I'm sick of hearing how Curry is a concern rushing the passer

[Red Dawg]

If we keep the pick and he's there, we'd be crazy not to take him. Raji would be fine as well but then that would be 3 1 rdrs we spent on the DL in the last few years. Dorsey last year and Hali 3years ago.

Just because he wasn't given the repsonsibility of going after the QB alot in college doesn't mean he can't do it. No way a LB with his size and speed can't blast up the middle or around the end and get to the QB.

This guys talent is rediculous.

[L.A. Chieffan]

dude cant get sacks

[milkman]

I am sick of dumbasses assuming that he can do something he has never done.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

http://www.agri-pro.com/ringpk01.jpg

[eazyb81]

I'm sick of seeing people start a new thread whenever a thought pops in their head, instead of posting in one of the other thousand threads here about Curry.

[Brock]

I'm sick if hearing how a guy with a handful of sacks in 4 years can be taught to rush the passer.

[KCrockaholic]

dude cant get sacks

Guys cant throw touchdowns when his offense runs a power I all the time.

[Quesadilla Joe]

I am sick of dumbasses assuming that he can do something he has never done.

Like BJ Raji or Glenn Dorsey playing in a 3-4?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Like Glenn Dorsey playing in a 3-4?

Why do you think some of us were so pissed when that move was announced?

[milkman]

Like BJ Raji or Glenn Dorsey playing in a 3-4?

Yeah, like that.

Except, no.

[Crush]

I am sick of tainted tuna fish.

[chiefzilla1501]

If we keep the pick and he's there, we'd be crazy not to take him. Raji would be fine as well but then that would be 3 1 rdrs we spent on the DL in the last few years. Dorsey last year and Hali 3years ago.

Just because he wasn't given the repsonsibility of going after the QB alot in college doesn't mean he can't do it. No way a LB with his size and speed can't blast up the middle or around the end and get to the QB.

This guys talent is rediculous.

A 3-4 OLB is basically a DE who plays SOME outside linebacker.

It's not that Curry can't rush the passer. It's that we have no idea how he would do when he does that as his primary responsibility. You are assuming he knows how to play the defensive end position because a few times in college, he was asked to blitz. It's not even close to the same thing.

Why do we assume that Curry can't play OLB in a 3-4? Because 100% of 3-4 OLBs played DE in college. Because 15 of 16 of them are over 260 lbs (Curry is about 255). Because we haven't seen Curry do it. Because we will need to train him on something he has never done before. Because we would be drafting him to do something that is not listed as one of his strengths (and he has many of them).

It's not that he can't do it. But the odds are stacked against him, and you don't want to do that with your #3 pick that you're going to be giving millions of dollars to.

[KCrockaholic]

Yeah, like that.

Except, no.

No because it doesnt help your arguement?

[Just Passin' By]

I'm sick of going to Chinese restaurants that can't even make a decent fried rice.

[SBK]

Like BJ Raji or Glenn Dorsey playing in a 3-4?

Or Kyle Orton playing for a winner?

[SBK]

ILB's at 3 are the obvious picks. The NFL has shown throughout it's history that this is the best move a franchise can make.

[KCrockaholic]

A 3-4 OLB is basically a DE who plays SOME outside linebacker.

It's not that Curry can't rush the passer. It's that we have no idea how he would do when he does that as his primary responsibility. You are assuming he knows how to play the defensive end position because a few times in college, he was asked to blitz. It's not even close to the same thing.

Why do we assume that Curry can't play OLB in a 3-4? Because 100% of 3-4 OLBs played DE in college. Because 15 of 16 of them are over 260 lbs (Curry is about 255). Because we haven't seen Curry do it. Because we will need to train him on something he has never done before. Because we would be drafting him to do something that is not listed as one of his strengths (and he has many of them).

It's not that he can't do it. But the odds are stacked against him, and you don't want to do that with your #3 pick that you're going to be giving millions of dollars to.


This was a good, well thought out post :thumb:

[chiefzilla1501]

Like BJ Raji or Glenn Dorsey playing in a 3-4?

Not exactly.

If Dorsey plays End, it's not entirely different from playing DT in a 4-3. And playing nose tackle isn't far off from his responsibility as a 1-gap tackle at LSU. I think it's a mistake to move him to the nose, but it's not a far departure from what he's already done.

Same with Raji, except that he has better physical measurables to do it.

The transition from DT to 3-4 NT or 3-4 DE or from 4-3 DE to 3-4 OLB is a hell of a lot less than moving from 4-3 OLB to 3-4 OLB.

[CrazyHorse]

Why not let Vrable be the rush LBer? :D

[SBK]

Or Kyle Orton playing for a winner?

This was a dumb response cause Jay Cutler never had. I'm sure Orton has at least had a few winning seasons.

[KCrockaholic]

Why not let Vrable be the rush LBer? :D

Vrable doesnt play for us.

[CrazyHorse]

Vrable doesnt play for us.

Let's trade for him.

[keg in kc]

http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/8665/godkillskittencopy.jpg

[Mr_Tomahawk]

I am sick of Minnesota Twins fans.

[Quesadilla Joe]

This was a dumb response cause Jay Cutler never had. I'm sure Orton has at least had a few winning seasons.
Orton had a 21-12 record when he was in Chicago. The defense was the main reason for that but Orton did play pretty well before he got injured last year.

[htismaqe]

I'm sick of hearing about Curry, period.

[htismaqe]

Orton had a 21-12 record when he was in Chicago. The defense was the main reason for that but Orton did play pretty well before he got injured last year.

Orton is a good game manager, he's generally not going to win you games, but he's not going to single-handedly lose you games either.

[Brock]

Orton had a 21-12 record when he was in Chicago. The defense was the main reason for that but Orton did play pretty well before he got injured last year.

/Iraqi Information Minister

[htismaqe]

A 3-4 OLB is basically a DE who plays SOME outside linebacker.

It's not that Curry can't rush the passer. It's that we have no idea how he would do when he does that as his primary responsibility. You are assuming he knows how to play the defensive end position because a few times in college, he was asked to blitz. It's not even close to the same thing.

Why do we assume that Curry can't play OLB in a 3-4? Because 100% of 3-4 OLBs played DE in college. Because 15 of 16 of them are over 260 lbs (Curry is about 255). Because we haven't seen Curry do it. Because we will need to train him on something he has never done before. Because we would be drafting him to do something that is not listed as one of his strengths (and he has many of them).

It's not that he can't do it. But the odds are stacked against him, and you don't want to do that with your #3 pick that you're going to be giving millions of dollars to.

Excellent post once again. But I've seen you post this before, and it's been largely ignored.

[Rigodan]

If we keep the pick and he's there, we'd be crazy not to take him. Raji would be fine as well but then that would be 3 1 rdrs we spent on the DL in the last few years. Dorsey last year and Hali 3years ago.

Just because he wasn't given the repsonsibility of going after the QB alot in college doesn't mean he can't do it. No way a LB with his size and speed can't blast up the middle or around the end and get to the QB.

This guys talent is rediculous.

I don't understand why people want to draft him as a linebacker. Hs is so freaking talented he would easily be able to learn how to be a HoF quarterback. This is Aaron Jesus Curry we're talking about her people.

[LaChapelle]

I'm sick of hearing how Curry is a concern rushing the passer... If we keep the pick and he's there, we'd be crazy not to take him. Raji would be fine as well but then that would be 3 1 rdrs we spent on the DL in the last few years. Dorsey last year and Hali 3years ago.

