That's completely hypothetical as Cassel didn't have "good protection" at any point during the 2009 season. Defensive players were in the backfield to take the handoff, coming from every single gap/point on the offensive line - including left tackle. It was just as bad at every position on the line. And no, they did not get "better" in the second half of the season. We just decided to have a running back run the ball with a bit more elusiveness and speed than a previous running back. That helped a ton. But the offensive line didn't have some miraculous epiphany. It was Charles. The line still sucked dog balls.

I'm not saying that the middle of the defense isn't dog shit. It is. It was last year too. But let's have a ****ing conniption about drafting Curry last year because we all knew DJ was a passionate workhorse that gave 100% every game so it was a waste to burn a pick on a linebacker then.

We are going to be doing the same thing next year when we are going to desperately need a OT, and the only one of merit is going to be Joe Barksdale.

Untrue, and invalidates anything after.

Dj wasn't why we had conniptions about curry. Curry projected way better to the 43. But please, continue to ignore facts in your "objective" analysis (which equates to an oline fetish if you ask me)
Posted via Mobile Device

Facts? Curry was a strong side linebacker in college (same as DJ) that had the size, speed and coverage skills to effectively transition to the middle in a 3-4 scheme. (Hell, he was probably overqualified to play inside in a 3-4.) The guy shed blocks amazingly well and was able to play sideline to sideline. He would have been a very good pick for the Chiefs in hindsight considering how ineffectual Mays has been, how inconsistent Johnson has been or how old Vrabel looked on the field at times from the LOLB spot.

However, he is not a edge rush backer (ROLB) and that's where people around here complained that you never take a MLB (especially a 3-4) or a SSOLB with a top ten pick unless they are the second coming of a modernized version of Dick Butkus or Derrick Brooks.

Curry is/would have been the same pick as McClain. (Although Curry is faster.)

Surprisingly, I agree with about everything you just said.

You're rewriting history. What I remember reading is that you don't take a non pass-rushing linebacker in the top 3, which has pretty much been the case in the NFL draft. I remember defending taking a linebacker in the TOP 10. I wouldn't take McClain if the Chiefs were at 3 either.

Curry didn't have strong lateral agility. He had good straight line speed and was disruptive up the middle, but he lacked fluidity in his hips. I dunno where you are getting your stuff.
Posted via Mobile Device

Is it just me, or is it mildly funny that Saccapoo claims he watches football games, yet he sees something completely different than everyone else?

As for Curry, Jesus Christ shut the **** up. McClain is a way better Mike prospect than Curry was. Sure hes not as fast, but that doesn't matter because he does everything else so much better. There is a lot more to football than a 40 time.

Man, if there was anyone who needed a dose of Prozac, it's you.

Holy shit. Seriously? You are breaking it down to the minutia of lacking fluidity in his hips? And this is in comparison to McClain? And since he had the best time out of all linebackers in the combine in not only the 40 yard dash, but also the 3 cone drill, the 20 yard shuttle, the 60 yard shuttle, the vertical jump, the broad jump as well as the top reps in the bench press, I'd say that if there was a lacking of fluidity in his hips, he'd have not posted such good times in the cone and shuttles.

But as someone stated, it's history.

It didn't have anything to do with DJ. Curry was similar to Okung, a player who'd be a mid- to low round pick in any other draft. The dearth of top-level talent in the draft inflated his value (and the value of everybody else drafted in the top half of the round) an insane amount, much like the dearth of blue-chip tackle talent in this year's draft is overvaluing Okung.

Aaron Curry again.... :shake:

http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f1...picardssdd.jpg

I doubt Curry was a mid-to-low rounder. He was the Butkus award winner and possessed superb measurables. He was a better prospect than Derrick Johnson at the same position. But I digress...

Other than Suh, and potentially Berry, there's not any players that you could say, at this point, are real "elite" level players in this draft, although it is a very deep draft with excellent players into the later rounds. If you are forced to take a top five pick, you might at well get the most value out of it that you can and address a position of need. And while there is some arguments about the actual need of a LT on the current Chiefs roster, I feel that it is a position that needs upgrading and gives you the opportunity to upgrade two positions on the line with a single pick.

He might not be heads and shoulders above anyone else in this draft at his position, but it's generally regarded that he's the best tackle prospect in this draft. Even if you are pleased with Albert at LT, RT (which is an incredibly important position in it's own right) still needs to be addressed, whether that's Albert or Okung is of little consequence.

For those people who want a safety or a MLB with the #5 pick, they need to realize that those positions aren't going do to anything to improve the Chiefs until they get a NT anyway. The 3-4 defense is reliant on that position more than anything else, but no one is going to convince me that Williams or Cody is better at their position than Okung is. And they might be able to pick up Cody with the first pick in the second round anyway.

FFS....

Moving Albert to RT would = FAIL
Drafting Okung to play RT = FAIL/reerunED

Good thing there's 7 rounds in the draft, so they can address other needs after the first round.

You know, like nose tackle. And right offensive tackle.