First two picks = OT

[Chiefmanwillcatch]

If we take OT in the first and Sam Baker or the Boston C. OT is sitting there in the 2nd then we take him.

Do you agree?

What do also think of D.Macintosh at RT ? Should we be worried?

[Delano]

I don't like any of that.

[The Franchise]

No.

[SBK]

Why stop with the first 2, I think we should take OT with our first 5 picks.

[Brock]

Really quite a horrid idea.

[Mecca]

And we're right back to this...

[eazyb81]

I just clawed my eyes out.

[el borracho]

How about we trade out of the first five rounds of the draft until we own all of the picks in the sixth and seventh rounds and then we select all the remaining offensive linemen.

Do you agree?

[Sully]

Is there any way we can draft 1984 Anthony Munoz, and 1998 Jonathan Ogden?

If that's the case, I'm 50/50.
Otherwise, it's a dumb idea.

[Buehler445]

Only if they are BPA. Which I find very unlikely.

[The Poz]

If for some reason Jake Long is available, we take him. By the time we pick in the second and OG Brandon Albert is available? I wouldn't be opposed to that at all. Probably about a 2% chance of this happening but can't a boy dream?
That's the only way we walk out into round 3 with 2 O-lineman.

[SBK]

I still think we need to take Todd Blythe in the 1st. Maybe there's a C we can take with our 2, and perhaps a K with our 3?

[Ebolapox]

I feel like all of the OT homers just pissed on my leg.

[ChiefsCountry]

OL or Bust!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MLU]

McIntosh is a decent RT, no? I'd like to see the Chiefs trade down into the teens and grab Ryan Clady who is IMO the best LT prospect in the draft. There should be a quality CB or Interior lineman at the top of round 2 to address two of the Chiefs three biggest needs unless a real talent drops. This draft is deep in receivers and CB's, so a good prospect for those spots can be had in rounds 3-5.

[ChiefsCountry]

McIntosh is a decent RT, no? I'd like to see the Chiefs trade down into the teens and grab Ryan Clady who is IMO the best LT prospect in the draft. There should be a quality CB or Interior lineman at the top of round 2 to address two of the Chiefs three biggest needs unless a real talent drops. This draft is deep in receivers and CB's, so a good prospect for those spots can be had in rounds 3-5.

McIntosh is a better left tackle. Clady isnt the best LT in the draft, Williams and Baker are better IMO.

[Mr. Laz]

IF ........ we take Jake long in the 1st and Sam Baker in the 2nd i won't be pissed.

[evolve27]

IF ........ we take Jake long in the 1st and Sam Baker in the 2nd i won't be pissed.

That would be some fine picks. Do wonders for our line.

[MLU]

McIntosh is a better left tackle. Clady isnt the best LT in the draft, Williams and Baker are better IMO.I don't think that Baker has the footwork for LT in the NFL. Scouting reports all point out his trouble with the speed rushers on the edge while pointing out how effective he is as a drive blocker. He kinda reminds me of Jon Runyan.

I have no real problems with Chris Williams, but as a guy who watches an awful lot of SEC football, he never really appeared to be NFL-ready. He needs improvement in overall strength and could stand to gain some weight as well. I think he's very athletic, but will get your QB killed if you count on him to protect his blindside from day 1. I think he would be great playing RT for a year, hit the weight room in the summer and make a move to the left for year two.

Clady is extremely quick and athletic for a guy his size. He too could add some weight, but he has very good lateral movement and quickness that just isn't taught. He needs to develop his lower body to more effectively handle the guys with power moves, but I think he would step in at LT from day 1 and be better than what the Chiefs have now.

Now you Chiefs fans know how we Saints fans feel now that Willie Roaf has left the team. That broke the hearts of a lot of fans, but it really hurt the Saints QB's. Wayne Gandy and Darryl Terrell is never the answer at LT. :D

BTW, what's going on with Turley? I lost track of him after he left the Chiefs...

[Tribal Warfare]

Clady is extremely quick and athletic for a guy his size. He too could add some weight, but he has very good lateral movement and quickness that just isn't taught. He needs to develop his lower body to more effectively handle the guys with power moves, but I think he would step in at LT from day 1 and be better than what the Chiefs have now.




He's quick enough to get PWNED against Hawaii,I'll retort if you've watched any of the games you'd know the problems came from the right side of the line not the left

[melbar]

What happened to the BPA no matter what croud? Dont draft for need!!! Only draft the top guy on your board regardless!

[Tribal Warfare]

What happened to the BPA no matter what croud? Dont draft for need!!! Only draft the top guy on your board regardless!

damn right! BPA, for the maximum value of the player instead of a stopgap to get to 8-8. Dorsey, Ellis, Gholston will probably be the BPA

[RedThat]

Nope I wouldn't be pissed at all if the Chiefs drafted 2 OT's with their first 2 picks. Especially if you're going with a young QB in Croyle, he needs all the help he can get. Might as well build around him? Good blockers would be a good start for him. Plus, the running game, need lineman to open up holes for LJ.

The offensive line needs to be rebuilt anyway?

whether it's a guard, left tackle, right tackle, or center. The line could use a job.

Waters is a lock on the line for sure. But even his play kinda slipped a little. The way I see it, I don't think he would fair better with the talent he has around him?

