I like the sound of that. Who could argue against landing this lad? Maybe we could even trade down, pick him deeper in the 1st round, and get a later round pick as well.

Denver supposedly likes him too, and now think that he won't make it to 12 because of his performance during Senior Bowl week.

Didn't Shefter get the memo from Zombi? There will be no questions under the Patriot Way!

Gibbs ran a 4-3 in New Orleans.
Pendergast ran a 4-3 in Arizona before Whisenhunt made him switch.

Dorsey was a top five pick and the consensus #1 player in the draft last year, and doesn't fit in a 3-4 whatsoever.

Combine that with the shitiful nature of the two above coaches in their last coordinating stints, and if this is true, it says a lot about how goddamned incompetently this franchise is still being run.

I've always thought Raji was the pick. Some don't like the pick, but I think he has PB potential and would be thrilled with drafting him.

Because smaller DEs can get swallowed up but the tackles in the NFL...UNLESS they are freakish athletes.

See Freeney vs Hali, as evidence. Freeney is freakish; Hali, not so much.

Hali would have to try OLB in a 3-4; depending on speed/quickness he could do it with strong safety support.

Because dropping 100 million dollars on the defensive tackle position is an intelligent way to build a team.

If the Chiefs took Sanchez or Stafford this year and the kid ended up being a bust and 3 years from now took another top flight QB would you complain about tying up 100 million in QB's?

That would be taking a qb every 4th year. Not two DT in in 2 years in the top 5.


I wish they would just work this shit out with these rookie contracts. It's the only thing that football has WRONG.

I can think of worse ways to do it.

Also if we move to a 3-4, which I believe we will, that money would be used on a dominant NOSE TACKLE and a DE. I put a premium on the lines and don't think it's unwise to become more stout upfront, regardless of scheme.

I'm not in the QB or bust mode like many of you all are. Yes, we absolutely need one(or three ;)), but I don't believe Sanchez is our guy, at least not with our 1st overall pick.

Why would you judge a "bust" QB after 3 years?

And yes, the Chargers did it after 4 years, so what's your point?

Try to follow along, people don't think X dollars should be tied up in a certain position. I was wondering if it applied to QB's.

Jax took Stroud and Henderson in the top 15 in consecutive years.

So, we're cool with dumping 50 million on a 3-4 end, and 60 million on a 3-4 NT.

Which is awesome because the 50 million dollar end can't play his position, because he's too goddamned short.

So, you've effectively turned the 50 million dollar end into a less valuable piece of your D than Turk McBride, since he can actually play the position.

This is how teams go 3-13 for a decade, and how they end up in cap hell.

Top 15 does not = top 5, dumbass. There is a huge difference in those contracts.

I'll "try".







And people think I'm a dick.

Dorsey's contract isn't $50 million, he isn't too short given his arm length, and McBride has shown nothing to make anyone think he can "actually play" 3-4 DE.

Nice try, though.

Sorry, but paying top money for ONE DT and ONE DE on rookie contracts, doesn't put any team in cap Hell.

Top 15 is a lot different from top 5.

Does Dorsey have long arms? Serious question.

If Raji was the guy we took at #3, Tank could be a pretty good DE in a 34, couldnt he? He seems like a big strong ****er who can tie up at least 1 blocker, and most likely 2 if he can get into the gap.

Yes.

I don't understand all the crying about total contract dollars. So you spend $100mil on a couple of DTs. Is that a big deal if it's over a four or five years?

I would really like Stafford and I'll embrace Sanchez if we draft him but I can't believe how far the QB or bust crowd will go in finding reasons why we shouldn't draft a position other then QB.

PhilFree:arrow:

Agreed on all counts. For the record, here's Dorsey's contract details, hardly cap busting....

7/26/2008: Signed a five-year, $33 million contract. The deal includes $22.5 million guaranteed. Another $18 million is available through incentives. 2009: $385,000, 2010: $983,500, 2011: $1,582,250, 2012: $2.181 million, 2013: $2.75 million, 2014: Free Agent

slightly over 7' wingspan... freakish since he is 6'1-2".

I remember them talking about that last year a lot. Just read about it a week or 2 ago as well.

I am still trying to wrap my head around the "too short" thing. Since all T's are now 6'5" and taller in the NFL, wouldnt it possibly be beneficial to a DE in the 34 to be shorter? After all they are just trying to tie up the blocker for passing D, and hold the point of attack for the run D, ultimately crashing down the line to the runner.

