ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   NFL Draft Treatise from the "Gang of 14" (Long Read) (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=203071)

OnTheWarpath15 02-25-2009 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rigodan (Post 5528043)
You gotta take the big risks (pick a QB) to get the big rewards (playoff wins). Go big or go home.

This.

For some reason, people think that any pick other than Stafford/Sanchez is a safe pick.

There is no such thing as a safe pick.

chiefzilla1501 02-25-2009 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rigodan (Post 5528043)
You gotta take the big risks (pick a QB) to get the big rewards (playoff wins). Go big or go home.

I don't disagree. But again, just saying it's not a slam dunk and it's reasonable for people to be hesitant.

chiefzilla1501 02-25-2009 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 5528052)
This.

For some reason, people think that any pick other than Stafford/Sanchez is a safe pick.

There is no such thing as a safe pick.

No, but I think there will be many that believe that those two QBs are less NFL-ready than most top QBs going into the draft. Granted, the top of the class is pretty shallow in general and the Chiefs can't just cross their fingers and hope they'll get a top 5 pick next year (especially given that the QB class might be worse next year).

But to your point... QBs generally bust at the highest rate. Other positions would be safer, without a doubt. But it's about risk vs. reward. QBs are high risk, high reward.

OnTheWarpath15 02-25-2009 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 5528054)
I don't disagree. But again, just saying it's not a slam dunk and it's reasonable for people to be hesitant.

And it's just as reasonable for people to be hesitant about taking a LB that doesn't rush the passer at the 3 slot.

Add to that what Scott Wright said this week, that Curry compares to DJ Williams, and you have another reason people would be hesitant.

DJ.

Williams.

Let that sink in.

EVERY pick has risks associated with it.

ChiefsCountry 02-25-2009 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 5527659)
omg .... they even made up a name for their little group of draft hitmen

have a some sort of Manifesto now i guess too






i think i'm gonna be ill :Lin:

Your dupe account made that nickname.

OnTheWarpath15 02-25-2009 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 5528060)
No, but I think there will be many that believe that those two QBs are less NFL-ready than most top QBs going into the draft. Granted, the top of the class is pretty shallow in general and the Chiefs can't just cross their fingers and hope they'll get a top 5 pick next year (especially given that the QB class might be worse next year).

But to your point... QBs generally bust at the highest rate. Other positions would be safer, without a doubt. But it's about risk vs. reward. QBs are high risk, high reward.

There may be people that don't know how to scout the QB position that think they are less NFL ready.

Scott Wright mentioned in his chat today that he thinks Stafford is a better prospect than both Cutler and Ryan.

He's admitted that Sanchez has everything you look for, but that the lack of experience may scare some teams.

QB's are going to bust at a higher rate, because they play the most important position on the field, and more is asked of them.

If a LT busts, you move him to guard. At least you're getting something out of him.

When a QB busts, you have to ride it out.

But if you're too chickenshit to take the risk, you'll never have to worry about losing playoff and championship games - you'll never get there.

DeezNutz 02-25-2009 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 5528062)
And it's just as reasonable for people to be hesitant about taking a LB that doesn't rush the passer at the 3 slot.

Add to that what Scott Wright said this week, that Curry compares to DJ Williams, and you have another reason people would be hesitant.

DJ.

Williams.

Let that sink in.

EVERY pick has risks associated with it.

It stretches believability to try to argue that Stafford and Sanchez aren't first-round quality prospects, and this begs the obvious: If not now, when and how?

FA? We know the results this tends to bring.

Next years draft? For whom, Bradford? Ok, but he's probably going very, very early. Maybe even 1/1, and we'll likely not be *that* bad.

And I don't even want to talk seriously about a guy like McCoy. He's going to be about a 3rd rounder. Maybe he'll develop into a stud, but you're talking about a much riskier avenue.

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-25-2009 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 5527659)
omg .... they even made up a name for their little group of draft hitmen

have a some sort of Manifesto now i guess too






i think i'm gonna be ill :Lin:


Gang of 14 dedicates the following number to ALL you little bitches!!!!

:fire::LOL:

<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RfX9SO7-HkA&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

Reaper16 02-25-2009 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth CarlSatan (Post 5528125)
Gang of 14 dedicates the following number to ALL you little bitches!!!!

:fire::LOL:

<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RfX9SO7-HkA&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

Jesus. Next time, instead of a Bathory tribute, just play something from Bathory. It would make my ears, and Quorthon's soul, happy.

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-25-2009 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rigodan (Post 5528043)
You gotta take the big risks (pick a QB) to get the big rewards (playoff wins). Go big or go home.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 5528062)
And it's just as reasonable for people to be hesitant about taking a LB that doesn't rush the passer at the 3 slot.

Add to that what Scott Wright said this week, that Curry compares to DJ Williams, and you have another reason people would be hesitant.

DJ.

Williams.

Let that sink in.

EVERY pick has risks associated with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 5528074)
There may be people that don't know how to scout the QB position that think they are less NFL ready.

Scott Wright mentioned in his chat today that he thinks Stafford is a better prospect than both Cutler and Ryan.

He's admitted that Sanchez has everything you look for, but that the lack of experience may scare some teams.

