Don’t Discount Sanchez

[Delano]

<table><tbody><tr><td colspan="3" class="storytitle">Don’t Discount Sanchez </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="primaryimage" valign="top">http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/64/645440.jpg
Steve Helber - AP
</td> <td width="3" nowrap="nowrap">
</td> <td valign="top"> <table width="60%" bgcolor="#f5f5f5" border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="1"> <tbody><tr valign="top"> <td valign="middle" nowrap="nowrap">By Michael Ash
Warpaint Illustrated Columnist
Posted Apr 18, 2009
</td> <td nowrap="nowrap">
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

A week ago, while discussing KC's options for trading down, I mentioned the possibility of forcing a team to trade up. Such a move would involve drafting USC quarterback Mark Sanchez with the third pick (assuming Georgia quarterback Matthew Stafford goes #1 to Detroit), allowing quarterback-needy teams who covet Sanchez to bid on him.
</td></tr> <tr> <td colspan="3">
Many of the responses to that idea – not just my own proposal of it, but any talk of such a scenario unfolding come draft day – have been written off as “too risky.” It would be too much of a gamble, some argue, for the Chiefs to take Sanchez and risk getting stuck with a player they don’t want. After all, other teams would know the Chiefs have no use for a quarterback, and wouldn’t offer much as a result.

But who says the Chiefs have no use for Sanchez?

I’m not talking about the idea of drafting Sanchez so he can be traded. What about drafting Sanchez with the idea of actually keeping him in Kansas City? Who says that couldn’t happen?

The Chiefs certainly haven’t. They could have said it if they had signed Matt Cassel to a long-term contract extension after they acquired him from New England. Such a move would have told the entire league that Cassel was both the Chiefs’ present and their future.

Curiously, though, they’ve yet to do that.

Many talk about Cassel’s contract like it’s a forgone conclusion, as though the Chiefs – for whatever secretive reasons they have – are just waiting to announce it until some later date. Apparently, though, that would come as news to Cassel’s agent. In his column a few weeks ago on SI.com, Peter King discussed a conversation he had with Cassel’s agent (David Dunn) in which Dunn was perplexed by the fact Scott Pioli wasn’t eager to discuss a long-term contract.

If the Chiefs are convinced Cassel is their guy, what’s stopping them from locking him up with a new deal? The only explanation I’ve seen floated that even comes close to making sense is that, because the team has so much room under the salary cap, the lofty salary figure guaranteed to Cassel by the franchise tag is helping the Chiefs reach the minimum 2009 salary amount. In other words, they actually want to keep his large salary on the books instead of working out a contract and reducing his cap hit.

But if that were actually the case, it could still be accomplished by signing Cassel long-term. If the Chiefs wanted Cassel’s 2009 salary to be significantly large, they could simply front-load his contract. A handful of teams around the league routinely use the front-loading strategy, making the early years of a player’s contract worth the most money. That way, they gain more room under the salary cap every season, because their contracts become cheaper with each passing year.

The Chiefs have more than enough salary cap room to strike such a deal with Cassel. And if the issue was really as simple as the team wanting his large cap number counting towards 2009, why would Cassel’s agent be so confused about the lack of a deal for his client?

As many have suggested, the only answer that truly makes sense here is that the Chiefs aren’t ready to attach themselves to Cassel on a long-term basis. They want to make sure his one good season, throwing to Randy Moss, wasn’t a fluke before they make a long-term commitment.

Pioli is hedging his bets. He was obviously confident enough in Cassel to trade for him, but he’s not going to make a heavy financial investment until Cassel proves to be something more than a one-year wonder. The only way to interpret that position is to say Pioli isn’t completely convinced that Cassel is the answer. <table width="225" align="right" cellspacing="7"><tbody><tr><td>http://media.scout.com/media/image/65/656532.jpg
What if the Chiefs drafted Sanchez?
Chris Carlson - AP </td></tr></tbody></table> With that in mind, why is it so hard to imagine Pioli covering all his bases? The quarterback is the most important player on the field, and no one knows that better than Pioli, who watched firsthand as Tom Brady helped turn the New England Patriots into a modern-day dynasty.

Is there something wrong with having a backup plan in case Cassel doesn’t pan out?

It seems like the idea of putting a premium on the quarterback position is something fans in Kansas City just can’t understand. After two decades of Carl Peterson, we’ve been blindfolded and spun around in circles so many times that, somewhere along the way, a depth chart featuring the likes of Brodie Croyle, Damon Huard, and Tyler Thigpen began to seem normal to us.

A year ago, the Chiefs went into the season with a completely unproven and highly injury prone starter at quarterback. Worse yet, the player waiting in the wings behind him was a journeyman in his mid 30's. Doesn’t that seem absurd in hindsight? But we bought into it. Year after year of that sort of insanity has taken its toll on everyone.

No position is more critical to the success of a team than a quarterback, yet we can’t fathom the idea of the Chiefs’ new regime doing everything they can to make sure that position is set. We can’t wrap our minds around the possibility of Pioli telling us, “the quarterback position is so important that we’re going to make sure we have another option to fall back on, just in case Cassel isn’t the right fit.”

Drafting Sanchez would provide the Chiefs with another legitimate option at quarterback if Cassel, as his critics have suggested, ends up being the next Scott Mitchell. Imagine how brilliant Pioli would look if Cassel were to fail and the Chiefs already had his replacement ready to step in and take over.

Now imagine if Cassel plays even better this year than last. Suddenly, the Chiefs would have quite a poker chip to bring to the table – a shiny, untouched quarterback, all wrapped up in a neat little bow for whoever wants to trade for him. At worst, Pioli would be able to recoup the first-round pick spent on Sanchez.

Some who scoff at this idea have suggested Sanchez isn’t worthy of being taken with the #3 pick. In reality, he’s one of the top prospects in this year’s class, as ESPN’s Mel Kiper ranks him as the fifth-best player in the draft. Both Mike Mayock of the NFL Network, and Scout.com, actually have Sanchez rated higher than Stafford.

Todd McShay of ESPN and Scouts Inc. has reported that if Sanchez is available at #4, he’ll be drafted by the Seattle Seahawks. A similar report has surfaced from Cleveland, suggesting Sanchez will be the pick at #5 if he’s there.

Knowing all that, there’s really no debating that Sanchez is worthy of being taken at #3. The only question is whether Pioli would actually pull the trigger. Even if Pioli is willing to draft a quarterback, it’s entirely possible he hasn’t graded Sanchez as highly as other teams around the league.

So what does all of this mean? Does this mean Sanchez will be the Chiefs’ pick #3? Not at all. It would be a surprise.

But you have to admit, it’s not as crazy as it initially sounds. There are plenty of crazier things the Chiefs could do with the third overall pick, like drafting a coverage linebacker who doesn’t rush the passer.</td></tr></tbody></table>

[88TG88]

not happening

[Reaper16]

not happening
Nope.

It should, though.

[DaWolf]

not happening

This.

[DaWolf]

Nope.

It should, though.

With the Chiefs luck, it would happen and they both turn out to be busts...

[RustShack]

I'm not saying we wont draft him, but really it wouldn't surprise me one bit. Personally I would rather have him or especially Stafford than Cassel. But I will gladly take Cassel over Thigpen.

[rad]

I wouldn't complain.....we'll be missing that R2 pick, though.

[Pioli Zombie]

Brilliant. 2-14 shit team using both the 1st and 2nd round picks on QBs JUST IN CASE the starter gets hurt. Essentially using the #3 for backup qb assurance.

IF they draft in order to trade one of them this might make some sense. Other than that, this idea of keeping Sanchez around on the bench is a horrible waste of a draft pick when there are a TON of holes to fill on the team.
Posted via Mobile Device

[LaChapelle]

Oh you're just asking for it now. ROFL

[RustShack]

Brilliant. 2-14 shit team using both the 1st and 2nd round picks on QBs JUST IN CASE the starter gets hurt. Essentially using the #3 for backup qb assurance.

IF they draft in order to trade one of them this might make some sense. Other than that, this idea of keeping Sanchez around on the bench is a horrible waste of a draft pick when there are a TON of holes to fill on the team.
Posted via Mobile Device

Actually we would likely trade one, and would mostly likely get more than the 34th overall pick for it...

[notorious]

Just pray for a trade down offer. I like Stafford and Sanchez, but Pioli made our bed with Cassel. Pick one of them if they are available and hope the phone rings so we can fill some more holes.

[ChiefsCountry]

It would be the best move the franchise has made since taking DT but they wont do it.

[KCDC]

Gee, what if Pioli hasn't locked up Cassel on a long-term deal because he would like to see how he plays in preseason first? Imagine that, a Chiefs GM actually being prudent, even when his heart tells him that Cassel is the real deal and won't have the sophmore jinx.

If Cassel flounders in preseason, Pioli signs him for half the money he would spend now. Yeah, it's possible too that Cassel has a brilliant preseason that drives up the cost, but I guessing that Pioli is gambling that he will be no worse off signing him, even if he has a good pre-season.

[Pioli Zombie]

Actually we would likely trade one, and would mostly likely get more than the 34th overall pick for it...

That's an entirely different story. If there is a trade in place for one or the other then fine. But if you get stuck with both its a disaster. At least if you have Monroe and Albert they both can play at the same time.
Posted via Mobile Device

[whoman69]

The amount of money eaten up with a franchised QB and a QB taken 3rd overall would make this deal impossible. Teams don't want the Chiefs to take Sanchez either because they don't want to pay the amount of money it would cost to sign a QB with the 3rd overall pick.

[Pioli Zombie]

The amount of money eaten up with a franchised QB and a QB taken 3rd overall would make this deal impossible. Teams don't want the Chiefs to take Sanchez either because they don't want to pay the amount of money it would cost to sign a QB with the 3rd overall pick.
Stop making sense. They frown on that here.
Posted via Mobile Device

[BigMeatballDave]

I'd love to see us draft Sanchez and trade Cassel. I don't hate Cassel. I just want Sanchez, and I don't want Denver to have him.

[Rigodan]

Even if they don't trade one of them this year they can start Cassel let Sanchez learn behind a vet. Then they can franchise Cassel again and trade him for a pick in a draft that will be loaded with defense.

[Mecca]

Gee, what if Pioli hasn't locked up Cassel on a long-term deal because he would like to see how he plays in preseason first? Imagine that, a Chiefs GM actually being prudent, even when his heart tells him that Cassel is the real deal and won't have the sophmore jinx.

