Chiefs Matt Flynn [Archive]

BigCatDaddy

10-11-2010, 11:47 AM

The Packers love this guy (and they should... he's one of the best backups in the league). I think it's going to take more than a 4th rounder to acquire Flynn.

Yeah, probably a 2nd and another pick. Schaub brought back quite a bit, but the price for a teams backup QB seems to have dropped quite a bit since then.

The Bad Guy

10-11-2010, 11:47 AM

We already paid for a good portion of it. He's relatively cheap after this year... especially since he didn't earn any of the incentives.

He has a 15 million dollar roster bonus.

Chiefnj2

10-11-2010, 11:56 AM

You know how you get a Matt Flynn? You draft them. I love GB's draft strategy of almost always taking a QB somewhere in the draft. KC should be taking that approach.

Sure-Oz

10-11-2010, 12:01 PM

draft a QB? LOL

Frankie

10-11-2010, 12:04 PM

I love GB's draft strategy of almost always taking a QB somewhere in the draft.

This.

KC kid

10-11-2010, 12:08 PM

Matt Flynn? People's hatred for Cassel makes them say and do crazy things.

BigCatDaddy

10-11-2010, 12:09 PM

You know how you get a Matt Flynn? You draft them. I love GB's draft strategy of almost always taking a QB somewhere in the draft. KC should be taking that approach.

I agree, but I think this team is ready to compete to get deep into the playoffs and dare I say a suberbowl right now with an upgrade at QB and WR. I don't want to wait 2-3 years and hope a guy pans out. So I would trade for Flynn, and then you can draft your QB's and let them learn behind him and Rodgers did with Favre and Flynn did with Rodgers.

TheGuardian

10-11-2010, 12:20 PM

Flynn will be traded more than likely. Rogers is young and will be there for a long time. Why on earth they even drafted him I don't know.

boogblaster

10-11-2010, 12:22 PM

I'd trade for him ...

BigCatDaddy

10-11-2010, 12:23 PM

Flynn will be traded more than likely. Rogers is young and will be there for a long time. Why on earth they even drafted him I don't know.

Value in the 7th round I suppose. Brohm didn't pan out so it looks like a solid move now. They busted in the 2nd, but now that 7th will bring back what they lost and then some.

RealSNR

10-11-2010, 12:24 PM

Flynn will be traded more than likely. Rogers is young and will be there for a long time. Why on earth they even drafted him I don't know.Rodgers was an unknown at that time. Green Bay figured that they could find the successor to Brett Favre among Aaron Rodgers, Brian Brohm, and Matt Flynn. They ended up hitting on 2 of the 3. Even better for them.

Also, considering they spent a 7th rounder on Flynn, that's a bad problem to have at all. How many Brett Favre backups in the 90s did Green Bay trade away? Answer: a ton.

There will be more Matt Flynns to be produced by that team in the future. I guarantee it.

kysirsoze

10-11-2010, 12:25 PM

The problem is Cassell is untradeable with his big contract.

Probably. Better to just cut him and trade pick(s).

I know nothing about Flynn. Just speaking hypothetically about getting an up and coming QB.

DaneMcCloud

10-11-2010, 12:27 PM

He has a 15 million dollar roster bonus.

Cassel has a $7.5 million dollar roster bonus due March 1st. His contract was front loaded and he's been paid in excess of $28 million during his first two years with the Chiefs.

Minus the signing bonus, he's relatively cheap during the remainder of the contract.

pkane

10-11-2010, 08:29 PM

I must be missing something. What has Flynn done for people to think he his good?

ILChief

10-11-2010, 08:32 PM

I must be missing something. What has Flynn done for people to think he his good?

His last name isn't Cassel

RustShack

10-11-2010, 08:32 PM

Kinda like when Cassel got to audition after Brady got hurt?

pkane

10-11-2010, 08:33 PM

His last name isn't Cassel

Other than the obvious Chief Planet answer?

TheGuardian

10-11-2010, 08:33 PM

I must be missing something. What has Flynn done for people to think he his good?

Won a national championship, has a lot of leadership intangibles, had "good" stats in college in a year where LSU ranked near the top in terms of dropped passes. Was awesome in crunch time.

