Awful.

He played the whole year at RT, had a lot of struggles (as many spread LTs have), and now he has post-concussion syndrome and his future availability could be up in the air.

Wow, that sucks ass for the Rams.

If the Rams take Bradford at #1, I'd be worried.

The last two years, they've taken "safe" guys in the top 2, and both have been huge disappointments so far.

Now they could draft an incredibly risky prospect at QB, and he only has one legitimate weapon.

is this another trap link to get people to go to WPI?


not going to fall for it this time :harumph:

And there is no doubt what I guy does with the pads on in a game is what really matters. This should be obvious.

He also said he loved scouting and showed that by signing 1 cut who was from his former team.

I believe it had to do more with Dick Vermeil taking everything John Bunting said about Sims as gospel.

It still sickens me to think we could have stood still and got Henderson. I was worried about Haynesworth and thought he benefited more from Henderson's presence at UT and admittedly didn't want him, but I did want Big John.

If the Chiefs hadn't taken Sims the Vikings were, just remember that.

How does a GM thinking that game film is the most important thing equal Pioli already knowing who he will draft? Big leap there.

Flowers ran a 4.58.

OK, I see what you're saying now.

If Flowers had posted a 4.48 he'd have gone in the top 20 picks, 1 tenth matters that much to his position.

Right right right. They may not make it, but some are some CB's that can't out run Trent Williams playing right now. Ty Law for one. But yeah, coming out of school it helps.

Some guys get the benefit being vets but once a CB's speed goes his career goes in the toilet.

I'm not huge on 40 times but for CB's it's wildly important.

The other thing to consider when discussing Okung v. Bruce Campbell is that Okung is 23 years old, while Campbell is only 20.

Campbell should probably have stayed in school another year to mature physically (not to mention emotinally).

But his upside is through the roof compared to Okung.

I know some teams will rail Campbell because his workouts are far more impressive than his game tape so if he gets taken really high some dumbass on ESPN is going to make fun of that team for an hour.

If you have a good OL coach Campbell is a dream.

Good. That's the way it should be. These scouts travel the country and work relentlessly, watching games live, talking to coaches, talking to references, etc... getting a detailed snapshot of every single player. In most cases, I'm sure the combine doesn't tell the team a whole lot that you don't know already. You get a few surprises here and there in terms of combine performance that are inconsistent with what scouts tell you, and if they do, you take a second or third look. But for the majority of players, if your scouts have done their homework, then the combine is mostly a show.

The biggest problem, actually, is when coaches/GMs go on power trips because they love the way the guy runs in shorts, even when the scouts tell them they're not that good (see Junior Siavii). And I've heard this happens quite a bit--it certainly happened with Vermeil. The GM and coaches don't have time to travel around the country and watch every game. The scouts are the ones with all the juicy information. I would rather we rely on scouts than a GM who's only seen these guys a few times.

And by the way, I think Pioli was being facetious. He also made a comment a few days ago about how he doesn't like players who don't try out for the combine because he doesn't think they should have anything to hide. Obviously, he does find it important enough.

More Pioli ass kissing.

You are so ****ing duplicitous.

So far, my dislikes for the new regime are outnumbering my dislikes from the previous one.

That can definitely change, but so far my hope is dwindeling.

I know its early and I may be alone on this one, but I think the job Muir did in the second half of the year was admirable and that we will do a good job of developing talent under him.

This is an extremely good coaching staff we have in place, if they are given the players they will succeed.

Actually, forget his 40. If Flowers was 2 inches taller he would have gone in the top 20. Teams put too much emphasis on height within the secondary players.

Flowers problem was he's 5'9 and wasn't blazing fast.

I still think Anthony Davis will go before Okung. He is the best LT in this draft.

He's good, but I put him neck and neck with Campbell, and Bulaga. I've said many times, Bulaga is the best run blocking OL in this draft and I actually feel that he will be better as a Guard than at RT. But wasting a pick on Okung would be dumb when I see a couple OL's later in the draft that will be good.

Davis was unimpressive at the combine and has character issues...so far he's hurt himself.

did you look at your mock draft selections last year ROFL

Ouch...

