This is based on the view that there is a great deal of talent in the first two rounds. Hey, if nothing else, it is harder to screw up two picks than one.

Many of the guys projected for the Chiefs could be available in the mid-first round. So, my view is that I'd rather have two good players than one, even if that one has a chance to be a very good player at one position. Most anyone we take in the first two rounds will be an automatic upgrade over what we have currently (except at RB).

If KC can't get Berry, then I believe that KC might draft Mays with the 5th overall pick

I'm still in the boat where I think Mays ends up with the better career.. so I wouldn't mind it.

There is four first round draft picks on the Chiefs defense, with two being top five picks the past two years. Does that sound like it's being neglected to you?

true ... so can you tell which players in the draft are 100% going to be great players in the NFL before the draft?

NO .......... nobody can

then i will be grabbing a rifle and shooting some muther fuggers.

Mays a 5?


omg, gawd dam retarted mofos

With only one of them really fitting the scheme.

It would be a hell of a lot better than drafting a any LT this year there.

hey ... well if you line of demarcation is just not drafting an LT then you should be one happy sob.

:shake:

People forget that last year Mays was proclaimed a top 5 pick, but was over scrutinized as a Senior because of his great success during his career

Okay, I'll bite: Who?

List 'em.

He won't.

Don't worry.

Great career?

LMAO

Is this what Chiefs fans have been reduced to thinking is "great"? A QB who didn't win a playoff game in 6 seasons after the Chiefs passed on Drew Brees in favor of Green, who had never proven ANYTHING?

JFC.

Wrong.

The draft board of Scott Pioli is different than any other NFL GM.

Seriously? You're going to blame the 80's on Cherry?

The Chiefs were absolutely ****ing LOADED with talent, especially talent in the secondary in the 80's.

Schaaf and Steadman just couldn't hire a coach to save their jobs.

Not really, but I'm not opposed to the idea either. And I'm not so naive as to try to justify that the Chiefs don't need to draft a tackle because Branden Albert was a first round draft pick two years ago. He was picked by Carl and Herm. Their stellar drafting record speaks for itself, especially in the Herm years. They took a flyer on a guy who had never played left tackle in college and tried to shoe horn him into the position at the next level. It was a typical Carl/Herm pick, and his performance on the field has not been good. And that's with two years of starting experience. And that's not even mentioning the rest of the line positions, which all need to be looked at. (Smith being the one potential talent.)

People around here seem to love to make excuses and criticisms for anyone and everyone as long as it's just not their pet player for the Chiefs first round selection.

Our safeties suck. I'd be happy with Berry. Our linebackers suck. I'd be happy with McClain or Spikes or Kindle. Our tight ends suck. I wouldn't mind it one bit if they took Gresham with the #1. Our defensive line sucks. It would be a godsend if Suh dropped.

But guess what? Our entire offensive line sucks even worse and I just feel that it's a pretty important position for a NFL football team. I wanted Oher last year. I would have even been happy if Mack was our pick. And I also felt that if Okung came out last year, he would have been the second best OT in that draft behind Oher. If you don't want a guy like Okung this year, and are holding out hope that Albert gets "it" in his third season of starting in the NFL, or just think that we'll be able to pick up a quality OT in 2011 (when we'd have a shot at Green, Jones, Gabbert or the like), unless some guy has an epiphany, there is going to be a real lack of talent at the OT spot for the next couple of years. Just trying to be a realistic island in this sea of desire for guys who are perceived as high ceiling "playmakers."

With the exception of Flowers and Charles, I don't really care who they replace. They are all expendable/replaceable.

well,i wouldn't be jumping for joy if they took McClain but id take him before i took OKung

This post was approved of by: Nick Mangold, Alex Mack, Jeff Saturday and Matt Birk.

Steve Largent does not approve of this message.

Cleveland has a bunch of highly drafted and highly paid offensive linemen, it's really winning them a lot of games isn't it?

Seeing as that would be the exact 2010 equivalent of drafting Jackson last year...

