There is 5 critcial positions that all championship teams have:
QB
Pass Rusher either DE/OLB depending on system
LT
WR
DT

Chiefs have 3 of those blocks (Albert, Dorsey, Bowe). Pittsburgh won it without a LT somehow, but look at most championship teams and they have key players at those positions.

It doesn't seem to sink in.

Of course I'm not talking about Harrington. He was a bust at #3. Everyone but you knows that.

I was talking about Bulger, Hasselbeck and Delhomme.

Cool, that's what I wondered. I just don't feel that way. If we draft a QB at #3, I sure as shit hope he is better than the 15th ranked starting QB in the NFL. I want a guy like Manning, Brady, Brees.

RaiduhsRaiduhsRaiduhsRaiduhsRaiduhsRaiduhsRaiduhsRaiduhsRaiduhs:bang::fire:

Actually, in all 403 posts in this thread, I haven't heard one person say that they wanted to pass on a QB this year and draft one in 2010.

How about the guy comparing QB's to rims?

Zach wanted to pass on one in the first round.



Oh, and **** Matt Bonner.

But not to draft one next year. He just said he wasn't sold on those two guys this year. That's a valid opinion. Might be mine or yours, but that's OK.

And who's Matt Bonner?

Some scrub killing the Nets right now. I'm watching basketball and felt the need to say that.

I am all for drafting a QB!

I can see the pro QB side using the same excuses like no time to throw, sacked, hurried, read the defense to make a decision next year when we do draft a QB, if they play bad or are outplayed by one of the "bad" prospects this year as the other side is using now for TT. I can also see the reason if it is Sanchez of the "well he was only a starter" for a year in college come up. A #3 pick after getting drafted can not use that excuse since it is being used now to debuke the best foot work, pro-style, etc. etc. IMO

I believe the O-line is important due to the fact if you would rather have an O-line learn, gel and get cohesive first or would you rather have a good prospective QB have to overcome the fight against having no line and overcome the jump from college to the NFL and risk the most important cog getting hurt or a kink in his confidence?

I feel we have been without a self developed QB for so long at this point that I am willing to take the risk on the QB at this point to provide more time for the QB to develop.

I have a hard time seeing where one side is absolutely right and the other side is wrong at this point considering our history.

You all do know we could pick a QB first and still greatly improve the line right?

Nope we need all first round picks on the OL.

By the way you need to put those fine USC asses back in your sig. Maybe with Sanchez squeezed between them. :D

LOL I'll switch it back after the draft.

As long as we get better, yay!

We have real needs at QB. I know a lot of people want Thigpen to start next year, but what happens if Pioli determines he can't hit the broad side of a barn from watching film, or his terrible footwork. What if Thigpen's cut before training camp. He probably won't be cut, you need arms in camp.

As for the top 5 players and being worth the money--that's the cost of doing business in the NFL. It's hard for us to comprehend spending that kind of money on a player, but if that's the going rate for a legitimate franchise QB you have to get him. Many teams draft a QB then fill in the other positions around him.

Us bitching cuz Sanchez has no time to throw in October? OK I'll sign up for that--I'm sure I'll bitch too, but I'll be thrilled that the Chiefs are one step closer to a championship caliber team.

Not having a legit franchise QB is a lot like a rimjob. I'll give 'em that.

Anyone else seeing 2009 N00b of the Year out of this guy?

Good work. Rep.

LMAO

I don't have a problem with drafting a QB in the top 5 and I think many people don't. Those who believe that Thigpen should be the outright starter and that no competition should be brought in, I feel, are in the minority among fans with any knowledge of the game.

That being said, Mecca, I would also argue "why are there so many so fixated on wanting Thigpen to fail?" There is just as big of a contingency of fans who want Thigpen cut or who believe he is nothing better than a #3 QB, given the season he had last year.

My pet peeve is not people who want to draft a QB. It's those who want to guarantee a starting job to a QB taken in the top 5, and who have doomed Thigpen to failure before he has had a full shot to prove himself and will use every last excuse to justify why he's a lousy QB. That's where most of the frustration, at least on this board, seems to come from.

Quote's been used as a noun for something like 120 years last I checked.
Not arguing, just saying...

If you're going to bother correcting someone...
A little fact-checking might help.
Just sayin...

I also think the first sentence of this thread is funny.

Why did you think the Thigpen support would be more than it is, Mecca? Is it because he played well enough to where even you would be able to understand if people on this board were supporters of him going into next year as QB?

This is my last response on this.

I was giving you the business because of the *sigh* bullshit that you like to do in your posts. That's all.

I explained the quote/quotation thing, and I'm correct. On this subject, there's no one more qualified on this forum. More qualified than the first Google entry. Read my full explanation. Now, drop it. Let's talk about more important things. Like people who think QB's are like rimjobs.

Because during the course of the season we had people comparing him to ****ing John Elway.

Ok you are going to have to post names so we can all point and laugh at them

You don't remember the "Thigpen compares favorably to" posts?

This has been a running joke amongst several of us.

this is obligatory

That's the thing, it's very unlikely that you can have your cake and eat it too.

