current philosophy is to constantly acquire new QBs until they hit on one that has "it". I think they are willing to spend a high draft pick if they have a lot of confidence in a guy (for example, if they happen to be in position to draft Eli Manning or Carson Palmer, they will). But if they consider the guy to be a gamble (and surely that's the case with Matt Ryan), I think it's more likely that they will take a guy later in the draft. If Croyle pans out this year then great. If not, they will have Thigpen and NewDraftee grooming for the year and ready to take a shot in 2009. Meanwhile, if we are still looking for "the guy" next year, we rinse and repeat. They plan to keep a QB pipeline flowing, but it's way too expensive to fill that pipeline with a series of 1st round picks.

It's the difference between taking a gamble on this year's spotlight guy just because we happen to have a high draft spot and taking a more methodical approach to finding a QB over a period of a few years. Given the hit and miss nature of QB prospects and given the way you become married to a QB who you take early in the draft (see SF and Alex Smith for example), I think the Chiefs approach is the prudent one.

totally agree!

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Sully

A lucky spin?
Picking a top 5 QB is roulette?

Absolutely. Here's a list of all the Top 5 QBs taken since the year 2000:

JaMarcus Russell (1)
Vince Young (3)
Alex Smith (1)
Eli Manning (1)
Philip Rivers (4)
Carson Palmer (1)
David Carr (1)
Joey Harrington (3)
Michael Vick (1)

Of those, I think you can call Eli Manning and Carson Palmer bona fide franchise QBs. Some, like Russell, Rivers, Young, and Vick (ignoring his off-field trouble) have potential to develop. I'd argue that Smith, Carr, and Harrington are all busts.

To me, this list says that your chances of finding a franchise guy at the top of the draft are pretty hit and miss. It's a straight up gamble, just like roulette.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Sully

If you personally judge Ryan to not be that good, that's one thing, and I disagree. That's fine.
I'm not sure I understand you, but it seems you are arguing tha the onyl reason Ryan is ranked so high is because he plays QB. If that is what you are saying, it's also horseshit, as several other QBs who were,a t one time rated as 1st rounders are now far further down the draft. If it's a choice between Ryan and some 2nd tier O-Lineman, or a D-Lineman who is, at best, rated by many scouts as equal, then make the damn pick!

I definitely think that the only reason Ryan is a top 10 prospect is because he's a QB. He may be the best QB prospect in this draft, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's a good gamble. Because QB is so important and because there are always going to be teams that need a QB, there's always going to be a QB prospect in the top 10 even if none of them are as good as the top 10 guys from other years.

I'd go further to say that the only reason you like Ryan is because he's a QB. You appear to be desperate to take a chance on grabbing a QB and you think that you get good QBs by using your most valuable picks on them. I don't pretend to know whether Ryan is going to be good or not. If the Chiefs think he will be, they'll pick him. If they have questions about him, I think they'll be right to go in a different direction and take a different QB prospect with questions later in the draft.

Originally Posted by Sully

The Sims pick KILLED us and is part of the reason we are where we are. Could he play in a rotation? Yeah, if you want to throw a guy out there, he did... but the fact that we had to chase DT for several year afterwards made his pick just as damaging as any QB pick would have. We DiD (and still DO) have to replace that position. We are still reeling from it, and we WERE married to him for years. We find ourselves in a position this year to pick another DT if he's the best guy, where we could have more options if Sims had worked out. The Trezelle Jenkins pick KILLED us because, even though he could contribute to an O-Line, we had to chase that position in later drafts. And we WERE married to him for several years.

ANY 1st round pick is someone you are married to for several years (3 minimum).

You act like a girl jilted you, and because of that, you are afraid to date again. It's okay to draft a QB. It's not your fault... It's not your fault...It's not your fault...

You're lusting over the BMOC Quarterback and I'm the one acting like a girl. Right.

[Sully]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Absolutely. Here's a list of all the Top 5 QBs taken since the year 2000:

JaMarcus Russell (1)
Vince Young (3)
Alex Smith (1)
Eli Manning (1)
Philip Rivers (4)
Carson Palmer (1)
David Carr (1)
Joey Harrington (3)
Michael Vick (1)

Of those, I think you can call Eli Manning and Carson Palmer bona fide franchise QBs. Some, like Russell, Rivers, Young, and Vick (ignoring his off-field trouble) have potential to develop. I'd argue that Smith, Carr, and Harrington are all busts.

To me, this list says that your chances of finding a franchise guy at the top of the draft are pretty hit and miss. It's a straight up gamble, just like roulette.

Hell. We might as well just not make the pick, then...
You can find just as many busts that high at ANY position.