If Cassel flounders in preseason, Pioli signs him for half the money he would spend now. Yeah, it's possible too that Cassel has a brilliant preseason that drives up the cost, but I guessing that Pioli is gambling that he will be no worse off signing him, even if he has a good pre-season.

If Cassel flounders at all Pioli is going to look bad...there is no way to look smart if Cassel isn't the guy.

[Mecca]

The amount of money eaten up with a franchised QB and a QB taken 3rd overall would make this deal impossible. Teams don't want the Chiefs to take Sanchez either because they don't want to pay the amount of money it would cost to sign a QB with the 3rd overall pick.

Um they could do it this year they only have 50 million dollars of cap room...and no one who wants them to take Sanchez has any long term plans of keeping both of them.

[Pioli Zombie]

You help the team the most by using the threat of taking Sanchez at #3 to bring in multiple draft picks to build other areas of the team. Just as left tackle is not a weakness, neither is qb. Its a 53 man team, not a one man team. Its not the NBA.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Rigodan]

Just as left tackle is not a weakness, neither is qb. Its a 53 man team, not a one man team. Its not the NBA.
Posted via Mobile Device

True but getting the right QB is INVALUABLE. We're not going to win anything this year anyway.

[Pioli Zombie]

I forgot. Mark Sanchez is Sid Luckman, Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana, and John Elway rolled into one body sitting at the right hand of God.
Its just a given he is the "right qb" based on his Heisman trophy and amazing college career.
Posted via Mobile Device

[SBK]

I love that people think ANY pick at #3 is going to make us a winning team this year. This draft isn't important for 2009, it's important for 2011 and 2012.

If we trade down and pick up 3 first round picks we still aren't going to the playoffs. LMAO

[Ebolapox]

Gee, what if Pioli hasn't locked up Cassel on a long-term deal because he would like to see how he plays in preseason first? Imagine that, a Chiefs GM actually being prudent, even when his heart tells him that Cassel is the real deal and won't have the sophmore jinx.

If Cassel flounders in preseason, Pioli signs him for half the money he would spend now. Yeah, it's possible too that Cassel has a brilliant preseason that drives up the cost, but I guessing that Pioli is gambling that he will be no worse off signing him, even if he has a good pre-season.

sophomore jinx? you're a retard. cassel was picked in the seventh round in 2005! so is he worried about a senior jinx? senior moments? senioritis?

[Delano]

I forgot. Mark Sanchez is Sid Luckman, Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana, and John Elway rolled into one body sitting at the right hand of God.
Its just a given he is the "right qb" based on his Heisman trophy and amazing college career.
Posted via Mobile Device

You've got Sanchez confused with The Omnipotent Curry.

[Pioli Zombie]

You've got Sanchez confused with The Omnipotent Curry.

They both, and Stafford, have become terribly overated during this draft season.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Pioli Zombie]

I love that people think ANY pick at #3 is going to make us a winning team this year. This draft isn't important for 2009, it's important for 2011 and 2012.

If we trade down and pick up 3 first round picks we still aren't going to the playoffs. LMAO

But getting those picks increase your chance of success in 2012

But I agree, 2009 is part of the rebuilding process and in fact the tough schedule might be a blessing. 4-12 gives you better picks then 6-10
Posted via Mobile Device

[Toad]

Selecting a QB with the 3 may be the 2nd best option behind trading down and ahead of Curry/Crabtree/Monroe.

For future (long term) trade value, Sanchez or Stafford don't need to be Elway. The Chiefs merely need other teams to think he has that potential.

[kcxiv]

With no 2nd round pick, that shit is not happening.l

[SBK]

With no 2nd round pick, that shit is not happening.l

We could pick that pick up by trading Gonzo, or even Cassel. Although I tend to think neither will happen.

[Pioli Zombie]

I still say trade the #3 to the Patriots for #23,#34, and a 4th. Patriots get Curry to play alongside Mayo. Good God.
The Chiefs get #23,Cassel, Vrabel, and a 4th for the #3
Also damn good
Posted via Mobile Device

[ChiefsCountry]

The Chiefs get #23,Cassel, Vrabel, and a 4th for the #3
Also damn good
Posted via Mobile Device

Not really.

[SBK]

But getting those picks increase your chance of success in 2012

But I agree, 2009 is part of the rebuilding process and in fact the tough schedule might be a blessing. 4-12 gives you better picks then 6-10
Posted via Mobile Device

Our defense is the problem. I'd much rather have extra picks next year than this year. Grab some G's or RT's in the later rounds, get the O-line fixed and load up for picks next year to get some defensive studs.

[Pioli Zombie]

Not really.
So Sanchez is so much better than Cassel you'd rather have Sanchez at 3 than Cassel, plus the #23, Vrabel, and a 4th.
That's where we differ. I'm not convinced Sanchez is even as good as Cassel let alone worth that much more
Posted via Mobile Device

[Coach]

I would take Sanchez or Stafford at 3rd, if either one of them is available.

[ChiefsCountry]

So Sanchez is so much better than Cassel you'd rather have Sanchez at 3 than Cassel, plus the #23, Vrabel, and a 4th.
That's where we differ. I'm not convinced Sanchez is even as good as Cassel let alone worth that much more
Posted via Mobile Device

Well your Patriots fan so I care less what you think.

[KCwolf]

And do what with them? It's amazing to me the cap implications are completely ignored by the people who post this crap. If we draft a QB after trading for a QB with a $14 Million contract ...... we are the Raiders.

[kcxiv]

And do what with them? It's amazing to me the cap implications are completely ignored by the people who post this crap. If we draft a QB after trading for a QB with a $14 Million contract ...... we are the Raiders.

Yep, 14million guaranteed to 1 QB. Then another 30 million to another. 45million dolllars before either of them plays a fucking game for the Chiefs.

[Coach]

And do what with them? It's amazing to me the cap implications are completely ignored by the people who post this crap. If we draft a QB after trading for a QB with a $14 Million contract ...... we are the Raiders.

Yes, a 14 million contract for a year. Basically, it's okay to let the 14 million dollar man play the majority of the snaps this year while the rookie QB can sit on the bench, and learn the ropes, and when the 14 million man is done, we don't get hooked on a long term deal, and we can play the rookie the next year.

Even at that, the Chiefs are roughly under 40 million under the salary cap. They have the luxury of keeping both QB's this year.

[Rigodan]

And do what with them? It's amazing to me the cap implications are completely ignored by the people who post this crap. If we draft a QB after trading for a QB with a $14 Million contract ...... we are the Raiders.

We're in danger of not meeting the minimum salary cap number much less the maximum. Salary cap is not a concern.

[KCwolf]

It seems so obvious that a QB is the last postition we need to select....yet the Stafford/Sanchez debate is still talked about....bat shit crazy if u ask me.

[Coach]

It seems so obvious that a QB is the last postition we need to select....yet the Stafford/Sanchez debate is still talked about....bat shit crazy if u ask me.

No, QB is a position to be discussed, IMHO. I would have strongly believe that the QB position would have been moot had Cassel signed a long term deal. But since that hasn't happened, anything is possible. Plus, if you add in the mix of signing Vrabel and Thomas as the LB's, all signs apparently could be pointing to a QB.

[KCwolf]

I could be completely wrong.....but IF we draft a QB ..... I will be shocked and dissappointed.

[KCwolf]

We just drafted Matt Cassell with our 2nd rd. pick

[ChiefsCountry]

QB is the only position in the NFL where you can get a hell of a return for. If we can ship either Cassel or Stafford/Sanchez out it would help our rebuild out alot more than selecting Aaron Curry or Eugene Monroe.

[Coach]

I could be completely wrong.....but IF we draft a QB ..... I will be shocked and dissappointed.

I would not be. QB is one of the needs IMHO. Besides, you don't pick a ILB in a 3rd pick. You just don't. A ILB is not considered one of the top 5 important positions in today's NFL, or football for that matter.

[KCwolf]

QB is the only position in the NFL where you can get a hell of a return for. If we can ship either Cassel or Stafford/Sanchez out it would help our rebuild out alot more than selecting Aaron Curry or Eugene Monroe.


Ship?? Where? The guy has never played a down...and we should "ship" him where? That's where I don't get the logic....Pioli came from NE...He knows Cassel better than most. Sorry but I don't claim to be a GM and I think Pioli has done a pretty good job to date..... I don't get it.

[Coach]

We just drafted Matt Cassell with our 2nd rd. pick

Heh, and what will happen if Cassel puts a career year? Then the Chiefs have more power/bargaining chips. They can franchise him and trade him.

[CrazyHorse]

Spend our 1st and second round pick on a QB this year?

Yeah, that article seems well thought out.

Only one would play. Both would get paid like starters.

Where do people come up with this stuff? There is no logic involved.

The logic seems to always be, Cassel dont have a contract.

A 14 million dollar test drive may be the smartes thing to do. Unless we can sign him on the cheap. The best way to get the best deal? Not act like you have to get him signed immediately!!

There is no reason to initiate a "knee jerk, get him signed right this minute, cant wait for the market to come to you", contract negotiation at this time.

Once you subtract that theory, the whole let's draft Sanchez becomes as stupid as you originally thought it was since trading for Cassel. Give it up folks. The dream is dead.

[KCwolf]

Heh, and what will happen if Cassel puts a career year? Then the Chiefs have more power/bargaining chips. They can franchise him and trade him.

He put up 11 wins last year.....what is a career year?

[ChiefsCountry]

Ship?? Where? The guy has never played a down...and we should "ship" him where? That's where I don't get the logic....Pioli came from NE...He knows Cassel better than most. Sorry but I don't claim to be a GM and I think Pioli has done a pretty good job to date..... I don't get it.

If you have two QBs that can be considered franchise worthy some team will pay an assload for them. Its not that hard of a concept.

[kcxiv]

No, QB is a position to be discussed, IMHO. I would have strongly believe that the QB position would have been moot had Cassel signed a long term deal. But since that hasn't happened, anything is possible. Plus, if you add in the mix of signing Vrabel and Thomas as the LB's, all signs apparently could be pointing to a QB.

I am thinking LT and Monroe if he's there.

If we get him, we would have one damned decent Oline.

[Rigodan]

He put up 11 wins last year.....what is a career year?

He can play a hell of a lot better than last year and still not lead this team to 11 wins...