QB's are going to bust at a higher rate, because they play the most important position on the field, and more is asked of them.

If a LT busts, you move him to guard. At least you're getting something out of him.

When a QB busts, you have to ride it out.

But if you're too chickenshit to take the risk, you'll never have to worry about losing playoff and championship games - you'll never get there.

THESE!

And for the love of ****; we been drafting defense, defense, defense for two ****ing seasons now, and the positions that people are crying for today, ARE THE SAME GODDAMNED ONES WE'VE BEEN WASTING PICKS ON!!!!

DIE IN FIRE!


:fire::bang::fire:

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-25-2009 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper16 (Post 5528128)
Jesus. Next time, instead of a Bathory tribute, just play something from Bathory. It would make my ears, and Quorthon's soul, happy.


ROFL
The live( and only recording I could find on You Tube )Bathory version is even more lo-fi than this!
DCS respects your passion for authenticity though.

Reaper16 02-25-2009 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth CarlSatan (Post 5528146)
ROFL
The live( and only recording I could find on You Tube )Bathory version is even more lo-fi than this!
DCS respects your passion for authenticity though.

Yeah, but it sounds much, much better. Bathory are stone-cold classics. RIP, Quorthon.

<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/j-iuIArton4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-25-2009 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper16 (Post 5528183)
Yeah, but it sounds much, much better. Bathory are stone-cold classics. RIP, Quorthon.

<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/j-iuIArton4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

Now that I've heard it a few times and know where the lyrics are, the original IS better.

Pioli Zombie 02-25-2009 11:58 PM

Hello I would like to talk about the draft

Shit piss **** **** one who sucks the penis mother****er tits

Is that a no?
Posted via Mobile Device

Reerun_KC 02-26-2009 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioli Zombie (Post 5528276)
Hello I would like to talk about the draft

Shit piss **** **** one who sucks the penis mother****er tits

Is that a no?
Posted via Mobile Device

Hey where is the orginal thread for the gang of 14?

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-26-2009 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC (Post 5528281)
Hey where is the orginal thread for the gang of 14?

`


We confiscated the sonofabitch. If you want access; secret handshake and password please...:D

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-26-2009 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioli Zombie (Post 5528276)
Hello I would like to talk about the draft

Shit piss **** **** one who sucks the penis mother****er tits

Is that a no?
Posted via Mobile Device

Much better! :D

Pioli Zombie 02-26-2009 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth CarlSatan (Post 5528293)
Much better! :D

I'm starting to get the lingo down. :)
Posted via Mobile Device

Reerun_KC 02-26-2009 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth CarlSatan (Post 5528290)
`


We confiscated the sonofabitch. If you want access; secret handshake and password please...:D

Alright here is the secret handshake! Password is, "bitch you better have my money"


Secret Handshake!

Pioli Zombie 02-26-2009 12:31 AM

Blah blah blah quarterback

Blah blah blah linebacker

You ****ing reerun douchebag asshole mother ****ing **** licking piece of shit reerun ass wipe ****head dick shit ass **** **** piece of ****

Blah blah blah linebacker.
Posted via Mobile Device

DaneMcCloud 02-26-2009 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By (Post 5525903)
3.) Pete Carroll said that Sanchez should stay in school. I'm not sure how my saying that people shouldn't be berated for not wanting Sanchez at #3 is somehow acting as if I'm smarter than any college or NFL head coach given what came out of his own head coach's mouth.

Why do you care what Pete Carroll thinks?

I've posted quotes from big time USC Boosters that have told me that Pete was pissed because he was virtually eliminated from Title Contention the minute Sanchez declared.

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-26-2009 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC (Post 5528336)
Alright here is the secret handshake! Password is, "bitch you better have my money"


Secret Handshake!

LMAO That's the hand shake that gets you dropped through Porky's trap-door!

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 5528388)
Why do you care what Pete Carroll thinks?

I've posted quotes from big time USC Boosters that have told me that Pete was pissed because he was virtually eliminated from Title Contention the minute Sanchez declared.

Hell yes he was pissed!
It kills me that no matter how painfully obvious it is that Mark is one very talented young man who will be such a dynamic leader for a team, TF's in KC just have a really inbred mental block from 30 years of overall shite that will NOT let them see the forest for the trees!

Winner. That's what this kid is, plain and simple.

tk13 02-26-2009 02:01 AM

I think it's definitely devolved to the point where all the QB lovers cut down Curry, Crabtree, and pretty much every one else who isn't a QB. And the people who are afraid of a QB cut them down while propping up the other guy.

In the end, most people get so caught up in wanting to be right that their opinion becomes way too emotional. Some of the hyperbole both ways about these guys is flat insane. People saying Sanchez is some God like leader of men or Stafford doesn't have "it"... I don't know about that. And I'm probably being kind.

It's a huge risk, this is probably the time to take it. There doesn't appear to be too many insane prospects out there. I'm not sure Curry's really worth it at 3, but I'm not sure he sucks quite as bad as some people think he does. All the other top 15-20 picks besides Stafford and Sanchez aren't going to bust, and there are guys we're propping up now who are going to fail, and guys who people think are overrated who will succeed.

