My guess--Stafford is not the Lions pick

[SBK]

Why do I think they don't want Stafford (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/05/report-lions-attempting-to-trade-no-1-pick/)?

Report: Lions Attempting To Trade No. 1 Pick (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/05/report-lions-attempting-to-trade-no-1-pick/)

Posted by Aaron Wilson on April 5, 2009, 11:28 a.m. EDT


The Detroit <nobr style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 100%;" id="itxt_nobr_0_0">Lionshttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif</nobr> (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/05/report-lions-attempting-to-trade-no-1-pick/#) have initiated trade scenarios (http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2009/04/05/hell_be_a_guiding_light/?page=4) with other <nobr style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 100%;" id="itxt_nobr_1_0">NFLhttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif</nobr> (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/05/report-lions-attempting-to-trade-no-1-pick/#) teams about trading the top overall selection they currently own, according to Mike Reiss of the Boston Globe.


However, there hasn’t been anyone inclined toward trading up at this point because of the high expense of signing a player at that slot.
Citing NFL scouts and personnel executives as sources, Reiss notes that at least one scouting director doesn’t think that Baylor offensive tackle Jason <nobr style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 100%;" id="itxt_nobr_4_0">Smithhttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif</nobr> (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/05/report-lions-attempting-to-trade-no-1-pick/#) is top-of-the-draft material, or even a “top-10 talent.”


Smith and University of Georgia quarterback Matthew Stafford are among the players the Lions are considering drafting No. 1.

What a cruel irony for those of us that wanted Stafford all year.

[SAUTO]

What a cruel irony for those of us that wanted Stafford all year.

WHY? someone trading up would only do so for stafford IMO and no way IMO we would have traded up

[SBK]

WHY? someone trading up would only do so for stafford IMO and no way IMO we would have traded up

Read between the lines, if they wanted Stafford they wouldn't be trading down. They want one of the LT's.

They're gonna pass on Stafford, as will the Rams and he'll be sitting there at 3, meanwhile we already picked up our QB.

That's why I said it's a cruel irony.

[kysirsoze]

Read between the lines, if they wanted Stafford they wouldn't be trading down. They want one of the LT's.

They're gonna pass on Stafford, as will the Rams and he'll be sitting there at 3, meanwhile we already picked up our QB.

That's why I said it's a cruel irony.

PLUUUUS the Rams signed Kyle Boller. There QB situation is SOLID.ROFLROFLROFLROFL

[Shag]

Just because they'd rather trade down doesn't mean they won't pick Stafford at #1 if they are unable to trade away the pick...

[SAUTO]

Read between the lines, if they wanted Stafford they wouldn't be trading down. They want one of the LT's.They're gonna pass on Stafford, as will the Rams and he'll be sitting there at 3, meanwhile we already picked up our QB.

That's why I said it's a cruel irony.

yeah i understood that, also like i said the team that trades UP will in all likelyhood WANT stafford so he STILL would not be there at three. so WE would have to TRADE UP to get him still. IMO we wouldnt trade up even without cassel, but if they stay put they will take stafford IMO

[SBK]

yeah i understood that, also like i said the team that trades UP will in all likelyhood WANT stafford so he STILL would not be there at three. so WE would have to TRADE UP to get him still. IMO we wouldnt trade up even without cassel, but if they stay put they will take stafford IMO

:shake:

They are looking to trade down because THEY DO NOT WANT Stafford. They want the LT, which they can pick up a little lower.

They're taking Jason Smith.

[SAUTO]

:shake:

They are looking to trade down because THEY DO NOT WANT Stafford. They want the LT, which they can pick up a little lower.

They're taking Jason Smith.

if someone trades up they are taking stafford though. we will see. it's funny how teams all of a sudden arent too high on these cant miss qb's.

[milkman]

yeah i understood that, also like i said the team that trades UP will in all likelyhood WANT stafford so he STILL would not be there at three. so WE would have to TRADE UP to get him still. IMO we wouldnt trade up even without cassel, but if they stay put they will take stafford IMO

The Rams are not likely going to draft Stafford if the Lions don't.

They'll selct an OT, whether it's Smith or Monroe, leaving Stafford and Sanchez sitting there at # 3.

The only way the Chiefs will be able to take advatage of that situation is to draft Stafford and hold him for ransom in a draft day trade.

If Stafford goes to the Lions, there will still be teams looking to trade up for Sanchez.

I doubt there are many QB needy teams that would rather sit on their pick and settle for Freeman.

Sanchez, IMO, is going to develop into a top 3 QB in the NFL.

[SBK]

if someone trades up they are taking stafford though. we will see. it's funny how teams all of a sudden arent too high on these cant miss qb's.

You're correct, if you read the article you'll also see nobody wants to pay #1 money.

And if you want to use the Lions as your model franchise as to why a QB isn't 'can't miss' knock yourself out.

[SAUTO]

The Rams are not likely going to draft Stafford if the Lions don't.

They'll selct an OT, whether it's Smith or Monroe, leaving Stafford and Sanchez sitting there at # 3.

The only way the Chiefs will be able to take advatage of that situation is to draft Stafford and hold him for ransom in a draft day trade.

If Stafford goes to the Lions, there will still be teams looking to trade up for sanchez.