[KCwolf]

I guess I just don't understand why ANYONE would rather have a COLLEGE QB rather than a STARTING NFL QB who just came off a good season. Yea....Sanchez has an upside, with his 16 starts in college...could be great...could suck ass. Akili Smith was UNREAL in College....now he's pumping gas. But on this message board ... you cannot compare that. All I'm saying is I'm much more comfortable with a NFL proven player (albeit 1 year) vs. a College player with "upside"

[ChiefsCountry]

I guess I just don't understand why ANYONE would rather have a COLLEGE QB rather than a STARTING NFL QB who just came off a good season. Yea....Sanchez has an upside, with his 16 starts in college...could be great...could suck ass. Akili Smith was UNREAL in College....now he's pumping gas. But on this message board ... you cannot compare that. All I'm saying is I'm much more comfortable with a NFL proven player (albeit 1 year) vs. a College player with "upside"

Using that logic we never should draft any players and just sign free agents.

[KCwolf]

Using that logic we never should draft any players and just sign free agents.

whatever.........ya thats what I said.
Monroe would be an outstanding selection.

[ChiefsCountry]

Monroe would be an outstanding selection.

No he wouldn't bc it would force Albert out of the left tackle spot.

[KCwolf]

No he wouldn't bc it would force Albert out of the left tackle spot.

Well...we agree to disagree.
Tell you what...if we draft a QB...U win.
Find out next Sat.....and we better not.

[Rigodan]

Tell you what...if we draft a QB...Chiefs fans everywhere win.

FYP

[KCwolf]

No he wouldn't bc it would force Albert out of the left tackle spot.


Just curious.....where do you think he played last year?

[Coach]

He put up 11 wins last year.....what is a career year?

Judging a QB with W-L's isn't exactly a measuring stick, IMHO. It's like judging how good a pitcher is by his W-L. Everybody know that Meche W-L's isn't great, but just because he had more losses than wins, doesn't necessary mean that Meche sucks. I remember his first year in KC, he did well enough, just that he was one of the top pitchers that was not getting enough run support that year.

[Rigodan]

Just curious.....where do you think he played last year?

God. not this conversation again...

[ChiefsCountry]

Just curious.....where do you think he played last year?

Albert? He played left tackle and was damn good at it. He needs to stay there, we have a future top 3 LT with him there.

[KCwolf]

FYP

:clap: bat shit crazy....but well done

[CrazyHorse]

Drafting a LT seems foolish to me as well. Why draft one when you have a good one.If your going to draft a LT to fill the RT spot, which is essentially what you'd be doing, then why not just draft a RT later in the draft?

That would be a silly way to build your O line, IMO.

[Coach]

I am thinking LT and Monroe if he's there.

If we get him, we would have one damned decent Oline.

To me, it would make no sense to get a LT, since we already GOT one. Why need another LT?

And really, there's not point in moving Albert at all, considering the guy missed practically the whole training camp, and one game, yet as a rookie, only gave up 4.5 sacks, and IIRC, one false start penalty.

That's pretty damned impressive. He just might be the next coming of Willie Roaf, and I sure as fuck wouldn't want to mess with that.

[Coach]

No he wouldn't bc it would force Albert out of the left tackle spot.

That, IMHO, is a failed logic, and my previous post pointed out.

[Rigodan]

Judging a QB with W-L's isn't exactly a measuring stick, IMHO. It's like judging how good a pitcher is by his W-L. Everybody know that Meche W-L's isn't great, but just because he had more losses than wins, doesn't necessary mean that Meche sucks. I remember his first year in KC, he did well enough, just that he was one of the top pitchers that was not getting enough run support that year.

I think wins are very important but you obviously cant compare win totals when he is taking over a team that went 16-0 to when he is taking over a team that went 2-14.

[kcxiv]

To me, it would make no sense to get a LT, since we already GOT one. Why need another LT?

And really, there's not point in moving Albert at all, considering the guy missed practically the whole training camp, and one game, yet as a rookie, only gave up 4.5 sacks, and IIRC, one false start penalty.

That's pretty damned impressive. He just might be the next coming of Willie Roaf, and I sure as **** wouldn't want to mess with that.

Becuase we have other needs at the line. Do you remember how horrible our ****ing offensive line was last year even with Albert? who right now is going to play right tackle and effective for us? Suckintosh? Do you think he is the answer? Your the coach.

[CrazyHorse]

Becuase we have other needs at the line. Do you remember how horrible our ****ing offensive line was last year even with Albert? who right now is going to play right tackle and effective for us? Suckintosh? Do you think he is the answer? Your the coach.

Why not draft at those positions. Why move a good LT and spend a 1st round pick on anther one when you can just keep the one you have and spend a later round pick on a position where later round picks are usually spent filling those positions. Why spend a 1st rounder on a RT?

That's dumb.

[KCwolf]

To me, it would make no sense to get a LT, since we already GOT one. Why need another LT?

And really, there's not point in moving Albert at all, considering the guy missed practically the whole training camp, and one game, yet as a rookie, only gave up 4.5 sacks, and IIRC, one false start penalty.

That's pretty damned impressive. He just might be the next coming of Willie Roaf, and I sure as **** wouldn't want to mess with that.

AND to Me, it would make no sense to ge a QB since we already GOT one. WHY do we need ( @#3) another QB? He might just be the next coming of Joe Montana, and I sure as **** wouldn't want to mess with that. ;)

[Coach]

Becuase we have other needs at the line. Do you remember how horrible our ****ing offensive line was last year even with Albert? who right now is going to play right tackle and effective for us? Suckintosh? Do you think he is the answer? Your the coach.

Well, I know that you can't, and shouldn't pick a RT in the top 5. Yes, RT is a big issue, that I can agree with, as McSuckintosh is a problem. But, so is Defensive line.

Just remember this. 10 sacks in 16 NFL Games, a new NFL record for least sacks in a single season. So the possibility of drafting a DE is possible as well. Personally, if Sanchez or Stafford is available at 3, take it. If either one is not available, trade out if possible, and pick up more picks.

[kcxiv]

Why not draft at those positions. Why move a good LT and spend a 1st round pick on anther one when you can just keep the one you have and spend a later round pick on a position where later round picks are usually spent filling those positions. Why spend a 1st rounder on a RT?

That's dumb.

I dont think they are going to put in a 3rd to 4th rounder in the starting spot. As sad as it sounds, Suckintosh may be better then that person. He may need a year of seasoning if we go that route. I still think its (if we pick at 3) Monroe, Crabtree or Raji. I remember watching something on the NFL network they said that after the first 4 or 5 tackles the drop off is huge.

I dont see anyone else we are going to take. We will find out in 1 week though.

[Coach]

AND to Me, it would make no sense to ge a QB since we already GOT one. WHY do we need ( @#3) another QB? He might just be the next coming of Joe Montana, and I sure as **** wouldn't want to mess with that. ;)

But Albert has what, 3-4 more years in his contract? So he ain't going anywhere anytime soon. And besides, how good do we really know Cassel can be? Having a receiving corps of Randy Moss and Wes Welker can make any QB look very good. So, my thinking is, if we got Sanchez or Stafford, and get one of them, and Cassel doesn't pan out, the Chiefs have a back-up, or a insurance policy with either one of those two guys.

[kcxiv]

Well, I know that you can't, and shouldn't pick a RT in the top 5. Yes, RT is a big issue, that I can agree with, as McSuckintosh is a problem. But, so is Defensive line.

Just remember this. 10 sacks in 16 NFL Games, a new NFL record for least sacks in a single season. So the possibility of drafting a DE is possible as well. Personally, if Sanchez or Stafford is available at 3, take it. If either one is not available, trade out if possible, and pick up more picks.

I remember, but to be quite honest, i rather have them fix the Oline right now first, since we will probably be signing Casell to a huge contract. You gotta keep him upright. We also wont pick a RT first. Monroe played with Albert and took Alberts spot. Monroe will be a instant starter on the LT if KC drafts him. Albert will move to RT. We did something similar when we got Big Willie and Tait got drafted and went to RT as well.


We do have massive neeeds on the Dline and thats something they have to figure out, but why not fix your offensive line first since we got our "franchise" QB.

[ChiefsCountry]

Hows the best way to fill all of those needs? Trade a potential franchise QB.

[Coach]

I remember, but to be quite honest, i rather have them fix the Oline right now first, since we will probably be signing Casell to a huge contract. You gotta keep him upright. We also wont pick a RT first. Monroe played with Albert and took Alberts spot. Monroe will be a instant starter on the LT if KC drafts him. Albert will move to RT. We did something similar when we got Big Willie and Tait got drafted and went to RT as well.


We do have massive neeeds on the Dline and thats something they have to figure out, but why not fix your offensive line first since we got our "franchise" QB.

Well, if the Chiefs did get their "franchise" QB, then you would think that they would already go ahead and sign him to a long term contract. The fact that he hasn't signed the long term contract, still tells me that KC could possibly select a QB.

[KCwolf]

But Albert has what, 3-4 more years in his contract? So he ain't going anywhere anytime soon. And besides, how good do we really know Cassel can be? Having a receiving corps of Randy Moss and Wes Welker can make any QB look very good. So, my thinking is, if we got Sanchez or Stafford, and get one of them, and Cassel doesn't pan out, the Chiefs have a back-up, or a insurance policy with either one of those two guys.


Dude I'm with ya .... I have NO idea what Cassel will be. But we just gave up our 2nd rd pick and will have to pay him a minimum of $10 million. If Stafford OR Sanchez had the reputation of a Matt Ryan, it would be a no brainer. But I don't think that's the case. They MIGHT be....but right now it's not expected. This Chiefs team has a TON of needs, we dealt with one getting Cassel. Drafting a QB on top of him seems crazy. All this talk of Curry and ILB not worth a #3.....F That IMO.....if it's a need position and a difference maker - u take him. It's a shitty year to have the #3 pick....and EVERONE wants to trade down which is nearly impossible to get fair value....but the QB position has been addressed. Whether you agree or disagree with the player is fine...but the organization feels like they made their move.

[CrazyHorse]

I dont think they are going to put in a 3rd to 4th rounder in the starting spot. As sad as it sounds, Suckintosh may be better then that person. He may need a year of seasoning if we go that route. I still think its (if we pick at 3) Monroe, Crabtree or Raji. I remember watching something on the NFL network they said that after the first 4 or 5 tackles the drop off is huge.

I dont see anyone else we are going to take. We will find out in 1 week though.

I doubt seriously there are 4 or 5 RTs off the board by the 3rd round. Thats just opinion, of course. But if so, that is certainly no reason to draft one with the #3 which is essentially what you'd be doing by moving Albert. I would be surprized by a Crabtree pick as well. But it would make better sense and potentially better value than Monroe from a need standpoint.