The reality is that you're more likely to find a Super Bowl winning guy in the 1st round. The other reality is that picking a 1st round QB that flops will set your franchise back 4 or 5 years. So it's not a pick to be made lightly. It's not a mistake you can just fix, you have to ride it out and be patient. That is not a poor argument to make. That doesn't mean you should be afraid to take the risk, but you have to be right, and sometimes that comes down to luck, injuries, the team that's built around them, etc.. The amount of confidence people on both sides of this argument make is probably way too excessive. But that's life on a message board.

The other thing is, we're not going to be a Super Bowl team next year, but we've got high draft picks, a ridiculous amount of cap space, with a horribly weak division that's being turned over with the Raiders, a younger coach than Mangini, and Norv Turner. I think turning in a record much better than 2-14 is not far-fetched. This team could look totally different come June, Pioli really has the freedom to do whatever he wants.

Mecca 02-26-2009 02:07 AM

I don't think Aaron Curry sucks, I just don't think OLB's are worth top 3 picks.

And Michael Crabtree has red flags popping up everywhere he's cutting himself down.

tk13 02-26-2009 02:17 AM

But it is different now with Pioli. It's not like Carl. Regardless of whether he succeeds in KC or not, the dude was a HUGE part in the evaluation and decision making process of the greatest dynasty of the salary cap era. It's very hard to second guess his decisions, or to act like you're smarter than him. Because you're not. And he will make some poor decisions, I don't doubt that one bit.

Reerun_KC 02-26-2009 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk13 (Post 5528502)
But it is different now with Pioli. It's not like Carl. Regardless of whether he succeeds in KC or not, the dude was a HUGE part in the evaluation and decision making process of the greatest dynasty of the salary cap era. It's very hard to second guess his decisions, or to act like you're smarter than him. Because you're not. And he will make some poor decisions, I don't doubt that one bit.

Which is funny, because people bash someone for wanting a certain player, Saying they arent smarter than NFL GM's. Then turn right around and say we wont pass on a sure fire HOF OLB... Because they are smarter than the GM...

How do you figure that?

Mecca 02-26-2009 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC (Post 5528505)
Which is funny, because people bash someone for wanting a certain player, Saying they arent smarter than NFL GM's. Then turn right around and say we wont pass on a sure fire HOF OLB... Because they are smarter than the GM...

How do you figure that?

Because the argument is "Pioli agrees with me" which I don't really understand but there are posters that seem to really think that.

Reerun_KC 02-26-2009 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5528509)
Because the argument is "Pioli agrees with me" which I don't really understand but there are posters that seem to really think that.

How do they know that Pioli agrees with them? Can they post a link or evidence to support those claims?

Mecca 02-26-2009 02:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC (Post 5528512)
How do they know that Pioli agrees with them? Can they post a link or evidence to support those claims?

They don't it just sounds good so they can call everyone else stupid or "you think you know more than Pioli does!"

tk13 02-26-2009 02:42 AM

Three is probably a bit high. Although I think OLB is an impact position if you are a 3-4 team. But that said, there doesn't appear to be a Mario Williams in this draft, no Glenn Dorsey's... if you're not looking for a QB or LT then Curry looks about as good as anyone else. What do you do?

Mecca 02-26-2009 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk13 (Post 5528515)
Three is probably a bit high. Although I think OLB is an impact position if you are a 3-4 team. But that said, there doesn't appear to be a Mario Williams in this draft, no Glenn Dorsey's... if you're not looking for a QB or LT then Curry looks about as good as anyone else. What do you do?

You take the QB?

There's a ton of defenders next year and reality is we'll be picking high again.

keg in kc 02-26-2009 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5528509)
Because the argument is "Pioli agrees with me" which I don't really understand but there are posters that seem to really think that.

There's a lot of folks who think the chiefs are going to do exactly what they want for some reason, this attitude like 'when the chiefs take curry, i'll be vindicated, and it'll prove that sanchez sucks!'. Like they somehow know better than the rest of us what the chiefs are going to do. It's interesting.

Mecca 02-26-2009 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 5528533)
There's a lot of folks who think the chiefs are going to do exactly what they want for some reason, this attitude like 'when the chiefs take curry, i'll be vindicated, and it'll prove that sanchez sucks!'. Like they somehow know better than the rest of us what the chiefs are going to do. It's interesting.

No one knows, which is why those arguments do get on my nerves. Just like the "you don't work in the NFL" arguments are lazy.

What should we all do sit around going "they'll make the right decision" like little sheep with no opinions that'd be a real fun forum.

Goldmember 02-26-2009 08:18 AM

What I'd like to see is some statistic that shows the relationship of success to the quality of their offensive line. I'd say that most of those qb's you listed didn't spend a lot of time on their asses or have to hurry the majority of their throws. I still think the most important position on the team is the entire offensive line. BTW, I am not a former Big Ugly nor am I related to one whatsoever.

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-26-2009 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goldmember (Post 5528612)
What I'd like to see is some statistic that shows the relationship of success to the quality of their offensive line. I'd say that most of those qb's you listed didn't spend a lot of time on their asses or have to hurry the majority of their throws. I still think the most important position on the team is the entire offensive line. BTW, I am not a former Big Ugly nor am I related to one whatsoever.

