I don't think I've ever seen one person call CC a name.

I'm just gonna say this and then leave this bomb of a topic alone, because I came back in the middle of it and didn't see completely the genesis of the issue, but I saw alot of attacks on said "n00bs" that didn't seem to be provoked.

Thigpen was already on the roster, so until Pioli actually did something, neither Cassel nor Sanchez were "options" except in the minds of the fans and some of the media.

If Pioli had no intention of drafting Sanchez, he wasn't ever an option.

CC wasn't cut out for all of the name-calling and vitriol surrounding the Sanchez/Stafford/Cassel debate.

Here's the thing about Big Ben...

Franchise QB, definitely. But he IS a game manager. There's no way you can get away with throwing for barely 3,000 yards with limited rushing yards playing for, let's say, the Cardinals. Take away a dominant defense, and Ben is probably a 9-7 QB who can win IF your defense can put you in a great position to win a the end of the game--in those situations, he's the second QB in the NFL I'd want (behind Brady).

From the perspective, I think he's slightly overrated. Let's make a comparison. Brady arguably complemented an outstanding defense in the 90's. Like Ben, he was a franchise QB that was a game manager that can win games in the clutch. The difference is, as the Pats' defense declined, Brady was asked to take the team over, and he did just that--he moved from game manager to a guy who took over games; from 3,000 yards passing to about 4,000 yards passing easily. Ben hasn't made that transition. I know it's not just about #'s, but can you seriously tell me that 17 TDs and 15 INTs would win a Super Bowl with Indy's defense or especially Detroit or KC's or New Orleans'?

It's not to say that he can't do it. But I've seen limited evidence to suggest that he can take over games consistently when his defense isn't outstanding. Maybe he makes a Brady-like transformation, but I still believe that QBs who consistently make the playoffs on 3,000 yard seasons are the definition of game managers.

It's the ebb and flow of Chiefsplanet. We've certainly had people leave over the years due to the opposite - people choosing to make anything "positive" an unforgivable sin.

You don't think Sanchez was an option, ever? Pioli ruled out Sanchez as a draft pick before ever evaluating him? He HAD to have been an option at somepoint. If there is anything that I've consistently read about Pioli is that he is thorough.

Without knowing what Pioli thought/thinks about Sanchez, the only connection is in our minds. There's no factual evidence suggesting Sanchez was ever an option. Which is why stewing about passing on him seems so absurd. For all we know, Pioli said the same thing some of the Sanchez-haters have said - less than 25 starts.

That's just your opinion. I think it's a lot closer than you would believe.

Jackson carries much higher positional value than Unger. And Sanchez is not a lock to succeed, while Cassel is not a lock to bust.

But essentially, that's the draft duo we're talking about here. Frankly, I still don't understand why people are so tough on Cassel. Yes, he has Moss and Welker, but I don't remember people saying that Palmer was effective because he had Chad Johnson/Housh, or Big Ben only won his first Super Bowl because he had Hines Ward/Burress. And if you watch tape of games, you will see that NE's line is not nearly as good as advertised--they are only as good as they are because Brady is really that good.

I can understand that Cassel makes you nervous. I'm uncertain about him too. But you have to admit that the critics are harsher than they should be. I know you've said he's going to be a game manager, but what leads you to believe that? What does he have that Sanchez doesn't? He's got a hell of a work ethic, above average arm strength, accuracy, and mobility, flawless mechanics, and great leadership. Yes, Sanchez has slightly better upside, but he also has a lot more downside risk. I can understand that there's doubt about Cassel, but I think people make arguments for him that they would never make for first round picks. Just my opinion.

I honestly think it stems from the fact that most of the people you're talking about didn't want Cassel and did want Sanchez.

Like I said before, I think it's going to be very, very hard for Cassel to ever be much in some people's minds because they've set the bar high enough the won't ever be wrong.

Probably because there is going to be little tolerance for mistakes. He's 27 years old, he's not a big-time prospect fresh out of college.

I hope that Cassel succeeds. Absolutely.

But if the decision were up to ME (and it's clearly not), I would have chosen Sanchez/Unger over Jackson/Cassel.

I've posted "my" mock draft in the draft forum. It would have address every need on the offensive line, TE, WR, K and most importantly, QB. We would have had an offense that would grow together for the next 5 years and beyond (with Bowe, Charles, Albert & Cottam).

That's not how it worked out. I'm not "bitching" about it. I'm voicing my opinion.

After all, that's what this forum is for; voicing our opinions.

Unless somehow I missed the memo after Pioli was hired and we're all now supposed to fall in line like a bunch of lemmings.

And even then, I'd voice my opinion

I trust you see the irony of your post.

i've thought about this quite a bit and maybe pioli saw enough of sanchez BEFORE taking our job that he already knew what he thought, so as GM of the chiefs sanchez never was an option. like i have said MANY times pioli either knew he was getting cassel or had a VERY good idea he was. look back at the opening presser, when asked about the QB situation he smiles and says he has something in mind. In my opinion he knew that was cassel

ROFL

I'd take Hamas, CC and Mecca over you and all the other n00bs any day of the week.