I would think being short in this instance, and strong, would be good. He would have leverage to get under the pads of the T and hold them up, especially when he has these freakishly long arms.

Nearly 35". One of his stronger points and one of the reasons he's never on the ground. Critical for a 3-4 end who has to fend off the OT and set the edge.

Then factor in the salary caps mandatory growth; isnt it 7% growth in total dollars from the previous year?

With how much cap there is now, and the way contracts are bloating, $50 million contracts are par for starters now, $75 million is for the above average PB players, and $100 million + is reserved for the super stars such as Manning, Brady, *cough* Vick *cough*.... or so it seems.

So compared to that Raji would recieve about a $40mil contract if he were picked 3rd. Hardly a reason to not pick him. I believe that drafting defensive and offensive linemen is the patriots way and will become the Chiefs way.


PhilFree:arrow:

Yes, I would say a 6 year deal for roughly $40 mil.

Height never hampered Curly Culp.

FAX

After they find a Franchise Quarterback.

Or Curly Joe

The Pats have drafted a total of five O and D Lineman in the first round in the nine years that Belchick has been there.

The Patriot way is to draft for value.

And here I thought they only drafted lineman.

With every selection!

Absolutely.

Now herein lies the problem, explaining what "value" means to a fanbase enamored, and for some very good reasons, with Will Shields and Tony Gonzalez.

This entire discussion is very cyclical in nature.

Now let's prepare for the next Curry or RT petition.

Five out of nine is more then half so there you go. Maybe the Patriots know that's where the value is?

So now does Raji a DT not have the proper value either?


PhilFree:arrow:

Where were these players taken in round 1?

It don't matter.

It's pretty obvious that no player in the 2009 draft is worthy of a top five pick except Stafford of Sanchez. Well according to handful of geniouses.


PhilFree:arrow:

Well... the Chiefs going 3-4 is a lot better than the Chiefs going 3-13 I guess

Of course it does.

You can't make a statement about the Pats drafting linemen for value without considering where they were taken in round 1.

At #3, this entire discussion changes. You know that, so you can't dismiss the most important variable when discussing the overall value of the board.

Regarding this draft, there are actually several players "worthy" of the selection, but many of these are LTs. Good thing two of the "values" are QBs.

Actually, my bad, only 4 of 9.

Belichick's first year, they didn't have a first round pick.

in 2000, they selected G Adrian Klemm with their first pick, #46 overall, in the second round.

2001, Richard Seymour, #6 overall.
2002, TE Daniel Graham, #21
2003, DE Ty Warren, #13
2004, NT Vince Wilfork, #21 and TE Ben Watson, #32
2005, G Logan Mankins, #32
2006, RB Lawrence Maroney, #21
2007, DB Brandon Merriweather, #24
2008, LB Jarod Mayo, #10

Yep.

And that's the point I was making. One can't even accurately use the Seymour selection as a point of comparison. Big difference between #3 and #6. Hell, Chiefs fans should know real well, based on last year, the difference between #3 and #5.

hardy har har!

The principals remain the same no matter where a team picks in the draft.


PhilFree:arrow:

What? What are you talking about?

Not in relation to value. A team can make a great justification for taking an uber-talented guard at pick #19, for example. Taking this same player at #5 would be a fireable offense.

It's tough to cull any valuable information about past Pats drafts because they were never in the top 5, let alone #3 overall.

Saying they value line play is great. Every team does. But pointing to draft history to confirm this fact is a false argument.

I think some indication of value would be how far the player would fall if he wasn't picked at #3.

And with picks #4 through #9 being the teams listed below, which all have QBs. I could definitely see Sanchez sliding to #10 or farther if the Chiefs don't take him. That is assuming that someone doesn't trade up. I don't see Crabtree falling past #4 or #7. So, using that assumption of value, Crabtree is a better value than Sanchez. I'm not saying we should take Crab, but he appears to be a better a value.

4 Seattle Seahawks
5 Cleveland Browns
6 Cincinnati Bengals
7 Oakland Raiders
8 Jacksonville Jaguars
9 Green Bay Packers

The Patriot way also had a franchise QB in place.

All that tells you is that a player's value is relative to a team's needs.

If the Jets, for instance, were sitting at #6, there is almost certainly no chance that sanchez would fall beyond 6.

Value is always tempered with need.