"The Ballad Of Fix The O-Line And Everything Will Fall In To Place"

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dt1fBjCm49g&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dt1fBjCm49g&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

kcbubb 02-26-2009 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5528494)
I don't think Aaron Curry sucks, I just don't think OLB's are worth top 3 picks.

And Michael Crabtree has red flags popping up everywhere he's cutting himself down.

that's where your opinion differs with many NFL analysts. one reason Curry has been projected so high is because of his versatility. They believe he can play any LB position in the 3-4 or 4-3 including rushing the passer as a 3-4 OLB.

Mecca 02-26-2009 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb (Post 5528712)
that's where your opinion differs with many NFL analysts. one reason Curry has been projected so high is because of his versatility. They believe he can play any LB position in the 3-4 or 4-3 including rushing the passer as a 3-4 OLB.

Just thinking a guy with less than 10 sacks in his career that readily admits he's never been coached to pass rush and has no pass rush moves is a pretty large assumption.

Demonpenz 02-26-2009 09:26 AM

ask anyone in the nfl defense wins championships

keg in kc 02-26-2009 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb (Post 5528712)
They believe he can play any LB position in the 3-4 or 4-3 including rushing the passer as a 3-4 OLB.

Inside/outside? Yes, 'they' say that. "Including rushing the passer"? No, 'they' don't say that. I don't think I've seen anybody anywhere talk about him as any kind of a pass rusher, excluding a handful of people on this board who seem to believe his lack of sacks was the sole result of WFs coaching staff.

philfree 02-26-2009 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 5528729)
Inside/outside? Yes, 'they' say that. "Including rushing the passer"? No, 'they' don't say that. I don't think I've seen anybody anywhere talk about him as any kind of a pass rusher, excluding a handful of people on this board who seem to believe his lack of sacks was the sole result of WFs coaching staff.

I've heard Mayock say that Curry could rush the passer. I like the clip of Mayock showing Curry's one supposed flaw of occasionally not breaking down in space to make the tackle. Curry shases the QB down and forces him to throw an INT. Some flaw.


PhilFree:arrow:

Mr. Laz 02-26-2009 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry (Post 5528071)
Your dupe account made that nickname.

O'rly ....... and what would the name of my dupe account be?



dyin' to hear this ROFL

Brock 02-26-2009 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree (Post 5528754)
I've heard Mayock say that Curry could rush the passer. I like the clip of Mayock showing Curry's one supposed flaw of occasionally not breaking down in space to make the tackle. Curry shases the QB down and forces him to throw an INT. Some flaw.


PhilFree:arrow:

3 sacks per year. It's probably a flaw.

'Hamas' Jenkins 02-26-2009 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk13 (Post 5528489)
I think it's definitely devolved to the point where all the QB lovers cut down Curry, Crabtree, and pretty much every one else who isn't a QB. And the people who are afraid of a QB cut them down while propping up the other guy..

Did you even read the OP?

Mr. Laz 02-26-2009 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock (Post 5528851)
3 sacks per year. It's probably a flaw.

unfair ..... Curry wasn't used as a pass rusher

he got 3 sacks per year just in his normal linebacker duties

but ..... it is a concern

much like Sanchez's lack of experience, Curry's lack of experience as a pass rusher makes it a difficult judgment taking him so high in the draft.

the difference is that even if Curry doesn't develop as a stud pass rusher he could still be a stud linebacker, which he's already shown.

Sanchez, on the other hand, is boom or bust.

htismaqe 02-26-2009 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 5528917)
unfair ..... Curry wasn't used as a pass rusher

he got 3 sacks per year just in his normal linebacker duties

but ..... it is a concern

much like Sanchez's lack of experience, Curry's lack of experience as a pass rusher makes it a difficult judgment taking him so high in the draft.

the difference is that even if Curry doesn't develop as a stud pass rusher he could still be a stud linebacker, which he's already shown.

Sanchez, on the other hand, is boom or bust.

The problem is that you could get a guy like Curry with a MUCH later pick. Just ask Jerrod Mayo.

I'm VERY torn on Sanchez. He has the "it" factor - the intangibles - that you want in a QB. However, lack of experience is a HUGE red flag. He won't have a chance to gain "experience" at this point. He has a chance to learn by watching film and studying plays, but that's not game-time experience. He's either going to succeed, or he's going to fail. Simple as that.

To be fair, I'm torn on Stafford too. He has the experience that Sanchez doesn't, but the more I watched him this past year, the more I thought he DOESN'T have "it". He's got the physical tools, but does he have it upstairs?

Mr. Laz 02-26-2009 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 5528995)
The problem is that you could get a guy like Curry with a MUCH later pick. Just ask Jerrod Mayo.

I'm VERY torn on Sanchez. He has the "it" factor - the intangibles - that you want in a QB. However, lack of experience is a HUGE red flag. He won't have a chance to gain "experience" at this point. He has a chance to learn by watching film and studying plays, but that's not game-time experience. He's either going to succeed, or he's going to fail. Simple as that.

