ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Chiefs have an OT in the building! (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=271171)

The Franchise 03-15-2013 09:42 AM

The numbers have been posted by DaKCManAP in either this thread or another thread.....but if we drafted Geno.....all 3 of our QBs would have the cap hit of Joe Flacco.

patteeu 03-15-2013 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC_Lee (Post 9501496)
And that's my point, and I think yours as well Pestilence, regarding 1.1 and KC taking QB there.

It's ok to let a DL taken @ 1.1 to sit and learn, rotate in now and again to learn the position in the NFL.

But a QB taken @ 1.1 sitting and learning, getting into a few games late to learn the position in the NFL?!?! The Hell you say!!!

A DL taken at 1.1 may or may not start, but he's almost certainly going to get plenty of snaps over the course of the season as a part of the rotation. We're talking about a QB at 1.1 who never sees the field. That doesn't happen in the modern NFL. (I'm not saying it can't happen, but it doesnt. And it's not the same as the DL scenario at all).

DaKCMan AP 03-15-2013 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 9501492)
True enough. But to the argument that KC has a particularly bad track record with DL, the answer is that the guys picking for KC this year aren't the same guys who made all those other picks.

Yep. And the guys picking for KC last year aren't the same guys who made the previous round of bust picks.

To me all that stuff is stupid. Past bust results aren't indicative of future busts. Just like the whole "USC QB = Bust" mantra. BS. If a prospect's a stud I don't care what school he played for or how that school's previous QBs turned out in the NFL.

The Franchise 03-15-2013 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 9501509)
A DL taken at 1.1 may or may not start, but he's almost certainly going to get plenty of snaps over the course of the season as a part of the rotation. We're talking about a QB at 1.1 who never sees the field. That doesn't happen in the modern NFL. (I'm not saying it can't happen, but it doesnt. And it's not the same as the DL scenario at all).

So tell me this then....

Say the Texans for some reason end up at 1.1 this year. Would it be ok for them to take Geno Smith and sit him for a year? They already have an established veteran QB with a decent salary who could realistically play for another 2-3 years. Would they need to take a DE/DT who would rotate in his 1st year? How about a RT?

RunKC 03-15-2013 09:48 AM

The biggest need on this team is the pass rush. I would love Dion Jordan here. He's going to be a beast.

crazycoffey 03-15-2013 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 9501502)
The numbers have been posted by DaKCManAP in either this thread or another thread.....but if we drafted Geno.....all 3 of our QBs would have the cap hit of Joe Flacco.

Pretty cool tidbit. I say draft your QB. Said all along I don't want all our eggs in one basket. Get a starter. A vet back up and draft your guy. I want options.

Bowser 03-15-2013 09:54 AM

I'll ask again - Is there some law that a team, particularly the Chiefs, can't be stacked at the QB position?

If they sign this guy, and I really hope they do, then Dorsey and Reid have done nearly the impossible by making the first overall pick in the draft for a team that won 2 games the year before a near luxury draft pick. Why WOULDN'T they pick a talented quarterback that would benefit by watching the NFL game from the bench for a season?

Easy 6 03-15-2013 10:00 AM

Wow, these guys arent jacking around, what a nice get, it really gives them leeway in the draft.

And no one has found a single thing to bitch about with this guy, that may be the most amazing thing about it.

Dudes freakin huge
When he plays his teams run game spikes upward
Is considered pro bowl caliber
Versatile, plays two spots at a high level
Veteran, no learning curve
He's Samson re-incarnate, bain of philistines everywhere

KEEP DOUBTING THE WALRUS

Mr. Laz 03-15-2013 10:00 AM

I think he has some weight control issues.

DaKCMan AP 03-15-2013 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC (Post 9501517)
The biggest need on this team is the pass rush. I would love Dion Jordan here. He's going to be a beast.

Barring the removal of Hali from our roster, Jordan would be at most a situational player for KC in 2013.

patteeu 03-15-2013 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP (Post 9501510)
Yep. And the guys picking for KC last year aren't the same guys who made the previous round of bust picks.

To me all that stuff is stupid. Past bust results aren't indicative of future busts. Just like the whole "USC QB = Bust" mantra. BS. If a prospect's a stud I don't care what school he played for or how that school's previous QBs turned out in the NFL.

:thumb:

Shag 03-15-2013 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 9501385)
Unless the rules have changed in the past year or two, keeping only 2 QBs active effectively gives you an extra active roster spot because the 3rd QB can still be an emergency QB (once he goes in the game the first 2 QBs can't return though, iirc).

Pretty sure they expanded the active roster by 1 player, and eliminated the emergency QB concept a couple years ago...

DaKCMan AP 03-15-2013 10:04 AM

DaKCMan AP's glue-sniffing scenario:

Draft Geno @ 1.1 and sit him for a year.
Start Alex Smith who has a Pro Bowl (either #3 QB or alternate) season.
In 2014 offseason trade Alex Smith for multiple picks (including 2nd rounder) a la AJ Feely & Kevin Kolb.

Profit.

patteeu 03-15-2013 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 9501516)
So tell me this then....

Say the Texans for some reason end up at 1.1 this year. Would it be ok for them to take Geno Smith and sit him for a year? They already have an established veteran QB with a decent salary who could realistically play for another 2-3 years. Would they need to take a DE/DT who would rotate in his 1st year? How about a RT?

It would be OK with me. I think that if they took QB with 1.1, they'd be in for a QB controversy, but if they're willing to deal with that, it's no skin off of my back.

patteeu 03-15-2013 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shag (Post 9501573)
Pretty sure they expanded the active roster by 1 player, and eliminated the emergency QB concept a couple years ago...

Thanks. I had a vague feeling that the rule had changed, but I wasn't sure. In that case, DaKCMan's concern about the wisdom of only suiting up 2 QBs is a lot more valid.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:31 AM.

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