Just because he wasn't given the repsonsibility of going after the QB alot in college doesn't mean he can't do it. No way a LB with his size and speed can't blast up the middle or around the end and get to the QB.

This guys talent is rediculous.

WTF
You're sick of hearing he can't rush the passer. Then part of your argument is that the Chiefs have alread spent 3 1st on the DL?

[kcfanXIII]

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk96/kcfanxiii/motivator4739640.jpg

curry>norris?







btw, this thread ended with chiefzilla1501's post

[shitgoose]

I really hope we draft Curry. My son is going to be born in the next week or so (wife is due the 23rd) and it would be nice to see if we could have Jesus Christ himself perform the baptisim.

[kcfanXIII]

I really hope we draft Curry. My son is going to be born in the next week or so (wife is due the 23rd) and it would be nice to see if we could have Jesus Christ himself perform the baptisim.

lol, i was wrong. now the thread is over.

[Kyle DeLexus]

I really hope we draft Curry. My son is going to be born in the next week or so (wife is due the 23rd) and it would be nice to see if we could have Jesus Christ himself perform the baptisim.

Maybe Don Pioli would accept being his Godfather?

[RustShack]

Yeah, because talent is all that matters in the NFL.

[el borracho]

No way a LB with his size and speed can't blast up the middle or around the end and get to the QB.

If that were true then Kawicka Mitchell would have been a QB killer. Size and speed are great but they aren't the best indicators of pass-rushing ability.

[el borracho]

I don't understand why people want to draft him as a linebacker. Hs is so freaking talented he would easily be able to learn how to be a HoF quarterback. This is Aaron Jesus Curry we're talking about her people.

Obviously, he would be a two-way player; QB while on offense and LB while on defense. At no time would we pull him off the field. Heck, he'll probably stay out there at half-time to entertain the crowd by turning water into wine or something.

[kcfanXIII]

Obviously, he would be a two-way player; QB while on offense and LB while on defense. At no time would we pull him off the field. Heck, he'll probably stay out there at half-time to entertain the crowd by turning water into wine or something.

you are all missing the obvious. he's for sure going to shatter hester's return record. he's a three way player

[Kyle DeLexus]

you are all missing the obvious. he's for sure going to shatter hester's return record. he's a three way player

Then when teams start kicking it out of bounds to keep it away from him, he's going to kick a 73 yard FG just because he can.

[kcfanXIII]

and you know culquit got hurt last year. curry with his size and speed, could certainly learn to punt with a 10 second hang time, so he could easily coffin corner the ball.

[el borracho]

Curry doesn't need to coffin-corner the ball; 10 seconds is plenty of time for Curry to run the length of the field, blast through the wedge and knock the return man the fuck out before recovering the fumble and returning it for a touchdown every time.

[Fairplay]

..................our future

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BFFVkO6CSpU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BFFVkO6CSpU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Coogs]

Curry doesn't need to coffin-corner the ball; 10 seconds is plenty of time for Curry to run the length of the field, blast through the wedge and knock the return man the fuck out before recovering the fumble and returning it for a touchdown every time.


No wedge this year to blast through. Return man won't have a chance. :)

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=204708&highlight=rules

[kcfanXIII]

Curry doesn't need to coffin-corner the ball; 10 seconds is plenty of time for Curry to run the length of the field, blast through the wedge and knock the return man the **** out before recovering the fumble and returning it for a touchdown every time.

except the times he feels like throwing a touchdown pass to himself, then he'll take a knee.


edit: i also heard that if the chiefs draft him, he'll be late for training camp, cause the royals are asking him to be their 5th starter.

[Chiefs Pantalones]

I don't want Curry. If he can't rush the passer (game changer) he doesn't deserve to be drafted at #3. I mean he better be a game changer if he's gonna be drafted that high, and he's not.

[RustShack]

I bet Curry falls down the draft Derrick Johnson style.

[milkman]

No because it doesnt help your arguement?

I would go into detail as to why, but I could not articulate it as well as zilla did.

[melbar]

[QUOTE=Brock;5684154]I'm sick if hearing how a guy with a handful of sacks in 4 years can be taught to rush the passer.[/QUOTE

And what ...50 some tackles behind the line?...Just as good as a sack.

[CrazyHorse]

Why not let Vrable be our rush LB?

[suds79]

No way a LB with his size and speed can't blast up the middle or around the end and get to the QB.

This guys talent is rediculous.

This is flawed logic. Derrick Johnson has real good speed for a LB. He's not exactly the next DT.

I think rushing the passer takes a lot more then size & speed. How are his hands in shedding the blocks? etc.

No way you can shake it. The fact that he didn't do that at all in college is a major concern. Does it mean he can't do it? No. But it's still a concern.

[milkman]

I'm sick if hearing how a guy with a handful of sacks in 4 years can be taught to rush the passer.

[And what ...50 some tackles behind the line?...Just as good as a sack.

No, they are not.

[Sully]

[QUOTE=Brock;5684154]I'm sick if hearing how a guy with a handful of sacks in 4 years can be taught to rush the passer.[/QUOTE

And what ...50 some tackles behind the line?...Just as good as a sack.

First off, no.

Secondly, apples and oranges, skill-wise.

[melbar]

No, they are not.

3rd and 5....Sack for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10

3rd and 5...tackle for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10


You have some insight I'm missing? Other than sack sounds sexier?

[RedThat]

This is flawed logic. Derrick Johnson has real good speed for a LB. He's not exactly the next DT.

I think rushing the passer takes a lot more then size & speed. How are his hands in shedding the blocks? etc.

No way you can shake it. The fact that he didn't do that at all in college is a major concern. Does it mean he can't do it? No. But it's still a concern.

He wasn't really put into a lot situations where he was asked to rush the passer in college, but I don't know man? I saw him a lot of times fighting off blocks and getting to the ball carrier.

[melbar]

Averaged 83 tackles a season and had 105 last year. Had 45½ tackles for a loss, 9½ sacks, five interceptions and four forced fumbles in his career.

A guy like say Orakpo had 22 sacks in roughly the same number of games, and he was asked to rush all the time. He also had only 31 tackles. No int's. Brown has roughly the same stats as Orakpo and both are slower and roughly the same size as Curry. (Orakpo about 7lbs heavier).

Better production than the pass rushers by far.

[BryanBusby]

Too bad teams don't think Curry is much of a pass rusher, either.

"This draft is different than any I've seen in 20 years of doing this," a personnel director for an AFC team said. "There's one player that is on top of everybody's board, and that's (Aaron) Curry. Then you have differences of opinion on the next 30 guys. It's like everybody has a hole, a flaw.

"If Detroit could they'd pass three or four times because the money is so high on top and there's not that great value. You might not see any trades in the top 10."

Another personnel director for a team in the top eight said: "It's a second- and third-round draft. I would try to move down. I told (the team's owner) I would try to gamble and get seconds. You can get really good players in the second."

In late February, New England coach Bill Belichick was jabbed by pundits for accepting Kansas City's offer of a second-round pick (No. 34) in the trade for quarterback Matt Cassel. It was pointed out that he might have picked up a first-round choice in a three-way deal with other teams if he had waited.

More than likely, Belichick already knew the draft board was weak on top and wanted no part of a salary structure-wrecking high choice. Last year, the average guarantee was $11.9 million for a first-round pick, just $1.9 million for a second-round pick.

Obtaining another cheap second-round pick was the perfect way to go.