Yea well I drafted Percy Harvin so yea!

chiefscountry did not have a good mock

It's not easy to have a good one if you have teams with low picks or someone in front of you makes weird picks.

Stop questioning "the man"....
 

This maybe the single dumbest post on the planet. Seriously you think Carl / Herm > Pioli / Haley?

Wow...

if you cant read and successfully comprehend what you are reading, you shouldnt try.

That isnt even remotely what that post meant.

thanks for playing

This reminds me...I was at a sports card store, and some Donk fan was trying to pimp up this Tyson Jackson, jersey insert card for like 20 bucks or something stupid. He was talking like it was something special. I felt like asking him "how stupid do you think I am?" He then went on to say Jackson is by far better than Glenn Dorsey....:spock: Dumbass Donk fans out here...I swear.

And big ****ing surprise, you're the one who is making a mountain out of an imaginary mohill. Yes, it's definitely true that Scott Pioli, who is ever-present during the combine doesn't give a shit about the combine because... he said so in his interview. I heard he's sitting in the corner with his headphones on listening to Tupac and flipping people off.

Nothing I said was wrong. The combine is overrated. Teams find a few surprises and, if you do, then yes you take an extra look at the guy. But you talk about interviews... you think the scouts haven't done that already? You think the scouts haven't interviewed every single last person that knows a good prospect? They probably even know what color briefs prospects wear.

So yes, I'd rather the scouts be the most influential people in the process than a GM that is probably seeing these guys for the first time at the Senior Bowl or Combine. The Combine is meant to either confirm or refute what scouts have already seen. And if it refutes, you take an extra look. But the majority of the homework is already done. That's not unique to the Chiefs. That is the way almost every franchise runs their scouting operations. Why do you think the Chiefs had such a shitty draft in 2009? Because Pioli stupidly froze his scouts out and decided he was going to make all of his decisions based on the senior bowl and combine. Stupid decision.

Cowboys draft was pretty darn good. Bengals sucked dick, mainly bc we started too early - players changed way too much.

I'd say you're pretty much correct. I recall one GM saying the Scout interviews during the school year were the most important. By the time the teams interview prospects at the combine the players have all retained agents who have coached them to say the right things.

So what did you mean by the quote below because that is how I took it as well?

Yeah this one sure sucked
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...ght=mock+draft

Or this one
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...ght=mock+draft

Or this one
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...ght=mock+draft

Or this one
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...ght=mock+draft

Or this one
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...ght=mock+draft

what are you talking about?

I'm just talking about your picks in the mock draft last year...

They were GOD awful.

I can make a mock with all the 1st rounders going to the Chiefs for the 1st 7 rounds too...

Why would anyone argue that the combine is more valuable than game film and scouting?

The combine is a dog and pony show. It's entertaining, and it helps some guys, but otherwise the game film and interview process should be the main areas of examination for every NFL GM and scout.

Those were all my final Chiefs mocks before the last drafts up to 2005.

So tell me Hootie which of these picks were so awful

Bengals
1. Everette Brown, DE, Florida State
2. Jamon Meredith, OT, South Carolina
3. Antoine Caldwell, C, Alabama
3. Shonn Greene, RB Iowa
4. Cornelius Ingram, TE, Florida
5. Vance Walker, DT Georgia Tech
6. Captain Munnerlyn, CB, South Carolina
6. Brian Hoyer, QB, Michigan State
7. Britton Colquitt, P, Tennessee
7. PJ Hill, RB, Wisconsin
7. Anthony Felder, LB, California

Cowboys
2. William Moore, S, Missouri
3. Herman Johnson, OG, LSU
4. Sammie Lee Hill, DT, Stillman
4. Sebastian Vollmer, OT, Houston
5. Domonique Johnson, CB, Jackson State
5. Jarett Dillard, WR, Rice
5. Henry Melton, DE/OLB, Texas
6. Stephen McGee, QB, Texas A&M
6. Lardarius Webb, S/KR, Nicholls State
7. Brock Christopher, LB, Missouri
7. Quan Cosby, WR, Texas

"So far, my dislikes for the new regime are outnumbering my dislikes from the previous one. "

...