McIntosh is okay. But you don't get by in the NFL with ok players. Especially with him, who is 31, and has been injury prone a lot throughout his career. If you're satisfied with the Chiefs relying on that type of player, I know I am not quite.

And the rest of the guys, Niswanger, Taylor, svitek, Stallings all projects. Nothing but projects.

[blueballs]

Chiefmanwillgetyou's mother's shit is spotted like a June fawn

[Tribal Warfare]

The offensive line needs to be rebuilt anyway?






Yes, but shouldn't sacrifice quality because of need, this year is a great year for solid tackles but no true elite ones. Next year, Michael Oher will be that Elite tackle in the Pace/Boseli/ Walter Jones mold of a franchise LT. Being 4-12, this team shouldn't and can't reach because KC has holes at almost every position.

[RedThat]

Yes, but shouldn't sacrifice quality because of need, this year is a great year for solid tackles but no true elite ones. Next year, Michael Oher will be that Elite tackle in the Pace/Boseli/ Walter Jones mold of a franchise LT. Being 4-12, this team shouldn't and can't reach because KC has holes at almost every position.

If Jake Long falls to 5, would you call that a reach? I wouldn't. I think he is quality. Mind you, that is my opinion.

He could be the best prospect available picking at 5? who knows?

I agree that we have holes at a lot of positions. But anywhere where the top prospect can help at 5, you take. If its Jake Long, it's Jake Long. If it's Glenn Dorsey, it's Glenn Dorsey. If it's Matt Ryan, it's Matt Ryan.

Regardless, Chiefs are picking at 5, a good prospect will be sitting there so hopefully that prospect can help our team.

Drafting tackles are usually worthy picks. history has proven that. Mind you, there are a few busts here and there. But most of the time, they equate to solid picks, and can some even go on to play for 10-15 years.

[Mr. Laz]

Yes, but shouldn't sacrifice quality because of need, this year is a great year for solid tackles but no true elite ones. Next year, Michael Oher will be that Elite tackle in the Pace/Boseli/ Walter Jones mold of a franchise LT. Being 4-12, this team shouldn't and can't reach because KC has holes at almost every position.

taking Jake Long at #5 is hardly a reach

taking Sam Baker at #35 is hardly a reach

[Tribal Warfare]

taking Jake Long at #5 is hardly a reach

taking Sam Baker at #35 is hardly a reach




I'm not a real big fan of Jake Long, but some believe that it's OT or bust, and nothing else will do. drafting someone like Clady or Otah in the 1st would piss me off since it's paved way to 8-8 and nothing more

[Coogs]

taking Jake Long at #5 is hardly a reach

taking Sam Baker at #35 is hardly a reach


Taking Clady at #5 is hardly a reach either.

Taking Baker at #5... now that is a reach.

[Mr. Laz]

I'm not a real big fan of Jake Long, but some believe that it's OT or bust, and nothing else will do. drafting someone like Clady or Otah in the 1st would piss me off since it's paved way to 8-8 and nothing more
i'm not a OT or bust guy ... my 1st initial choice would be Dorsey or Ellis.

but if they are gone and Long is there then we take him.

i also like same baker in the 2nd round unless someone unforeseen falls.

Brohm in the 2nd ... a cornerback??

i think baker is going to be a solid RT

if Jake long's feet are quick enough he could be a pro bowl left tackle.

if Dorsey's knees are healthy he could be a beast ...


lots of if's in this draft

[RedThat]

i'm not a OT or bust guy ... my 1st initial choice would be Dorsey or Ellis.

but if they are gone and Long is there then we take him.

i also like same baker in the 2nd round unless someone unforeseen falls.

Brohm in the 2nd ... a cornerback??

i think baker is going to be a solid RT

if Jake long's feet are quick enough he could be a pro bowl left tackle.

if Dorsey's knees are healthy he could be a beast ...


lots of if's in this draft


I just wanna comment that I find it intriguing about all this talk about Dorsey's
health when in college he played 4 seasons, and, in his first 2 seasons he didn't start mainly because he was part of a rotation that included Kyle Williams and Claude Wroten.

In his junior and senior years the guy played every game. And when he was hurt, he still played! come to wonder the character and heart shown by this man. I personally don't think he'll be there at 5? I'd be ecstatic if he was. I just think he is too good of a prospect to fall to 5. I project him to go 1-3 overall.

No doubt in my mind, the top 3 prospects I think will be C.Long, J.Long, and Glenn Dorsey.

Watch the Chiefs draft Matt Ryan. All these mocks have Atlanta taking Ryan, I don't see it. I think he'll fall to the Chiefs.

[melbar]

damn right! BPA, for the maximum value of the player instead of a stopgap to get to 8-8. Dorsey, Ellis, Gholston will probably be the BPA

You do realize that we'll probably have to pass 8-8 on our way to being a good team? We're not going 4-12 for 2 seasons and winning the SB the next.

I actually wouldnt be upset with 2 OT's in the first 2 rounds, but what if the BPA in the 3rd is OT? What if the BPA at our spot every round is RB? Are we going to grab 5 great RB's and still have crap everywhere else? If we get Dorsey in the 1st and Balmer is the BPA in the 2nd do you neglect everything else for a position where we would now have a surplus of good young talent? The only reason it works for the OL is that we need 4 starters. Probably wont get them all this year, and I'm hoping someone steps up, but we do have an incredibly glaring weakness in the foundation of our whole offense.