It will be interesting if he gets to play this week to see how he looks but I was shocked that he fell to the 7th round.

ILChief

10-11-2010, 08:35 PM

no more other teams castoffs/late round projects. Every QB we've had (except for the Croyle experiment) from Bono on has two things in common: They were very late round picks and they were some other teams backup.

Thig Lyfe

10-11-2010, 08:36 PM

Like most people, I'd prefer to actually draft and develop a QB. But the rest of this team is ready to win RIGHT NOW, so I'm open to trading for any QB who can win RIGHT NOW, or at least not be the reason the team loses.

I don't know if Matt Flynn is that guy, but I'd be more than willing to find out if it means cutting Cassel loose.

pkane

10-11-2010, 08:36 PM

Won a national championship, has a lot of leadership intangibles, had "good" stats in college in a year where LSU ranked near the top in terms of dropped passes. Was awesome in crunch time.

It will be interesting if he gets to play this week to see how he looks but I was shocked that he fell to the 7th round.

A lot of college QB's have good stats and win Championships but flame out or don't get drafted. Did he look good in pre-season?

ChiefsCountry

10-11-2010, 08:38 PM

Damn it you not trade for other people's trash. Draft your own damn QB. Or if you do trade for one make sure he was drafted in the 1st round.

RustShack

10-11-2010, 08:38 PM

Cassel looked like shit in Pre Season with the Pats and almost got cut.

ILChief

10-11-2010, 08:40 PM

I say draft Ponder or Foles. I'm convinced Luck, Locker, and Mallett will be gone. Apparently the dude at Walter Football has been insinuating that Mallett is a cokehead.

pkane

10-11-2010, 08:42 PM

Not really interested in disscusing Cassel, just Flynn. Just wondering why people are really high on him when he hasn't showed anything yet at the pro level.

RustShack

10-11-2010, 08:46 PM

I'm in the Ponder wagon.. assuming Luck and Mallet are gone.

Al Bundy

10-11-2010, 08:48 PM

You want yet another teams backup?? Haven't the Chiefs been down that road before?

'Hamas' Jenkins

10-11-2010, 08:52 PM

pkane

10-11-2010, 09:01 PM

So... pretty much people want this guy for no reason other than he is not Cassel.

kysirsoze

10-11-2010, 09:06 PM

So... pretty much people want this guy for no reason other than he is not Cassel.

I'm not sure how many people in this thread "want this guy." The question was put up for discussion and seems to have come back a resounding "NO".

Frankie

10-11-2010, 09:19 PM

I must be missing something. What has Flynn done for people to think he his good?

He looks greener on the other side of the fence.

Frankie

10-11-2010, 09:24 PM

I say draft Ponder or Foles. I'm convinced Luck, Locker, and Mallett will be gone. Apparently the dude at Walter Football has been insinuating that Mallett is a cokehead.

I've heard Mallett's focus on preparation is not good. But I would be very happy about either Ponder or Foles, if we are picking later in the first.

Frankie

10-11-2010, 09:24 PM

I'm in the Ponder wagon.. assuming Luck and Mallet are gone.

Second.

Frankie

10-11-2010, 09:26 PM

How many ****ing backups do we have to try out here before we try and actually draft a QB?

Once upon a time we tried out a bench warming back up named Lenny Dawson.

Oh, the good old days.

RealSNR

10-11-2010, 10:26 PM

How many fucking backups do we have to try out here before we try and actually draft a QB?

A hundred? A thousand? Give us a number so we won't annoy you again until the number of contracts and wasted draft picks via trades makes it more sensible for you to get your own guy than someone else's trash?The horrible Matt Cassel trade wouldn't be nearly as bad if we had just drafted Sanchez with #3 overall. That way we have shitty stopgap AND a future. QB position solved.

JoeyChuckles

10-11-2010, 10:40 PM

You will not see nothing like the mighty Flynn.

Sweet Daddy Hate

10-12-2010, 12:03 AM

A lot of college QB's have good stats and win Championships but flame out or don't get drafted. Did he look good in pre-season?

Yes. Yes he did. Even Scrub Harrell looked better than Cassel in our preseason game against GB.