Tell me one move this regime made that has shown to be a good one before the hires of Weis and Crennel.

1

...

Carl may not have drafted well, but I dont think he ever had a draft as bad as ours last year. Im not sure you could have bombed a draft much worse, at least from first glances.

Pioli cut Pollard and signed Mike Brown to replace him
they benched DJ
didnt let Page on the field as much as he should be before he got injured
signed Goff to start and wouldnt take him out till injuries took him out
continue to start Rudy at a position he is getting dominated at all year ...badly
traded for Mike Vrabel
benched and even deactivated Jamaal Charles and started LJ
wouldnt let Studabaker on the field on defense in fear he would completely show up Mr Vrabel like against Pittsburgh
went for it on our own 30 yard line
called a hail mary from the opponents 25 yard line with their 63 million dollar qb they got after he started one year since high school,
fired our OC and QBC mere days before the season started and started from scratch on offense showing total irresponsibility toward the needed development of our new qb with such drastically limited amount of experience with such moves,
took a 5-tec in the top five when about every position we needed offered a legit prospect for us to draft at that spot including qb
Switched from a scheme that had multiple first rounders invested in it and basically jettisoned half the talent and a top 5 pick to make the change and it still wasnt successful, even remotely.

I dont want to add more, it hurts too bad to remember all the ****ups and all I hope is that these arent stubborn guys and that they can show to learn from their mistakes and not just try to cover them up, if they are they type to want to cover them up we might be in for some very disappointing moments in the near future.

I hope not.

I dont even know where to start on making a list of things I like that this regime has done so far. It would be a short list, to be sure. Ill try.

Didnt go with a has been or never was as the new HC, instead went with a up and comer with a good track record for getting the most out of his players through various motivational techniques.
Weis
Crennel
I like that they didnt change the team colors.

Im sorry, but I am a guy that loves this team but has been burned in the past by drinking the koolaid instead of being objective and right now if you were to grade this regime overall for their job so far it would be a d at absolute maximum and IMO it should be a F.

I hope the hit a homerun offseason and we get that average up to a c by training camp.

Well, Boss, while Pioli's offseason was bad, it wasn't a whole lot worse than the kinds of offseasons Carl Peterson was stringing together late in his career. The difference is that Peterson had a below average season time-after-time-after-time, whereas Pioli has only had one. (that excludes the last season of the Peterson era where, I believe, Peterson lost most control and Kuharich was calling most of the shots on the personnel side).

So I dislike what Pioli has done in 2009 as much as I hated what Peterson does. I think it's fair to give last offseason an F. But until Pioli flubs the offseason consistently, he's not going to match my hatred for Peterson.

I don't like what Pioli's done so far either (even though I've been labelled an apologist, for some reason). I just don't understand the overreaction and can't stand when people fish for small, stupid, exaggerated details. And this thread is the classic example of that. The fact that people are actually going to believe that Scott Pioli is yawning through the combine is a pretty good testament to how far some people will go.

If you dont want to be grouped in with Pioli apologists then dont make up excuses for him that dont include factual statements. When you do, you are from that point a "slurpie"

I want the guy to succeed as much as ANYONE out there, but CP didnt have one single offseason or draft that was as bad as we got from Scott in 2009. Never. I can say that easily because its the truth. Even in 2004 he got us Jared (even though Dick Vermiel had to stand on a table and tell CP to draft him. I hated CP with a passion but he was never that bad.

Pioli owes us all a big one and his name is either Eric or Jimmy!

Fair enough I was just curious because you said that isn't what you meant which in all honesty it is what you meant. And if you think CP didn't have worse drafts then you have bad memory.