[ChiefsCountry]

i think baker is going to be a solid RT

if Jake long's feet are quick enough he could be a pro bowl left tackle.


You know if you draft Long and Baker, Long will play RT and Baker will play LT. Long is a mauler which is perfect for the right side and Baker is more of a natural left tackle. So basically you would blow a top 5 pick on a right tackle.

[Chiefnj2]

You know if you draft Long and Baker, Long will play RT and Baker will play LT. Long is a mauler which is perfect for the right side and Baker is more of a natural left tackle. So basically you would blow a top 5 pick on a right tackle.


Are you blowing a top 5 pick if that player becomes a Pro Bowler for the next 10 years?

[Mr. Laz]

You know if you draft Long and Baker, Long will play RT and Baker will play LT. Long is a mauler which is perfect for the right side and Baker is more of a natural left tackle. So basically you would blow a top 5 pick on a right tackle.
i think alot of people disagree

no way would Jake Long be considered a top 5 pick if they projected him at right tackle.

you have a right to your opinion, of course .....

[Tribal Warfare]

You do realize that we'll probably have to pass 8-8 on our way to being a good team?

.

No Joke, rebuilding is more than a one year process and this year their isn't a true elite tackle out of the bunch. Their is plenty of solid tackles, and saying that you never ever reach when you have an above average player( Clady,Otah) at one position compared to an all-world player at another one (Dorsey,Ellis Chris Long, Vernon Gholston). It would be idiotic to go for the above average player instead of the said elite football players because of a need . Enough of these stopgap alliterations that's how KC got to 4-12 in the 1st place. If the BPA is an OT excellent but it's just stupid to pass great players because of need at another.

[milkman]

Nope I wouldn't be pissed at all if the Chiefs drafted 2 OT's with their first 2 picks. Especially if you're going with a young QB in Croyle, he needs all the help he can get. Might as well build around him? Good blockers would be a good start for him. Plus, the running game, need lineman to open up holes for LJ.

The offensive line needs to be rebuilt anyway?

whether it's a guard, left tackle, right tackle, or center. The line could use a job.

Waters is a lock on the line for sure. But even his play kinda slipped a little. The way I see it, I don't think he would fair better with the talent he has around him?

McIntosh is okay. But you don't get by in the NFL with ok players. Especially with him, who is 31, and has been injury prone a lot throughout his career. If you're satisfied with the Chiefs relying on that type of player, I know I am not quite.

And the rest of the guys, Niswanger, Taylor, svitek, Stallings all projects. Nothing but projects.

You do realize that Waters is a finished project?

[milkman]

i think alot of people disagree

no way would Jake Long be considered a top 5 pick if they projected him at right tackle.

you have a right to your opinion, of course .....

A lot?

Almost every draft analysis questioned his ability to match up against NFL speed rushers.

His combine scores alleviated that concern to some extent for some, but there are still numerous people that still question him.

To me, his combine only further strenthened his reputation as a hard worker, cause he clearly worked hard in preparation for those drills.

He still looked awkward.

[milkman]

Are you blowing a top 5 pick if that player becomes a Pro Bowler for the next 10 years?

I don't think it would be looked on as blown.

However, there would still be a certain sense of disappointment.

You don't go into the draft looking for PB RTs in the top 5.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Are you blowing a top 5 pick if that player becomes a Pro Bowler for the next 10 years?

I don't think it would be looked on as blown.

However, there would still be a certain sense of disappointment.

You don't go into the draft looking for PB RTs in the top 5.

My thoughts exactly.

By doing so, you lose the value of the pick, plus take a HUGE hit on the value of the contract.

In the Baker/Long scenario, you'll be paying your RT (Long) LT money for his entire career because he was the 5th overall pick.

Your LT will be grossly underpaid in his rookie contract, then if he's any good, be looking for a raise into the $5+ million range, or in the neighborhood of solid LT's at the time.

LT's are the 2nd highest paid position on the field (on average) other than QB. RT's are WAY down the list.

[RedThat]

You do realize that Waters is a finished project?

Yes.

But when you have 4 guys there who are pretty much all projects there is a problem.

[milkman]

Yes.

But when you have 4 guys there who are pretty much all projects there is a problem.

Here's the thing.

Tre Stallings started 48 games in college, Herb Taylor started in 48, and Rudy Niswanger started in 29.

Taylor and Niswanger showed pretty well in the games they played in last year, and appear to be ready to step in and play.

Fact is, if the Chiefs hadn't started off the season with the moronic belief that they were a playoff team and played these guys, along with Brodie Croyle, starting in game one, we might have found out that we have some OL building blocks in Niswanger and taylor.

The league is littered with players on the O-Line that started a lot of college games, were drafted on the seond day, and have become solid starters.

Our needs on the O-Line may not be as great as some/most think.

[Mr. Laz]

A lot?

Almost every draft analysis questioned his ability to match up against NFL speed rushers.

His combine scores alleviated that concern to some extent for some, but there are still numerous people that still question him.

To me, his combine only further strenthened his reputation as a hard worker, cause he clearly worked hard in preparation for those drills.

He still looked awkward.
and i'm one of the people who question his ability to handle top-notch speed rushers.

he really only faced 1 in his college career ..... and he gave up a sack him.

but ...... yes, a lot.

he'll go in the top 5 because people think he can play left tackle.

