Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515026)

Of course not.

But that's been the discussion all offseason, not whether Fisher WOULD start at LT but whether he SHOULD.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515100)

No downside?

ROFL

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515097)

Lol, no shit. Fisher was drafted at 1.1 to be the LT, he is going to be the LT.

Any argument to the contrary is hilariously ridiculous and is only being made to be argumentative.

There is no downside to this move. You have to see if he is the player thought he was when you drafted him.

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 10515101)

That's what makes this whole "tale of two offseasons" ****ing weird. The smart move would have been to let Albert walk, or take whatever they could get for him, after they drafted Fisher. But they couldn't do that because they had just traded 2 second round picks for Smith. They would have gotten at least a 3rd rounder in this years draft and Fisher wouldn't have had to learn a new position....and then move back.

Now he comes in this year....basically a rookie still....and he has to protect Alex Smith. Hope to God that strength program works out great for him.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515100)

No downside?

ROFL

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515105)

Your Fisher butthurt is showing.

:)

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515025)

Or he may be all screwed up and have to start over...

Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 10515110)

Such a dumb argument.

He was drafted to be the LT. He sucked at RT. So promote him to LT?

Who ****ing cares what he was drafted for when he can't even prevent Alex from being sacked from the side he can see?

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515108)

Only if you like to argue about everything under the sun.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515117)

No the dumb argument is to think the plan hasn't always been to move him to LT.

Just like many of the other tackles taken in the first round last year.

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 10515116)

ROFL

Oh, man.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515112)

The bolded part is simply wrong. Nothing about Fisher makes him basically a rookie this year.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515115)

Butthurt would imply that I have an emotive response. I'm not mad.

It was a horrible pick and they followed up with horrible moves. He was horrible for a large part of the year at RT but they're going to hand him the LT job.

If that screams "success" to you, I don't know what to tell you.

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 10515128)

It tells me that they have faith in their pick, who is, by FAR, the most talented lineman on the roster.

Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 10515120)

Plans change you ****ing moron.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515130)

Have you seen Fisher play a snap at LT yet?

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515065)

Then you've completely wasted the #1 pick.

Drafting a T at 1.1 is enough of a waste as it is.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515019)

As the backup behind the guy who earned the spot last year.

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 10515127)

The hell it isn't. He spent his entire rookie year at RT. He now has to learn how to play LT at the NFL level. He has to take the "learning" that he did last year of swapping everything and throw it out the window. The only bonus he will have will be a strength program for 1 year.

Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 10515133)

Nope. But I've seen him play at RT and booooooooooy it wasn't pretty.

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 10515136)

So because one got to play the position he earned it and because someone else did not play the position at all, even though that is his natural position, doesn't deserve a chance to play the position that he was drafted to play.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515139)

Pretty much every LT tackle taken high in the draft last year started at RT.

They are all slated to be LT sooner than later.

This isn't a new idea, they aren't reinventing the wheel here.

This is hilarious, you guys were bitching we had a 1.1 at RT and now you are bitching he is going to be LT.

JFC

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 10515079)

Dude
was
a
Rookie.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515123)

Are you trying to suggest that's not a possible outcome?

Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 10515133)

Nope. But I've seen him play at RT and booooooooooy it wasn't pretty.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515139)

Pretty much every LT tackle taken high in the draft last year started at RT.

They are all slated to be LT sooner than later.

This isn't a new idea, they aren't reinventing the wheel here.

This is hilarious, you guys were bitching we had a 1.1 at RT and now you are bitching he is going to be LT.

JFC

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 10515149)

I would imagine the chances that a guy completely forgets how to play LT after some time at RT would be pretty slim.
]It's muscle memory.
You don't lose it, by learning new skills.
It gets rusty from not being used, but any guitar player should know that it comes right back after a little practice.

Originally Posted by Buehler445 (Post 10515148)

I'm not saying he's junk. I'm saying leave his ass at RT until he is consistently better at LT than Stephenson.

Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 10515153)

Who knows if he ever had it in the first place?

Did we already forget where Fisher came from?

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 10515157)

His talent is such and draft status so high, that valuable repetitions leading up to the season would be lost were he not the #1 LT.

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515163)

I'm so glad no one here has a defeatist attitude...

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515152)

Because opinions never change as empirical evidence is gathered... :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515162)

So you're handing him the job due to his draft status. His "talent" is a non-factor - we've already seen him play and he struggled.

You're giving him the job based solely on his draft status.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515167)

Empirical evidence of him playing LT? You mean like his college career? The empirical evidence that had him as a top 2 or 3 player in the draft by most accounts?


He struggled some as a rookie. He isn't a bust at this point regardless of how much many of you want him to be so you can be right.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515166)

Sitting through 30-plus years of failure tends to inspire hope...

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 10515079)

Dude
was
a
Rookie.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515173)

I bet you are a blast at parties.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515170)

Who said he was a bust?

You couldn't be more wrong...

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515162)

So you're handing him the job due to his draft status. His "talent" is a non-factor - we've already seen him play and he struggled.

You're giving him the job based solely on his draft status.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515177)

Have you ever actually read anything you have posted?

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515178)

It ****ing happens every year on other teams.

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 10515101)

That's what makes this whole "tale of two offseasons" ****ing weird. The smart move would have been to let Albert walk, or take whatever they could get for him, after they drafted Fisher. But they couldn't do that because they had just traded 2 second round picks for Smith. They would have gotten at least a 3rd rounder in this years draft and Fisher wouldn't have had to learn a new position....and then move back.