I doubt there are many QB needy teams teams that would rather sit on their pick and settle for Freeman.

Sanchez, IMO, is going to develop into a top 3 QB in the NFL.

i think sanchez will be good also. i just wonder how teams with qb issues(det AND to an extent stl) could pass on these supposedly cant miss guys. and if they are once every few years types why arent teams beating down det and stl's doors?

[SBK]

The bright side of this (if you want to call it that) is that with 2 QB's sitting at 3 we may have a little more action in the trade down market.

[Mr. Krab]

Anyone ever consider that we got Cassel and Detroit doesn't want Stafford/Sanchez is because maybe these QB's are not that good? I realize all the people on this board no more than the actually NFL teams but still. Cruel Irony or Saving Grace?

Just a thought.

[SAUTO]

You're correct, if you read the article you'll also see nobody wants to pay #1 money.

And if you want to use the Lions as your model franchise as to why a QB isn't 'can't miss' knock yourself out.

what about stl? they arent in great shape IMO, bulger is getting older and if these guys are half the qbs some make them out to be...

[SAUTO]

The bright side of this (if you want to call it that) is that with 2 QB's sitting at 3 we may have a little more action in the trade down market.

or less if some teams think they are =

[SBK]

Anyone ever consider that we got Cassel and Detroit doesn't want Stafford/Sanchez is because maybe these QB's are not that good? Cruel Irony or Saving Grace?

Just a thought.

Either some folks around here can't read, or they've got such a hard-on to prove that drafting a QB is stupid that they choose not to.

I simply said it's a cruel irony FOR THOSE OF US THAT WANTED STAFFORD ALL YEAR.

[milkman]

You're correct, if you read the article you'll also see nobody wants to pay #1 money.

And if you want to use the Lions as your model franchise as to why a QB isn't 'can't miss' knock yourself out.

People don't get it.

The fact is there is no such thing as "can't miss", and there never has been.

The only difference is that we have access to more games and info now than we ever did before, so we are btter educated about player's strengths and weaknesses.

[SBK]

or less if some teams think they are =

Trading up to 3 is much cheaper, both in picks and in $$ than trading up to #1. But you win, these QB suck balls and nobody in the NFL is interested in them at all.

[doomy3]

So, if the Lions are trying to trade the number one pick, and Stafford is the QB of the century, why wouldn't there be a line of teams to trade up for him? I mean, the Bears just traded 2 firsts, a third and Kyle Orton for Cutler. Couldn't they have just traded that for Stafford? Maybe these QBs just aren't the prospects as have been built up on this board.

I like Stafford, BTW, but if the Lions don't want him, and there aren't any teams that want to move up to get him, it really makes you wonder...

[SAUTO]

Trading up to 3 is much cheaper, both in picks and in $$ than trading up to #1. But you win, these QB suck balls and nobody in the NFL is interested in them at all.

i'm not saying that. it IS a little concerning that teams seem to be shying away. and my point about possibly being harder for us to trade is : if a team thinks stafford and sanchez are equal and both are there at 3 why trade to 3? if 4 takes one of them then you trade to 5. you dont have to trade up until one is gone if in fact you grade the 2 out equally

[Brock]

If Stafford is there when the Chiefs pick, they should draft him, with Cassel or without.

[SAUTO]

So, if the Lions are trying to trade the number one pick, and Stafford is the QB of the century, why wouldn't there be a line of teams to trade up for him? I mean, the Bears just traded 2 firsts, a third and Kyle Orton for Cutler. Couldn't they have just traded that for Stafford? Maybe these QBs just aren't the prospects as have been built up on this board.

I like Stafford, BTW, but if the Lions don't want him, and there aren't any teams that want to move up to get him, it really makes you wonder...

this is all i'm saying

[milkman]

i think sanchez will be good also. i just wonder how teams with qb issues(det AND to an extent stl) could pass on these supposedly cant miss guys. and if they are once every few years types why arent teams beating down det and stl's doors?

It's all about the money.

The first player chosen is going to make a ton of jack, but that player is a QB, that raises the ante.

No one was clamoring to trade up to draft Matt Ryan last year, and the Dolphins passed on him to seelct a LT (who. IMO, will never be elite), all because of the money.

Now tell me, who would you rather have?

Jake Long or Matt Ryan.

[SAUTO]

If Stafford is there when the Chiefs pick, they should draft him, with Cassel or without.

i'm not so sure that we shouldnt draft either one if they are there, it would hurt us right now but down the line it would probably be good

[milkman]

i'm not saying that. it IS a little concerning that teams seem to be shying away. and my point about possibly being harder for us to trade is : if a team thinks stafford and sanchez are equal and both are there at 3 why trade to 3? if 4 takes one of them then you trade to 5. you dont have to trade up until one is gone if in fact you grade the 2 out equally

That's why you go ahead and draft Stafford.

[SBK]

So, if the Lions are trying to trade the number one pick, and Stafford is the QB of the century, why wouldn't there be a line of teams to trade up for him? I mean, the Bears just traded 2 firsts, a third and Kyle Orton for Cutler. Couldn't they have just traded that for Stafford? Maybe these QBs just aren't the prospects as have been built up on this board.

I like Stafford, BTW, but if the Lions don't want him, and there aren't any teams that want to move up to get him, it really makes you wonder...