Did anyone cue AustinChief?

Oh no! Didn't you hear? Dorsey is our best defensive player and to give up on him (much the same as giving up on Albert) would be an unspeakable travesty!

I'm sorry. You have two top five draft picks on the defense. One of them, who isn't named Jackson, is supposedly our best defensive player.

That's not neglecting the defense. (Especially considering that you also have two first rounders at linebacker as well.) In addition, they brought in three Pro Bowl players as free agents this off-season on the defensive side of the ball.

You are going to have to do better than that to convince me that our defense has been neglected.

Moot point. No way they let Berry slide down. But they may take a QB there if it shakes out right.

Two UDFAs in there, btw.

The board meltdown will be at a level heretofore unseen on all of the internets.

they drafted a qb in the first round
they drafted a playmaking wideout top 5
They drafted a playmaking tight end top 10

how are those gambles turning out? Their best drafted player is their LT Joe Thomas who was drafted top 5.

Cleveland is a bad example. They are the mold of how taking playmakers high can burn your ass if it doesn't work out.

But we arent the niners. They gambled and it didnt pay off. This whole thing is a ****ing crapshoot anyways. You just have to hope you land a guy that has the work ethic and wants to take it to the next level and you have to hope he's not injured.

We could gamble and it doesnt pay of, or we could gamble and it pays off. We just have to hope the guy they pick a guy thats goign to be good to great in the NFL.

The best case scenario for us is to trade back with Buffalo so they get their qb and we add a second rounder and fall back to 9 and still get McClain. Take the second we got as comp for moving back and package it with Atls 2nd to move up to take a guy that slips into the mid 20s like Graham, Earl Thomas, Dez Bryant, Taylor Mays, Dan Williams, Witherspoon, Iupati.

I would love for us to finally have a defensive leader with our first rounder and it would be great if we could have added value for the pick as well.

Neither you nor I know whether he will or won't.

We know he wont, because unlike you we can tell who fits where and what upside they have. You just guy buy what the "experts" who are wrong every year say because you don't watch football. Let me guess, you wanted Curry last year too?

ROFL

Jim Zorn was actually a pretty good QB, who would have had a lot more success playing on better teams.

you may think but you don't know. If you KNOW who's going to be good and who won't, you should be working for an NFL team or at the least ESPN or NFL network. Since you know more than the "experts" and all

I'm sure it's just a matter of cosmic randomness that the Colts, Ravens, Steelers, and Packers draft better than everyone else.

This is my take as well, and I was one of the biggest Berry homers on here from the beginning. I still think he has the potential to be amazing, but there are definitely a few concerns with him, namely his fundamentals, lack of production this year, and small stature. He could just turn out to be a ballhawk freakshow like Ed Reed, but it's not 100% guaranteed.

If we pass him up for someone like McClain or Haden, I might be a little disappointed but I won't freak out or anything.

Graham is so much more explosive than Hali it's not even funny. The Hali-Graham comp is terrible.

No, they have RustShack and Mecca in their scouting departments apparently.

The funny part? I haven't met a single Packer fan who doesn't hate their GM Ted Thompson

Is it really that they draft better? Maybe they develop talent better.

the consensus is that pioli is already a failure

so, the only interesting question is how would people's opinion of him change if he does draft Berry?

Which is why Peter Giunta was the DC for a SB champion defense (as was G-Rob*2) and yet removed from that talent they "developed" one of the worst collections of talent in the history of the NFL

There's the rub that most people don't talk about.

bad teams seem to turn whomever they draft into shit.


bad drafting or bad player development?


alot people seem to believe that a good player will overcome bad coaching and bad development no matter what. I disagree ... imo there is no way that some of these crappy teams that have been drafting at the top for the last decade could "miss" on their picks that consistently. Bad coaching,Bad development and Bad team environment contributes to the downfall of all those draftees.

only by people too idiotic to be allow to breed in the future.

Funny how this was a completely foreign concept when people were arguing that changing to a 3-4 would **** up Dorsey's development.