CrazyPhuD

10-12-2010, 01:25 AM

Hmmm I'm not sure Flynn would look that good on the game grid around here, end of line.

-Matt Cassel Program

kysirsoze

10-12-2010, 01:37 AM

Once upon a time we tried out a bench warming back up named Lenny Dawson.

Oh, the good old days.

I sometimes wonder if Len Dawson's greatness isn't eclipsed by the harm his "story" and the Hunt's belief they can recreate it has done to the franchise. It's as if they decided early, "See, we don't ever need to draft or develop our own QB. Look at Lenny Dawson!!"

I'd like to think this isn't the case, but you have to wonder.

Silock

10-12-2010, 02:13 AM

NO MORE FUCKING BACKUP QBs. FUCK.

jjchieffan

10-12-2010, 03:40 AM

I would prefer to draft a QB, but I have no problem in trading for a promising young backup like Flynn. Some of you act like that never works. I think Houston did well getting Schaub. Trent Green was a solid acquisition for us. Green Bay traded for Favre, who was a backup at the time. There are plenty of examples of when it has been a good move. Just because we missed on the likes of Bono, Gannon, and Cassel, doesn't mean that all of the backups are no good.

Shogun

10-12-2010, 05:47 AM

If we put the new and improved Mike Tyson in at QB, we're bound to win.

Red Dawg

10-12-2010, 07:27 AM

http://www.latestbeauty.com/file/pic/gallery/1399.jpg

Yeah baby!

Red Dawg

10-12-2010, 07:28 AM

NO MORE ****ING BACKUP QBs. ****.

HE"S NOT A BACK UP! He's Rogers successor.

BigCatDaddy

10-12-2010, 07:47 AM

I'm not saying give up on drafting and developing a QB, you can trade for a good starter that might be able to help this team win now while you develop someone else. There have been plenty of solid backups that became great QB's stuck behind guys that win on to have pretty good careers. Warner and Favre to name a couple. Delhomme even was pretty good for awhile and took the Panthers to the SB and darn near won it.

Radar Chief

10-12-2010, 08:01 AM

:drool: Hey guys, I heard Colt McCoy may start against Pittsburg. :shake:

Shogun

10-12-2010, 08:03 AM

Colt is on a whole other level of suck

RealSNR

10-12-2010, 08:07 AM

:drool: Hey guys, I heard Colt McCoy may start against Pittsburg. :shake:Good for Colt Thigpen, but I don't give a shit. Other teams can draft all the non-QBs they want. That still won't solve our problem.

milkman

10-12-2010, 09:13 AM

How many ****ing backups do we have to try out here before we try and actually draft a QB?

A hundred? A thousand? Give us a number so we won't annoy you again until the number of contracts and wasted draft picks via trades makes it more sensible for you to get your own guy than someone else's trash?

I would rather draft than trade for someone's backup.

However, the reality is that, a jjj pointed out, you can succeed with another team's backup, if you get the right one.

I alos don't believe that Pioli is going to draft a first round QB, and it has nothing to do with his drafting history.
It is simply a gut feeling.

I think the thing you have to do if you do trade for another team's backup is look at what kind of promise they show in thier opportunities to show what they can do, not only in the regular season, which may be minimal, but in the preseason as well.

You also have to evaluate their college production and the skillset they displayed while still in school.

And equally as important, get them while they're still young.

Don't trade for a guy that 27-28 years old and who has been a career backup.

BigCatDaddy

10-12-2010, 09:32 AM

I would rather draft than trade for someone's backup.

However, the reality is that, a jjj pointed out, you can succeed with another team's backup, if you get the right one.

I alos don't believe that Pioli is going to draft a first round QB, and it has nothing to do with his drafting history.
It is simply a gut feeling.

I think the thing you have to do if you do trade for another team's backup is look at what kind of promise they show in thier opportunities to show what they can do, not only in the regular season, which may be minimal, but in the preseason as well.

You also have to evaluate their college production and the skillset they displayed while still in school.

And equally as important, get them while they're still young.

Don't trade for a guy that 27-28 years old and who has been a career backup.