"Jake Long had a good year but they paid him more than any tackle that ever played the game," one scout said. "You really don't want a top-10 pick. It really hampers you if the guy ends up not being a player. Even if he does, he generally doesn't become worth that value you have to pay him."

Take A.J. Hawk. As the No. 5 choice in 2006, Hawk's guaranteed money totaled $15.59 million. Hawk has played 90% of the defensive downs and at least is near the mid-point of starters playing his position. But knowing Hawk's average salary per year is higher than their own might have annoyed players such as Charles Woodson, Aaron Kampman and Nick Collins.

Jamal Reynolds (No. 10 in 2001) collected $6.7 million in guaranteed money back when the salary cap was $67 million, not $127 million as it is today. The contract of Justin Harrell (No. 16 in 2007), which contains $6.547 million in guarantees, has locker-room ramifications now and will affect the cap if he ends up being jettisoned.

As Thompson and associates begin final deliberations, they're looking at a first-round board dominated by unpredictable underclassmen and few game-changers.

This month, the Journal Sentinel surveyed 20 personnel people with a national orientation and asked them to name the best player in the draft.

Curry, the linebacker from Wake Forest, has been built up to be No. 1 since he worked out and interviewed well at the combine. Yet, in a bit of a surprise, the men who know best don't think he's the least bit dominating. Depending on the scout, he's rated about on a par with Hawk coming out.

"He's not a violent football player," one personnel man said. "He's talented. Plays disciplined. But he's not a first-to-the-pile guy."

Furthermore, he's not much of a pass rusher.

Curry did win the poll but by merely a 9-7 margin over Michael Crabtree, the sophomore wide receiver from Texas Tech who remains on crutches after undergoing foot surgery last month.

Four players received one vote: Missouri wide receiver Jeremy Maclin, Southern California middle linebacker Rey Maualuga, Baylor tackle Jason Smith and Georgia quarterback Matthew Stafford.

[melbar]

This is flawed logic. Derrick Johnson has real good speed for a LB. He's not exactly the next DT.

I think rushing the passer takes a lot more then size & speed. How are his hands in shedding the blocks? etc.

No way you can shake it. The fact that he didn't do that at all in college is a major concern. Does it mean he can't do it? No. But it's still a concern.

Some of his highest grades have been for his ability to shed blocks and maintain leverage. Who knows if it translates, but he has the skills. Most film I've seen he's chasing QB's rolling away from him and getting plenty of attention.

[milkman]

3rd and 5....Sack for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10

3rd and 5...tackle for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10


You have some insight I'm missing? Other than sack sounds sexier?

Are you kidding me?

First off, team in 3rd and 5 situations are going to be passing the ball.
Second, if they are running the ball in that situation, they will more often than not be running a draw, because, you guessed it (well, probably not you), they been abused by the pass rush in similar situations., and you're not going to get a stop for a 5 yard loss.

Aaron Curry might get 10 opportunities for a play like that 10 times in his career.

But the primary reason is that sacks are game changing plays, they change momentum.

Dropping a RB for a 5 yard loss, not so much.

[melbar]

By the way, I end up defending this kid all the time, and I do think he will be very good if not great. But I have no illusions that he is "unstoppable" or a cant miss pro-bowler. I think he's one of 3 choices we have at #3 this year and maybe the best choice we will have. I cant see him being anything less than solid, and he has a very good chance to be much more. Who else can we say that about at 3 that isnt a LT? Maybe Raji? Sanchez has a good shot if he's given the chance to develop, but we have a young QB now. I keep missing the brilliant better choice by all the naysayers?

[milkman]

Some of his highest grades have been for his ability to shed blocks and maintain leverage. Who knows if it translates, but he has the skills. Most film I've seen he's chasing QB's rolling away from him and getting plenty of attention.

Shedding blocks as a run defenser is an entirely different skillset than beating the tackle to get after the QB in a pass rush.

And in those films, you see him chasing a QB virtually unblocked.

[beer bacon]

The Chiefs need to call up Lebron James and see if he wants to play DE/OLB for us. Dude has to be a great pass rusher with his size and athletic ability.

[kysirsoze]

3rd and 5....Sack for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10

3rd and 5...tackle for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10


You have some insight I'm missing? Other than sack sounds sexier?

Run blocking is different that pass blocking. That's why pass rushing ability and run stopping ability do not always go hand in hand.

[kysirsoze]

Shedding blocks as a run defenser is an entirely different skillset than beating the tackle to get after the QB in a pass rush.

And in those films, you see him chasing a QB virtually unblocked.

beat me to it.

[kstater]

3rd and 5....Sack for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10

3rd and 5...tackle for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10


You have some insight I'm missing? Other than sack sounds sexier?

Who would you rather have? DeMarcus Ware or Patrick Willis?

[melbar]

Are you kidding me?

First off, team in 3rd and 5 situations are going to be passing the ball.
Second, if they are running the ball in that situation, they will more often than not be running a draw, because, you guessed it (well, probably not you), they been abused by the pass rush in similar situations., and you're going to get a stop for a 5 yard loss.

Aaron Curry might get 10 opportunities for a play like that 10 times in his career.

But the primary reason is that sacks are game changing plays, they change momentum.

Dropping a RB for a 5 yard loss, not so much.

Yes a sack is more exciting, but a loss is a loss. I know you just want to argue and your bored, but seriously grow up. The auto personal attacks just showcase your inability to make a valid argument. A guy getting into the backfield on a regular basis is disruptive. Again, who is your brilliant choice at 3 oh great one?

[melbar]

Run blocking is different that pass blocking. That's why pass rushing ability and run stopping ability do not always go hand in hand.

The question was about whether he uses his hands well and he does.

[melbar]

Who would you rather have? DeMarcus Ware or Patrick Willis?

If you see DeMarcus Ware in this draft your seeing something I dont.

[milkman]

Yes a sack is more exciting, but a loss is a loss. I know you just want to argue and your bored, but seriously grow up. The auto personal attacks just showcase your inability to make a valid argument. A guy getting into the backfield on a regular basis is disruptive. Again, who is your brilliant choice at 3 oh great one?

You watched DT for years, and saw guys like Saleamua and Neal Smith get into the backfield and disrupt plays for years, and you didn't see how sacks did more to to change momentum?

How can I come up with a valid argument when the person I'm arguing with refuses to see what is right in front of him?

[milkman]

If you see DeMarcus Ware in this draft your seeing something I dont.

Wow, that's a great deflection.

[kysirsoze]

The question was about whether he uses his hands well and he does.

Shedding blocks as a run defenser is an entirely different skillset than beating the tackle to get after the QB in a pass rush.

And in those films, you see him chasing a QB virtually unblocked.

That was addressed too.

[htismaqe]

Yes a sack is more exciting, but a loss is a loss. I know you just want to argue and your bored, but seriously grow up. The auto personal attacks just showcase your inability to make a valid argument. A guy getting into the backfield on a regular basis is disruptive. Again, who is your brilliant choice at 3 oh great one?

Curry isn't going to be in the backfield if he's covering a TE...

[kstater]

Wow, that's a great deflection.

Yeah after attacking you not debating the issues, he conviently skips the differences between Willis and Ware.

[htismaqe]

3rd and 5....Sack for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10

3rd and 5...tackle for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10


You have some insight I'm missing? Other than sack sounds sexier?

Maybe you're missing that 3rd and 5 is almost ALWAYS a passing down, which makes your second scenario so rare that it's not worth talking about. :shake:

[keg in kc]

Instead of drafting a guy and playing him to his strengths, let's draft him and ask him to do something completely different.