It's the same principle as to why Chiefs shouldn't take a player like Smith. Yes, this is a player worthy of the value of the selection, but the team already has a LT, so it would be dumbass move.

Same reason why teams like Cleveland and Oakland are not going to take a QB.

I wouldn't consider it a lock that Seattle would pass on Sanchez, though, without knowing how much money is tied up in Hasselbeck.

Anyway, Crabtree is not a better value than Sanchez. Go to draftplanet and read some of the material there about him not being considered an "elite" WR by some analysts.

I could see Sanchez falling to #17 if the Chiefs don't take him at #3. That is assuming that no one trades up and the 49ers pass on him. I think Singletary likes Hill. And they already have a lot of $$$ invested in Smith. #11 to #16 appear to be pretty content with their QB situations.

11 Buffalo Bills
12 Denver Broncos
13 Washington Redskins
14 New Orleans Saints
15 Houston Texans
16 San Diego Chargers

No one thought the Broncos were taking Cutler.

If, as many on here believe, organizations end up viewing Sanchez as a potential stud, franchise QB, he'll be a very early selection. Perhaps by a team off the radar, like a Seattle.

Yeah, the Broncos came out of nowhere.

Nothing like moving up 10-15 spots to take a guy you haven't even interviewed.

Yep. And it was a great decision.

I was thinking about this a couple of days ago: I'm going to be very interested when Jaws does a breakdown of this year's QB's. Dude absolutely loved Cutler coming out, and I think Jaws adds a lot of insight in this area.

I'm really interested in whom he sees as the top guy, and where he ranks a guy like Davis relative to Stafford and Sanchez.

Going to a 3-4 is a tough transition, it'll take a few years to get all the right guys in place. I see KC definitely taking a defensive player with their 1st pick, possibly a trade down to accumulate more picks...for more defensive players.

Please, give us details about this trade down that you envision.

I absolutely hate Jaws' voice and personality, but he occasionally has the mark on QBs, that's for certain.

We may not have the opportunity. Not everyone is into paying top dollar for the youngblood right now.

what has jaws said about thigpen?

i'll answer he said that the chiefs had found their qbotf in thigpen

No doubt he knows a lot about the position, and usually his analysis is very detailed.

Everytime he was on the air leading up to the Cutler draft, Jaws was singing the guy's praises. It was annoying, truthfully, but ultimately correct.

I like Jaws, he is the best at breaking down film and providing detailed insight.

I respect his opinion, but in this, I believe he's wrong.

Given the amount of tape that there is on Thigpen now, I'd be interested in hearing Jaws' justification of this, assuming he'd stand by the comment today.

Especially knowing that the Chiefs will almost certainly be in position to get 1 of the 2 top QB's in the draft.

If he says that the Chiefs would be better served getting a T at #3 to protect Thigpen, well, you know how this news should be treated, and it's not out of the realm of possibilities for him to say this as a former QB.

:) i figured as much

Havent gotten through the whole thing yet and this isnt directed at just you but,

The arguments I've been having have said Curry isnt worth it because LB's dont have value unless they rush the passer. I bring up that Ray Lewis hasnt had 4 sacks since 97 and Curry has a similar skill set (not saying he's Ray before you start). Then the argument becomes "well LB's are only valuable in the 3-4". So now we're possibly going 3-4 and we're back to arguing that he's not really a good player?

Man, its anything to not even mention anyone but Sanchez. I actually hope we can draft a QBOTF, but can we at least have an honest discussion about who the options are if Pioli/Haley decide to go another direction or God forbid the top 2 guys are gone by #3? If not Curry, then who? Draft a LT? Crabtree? Its like talking to a 3 yr old with some of you guys that refuse to chose any option if you cant get what you want.

As I recall, Ray Lewis was drafted in the 20s and was the fourth or fifth LB off the board that year.

If anyone knew what he would be he would have gone much higher. He's probably the most valuable player on that team. Granted a lot of that is his leadership, but a great LB can be a very valuable part of a Defense. Curry is a top 5 worthy pick thats all I'm saying. If you think we dont need a LB on this team, cool. But saying this kid couldnt be a valuable addition to somebody just isnt true.

during the year last year, he came out as 'in love' with tyler thigpen. he said 'the chiefs have found their franchise qb finally.'

kinda took my love for jawa down a few pegs.

I'm scared that this would quite suck, but if all pieces play to thier upside, it's not too bad really. But that's probably asking for too much....