Its just too bad the NFL is about who you know and now what you know

Our head coach has a litany of experience as both a player (ironically used against posters in the past) and a coach. Fortunately, through hard work and dedication he was able to get a foothold in this league, unlike some other nincompoop that was the beneficiary of nepotism, like Rex Ryan.

Todd Haley first got into the NFL because of his dad..

BOOM

Are you kidding me... the superbowl championship defense of the 1999 Rams. ROFL The best offensive team in the history of the league. Yeah I guess that it took alot of skill to prevent the other team from scoring more then the 30 points per game that the STL offense put up. What a horrible argument(how long did he have to assemble that defense?). Full reerun?

Their job was about as hard as the Patriots offense while Weis was there managing the offense to not blow the game for the defense.

They were 6th in the league in defense and near the lead league in TO's you Reindeer molesting ****.

Are you seriously trying to convince me that the Rams 1999 defense was a big part in them winning the Superbowl?

That defense was a product of their offense. Maby if teams werent playing catchup they wouldnt be first against the run and in sacks. Look at their time of possetion.

And the rams 1999 defense compared to what Giunta did elsewhere is your basis for saying that good teams aren't better at developing talent? Come on man you are reaching...

It was defense alone that won that playoff game against Tampa.

The offense made some clutch plays at the end, but other than that, it was all defense. That's something none of Vermeil's Chiefs teams could have hoped to have done. Maybe 2005, but that's it.

How many games did they hold their opposition under 20 points?

Was it the defense that ended the Super Bowl with a tackle on the 1 yard line?

mylittlepony is one of those fans who only watches one team so he has no idea what hes talking about.

Jesus, what a dumb mother****er.

The 28th ranked offense. Tampa bay hadnt scored 30+ point more then once. They scored less then 2 TDs at 5 separate games. I know this might sound arena league to some people... it must have taken alot of talent (drafted talent I might add) to be able to keep up with this juggernaugh. :banghead:

Also this is the biggest strawman argument ever. Because the Rams 99 defense were better then 03 chiefs defense that means that talent is drafted and not developed how exactly?

Well, if the one team is the Chiefs he should no something about what a record setting offense and no defense can get you. Assuming he is older than 12.

St. Louis Rams offense is probably one of the best, most disrespected defenses on the super bowl winners. Noone remembers them in the least.

They were sixth AND they had to defend against teams throwing the ball all over the field to try to keep up with that crazy offense.

Even if I did I would have seen for example Fujita, Mitchel, Tynes and Pollard go on to other teams to do well. How come if you draft talent; these players were so bad in KC? Yet good in other teams.

They didn't do better, their teams did better. Pollard is the only won who actually performed better, and thats because he was surrounded by talent unlike here.

He's also more suited to a 4-3 defense.

And Fujita led the Chiefs in tackles for two straight seasons. He was good when he played here.

:shrug::D

:LOL:LMAO But...but...it was all Mangina's drafting! LMAO

Out of your list, only Williams and B5TA(WhoTFIT?) would upset me in the top 5.

I'm sorry, I never returned to this thread, so I never saw your question.

If that were to happen, my opinion of Pioli wouldn't change. I would imagine a large number of Pioli's top picks are going to be head-scratchers. If I recall correctly, the Pats, when Pioli was there, were one of 4 teams who didn't use a scouting service, and only did their own scouting. With that, I assume the Chiefs will do the same thing.
So, keeping that in mind, I can imagine that, while how a service ranks players and an individual team ranks players may be close, there may be some big discrepancies in some players, as well.
I don't like the Jackson pick in the first round last year. But I'm gonna guess there won't be many drafts we have where we sit around on Monday patting each other on the backs for an A+ draft, either. I think it boils down to this...
It is what it is. Pioli and his people are going to value things differently than draft sites, fans, and other teams do. It's going to be hit and miss, just like draft sites, fans, and other teams. I'll judge Pioli's drafts to be good or bad after I see how they work out over the long haul, rather than short-term.