Brilliant!

[SBK]

I've seen it all, a tackle for loss is as important as a sack. I don't think Herm Edwards could have even said something so dumb.

[kcfanXIII]

well if we draft curry, we'll have to have him touch farnsworth's arm. he should be able to make it not suck.

[Red Dawg]

Averaged 83 tackles a season and had 105 last year. Had 45½ tackles for a loss, 9½ sacks, five interceptions and four forced fumbles in his career.

A guy like say Orakpo had 22 sacks in roughly the same number of games, and he was asked to rush all the time. He also had only 31 tackles. No int's. Brown has roughly the same stats as Orakpo and both are slower and roughly the same size as Curry. (Orakpo about 7lbs heavier).

Better production than the pass rushers by far.

Exactly! He's a freaking STUD! How the hell can we pass on him if he's there?

[Jethopper]

well if we draft curry, we'll have to have him touch farnsworth's arm. he should be able to make it not suck.

This

[Mecca]

Exactly! He's a freaking STUD! How the hell can we pass on him if he's there?

He plays a devalued position and doesn't rush the passer...he's only "at the top of boards" because he's considered safe. He is no different than the top LB prospect in most years....

[Blick]

A 3-4 OLB is basically a DE who plays SOME outside linebacker.

It's not that Curry can't rush the passer. It's that we have no idea how he would do when he does that as his primary responsibility. You are assuming he knows how to play the defensive end position because a few times in college, he was asked to blitz. It's not even close to the same thing.

Why do we assume that Curry can't play OLB in a 3-4? Because 100% of 3-4 OLBs played DE in college. Because 15 of 16 of them are over 260 lbs (Curry is about 255). Because we haven't seen Curry do it. Because we will need to train him on something he has never done before. Because we would be drafting him to do something that is not listed as one of his strengths (and he has many of them).

It's not that he can't do it. But the odds are stacked against him, and you don't want to do that with your #3 pick that you're going to be giving millions of dollars to.

Name 'em. I can already think of 2 under 260.

Other than that, good post.

[Mecca]

Name 'em. I can already think of 2 under 260.

Other than that, good post.

I've said this about 20 times now, someone give me 1 example of a player who plays 3-4 OLB that was a traditional LB and not a defensive end.

[Blick]

I've said this about 20 times now, someone give me 1 example of a player who plays 3-4 OLB that was a traditional LB and not a defensive end.

I think you misread my post. I'm not arguing that 4-3 OLB's can be 3-4 OLB's. I'm arguing that 15 out of 16 3-4 OLB's aren't over 260 pounds.

[Mecca]

I think you misread my post. I'm not arguing that 4-3 OLB's can be 3-4 OLB's. I'm arguing that 15 out of 16 3-4 OLB's aren't over 260 pounds.

That's fine but I do mean in general, it's not just about weight. It's about the guy having a background rushing the passer so he has experience and knowledge of how to do it.

[milkman]

I've said this about 20 times now, someone give me 1 example of a player who plays 3-4 OLB that was a traditional LB and not a defensive end.

I don't mean to undermine your point, but in reading his bio, James Harrison is said to have been a traditional 43 OLB at Kent St.

[Mecca]

I don't mean to undermine your point, but in reading his bio, James Harrison is said to have been a traditional 43 OLB at Kent St.

If that is true he is literally the only one and it took him being undrafted and cut 4 times.

[Blick]

Also, Clint Sintim will be.

[Mecca]

Also, Clint Sintim will be.

Ok he's playing for a college team that runs a 3-4, that's a little different.

[Blick]

I know. Just saying.

[milkman]

If that is true he is literally the only one and it took him being undrafted and cut 4 times.

It might well speak to the difficulty of honing the skills to rush the passer and the time it takes to make that kind of transition.

Aaron Curry could very well be able to make that transition, and do it quicker, but you would still be talking about a 2 to 3 year learning curve.

[Mecca]

Curry in a 3-4 is going to be an inside backer it's a given.

If the Chiefs took him he'd play the role Karlos Dansby plays.

[milkman]

Curry in a 3-4 is going to be an inside backer it's a given.

If the Chiefs took him he'd play the role Karlos Dansby plays.

I am not debating that.

I've been arguing for a month or more that he's an ILB, thus not a core position to pick at #3.

I'm just pointing out for those that think he can be an OLB in a 34 that there isn't a history, and the one guy that can be pointed to took a long time to develop.

[Mecca]

I am not debating that.

I've been arguing for a month or more that he's an ILB, thus not a core position to pick at #3.

I'm just pointing out for those that think he can be an OLB in a 34 that there isn't a history, and the one guy that can be pointed to took a long time to develop.

Why do I have this really bad vision of Clancy Pendergast going apeshit pounding the horn of how valuable Dansby was for him and saying Curry can do the same?

[CrazyHorse]

Why not let Vrable be the rush LB?:D

[Mecca]

Why not let Vrable be the rush LB?

Uh if you hadn't noticed, both OLB's in the 3-4 rush the passer, they just don't both usually do it at the same time.

If you went by what you're saying here you'd lose all of the surprise ability the 3-4 brings which is "what guys are coming this time"

[KCwolf]

Thank God the draft is less than a week away. Speculation will soon commence.

[Mecca]

Thank God the draft is less than a week away. Speculation will soon commence.

It will then turn into what teams are great and what teams are retarded.

[KCwolf]

It will then turn into what teams are great and what teams are retarded.

Good Call...my bad.

[CrazyHorse]

Uh if you hadn't noticed, both OLB's in the 3-4 rush the passer, they just don't both usually do it at the same time.

If you went by what you're saying here you'd lose all of the surprise ability the 3-4 brings which is "what guys are coming this time"

Uhhhh...............

So you're saying that we need 5 defensive linemen in a 3-4 defense to be successful?

Not only is that wrong, it would expose any defense. 3-4 teams also send ILB.

You guys have become so entrenched in arguing against Curry that you have forgotten that some of us actually have watched, played and understand football.

I guess, given your theory you must have two pass catching TEs to be successful getting the ball to one of them. You must have 2 FBs lined up in the backfield to execute a successfull iso block?

Not only have you lost the ability to be creative in your arguement you lack it in scheme as well.

I wonder....... if Vrable is lined up on one side of the formation, which way you would roll your protection.

The arguement is that Curry is talented enough to take at #3. Not that he can do everything a LB could ever be asked to do. DT had his limitations. Currys limitations are speculated. Even given your speculation he's worth taking over any other candidate at the #3 spot. He is supposed to be scheme diverse. Meaning that many things can be done with him. If you cant take a talented LBer who is scheme diverse and utilize him in creative ways in your formations then you dont need to be argueing against him.

I dont care of he can rush the passer. With that in mind, do you have any other arguement? If he can rush the passer then that is only a bonus on top of the massive talent this guy is.

[Mojo Jojo]

If we keep the pick and he's there, we'd be crazy not to take him. Raji would be fine as well but then that would be 3 1 rdrs we spent on the DL in the last few years. Dorsey last year and Hali 3years ago.

Just because he wasn't given the repsonsibility of going after the QB alot in college doesn't mean he can't do it. No way a LB with his size and speed can't blast up the middle or around the end and get to the QB.

This guys talent is rediculous.

We all said the same thing about DJ. Yet he slipped to us and we are still waiting on that great upside,

[chiefzilla1501]

Uhhhh...............

So you're saying that we need 5 defensive linemen in a 3-4 defense to be successful?