The odds tell you that drafting a QB in round 1 and devolping him is your teams best shot at success. However, it can be done other ways, such as trade for a starter, trade for a backup, or sign as a FA. So I would utilize all options on a position so important.

I also don't believe you need to go out and get that young guy. I'm all for going the Montana route again if you have the other parts in place, however you need to be addressing his successor while this guy in under center and not wait and see who is available after the guy retires or falls off a cliff production wise. That's how you end up with Derek Anderson as your QB.

Fansy the Famous Bard

10-12-2010, 09:37 AM

Pioli is still trying to build a team. You draft a QB and start him right away with crappy receivers and a crappy O'Line, then he's not going to succeed. The smart thing to do is draft and let him develop for a year or three. But that won't happen. Especially here in KC. Everyone... EVERYONE will be screaming for the new franchise QB to start...

Pioli is building a team first. He took a flyer on a guy that had "some" success, and has the right attitude (by all accounts) in Cassell to get us by if he doesn't work out. If\when they decide to draft the guy. That is the day that Pioli feels he has the talent across the board to support the "next step".

Just my opinion, not that I completely agree with it. I still think you need to draft mid-round QB's on a consistent basis. I really wanted Dan Lefevoure this past year in the 5th round. Nate Davis the year before.

Frankie

10-12-2010, 04:06 PM

HE"S NOT A BACK UP! He's Rogers successor.

Based on what?

Reerun_KC

10-12-2010, 04:09 PM

The Rick

10-13-2010, 10:45 AM

Shaun Hill has been looking REALLY good with the Lions...

Brock

10-13-2010, 10:46 AM

Shaun Hill has been looking REALLY good with the Lions...

Shaun Hill should get another chance somewhere next year.

Brock

10-13-2010, 10:46 AM

HE"S NOT A BACK UP! He's Rogers successor.

When, 8 years from now? Pull your head out.

BigCatDaddy

10-13-2010, 10:57 AM

Shaun Hill should get another chance somewhere next year.

I really like the guy. He typically puts up QB ratings in the 80's on the season, while playing for teams that didn't have that much talent around him on offense. He seems like a gamer to me as well.

patteeu

10-13-2010, 11:11 AM

You know how you get a Matt Flynn? You draft them. I love GB's draft strategy of almost always taking a QB somewhere in the draft. KC should be taking that approach.

I agree. I'd churn through backup QBs until I found what I was looking for as a QBOTF. I wouldn't necessarily do it exclusively through the draft, but that would be a major source.

ElGringo

10-13-2010, 11:15 AM

Think I would agree, keep picking QB's, even a blind dog finds a bone now and again.

RealSNR

10-13-2010, 11:30 AM

How about we sign Hill AND draft a QB in Round 1?

But nooooo... too much capital being spent on one position... can't have that.... nooooope.....

BigCatDaddy

10-13-2010, 11:41 AM

How about we sign Hill AND draft a QB in Round 1?

But nooooo... too much capital being spent on one position... can't have that.... nooooope.....

Once the new CBA is reached I don't think the salary of a 1st round QB is going to be an issue.

Frankie

10-13-2010, 05:33 PM

Shaun Hill has been looking REALLY good with the Lions...

30 years old. I thought y'all want a QBOTF. That said, I agree that he has looked good.

Hug it Out Dan

10-13-2010, 05:34 PM

http://www.latestbeauty.com/file/pic/gallery/1399.jpg

Ban this guy for making reference to Grease on a football msg board.

Frankie

10-13-2010, 05:37 PM

How about we sign Hill AND draft a QB in Round 1?

That's not a bad idea. But if we draft aQBOTF in the 1st, there's gonna be pressdure to start him over Hill. This scenario works better if we signed Hill and drafted a QB in the 2-4 round range.

ChiefsCountry

10-13-2010, 06:51 PM

Reerun_KC

10-13-2010, 06:55 PM

That's not a bad idea. But if we draft aQBOTF in the 1st, there's gonna be pressdure to start him over Hill. This scenario works better if we signed Hill and drafted a QB in the 2-4 round range.IF we draft a 1st round QB, he better be the starter on opening day... Lets not have any of this "Let him learn the ropes" bullshit....