Of course Raji is the best you have listed. But if he tests positve he will drop down the board, as well he should.

IMO we will likely draft LB or DE in that order with the #3. Given the talent, our needs, and where we pick, it seems most logical. But then, it looks like the spector of trading down is becoming more likey all the time.

Which is my preference. Then who knows what we'll do?

[kcxiv]

Well, if the Chiefs did get their "franchise" QB, then you would think that they would already go ahead and sign him to a long term contract. The fact that he hasn't signed the long term contract, still tells me that KC could possibly select a QB.

Honestly, do yout hink they would talk about it even if he did sign it? right now is the WORST possible time to announce that. They could still put in peoples minds that we may draft one.

That would be showing their cards right now. Its a game of poker right now. They are keeping everything quite. They are doing it right. For all we know, he could be signed already or at least reached a verbal agreement.

[Rigodan]

Dude I'm with ya .... I have NO idea what Cassel will be. But we just gave up our 2nd rd pick and will have to pay him a minimum of $10 million. If Stafford OR Sanchez had the reputation of a Matt Ryan, it would be a no brainer. But I don't think that's the case. They MIGHT be....but right now it's not expected. This Chiefs team has a TON of needs, we dealt with one getting Cassel. Drafting a QB on top of him seems crazy. All this talk of Curry and ILB not worth a #3.....F That IMO.....if it's a need position and a difference maker - u take him. It's a shitty year to have the #3 pick....and EVERONE wants to trade down which is nearly impossible to get fair value....but the QB position has been addressed. Whether you agree or disagree with the player is fine...but the organization feels like they made their move.

I may be mistaken but I'm pretty sure Stafford is more highly regarded than Ryan was last year. If Sanchez isn't as well he's not very far behind.

[Coach]

Dude I'm with ya .... I have NO idea what Cassel will be. But we just gave up our 2nd rd pick and will have to pay him a minimum of $10 million. If Stafford OR Sanchez had the reputation of a Matt Ryan, it would be a no brainer. But I don't think that's the case. They MIGHT be....but right now it's not expected. This Chiefs team has a TON of needs, we dealt with one getting Cassel. Drafting a QB on top of him seems crazy. All this talk of Curry and ILB not worth a #3.....F That IMO.....if it's a need position and a difference maker - u take him. It's a shitty year to have the #3 pick....and EVERONE wants to trade down which is nearly impossible to get fair value....but the QB position has been addressed. Whether you agree or disagree with the player is fine...but the organization feels like they made their move.

Well, I'm OK with the fact that KC traded their 2nd round pick for Cassel, considering the history of the Chiefs 2nd round picks have been just flat out awful, with the exception of Flowers and Tounge.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=5539680&postcount=233

Chiefs' last 15 2nd round picks:

Brandon Flowers
Turk McBride
Bernard Pollard
Junior Siavii
Kris Wilson
Kawika Mitchell
Eddie Freeman
William Bartee
Mike Cloud
Kevin Lockett
Reggie Tongue
Donnell Bennett
Darrin Mickell
Matt Blundin
Joe Valerio

You be the judge...

[Rigodan]

Honestly, do yout hink they would talk about it even if he did sign it? right now is the WORST possible time to announce that. They could still put in peoples minds that we may draft one.

That would be showing their cards right now. Its a game of poker right now. They are keeping everything quite. They are doing it right. For all we know, he could be signed already or at least reached a verbal agreement.

This is probably whats happening but damn't I can still cling to hope for one more week. Please don't ruin it for me.

[KCwolf]

Well, I'm OK with the fact that KC traded their 2nd round pick for Cassel, considering the history of the Chiefs 2nd round picks have been just flat out awful, with the exception of Flowers and Tounge.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=5539680&postcount=233


Jesus, that list is sick....doesn't look good for Cassel :banghead:

[ChiefsCountry]

Well, I'm OK with the fact that KC traded their 2nd round pick for Cassel, considering the history of the Chiefs 2nd round picks have been just flat out awful, with the exception of Flowers and Tounge.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=5539680&postcount=233

Look who the Chiefs have traded 2nd round picks for Pat Surtain, Victor Bailey and Dick Vermeil.

[DaneMcCloud]

Discount Sanchez?

I don't know if anyone's mentioned it but JFC, that sounds REALLY racist!

[KCwolf]

What's everyone's guess on Tony G.....a Chief or a draft day trade?

[DaneMcCloud]

What's everyone's guess on Tony G.....a Chief or a draft day trade?

Discount Gonzalez?

[CrazyHorse]

What's everyone's guess on Tony G.....a Chief or a draft day trade?


I'm gonna go with draft day trade. If not before.

[Quesadilla Joe]

That would be hilarious. Cassel is making over 14 million this year and Sanchez will demand more than 34 million guaranteed.

[BigRock]

That would be hilarious. Cassel is making over 14 million this year and Sanchez will demand more than 34 million guaranteed.

Yeah, that would really screw us, having such little cap room and all.

Oh, wait.

[Silock]

I don't get it. Why would you pick up a QB at #3 and then attempt to trade him instead of just trading the pick?

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

It seems like the idea of putting a premium on the quarterback position is something fans in Kansas City just can’t understand. After two decades of Carl Peterson, we’ve been blindfolded and spun around in circles so many times that, somewhere along the way, a depth chart featuring the likes of Brodie Croyle, Damon Huard, and Tyler Thigpen began to seem normal to us.

ROFLROFLROFL( One for each LOSER QB mentioned, thank you very much! )

Knowing all that, there’s really no debating that Sanchez is worthy of being taken at #3. The only question is whether Pioli would actually pull the trigger. Even if Pioli is willing to draft a quarterback, it’s entirely possible he hasn’t graded Sanchez as highly as other teams around the league.


Fuckin-a RIGHT! :LOL:

So what does all of this mean? Does this mean Sanchez will be the Chiefs’ pick #3? Not at all. It would be a surprise.

But you have to admit, it’s not as crazy as it initially sounds. There are plenty of crazier things the Chiefs could do with the third overall pick, like drafting a coverage linebacker who doesn’t rush the passer.

Hammer, meet nail. :LOL:

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Um they could do it this year they only have 50 million dollars of cap room...and no one who wants them to take Sanchez has any long term plans of keeping both of them.

Stop making sense. They frown on that here.
Posted via Mobile Device:D

[Boris The Great]

Honestly, do yout hink they would talk about it even if he did sign it? right now is the WORST possible time to announce that. They could still put in peoples minds that we may draft one.

That would be showing their cards right now. Its a game of poker right now. They are keeping everything quite. They are doing it right. For all we know, he could be signed already or at least reached a verbal agreement.

Did you miss the part of the column that referenced Peter King and his talk with Cassels agent? Unless the agent is going around lying to reporters on the off-chance that they will happen to write about it, there isnt any secret deal in place. And the SI report isnt the only one that has mentioned the Chiefs arent interested in signing Cassel long-term yet, a reporter from NY Newsday said the same thing on ESPN a few days ago.

And what game of poker is going on here? Absolutely no one on a national level has floated the idea that the Chiefs might consider taking a quarterback. No one considers it a possibility. If there is a secret deal in place for Cassel, keeping it quiet is accomplishing nothing as far as the other 31 teams go.

[BigRock]

I don't get it. Why would you pick up a QB at #3 and then attempt to trade him instead of just trading the pick?

If a team calls and says "We really want to get Sanchez, how about trading with us?", then obviously you would just trade the pick.

But what if that doesn't happen? What if the Chiefs are trying to move down and other teams go "No thanks. We like him and all, but we don't think we have to move as high as #3 to get him". Well, if he gets taken at #3, then they do have to.

But with the reports that Sanchez may go at #4 or #5, that idea seems less likely all the time. If a team really wants to move up for Sanchez, they're going to know that KC's spot is where they have to go.

[Coach]

I don't get it. Why would you pick up a QB at #3 and then attempt to trade him instead of just trading the pick?

More picks.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

FYP

Yeah, that would really screw us, having such little cap room and all.

Oh, wait.

Theeeeeeeeeeeeese...:D

I love it; we're gonna' ride this fucking horse all the way to the 11th hour!

http://i689.photobucket.com/albums/vv252/raisedonriots/SANCHEZSUCKIT.png

[Pioli Zombie]

Well your Patriots fan so I care less what you think.
In other words you couldn't come up with a logical arguement for your case.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Pioli Zombie]

No he wouldn't bc it would force Albert out of the left tackle spot.

Well using your logic since we had 2 great left tackles that mean we could get an assload in a trade next year

Who knew. The best way to rebuild a team in shambles. Acquire 2 quarterbacks.

Either trade down on draft day or if you can't draft Raji. NT is crucial if you are going to play the 3-4
Posted via Mobile Device

[T-post Tom]

More filler to justify the subscription price.

[kcxiv]

Did you miss the part of the column that referenced Peter King and his talk with Cassels agent? Unless the agent is going around lying to reporters on the off-chance that they will happen to write about it, there isnt any secret deal in place. And the SI report isnt the only one that has mentioned the Chiefs arent interested in signing Cassel long-term yet, a reporter from NY Newsday said the same thing on ESPN a few days ago.

And what game of poker is going on here? Absolutely no one on a national level has floated the idea that the Chiefs might consider taking a quarterback. No one considers it a possibility. If there is a secret deal in place for Cassel, keeping it quiet is accomplishing nothing as far as the other 31 teams go.
I didnt even really read the damn column. Its a WPI one. I read the comments and were replying to the comments other members made. They are just informed about football as a write from WPI anyways. lol

[Pioli Zombie]

But Albert has what, 3-4 more years in his contract? So he ain't going anywhere anytime soon. And besides, how good do we really know Cassel can be? Having a receiving corps of Randy Moss and Wes Welker can make any QB look very good. So, my thinking is, if we got Sanchez or Stafford, and get one of them, and Cassel doesn't pan out, the Chiefs have a back-up, or a insurance policy with either one of those two guys.
This is the most dumbass thing I've heard both media and fans say about Cassel. That Moss and Welker would make anyone look good.
Really. Did anyone ever watch Terry Hanratty when he came in to replace Bradshaw. He had Swann and Stallworth. Why didn't he look good? How come Elvis Grbec didn't win a fucking Super Bowl with the 49ers with those receivers? Who needs Peyton Manning when you had Harrison and Wayne. Just put anyone in there? Duper and Clayton were great. Why didn't David Woodley throw for 5,000 yards?
Not just ANYONE can step in and win in the NFL. Remember? QB is the most important position?
When people make this arguement is just tells me they didn't watch the games.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

In other words you couldn't come up with a logical arguement for your case.
Posted via Mobile Device


Do you ever NOT post from a mobile device? Are you a robot taxi driver? Some kind of Black Ops Cyborg, perhaps?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

This is the most dumbass thing I've heard both media and fans say about Cassel. That Moss and Welker would make anyone look good.
Really. Did anyone ever watch Terry Hanratty when he came in to replace Bradshaw. He had Swann and Stallworth. Why didn't he look good? How come Elvis Grbec didn't win a fucking Super Bowl with the 49ers with those receivers? Who needs Peyton Manning when you had Harrison and Wayne. Just put anyone in there? Duper and Clayton were great. Why didn't David Woodley throw for 5,000 yards?
Not just ANYONE can step in and win in the NFL. Remember? QB is the most important position?
When people make this arguement is just tells me they didn't watch the games.
Posted via Mobile Device

Just be honest; you ARE Scott Pioli. You are Scott Pioli and you are mad because not everyone has embraced your QB, the 1st-Messiah Matt Cassel. Why do you believe Matt Cassel is so great and all-powerful? Did you imbue Him with the power of the Force? Can he levitate receivers with his mind? Does he wash you car on Saturday's?