[Mr. Laz]

My thoughts exactly.

By doing so, you lose the value of the pick, plus take a HUGE hit on the value of the contract.

In the Baker/Long scenario, you'll be paying your RT (Long) LT money for his entire career because he was the 5th overall pick.

Your LT will be grossly underpaid in his rookie contract, then if he's any good, be looking for a raise into the $5+ million range, or in the neighborhood of solid LT's at the time.

LT's are the 2nd highest paid position on the field (on average) other than QB. RT's are WAY down the list.
not really ..... you'll pay him a LT signing bonus.

which will hurt

but if Long moves to right tackle then he won't be asking for a big contract restructure like a PB left tackle would do 3 years into his first contract.

[OnTheWarpath15]

not really ..... you'll pay him a LT signing bonus.

which will hurt

but if Long moves to right tackle then he won't be asking for a big contract restructure like a PB left tackle would do 3 years into his first contract.

He's going to be paid like a PB LT just for being the 5th overall pick.

You think he's going to take a pay cut just because he gets moved to RT?

[Ebolapox]

not really ..... you'll pay him a LT signing bonus.

which will hurt

but if Long moves to right tackle then he won't be asking for a big contract restructure like a PB left tackle would do 3 years into his first contract.

he won't? if he makes a pro bowl or three, he'll be demanding a pay RAISE. guys don't just make pro bowls and say 'well, you know what, you can pay me LESS.' he'll demand a raise of at LEAST 5-10%, and carl would give it to him because he's a BADASS general manager.

seriously, laz. guys just don't lay down for the team (unless you're the patriots) and accept LESS money than they're worth. they want MORE than they're worth.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Here's the thing.

Tre Stallings started 48 games in college, Herb Taylor started in 48, and Rudy Niswanger started in 29.

Taylor and Niswanger showed pretty well in the games they played in last year, and appear to be ready to step in and play.

Fact is, if the Chiefs hadn't started off the season with the moronic belief that they were a playoff team and played these guys, along with Brodie Croyle, starting in game one, we might have found out that we have some OL building blocks in Niswanger and taylor.

The league is littered with players on the O-Line that started a lot of college games, were drafted on the seond day, and have become solid starters.

Our needs on the O-Line may not be as great as some/most think.


Bingo.

[Mr. Laz]

He's going to be paid like a PB LT just for being the 5th overall pick.

You think he's going to take a pay cut just because he gets moved to RT?
dude ..... that's not what i said.

please try and actual comprehend what you read some time.


most players who succeed at a pro bowl level after being drafted with ask for a raise 3/4 years into their first contract.

BUT ....... if Jake Long has to move to right tackle he won't have near the leverage to ask for any kind of raise even if he's a pro bowler because right tackle is a lesser position than left tackle.


i dunno why i bother ...... you guys are looking for a fight so just carry on. Maybe you can find some way to pull each other's hair through the internet or something.

[Mr. Laz]

he won't? if he makes a pro bowl or three, he'll be demanding a pay RAISE. guys don't just make pro bowls and say 'well, you know what, you can pay me LESS.' he'll demand a raise of at LEAST 5-10%, and carl would give it to him because he's a BADASS general manager.

seriously, laz. guys just don't lay down for the team (unless you're the patriots) and accept LESS money than they're worth. they want MORE than they're worth.
if he moves from left to right tackle he won't have anywhere near the leverage to demand a raise.

[OnTheWarpath15]

dude ..... that's not what i said.

please try and actual comprehend what you read some time.


most players who succeed at a pro bowl level after being drafted with ask for a raise 3/4 years into their first contract.

BUT ....... if Jake Long has to move to right tackle he won't have near the leverage to ask for any kind of raise even if he's a pro bowler because right tackle is a lesser position than left tackle.


i dunno why i bother ...... you guys are looking for a fight so just carry on. Maybe you can find some way to pull each other's hair through the internet or something.

You're missing the point, Laz.

He wouldn't even HAVE to ask for a raise. He would already be the highest paid RT in the history of the league. He'll ALWAYS make more than the position calls for, based on his draft position alone.

LT's on average make around $4-8M more than their RT counterparts.

[Mr. Laz]

You're missing the point, Laz.

He wouldn't even HAVE to ask for a raise. He would already be the highest paid RT in the history of the league. He'll ALWAYS make more than the position calls for, based on his draft position alone.

LT's on average make around $4-8M more than their RT counterparts.
but a players first contract is always LOWER

he won't be paid like a veteran LT on his first contract ... that's why players always want raises so quickly.

that's why drafting is so important because a drafted player ... even a highly drafted players are relative cheap IF they are successful .

[Mr. Laz]

btw ...

our starting offensive line this year IF long/baker were drafted

LT - McIntosch
LT - Waters
C - Niswanger
RG - Baker
RT - Long

or maybe

LT - McIntosch
LG - Baker
C - Waters
RG - Niswanger
RT - Long

[OnTheWarpath15]

but a players first contract is always LOWER

he won't be paid like a veteran LT on his first contract ... that's why players always want raises so quickly.

that's why drafting is so important because a drafted player ... even a highly drafted players are relative cheap IF they are successful .

Levi Brown signed a 6 year, $62M contract at the 5 slot LAST year. $18M guaranteed.

It will be higher THIS year.