2002 Draft
<table class="pt8" border="0" cellpadding="0" width="500"><tbody><tr><td>
</td> <td>Ryan Sims</td> <td>North Carolina</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2</td> <td>Eddie Freeman</td> <td>Alabama-Birmingham</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>4</td> <td>Omar Easy</td> <td>Penn State</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>5</td> <td>Scott Fujita</td> <td>California</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>7</td> <td>Maurice Rodriguez</td> <td>Fresno State</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="4"> </td></tr></tbody></table>
2001 Draft
<table class="pt8" border="0" cellpadding="0" width="500"><tbody><tr><td>
</td> <td>Eric Downing</td> <td>Syracuse</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>3</td> <td>Marvin Minnis</td> <td>Florida State</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>4</td> <td>Monty Beisel</td> <td>Kansas State</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>4</td> <td>George Layne</td> <td>Texas Christian</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>5</td> <td>Billy Baber</td> <td>Virginia</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>5</td> <td>Derrick Blaylock</td> <td>Stephen F. Austin</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>6</td> <td>Alex Sulfsted</td> <td>Miami (OH)</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>7</td> <td>Shaunard Harts</td> <td>Boise State</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>7</td> <td>Terdell Sands</td> <td>Chattanooga</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="4"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="4">2000 Draft
</td> </tr> <tr class="stathead"> <td width="40">Rnd</td> <td width="150">Name</td> <td width="200">College</td> <td width="60">Note</td> </tr> <tr> <td>1</td> <td>Sylvester Morris</td> <td>Jackson State</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2</td> <td>William Bartee</td> <td>Oklahoma</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>3</td> <td>Gregory Wesley</td> <td>Arkansas-Pine Bluff</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>4</td> <td>Frank Moreau</td> <td>Louisville</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>5</td> <td>Dante Hall</td> <td>Texas A&M</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>5</td> <td>Patrick Dennis</td> <td>Louisiana-Monroe</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>6</td> <td>Darnell Alford</td> <td>Boston College</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>7</td> <td>Desmond Kitchings</td> <td>Furman</td></tr></tbody></table>

Ugh, those drafts still make me ill.

That didnt help you but thanks for playing.

Its been fun.

Why dont you post Carls draft from 1989 when he had a top 3 pick...didnt think so.

You can try to paint those drafts as worse, but they werent. We had a top 3 pick and got a good defender but not a top 3 kinda player at all. Im not sure I can remember a draft when a top 3 picking team took a player that wasnt even in the green room.

00 would have been a good draft if Morris never gets hurt. 3 solid players from one draft isnt a bad one. Injuries happen, you cant blame Carl for that and be honest in the conversation.

01 took multiple high picks to get a coach that never failed to take ANY team to the championship game whether in college or pros. EVERY TEAM BUT US.

02 we drafted Sims and he busted, but he was a player than any team in the NFL would have made him their pick at that slot because he looked like a impact player coming out.

We passed on elite prospects at rushbacker, qb, wr, nt, and OL to take a 5-tec that isnt a elite prospect.

You really need to go back and look at the last 10 years of Carl drafting. By far his best draft was his very last one the others are an abortion. This isn't any kind of surprise. But I agree with you CP had a better first draft pick than Pioli no question about it. DT is still my all time favorite Chief.

And I am not saying that Pioli's first draft was a success it is to early to tell but it sure isn't as bad as the 3 that I posted right now. Maybe 5 years from now it will be.

How is saying that Pioli gets an "F" apologizing for him?

I'm saying that Carl Peterson was one of the most consistently bad drafters in the NFL and that he did for over 15 years straight. Until 2008, when he was finally pushed out of the draft room.
http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/ful...2310&type=team
In almost every single draft, he whiffed on every pick and hit on one pick. And yes, I think the 2002 draft very closely parallels the 2009 draft--especially given that we TRADED UP to take an absolute bust. So if your argument is that one F season will make you dislike a person more than 15 straight D seasons, then I think you're being just a little short-sighted.

And yes, Peterson has had much worse offseasons. 2004 was the worst of all time. How about the Chiefs going 13-3, then the Chiefs decide to fire Greg Robinson for Gunther Cunningham, trade down in the draft to take Junior Siavii, follow that up with Kris Wilson, Keyaran Fox, Samie Parker, Jared Allen (okay, one hit), Jeris McIntyre, and Kevin Sampson. In the meantime, they sat on their hands and even took a vacation in the opening weeks of free agency.