Remember 2 things here. 1-you're talking about the Lions. 2-Cutler has proven himself in the NFL and doesn't come with a $40,000,000 guaranteed contract.

Plus, if you're an NFL GM you can read that the Lions don't want Stafford, and it's a pretty safe bet that the Rams don't either. Why not wait until draft day and save a bunch of picks and $10-$15 million?

[SAUTO]

It's all about the money.

The first player chosen is going to make a ton of jack, but that player is a QB, that raises the ante.

No one was clamoring to trade up to draft Matt Ryan last year, and the Dolphins passed on him to seelct a LT (who. IMO, will never be elite), all because of the money.

Now tell me, who would you rather have?

Jake Long or Matt Ryan.

ryan for sure, but isnt stafford rated higher than ryan was last year? a potentially great qb SHOULD be worth the #1 pick and the money that goes along with it.

[SAUTO]

Remember 2 things here. 1-you're talking about the Lions. 2-Cutler has proven himself in the NFL and doesn't come with a $40,000,000 guaranteed contract.

Plus, if you're an NFL GM you can read that the Lions don't want Stafford, and it's a pretty safe bet that the Rams don't either. Why not wait until draft day and save a bunch of picks and $10-$15 million?

i would say cutler is going to get that contract, if not i would also bet he holds out either this year or next. do you actually think his agent is going to let him play under his what #12 rookie contract when the bears gave up what they did for him?

[milkman]

ryan for sure, but isnt stafford rated higher than ryan was last year? a potentially great qb SHOULD be worth the #1 pick and the money that goes along with it.

Stafford has more raw talent than Ryan, but there are questions about his consistency, and Ryan was alone atop the QB draft board, while Sanchez is right up there near the top with Stafford, so teams can hold out a little to see how things fall.

[SBK]

i would say cutler is going to get that contract, if not i would also bet he holds out either this year or next. do you actually think his agent is going to let him play under his what #12 rookie contract when the bears gave up what they did for him?

He's going to get another contract because he's earned it. The rookie is going to get the huge contract because of where he was drafted. There is a big difference.

The one reason the draft is a crap shoot is because you don't know if the kid is going to get soft when he gets millions of dollars. Will his drive go away, will he drink his millions? When you're playing to become a pro you work your balls off, but once you've been paid keeping that same level of drive is much, much harder.

[SAUTO]

Stafford has more raw talent than Ryan, but there are questions about his consistency, and Ryan was alone atop the QB draft board, while Sanchez is right up there near the top with Stafford, so teams can hold out a little to see how things fall.

thats why i'm a little worried that both might still be on the board, and if we take one here's hoping it's the right one(the one that we can either move or becomes GREAT)

[SAUTO]

He's going to get another contract because he's earned it.
. , will he drink his millions? .

. cutler still drinks, has diabetes, and throws int's at the absolute worst times, and on top of all that acts like a little girl so.....

[chiefforlife]

I dont think they will be able to trade the pick and therefor WILL draft Stafford. They will take a LT at 20, an incredible start to rebuilding. JMO.

[SAUTO]

I dont think they will be able to trade the pick and therefor WILL draft Stafford. They will take a LT at 20, an incredible start to rebuilding. JMO.

hell with their picks they could take stafford at 1 and trade up from 20 to get a pretty good lt if a run on them starts

[L.A. Chieffan]

If Stafford is there when the Chiefs pick, they should draft him, with Cassel or without.

odelay

[Pioli Zombie]

The Rams are not likely going to draft Stafford if the Lions don't.

They'll selct an OT, whether it's Smith or Monroe, leaving Stafford and Sanchez sitting there at # 3.

The only way the Chiefs will be able to take advatage of that situation is to draft Stafford and hold him for ransom in a draft day trade.

If Stafford goes to the Lions, there will still be teams looking to trade up for Sanchez.

I doubt there are many QB needy teams that would rather sit on their pick and settle for Freeman.

Sanchez, IMO, is going to develop into a top 3 QB in the NFL.
In that case the Chiefs be able to get one heck of a draft day deal.
In 2003 the Ravens wanted Boller at #19 and gave the Patriots a second in 2003 and a first in 2004. Imagine what Sanchez, a "top 3 qb" should bring? Jay Cutler isn't a top 3 and look what he brought?
Posted via Mobile Device

[notorious]

If Stafford is there when the Chiefs pick, they should draft him, with Cassel or without.

This, that, all of the above

[doomy3]

In that case the Chiefs be able to get one heck of a draft day deal.
In 2003 the Ravens wanted Boller at #19 and gave the Patriots a second in 2003 and a first in 2004. Imagine what Sanchez, a "top 3 qb" should bring? Jay Cutler isn't a top 3 and look what he brought?
Posted via Mobile Device

Yeah, no kidding. A top 3 QB like Manning or Brady would have to bring 5 firsts or something to even be worth thinking about.

[LaChapelle]

Why they hell do you even get out of bed in the morning?

[milkman]

In that case the Chiefs be able to get one heck of a draft day deal.
In 2003 the Ravens wanted Boller at #19 and gave the Patriots a second in 2003 and a first in 2004. Imagine what Sanchez, a "top 3 qb" should bring? Jay Cutler isn't a top 3 and look what he brought?
Posted via Mobile Device

Focus on the subject rather than the single opinion I threw in at the end, dumbass.