Jake Long will be paid more than 80% of the veteran LT's in the league.

[Chiefnj2]

Here's the thing.



Our needs on the O-Line may not be as great as some/most think.

The same could be said about DT with a young McBride and Tyler.

[OnTheWarpath15]

The same could be said about DT with a young McBride and Tyler.

It absolutely could.

But let me ask this:

Do offensive linemen play in a rotation?

[Chiefnj2]

It absolutely could.

But let me ask this:

Do offensive linemen play in a rotation?


No. Which would make getting a solid starter a greater priority than a rotational DT.

[OnTheWarpath15]

No. Which would make getting a solid starter a greater priority than a rotational DT.

When you're as bad as we are, the word "priority" shouldn't exist.

[milkman]

No. Which would make getting a solid starter a greater priority than a rotational DT.

I wouldn't disagree that getting a solid starter on the O-Line is a greater priority.

I do disagree with the OT or bust mentality.

I think we can get a starter at OT in the second round, and guard in later rounds.

We can't get a potential stud like Dorsey or Ellis at 5 if Jake Long is already gone, if you believe he's a stud LT.

[ChiefsCountry]

btw ...

our starting offensive line this year IF long/baker were drafted

LT - McIntosch
LT - Waters
C - Niswanger
RG - Baker
RT - Long

or maybe

LT - McIntosch
LG - Baker
C - Waters
RG - Niswanger
RT - Long

Baker is not playing guard.

It would be this:

LT - Baker
LG - Waters
C - Niswanger
RG - Stallings/Taylor
RT - Long

[raypec85]

Here's the thing.

Tre Stallings started 48 games in college, Herb Taylor started in 48, and Rudy Niswanger started in 29.

Taylor and Niswanger showed pretty well in the games they played in last year, and appear to be ready to step in and play.

Fact is, if the Chiefs hadn't started off the season with the moronic belief that they were a playoff team and played these guys, along with Brodie Croyle, starting in game one, we might have found out that we have some OL building blocks in Niswanger and taylor.

The league is littered with players on the O-Line that started a lot of college games, were drafted on the seond day, and have become solid starters.

Our needs on the O-Line may not be as great as some/most think.

Excellent point.

[raypec85]

I wouldn't disagree that getting a solid starter on the O-Line is a greater priority.

I do disagree with the OT or bust mentality.

I think we can get a starter at OT in the second round, and guard in later rounds.

We can't get a potential stud like Dorsey or Ellis at 5 if Jake Long is already gone, if you believe he's a stud LT.

Is it really that far fetched that all the OT's worthy of a high 2nd round pick could be gone by the time KC picks in the 2nd round? I don't think so at all. I could easily see a run occurring on OT's that would leave KC grasping for air if they don't pick one up before then. Remember the situation with the CB's last year? I'm not saying it wouldn't be worth the risk if Dorsey is available at #5 in the 1st round. He's the kind of player worth taking a risk on. I'm only saying it could be a false assumption to think an OT will be there in round 2.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Is it really that far fetched that all the OT's worthy of a high 2nd round pick could be gone by the time KC picks in the 2nd round? I don't think so at all. I could easily see a run occurring on OT's that would leave KC grasping for air if they don't pick one up before then. Remember the situation with the CB's last year? I'm not saying it wouldn't be worth the risk if Dorsey is available at #5 in the 1st round. He's the kind of player worth taking a risk on. I'm only saying it could be a false assumption to think an OT will be there in round 2.

But you can't draft based on what MIGHT happen.

Honestly, I'm not sure why people are so hell-bent on getting a OT on the first day.

This team has so many holes that they'll get better now AND in the future for picking BPA.

Tony Gonzalez, Brian Waters, Dwayne Bowe, Derrick Johnson and Jared Allen are about the only GUARANTEED starters on this team.

And we even happen to need depth at each of those positions due to age or just flat out lack of bodies.

[raypec85]

But you can't draft based on what MIGHT happen.

Honestly, I'm not sure why people are so hell-bent on getting a OT on the first day.

This team has so many holes that they'll get better now AND in the future for picking BPA.

Tony Gonzalez, Brian Waters, Dwayne Bowe, Derrick Johnson and Jared Allen are about the only GUARANTEED starters on this team.

And we even happen to need depth at each of those positions due to age or just flat out lack of bodies.

Yeah, I don't completely disagree. That's why I said Dorsey would be worth not taking an OT in the 1st. I'm not sure how many players other than Dorsey or Ellis would be worth risking missing out on an OT though. I'm torn on the issue. It bothers me that KC has no definitive solution at LT. That position is on the field every offensive snap and is so critical to the success or failure of an offense. I don't believe Croyle can be accurately evaluated without the O-line being fixed. In my opinion J. Long could fill the LT need as could Clady if they trade down or Baker in the 2nd. Is it possible the o-line would work with McIntosh / Waters / Niswanger / later draft selection / Taylor? Yes, it's possible - but with the evaluation of Cryole an issue I'd feel better if KC had better options.

Having said all that, if J. Long is gone at 5 and Dorsey is there I want KC to take Dorsey and just hope a good LT or at least RT is there in round 2. If they're both there I'd prefer J. Long because he's an every snap player plus OT's historically are less of a risk with a high pick. However if they took Dorsey even with J. Long on the board I would not be upset. If they come away with J. Long / Dorsey / Ellis at # 5 or trade down I'd be happy.