Come clean Scott; confess all to Chiefs Planet.

[Pioli Zombie]

Do you ever NOT post from a mobile device? Are you a robot taxi driver? Some kind of Black Ops Cyborg, perhaps?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Its my phone. Doesn't mean I'm driving all the time. Sheesh.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Pioli Zombie]

Just be honest; you ARE Scott Pioli. You are Scott Pioli and you are mad because not everyone has embraced your QB, the 1st-Messiah Matt Cassel. Why do you believe Matt Cassel is so great and all-powerful? Did you imbue Him with the power of the Force? Can he levitate receivers with his mind? Does he wash you car on Saturday's?

Come clean Scott; confess all to Chiefs Planet.
Hmmmmm let's see. One quarterback steps in for Tom Brady and goes 11-5 on a team whose defense lost 4 of the games. By the end of the season they were the team nobody wanted to play in the playoffs and many were pointing to Cassels play as a reason why.

Then you have a college qb who up until draft insanity was never considered a can't miss franchise qb by anybody.

Which has proven he can play in the NFL?
Posted via Mobile Device

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Hmmmmm let's see. One quarterback steps in for Tom Brady and goes 11-5 on a team whose defense lost 4 of the games. By the end of the season they were the team nobody wanted to play in the playoffs and many were pointing to Cassels play as a reason why.

Then you have a college qb who up until draft insanity was never considered a can't miss franchise qb by anybody.

Which has proven he can play in the NFL?
Posted via Mobile Device

And yet.......
PITTSBURGH! LMAO

You think Cassel's been fully tested in the NFL???

No, but he will be after this season, believe you me!

SMACK! BOOM! OUCH! MY POOR HEAD AND BALLS!!!ROFL

Yep; better trade Brokie and Thigshit for a few lap dances while you can, and use that 3rd to secure QB GREATNESS!!!

[Coach]

This is the most dumbass thing I've heard both media and fans say about Cassel. That Moss and Welker would make anyone look good.
Really. Did anyone ever watch Terry Hanratty when he came in to replace Bradshaw. He had Swann and Stallworth. Why didn't he look good? How come Elvis Grbec didn't win a fucking Super Bowl with the 49ers with those receivers? Who needs Peyton Manning when you had Harrison and Wayne. Just put anyone in there? Duper and Clayton were great. Why didn't David Woodley throw for 5,000 yards?
Not just ANYONE can step in and win in the NFL. Remember? QB is the most important position?
When people make this arguement is just tells me they didn't watch the games.
Posted via Mobile Device

Apparently, you don't think Randy Moss is that good, eh? Well, for starters, Culpepper was the shit when he had Randy Moss. When they both went their own individual paths, Culpepper ain't worth a shit anymore. Comparing Hanratty to Cassel is possibly the most silliest thing I ever seen. Hanratty completed only 38 percent of his pass attempts, which led to a relatively poor overall rating of 43.0. That ain't a good comparsion to begin with. And as for Girlbac, he couldn't win a fucking Super Bowl for the 49ers, because he was a back-up to STEVE YOUNG!

We'll see how good Cassel truly is when he takes a few snaps as a Chief. The O-line protection probably will be an issue, especially on the right side of the line. He'll have Bowe, but will he have Gonzalez? Who will be the reliable #2 WR? Will he have a consistent running game? I would gladly take Wes Welker on my team if I had a chance. The guy is a pain in the ass to defend, which is why New England picked him up from Miami, because he owned the Patriots repeatedly.

[Coach]

Hmmmmm let's see. One quarterback steps in for Tom Brady and goes 11-5 on a team whose defense lost 4 of the games. By the end of the season they were the team nobody wanted to play in the playoffs and many were pointing to Cassels play as a reason why.

Then you have a college qb who up until draft insanity was never considered a can't miss franchise qb by anybody.

Which has proven he can play in the NFL?
Posted via Mobile Device

Neither as of this point, since both are somewhat inexperienced. Cassel has the edge in terms of experience, as he had one full season to play. The question is, is he the product of NE's system?

[Jethopper]

It would be the best move the franchise has made since taking DT but they wont do it.

Wow... just won't let the dream die will you?

[milkman]

I am thinking LT and Monroe if he's there.

If we get him, we would have one damned decent Oline.

No offense intended, bu go fuck yourself.

[MMXcalibur]

It seems so obvious that a QB is the last postition we need to select....yet the Stafford/Sanchez debate is still talked about....bat shit crazy if u ask me.

I imagine the Sanchez supporters as crazy people rocking back and forth in padded rooms riddled with "Sanchez will be ours." scriblings on those walls. All the while, they're rocking back and forth in the fetal position proclaiming their manlove for the USC quarterback.

The pick is Curry or we trade down.

[milkman]

I remember, but to be quite honest, i rather have them fix the Oline right now first, since we will probably be signing Casell to a huge contract. You gotta keep him upright. We also wont pick a RT first. Monroe played with Albert and took Alberts spot. Monroe will be a instant starter on the LT if KC drafts him. Albert will move to RT. We did something similar when we got Big Willie and Tait got drafted and went to RT as well.


We do have massive neeeds on the Dline and thats something they have to figure out, but why not fix your offensive line first since we got our "franchise" QB.

Monroe didn't keep Albert at guard.

Albert's versatility, and Monroe's lack thereof, kept Albert at guard.

Monroe does have the necessary athleticism to protect the QB's blindside, but Albert is a better athlete, and Virginia is a team that relies heavily on pulling guards, and Monroe didn't have Albert's natural ability to get out in space and pull.

And it doesn't matter how the fuck you spin it, if you take Monroe at #3 overall, you are using that pick to fill the hole at RT, and to suggest otherwise is bullshit.

And we did a "similar" thing with Roaf because it took one season to figure out that Tait wasn't a LT.

The Bears came to the same realization after they signed him to that big contract.

[Pioli Zombie]

Apparently, you don't think Randy Moss is that good, eh? Well, for starters, Culpepper was the shit when he had Randy Moss. When they both went their own individual paths, Culpepper ain't worth a shit anymore. Comparing Hanratty to Cassel is possibly the most silliest thing I ever seen. Hanratty completed only 38 percent of his pass attempts, which led to a relatively poor overall rating of 43.0. That ain't a good comparsion to begin with. And as for Girlbac, he couldn't win a fucking Super Bowl for the 49ers, because he was a back-up to STEVE YOUNG!

We'll see how good Cassel truly is when he takes a few snaps as a Chief. The O-line protection probably will be an issue, especially on the right side of the line. He'll have Bowe, but will he have Gonzalez? Who will be the reliable #2 WR? Will he have a consistent running game? I would gladly take Wes Welker on my team if I had a chance. The guy is a pain in the ass to defend, which is why New England picked him up from Miami, because he owned the Patriots repeatedly.

But we KNOW Sanchez is "that good".

Whatever.

Why is the Hanratty comparison not valid when the statement in question is "Anybody would look good with Moss and Welker" and my point is "anyone" wouldn't.
Posted via Mobile Device

[milkman]

I dont think they are going to put in a 3rd to 4th rounder in the starting spot. As sad as it sounds, Suckintosh may be better then that person. He may need a year of seasoning if we go that route. I still think its (if we pick at 3) Monroe, Crabtree or Raji. I remember watching something on the NFL network they said that after the first 4 or 5 tackles the drop off is huge.

I dont see anyone else we are going to take. We will find out in 1 week though.

The NFL Network might have said that after the first 4 or 5 LTs, there's a huge dropoff.

But this is a deep draft.

After the first 4 05 LTs (Smith, Monroe, Oher, Beatty, Britton) there are a number of OT propspects that could come in and start at RT right away, including Jamon Meredith, Troy Kropog, Xavier Watkins, Fenuki Topou, Jason Watkins, guys that can be had in the 3rd or 4th rounds.

This is as deep a draft for OT that I can remember.

[Pioli Zombie]

"A product of the Patriots system"

I love that one too. They said that about Brady too. Its the system. Its the system.

Wtf. Its football. If you can play you complete the pass and you win. If you can't you suck.

Someone explain wtf "its the system" means and why you could plug Brodie Croyle into it and he will be great.
Posted via Mobile Device

[milkman]

Dude I'm with ya .... I have NO idea what Cassel will be. But we just gave up our 2nd rd pick and will have to pay him a minimum of $10 million. If Stafford OR Sanchez had the reputation of a Matt Ryan, it would be a no brainer. But I don't think that's the case. They MIGHT be....but right now it's not expected. This Chiefs team has a TON of needs, we dealt with one getting Cassel. Drafting a QB on top of him seems crazy. All this talk of Curry and ILB not worth a #3.....F That IMO.....if it's a need position and a difference maker - u take him. It's a shitty year to have the #3 pick....and EVERONE wants to trade down which is nearly impossible to get fair value....but the QB position has been addressed. Whether you agree or disagree with the player is fine...but the organization feels like they made their move.

Not every position is difference making.

The only way that a Sam or ILB in a 34 can be a difference maker is if the guy that fills that need brings the same kind of intensity and fiery leadership that Junior Seau and Ray Lewis brought/bring.

Otherwise there are only a few difference making positions.

On defense that would be a DT/NT and pass rusher.

[milkman]

Honestly, do yout hink they would talk about it even if he did sign it? right now is the WORST possible time to announce that. They could still put in peoples minds that we may draft one.