[milkman]

Yeah, no kidding. A top 3 QB like Manning or Brady would have to bring 5 firsts or something to even be worth thinking about.

If you are Bill Polian, would you take five 1st round picks for Manning?

[RealSNR]

The Lions are the dumbest fucks in the world if they don't take Stafford.

They need a franchise QB. They don't have one. Here's a guy that has all the potential to be one. Oh, and get this.

He WANTS to play for the Lions. His interviews mention that he wants the challenge and the eventual reward of taking a team like the Lions to successful heights. This isn't an Eli Manning situation. Stafford wants to actually play for the fucking Lions.

WHY would you refuse a great potential franchise QB prospect who WANTS to play for your shitty ass team?

[chiefforlife]

Having a real shot at Stafford does have some irony to it. He is the guy I originally wanted until we got Cassel. Mostly because I felt he stacked up well with Cutler, Rivers and Russel. Big arm and all. Now that he scored a 38 on the wonderlic, I like him even more.

[chiefforlife]

The Lions are the dumbest fucks in the world if they don't take Stafford.

They need a franchise QB. They don't have one. Here's a guy that has all the potential to be one. Oh, and get this.

He WANTS to play for the Lions. His interviews mention that he wants the challenge and the eventual reward of taking a team like the Lions to successful heights. This isn't an Eli Manning situation. Stafford wants to actually play for the fucking Lions.

WHY would you refuse a great potential franchise QB prospect who WANTS to play for your shitty ass team?

My brother and I just had that exact conversation. He ACTUALLY WANTS to play for the Lions.

[SBK]

Having a real shot at Stafford does have some irony to it. He is the guy I originally wanted until we got Cassel. Mostly because I felt he stacked up well with Cutler, Rivers and Russel. Big arm and all. Now that he scored a 38 on the wonderlic, I like him even more.

It makes me sad, I was hoping so much that we got him. If he's sitting there at 3 I might just puke.

[Ralphy Boy]

People don't get it.

The fact is there is no such thing as "can't miss", and there never has been.

The only difference is that we have access to more games and info now than we ever did before, so we read more crap written by more people with widely varying points of view, so we think we are better educated about player's strengths and weaknesses.

FYP

[Ralphy Boy]

Okay, I'll be the first to suggest it then.

Take Stafford and trade Cassel for the #18 pick.

Disclaimer: Somebody had to say it and for the record I still think Detroit will take Stafford

[Reaper16]

Okay, I'll be the first to suggest it then.

Take Stafford and trade Cassel for the #18 pick.

Disclaimer: Somebody had to say it and for the record I still think Detroit will take Stafford
;spock:

[KCDC]

I'd be careful about reading too much into these rumors that Detroit is sending out. Their #1 need is QB. They will put out rumors that they are in love with Jason Smith, Aaron Curry and anyone other than the QB they want. They will whisper that they want to trade down. I'd do the same to make Stafford or Sanchez accept less money. If Stafford is not taken at #1, he could fall to #4, or #8. That would be a huge drop in contract money that the Lions can threaten. So, it's all a mind game. I'm hoping Pioli is doing the same -- threatening to take whomever the Browns want to have then give us a 2nd or 3rd rounder to swap picks, for example.

[Pioli Zombie]

Okay, I'll be the first to suggest it then.

Take Stafford and trade Cassel for the #18 pick.

Disclaimer: Somebody had to say it and for the record I still think Detroit will take Stafford

You may be surprised to hear me say it but if the Chiefs could get #18 for Cassel then that is a solid football move. You would gotten Stafford at #3 and then traded #34 and gotten back #18 and Vrabel.

I just think since you have Cassel it makes more sense to try and get #12 and #18 for #3.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

The Rams are not likely going to draft Stafford if the Lions don't.

They'll selct an OT, whether it's Smith or Monroe, leaving Stafford and Sanchez sitting there at # 3.

The only way the Chiefs will be able to take advatage of that situation is to draft Stafford and hold him for ransom in a draft day trade.

If Stafford goes to the Lions, there will still be teams looking to trade up for Sanchez.

I doubt there are many QB needy teams that would rather sit on their pick and settle for Freeman.

Sanchez, IMO, is going to develop into a top 3 QB in the NFL.

Regardless of where he goes, I will enjoy watching him play football, and collecting my $35,000.00 in Casino Cash from Beach Tribe in the bargain!

i'm not so sure that we shouldnt draft either one if they are there, it would hurt us right now but down the line it would probably be good

T H I S!

I dont think they will be able to trade the pick and therefor WILL draft Stafford. They will take a LT at 20, an incredible start to rebuilding. JMO.

This is probably a bunch of smoke screen bullshit on Detroit's part anyway.

[SBK]

I've never understood the idea of a smokescreen when you're picking #1. If someone will give you the farm, which pretty much never happens, then sure, but no matter what you're paying someone a ton of money. Why on earth would you act for a second like you'd pick an inferior player to save $1M when you're writing a contract for $60-$70M?

I think most often the team picking #1 has an inept organization at the time, so smokescreens are just the result of having idiots in control.

[Mecca]

I've never understood the idea of a smokescreen when you're picking #1. If someone will give you the farm, which pretty much never happens, then sure, but no matter what you're paying someone a ton of money. Why on earth would you act for a second like you'd pick an inferior player to save $1M when you're writing a contract for $60-$70M?