Not only is that wrong, it would expose any defense. 3-4 teams also send ILB.

You guys have become so entrenched in arguing against Curry that you have forgotten that some of us actually have watched, played and understand football.

I guess, given your theory you must have two pass catching TEs to be successful getting the ball to one of them. You must have 2 FBs lined up in the backfield to execute a successfull iso block?

Not only have you lost the ability to be creative in your arguement you lack it in scheme as well.

I wonder....... if Vrable is lined up on one side of the formation, which way you would roll your protection.

The arguement is that Curry is talented enough to take at #3. Not that he can do everything a LB could ever be asked to do. DT had his limitations. Currys limitations are speculated. Even given your speculation he's worth taking over any other candidate at the #3 spot. He is supposed to be scheme diverse. Meaning that many things can be done with him. If you cant take a talented LBer who is scheme diverse and utilize him in creative ways in your formations then you dont need to be argueing against him.

I dont care of he can rush the passer. With that in mind, do you have any other arguement? If he can rush the passer then that is only a bonus on top of the massive talent this guy is.

We are not saying that.

8 NFL teams that run the 3-4 defense do.

Go ahead and check. All 8 of those defenses have 5 players on the defense who played D-Line in college. 100% of them. Yes, of course you send ILBs in, but only as blitzers. 3-4 OLBs very often rush the passer as a traditional pass rusher.

Unless you're claiming that guys like Dick Lebeau, Bill Bellichick, Wade Phillips, and company are all stupid and don't understand football.

[chiefzilla1501]

Yes a sack is more exciting, but a loss is a loss. I know you just want to argue and your bored, but seriously grow up. The auto personal attacks just showcase your inability to make a valid argument. A guy getting into the backfield on a regular basis is disruptive. Again, who is your brilliant choice at 3 oh great one?

But if you have a guy who is disruptive on run plays and is consistently dominated on pass downs, then you have yourself a one-dimensional player. It's not about sacks. It's about putting consistent pressure on pass plays.

Go ahead and look at draft history to see which is valued more highly: a pass rusher or a run stuffing LB. There are dozens of scouts who will tell you that pass rushers are far more valuable than LBs, not just people on this board.

And for good reason. A quarterback controls the tempo of the game 9 times out of 10. An End that can put pressure on a quarterback forces the quarterback to become uncomfortable, force mistakes, and often get rid of the ball sooner than they'd like to. Keep in mind also that because you have 4 LBs in a 3-4, you have a lot more range to cover the run, so your ability to stop the run becomes monumentally less important for a LB.

[chiefzilla1501]

I don't mean to undermine your point, but in reading his bio, James Harrison is said to have been a traditional 43 OLB at Kent St.

Yeah, I tried looking for that too, but it's hard to find. He also has a record for most sacks at Kent State, which leads me to believe he played some DE in college. I find it hard to believe that a LB could get 15 sacks.

[chiefzilla1501]

3rd and 5....Sack for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10

3rd and 5...tackle for a 5 yard loss...makes it 4th and 10


You have some insight I'm missing? Other than sack sounds sexier?

First of all, 3rd and 5 is usually a passing down, so yes you want your sack artist in there.

Let's throw more scenarios out there:
1st and 10 - run tackle for a 5 yard loss
2nd and 15 - pass down, QB has 10 seconds to throw, throws it for a 20 yard gain

1st and 10 - sacked for a 5-yard loss
2nd and 15 - Come on... are you seriously worried about the run on this down?


What you left out in your analysis is that when you get a loss on first down, more likely than not you're going to pass on second and third down. What's the point of getting a loss if your pass defense struggles to stop the other team on 2nd and 15 or third and 15? And what good is a great run defending LB when the opposing offense needs to put up 15 yards to get a first down?

A QB controls the game the majority of the time. On third down, I would much rather you put the ball in the hands of a RB than a QB who has a million seconds to throw the ball.

[CrazyHorse]

We are not saying that.

8 NFL teams that run the 3-4 defense do.

Go ahead and check. All 8 of those defenses have 5 players on the defense who played D-Line in college. 100% of them. Yes, of course you send ILBs in, but only as blitzers. 3-4 OLBs very often rush the passer as a traditional pass rusher.

Unless you're claiming that guys like Dick Lebeau, Bill Bellichick, Wade Phillips, and company are all stupid and don't understand football.

Not saying that at all. But I am saying that if you cant be creative with a guy like Curry and create pressure, coach soccer. Even if that means lining him up inside at times and lining him up outside at others.

I would seldom if ever send 5 down linemen after the QB. I would probably have at least one guy standing up. And you could only guess which guys were coming.

That was my point.

IIRC you dont read my posts well, so I dont expect you to understand what I am saying. So, please dont be offended if I dont argue with you today on any rebuttles you might have.

[DeezNutz]

First of all, 3rd and 5 is usually a passing down, so yes you want your sack artist in there.

Let's throw more scenarios out there:
1st and 10 - run tackle for a 5 yard loss
2nd and 15 - pass down, QB has 10 seconds to throw, throws it for a 20 yard gain

1st and 10 - sacked for a 5-yard loss
2nd and 15 - Come on... are you seriously worried about the run on this down?


What you left out in your analysis is that when you get a loss on first down, more likely than not you're going to pass on second and third down. What's the point of getting a loss if your pass defense struggles to stop the other team on 2nd and 15 or third and 15? And what good is a great run defending LB when the opposing offense needs to put up 15 yards to get a first down?

A QB controls the game the majority of the time. On third down, I would much rather you put the ball in the hands of a RB than a QB who has a million seconds to throw the ball.

I'd say this post provided sufficient insight as to why the sack and tackle for loss are not created equal.

And sexy has nothing to do with it.

[veist]

Not saying that at all. But I am saying that if you cant be creative with a guy like Curry and create pressure, coach soccer. Even if that means lining him up inside at times and lining him up outside at others.

I would seldom if ever send 5 down linemen after the QB. I would probably have at least one guy standing up. And you could only guess which guys were coming.

That was my point.

IIRC you dont read my posts well, so I dont expect you to understand what I am saying. So, please dont be offended if I dont argue with you today on any rebuttles you might have.

The essential disconnect is that nobody here is saying "Curry is a shitty football player" they are just saying "why should we draft a guy #3 overall on the hope that he can develop pass rush skills?" The argument is that the vast, vast, vast majority of successful 3-4 OLB's played DE in college (in a 4-3) where they were able to develop pass rush moves prior to entering the NFL. Drafting a guy that high on potential is asking for failure, the only upside is the amount of failure with Curry would be he falls back to playing inside. But still a waste to draft an ILB #3 overall.

[Marcellus]

6 days to the draft. Please God let it end.

[Crush]

6 days to the draft. Please God let it end.

Ha, it will never end.

[CrazyHorse]

The essential disconnect is that nobody here is saying "Curry is a shitty football player" they are just saying "why should we draft a guy #3 overall on the hope that he can develop pass rush skills?" The argument is that the vast, vast, vast majority of successful 3-4 OLB's played DE in college (in a 4-3) where they were able to develop pass rush moves prior to entering the NFL. Drafting a guy that high on potential is asking for failure, the only upside is the amount of failure with Curry would be he falls back to playing inside. But still a waste to draft an ILB #3 overall.

I get the arguement. Just dont completgely agree with it. Is Curry the ideal LB for us? Maybe not. Maybe he is. However, worst case senario, he is still the best on the board at a position of need. IMO.

So I take him. And instead of throwing my hands up because he isn't perfect, look at ways to utilize his talent to my advantage.