[keg in kc]

Only if they are BPA. Which I find very unlikely.That would be my answer.

[keg in kc]

Tony Gonzalez, Brian Waters, Dwayne Bowe, Derrick Johnson and Jared Allen are about the only GUARANTEED starters on this team.You could say that if the only qualifyer for being a "guaranteed starter" is that said player is potentially pro bowl calibre. This isn't Madden NFL, however, and you can't have that kind of talent at every position on the roster. No team can. So the list of starters on the current Chiefs roster is going to be much, much longer than that. Something like:

Jared Allen, Alphonso Boone, Dwayne Bowe, Donnie Edwards, Ron Edwards, Tony Gonzalez, Tamba Hali, Napoleon Harris (or DeMorrio Williams), Derrick Johnson, Larry Johnson, Damion McIntosh, Rudy Niswanger, Jarrad Page, Bernard Pollard, Patrick Surtain, Jeff Webb

That's 16, out of 22, and the missing 6 include QB, which is Croyle at the moment, and 3 of the 5 offensive line positions (and this after I put Niswanger on the starting list, which is premature at this point...).

There's a reason people think the Chiefs are looking o-line in this draft, and that's simply because they don't even have players on the roster to fill the holes, unless they're expecting to get starts out of guys like Alabi or Stallings or Svitek. You can't say that about any other area on the squad, with the possible exception of cornerback. You certainly can't say that about the defensive line, where they're clearly set at end (assuming they retain Allen) and have recently-drafted higher-round players under development like Turk and Tank.

That doesn't mean drafting a player like Dorsey or Ellis would be a bad idea if he's there at 5, but the idea that there's a bigger need on this team than offensive line right now doesn't seem to stand up to even a cursory look at the roster, at least not in my mind. I'll agree with anybody who says we shouldn't 'reach' for an OT early if he's not at least close to the BPA at the time, but if we don't come out of the first three rounds of the draft with a quality OT, and then probably two good o-linemen from rounds 4-5(one of them a guard, we have almost nothing at that position right now) then I think we're asking for big, big trouble. The Chiefs have tried for years to develop low-round players into starting linemen, they haven't spent any draft pick higher than a 4th rounder on one since Tait in 1999. And it hasn't worked, which is why the line today is what it is. Dave Szott was 18 years ago, and it doesn't look like that particular lightning bolt is striking again. They need to take real steps to fix the problem, and they need to do it yesterday.

[OnTheWarpath15]

You could say that if the only qualifyer for being a "guaranteed starter" is that said player is potentially pro bowl calibre. This isn't Madden NFL, however, and you can't have that kind of talent at every position on the roster. No team can.

The Chargers do.

RT is the only position on their roster that a rookie could push for a starting job. Every other position on the field is locked up.

On our roster, the only positions a rookie probably couldn't unseat a starter is at TE, LG, RDE, SSLB and Punter.

There's a reason people think the Chiefs are looking o-line in this draft, and that's simply because they don't even have players on the roster to fill the holes, unless they're expecting to get starts out of guys like Alabi or Stallings or Svitek. You can't say that about any other area on the squad, with the possible exception of cornerback. You certainly can't say that about the defensive line, where they're clearly set at end (assuming they retain Allen) and have recently-drafted higher-round players under development like Turk and Tank.

Set at end?

You realize that the only 2 DE's on the roster right now are Allen and Hali?

We have 5 DT's on the roster, one is 32 years old, one is 35 years old, one is camp fodder,and the other two should get some playing time, but have enormous question marks.

That doesn't mean drafting a player like Dorsey or Ellis would be a bad idea if he's there at 5, but the idea that there's a bigger need on this team than offensive line right now doesn't seem to stand up to even a cursory look at the roster, at least not in my mind. I'll agree with anybody who says we shouldn't 'reach' for an OT early if he's not at least close to the BPA at the time, but if we don't come out of the first three rounds of the draft with a quality OT, and then probably two good o-linemen from rounds 4-5(one of them a guard, we have almost nothing at that position right now) then I think we're asking for big, big trouble. The Chiefs have tried for years to develop low-round players into starting linemen, they haven't spent any draft pick higher than a 4th rounder on one since Tait in 1999. And it hasn't worked, which is why the line today is what it is. Dave Szott was 18 years ago, and it doesn't look like that particular lightning bolt is striking again. They need to take real steps to fix the problem, and they need to do it yesterday.

Again with the history.

What happened in the past has no relevance on THIS draft, or its players.

If we're TRULY rebuilding, then why shouldn't guys like Rudy Niswanger and Herb Taylor get to actually play? Let's see what we have. It's not like we're expected to compete for anything this year, or next for that matter.

While it's not possible, IMO, you could run out the same 5 guys from last year, and they'd play better because we'd have a competent OC running the show.

[keg in kc]

You need to make up your mind. First you say On our roster, the only positions a rookie probably couldn't unseat a starter is at TE, LG, RDE, SSLB and Punter. and then, later, you sayIf we're TRULY rebuilding, then why shouldn't guys like Rudy Niswanger and Herb Taylor get to actually play? Let's see what we have. It's not like we're expected to compete for anything this year, or next for that matter.So which is it? Because you can't have it both ways. You can't say "our roster sucks" on one hand and then say "why if we're rebuilding don't we give our young players a chance?" Because if your arguement that we don't need o-linemen is that we have Herb Taylor and Rudy Niswanger on the roster, then we must not need d-linemen, either, because we have Turk and Tank and TJ Jackson. Set at end?