To be fair, I'm torn on Stafford too. He has the experience that Sanchez doesn't, but the more I watched him this past year, the more I thought he DOESN'T have "it". He's got the physical tools, but does he have it upstairs?

agreed with pretty much everything

the top of the draft is weak and risky this year ... more so than many other years imo.

you got guys with less exp that you want with a top pick
you got guys with part of their game missing that is necessary for a top pick

i'm pretty much ok with whomever Pioli goes with tbh

it's a dam crap shoot as far as i can tell. I wish him good luck and hopes he doesn't screw it up.

htismaqe 02-26-2009 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 5529031)
i'm pretty much ok with whomever Pioli goes with tbh

:clap:

I'm there with you brother.

Brock 02-26-2009 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 5529129)
:clap:

I'm there with you brother.

WTF are you doing here?

Mr. Laz 02-26-2009 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock (Post 5529137)
WTF are you doing here?

htismaqe is my secret lover

we had a spat, so he left

we are back together now, so he's back


come here and give me a hug, parkee baby.

Brock 02-26-2009 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 5529151)
htismaqe is my secret lover

we had a spat, so he left

we are back together now, so he's back


come here and give me a hug, parkee baby.

Well, I'm glad to see it. Give him a kiss on the ear for me.

htismaqe 02-26-2009 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock (Post 5529137)
WTF are you doing here?

I couldn't let the BEST OFFSEASON EVER pass without talking to SOMEBODY about it.

My wife just rolls her eyes when I walk in the door every night after walk and shout "PIOLI!"

:D

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-26-2009 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 5528917)
unfair ..... Curry wasn't used as a pass rusher

he got 3 sacks per year just in his normal linebacker duties

but ..... it is a concern

much like Sanchez's lack of experience, Curry's lack of experience as a pass rusher makes it a difficult judgment taking him so high in the draft.

the difference is that even if Curry doesn't develop as a stud pass rusher he could still be a stud linebacker, which he's already shown.

Sanchez, on the other hand, is boom or bust.

:whackit:

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...HOSTOFTODD.gif

Mr. Laz 02-26-2009 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 5529161)
I couldn't let the BEST OFFSEASON EVER pass without talking to SOMEBODY about it.

My wife just rolls her eyes when I walk in the door every night after walk and shout "PIOLI!"

:D

HA!!!

*cough, cough* btw didn't i call this Pioli thing about 5 years ago? :evil:

htismaqe 02-26-2009 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 5529174)
HA!!!

*cough, cough* btw didn't i call this Pioli thing about 5 years ago? :evil:

You always were the eternal optimist. ROFL

FAX 02-26-2009 11:22 AM

Great to see you, Mr. htismaqe.

FAX

Reerun_KC 02-26-2009 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 5529260)
You always were the eternal optimist. ROFL

:hail:

welcome back! You have been missed!

Hammock Parties 02-26-2009 11:29 AM

YAAAAAAY PARKER!!!

KISS ME

htismaqe 02-26-2009 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan (Post 5529334)
YAAAAAAY PARKER!!!

KISS ME

SSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

'Hamas' Jenkins 02-26-2009 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth CarlSatan (Post 5529164)

ROFLROFLROFL

Sweet Daddy Hate 02-26-2009 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5529373)
ROFLROFLROFL

I had me a feelin' you'd like that!

RealSNR 04-19-2010 06:20 PM

Bump. This thread gets linked enough, I think we should just keep it on the front page.

Pitt Gorilla 04-19-2010 10:46 PM

The Kurt Warner things is interesting. In STL, he had a solid line, great back, great receivers. In AZ (I know they didn't win, but they did everything but win), he had no backs, no line, and a pretty porous D. It was basically Warner and his receivers that just about ended up Super Bowl champs. How does one account for an interesting talent like him? Should he have been drafter higher?

Ebolapox 04-19-2010 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla (Post 6687774)
The Kurt Warner things is interesting. In STL, he had a solid line, great back, great receivers. In AZ (I know they didn't win, but they did everything but win), he had no backs, no line, and a pretty porous D. It was basically Warner and his receivers that just about ended up Super Bowl champs. How does one account for an interesting talent like him? Should he have been drafter higher?

he wasn't drafted at all, IIRC

Pitt Gorilla 04-19-2010 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H5N1 (Post 6687776)
he wasn't drafted at all, IIRC

Believe me, I know. It's a UNI thing.

Hammock Parties 09-18-2011 02:55 PM

Bump.

kstater 09-18-2011 02:56 PM

Can we get a ban for all the reeruns that feel the need to bump every Cassel thread out there?