I dont see a better player @3. Pass rush skills or not. To me he's still the best player

Some agree, some dont.

I think we all want a good player.

[Pioli Zombie]

If the Chiefs don't trade down or trade out into 2010 they should kill themselves and the take out the entire City with them
This is the most flawed group of prospects in years.
Posted via Mobile Device

[SBK]

I get the arguement. Just dont completgely agree with it. Is Curry the ideal LB for us? Maybe not. Maybe he is. However, worst case senario, he is still the best on the board at a position of need. IMO.

So I take him. And instead of throwing my hands up because he isn't perfect, look at ways to utilize his talent to my advantage.

I dont see a better player @3. Pass rush skills or not. To me he's still the best player

Some agree, some dont.

I think we all want a good player.

Mr Peterson you are no longer employed by the Kansas City Chiefs.

[CrazyHorse]

Mr Peterson you are no longer employed by the Kansas City Chiefs.

Who's your pick.....Sanchez?

Or are you one of the "reaching" crowd?

And dont say you'd trade down. This is for the 3rd pick.

[SBK]

Who's your pick.....Sanchez?

Or are you one of the "reaching" crowd?

And dont say you'd trade down. This is for the 3rd pick.

If we were stuck at 3, I'd take a position of impact. Most likely I'd want Raji, Crabtree, possibly Jackson, although I think he might be a reach. I would love to see us get a QB, but that's not a very likely option.

If you ranked the positions 1-11 on defense, the position that Curry plays would land 10 and 11. (in a 3-4). Taking him at 3 is the the same as drafting a FB or a G at 3 for the offense. No matter how good he is, his position just isn't worth it.

[Pioli Zombie]

The best part about Saturday will be after the pick or trade is made all the posts that will basically be this

Shit fuck motherfucking piss dammit fuck fuck fuck fuck cocksucker shit shit shit
Posted via Mobile Device

[DeezNutz]

Who's your pick.....Sanchez?

Or are you one of the "reaching" crowd?

And dont say you'd trade down. This is for the 3rd pick.

One could convincingly argue that the Curry crowd and the "reaching" crowd would dovetail nicely with the selection of an ILB.

[Reaper16]

If the Chiefs don't trade down or trade out into 2010 they should kill themselves and the take out the entire City with them
This is the most flawed group of prospects in years.
Posted via Mobile Device
Not really, its just that this fanbase finally has a top 3 pick and the size of their collective bitch-tits is getting in the way of the desire to pull the trigger one any of them.

[SBK]

The best part about Saturday will be after the pick or trade is made all the posts that will basically be this

Shit **** mother****ing piss dammit **** **** **** **** one who sucks the penis shit shit shit
Posted via Mobile Device

No. We don't live under the thumb of Carl Peterson anymore. People are going to be surprised by what we do, and I bet you most of us are going to like it.

[CrazyHorse]

If we were stuck at 3, I'd take a position of impact. Most likely I'd want Raji, Crabtree, possibly Jackson, although I think he might be a reach. I would love to see us get a QB, but that's not a very likely option.

If you ranked the positions 1-11 on defense, the position that Curry plays would land 10 and 11. (in a 3-4). Taking him at 3 is the the same as drafting a FB or a G at 3 for the offense. No matter how good he is, his position just isn't worth it.

FB or G huh?

That's ridiculous. You have little imagination or creativity if this is how you truely feel.

As for your picks......everyone of them would have less impact on the Chiefs as a team. Given our LB corp and the picks we've spent inside the last few seasons, you would have to scrap high drafted players without trying to develop them, to draft Raji. Raji testing positive the week of the combine is a red flag you dont spend a#3 on. Not to mention he is as much a reach, if not more @3 than Curry would be.

Crabtree......maybe. But the WR draft is deep enough that I spend a later pick at WR. But that is merely my opinion. But LB is where we were the weakest last year. Drafting a 3rd WR behing Gonzo and Bowe would be spending a lot of money and a high pick for a 3rd WR.

Jackson.......late 1st to second round.

See how easy it is to pick at the players? No one is perfect. The best player on the board at a position of need is likely going to be Curry. IMO

[Reaper16]

FB or G huh?

That's ridiculous. You have little imagination or creativity if this is how you truely feel.

So, in your estimation, the whole of the NFL for the past twenty years or more has had little imagination or creativity? No one takes ILB/MLB in the top 3 and everyone who has done so has regretted it.

[SBK]

FB or G huh?

That's ridiculous. You have little imagination or creativity if this is how you truely feel.

As for your picks......everyone of them would have less impact on the Chiefs as a team. Given our LB corp and the picks we've spent inside the last few seasons, you would have to scrap high drafted players without trying to develop them, to draft Raji. Raji testing positive the week of the combine is a red flag you dont spend a#3 on. Not to mention he is as much a reach, if not more @3 than Curry would be.

Crabtree......maybe. But the WR draft is deep enough that I spend a later pick at WR. But that is merely my opinion. But LB is where we were the weakest last year. Drafting a 3rd WR behing Gonzo and Bowe would be spending a lot of money and a high pick for a 3rd WR.

Jackson.......late 1st to second round.

See how easy it is to pick at the players? No one is perfect. The best player on the board at a position of need is likely going to be Curry. IMO

You go ahead and see who the NFL picks in the top 3. Take the last 20 years if you wish. You can point out all the all-important ILB's on defense, and FB and G's on offense.

[CrazyHorse]

No. We don't live under the thumb of Carl Peterson anymore. People are going to be surprised by what we do, and I bet you most of us are going to like it.

I agree with this. I can live with several picks. Thats what comes from being a bad team. You have so many needs. In the years when we were more competetive, our needs were more defined.

But his year, I can get behind just about anything.

[Pioli Zombie]

Why don't they just draft Jim Nantz to be a Cocksucker. He's a can't miss pick.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Dave Lane]

Who's your pick.....Sanchez?

Or are you one of the "reaching" crowd?

And dont say you'd trade down. This is for the 3rd pick.

I'd personally rather take Sanchez than Curry. The upside of Sanchez "hitting" is much more valuable down the road. I doubt the Chiefs will do it but LB's Especially ILB can be gotten later in the draft and personally I'd rather trade down. Barring that I personally take Sanchez.

I also think having a good rising backup QB to learn is a very valuable thing to a franchise.

[Pioli Zombie]

I'd personally rather take Sanchez than Curry. The upside of Sanchez "hitting" is much more valuable down the road. I doubt the Chiefs will do it but LB's Especially ILB can be gotten later in the draft and personally I'd rather trade down. Barring that I personally take Sanchez.

I also think having a good rising backup QB to learn is a very valuable thing to a franchise.
Oh Jesus
Posted via Mobile Device

[CrazyHorse]

You go ahead and see who the NFL picks in the top 3. Take the last 20 years if you wish. You can point out all the all-important ILB's on defense, and FB and G's on offense.

I would pick based on the current situation. Not what has happened in the past. You must admit this year is different as for talent. That's why guys are rated where they are. I never said I would make the same pick no matter the talent pool. Come on now.

The talent dictates the draft this year. Are you saying that if we dont draft Curry that other teams will wait till the 4th and 5th rounds when they are picking FBs before drafting Curry?

Surely you're not saying that. I am trying to have an intelligent conversation with you. If you give up.....just say so.

[CrazyHorse]

I'd personally rather take Sanchez than Curry. The upside of Sanchez "hitting" is much more valuable down the road. I doubt the Chiefs will do it but LB's Especially ILB can be gotten later in the draft and personally I'd rather trade down. Barring that I personally take Sanchez.