You realize that the only 2 DE's on the roster right now are Allen and Hali?I thought the conversation was about starters. And, last I checked, we have 2 starting defensive ends, both of whom are young. That tells me it's a position that doesn't need a high draft pick right now, unless they're expecting to trade Allen. Unless you think it's a good idea to add a high pick backup to one of the strongest positions on the roster instead of using it to bolster another area that needs help on a team that's basically rife with holes.We have 5 DT's on the roster, one is 32 years old, one is 35 years old, one is camp fodder,and the other two should get some playing time, but have enormous question marks.Unless I'm forgetting what I said in my last post, I could swear I mentioned that I didn't think Ellis or Dorsey would be a bad pick.

Beyond that, who's the 35-year old DT? Boone's 32 and Edwards is 29. Waters and McIntosh are both 32, which it means 2 of our 5 possible starting o-linemen are older players, with no apparent replacement in the wings for either of them, unlike Turk and Tank at DT, both 24 and both first day draft picks.

There may be more o-linemen on the roster, numerically speaking, but they're virtually all camp fodder. Unless you think Alibi, Adrian Jones, Travis Leffew and Rob Smith are all going to be contributing in some meaningful way, and Stallings, Svitek and Taylor are all going to miraculously turn into quality starters.

That's all you, if you do believe that. We might luck out and get one starter out of that bunch. And I think we might be fortunate get that.Again with the history.Again? I hardly ever post about the draft, so I'm not sure what you're going at there. I only brought up Szott because he's invariably who everybody points to as the poster boy for why it's okay to only draft linemen late, despite the fact that it's basically an act of god that happened almost 20 years ago.What happened in the past has no relevance on THIS draft, or its players.That's not true at all. What's happened in the past, or rather, the recent past, has a great deal of bearing on this draft. It's important to remember who was drafted recently and who's expected to develop into impact players from recent drafts.While it's not possible, IMO, you could run out the same 5 guys from last year, and they'd play better because we'd have a competent OC running the show.Again, if you really believe that, then why are you saying things like "Tony Gonzalez, Brian Waters, Dwayne Bowe, Derrick Johnson and Jared Allen are about the only GUARANTEED starters on this tea."? Because, when you say that, you're dismissing out-of-hand every young player we have.

As for thisThe Chargers do.

RT is the only position on their roster that a rookie could push for a starting job. Every other position on the field is locked up.I don't agree with that. At all. But if I did, then I would point out that never finishing above .500 for 8 years, including 5 years with 5 or fewer wins, nets a team a pretty nice string of high draft picks to build a team around. So, hey, maybe if we do that, we'll be as 'stacked' as they are, too. But, personally, I think you overvalue their non-marquee roleplayers, and undervalue the Chiefs, but that's just me.

[RedThat]

Here's the thing.

Tre Stallings started 48 games in college, Herb Taylor started in 48, and Rudy Niswanger started in 29.

Taylor and Niswanger showed pretty well in the games they played in last year, and appear to be ready to step in and play.

Fact is, if the Chiefs hadn't started off the season with the moronic belief that they were a playoff team and played these guys, along with Brodie Croyle, starting in game one, we might have found out that we have some OL building blocks in Niswanger and taylor.

The league is littered with players on the O-Line that started a lot of college games, were drafted on the seond day, and have become solid starters.

Our needs on the O-Line may not be as great as some/most think.

I agree with you in some sense that if the Chiefs hadn't started the season thinking they were a playoff team and played guys like Taylor and Niswanger more they coulda found out what they had in them.

but things happen.

I really don't think we know what we have in taylor and niswanger. Both played very sparingly last season. I think we have come to realize and understand that it takes a whole season of play to base an evaluation on these guys to determnie whether they can play in this league or not. And that's where the Chiefs screwed up last year.

With that being said, I really think it is a HUGE risk to start the season off with those guys. It may or may not be worth it? I really wouldn't cancel out the idea though of drafting top offensive line prospects early? I think may not be a bad choice to do that?

You and I know you need offensive line in this league. That is the bread and butter of success to an offense. You want a good offensive line? Pick good prospects early that is the way to go imo. History proves it.

Look back and you see Tarik Glenn, Willie Roaf, Walter Jones, Orlando Pace, Steve Hutchison, Alan Faneca, Nick Mangold, Jonathan Ogden all those guys are first rounders. I could go on, but most top offensive lineman are pick early.

I feel more comfortable drafting top offensive line prospects early then relying on Taylor and Niswanger to be quite honest with you.

[milkman]

I agree with you in some sense that if the Chiefs hadn't started the season thinking they were a playoff team and played guys like Taylor and Niswanger more they coulda found out what they had in them.

but things happen.

I really don't think we know what we have in taylor and niswanger. Both played very sparingly last season. I think we have come to realize and understand that it takes a whole season of play to base an evaluation on these guys to determnie whether they can play in this league or not. And that's where the Chiefs screwed up last year.

With that being said, I really think it is a HUGE risk to start the season off with those guys. It may or may not be worth it? I really wouldn't cancel out the idea though of drafting top offensive line prospects early? I think may not be a bad choice to do that?