Pasta Little Brioni 09-18-2011 02:57 PM

Hooray it's 09 all over again :whackit: Time to boog out for a while.

aturnis 09-18-2011 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5525019)
<o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PlaceName"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="State"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"></o:smarttagtype><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> Treatise from the “Gang of 14”:
<o></o>
I see a lot of dissent from the True Fans on the board that those of us who continually express the primacy of a franchise quarterback are not adding any kind of insight or support to our opinions, merely insults. In the interests of refutation, I am going to skip any form of attack in this post in order to demonstrate to you what our argument is, and the history that we have on the board of supporting said argument with pointed, and factual examples.
<o></o>
Why do we believe in obtaining a franchise QB?<o></o>
<o></o>
It’s quite simple. It is the most important piece of a team that will successfully contend for a number of years. Look back on the last several dynasties or near-dynasties in the NFL.
<o></o>
The Steelers of the 70’s had Bradshaw
The 49ers of the 80’s and 90’s had <st1:state w:st="on"><st1>Montana</st1>l</st1:state> who then bridged seamlessly to Steve Young
The Cowboys of the 90’s had Troy Aikman
The Bills of the 90’s had Jim Kelly
The Broncos of the 80’s and 90’s had John Elway
The Patriots of this decade have Tom Brady
The Colts of this decade have Peyton Manning
The Steelers of this decade have Ben Roethlisberger
<o></o>
8 teams, all of them had franchise QBs. Most of them also had good to great defenses, but none of them didn’t have a franchise quarterback.
<o></o>
Here is why we don’t believe in defense above all else:
<o></o>
The 1980s <st1:city w:st="on"><st1></st1></st1:city><st1:city w:st="on"><st1>Chicago</st1> </st1:city>Bears
The late 80’s-early 90’s Philadelphia Eagles
The Bucs of the 1990s and 2000s
The Ravens of this decade.
<o></o><o></o>
Many people consider the 1985 Bears to be the greatest team of all time, with the greatest defense of all time. What people forget is that the 1986 Bears had a better defense, setting NFL records for fewest points allowed. What they didn’t have was the same level of consistent play from the quarterback position as these other teams did. In spite of one of the most impressively talented units of all time on either side of the ball, they were essentially a one-hit wonder.
<o></o>
The Philadelphia Eagles of the Buddy Ryan era had some of the most dominant defenders of any era. Guys like Reggie White, Jerome Brown, Clyde Simmons, Seth Joyner, Eric Allen, Wes Hopkins, and Andre Waters. They led the NFL in both passing and rushing yardage allowed in 1991, the first team to do that in 16 years, and they missed the playoffs. In fact, that team did not win a single playoff game.
<o></o>
The Bucs of the last 10 years are another great example. Although they had an amazingly talented unit, Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice (120 sacks), Ronde Barber, Derrick Brooks, Booger McFarland, and John Lynch (among others), they routinely flamed out in the playoffs. They eventually won one Super Bowl, but with that kind of talent on one unit, it’s positively criminal that they weren’t in the <st1></st1><st1><st1:country-region w:st="on">Ch.</st1:country-region></st1> Game or Super Bowl every year.
<o></o>
The 2000 Ravens had arguably the greatest or second greatest D of all time, but with only Trent Dilfer at the helm, and no other offensive weapons aside from Jamal Lewis, they flamed out quicker than Colin Farrell.
<o></o>
Now, with that being said, why do we want a franchise QB this year?<o></o>
It comes down to this: we see Matt Stafford and Mark Sanchez as two of the best quarterback prospects of the last five years.
<o>
</o><st1>Stafford</st1> has an amazing physical skillset. Here is a list of reasons I posted in support of<st1>Stafford</st1> some months ago:
<o></o>
  • He has three years of starting experience in the SEC
    2. He comes from a pro offense
    3. He knows how to read a defense, and can audible into advantageous plays, recognizes the blitz
    4. He's willing to get pounded and get back up
    5. He's mobile
    6. He has good mechanics
    7. He has unbelievable arm strength
    8. He's played with a very marginal OL this year with three freshmen on it, and receivers who can't get separation, so he has to make NFL throws to get them the ball, he's not lobbing a rainbow up to a WR with 5 yards of separation.
    9. He's a leader and he's been under intense scrutiny since he was 16 years old.
    10. He's improved every year in college, despite having less and less talent around him to work with.
<o></o>
Combine that with reports of how teams were “blown away” by his board work, as well as the natural athleticism he showed in running the 40, and I don’t know how one wouldn’t be floored by this kid.
<o></o>
Why do we want Sanchez?<o></o>
<o></o>
It’s a similar question with slightly different answers, but achieving the same result.
<o></o>
  • Sanchez is a leader of men. It’s that simple. He’s naturally charismatic, and he has the aura around him that all great QBs do. He owns the room when he walks in. That confidence bordering on cockiness (minus Jeff George dickheadedness) is a great asset.
  • He has textbook throwing mechanics