That would be showing their cards right now. Its a game of poker right now. They are keeping everything quite. They are doing it right. For all we know, he could be signed already or at least reached a verbal agreement.

We know he isn't signed already because Cassel's agent is scratching his head wondering why the Chiefs aren't contacting him to get a deal done.

[milkman]

I may be mistaken but I'm pretty sure Stafford is more highly regarded than Ryan was last year. If Sanchez isn't as well he's not very far behind.

You're right, Stafford is more highly regarded than Ryan was last year.

Kcwolf has a short memory, apparently, because last year at this time people were questioning Matt Ryan's viability as a potential franchise QB far more that Stafford.

[Pioli Zombie]

Not every position is difference making.

The only way that a Sam or ILB in a 34 can be a difference maker is if the guy that fills that need brings the same kind of intensity and fiery leadership that Junior Seau and Ray Lewis brought/bring.

Otherwise there are only a few difference making positions.

On defense that would be a DT/NT and pass rusher.

Agreed. That's why if they can't trade down they should take Raji.
Posted via Mobile Device

[milkman]

But we KNOW Sanchez is "that good".

Whatever.

Why is the Hanratty comparison not valid when the statement in question is "Anybody would look good with Moss and Welker" and my point is "anyone" wouldn't.
Posted via Mobile Device

You're right.

A QB does have to have some ability to perform at a decent level even if he is playing in a system with a lot of talent to help him.

But there have been a number of QBs who did play pretty well when repacing a starter that went on to other teams and completely crapped their pants.

Scott Mitchell is the example that most look at, but there's also Jeff Kemp, who the Seahawks traded for afte he got to show his stuff with 9ers, and of course there's both Steve Bono and Elvis GrBac to point to.

You also have Derek Anderson who followed up a Pro Bowl season by craping his pants.

I'm not saying that Cassel is going to crap his pants, but there's a number of examples that can be pointed out beyond Terry Hanratty.

[milkman]

Agreed. That's why if they can't trade down they should take Raji.
Posted via Mobile Device

Sadly, I agree.

[Danman]

These conversations were great. . . in Jan/Feb, but the same people say the same things day after day. I'm sick of this sh*t and can't wait till next weekend. Drafting QB at 3 or raping another team of picks would be a very shrewd move. It's really an opportunity to improve your football team and has many many ramifications.

I'm gonna love to watch Pioli draft because he's not ever gonna be tied to one player or position. He won't draft Larry Johnson because Priest Holmes has a hip injury and he won't go into a season with Croyle, Huard, and Thigpen as the QBs on the roster. He's gonna look at opportunity constantly.

Also, he'll force all us fans to watch the entire draft as you'll never know when he'll strike with a trade.

[KCwolf]

You're right, Stafford is more highly regarded than Ryan was last year.

Kcwolf has a short memory, apparently, because last year at this time people were questioning Matt Ryan's viability as a potential franchise QB far more that Stafford.


Pretty sure Matt Ryan was a 5th year Senior and was THE consensus #1 QB in the draft. You can find many on this BB alone that will argue Sanchez over Stafford.

[rad]

This is kinda like a throwaway draft.....just draft whoever, by value, and you're OK. Especially with all the cap space we have, I could see 45 mil. tied up in QB for this year, and it would be worth it for the future of this team. I could see a big pothead DT to clog up the middle. Those are value positions that I could live with. We'll end up with a starter on the line out of round 3 or 4. Next years draft is all about defense, so I've heard.

Taking a LT at 3 is crazy. You may as well draft a G.

[milkman]

Pretty sure Matt Ryan was a 5th year Senior and was THE consensus #1 QB in the draft. You can find many on this BB alone that will argue Sanchez over Stafford.

The fact that Ryan was the consensus #1 QB last year speaks to the poor QB class last year.

He was the only top ten QB in that class, and most thought that Joe Flacco was a second round prospect that was a huge reach by the Ravens in the first round.

This year, you have two QBs that will probably go in the top ten, including Stafford who will most likely go #1 overall to the Lions in a draft class that includes better LT prospects (Jason Smith and Eugene Monroe) than Jake Long, who was drafted ahead of Ryan.

You also have a third QB that will probably go in the top 20.

Most draft analysts from Kiper to McSahy to Scott Wright, to Charles Davis and Charlie Casserly have said if they were rating Ryan in this class, they would have rated behind Stafford and ahead of Sanchez.

The only draft analyst who says he would have Ryan rated ahead of Stafford is Mayock.

[TheGuardian]

This is the part I don't get.

You have people in here that say that Sanchez, a guy who hasn't even started two full seasons of college football, is better than Cassel, who had a top 10 QB year last year in the NFL. You have one GM who traded for him, and another head coach who was willing to trade away their own "franchise QB" to acquire Cassel.

So Pioli and McDaniels are guys that have sat in film rooms, on the practice field, training camp, watched Cassel in games, etc and think he's so good both wanted him. Even over a guy I bet a lot of people in here thought is/was a top 10 NFL QB (Cutler). And LMAO at the same time we have really smart MF'ers in here who want a green college QB OVER this guy. It's gold Jerry, gold.

[milkman]

This is the part I don't get.

You have people in here that say that Sanchez, a guy who hasn't even started two full seasons of college football, is better than Cassel, who had a top 10 QB year last year in the NFL. You have one GM who traded for him, and another head coach who was willing to trade away their own "franchise QB" to acquire Cassel.

So Pioli and McDaniels are guys that have sat in film rooms, on the practice field, training camp, watched Cassel in games, etc and think he's so good both wanted him. Even over a guy I bet a lot of people in here thought is/was a top 10 NFL QB (Cutler). And LMAO at the same time we have really smart MF'ers in here who want a green college QB OVER this guy. It's gold Jerry, gold.

It's amazing, isn't it.

Cause we all know that smart football people are never wrong.

[DTLB58]

<table><tbody><tr><td colspan="3" class="storytitle">Don’t Discount Sanchez </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="primaryimage" valign="top">http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/64/645440.jpg
Steve Helber - AP
</td> <td width="3" nowrap="nowrap">
</td> <td valign="top"> <table width="60%" bgcolor="#f5f5f5" border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="1"> <tbody><tr valign="top"> <td valign="middle" nowrap="nowrap">By Michael Ash
Warpaint Illustrated Columnist
Posted Apr 18, 2009
</td> <td nowrap="nowrap">
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

A week ago, while discussing KC's options for trading down, I mentioned the possibility of forcing a team to trade up. Such a move would involve drafting USC quarterback Mark Sanchez with the third pick (assuming Georgia quarterback Matthew Stafford goes #1 to Detroit), allowing quarterback-needy teams who covet Sanchez to bid on him.
</td></tr> <tr> <td colspan="3">
Many of the responses to that idea – not just my own proposal of it, but any talk of such a scenario unfolding come draft day – have been written off as “too risky.” It would be too much of a gamble, some argue, for the Chiefs to take Sanchez and risk getting stuck with a player they don’t want. After all, other teams would know the Chiefs have no use for a quarterback, and wouldn’t offer much as a result.

But who says the Chiefs have no use for Sanchez?

I’m not talking about the idea of drafting Sanchez so he can be traded. What about drafting Sanchez with the idea of actually keeping him in Kansas City? Who says that couldn’t happen?

The Chiefs certainly haven’t. They could have said it if they had signed Matt Cassel to a long-term contract extension after they acquired him from New England. Such a move would have told the entire league that Cassel was both the Chiefs’ present and their future.

Curiously, though, they’ve yet to do that.

Many talk about Cassel’s contract like it’s a forgone conclusion, as though the Chiefs – for whatever secretive reasons they have – are just waiting to announce it until some later date. Apparently, though, that would come as news to Cassel’s agent. In his column a few weeks ago on SI.com, Peter King discussed a conversation he had with Cassel’s agent (David Dunn) in which Dunn was perplexed by the fact Scott Pioli wasn’t eager to discuss a long-term contract.

If the Chiefs are convinced Cassel is their guy, what’s stopping them from locking him up with a new deal? The only explanation I’ve seen floated that even comes close to making sense is that, because the team has so much room under the salary cap, the lofty salary figure guaranteed to Cassel by the franchise tag is helping the Chiefs reach the minimum 2009 salary amount. In other words, they actually want to keep his large salary on the books instead of working out a contract and reducing his cap hit.

But if that were actually the case, it could still be accomplished by signing Cassel long-term. If the Chiefs wanted Cassel’s 2009 salary to be significantly large, they could simply front-load his contract. A handful of teams around the league routinely use the front-loading strategy, making the early years of a player’s contract worth the most money. That way, they gain more room under the salary cap every season, because their contracts become cheaper with each passing year.

The Chiefs have more than enough salary cap room to strike such a deal with Cassel. And if the issue was really as simple as the team wanting his large cap number counting towards 2009, why would Cassel’s agent be so confused about the lack of a deal for his client?

As many have suggested, the only answer that truly makes sense here is that the Chiefs aren’t ready to attach themselves to Cassel on a long-term basis. They want to make sure his one good season, throwing to Randy Moss, wasn’t a fluke before they make a long-term commitment.

Pioli is hedging his bets. He was obviously confident enough in Cassel to trade for him, but he’s not going to make a heavy financial investment until Cassel proves to be something more than a one-year wonder. The only way to interpret that position is to say Pioli isn’t completely convinced that Cassel is the answer. <table width="225" align="right" cellspacing="7"><tbody><tr><td>http://media.scout.com/media/image/65/656532.jpg
What if the Chiefs drafted Sanchez?
Chris Carlson - AP </td></tr></tbody></table> With that in mind, why is it so hard to imagine Pioli covering all his bases? The quarterback is the most important player on the field, and no one knows that better than Pioli, who watched firsthand as Tom Brady helped turn the New England Patriots into a modern-day dynasty.

Is there something wrong with having a backup plan in case Cassel doesn’t pan out?

It seems like the idea of putting a premium on the quarterback position is something fans in Kansas City just can’t understand. After two decades of Carl Peterson, we’ve been blindfolded and spun around in circles so many times that, somewhere along the way, a depth chart featuring the likes of Brodie Croyle, Damon Huard, and Tyler Thigpen began to seem normal to us.

A year ago, the Chiefs went into the season with a completely unproven and highly injury prone starter at quarterback. Worse yet, the player waiting in the wings behind him was a journeyman in his mid 30's. Doesn’t that seem absurd in hindsight? But we bought into it. Year after year of that sort of insanity has taken its toll on everyone.