I also think having a good rising backup QB to learn is a very valuable thing to a franchise.


I'd rather trade down too.

I just cant get behind drafting Sanchez. Especially after spending our second on Cassel. Giving up our 1st and second for one position, only to sit one on the bench has no value at all in my opinion.

[CrazyHorse]

I'm outta here.

Good night.

[melbar]

But if you have a guy who is disruptive on run plays and is consistently dominated on pass downs, then you have yourself a one-dimensional player. It's not about sacks. It's about putting consistent pressure on pass plays.

Go ahead and look at draft history to see which is valued more highly: a pass rusher or a run stuffing LB. There are dozens of scouts who will tell you that pass rushers are far more valuable than LBs, not just people on this board.

And for good reason. A quarterback controls the tempo of the game 9 times out of 10. An End that can put pressure on a quarterback forces the quarterback to become uncomfortable, force mistakes, and often get rid of the ball sooner than they'd like to. Keep in mind also that because you have 4 LBs in a 3-4, you have a lot more range to cover the run, so your ability to stop the run becomes monumentally less important for a LB.

But the argument has been that he is a coverage LB who also plays the run well however doesnt rush the passer. Curry certainly isnt dominated in any aspect of the game, he just didnt do it in that scheme. I dont think that makes him 1 dimentional. Of course a solid rusher is and should be considered more valuable than someone who is a specialist in another area. But a play for a loss is always good for the D. Curry makes solid plays in the run. He makes a lot of those plays for a loss. He also plays the pass well in coverage. If Curry doesnt sack the QB on a play he can still be disruptive and play well within the scheme which is what his M.O. is. Raji isnt gonna get a ton of sacks but his support of the scheme and play as a part of it will help the D if he plays solid and does what is asked of him.

[Pioli Zombie]

With the third pick of the 2009 NFL Draft the Kansas City Chiefs pick.....a backup Quarterback.
Good God.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Reaper16]

With the third pick of the 2009 NFL Draft the Kansas City Chiefs pick.....a backup Quarterback.
Good God.
Posted via Mobile Device
Win now! Win now! Win now! Win now! Win now!

[melbar]

First of all, 3rd and 5 is usually a passing down, so yes you want your sack artist in there.

Let's throw more scenarios out there:
1st and 10 - run tackle for a 5 yard loss
2nd and 15 - pass down, QB has 10 seconds to throw, throws it for a 20 yard gain

1st and 10 - sacked for a 5-yard loss
2nd and 15 - Come on... are you seriously worried about the run on this down?


What you left out in your analysis is that when you get a loss on first down, more likely than not you're going to pass on second and third down. What's the point of getting a loss if your pass defense struggles to stop the other team on 2nd and 15 or third and 15? And what good is a great run defending LB when the opposing offense needs to put up 15 yards to get a first down?

A QB controls the game the majority of the time. On third down, I would much rather you put the ball in the hands of a RB than a QB who has a million seconds to throw the ball.

OK then 1st and 10 etc etc...

No 1 person is gonna do everything needed to make any given play. A loss is a loss. Someone has to block his man in order for the rusher to get through. Guys behind have to cover so the QB doesnt complete a dump off, if someone does have the ball someone has to make the tackle. On defense pushing the Offense back and getting into the backfield is never a bad thing. I concede that a sack on a 3rd down passing play is huge. Putting a team in a 3rd and long is pretty darn nice too. We're just talking timing here. Or who is holding the ball when tackled behind the line.

[melbar]

Win now! Win now! Win now! Win now! Win now!

Ya lets discard the 26 yr old QB we just acquired and ignore the 10 or so gaping holes at other positions. Thats a great plan for the future...:rolleyes:

[Pioli Zombie]

Win now! Win now! Win now! Win now! Win now!
I'm sorry. I forgot Mark Sanchez was the greatest quarterback to. ever put on a uniform in the history of football. He just so dominated the NCAA over his long, illustrious college career. I mean all we heard for years on ESPN was Sanchez this and Sanchez that. And he was on the cover of SI about 65 times. Mark Sanchez is an icon of this generation and we shall never see his like again. When he rose from the dead on Easter He provided Salvation for us all.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Rigodan]

Ya lets discard the 26 yr old QB we just acquired and ignore the 10 or so gaping holes at other positions. Thats a great plan for the future...:rolleyes:

This.

Wait. Why are you rolling your eyes?

[Rigodan]

I'm sorry. I forgot Mark Sanchez was the greatest quarterback to. ever put on a uniform in the history of football. He just so dominated the NCAA over his long, illustrious college career. I mean all we heard for years on ESPN was Sanchez this and Sanchez that. And he was on the cover of SI about 65 times. Mark Sanchez is an icon of this generation and we shall never see his like again. When he rose from the dead on Easter He provided Salvation for us all.
Posted via Mobile Device

Are you thinking of Aaron Curry?

[DeezNutz]

Or who is holding the ball when tackled behind the line.

Who is the most likely suspect to fit this description?

[Reerun_KC]

I'm sorry. I forgot Mark Sanchez was the greatest quarterback to. ever put on a uniform in the history of football. He just so dominated the NCAA over his long, illustrious college career. I mean all we heard for years on ESPN was Sanchez this and Sanchez that. And he was on the cover of SI about 65 times. Mark Sanchez is an icon of this generation and we shall never see his like again. When he rose from the dead on Easter He provided Salvation for us all.
Posted via Mobile Device

That wasnt even remotely funny...

[Reerun_KC]

I really hope we draft Curry. My son is going to be born in the next week or so (wife is due the 23rd) and it would be nice to see if we could have Jesus Christ himself perform the baptisim.

Pioli Zombie?

This is funny....

[Pioli Zombie]

Are you thinking of Aaron Curry?

Curry, Stafford, and Sanchez have become the Holy Trinity.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Reerun_KC]

Curry, Stafford, and Sanchez have become the Holy Trinity.
Posted via Mobile Device

That is funny!

ROFL

[SBK]

I would pick based on the current situation. Not what has happened in the past. You must admit this year is different as for talent. That's why guys are rated where they are. I never said I would make the same pick no matter the talent pool. Come on now.

The talent dictates the draft this year. Are you saying that if we dont draft Curry that other teams will wait till the 4th and 5th rounds when they are picking FBs before drafting Curry?

Surely you're not saying that. I am trying to have an intelligent conversation with you. If you give up.....just say so.

The talent is fine this year. If we hadn't traded for Cassel we'd be in great shape to take a top notch QB prospect. Since we drafted Albert last year we don't have the need for a top notch LT prospect, so the top prospects are positions we no longer need.

If they can't trade down I'd rather they take a QB than an ILB, if the pick hits the payoff is so much greater than the LB. Think about it, would anyone in the world take Ray Lewis instead of Peyton Manning?

Pioli knows what he's doing, he'll make the right choice.

[chiefzilla1501]

But the argument has been that he is a coverage LB who also plays the run well however doesnt rush the passer. Curry certainly isnt dominated in any aspect of the game, he just didnt do it in that scheme. I dont think that makes him 1 dimentional. Of course a solid rusher is and should be considered more valuable than someone who is a specialist in another area. But a play for a loss is always good for the D. Curry makes solid plays in the run. He makes a lot of those plays for a loss. He also plays the pass well in coverage. If Curry doesnt sack the QB on a play he can still be disruptive and play well within the scheme which is what his M.O. is. Raji isnt gonna get a ton of sacks but his support of the scheme and play as a part of it will help the D if he plays solid and does what is asked of him.

