ChiefsPlanet
Page 11 of 25 « First 78910 11 1213141521 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Chiefs lose to Denver and draft 3rd or 2nd (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=220599)

Hoover 12-27-2009 04:23 PM
We need a playmaker period. That means Berry if he is there.

HolmeZz 12-27-2009 04:24 PM
I'm a Notre Dame fan.

There shouldn't be any talk of us taking Clausen. I don't like taking quarterbacks in the top half of the draft unless it's blatantly evident that there's something that sets them apart from the bulk of the quarterbacks in the league. I didn't get that feeling with Jimmy. He could turn out to be really good, but I wouldn't be confident enough in believing that will be the case to take him high in the draft(not that I think we should be looking QB anyway. Berry should be our man).

Coogs 12-27-2009 04:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoover (Post 6382521)
We need a playmaker period. That means Berry if he is there.
Or a QB.

KC kid 12-27-2009 04:25 PM
The thing about drafting a QB is Cassel will be 28 next year. You could always say that you want the new QB to have a year behind Cassel.

Coogs 12-27-2009 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HolmeZz (Post 6382523)
I'm a Notre Dame fan.

There shouldn't be any talk of us taking Clausen. I don't like taking quarterbacks in the top half of the draft unless it's blatantly evident that there's something that sets them apart from the bulk of the quarterbacks in the league. I didn't get that feeling with Jimmy. He could still be good, but I wouldn't be confident enough in believing that will be the case to take him high in the draft(not that I think we should be looking QB anyway. Berry should be our man).
That's your opinion, and that is fine. I just don't happen to agree. We need a QB in a big way, Cassel be damned!

Coogs 12-27-2009 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC kid (Post 6382528)
The thing about drafting a QB is Cassel will be 28 next year. You could always say that you want the new QB to have a year behind Cassel.
Yep!

KC kid 12-27-2009 04:28 PM
If you take a QB and Cassel struggles, you covered your ass.

If you take a QB and Cassel does awesom, you have trade bait.

notorious 12-27-2009 04:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 6382514)
Just saying man, if we have a chance at the guy it couldn't be all bad. Locker either if he comes out, and Casserly said earlier today that he still might.
Locker needs some good coaching and a few years before he becomes a starter.


With that said, do you really want our coaching staff coming within 50 feet of a QB that needs coaching?

Mecca 12-27-2009 04:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HolmeZz (Post 6382523)
I'm a Notre Dame fan.

There shouldn't be any talk of us taking Clausen. I don't like taking quarterbacks in the top half of the draft unless it's blatantly evident that there's something that sets them apart from the bulk of the quarterbacks in the league. I didn't get that feeling with Jimmy. He could turn out to be really good, but I wouldn't be confident enough in believing that will be the case to take him high in the draft(not that I think we should be looking QB anyway. Berry should be our man).
Isn't that philosophy why we haven't had a QB in forever?

Pablo 12-27-2009 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 6382543)
Isn't that philosophy why we haven't had a QB in forever?
Yeah, we want the perfect prospect otherwise we're not all that interested.

And aside from Stafford and Palmer I don't know two better pure prospects for the QB position in forever...and we didn't really have a shot at them anyhow.

Coogs 12-27-2009 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by notorious (Post 6382541)
Locker needs some good coaching and a few years before he becomes a starter.


With that said, do you really want our coaching staff coming within 50 feet of a QB that needs coaching?
Yes. And if they can not do it, then find a coaching staff that can do it. It is not really rocket science. The teams with the franchise QB are usually in the hunt for the title.

ChiefsCountry 12-27-2009 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 6382510)
That is not exactly what the report says.
Thats my report on him.

Coogs 12-27-2009 04:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostRockPablo (Post 6382546)
Yeah, we want the perfect prospect otherwise we're not all that interested.

And aside from Stafford and Palmer I don't know two better pure prospects for the QB position in forever...and we didn't really have a shot at them anyhow.
We probably could have traded up for Stafford. We just didn't.

chiefzilla1501 12-27-2009 04:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC kid (Post 6382537)
If you take a QB and Cassel struggles, you covered your ass.

If you take a QB and Cassel does awesom, you have trade bait.
The concern is sinking so much money into 2 QBs who don't turn out to be QBOTFs. If they don't think Clausen is QBOTF material, then I'd rather move on and take a QB in the 2nd to compete with Cassel. Eitiher way, I agree we have to bring in true competition. In Miami's case, it really worked out in getting them Henne.

Mecca 12-27-2009 04:33 PM
It doesn't matter who the prospect is our fan base will not want them. When everyone thought we'd have a chance at Stafford he was repeatedly railed, then it switched to Sanchez, the year before it was "I don't want Matt Ryan" it will happen every year.

A good majority of this fan base is far to scared to want to take a QB, Carl had this base pegged they like the safe vet QB's more.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:55 AM.
Page 11 of 25 « First 78910 11 1213141521 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.