  • He has dancer’s feet. The importance of this really cannot be stressed enough. The only coaching that he is going to need when coming into the league is how to read and react to NFL defenses. He’s about as close to mechanically flawless as anyone since the Human Juggs Machine, Carson Palmer
  • He has very good arm strength (it’s not elite, but it’s more than good enough to make any throw).
  • He comes from a pro offense
  • He has four years of post high school experience. He’s worked on the scout team, he’s been a backup, he’s been a spot starter, and he’s been the man.
  • He had great production with a team that had good, but nowhere near elite, talent around him. This isn’t the 2004 Trojans. They aren’t anywhere near as talented.
<o></o>
Granted, both prospects have their warts. Every prospect has question marks. People employ revisionist history far too often when evaluating players after the fact.
<o></o>
What did Joe Montana or Tom Brady have that made them jump off the page to someone?
Peyton Manning was considered potentially maxed out as a prospect, a QB with little upside.
John Elway never even went to a bowl game, was he really a “winner”? He was also a very generously listed “6’3”. Look at him next to Peyton Manning and see if he’s really 6’3”, and yet the same questions are used to discount <st1>Stafford</st1> and Sanchez.
<o></o>
Many of you will beg the following question:
<o></o>
Why not defense in this draft?<o></o>
It’s quite simple:
  • The draft is seven rounds. We have six other picks
  • This draft lacks elite talent on defense at the top
  • Next year’s draft has two of the most ridiculously talented freaks at DE of the last decade (Carlos Dunlap and Everson Griffen), as well as better safety, LB, DT, and CB prospects across the board. It is a draft of defense
  • Borrowing on 3, there is a draft after this year. The 2009 Chiefs have a 0% chance of winning anything meaningful. This is a solid 3 year rebuilding process. If you want to see this team built correctly, you should look to 2011
<o></o>
Why do you hate Aaron Curry?<o></o>
<o></o>
We don’t. The fact of the matter is that Aaron Curry, for all the safety that he brings as a draft pick, and for all his physical gifts, cannot change games.
<o></o>
He has no history of rushing the passer. He expressed confidence in his ability to learn to do so, but he’s never done it. That makes him as big of a project at that job as any safety Carl ever tried to move to corner.
<o></o>
Cover backers make tackles in space and take away the 3<sup>rd</sup>-5<sup>th</sup> receiving options. That’s great, but it’s also like saying that middle relievers are more important than starting pitchers. Both contribute to the win, but the starter has far more chances to affect the outcome of the game.
<o></o>
Curry, for all his projections, has also never played Mike. That will also entail a position move.
<o></o>
Let’s address additional follow up questions:
<o></o>
“Why are you ‘QB or bust’ no matter who the QB?” and “Why do you want to reach for any QB?”<o></o>
<o></o>
  • We aren’t
  • We don’t.
<o></o>
No one here is saying we should take Freeman at 3, or think that Rhett Bomar or Nate Davis are the kinds of guys who could carry a franchise. It’s folly.
<o></o>
“Why is the spread so bad? Look at the #s QBs put up!”<o>
</o>
<o></o>
The quarterback, his pedigree, and his experience are paramount. With the proliferation of the spread in college football, it will become more and more difficult in order to properly evaluate quarterbacks and how they translate to the pro game.
<o></o>
The spread works for the same reason that the option worked. There is simply not enough speed on college defenses to contain it, and defense is a chain, the weakest link causes the failure of all. Given that talent is spread so thin on college defenses, most teams have to trot out fourth corners that run like NFL defensive ends. Combine that with the fact that college players don’t devote the same amount of time to film study and coaching as their pro counterparts, and college defenses run more simplistic schemes.
<o></o>
This leads to soft zone defenses with corners playing way off. WRs don’t get jammed at the line, and their free release, when combined with a quasi-prevent D, allows them to kill the opposing defenses by paper cut, or if a single tackle is missed or assignment blown, by guillotine.
<o></o>
Furthermore, college quarterbacks from the spread are running a two read system, and they do not read the defenses in front of them. Look at any spread team before the snap. Watch how the QB looks to the sideline for instructions from the offensive coaching staff on what the defense across from him is. NFL QBs need to make as many as four reads on any given passing play that isn’t a max protect situation.
<o></o>
The spread is a great equalizer for teams like <st1:state w:st="on">Missouri</st1:state> and <st1:state w:st="on"><st1>Kansas</st1> </st1:state>that don’t have elite talent but want to exploit the lack of 1-80 talent on other teams. It is not a solution to an NFL defense, where everyone is talented, and where the schemes are more exotic.
<o></o>
It faces the same fate as the Run-N-Shoot: Kill the Quarterback.
When these things are taken into account, as well as the fact that all spread quarterbacks need to learn how to take snaps from under center and proper footwork for 3,5, and 7 step drops, you have a huge learning curve that exponentially increases the bust rate for the prospect.
<o></o>
QB is the riskiest position to draft. We should draft a safer position<o></o><o></o>
Aundray Bruce, Tony Mandarich, Pac Man, Robert Gallery, Leonard Davis, Troy Williamson, Charles Rogers, Ryan Sims, Wendell Bryant, the list goes on forever<o></o>