No position is more critical to the success of a team than a quarterback, yet we can’t fathom the idea of the Chiefs’ new regime doing everything they can to make sure that position is set. We can’t wrap our minds around the possibility of Pioli telling us, “the quarterback position is so important that we’re going to make sure we have another option to fall back on, just in case Cassel isn’t the right fit.”

Drafting Sanchez would provide the Chiefs with another legitimate option at quarterback if Cassel, as his critics have suggested, ends up being the next Scott Mitchell. Imagine how brilliant Pioli would look if Cassel were to fail and the Chiefs already had his replacement ready to step in and take over.

Now imagine if Cassel plays even better this year than last. Suddenly, the Chiefs would have quite a poker chip to bring to the table – a shiny, untouched quarterback, all wrapped up in a neat little bow for whoever wants to trade for him. At worst, Pioli would be able to recoup the first-round pick spent on Sanchez.

Some who scoff at this idea have suggested Sanchez isn’t worthy of being taken with the #3 pick. In reality, he’s one of the top prospects in this year’s class, as ESPN’s Mel Kiper ranks him as the fifth-best player in the draft. Both Mike Mayock of the NFL Network, and Scout.com, actually have Sanchez rated higher than Stafford.

Todd McShay of ESPN and Scouts Inc. has reported that if Sanchez is available at #4, he’ll be drafted by the Seattle Seahawks. A similar report has surfaced from Cleveland, suggesting Sanchez will be the pick at #5 if he’s there.

Knowing all that, there’s really no debating that Sanchez is worthy of being taken at #3. The only question is whether Pioli would actually pull the trigger. Even if Pioli is willing to draft a quarterback, it’s entirely possible he hasn’t graded Sanchez as highly as other teams around the league.

So what does all of this mean? Does this mean Sanchez will be the Chiefs’ pick #3? Not at all. It would be a surprise.

But you have to admit, it’s not as crazy as it initially sounds. There are plenty of crazier things the Chiefs could do with the third overall pick, like drafting a coverage linebacker who doesn’t rush the passer.</td></tr></tbody></table>

Mecca is that you? :D

[Brock]

This is the part I don't get.

You have people in here that say that Sanchez, a guy who hasn't even started two full seasons of college football, is better than Cassel, who had a top 10 QB year last year in the NFL. You have one GM who traded for him, and another head coach who was willing to trade away their own "franchise QB" to acquire Cassel.

So Pioli and McDaniels are guys that have sat in film rooms, on the practice field, training camp, watched Cassel in games, etc and think he's so good both wanted him. Even over a guy I bet a lot of people in here thought is/was a top 10 NFL QB (Cutler). And LMAO at the same time we have really smart MF'ers in here who want a green college QB OVER this guy. It's gold Jerry, gold.

Is that somehow dumber than the people who want to replace Branden Albert?

[Coogs]

The NFL Network might have said that after the first 4 or 5 LTs, there's a huge dropoff.

But this is a deep draft.

After the first 4 05 LTs (Smith, Monroe, Oher, Beatty, Britton) there are a number of OT propspects that could come in and start at RT right away, including Jamon Meredith, Troy Kropog, Xavier Watkins, Fenuki Topou, Jason Watkins, guys that can be had in the 3rd or 4th rounds.

This is as deep a draft for OT that I can remember.

I have even read a report or two that have stated Kraig Urbilk could wind up being a pretty fair RT.

[KCwolf]

This is the part I don't get.

You have people in here that say that Sanchez, a guy who hasn't even started two full seasons of college football, is better than Cassel, who had a top 10 QB year last year in the NFL. You have one GM who traded for him, and another head coach who was willing to trade away their own "franchise QB" to acquire Cassel.

So Pioli and McDaniels are guys that have sat in film rooms, on the practice field, training camp, watched Cassel in games, etc and think he's so good both wanted him. Even over a guy I bet a lot of people in here thought is/was a top 10 NFL QB (Cutler). And LMAO at the same time we have really smart MF'ers in here who want a green college QB OVER this guy. It's gold Jerry, gold.

I hope the Sanchez frenzy keeps on rolling through the NFL right up to the 3rd pick in the draft - and 4 or 5 teams want him sooooo bad that the Chiefs are getting offers to good to refuse to get the hell out of the #3 pick!

[TheGuardian]

Is that somehow dumber than the people who want to replace Branden Albert?

No. Not at all. And that's what I mean. A lot of the people that post on boards are some of the most clueless fans I have ever seen. Finding a franchise left tackle is a difficult task. It's why those guys are taken so high and paid so much. Albert seems very much to be that kind of player. Yet you have some idiots in here who would move Albert to the right side, where he would be in a new learning curve all over again, and draft a left tackle, who would be an unknown at the NFL level. It's unbelievably stupid.

And I agree KC, I hope people think that Sanchez is the second coming of Johnny Unitas and that some dumb team gives us 94 future picks to get him. The odds of Sanchez being that good are astronomically low. The odds of him being better than Cassel are low as well. And even if he were, it would be years before he would get to that level. People point to Matt Ryan but the guy barely threw the ball for the first half of the season last year. And when he did it was check down after check down and the guy handed off to a pro bowl running back most of the year. It's not quite the same situation. Especially when you factor in that Ryan was a starter in college for about a thousand more games than Sanchez played. Fine me a college QB who became a knock out quarterback that started as few games as Sanchez has.

[chiefzilla1501]

You're right.

A QB does have to have some ability to perform at a decent level even if he is playing in a system with a lot of talent to help him.

But there have been a number of QBs who did play pretty well when repacing a starter that went on to other teams and completely crapped their pants.

Scott Mitchell is the example that most look at, but there's also Jeff Kemp, who the Seahawks traded for afte he got to show his stuff with 9ers, and of course there's both Steve Bono and Elvis GrBac to point to.

You also have Derek Anderson who followed up a Pro Bowl season by craping his pants.

I'm not saying that Cassel is going to crap his pants, but there's a number of examples that can be pointed out beyond Terry Hanratty.

Yes, but I think you're also neglecting that a lot of these guys you bring up had shortages in talent. Bono didn't have great arm strength and Grbac never seemed to have the head for the position. Besides, those are both examples of QBs who went to outstanding systems to horrendous ones. I still wonder if Bono could have done better if he weren't in Hackett's atrocious system. But the greater point is, Cassel has starter quality talent. He has very good arm strength, very good athleticism, good accuracy (though he needs some work on the deep ball), and a terrific head on his shoulders/work ethic. I think that's a pretty big distinction from guys like Huard or Bono, who really always had backup talent. From a technical and "measurables" standpoint, Cassel's game is just as good as most first round picks over the years.

I can understand that Cassel is still unproven. But I think that how unproven he is is overstated. I hear a lot about the outstanding receivers he had, but I never heard that same excuse for Big Ben his first season when he was throwing to Ward or Burress, nor did I heard that for Carson Palmer when he was throwing to Housh and Ocho Cinco. I have also never heard anyone question Joe Flacco's upside, even though there isn't a greater example of a first-year standout who has a ton to prove--he looked atrocious in games where they couldn't get a running game going. Secondly, Cassel's supporting cast wasn't as all-world as people claim. Watch any game tape and you'll realize that his offensive line was average at best--they are overrated because Brady makes them so much better.

[DTLB58]

With no 2nd round pick, that shit is not happening.l

Unless the sole purpose is to trade him to gain more picks for this draft.
But then that actually puts the pressure on us to unload him and possibly have to take less than if we would have just traded the pick in the first place.

Unless the team is Denver and McDaniels give us #12 and #18 for Cassel and we keep Sanchez. I can't belive I just said that. :doh!:

I agree QB is the most important position on the feild. But I really don't see Pioli spending both our 1st and 2nd round picks this year on the QB position with the intent of keeping both of them all season considering the fact he has stated we have a lot of postions to fill on this team. (unlike Herm who thought this team 85% built :shake:)

I believe Pioli is looking out for our future yes, but I think he wants to win now a little more than some people realize.

I think Haley thinks Tyler is a good enough backup to learn behind Cassel for now and build the rest of the team first.

Trade down or take Raji

[1ChiefsDan]

More filler to justify the subscription price.Kind of what I thought. Kind of funny watching WPI bashers suck WPI balls because they wrote an article supporting their delusion.

[chiefzilla1501]

I imagine the Sanchez supporters as crazy people rocking back and forth in padded rooms riddled with "Sanchez will be ours." scriblings on those walls. All the while, they're rocking back and forth in the fetal position proclaiming their manlove for the USC quarterback.

The pick is Curry or we trade down.

Curry would play a non-impact position in a 3-4. I would rather reach for solid talent at a high-impact position (Raji, Everett Brown, Maybin, etc...) than reach for a terrific player at a position that is virtually meaningless.

In a 3-4, the ILB position is by far the least important position.

[DTLB58]

[QUOTE=KCwolf;5683975]I hope the Sanchez frenzy keeps on rolling through the NFL right up to the 3rd pick in the draft - and 4 or 5 teams want him sooooo bad that the Chiefs are getting offers to good to refuse to get the hell out of the #3 pick![/QUOTE

Couldn't agree more. I want that 2nd round pick back.

Wouldn't it be awesome if we got Cassel, a 2nd round pick back and still a 1st round pick? Especially since most think the talent in this years draft is all about the same level in the 1st round anyways.

[Brock]

I imagine the Sanchez supporters as crazy people rocking back and forth in padded rooms riddled with "Sanchez will be ours." scriblings on those walls. All the while, they're rocking back and forth in the fetal position proclaiming their manlove for the USC quarterback.

The pick is Curry or we trade down.

That's hilarious, because I imagine the Curry and LT advocates as people with gigantic foreheads who have a shrine to Marty Schottenheimer in their closet.

[milkman]

Yes, but I think you're also neglecting that a lot of these guys you bring up had shortages in talent. Bono didn't have great arm strength and Grbac never seemed to have the head for the position. Besides, those are both examples of QBs who went to outstanding systems to horrendous ones. I still wonder if Bono could have done better if he weren't in Hackett's atrocious system. But the greater point is, Cassel has starter quality talent. He has very good arm strength, very good athleticism, good accuracy (though he needs some work on the deep ball), and a terrific head on his shoulders/work ethic. I think that's a pretty big distinction from guys like Huard or Bono, who really always had backup talent. From a technical and "measurables" standpoint, Cassel's game is just as good as most first round picks over the years.