I want that guy in the fucking game leading this team to the superbowl...

If he cant handle it on opening day, then you drafted the wrong guy...

Brock

10-13-2010, 07:04 PM

IF we draft a 1st round QB, he better be the starter on opening day... Lets not have any of this "Let him learn the ropes" bullshit....

I want that guy in the fucking game leading this team to the superbowl...

If he cant handle it on opening day, then you drafted the wrong guy...

Pure lunacy.

DeezNutz

10-13-2010, 07:09 PM

IF we draft a 1st round QB, he better be the starter on opening day... Lets not have any of this "Let him learn the ropes" bullshit....

I want that guy in the ****ing game leading this team to the superbowl...

If he cant handle it on opening day, then you drafted the wrong guy...

There is no reason why a rookie QB must start in game 1 of year 1, and I don't care if he's the #1 overall selection in the draft. There's a legit transition period for even the most talented of n00b QBs.

We need a vet. and a first-rounder.

DaneMcCloud

10-13-2010, 07:13 PM

I brought up Shaun Hill this past offseasons. He was traded for a 7th to the Lions this year.

I'm sure there are several teams, including the 49ers, that should have done more homework on the guy.

milkman

10-13-2010, 08:27 PM

If we decided to sign a guy like Shaun Hill, then we damn well better be looking to draft a first round QB.

I am sick to death of retreads and hand me downs.

I want my own fresh shiny new QB.

Frankie

10-13-2010, 08:40 PM

No it doesn't.

I'm all for drafting a 1st round QB if a good one is available. I was just talking about a scenario in which the Chiefs sign hill as well.

ChiefsCountry

10-13-2010, 08:41 PM

You sign Shaun Hill, you better have Ryan Mallet waiting in the wings.

Frankie

10-13-2010, 08:42 PM

IF we draft a 1st round QB, he better be the starter on opening day.....

I agree. Connecting this to my last post, there should not be a need to sign Shaun Hill too if we go QB in the 1st.

Frankie

10-13-2010, 08:44 PM

There is no reason why a rookie QB must start in game 1 of year 1.

But he better start SOMETIME in the year 1.

DeezNutz

10-13-2010, 08:45 PM

But he better start SOMETIME in the year 1.

Why?

Aside: Ponder is a very interesting option, assuming Gabbert doesn't declare.

ChiefsCountry

10-13-2010, 08:48 PM

But he better start SOMETIME in the year 1.

Thats what most people expect. A guy like Hill would be a stopgap until week 8 or so, more than likely.

DeezNutz

10-13-2010, 08:50 PM

Thats what most people expect. A guy like Hill would be a stopgap until week 8 or so, more than likely.

This would be fine, but all of year 1 should be a question mark, IMO. There is absolutely no reason why the rookie MUST start a single game.

Get some snaps, though? Absolutely. By year 2, at least, be ready to start the opener.

blazzin311

10-13-2010, 08:59 PM

I must be missing something. What has Flynn done for people to think he his good?

Kind of what I was wondering....I know he was good in college with some clutch games here and there and that he won a national title at LSU. I guess I just haven't seen him do much yet at an NFL level...then again who has besides GB. At the same time he'd be hard pressed to be any worse than Cassel. So why not take a flier on the guy I guess. I do recall scouts saying when he came out that they liked his intangibles but that he was a bit raw and might have to sit for a few years at the NFL level before he perhaps pans out. So I guess he's done that now too and could be ready to land a starting gig somewhere. Also GB does have a track record of finding good QBs.

Frankie

10-13-2010, 09:04 PM

Why?

Aside: Ponder is a very interesting option, assuming Gabbert doesn't declare.

Because I am beginning to think there are a couple of first rounders in this class that are smart enough and talented enough to be capable of that. Ponder seems to be one of them.

DeezNutz

10-13-2010, 09:06 PM

Because I am beginning to think there are a couple of first rounders in this class that are smart enough and talented enough to be capable of that. Ponder seems to be one of them.

Sure, I'm great with that. I'm just saying that if a QB isn't ready in year 1, that's not exactly a fault, and it shouldn't come as a surprise.