C'mon, Boss. Pioli has been bad... so far. But to compare him to Carl Peterson after one season is slightly ridiculous. You're better than that.

And for the record, nobody is arguing that the 2009 draft wasn't an abortion of a draft. It was. We all know it.

[QUOTE=BossChief;6572095]Jesus dude, don't dig a hole for yourself and lay in it. Because Carl got lucky with Derrick Thomas, that's his saving grace? 20 years of horrible drafts, truly horrible drafts.

That's your criteria for a good draft? That the guy is in the green room prepping for a television appearance?

He played next to Julius Peppers, who was constantly double and triple teamed, and didn't do anything in his career until the Senior Bowl. It was a complete reach of a pick. That's the type of Carl busto drafts that make most of his drafts complete dog shit. The best player out of that draft was Scott Fujita, who was a steal in the fifth round. And guess what, by the end of year three, after he led the Chiefs in tackles for two straight seasons, Carl trades him for a SIXTH round pick.

He got studs in DT, Gonzalez. He got insanely lucky in Jared Allen, then traded him away by year three. They traded a guy who is considered elite as not only a pass rusher but as a complete defensive player as he was coming into the best years of his career. So they could give the money to Larry Johnson.

You want to know how bad Carl's drafts are? We have no players on our team from them.

2007: Only Dwayne Bowe remains.
2006: Tamba, Brodie and Page
2005: Johnson and Colquitt
2004: No one.
2003: No one.
2002: No one.
2001: No one.
2000: No one.

So, when the core of our team should be built from these drafts, we have an over achiever playing out of position at ROLB, a punter, a backup QB, an under achieving, part time, special teams linebacker, a hurt safety, and a wide receiver who can't run routes or hold onto the ball.

The 2008 draft was Carl's crowning achievement giving the team four starters in Dorsey, Albert, Flowers and Charles. And Charles has only been a starter for eight games, and Dorsey and Albert have been mediocre at best to this point. Flowers is a stud. (And considering that two of those players from that draft came at the expense of losing one of, if not the, best defenders/pass rushers in the league in Jared Allen...well, you be the judge of that transaction.)

That's it. An entire decade of drafts, and we have two legit high level players in Flowers and Charles, and Charles hasn't even started an entire season.

And that's the guy who you are attempting to defend? Yeesh.

Completely false that the pick was a reach. The Vikings were trying to take Sims as well. KC beat them to the podium.

Is BossChief Saccopoo's dupe?

I understand, but it would have been just as big a reach for the Vikings as well as the Chiefs. It was one of those picks that was made because the guy had a really good week at the Senior Bowl and that's about it. I remember them talking about it - that he "blew it up" at the Senior Bowl.

But the facts remain, he played next to Peppers, who dominated even while facing constant double teams. It was the exact same type of reach that teams did in 2007 after Mario Williams was drafted. Two other NCS defensive line players were subsequently taken in the first round when the 49er's took Manny Lawson and the Bills took John McCargo.

Just because there were two teams stupid enough to burn a top ten pick on Sims doesn't mean it wasn't a reach.

I still curse the Vikings for being too slow. Had they got up there before the Chiefs, things might have been different. I still wonder if the Chiefs would have taken Bryant McKinnie or John Henderson?

Sims was highly regarded prior to the Senior Bowl. Lots of people thought he was worthy of a top 10 pick. Here is a story before the draft:

ProFootballWeekly.com asks Michael Holbrook, managing editor of special projects, and Jeff Reynolds and Nolan Nawrocki, associate editors of special projects, for their predictions regarding two of the more intriguing questions from the upcoming NFL draft.Which player will be the first defensive tackle selected?

