You want a project QB to groom for the future? - Page 3

The-Man · 12-04-2000, 12:57 PM

IMO, the Chiefs should trade the extra 4th round draft pick they get from the Stai trade, to the Patriots for Mike Bishop.

The precedent has been set with the Aaron Brooks trade between the Saints and Packers.

Bishop is prototype QB of the future of the same mold as McNabb and Culpepper.

There's your QB of the future.

[This message has been edited by Cannibal (edited 12-04-2000).]

Spott · 12-04-2000, 04:37 PM

It's not 49er complicated but it's light years beyond anything K-State has ever considered running.

And having Chris Carpenter is like having another coach for the kid(s).

The-Man · 12-04-2000, 04:39 PM

Chris Carpenter?

Don't you mean Chris [b]Carter[/b]?

Maybe we should be questioning your intelligence.

G_Man · 12-04-2000, 04:41 PM

Well, I'm sure that Bishop isn't in Carl's plans, and that Elvis will get a huge extension. We'll see how many trophies that football genius brings to KC.

The-Man · 12-04-2000, 04:41 PM

Minnesota's Offense is as simple as it gets in pro football.

Anyone could run it.

Do you know what they told Culpepper?

Go through your reads and if nothing is there, run the ball.<BR>

G_Man · 12-04-2000, 04:46 PM

I'd bet money that the Florida Gator's offensive playbook contains more plays than the Minnesota Vikings'.

The-Man · 12-04-2000, 04:49 PM

I agree, and with that simple system the Vikes have the best record in the league and will probably win Superbowl if their D can hold up.

It certainly won't be the fault of those "stupid" players like Culpepper and Moss.

broncosrule · 12-04-2000, 05:02 PM

I have a friend who played at K state with Bishop and confirmed that he is very dim.

------------------
GO PITT!

ddpatterson · 12-04-2000, 05:15 PM

Culpepper was a, what, 11th overall selection? Bishop was a 7th rounder. I think it's a little unfair to Culpepper to keep comparing him to Bishop, who's done squat so far in the NFL. He may be talented, but there has to be a reason he was a 7th rounder and is now a 3rd stringer behind Friesz.

The-Man · 12-04-2000, 05:44 PM

I think the biggest reason he is now a third stringer behind Frieze is because of his attitude.

He simply does not want to wait to play and he's been boisterous about it. He has a competitive fire. I like that in a player.

The bottom line here is that he would be a very good talent to develop. With the Chiefs record the way it is, who would you rather see the Chiefs trotting out there at QB if Grbac is injured? Warren Moon, or Mike Bishop?

The answer is pretty easy if you ask me.

[This message has been edited by Cannibal (edited 12-04-2000).]

ddpatterson · 12-04-2000, 05:50 PM

I have no problem bringing him aboard as a project, but try to hold the Culpepper comparisons until he takes a snap or two in the NFL. It's not like we'd be instantly turned into the Minnesota Vikings.

And ditching Grbac after he has his best season for an unproven 3rd string QB would be a very bad decision, IMO. I totally agree with getting someone to be the QBOTF, but the way you make it sound is as if Bishop's a can't miss prospect -- which he's not.

The-Man · 12-04-2000, 06:00 PM

I never said ditch Girlbac once in this thread.

I'm talking about taking a QB with excellent skills and trying to hone them into something we can use. Rather than running deteriorated old man on to the field when the starter is injured.

I'm not saying Bishop is Culpepper either. I'm saying that Bishop has all the athletic skill that Culpepper does and I think he could do the same things. The difference is that Culpepper was given a shot, while Bishop was not.

ddpatterson · 12-04-2000, 06:04 PM

It was Clint who seemed to be for letting Grbac go. I don't think anyone would mind having Bishop as a backup/QBOTF, but if he was to be our QB INSTEAD OF Grbac, then I'd disagree.

[This message has been edited by G_Man (edited 12-04-2000).]

G_Man · 12-04-2000, 06:55 PM

I'd rather have John Friez than Grbac w/ a $10 million roster bonus or a 5 year extension.

htismaqe · 12-04-2000, 07:02 PM

Someone who thinks like me. I love Bishop. The guy has real potential. I was dissapointed when the Chiefs didn't take him in the draft. I would love to see him in Red and Gold.

------------------
WILDCATS 29
corn balls 28

12-04-2000, 07:21 PM

Cannibal,

We often disagree, but I agree that a 4th round pick for Bishop would probably be a good deal. I however thought it was a 5th round pick for Stai.