I think most often the team picking #1 has an inept organization at the time, so smokescreens are just the result of having idiots in control.

Just trying to bait a team, but frankly most teams won't move for that pick the money and price of the pick is ridiculously high.

[bdeg]

You may be surprised to hear me say it but if the Chiefs could get #18 for Cassel then that is a solid football move. You would gotten Stafford at #3 and then traded #34 and gotten back #18 and Vrabel.

Posted via Mobile Device

It depends how you value Cassel.

Sure, you're getting more than what you paid, but if you think he's a franchise QB, which I think they do, it's still not a good deal. Very tempting though.

[SBK]

If the Chiefs drafted a QB at 3 I would figure one of the QB starved teams with late first rounders would call them up and see about Cassel. Tampa, NYJ, maybe even Minnesota. Heck, Detroit might even give us a call.

If you had other options there's not a single way I would entertain trading to Denver unless they offered the farm. If Cassel turned out great you would have screwed yourself pretty good.

***(this is only in the event KC were to draft a QB at 3 true fans, I'm not advocating that position with this post)

[Mecca]

If the Chiefs took a QB where both QB's were off the board by 3, a team might be willing to significantly overpay you for either one of them...

[King_Chief_Fan]

If the Chiefs took a QB where both QB's were off the board by 3, a team might be willing to significantly overpay you for either one of them...

If and might....hmmmmm

[whoman69]

Doesn't anyone realize there is always a rumor about the #1 team moving down. Its so expensive to draft there. A possibility for them wanting to move down is they'd rather have Sanchez. I don't believe that's the case. The Lions would be crazy to pass on a QB when they don't really have one. Building a team around a non-existant QB is almost as stupid as passing up one.

[SBK]

Doesn't anyone realize there is always a rumor about the #1 team moving down. Its so expensive to draft there. A possibility for them wanting to move down is they'd rather have Sanchez. I don't believe that's the case. The Lions would be crazy to pass on a QB when they don't really have one. Building a team around a non-existant QB is almost as stupid as passing up one.

These are the Lions you're talking about.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

These are the Lions you're talking about.

LMAO Beat me to it.

[KCUnited]

The only way the Chiefs will be able to take advatage of that situation is to draft Stafford and hold him for ransom in a draft day trade.


Is there a precedent for this in the draft? Drafting a guy without a trade scenerio in place. I'm not trying to be a dick, just honestly asking if anyone knows if this has been done in past drafts.

[SBK]

Is there a precedent for this in the draft? Drafting a guy without a trade scenerio in place. I'm not trying to be a dick, just honestly asking if anyone knows if this has been done in past drafts.

Perhaps you remember a dude named Eli Manning refusing to play for Sandy Eggo, who drafted him at #1 anyway?

[KCUnited]

Perhaps you remember a dude named Eli Manning refusing to play for Sandy Eggo, who drafted him at #1 anyway?

I believe that trade was being worked on before the draft.

[SBK]

I believe that trade was being worked on before the draft.

When Eli was picked there was no deal yet worked out.

[PastorMikH]

When Eli was picked there was no deal yet worked out.


That's my take. Why would Eli and his fam make such a public show about there being no way he'd play in SD if the deal was already in place?

[bdeg]

I'm not 100% opposed to the idea to picking Sanchez for trade value if Stafford is off the board. BUT, the only condition where that's a possibility is if the trades being offered are unfair and my scouts tell me Sanchez could potentially be taken first overall in a different draft.(that does not mean if he had come out a year later)

I really don't think it'll happen.

70% chance of trade down 15% Curry 15% Field

[ChiefsCountry]

Sanchez could potentially be taken first overall in a different draft.(that does not mean if he had come out a year later)


He would have a lock for #1 in 2010. He blows Sam Bradford out of the water.

[bdeg]

I agree, it'd be a close call for the #1 QB, but do you think next year a QB is going to go #1(2008 Sanchez included)?

[doomy3]

I agree, it'd be a close call for the #1 QB, but do you think next year a QB is going to go #1?

Yes, next year people will be saying "This is the year to take a QB!! Next year the QBs blow!!"

[bdeg]

Reasoning being if you take him #3 you can't expect to get a 100% return on your investment, especially considering that if teams aren't trying hard to trade up they obviously don't have him rated that highly, therefore don't want to trade that much even if you take him(may be inclined to trade for another player/pick up fa/wait for 2011 who knows) or give him a huge #3 QB contract(Matt Ryan money+).

[Nightfyre]

So, if the Lions are trying to trade the number one pick, and Stafford is the QB of the century, why wouldn't there be a line of teams to trade up for him? I mean, the Bears just traded 2 firsts, a third and Kyle Orton for Cutler. Couldn't they have just traded that for Stafford? Maybe these QBs just aren't the prospects as have been built up on this board.

I like Stafford, BTW, but if the Lions don't want him, and there aren't any teams that want to move up to get him, it really makes you wonder...
The package the Bears traded wasn't even worth the number one overall pick. I have no idea why you'd think this is a reflection on these QBs.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

He would have a lock for #1 in 2010. He blows Sam Bradford out of the water.