Say we draft Sanchez. I don't think anyone has a problem with him sitting for at least the 1st half of 09, if not the whole year.

But by doing that, it mean that either:

a) You have to bring in a veteran to run your pro style offense, or

b) Thigpen has to be proficient enough to warrant playing while Sanchez sits.

You're not going to draft a QB at 3, and pay him that money to sit and learn an offense you're not planning to use him in. You can't have him sitting on the bench learning a real offense, while the rest of the team is running the Pistol, because that's the only thing Thigpen can run.

Otherwise, option c) is to start Sanchez right away.

After what we all saw early in 2008, I have a hard time believing that anyone thinks that b) is an option. There's no way that in one offseason, Thigpen can get to a level of proficiency in a pro style offense that either Sanchez or a veteran already have.

So like I said, something has to give.

Vaguely but I have hard time remembering what happened last week.

So I take it they said Thigpen numbers in his "rookie" season = Elway's numbers?'

Rep

I think it's impossible to know. He didn't get any work last offseason, so it will be interesting to see how much he improves his dropback game this offseason.

I don't think Scott Pioli will settle for Tyler Thigpen after he saw what Tom Brady can do.

That he "compares favorably" to every ****ing HOF quarterback who has ever walked the face of the earth.

Elway, Marino, Manning, Brady. You name it.

He also saw what Matt Cassell can do, which was pretty similar to what Tom Brady was doing.

Pretty good system with other great players.

I agree, it's impossible to KNOW.

However, I'd be shocked if you didn't agree that it's a pretty fair assumption that a 7th round pick out of Coastal Carolina who knows nothing but the spread - with ONE offseason of prep-time - is going to be anywhere near as proficient in an offense that a veteran or Stafford/Sanchez have been running for their entire football careers.

I don't see how Thigpen can be compared to Cassell. I'd take Cassell any day of the week.

Matt Cassel can take snaps from center and read defenses if asked.

Being a backup at a program like USC has its advantages.

We need names so we can have a good laugh

If I have to choose between those two only?

Yeah, Cassel. Not even close.

DING DING DING

Or option D, you give Thigpen the starting job to start the offseason and make him fight with every last inch of his body to keep his job. If the Chiefs feel uncomfortable with Thigpen in a new offense, then you consider starting a veteran like Huard until Thigpen or Sanchez are ready. If Sanchez is ready and you truly believe he is, then you start him--I'm just not convinced that he will be.

I don't care if Sanchez is drafted or if he wins the job. I just believe that every rookie needs to fight for their job, and that too often the fans and the media put too much pressure on them to start even if they're not ready or not the best option. I just believe that in this stage, you need to force a guy like Sanchez to prove that he's worth a starting job and you need to give Thigpen every last chance to succeed before you give up on him. Just my thoughts.

Here's a scenario I don't think the Thigpen supporters can defend: Thigpen keeps it on the option, gets hit in the ribs by a linebacker and is taken off on a stretcher. Croyle is our backup quarterback.

I would be shocked if Croyle is still here when the season starts....

ROFL

I just listened to a podcast of an interview with McShay and Kiper.

When discussing QBs, both agree Detroit will take one. Both raised the point that Haley's system in Arizona will be the kind of system that Thigpen thrives in. Also, the host did an interview with Thigpen yesterday, and he said that Thigpen was extremely excited to have Haley as the coach.

They both said any unwillingness to draft a QB by the Chiefs would be due to Pioli attempting to pull a rabbit out of a hat like they did with Brady as a 6th rounder. Personally, that's bullshit. The Patriots HAD Drew Bledsoe as a franchise QB, who got injured and outplayed by a 6th round rookie. They really lucked into that one. Pioli won't be counting on Thigpen as the incumbent starter like Bledsoe was for New England.

Kiper finally raised the point that people need to shut up about Sanchez and Stafford comprising a "bad" QB class. That's just bullshit. He said everybody said the same thing about last year, that Matt Ryan throws too many picks, and that Joe Flacco was from a small ass school and the transition to the NFL would take awhile. Even Peyton Manning had all kinds of criticisms coming out of college. Basically, to act like you know everything and say, "Sanchez and Stafford are definitely not as good as Ryan and Flacco" is completely revisionist history. NOBODY thought we'd see this much success from rookie QBs in their first year. So yes, just because we had two successful rookies last year doesn't mean we'll have two successful rookies this year, but that also doesn't mean that because we had two successful rookies last year, we'll have two bad rookies this year.

Kind of said nothing. But they both buy Thigpen as a valid option for the Chiefs instead of drafting a QB in the 1st.

Take that for what it's worth this early in the drafting season pre-combine.

Regardless of that, he has football experience and despite what people have said to knock him down, he was at least average on the pro level. I would say that even considering the offense, he has already far outperformed guys like Kyle Boller, Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, and Tim Couch. I think too many are assuming that Thigpen's performance in 2008 was easily replicable. Even if it was a college-form offense, it was still a pro style offense simply because it showed some effectiveness on the pro level.

With all due respect, Ryan was a great find; I am not convinced that Flacco would have had even a fraction of the same kind of success if he played on a team with an average running game. I am not at all convinced about Flacco yet.