Holbrook: If the Bills don’t take North Carolina run-stuffer Ryan Sims with the No. 4 pick, it sure looks like Tennessee’s Albert Haynesworth is going to be the first defensive tackle taken when the Cowboys select him at No. 6. When I heard that Dallas owner Jerry Jones loves Haynesworth, that was enough for me — what Jones wants, he usually gets. Haynesworth has soared up the draft boards of teams across the league since declaring his intention to enter the draft after a fine junior season. He’s a huge man at 6-5 5/8, 320 pounds and is quick off the ball and can be overpowering. The biggest question is his desire. He didn’t show much as a freshman and sophomore at Tennessee, then exploded onto the scene as a junior. He could be a heartbreaker or he could be a difference-maker for whichever team selects him.

Reynolds: I think the run on defensive tackles starts at No. 7 barring any movement by teams picking lower than the Vikings at the seventh spot. Though I feel the Vikings will look to Texas SS Roy Williams, they could easily go with another safe pick and land North Carolina DT Ryan Sims. If it is the Chiefs at No. 8 to take the first run-stuffer, it is likely Albert Haynesworth. But Sims has been consistent in workouts, as strong as he is quick, and would add a playmaker on the line. While Tennessee’s DT tandem of John Henderson and Haynesworth will get looks early, Henderson has had back problems and Haynesworth is green in terms of game experience. His size (6-6, 320) and athleticism make many feel his potential is too tough to pass up, but Haynesworth lends the impression that he will either be very good, or very bad. The safe bet is with Sims.

Nawrocki: Tennessee’s Albert Haynesworth has excellent quickness and a huge upside, but Wisconsin’s Wendell Bryant and North Carolina’s Ryan Sims are proven products with tremendous character. Both arrived on their campuses four years ago, made an immediate impact in big games and can be expected to contribute immediately at the next level. Both are extremely driven and intelligent. Bryant was known for staying after practice and hitting the sleds in the sweltering heat during two-a-days. Sims has been trying to escape the shadow of Julius Peppers for years. Bryant has great speed for a defensive lineman, but will need a few years to develop physically. Sims is a step slower, but can manhandle blockers with his brute strength. While Haynesworth is projected the highest on many boards around the league for his football IQ, I am a firm believer that character will take you much further than raw ability. My draft board reads: Sims, Bryant, Haynesworth.

By that standard there were teams right below KC ready to pick Tyson

Who?

IIRC Cleveland for one.

You don't really know if Cleveland wanted Jackson. It's a fact that Minnesota had Ryan Sims written on their draft card and KC's runner blocked the Minny guy from handing in his card.

So, the gist of the article is support of Sims is that he's slower than Wendell Bryant and has been trying, unsuccessfully, to get out of Peppers shadow for years? That his strengths are a run stuffer with strength?

And that's not a reach in the top ten? A non-pass rushing run stuffer who was substantially less regarded than an elite pass rusher playing right next to him?

Actually, looking at that draft, Carl should have been shot on the spot for taking Sims over Freeney, especially when you look at the Chiefs roster at that point. Our RDE rush guy was R-Kal Truluck? Are you ****ing kidding me? And he takes Ryan Sims after drafting Freeman and Downing the two years prior?

I will bust anyone in the chops that even remotely tries to defend the Sims pick. It was classic Peterson, who had an unhealthy fascination with shitbag defensive tackles.

Here's the problem - all 3 of those drafts will turn out better than last season's.

The Sims draft sucks because of Sims, he was a lazy jackass, but he was also the consensus pick at the time. I have a hard time faulting Peterson because NOBODY had Sims being that bad. Fujita is a better player than anyone that will come from the 2009 draft.

2001 is a completely lost draft, but IIRC, we gave up our 1st and 2nd pick in that draft for Vermiel and Green. Ultimately, I'd have preferred take Brees with the first but Vermiel wanted his guy and the trades weren't pure busts; they did make the Chiefs an enjoyable team again.

2000 is a defensible draft - Morris was going to be a good player but blew out his knee; shit happens. Wesley was a better player for longer than anyone we'll get from 2009 and Hall was an absolute difference maker.


Seriously, don't underestimate how stunningly horrible Scott Pioli was at every facet of his job last offseason. Carl Peterson never had an offseason as bad as the one Pioli just put out there as his first impression. From assembling a roster to assembling a coaching staff, one would be hard pressed to come up with a more epic fail than the one put forward by Pioli.