Two demerits for even mentioning the Llama's name in the midst of Sanchez conversation.:cuss::D

[SBK]

If you draft Stafford or Sanchez the better trade value would be found in trading Cassel.

[ChiefsCountry]

If you draft Stafford or Sanchez the better trade value would be found in trading Cassel.

Which means we will be drafting Curry. :banghead:

[SBK]

Which means we will be drafting Curry. :banghead:

Duh, it's a much better move to get a linebacker who can not only walk on water but heal the blind as well. :thumb:

[bdeg]

If you draft Stafford or Sanchez the better trade value would be found in trading Cassel.

Doubt it, no good reason for BB not to shop him around as much as possible before sending him to us. Everyone knew he was up for grabs, I don't belive McD was 'late to the table'. If he was he's an idiot.

[bdeg]

What would Denver have traded, their 2nd and 4th maybe? MAYBE 3rd? Our value and needs lined up better at the time.

[SBK]

Doubt it, no good reason for BB not to shop him around as much as possible before sending him to us. Everyone knew he was up for grabs, I don't belive McD was 'late to the table'. If he was he's an idiot.

What I mean is you'd get a better return for trading Cassel than for trading Sanchez or Stafford.

I know you'd get more than the #34 pick for Cassel, and would be surprised if you got more value than the #3 pick for either of the other 2.

Make sense?

[bdeg]

I agree to an extent, and the value of a potential franchise QB may go up after the draft. I just question the notion that Cassel has a high value, judging by the fact of proven trade value.

[bdeg]

I mean cmon, who wants to look like a huge idiot and trade a first rounder for a player that we got(along with a solid veteran) for a seccond?

Unless we let him play out the year, he looked good, and then we traded him.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Duh, it's a much better move to get a linebacker who can not only walk on water but heal the blind as well. :thumb:

LMAO

Doubt it, no good reason for BB not to shop him around as much as possible before sending him to us. Everyone knew he was up for grabs, I don't belive McD was 'late to the table'. If he was he's an idiot.

That "deal was done" before Pioli packed his suitcase in New England for the last time and headed to the airport.

[DeezNutz]

Yes, next year people will be saying "This is the year to take a QB!! Next year the QBs blow!!"

I'll be shocked if that ends up being the case.

Bradford, who has several legit question marks, and then...yep, no one.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

I'll be shocked if that ends up being the case.

Bradford, who has several legit question marks, and then...yep, no one.

If I have Cassel as my franchise QB, why the hell would I even waste my time caring or talking about which other NFL team picks which member of the Three-Man Useless Spread-Monkey Loser Crew?
:shrug:

Yep, an utter waste of time, breath, and keyboard tapping energy.

[bdeg]

LMAO



That "deal was done" before Pioli packed his suitcase in New England for the last time and headed to the airport.

The guy(BB) is a shrewd businessman. I'm sure the lines of communication were open, but he doesn't give out freebies to buddies.

[SBK]

I agree to an extent, and the value of a potential franchise QB may go up after the draft. I just question the notion that Cassel has a high value, judging by the fact of proven trade value.

He had higher offers on the table, even he has talked about that.

There was also hope of a decent QB being available when we traded for him, which lowers his value. If you're Tampa, NYJ or perhaps Minnesota and you're looking at hoping Josh Freeman falls as your best option, all the sudden Matt Cassel or even Sanchez for example might be a lot more appealing than they were a few weeks back.

[Mecca]

I'll be shocked if that ends up being the case.

Bradford, who has several legit question marks, and then...yep, no one.

People that dig spread monkeys will say that.

[LaChapelle]

He's a ford, deal is done.

[bdeg]

He had higher offers on the table, even he has talked about that.

There was also hope of a decent QB being available when we traded for him, which lowers his value. If you're Tampa, NYJ or perhaps Minnesota and you're looking at hoping Josh Freeman falls as your best option, all the sudden Matt Cassel or even Sanchez for example might be a lot more appealing than they were a few weeks back.
Link to report of first paragraph?


I agree withthe 2nd part, as already stated:I agree to an extent, and the value of a potential franchise QB may go up after the draft. I just question the notion that Cassel has a high value, judging by the fact of proven trade value.

[bdeg]

I'd LOVE to hear how Belichick explained that one to pats fans, lol.

[SBK]

I'd LOVE to hear how Belichick explained that one to pats fans, lol.

It's on here if you search, he said that our deal was already done. There was another article that talked about taking the 2nd cause you knew you could get it rather than waiting for everything to work out and get Tampa's 1 and 3.

I'm too lazy to look it up, but I'm sure someone else will provide the links.

[SBK]

I'll be shocked if that ends up being the case.

Bradford, who has several legit question marks, and then...yep, no one.

Bull. Colt McCoy makes Chuck Norris cry. Tim Tebow pisses excellence, and Sam Bradford would be the -5 pick this year, going 6 spots before #1.

[DeezNutz]

People that dig spread monkeys will say that.

I'm going to throw up if I have to read much praise for a player like McCoy.

Yeah, the player who is almost identical to Croyle in terms of height/weight and who also has an injury history looks like a great QBOTF prospect.

[bdeg]

Tampa offered a first and third, according to Belichick? He may have commented about wanting to get the deal done in order to move forward in free agency, but I never heard anything firm.