Thanks for the info SNR. It will be interesting off-season\draft around here if they stick with Thigpen and draft a QB in the lower rounds.

Uh, option D is option B with different words thrown around.

Like I said, he has to show he's proficient in a pro style offense.

No one is saying that Sanchez should be given the job without competition, but considering who we're dealing with in Thigpen, I think a lot of people are assuming he'll beat him out fair and square - or that Thigpen will show he's not capable of running the offense, and Sanchez or a vet (Huard will not be here) will have to step in.

Please don't tell me Kiper thinks the Chiefs will draft Cullen Harper instead of Sanchez or Stafford.

No, it didn't. It showed effectiveness for half of each game.

You can't compare Thigpen to guys that play in a real offense, they are being asked to do way more than Thigpen is.

Considering he was running the spread, his numbers aren't really that great.

Like I said before:

Tyler Thigpen wouldn't start on any of the other 31 teams in the league.

Why?

None of them would be willing to scrap their current offensive philosophy to install the Pistol so he can be somewhat effective.

They left that open as an option. They think if the Chiefs pass on Sanchez, that Sanchez will fall pretty far down the board, which would leave the Chiefs in a position to take Nate Davis/whomever as the 3rd QB taken with their 2nd round pick.

I would be extremely lukewarm towards that. We may as well throw our 1st rounder at Cassell if we're going to do that.

Who doesn't?

Though Brees has yet to won anything of significance.

Numbers aren't important to me. WINNING is important to me. Ben Rothlisberger isn't going to win any style points but he already has TWO Super Championships in only 4 seasons in the league.

I'm curious as to what they think is "pretty far down the board."

If we pass on him, there's no way he falls past 22, and he realistically still goes in the Top 10, IMO.

8 - Jaguars

10 - Niners

17 - Jets

18 - Bears

19 - Bucs

20 - Detroit

22 - Vikings

I don't understand this argument.

Please tell me what Drew Brees can do to improve his play to put his team over the hump. The reason why the Saints did poorly this year is obviously his fault. 5000 yards, eh? I'd rather have wins.

Seriously, the man throws for 5000 ****ing yards. At some point you have to acknowledge that there's not that much he can do, besides put up points. His team has to play well around him, which they didn't.

My problem with Cassell is I wouldn't throw those draft picks and that kind of contract at the next Matt Schaub.

As for Cullen Harper, he ripped Tommy Bowden after he was fired. He isn't the character player Pioli wants. I saw him lose his cool when Nebraska pressured him throughout the second half of the Gator Bowl. He went into the tank emotionally.

I have seen literally nobody advocate this.

Versus Sanchez starts, the O-line sucks and NFL speed plus experience as QB is too much and we have to revert to the back up because the O-line still sucks 3 years in a row.

Now we have 20 million guaranteed tied up and have to draft offensive players in a defensive draft year?

contrary to popular belief, football is a team sport, not a one-man sport.

brees could have easily won the super bowl with that team. similarly, roethlisberger would not have won it with the saints.

Lets compare the defensive units both years them for both?

This

Sign Jason Brown to play center and draft a guard or right tackle.

Clearly you don't understand that Roethlisberger is a jedi knight who is able to summon The Force with 2 minutes left in the 4th quarter for every game he plays.

Well, if it's not that, how else do you justify not wanting Brees on your team? Seriously... 5000 yards? That's more yards than some starting QBs manage in 2 seasons.

You must be kidding.

There is no argument. It was a factual statement.

This.

You must be a true fan

Why? Because I would must rather have Drew Brees than Ben Roethlisberger?

Give me a break.

And you know this as fact?

We have some know-it-alls around here it seems.

I guess Thigpen would have QB'd the Steelers to a Super Bowl as well?

Yep, absolutely.

Everyone here knows Thigpen=Brees.

Come on, Dane. Quit being a dick.

You really don't get the whole QB position, do you?

There have been 43 Super Bowls. Rothlisberger has won two. Drew Brees was not re-signed by the team that drafted him and while he's put up gaudy numbers (style points), he hasn't even won a playoff game.

So yeah, I'll take Big Ben any day of the week. And apparently, you've never watched Pittsburgh because for one, their offensive line is worse than the Chiefs and two, their running game isn't much to speak.

Yet all Ben does is will them to wins.

Was that directed at you?

Then why are you answering for him?

Alright, then clearly you would rather have Trent Dilfer than Dan Marino too?

What's with the Thigpen fixation? :shrug:

I was hoping the True Fans would take off to Miami or follow Herm somewhere. Never in my wildest dreams would I see a fanbase so against building a championship team...

Are they scared of the Chiefs might actually win something? Are they missing mediocrity already?

Brees might have a ring if the Saints could play some D.

That could be said for several NFL QB's.

Ummm...Drew Brees took the Saints to the NFC Championship game in the 2006 season

Duh, my bad.

His offense was nearly completely shutdown by the Bears defense.

Yeah, because Trent Dilfer is the same exact QB as Ben Rothlisberger, right?

that wasn't directed to you. Why are you answering?

How can this work for some QBs but not for others?