No position is safe.
<o></o>
Why not draft Crabtree?<o></o>
<o></o>
WRs from the spread don’t run a traditional NFL route tree. He has no experience in doing so, that increases his learning curve.
<o></o>
He lacks elite speed. WRs taken in the top 10 almost universally have elite speed
<o></o>
He lacks elite size.
<o></o>
He has a cracked foot
<o></o>
College stats are not a good predictor of NFL success. Look at Ron Dayne, Rashan Salaam, Timmy Chang, Jake Barton, Manny Hazard, or Alex Van Dyke
<o></o><o></o><o></o>
“Why not just draft a QB in the middle rounds?”<o>
</o>
<o></o>
ChiefsCountry has compiled an impressive list of QBs who won the Super Bowl and where they were drafted.
<o></o>
So you want Thiggy as our quarterback.

How about these facts:
57% of the Super Bowls have been won by first round quarterbacks.
(Out of those quarterbacks only 3 were not top 10 picks)
40% of the Super Bowls won by top 5 picks.
21% have been won by 1st round quarterbacks that wasnt their original team (Dawson, Plunkett (2), Williams, Young, Dilfer)
16% of the Super Bowls were won by Montana and Brady
4% were Roger Staubuach's wins who would have went in the first if he wasnt going to Vietnam
14% were won by a 9th or lower (counting Warner who was Undrafted) and 4 of those wins were by Bart Starr & Roger Staubauch.
4% were won by second round quarterbacks
4% 3rd and 6th rounds picks that were not <st1><st1:state w:st="on">Montana</st1:state></st1> or Brady
0% of the Super Bowls were won by a 7th round pick<o></o>
<o></o>

http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost....&postcount=129<o>
</o>
<o></o>
Additionally, this was done before this year’s Super Bowl, in which another 1<sup>st</sup> round quarterback, Ben Roethlisberger, won.
<o></o><o></o>
Moreover, Scott Wright has an extensive breakdown of the profound failure rate of 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> round quarterbacks over the last 15 years on his site, NFLDraftCountdown.
<o></o><o></o>
“All you do is insult people”<o>
</o>
<o></o>
Actually we don’t. We insult people a lot, but a large portion of that is born out of frustration for having the same argument ad infinitum and telling the same thing to people who don’t’ listen to what we say.
<o></o>
I realize that this list is not comprehensive. It’s merely hitting the high notes of the discussions that we have previously had. If anyone else from the Gang of 14 wants to add anything, feel free.
<o></o>
Thank you for your time,
<o></o>
HJ

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...pxjCGcEpJ7SZfG

I'll round with you through them....

Hammock Parties 09-18-2011 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kstater (Post 7920696)
Can we get a ban for all the reeruns that feel the need to bump every Cassel thread out there?

This isn't a Cassel thread.

It's a draft a franchise QB thread.

We are now moving into position to do so, so the reeruns who think we should draft another position need to be educated.

orange 09-18-2011 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gif Horse (Post 7920759)
This isn't a Cassel thread.

It's a draft a franchise QB thread.

We are now moving into position to do so, so the reeruns who think we should draft another position need to be educated.

Interesting thought, though. What if the Chiefs/Cassel suck bad enough that they go to Stanzi in mid-season and he shows some promise? Is that good enough? (to hold off drafting another QB)

OnTheWarpath15 09-18-2011 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange (Post 7920981)
Interesting thought, though. What if the Chiefs/Cassel suck bad enough that they go to Stanzi in mid-season and he shows some promise? Is that good enough? (to hold off drafting another QB)

Nope.

But it won't even come to that.

I figured after losing Mo and Berry for the year, that would be enough of an excuse for the front office to keep Cassel around.

Now that Jamaal is done as well, I'd be willing to bet Cassel's leash just got lengthened by at least another year.

Bowser 09-18-2011 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 7920996)
Nope.

But it won't even come to that.

I figured after losing Mo and Berry for the year, that would be enough of an excuse for the front office to keep Cassel around.

Now that Jamaal is done as well, I'd be willing to bet Cassel's leash just got lengthened by at least another year.

I don't think I'd take that bet if I were you, especially if he keeps throwing turds on the field like he has the first couple of weeks. OF course, it may be moot, because if we give up 600+ points, I'm thinking the current regime will be jettisoned.

Titty Meat 09-18-2011 03:47 PM

We should trade the first pick in the 2nd round for Flynn and draft a LT at #1.

ChiefsCountry 09-18-2011 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 7921018)
We should trade the first pick in the 2nd round for Flynn and draft a LT at #1.

And that is what will probably happen. :banghead:

BigMeatballDave 09-18-2011 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 7921018)
We should trade the first pick in the 2nd round for Flynn and draft a LT at #1.

LMAO

BigMeatballDave 09-18-2011 03:51 PM

If we are in a position to draft Luck, and pass on him, I will be done. Pioli should then be executed.

DeezNutz 09-18-2011 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 7920996)
Nope.

But it won't even come to that.

I figured after losing Mo and Berry for the year, that would be enough of an excuse for the front office to keep Cassel around.

Now that Jamaal is done as well, I'd be willing to bet Cassel's leash just got lengthened by at least another year.

I don't think that will happen.

Like the Chiefs themselves, he also has to be treading historic territory: once again he posted a sub-50 QB rating, one of many throughout his 2+ years at the helm. I'm not sure if the total number has been matched.

Anyway, I don't think he has a leash. He'll either return as the clear placeholder for the QBOTF or be released.

ChiefsCountry 09-18-2011 11:27 PM

So I wonder which douchebag is going to be the one who is against Luck?

RealSNR 09-18-2011 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry (Post 7923191)
So I wonder which douchebag is going to be the one who is against Luck?

Has Pawnmower repented yet?

Titty Meat 09-19-2011 04:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 5527591)
McCoy and Bradford will have more successful careers than Leinart.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5527597)
Really? At what selling insurance? Or maybe used cars?

Classic.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.