12-04-2000, 04:37 PM	#31
Spott Court Jester Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Orlando Casino cash: $3102400	It's not 49er complicated but it's light years beyond anything K-State has ever considered running. And having Chris Carpenter is like having another coach for the kid(s).
Posts: 19,706

12-04-2000, 04:39 PM	#32
The-Man Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: San Leandro, Ca, USA Casino cash: $10004900	Chris Carpenter? Don't you mean Chris [b]Carter[/b]? Maybe we should be questioning your intelligence.
Posts: 604

12-04-2000, 04:41 PM	#33
G_Man Veteran Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	Well, I'm sure that Bishop isn't in Carl's plans, and that Elvis will get a huge extension. We'll see how many trophies that football genius brings to KC.
Posts: 2,215

12-04-2000, 04:41 PM	#34
The-Man Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: San Leandro, Ca, USA Casino cash: $10004900	Minnesota's Offense is as simple as it gets in pro football. Anyone could run it. Do you know what they told Culpepper? Go through your reads and if nothing is there, run the ball.<BR>
Posts: 604

12-04-2000, 04:46 PM	#35
G_Man Veteran Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	I'd bet money that the Florida Gator's offensive playbook contains more plays than the Minnesota Vikings'.
Posts: 2,215

12-04-2000, 12:57 PM
The-Man Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: San Leandro, Ca, USA Casino cash: $10004900	IMO, the Chiefs should trade the extra 4th round draft pick they get from the Stai trade, to the Patriots for Mike Bishop. The precedent has been set with the Aaron Brooks trade between the Saints and Packers. Bishop is prototype QB of the future of the same mold as McNabb and Culpepper. There's your QB of the future. [This message has been edited by Cannibal (edited 12-04-2000).]
Posts: 604

12-04-2000, 04:49 PM	#36
The-Man Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: San Leandro, Ca, USA Casino cash: $10004900	I agree, and with that simple system the Vikes have the best record in the league and will probably win Superbowl if their D can hold up. It certainly won't be the fault of those "stupid" players like Culpepper and Moss.
Posts: 604

12-04-2000, 05:02 PM	#37
broncosrule Starter Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Dallas,Texas,USA Casino cash: $10004900	I have a friend who played at K state with Bishop and confirmed that he is very dim. ------------------ GO PITT!
Posts: 386

12-04-2000, 05:15 PM	#38
ddpatterson Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	Culpepper was a, what, 11th overall selection? Bishop was a 7th rounder. I think it's a little unfair to Culpepper to keep comparing him to Bishop, who's done squat so far in the NFL. He may be talented, but there has to be a reason he was a 7th rounder and is now a 3rd stringer behind Friesz.
Posts: 943

12-04-2000, 05:44 PM	#39
The-Man Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: San Leandro, Ca, USA Casino cash: $10004900	I think the biggest reason he is now a third stringer behind Frieze is because of his attitude. He simply does not want to wait to play and he's been boisterous about it. He has a competitive fire. I like that in a player. The bottom line here is that he would be a very good talent to develop. With the Chiefs record the way it is, who would you rather see the Chiefs trotting out there at QB if Grbac is injured? Warren Moon, or Mike Bishop? The answer is pretty easy if you ask me. [This message has been edited by Cannibal (edited 12-04-2000).]
Posts: 604

12-04-2000, 05:50 PM	#40
ddpatterson Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	I have no problem bringing him aboard as a project, but try to hold the Culpepper comparisons until he takes a snap or two in the NFL. It's not like we'd be instantly turned into the Minnesota Vikings. And ditching Grbac after he has his best season for an unproven 3rd string QB would be a very bad decision, IMO. I totally agree with getting someone to be the QBOTF, but the way you make it sound is as if Bishop's a can't miss prospect -- which he's not.
Posts: 943

12-04-2000, 06:00 PM	#41
The-Man Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: San Leandro, Ca, USA Casino cash: $10004900	I never said ditch Girlbac once in this thread. I'm talking about taking a QB with excellent skills and trying to hone them into something we can use. Rather than running deteriorated old man on to the field when the starter is injured. I'm not saying Bishop is Culpepper either. I'm saying that Bishop has all the athletic skill that Culpepper does and I think he could do the same things. The difference is that Culpepper was given a shot, while Bishop was not.
Posts: 604

12-04-2000, 06:04 PM	#42
ddpatterson Starter Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	It was Clint who seemed to be for letting Grbac go. I don't think anyone would mind having Bishop as a backup/QBOTF, but if he was to be our QB INSTEAD OF Grbac, then I'd disagree. [This message has been edited by G_Man (edited 12-04-2000).]
Posts: 943

12-04-2000, 06:55 PM	#43
G_Man Veteran Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	I'd rather have John Friez than Grbac w/ a $10 million roster bonus or a 5 year extension.
Posts: 2,215

12-04-2000, 07:02 PM	#44
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $10269900	Someone who thinks like me. I love Bishop. The guy has real potential. I was dissapointed when the Chiefs didn't take him in the draft. I would love to see him in Red and Gold. ------------------ WILDCATS 29 corn balls 28
Posts: 100,022

12-04-2000, 07:21 PM	#45
Phobia Guest Casino cash: $	Cannibal, We often disagree, but I agree that a 4th round pick for Bishop would probably be a good deal. I however thought it was a 5th round pick for Stai.
Posts: n/a