Speaking of things that don't matter, do you think New Orleans cares why Drew Brees was moved? Would we have cared why Montana was moved if he'd won one more game in 93? Hell, do we care why he was moved anyway?

All you're doing is pointing out that there are top notch QBs who come available at the end of their careers because some teams act proactively to replace them before they drop off the cliff. The Minnesota version of Brett Favre is another example, although he fell just short of getting them to the big game.

It does matter, there's a reason some teams have small windows while say the Colts window has been open for nearly a decade now.

They hit on both of those trades. I don't think there's any reason to regret either one of them. You can't just assume that every first round QB you draft is going to become a Peyton Manning (or even an Eli). If the Chiefs could trade their first round pick every 3 or 4 years for a QB who was as effective as the aging Joe Montana at the top end or Trent Green in his prime at the bottom end, I'd take that.

I don't think getting 2 years out of a 1st round pick is enough.

How long is the Raiders window going to be locked down and shuttered as a result of the JaMarcus Russell pick? Come on, man, don't give me this every 1st Round pick is going to be a Peyton Manning BS. That kind of extreme best case evaluation is shoddy analysis.

I'd bet that the Ryan/Flacco/Sanchez windows won't be open nearly as long as the Manning window will end up being. I'm not sure whether they even count as being opened up yet.

Between Green and Montana we had 8 years so it would be an average of 4 years for every 1st round pick. Out of the 8, one would be a growing pains year and two would be the aging superstar years.

Favre and Montana fell short of the goal. Montana cost the Chiefs a valuable first round pick.

I think it matters quite a bit.

Trent Green's first and last year should be thrown out of this discussion for obvious reasons.

That leaves 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005.

8-8, 13-3, 7-9, 10-6.

Two winning seasons, ZERO playoff wins.

The Chiefs should have selected Brees at #12 overall in 2001.

And with your philosophy your team would start to suck because you'd have to constantly be trading for a QB.

It requires risk to be great, if the fear of taking a QB high is to great for you because he might bust, then you need to get out.

We shouldn't take the risk of being a Super Bowl Champion, lets just reach for 8-8 again.

"Stretching" is a generous descriptive in this case.

There's a far better than 50/50 chance that Sanchez will never make it to the Superbowl, but yet you would have drafted him last year. Suggesting that the pick used on Montana wasn't well spent just because the team ended up falling short is something I can't agree with.

Favre didn't even cost a pick. Picking him up was well worth it even though it didn't pan out for the Vikings.

Yeah, I should have included an injury year for Green's last season with us. I still think it was worth it. We didn't fail to win playoff games during those years because Trent Green was our QB. Trent Green was the leader of the most prolific offense the Chiefs have ever had. The credit needs to be shared with the likes of Priest Holmes, Willie Roaf and several others, but there's no reason to believe that there would have been any playoff victories if the Chiefs had had Brees instead of Green. Brees couldn't have forced Indy to punt.

Sanchez already made it as far with the Jets as Montana did with us.

You don't just blindly draft QBs in the first round just to take a chance. Which QB do you want at #5 this year?