I can understand that Cassel is still unproven. But I think that how unproven he is is overstated. I hear a lot about the outstanding receivers he had, but I never heard that same excuse for Big Ben his first season when he was throwing to Ward or Burress, nor did I heard that for Carson Palmer when he was throwing to Housh and Ocho Cinco. I have also never heard anyone question Joe Flacco's upside, even though there isn't a greater example of a first-year standout who has a ton to prove--he looked atrocious in games where they couldn't get a running game going. Secondly, Cassel's supporting cast wasn't as all-world as people claim. Watch any game tape and you'll realize that his offensive line was average at best--they are overrated because Brady makes them so much better.

First, I don't think that Bono ever had the qualities to be a legitimate NFL starter in any system, but that, in the big picture, is neither her nor there.

And, I agree that Cassel brings all the qualities that you list, except "great" arm strength.

He has reasonable arm strength.

However, regardless, he still remains every bit as proven at this point as Derek Anderson was at the the end of the '07 season.

[chiefzilla1501]

Unless the sole purpose is to trade him to gain more picks for this draft.
But then that actually puts the pressure on us to unload him and possibly have to take less than if we would have just traded the pick in the first place.

Unless the team is Denver and McDaniels give us #12 and #18 for Cassel and we keep Sanchez. I can't belive I just said that. :doh!:

I agree QB is the most important position on the feild. But I really don't see Pioli spending both our 1st and 2nd round picks this year on the QB position with the intent of keeping both of them all season considering the fact he has stated we have a lot of postions to fill on this team. (unlike Herm who thought this team 85% built :shake:)

I believe Pioli is looking out for our future yes, but I think he wants to win now a little more than some people realize.

I think Haley thinks Tyler is a good enough backup to learn behind Cassel for now and build the rest of the team first.

Trade down or take Raji

I'm with you 150%. I think people underestimate several huge factors. 1) how difficult it would be to pull off an agreeable Cassel trade, given that the Chiefs were the highest bidder for him earlier (and yes, there have been no conclusive reports to suggest the Broncos actually did outbid the Chiefs); 2) that the team most likely to want Cassel is a division rival; 3) that Pioli knows Cassel better than anyone in the league and if he liked him enough to give up a pick and $15M to get him, then it's safe to say that Pioli trusts Cassel a lot more than the fans do. The Chiefs could surprise and pick Sanchez, but I think there's a very, very minimal chance that happens.

[TheGuardian]

Actually there were reports that were confirmed that the Broncos would have given up more, it just came too late.

[chiefzilla1501]

First, I don't think that Bono ever had the qualities to be a legitimate NFL starter in any system, but that, in the big picture, is neither her nor there.

And, I agree that Cassel brings all the qualities that you list, except "great" arm strength.

He has reasonable arm strength.

However, regardless, he still remains every bit as proven at this point as Derek Anderson was at the the end of the '07 season.

I agree that the comparison to Derek Anderson is far more appropriate than to Bono or Grbac. But as for Derek Anderson, a few things.... first of all, I think there were a lot more warning signs in Anderson's first season than Cassel's. Anderson is extremely inconsistent--he threw a lot of picks in 2007, and he is very inaccurate. He's a gunslinger--big arm, but doesn't know how to use touch or doesn't know the spots to put them in. It also should be noted that many Browns fans will mention that after Anderson's concussion against the Jets in the first preseason game, he never looked the same--he looked indecisive and scared. Much like Big Ben looked really indecisive after the season coming back from the motorcycle accident. I think Cassel showed a lot more consistency and straight-line improvement than most first-year QBs--they typically peak after a few games when defenses figure out how to scheme them.

But I also think it points to a major double standard placed on first round QBs vs. non-first round QBs. Why is it that guys like Eli Manning and Joey Harrington can endure subpar second seasons, but non first rounders like Anderson are given two years at the most to succeed? First round QBs are almost always given three years to succeed, whereas non first rounders are scrapped the instant they don't perform well. I'm not convinced that Anderson is done by any stretch. Especially given that I hear he has a terrific work ethic. I think he'll be much better if he gets his confidence back and I think he has the work ethic and physical measurables to improve. I'm reminded of Drew Brees, a guy who the Chargers almost completely gave up on because he had a sophomore slump--something most NFL QBs endure. The Chargers even drafted Philip Rivers because they had completely given up on Brees. Thanks to a holdout, Brees started in spite of Rivers being on the roster. While Rivers is an outstanding QB, can you imagine if Brees didn't win that starting job? We'd be talking today about how Anderson was the next Drew Brees!

[chiefzilla1501]

Actually there were reports that were confirmed that the Broncos would have given up more, it just came too late.

Most of the reports I've seen were from speculators.

And the Patriots said that there was never a "serious" offer by any other party better than the Chiefs'. If a better trade comp was offered, it appears that no other team was serious about following through on it. Therefore, more than likely, the Chiefs had the most aggressive offer.

[milkman]

I agree that the comparison to Derek Anderson is far more appropriate than to Bono or Grbac. But as for Derek Anderson, a few things.... first of all, I think there were a lot more warning signs in Anderson's first season than Cassel's. Anderson is extremely inconsistent--he threw a lot of picks in 2007, and he is very inaccurate. He's a gunslinger--big arm, but doesn't know how to use touch or doesn't know the spots to put them in. It also should be noted that many Browns fans will mention that after Anderson's concussion against the Jets in the first preseason game, he never looked the same--he looked indecisive and scared. Much like Big Ben looked really indecisive after the season coming back from the motorcycle accident. I think Cassel showed a lot more consistency and straight-line improvement than most first-year QBs--they typically peak after a few games when defenses figure out how to scheme them.

But I also think it points to a major double standard placed on first round QBs vs. non-first round QBs. Why is it that guys like Eli Manning and Joey Harrington can endure subpar second seasons, but non first rounders like Anderson are given two years at the most to succeed? First round QBs are almost always given three years to succeed, whereas non first rounders are scrapped the instant they don't perform well. I'm not convinced that Anderson is done by any stretch. Especially given that I hear he has a terrific work ethic. I think he'll be much better if he gets his confidence back and I think he has the work ethic and physical measurables to improve. I'm reminded of Drew Brees, a guy who the Chargers almost completely gave up on because he had a sophomore slump--something most NFL QBs endure. The Chargers even drafted Philip Rivers because they had completely given up on Brees. Thanks to a holdout, Brees started in spite of Rivers being on the roster. While Rivers is an outstanding QB, can you imagine if Brees didn't win that starting job? We'd be talking today about how Anderson was the next Drew Brees!

We are basically debating for the sake of debate here.

I think Cassel has the tools to succeed, but until he does it for more than a season, he is still unproven.

The fact that I believe that Sanchez is going to be a better QB doesn't mean I think that Cassel's a bum.

I would rather have stood pat and taken Sanchez, but I accept the fact that Cassel is our QB going forward.

But, FTR, Brees didn't didn't have a sophmore slump, because he really didn't play all that well in his first season.

[TheGuardian]

Most of the reports I've seen were from speculators.

And the Patriots said that there was never a "serious" offer by any other party better than the Chiefs'. If a better trade comp was offered, it appears that no other team was serious about following through on it. Therefore, more than likely, the Chiefs had the most aggressive offer.

ESPN's Chris Mortensen has since reported there was a much better offer on the table, that the Patriots passed on the 12th overall pick in a three-way trade that would've sent Denver Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

The Patriots did business with Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli, who for the previous nine years worked closely with Bill Belichick in the Patriots' front office. It must be noted new Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels was Belichick's offensive coordinator in New England.

Mort and I have exchanged a few e-mails on the subject. Here is how he broke down the proposed three-way deal:

This one defies logic, but a source I really trust tells me it's true: The Broncos were willing to offer their own first-round pick (12th overall) to the Patriots for Cassel. Obviously, it was conditional upon Cutler being traded and Tampa Bay was the most likely destination, the Bucs willing to part with their first- and third-round picks.

There is plenty more. Basically where there is this much smoke, there is fire.

[chiefzilla1501]

There is plenty more. Basically where there is this much smoke, there is fire.

I know that's the story out, but I just don't see it. These reports are suggesting that New England knew there was a SIGNIFICANTLY better offer pending and they still quickly pulled the trigger on a trade to the Chiefs.

I just don't buy it. The Patriots are a world-class organization. If they believed there was any chance of getting a better deal, they would have held on and waited for it. Especially when the value was that much better than the Chiefs'. The Patriots strongly deny that there was ever any serious offer on the table and given how well that organization functions vs. how often these rumor mill guys are incorrect, I'll side with the Pats on this one.

[htismaqe]

If any of you watched NFL Network over the weekend, then you know by now that we might as well get used to Cassel being the face of this franchise. He was the lead story on "NFL Network Now" on Saturday during the day.

Cassel is our QB. Sanchez is trade bait.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Kind of what I thought. Kind of funny watching WPI peruse the Planet, absorbing the knowledge of football students who know more than they do, and then taking it to print.

Fixed...Yo'...Post.

If any of you watched NFL Network over the weekend, then you know by now that we might as well get used to Cassel being the face of this franchise. He was the lead story on "NFL Network Now" on Saturday during the day.

Cassel is our QB. Sanchez is trade bait.

You may be right. Haley's "I sure hope he can play" comment spells out both a lack of Coach / GM seeing eye to eye on the matter of the trade, and "done deal".

But, we'll see.

[Chiefnj2]

There is plenty more. Basically where there is this much smoke, there is fire.

Other teams weren't willing to sign Cassel without redoing his contract first.

[1ChiefsDan]

Fixed...Yo'...Post.



You may be right. Haley's "I sure hope he can play" comment spells out both a lack of Coach / GM seeing eye to eye on the matter of the trade, and "done deal".

But, we'll see.is it hard to type with balls bouncing off your chin?

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

is it hard to type with balls bouncing off your chin?

It is it hard to see with your head up your ass?:eek:

[bowener]

With the Chiefs luck, it would happen and they both turn out to be busts...

Would that make 4 boobs then?

[rad]

is it hard to type with balls bouncing off your chin?

That was called for?

[beach tribe]

This guy's a dumbass. Why would we sign Cassel to along term contract before the draft, and erase any possibility for other teams to think we might take him? Whatever small amount another team might think we would do it, is better that telling them straight out that we won't.

[Mecca]

This guy's a dumbass. Why would we sign Cassel to along term contract before the draft, and erase any possibility for other teams to think we might take him? Whatever small amount another team might think we would do it, is better that telling them straight out that we won't.

Odds are no one believes the Chiefs are taking a QB...someone asked the question to Scott Wright and he hit them back with "0%"