You are correct I am not 100% sure but IIRC there were some stories after the draft that stated they wanted to draft him.

I mean, seriously. People want to point to the '02, '03, '04, '05 Chiefs in terms of a team having a great offensive line and not winning playoff games, but just take a look at the defense and then at Carl's drafts. Sims instead of Freeney. Trading down and taking Larry Johnson when they could have had Polamalu. Kawika Mitchell instead of Chris Kelsay. The 2003 draft was so amazingly bad in terms of what could have been, but no...let's take ****ing playmakers with "potential" instead of solid guys who proved it on the field. **** Carl. **** potential. Anyone who drafts or wants to draft for "potential" versus proven production is just sucking at the tip of Carl's wrinkled old dick.

[QUOTE=DJ's left nut;6572834]http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/H...QIZw7y64Tl.jpg

http://cache.deadspin.com/assets/res...07/12/herm.jpg

People sure are quick to hop on Succop's nuts just because he was the only marginal useful player from last year's draft.

Among rookies he had the worst average kickoff distance in the league and the worst TB% by far. Among all kickers he was significantly below average. He's a liability as a kickoff man.

As a placekicker, His 86% success rate this year was only marginally better than Conner Barth the season before (y'know, the guy we cut to make room for this kicking miracle). Though there was really no other rookie placekicker in the league this year (the others were KO specialists), he is pretty average when compared to the 2008 crop of rookies. He was roughly equal to Dan Carpenter (who?) and nowhere near Garrett Hartley in 2008. Going back to 2007, he was pretty much Nick Folk (though better than Mason Crosby, Crosby kicks in the worst environment in football).

All told, we got ourselves a guy that's likely going to be a slightly above average kicker. Huzzah, we drafted Lawrence Tynes. He actually looks a lot like Dan Carpenter...who was undrafted. Don't get me wrong, I like Succop and think he'll stick, but I do not understand how much love this dude gets for merely being pretty decent.

Greg Wesley gave us 5 years of well above average play and a couple more solid years beyond that. Considering the value of the respective skills and the difficulty of replacing their respective positions, I think Wesley will give us the better career.

Kicking dissertation aside (which was superb by the way), you asked for a guy from the 2009 draft that will be with the Chiefs longer than Wesley. Unless his leg falls off, Succop will easily be that guy.

I don't know...the Chiefs have struggled to find a kicker of any merit since Anderson. Add to that that it's a position that ends up with most points scored, and can mean the difference between a win and a loss at the most crucial time, I'd place the importance of a quality kicker higher than I would a mediocre strong safety. Kickers need to have a certain mental makeup to survive in this league. While it's always been the vogue to downplay their role, it most certainly is an important one.

I actually put a fair amount of value on kickers in today's NFL.

At the same time, it's not terribly difficult to find an average to slightly above average kicker if you just keep plugging away at it. Like I said, a guy like Dan Carpenter was undrafted, as was Tynes. Succop himself would've been but/for us.

I guess it's like the Closer in MLB. A good team absolutely has to have a good closer. At the same time, many of your best closers are just failed starters or guys that didn't have a 3rd pitch to make it in the rotation. A good closer isn't hard to find or develop if you're willing to keep plugging away at it. There are many guys out there that could close games effectively that just haven't been found for whatever reason. I think that's less so for starting pitchers, centerfielders and ultimately, Strong Safeties.

Kicker's just not as tough a position to fill as most.

And I thought about Succup which was why I tried to qualify it by saying 'better for longer' rather than just 'longer'...poor attempt by me. What I really meant was Wesley's career will be, on aggregate, more valuable than Succop's will be to the Chiefs.

The 2009 offseason was horrendous. Though, I would easily put the 2004 season as close to its equal, given that they sat on their hands while they were maybe a few players away from a Super Bowl contender. I would also argue that making 4-5 marquee moves (e.g. offseason with Barber, Holliday, McCleon, etc...) that cost a lot of money and bust is just as bad if not worse as not spending a ton of money and having those players bust.

But the main point is that it's ludicrous for anyone to suggest that we're worse off with Pioli than with Peterson. Pioli has had one F-minus season. Peterson had 15+ seasons where his offseason earned a D-minus. Until Pioli does this for several seasons in a row, there's no way he's worse than Peterson.

Last offseason was the worst we have had as a team in 20 years.

Argue that.

Why are we constantly going back to Carl Peterson drafts?

Pioli sucked last year. Carl sucked for the better part of 20 years.

Honestly, this is like the guy who has one leg arguing with the guy with one arm.

Carl needed to be fired after the 2000 season.

The early part of his tenure showed much promise, but the last 9 years were absolutely dismal and punctuated all of his failings.

why is it ridiculous?

I find it funny that nobody responded with things they liked about what Pioli did, only slamming me for suggesting that Pioli did an equally horrid job in his first year.

Overall, I cant remember a offseason that was across the board as bad as 2009.

Can you?
LOL

I love how dishonest you can be to try to win a conversation.

The green room is the group of consensus top ten players from NFL scouts. They are the players that are considered the cream of the crop in that respective draft and Tyson was at home eating Cheerios.

If that isnt a microcosm of how bad the pick is, I dont know what is.

Spin it as unimportant as much as you like, you will be alone.

Go whack off to some Okung and Jackson videos.

What you also fail to mention was what we got for the missing spots and the production we got from those guys. Whenever you trade picks for vets, you lose years buy gain a good player.

Trent Greeen was the most productive NFL QB outside of Manning for 01-05 and it cost us a 2 and 3 in the 01 and 02 drafts.

I dont like trading picks for coaches, but giving up a first for a HOF level coach and a NFL icon that had taken every single team he ever coached to its respective championship game in college and the NFL wasnt as bad as some other moves.

You have to account for what we got from the picks we traded and adjust how effective that draft was for us.

when you take into consideration what we got for the missing picks, none of those drafts were as bad. Vermiel was a vet coach and didnt care to develop players from scratch, trding for him was a statement that "we are gonna try to win one for Lamar"

it didnt work out, but at least we tried. The Jackson pick signified that we werent gonna try.

I think Magee will be a better player and we could have had him and Orakpo in the first.

We would be absolutely in love with Brian by now.

**** you

We dont agree often, but in this case we do 100%

take a picture.

I am not talking about just the draft. I said offseason for a reason.

I listed all the things I felt were mistakes earlier in this thread and will always feel that way.

:clap:

Well done and agree 100%

i wonder where we would be if we had done so?

I quarantee woe would have drafted a qb in the first by now.

I don't think anybody's disputing that. I'm certainly not. I just disagree that one offseason makes a person. Yeah, if this year's offseason is as bad as the last, then shit.... But I just don't see any comparison between a guy who ****ed up one offseason with less resources to a guy who continually messed up for 15 straight years.

Like I said, don't dispute that 2009 was a mess. But the Pioli and CP comparison doesn't work. That doesn't, of course, give Pioli any excuse to **** up in 2010. I get that.

As far as I was concerned, Carl needed to be fired the minute he hired Marty.

I would have been fine with firing Pioli the minute he traded for Cassel.

Of course, I wasn't on the hire Pioli bandwagon.

Here is my original post that started this off:

I clearly didnt say he was doomed to future futility or anything, just that it was a horrible start.

see above post that started this discussion.

No, you said that After a single, transition period draft by Pioli, you are preferring 20 years of substandard quality at best drafting by Peterson.

That's a magnificent take based on historical draft analysis and projected draft potentials.

Michael Phelps doesn't backstroke as fast as you do.

Here is my still unaltered original post in this thread you are trying to pull an exert from while leaving out critical parts you dishonest prick

Pretty cut and dry isnt it? Its the first post of mine in this thread that got this thizang started.
Can you ****ing read?

How the **** am I a backstroker?

just STFU please.

40 times have some merit, but after the combine it NEVER takes place again. I put some stock into the combine, but it really should just back up what the scouts should have already known. I consider it an official guidelines of their overall measurables, but no way would I consider the combine as the best way to evaluate players.


One word:measurables.