Or did they literally make the offer after the deal was struck? I'd still love to see a link.

[DeezNutz]

Bull. Colt McCoy makes Chuck Norris cry. Tim Tebow pisses excellence, and Sam Bradford would be the -5 pick this year, going 6 spots before #1.

ROFL

Brodie Croyle, Jr., Lamar Latrell, and Bradford.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

The guy(BB) is a shrewd businessman. I'm sure the lines of communication were open, but he doesn't give out freebies to buddies.

As much as it pains me to say it, when I think of all the time I wasted watching QB reel, Scott Pioli was NOT coming to Kansas City without him.

[bdeg]

As much as it pains me to say it, when I think of all the time I wasted watching QB reel, Scott Pioli was NOT coming to Kansas City without him.

What does "watching QB reel" have to do with it? And you think Pioli was negotiating potential trades for a team BEFORE he signed on with that team/resigned from his then current position? Ridiculous.

[doomy3]

As much as it pains me to say it, when I think of all the time I wasted watching QB reel, Scott Pioli was NOT coming to Kansas City without him.

ROFLROFLROFL

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

ROFL

Brodie Croyle, Jr., Lamar Latrell, and Bradford.

If we get "a rap by little ol' me Lamar" at each halftime, I'll draft him.

http://apenotes.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/lamar1-1.jpg

But can Wormser design a football to go with his "limp-wristed throwing style"?
http://westernstandard.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/javelinlamar_071206_1.jpg

In any case, I'm sure the Super Bowl after-party will be "Lamar-Tastic"!!!

http://content7.flixster.com/photo/53/98/86/5398869_tml.jpghttp://www.blairmag.com/blair4/lamar/balloon.jpghttp://www.luminomagazine.com/mw/storyimages/344_wide.jpg

[bdeg]

Does DCS have a crush?

i kid, i kid

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

What does "watching QB reel" have to do with it? And you think Pioli was negotiating potential trades for a team BEFORE he signed on with that team/resigned from his then current position? Ridiculous.

ROFLROFLROFL

If you two fools think I'm the first person to postulate this theory, your mistaken. It was from an article that was posted as a topic on this forum by another member.

And fuck you Douchey; don't you have a set of New England balls to wash? You follow me around all day, and your Lord and Master "Matty" will be most displeased.:evil:

[doomy3]

If you two fools think I'm the first person to postulate this theory, your mistaken. It was from an article that was posted as a topic on this forum by another member.

And **** you Douchey; don't you have a set of New England balls to wash? You follow me around all day, and your Lord and Master "Matty" will be most displeased.:evil:

I'm just surprised you have time to post on here as much as you do, with all the "QB reel" you have to watch.

[Mecca]

Well atleast he took time to watch something, that's more than most of the posters here can say.

[bdeg]

Dude, just because your opinion is copied doesn't make it credible.

Anyway I thought it was all about you and your qb reel, what exactly did that tell you about this situation? This mind-numbing theory?

[doomy3]

Well atleast he took time to watch something, that's more than most of the posters here can say.

That's not true. Most posters just don't wear it like a badge.

[bdeg]

I hope I don't come off as 'wearing it like a badge', I just love football. Passing the offseason goes a lot easier with draft speculation and watching a little football from last season. I'm not the kind to go to a home-game completely sober, though.

I like baseball, but it's just way too slow for me. Way too slow of a game for me to play, although I wonder where I'd be if I had stuck with it.

[doomy3]

I hope I don't come off as 'wearing it like a badge', I just love football. Passing the offseason goes a lot easier with draft speculation and watching a little football from last season. I'm not the kind to go to a home-game completely sober, though.

No, it's just the people who think anyone who doesn't scream about breaking down game tape is uninformed. I watch tons of football, have Sunday ticket and DVR most games and go back through and watch them. But the people on here who act like everyone on here have no concept of football outside of about 10 people really drive me crazy. This is a passionate fan base who for the most part really knows their stuff, IMO. I just can't imagine other fan bases ridicule others as much as this one does for simply being fans of our players. I mean, seriously, it comes across as a BAD thing on this board if you talk highly of any player on the Chiefs team.

[doomy3]

I hope I don't come off as 'wearing it like a badge', I just love football. Passing the offseason goes a lot easier with draft speculation and watching a little football from last season. I'm not the kind to go to a home-game completely sober, though.

I like baseball, but it's just way too slow for me. Way too slow of a game for me to play, although I wonder where I'd be if I had stuck with it.

By the way, I am in no way referring to you. IMO, you are one who does have well-informed takes but you don't beat the shit out of anyone who has a different take. There are a few on here who are so arrogant and full of themselves, I wonder what is going on in real life to make them feel so powerful on a message board.

[bdeg]

Ya, that bugs me too. Some people take their arguments as infallible. How great is DVR for football, though? Nothing better than being able to go back and rewatch a play a few times, and then catching back up at commercial. Combined with HD, football's recently become a whole lot more fun to watch.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Dude, just because your opinion is copied doesn't make it credible.

Anyway I thought it was all about you and your qb reel, what exactly did that tell you about this situation? This mind-numbing theory?

What in the merry, happy fuck are you trying to ask me? :) You're jumping all over the place! Come back to us, Meatloaf; we're over here! :D Here; have a taco! :D

Damn! :)

[bdeg]

you backed up your argument saying that your opinion was from an article another user posted.