You and I know you need offensive line in this league. That is the bread and butter of success to an offense. You want a good offensive line? Pick good prospects early that is the way to go imo. History proves it.

Look back and you see Tarik Glenn, Willie Roaf, Walter Jones, Orlando Pace, Steve Hutchison, Alan Faneca, Nick Mangold, Jonathan Ogden all those guys are first rounders. I could go on, but most top offensive lineman are pick early.

I feel more comfortable drafting top offensive line prospects early then relying on Taylor and Niswanger to be quite honest with you.

The problem is, you only have so many early picks in single draft, and you can't target one position or unit to the exclusion of others when you have a team with all the holes the Chiefs have.

We are going to find out about the Niswangers and Taylors whether we like it or not, and the fact is, starting out the season with those guys isn't a bad idea, cause this team ain't going anywhere anyway.

We'll find out what we have, and continue to build through the next couple of drafts.

[RedThat]

The problem is, you only have so many early picks in single draft, and you can't target one position or unit to the exclusion of others when you have a team with all the holes the Chiefs have.

We are going to find out about the Niswangers and Taylors whether we like it or not, and the fact is, starting out the season with those guys isn't a bad idea, cause this team ain't going anywhere anyway.

We'll find out what we have, and continue to build through the next couple of drafts.

Again that is relying on projects rather then investing in top talent at valuable positions.

I have heard it before, same thing, the Chiefs have too many holes yada yada yada they shouldn't invest a majority of their picks on offensive line.

I say why not? And so what if they have too many holes? Should that prevent them from investing in what is clearly a foundation of a team? offensive line.

LT position is a premier "cornerstone" position on a team. So are guards, and centers. The bottomline is this, you're building a football team, it all starts with building it in the trenches. The trenches wins the games. Before Green and Holmes came here, they didn't excel where they were before until they arrived in KC and played behind a dominating offensive line.

Look what happened? Holmes was running behind Shields, and Roaf and co..and was a scoring machine. Trent was lighting it up with "eh" WR's. But the line was great! He was right up there in numbers with the Brady's and the Manning's of the leagues. My point is, an offensive line makes the rest of the guys around you better. Investing half of a draft on it is not a bad idea.

Look, Roaf and Shields both retired and for 2 years now this organization failed to plan ahead and replace them. They've been ignoring, and negating the offensive line position for years now. when is the last time they drafted an offensive lineman in the first round? 1999. It's time for them to smarten up.

[Chiefmanwillcatch]

redbull.

They know what they have. I doubt Oline coaches think they're that good.

[Tribal Warfare]

Again that is relying on projects rather then investing in top talent at valuable positions.



IMO, their isn't such thing as a specified "valuable" positions because you need 52 players to field a team so they are all valuable to play thus my stance for BPA.

[RedThat]

IMO, their isn't such thing as a specified "valuable" positions because you need 52 players to field a team so they are all valuable to play thus my stance for BPA.

IMO,

their are "first priority" positions. and then there are "secondary" positions. Certain positions are more important then other positions. No doubt about it.

For example, you could have a good quarterback, a good running back, and a good set of WR's..But what is the point if you don't have an offensive line? Doesn't that sound familiar? Arizona?

You could have a great offensive line, decent quarterback, decent running back, and decent WR's...And if your offensive line is amazing chances are those others will be too.

Then you could even talk about defense. If your defensive line sucks, what is the point of having a good secondary, and LBers if you give the QB all day to throw?

If your defensive line is awesome, but your secondary is average, and your LBers are "eh?" chances are your defense and the other guys will be good too!

It all starts upfront. The "offensive" and "defensive" lines are specified valuable positions more so then the other positions on a football team. They are the core of the team.

Now in this draft, there are 3 top prospects that can help out the core of this team. That is, C.Long, J. Long, and dorsey. I'll even throw Ellis in there. If one of them is at 5, you take. If the Chiefs are going to build this team all over again I hope they do it properly, and invest in the lines on both sides of the ball.

[RedThat]

redbull.

They know what they have. I doubt Oline coaches think they're that good.

Well I hope so? I have seen many times that they've tried this stupid route of hoping to get these good bargains ala Kyle Turley and Chris Terry when we all know those experiments failed.

And playing the Blacks, and Sviteks didn't help either.

They did this, and didn't even plan to prepare for drafting replacements after the retirement of Roaf and Shields. Coincedentally, they haven't even drafted a top OL prospect in the 1st round since 1999. 9 YEARS! That's pathetic.

Again, I hope they know what they have?

[Tribal Warfare]

IMO,


For example, you could have a good quarterback, a good running back, and a good set of WR's..But what is the point if you don't have an offensive line? Doesn't that sound familiar? Arizona?





Which goes what I previously stated you take what the draft gives you if you have another all-world WR or RB on the Board you take them, because of the value and the reach factor. A team can't have enough badass players at a position the only positions that are excluded are the QB and the OL spots due to you can't rotate those guys in the pro game. At the sametime if the QB or the specified OLs are just solid you take the elite players at that position

[Mr. Laz]

Baker is not playing guard.

It would be this:

LT - Baker
LG - Waters
C - Niswanger
RG - Stallings/Taylor
RT - Long

So you actually think that Baker is a better left tackle than Jake long?

man .... you really don't think much of picking Long at 5 then.

we just gonna cut McIntosh then?