Now he comes in this year....basically a rookie still....and he has to protect Alex Smith. Hope to God that strength program works out great for him.

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 10515187)

This is it exactly. The FO is the one that messed this situation up last off season.
And in doing so Fisher did not look very good playing out of position. Imagine that no one does. Now some stupid butt hurt fans want to hold that against Fisher and blame him like it is his fault. It is not at all.

Originally Posted by jd1020 (Post 10515189)

I don't blame Fisher.

I blame the FO for drafting a MAC tackle 1.1 thinking it was a great idea.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515175)

I don't party with losers...

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515162)

So you're handing him the job due to his draft status. His "talent" is a non-factor - we've already seen him play and he struggled.

You're giving him the job based solely on his draft status.

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 10515195)

It's his job to lose going into camp based on draft status, yes.
It happens all the time. And it should.

Like I said, he needs those reps with the 1st team if you believe he is to man that spot. Continuity is HUGE on the o-line, and the sooner you set it the way you intend it to be the better.

If he ****s ups, which very well could happen, then he loses the job, but you have to believe that the guy you picked with the 1st overall pick is the player you thought he was, and there really is no reason to **** around with it.
Put him where he goes, and get him ready for the season.

Otherwise you basically admit to missing on the pick. It's year two.

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 10515194)

Your attitude is the "loser" at this party.

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 10515195)

Continuity is HUGE on the o-line

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515166)

Sitting through 30-plus years of failure tends to inspire hope...

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 10515199)

htismage is to Eric Fisher as GoChiefs is to Alex Smith.
Have a feeling the results will be similar as well.

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 10515205)

Then why don't you leave and stay gone this time.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515206)

You obviously don't have a clue.

I don't hate Eric Fisher. I don't have any feelings one way or another about Eric Fisher, actually.

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515207)

I know this Fisher hate is due to not taking a QB.

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515207)

I don't know, maybe all these years in futility have taken the emotions out of this for me. I just don't see the point in being constantly pissed off about this stuff. I just roll with it.

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 10515211)

ROFL

Dude you need to check your ****ing meds or something.

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 10515139)

Pretty much every LT tackle taken high in the draft last year started at RT.

They are all slated to be LT sooner than later.

This isn't a new idea, they aren't reinventing the wheel here.

This is hilarious, you guys were bitching we had a 1.1 at RT and now you are bitching he is going to be LT.

JFC

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515212)

Wrong.



If you think there's any emotion in this for me, you'd be wrong.

This is a football DISCUSSION board. If everybody agreed, there'd be nothing to discuss.

So should we just shut down the server and scatter?

Originally Posted by ct (Post 10515217)

it is hilarious

boils down to those bitching that he was a bad pick, beit RT or LT, but who should we have taken? In my humble opinion, DT Richardson, RT/LT Fluker, and S Viccaro performed the best on the field over their rookie years, and there's no way we were taking Viccaro. that leaves Richardson and fluker, the #13 and #11 picks, respectively, that in our short evaluation period appear to be the best selections 1.1 so far. frankly, if they took a DT, the fan base may have stormed the stadium and burned it down. and at the time last year, nobody had fluker projected anywhere [b]except[\b] RT, so then they truly would have taken RT #1.

they chose the best upside in a downside talent pool. now they will play him where he was drafted to play.

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515223)

If there is no emotion, then why are you so averse to him at LT?

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515203)

ROFL

Must be almost spring. The homers are out in full force.

Originally Posted by Pablo (Post 10515239)

The Fisher hate is due to the fact that we had our pick of literally any amateur football player, and he was it.

And he gargled hot opossum shit for most of his rookie year. He was oft injured and largely ineffective. Now he's being handed a job for the sake of keeping up appearances instead of having to compete for it. Because we all know competition is bad, right?

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10515230)

Because I think it's a bad move, based on watching him play.

It's called "logic".

(And no, before you go there, I'm not suggesting my logic is CORRECT)

Originally Posted by philfree (Post 10515242)

No the real problem is we didn't draft a QB @ 1.1. didn't matter that they sucked.

Originally Posted by ct (Post 10515217)

it is hilarious

boils down to those bitching that he was a bad pick, beit RT or LT, but who should we have taken? In my humble opinion, DT Richardson, RT/LT Fluker, and S Viccaro performed the best on the field over their rookie years, and there's no way we were taking Viccaro. that leaves Richardson and fluker, the #13 and #11 picks, respectively, that in our short evaluation period appear to be the best selections 1.1 so far. frankly, if they took a DT, the fan base may have stormed the stadium and burned it down. and at the time last year, nobody had fluker projected anywhere except RT, so then they truly would have taken RT #1.

they chose the best upside in a downside talent pool. now they will play him where he was drafted to play.

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515246)

My logic is coming from years of observations of what several teams have done.

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515246)

My logic is coming from years of observations of what several teams have done.

Originally Posted by Pablo (Post 10515239)

The Fisher hate is due to the fact that we had our pick of literally any amateur football player, and he was it.

And he gargled hot opossum shit for most of his rookie year. He was oft injured and largely ineffective. Now he's being handed a job for the sake of keeping up appearances instead of having to compete for it. Because we all know competition is bad, right?

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 10515246)

My logic is coming from years of observations of what several teams have done.

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 10515256)

So is his.


And the chiefs keep doing things the teams that don't win do.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 10515259)

This.

What's so wrong with saying something like the following:

"Going into training camp, we need to address our LT position. We have two great young players that we're very confident in, Eric Fisher and Donald Stephenson. We're going to let them compete at that spot and give the job to the player we feel is best prepared to protect our QB's blind side."