I don't care. If you're going to post an opinion back it up for yourself.

[doomy3]

Ya, that bugs me too. Some people take their arguments as infallible. How great is DVR for football, though? Nothing better than being able to go back and rewatch a play a few times, and then catching back up at commercial.

Yeah, no doubt. DVR has to be one of the greatest inventions ever.

In fact, I was just talking to my wife tonight about this.

They need to make a DVR where you can delete certain portions of a show/game and save the parts you really want to watch for later. You know, so you could delete out all the commercials and anything else and just focus on what you really want to go back and watch.

This would be especially useful for when Raised on Riots was watching all his "QB reel" so he wouldn't have to mess with fast-forwarding through all the running plays. He could just delete them.

[bdeg]

I know a little about video editing and it wouldn't be hard with the torrents from tenyardtorrents.com

A lot easier on the computer, at least at this point.

[doomy3]

I know a little about video editing and it wouldn't be hard with the torrents from tenyardtorrents.com

A lot easier on the computer, at least at this point.

Right, but I'm talking for the TV novice who could just easily do something like that.

[SBK]

For the record I just watch the games. I don't go back and review tape. Haha, it's all about entertainment for me.

[bdeg]

Ya, that would be a great innovation we could see in the future. I'm not sure the easiest way to implement it, but it's a good idea.

[doomy3]

For the record I just watch the games. I don't go back and review tape. Haha, it's all about entertainment for me.

What?!?!?!?!?

How the hell do you form an opinion about whether a player is good or not then?

[pikesome]

Yeah, no doubt. DVR has to be one of the greatest inventions ever.

In fact, I was just talking to my wife tonight about this.

They need to make a DVR where you can delete certain portions of a show/game and save the parts you really want to watch for later. You know, so you could delete out all the commercials and anything else and just focus on what you really want to go back and watch.

This would be especially useful for when Raised on Riots was watching all his "QB reel" so he wouldn't have to mess with fast-forwarding through all the running plays. He could just delete them.

A couple of years ago I used a capture card and a computer to watch and re-watch the plays from a Chiefs' game. That convinced me that we fans, in general, see and understand far less than we think. And that no one knows less than the f'ing announcers calling the game.

[pikesome]

What?!?!?!?!?

How the hell do you form an opinion about whether a player is good or not then?

Listen to Hootie?

:D

[bdeg]

If I'm going to watch something I will usually put it on mute and have music going in the back. They're worthless, minus a few.

[SBK]

A couple of years ago I used a capture card and a computer to watch and re-watch the plays from a Chiefs' game. That convinced me that we fans, in general, see and understand far less than we think. And that no one knows less than the f'ing announcers calling the game.

Television announcers should be arrested for stealing their paychecks.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

you backed up your argument saying that your opinion was from an article another user posted.

I don't care. If you're going to post an opinion back it up for yourself.

It wasn't an opinion, it was a theory that someone else postulated, and that I happen to agree with.

And Belichick doesn't make deals with former ship-jumping coordinators. Especially ones who hold no cards of value.

Anyway, the overall point is that Pioli was getting first crack when Cassel got the tag. Now whether ol' Bill and Scott knew prior to Scott's departure the state of Brady's knee, that's something only the walls in Belichick's office can tell you.

:eek:

[bdeg]

It wasn't an opinion, it was a theory that someone else postulated, and that I happen to agree with.

And Belichick doesn't make deals with former ship-jumping coordinators. Especially ones who hold no cards of value.

Anyway, the overall point is that Pioli was getting first crack when Cassel got the tag. Now whether ol' Bill and Scott knew prior to Scott's departure the state of Brady's knee, that's something only the walls in Belichick's office can tell you.

Thank you, goodnight, and my next performance will be at 3am! :rockon:

First off, if you think BB blames McD for accepting a head-coaching position, which isn't going to be available with the Pats for many years most likey, you're flat out wrong. Common sense.

Maybe Pioli was allowed to make the first offer, but if you think BB didn't let everyone get their offers in, so as to maximize his team's worth you're wrong.

[SBK]

Pioli was the guy that proved the early bird gets the worm.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

First off, if you think BB blames McD for accepting a head-coaching position, which isn't going to be available with the Pats for many years most likey, you're flat out wrong. Common sense.

Maybe Pioli was allowed to make the first offer, but if you think BB didn't let everyone get their offers in, so as to maximize his team's worth you're wrong.

I don't think he blames, but I don't think he much likes it either! But maybe he does. Maybe he has that kind of ego where he wants the world to know that New England is all Bill.

I'm sure he took a look about the table too. But this isn't Wall Street man. This is NFL Football; one of the last bastions of the Good Ol' Boy Network.
Just sayin'.

[bdeg]

Maybe on ESPN.

Not when it determines who you'll be able to choose from in the next draft.

[ChiefsCountry]

Taking Vrabel off their hands was why we got it for the cheap price.

[bdeg]

Taking Vrabel off their hands was why we got it for the cheap price.
Disagree.

I don't know the cap figures, but Vrabel would've been a perfect fit for the new Denver 3-4 and all their young players.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Taking Vrabel off their hands was why we got it for the cheap price.

I'll let you take over, I'm tired of talking about it.

Good points though, Bdeg