An ILB in a 3-4's job is not that hard. Usually because you have 3 DTs in the middle, LBs never have to worry about getting sucked up in blockers. The 3-4 in general is a very run-friendly defense. So if the defense in general is run-friendly, then you don't need players who are outstanding against the run. Because a player who is average against the run will do just fine. Now, if you take a pass rusher out of that defense, then you're suddenly at a liability.

Here's an easy way to put this... a 3-4 defense made Kendrell Bell look like a stud, when in fact he was an average, one-dimensional LB. And Pittsburgh has done just fine without him. On the other hand, when the Chargers lost Shawn Merriman, the defense went to shit. Why? Because OLBs in a 3-4 are difference makers; ILBs are not (not usually). And it's because 3-4 OLBs are required to create plays while ILBs are asked to play supporting roles.

[Reaper16]

Ya lets discard the 26 yr old QB we just acquired and ignore the 10 or so gaping holes at other positions. Thats a great plan for the future...:rolleyes:
That did nothing to argue against the post you quoted.

[KCrockaholic]

...I wish I could comment on this but im still tired of discussing this from the other huge Curry threads. I think most of you know where I stand on this, and Ive given my input on what Ive seen from Curry, but face it Curry fans...No matter what you say, you will not persuade anyone to think that he will be a great, game changer. I am willing to say that if Curry doesnt get drafted by the Chiefs I will closely follow his career with whatever team he is on and support him throughout. I still believe Curry is the best team leader and captain in this entire draft besides the 2 top QB's.

[Rigodan]

...I wish I could comment on this but im still tired of discussing this from the other huge Curry threads.

I'm with you on this. I want to draft to be over just so we can start arguing over a new set of topics. Half the threads that are started now end up filled with sarcastic over the top shit about these prospects. NTTAWWT

[melbar]

That did nothing to argue against the post you quoted.

You see, you replied to a post suggesting that drafting a QB would be a bad Idea by suggesting in a terribly clever way that not drafting a QB means you just want to win quickly.

My argument was that drafting another young QB after just trading for one and thus ignoring the fact that almost every other position on the team needs attention.

Would it help if I used crayon next time?

[KCrockaholic]

I'm with you on this. I want to draft to be over just so we can start arguing over a new set of topics. Half the threads that are started now end up filled with sarcastic over the top shit about these prospects. NTTAWWT

Yep, I cant wait for Draft Day.

[salame]

The only thing about drafting a linebacker at #3 would be that his contract would be larger than James Harrison's new deal. Harrison is arguably one of the best defensive players in the league right now and a rookie is unproven. That's my only thinking on the likelihood of it all.

[Reaper16]

You see, you replied to a post suggesting that drafting a QB would be a bad Idea by suggesting in a terribly clever way that not drafting a QB means you just want to win quickly.

My argument was that drafting another young QB after just trading for one and thus ignoring the fact that almost every other position on the team needs attention.

Would it help if I used crayon next time?
Yes, because crayon would be an upgrade from Gerber.

I don't think that "not drafting a QB means just wanting to win quickly," necessarily, either.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Obviously, he would be a two-way player; QB while on offense and LB while on defense. At no time would we pull him off the field. Heck, he'll probably stay out there at half-time to entertain the crowd by turning water into wine or something.

WINNER! ROFL

..................our future

<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BFFVkO6CSpU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

Ironically, the name of the enemy IS "The Combine".

That is funny!

ROFL

2 out of 3 ain't bad...

http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/nechronical/nov2007/2/0/FB5162F2-A74F-24D6-B9586402F5C2F30E.jpg

[EyePod]

Why do you think some of us were so pissed when that move was announced?

It's almost like we're running a HYBRID.... like we'll need 3-4 and 4-3 lineman... GET THIS THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULLS.

[Mecca]

It's almost like we're running a HYBRID.... like we'll need 3-4 and 4-3 lineman... GET THIS THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULLS.

Do you really think they plan to always be a hybrid...I don't...I think that's a thing to say right now when they have 4-3 players and want to switch and can't fully switch.

It's hard enough to get the players to run 1 scheme properly and be good at it, do you really want to try to get players for 2?

[Chiefnj2]

An ILB in a 3-4's job is not that hard. Usually because you have 3 DTs in the middle, LBs never have to worry about getting sucked up in blockers.

My understanding of the 3-4 is completely different than yours. The ILB's always worry about getting sucked up by lineman. ILB's in a 3-4 are big, physcial guys who can stack and shed blocks of guards.

[RustShack]

My understanding of the 3-4 is completely different than yours. The ILB's always worry about getting sucked up by lineman. ILB's in a 3-4 are big, physcial guys who can stack and shed blocks of guards.

Like Donnie Edwards for example?

[Chiefnj2]

Like Donnie Edwards for example?

More like Lewis, Bruschi, Farrior.

[RustShack]

More like Lewis, Bruschi, Farrior.

Wasn't Lewis the one bitching about a NT so he didn't have to take on blocks?

[Deberg_1990]

If we keep the pick and he's there, we'd be crazy not to take him. Raji would be fine as well but then that would be 3 1 rdrs we spent on the DL in the last few years. Dorsey last year and Hali 3years ago.

Just because he wasn't given the repsonsibility of going after the QB alot in college doesn't mean he can't do it. No way a LB with his size and speed can't blast up the middle or around the end and get to the QB.

This guys talent is rediculous.

ROFL

[O.city]

Swing and a Miss there.

[O.city]

I think its understated how many guys get in the NFL,get paid, then don't really care about football.

[notorious]

Tuckdaddy was 100% right about Raji (Sp?).

[OnTheWarpath15]

This thread is rediculous.

LMAO

[Smed1065]

Hindsight is great though.

Everyone here after the fact can get it right and make a great team from the draft. (Just might take more than one)

I believe the reason football is so popular is that even the pros miss after having all the tools to judge by.

Hard to judge heart, desire, drive and etc before they get millions versus after they sign. I am so glad the rookie cap came in finally. I believe it will make the NFL better in the short and long term.

[O.city]

Hindsight is great though.

Everyone here after the fact can get it right and make a great team from the draft. (Just might take more than one)

I believe the reason football is so popular is that even the pros miss after having all the tools to judge by.

Hard to judge heart, desire, drive and etc before they get millions versus after they sign. I am so glad the rookie cap came in finally. I believe it will make the NFL better in the short and long term.

Hadn't really thought about with the whole rookie pay scale thing. Guys are gonna have to earn the big money now.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Hindsight is great though.

Everyone here after the fact can get it right and make a great team from the draft. (Just might take more than one)

I believe the reason football is so popular is that even the pros miss after having all the tools to judge by.

Hard to judge heart, desire, drive and etc before they get millions versus after they sign. I am so glad the rookie cap came in finally. I believe it will make the NFL better in the short and long term.

Hindsight?

Plenty of people were spot on the first time around, both in this thread and others.

[O.city]

Didn't think I would ever say this, but the Tyson Jackson looks like a much better pick that Aaron Curry at this point.

[L.A. Chieffan]

Didn't think I would ever say this, but the Tyson Jackson looks like a much better pick that Aaron Curry at this point.

im not sure we'd be able to get two picks for him

[O.city]

Jackson has put together 3 really good games in a row.

[zonachief]

Like BJ Raji or Glenn Dorsey playing in a 3-4?

Knowmo fail.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk