Who wouldn't be?

Absolutely. Picks are totally more valuable than filling a glaring hole at the most important position in football.

What if you don't think there's a QB worth spending the top pick for, and you can get a huge bounty of picks and get your QB later? I'm not saying that's what I'd do, but it certainly could be justified.

If I could be GUARANTEED of getting my QB later, I'd roll the dice.

But if there's a chance I trade down and end up getting nothing, I'm not doing it.

If Pioli made this announcement CP members would simultaneously JIMP and kill themselves.

5 of the qbs in the draft are better than anything we got right now

Your point being? The goal isn't to draft the 25th best QB.

I'm on your side, dude

Sounds like you're advocating for drafting the best QB value as opposed to the best QB available.

Nope, I'm merely remembering that Jimmy Clausen was talked about as being a top 5 pick around here.

Being a scardy pants won't get you anywhere. You've got to try shit to make things happen.

Unfortunately I'm afraid the organization has the same view as yourself.

someone in another thread said something like 'You can never take the hottest chick in HS to the prom if you don't even ask her out"

....yeah, the Chiefs have been asking out the creepy chick that smells like band-aids.

I don't know what my view is yet. All I'm saying is there may not be an elite QB in this draft. The possibility has to be acknowledged.

Then **** it.

Clark - fold the team & have Whiteman use Arrowhead as a B-2 bunker busting testing facility

History says that you are correct.


2013 - Draft best QB in 1st round
2013 - Draft another good QB prospect
2014 & 2015 - Draft a good QB prospect in the 2nd or 3rd round (Both years)

2016 - Rinse and repeat if none of the QBs work out


Short version: Constantly have QB's coming in to develop so that we can use them or trade them for more picks.

Jimmy Clausen wouldn't have been any worse than Brady Quinn and Matt Cassel.

Jimmy Clausen's record wouldn't have been worse than a 2-fer.

That's no justification.

It has been acknowledged. And it's been addressed.

There's also no elite LT, nor do we need one.

There's potentially 2 elite pass rushers but one of them has a health issue and we already have 2.

That leaves QB and DT. Do you want a defensive tackle?

Sure it is. Because Jimmy Clausen MIGHT have been better, too. His floor was 2-14, which is what we have now. Nothing but upside.

We've tried EVERY method of acquiring a QB short of drafting one in the 1st round.

There's only 1 thing left to do.

This is not how NFL teams operate. You know better.

Any Elite RBs ?

So should we just throw up our hands then?

I mean, that's where we've arrived at isn't it?

No. In fact, there might not be a single RB with a 1st-round grade.

:facepalm: I love how it's either one extreme or the other around here constantly.

Any NFL team that has a clue needs to draft one QB every draft.

See my post below

Current franchise QBs who were not considered "elite" at the time they were drafted:
1) Tom Brady
2) Drew Brees
3) Matt Ryan
4) Ben Roethlisberger
5) Matt Schaub
6) Josh Freeman
7) Philip Rivers

We're likely to have the #1 overall pick for the first and only time in franchise history.

That is the DEFINITION of "extreme".

Amongst many of the scouting services, Ryan and Rivers were absolutely considered elite prospects. They weren't consensus like Eli Manning but they were considered elite prospects. Freeman and Roethlisberger were in that "next" group ala Ryan Tannehill last year.

That doesn't mean everybody has to go full reerun. "We should have drafted Jimmy Clausen" is ****ing reeruned.

Would we be better off now with Jimmy Clausen? Maybe.

Would we be worse off now with Jimmy Clausen? No.

Pretty cut and dried to me.

Sums up my take.

We should be drafting the highest rated qb every year until we find one that works. Then we build the team around him.

Please define"franchise" QB. Thank you.

What do we stand to gain from all the draft picks we'll have coming in?

ILBs, DTs, CBs, and WRs. ****ING YIPPEE.

You also have to take into account that probably 75% of those guys won't work out in the pros. If we're lucky ONE of them will be an elite player that we need at those spots.

All while missing out on the best QB in the draft.

There. I've entertained the possibility of a trade down. I gave it serious thought. For another team like the 0-16 Detroit Lions, that may have been the thing to do. For the Kansas City Chiefs, where we already have good players, just a ****ing black hole at QB, that's NOT the right thing to do. At all.

I'm not sure where you're going with this. Are you saying the top QBs in this draft are as bad as Jimmy Clausen?

If so, then YOU'RE the one being reeruned.

No, he's saying we did the right thing by passing on Clausen because Clausen has ultimately turned out to not be very good.

The problem with that thinking is that EVERY QB coming out is nothing but potential. At the time Clausen was drafted, he had potential. The situation in Carolina didn't turn out.

But that doesn't mean he would have flamed out here. He might have - he also might have flourished under Weis the same way Matt ****ing Cassel did.

Who knows, maybe the disagreement over Cassel never happens, Weis never leaves, and we're headed towards the playoffs right now?

The point is that we will NEVER KNOW because the team is too scared to take a ****ing risk.

Exactly, should have kept Weis. Can't be changing OC's every off season and ****ing up the chemistry.

It never fails. Somebody interjects some reason into an argument involving drafting a QB and it turns into "You're scared to draft a QB". I personally am in favor of staying where they are and drafting a QB. But only an idiot doesn't acknowledge the possibility that none of these QBs are good enough to draft #1 overall, and the possibility that the next GM of this team would rather have a bunch of draft picks and what he thinks is as good a QB later.

FYP

Everybody here has already acknowledged the FACT that there might not be a QB good enough to draft #1 overall.

The problem is that there isn't any other player, at any other position, that's good enough to draft #1 overall either.

Unless you want a DT.

I've never suggested that YOU were too scared. I'm pretty sure I knew where you stand, even before you posted it in the above.

All I'm saying is that I've considered the possibility that you raised...

And I've dismissed it. There is no other suitable course of action.

I appreciate that you're seeing all sides to this debate.

I did the same awhile ago. I came to the conclusion that this team doesn't ****ing need all those extra picks. What we need is a GM who knows how to ****ing draft. If Tyson Jackson, Dexter McCluster, Jon Baldwin, Tony Moeaki, or even ****ing Gabe Miller were any good at all, absolutely nobody would think we have a lack of talent on this team. If you hit on 2 or more of your draft picks per year, you're doing an above average. We haven't had one of those drafts since 2008, and thanks to Pioli all of those players are leaving.

So you're right. We need the QB, and we should stay at #1 and draft that guy. What you're not considering when you're weighing the options is if we even need all those draft picks if we could just bring in a GM who acquires talent through the draft like a competent talent evaluator should.

It doesn't matter whether you've considered it and dismissed it. It exists.

You can't use the word FACT and "might" in the same sentence, because then its not a FACT.

I don't understand why Geno is so disrespected, but the talking heads all loved Tim Couch, David Carr, and Russell

And I've acknowledged it exists.

So what's the problem again? :D

Jeff George and Ryan Leaf too

Has a team picking first overall ever willingly traded out of the pick when they needed a qb?

No, the possibility that none of the QBs in this draft are worth a #1 overall pick is a FACT. There might not be one.

What experts are you talking about? Guys like Kiper LOVED Jamarcus Russell, thought he was one of the best prospects EVER. Kiper is one of the ones trying to tell everyone there's no elite QB in this draft.

San Diego

San Diago and they too Brees in the 2nd

The only trades I can remember that included the #1 overall pick involved QBs.

San Diego didn't trade the pick. They took Eli Manning and then traded his rights to the Giants and took Phillip Rivers.

Two sentences fixes the problems.

My point about Geno is just what you said. Russell is the best ever, but Geno isn't worth the pick. I don't trust them, or really care what they think.

Read his post again. He's saying he doesn't understand why a guy like Kiper thought Jamarcus Russell was phenomenal, but thinks Geno Smith isn't worth the high pick.

I'm talking about the 2001 draft when SD traded down from the 1st pick, which was Vick to take LT. Then they drafted Brees

Makes sense now, sorry.

Ah, yes.

Making a move like SD did in 2001 is very risky, but if you hit pay dirt with a QB in the second you look like a genius.

They did hit pay dirt, too.

Lucky for us they were too ****ing stupid to know what to do with it.

I know they had already drafted Rivers at that point, but when you have the season that Brees did in his last year in San Diego, how are you not tempted to take what you know is a good thing and cut your losses by trading the other?

San Diego really didn't hit pay dirt though. What do they have to show for that gamble? Nothing really. Certainly no hardware.

They ended up trading away the Super Bowl winner and are stuck with the whiner.

Of course if we didn't trade for Trent Green in 2001, we **** the Chargers plan up.

They drafted an all-world QB and RB in the first two rounds. The GM messed it up and drafted Rivers while letting Brees walk.

Why draft just one? The Redskins just won a game with TWO rookie QBs!

Brees wasn't all-world in San Diego. He wasn't all world until he got to New Orleans and teamed up with Sean Payton.

Outside of a great 2004 season, he average over 15 INTs a season and barely scratched 6.0 ypa.

In fairness, they really wanted E. Manning(drafted him) and basically were forced to settle. I suppose they coiuld be faulted for drafting Rivers over Roethlisberger......

True. That's fair.

**** Eli Manning...

Oh damn, I hate you.

Now I just thought "what if we draft Geno and he refuses to play in KC?"

hahahah....lets hope that doesnt happen.

I always found it funny that Archie didnt want Eli to play in SD because he thought it was a poor organization and didnt want his son to experience what he did in NOLA. Then, they got really good nearly immediatly after that with Marty.

I wonder if Marty would have won a title with Eli?

They guy plays college ball at West Virginia. Outside of the possibility of proximity to family, it's not like WV's a cultural mecca. Hell, I'm surprised the mountain folk haven't revolted with a black QB at the helm of their prestigious institution. I have a hard time believing that spending time in KC would be any worse than spending time in Morgantown, WV...

Ryan had a lot of question marks and Rivers was absolutely a second-class citizen to Manning, who was more of a question-mark than Peyton.

Ryan and Rivers were both consensus top 10 QBs, just not elite. Geno Smith, to me, is a better prospect than Ryan, Schaub and Freeman were on tools alone. So is Geno Smith an elite prospect or not? To me, he is. Maybe he's not A+ like Luck and Griffin, but he is certainly no worse than an A-.

Geno Smith is not an elite prospect. Definitely a good prospect/player though.

The Chiefs have forfeited the ability to judge an QB prospect elite or not. Their need is so great that if the player is a first round talent, he must be drafted. Its QB or bust. If the player busts then we rinse/repeat in 3 years.

Thanks for that completely subjective and well-thought analysis. You are such a waste of space.

Give me 5 reasons why.

Yep.

If the Chiefs have the #1 overall pick, and the Bills come along and want to trade up to the Chiefs slot, would you do it?

The Chiefs could possibly still get a QB with Bills pick. But just knowing that they could receive a ton from the Bills, hmmmm....something to think about.

I'm with the majority that they should draft a QB, but, I don't think that you have to go 1st overall to get one. I still think they should draft one in the 1st regardless though.

I just don't feel as if drafting a QB is going to be the answer overnight. This team needs more than just a QB, if they can still get a ton of picks and a QB then the chances of addressing the holes on this team improve far more significantly.

It's something to think about. Having the 1st overall pick is almost like a luxury in this case.

Trollin'......down in New Orleeeeeeeans...

I'm sure the Rams are much happier with Bradford, Brockers, Jenkins and co. instead of RGIII.

So now the Bills want to piss on my Chocolate Painii Parade, eh?

NEVAR!!!!!!

We haven't had a top flight QB in TWENTY YEARS. We haven't had a homegrown QB EVER.

But having the 1st overall pick is "almost like a luxury".

I may have to take a break from the board because I don't think I can listen to this shit for 3 months.