Be the GM
 

This will be a repeating feature. We will take each position in turn. For each position we will look at the players we already have on the roster and whether those player should be retained, resigned, traded, or cut. We will also discuss whether we need help in the draft, trades or free agency. The first position is the most obvious position for the team QUARTERBACK.

Currently on the roster we have:

Matt Cassel under contract under contract $5million
Kyle Orton FA
Ricky Stanzi under contract approx $550,000
Tyler Palko RFA

As I've said elsewhere, I think the firing of the Polians in INdy puts that first overall in play.

I package draft picks and players, including our best players, like DJ and Berry, if necessary, to move up to take Luck.

Mort reporting irsay plans to take luck no.one
Posted via Mobile Device

Please, nobody show your ignorance and say we need to trade for Manning. He is owed a $28 million bonus the week before the league season starts. The Colts are not going to pay him that money then trade him. He is either an FA or a Colt.

Indy's not going to want players, IMO - especially those like Berry who were Top 5 picks under the old system.

But I agree that #1 might be in play, and I'd give up anything to get it. Or at least make an offer that Indy has to consider.

Lets face it, your R1/R2 picks are usually best used on skill positions.

We are in good shape there.

We need help with a few line positions and depth. Those can be taken later in the draft.

If they can lock up Bowe and Carr, this team could get by without early picks for a few years, provided they draft decently in the later rounds.

It'll never happen, but it's what should happen.

****ing this.

Hell, they can have Albert and some of our foundational players on both sides of the ball if they want. I'd also be up for giving our first half of the draft this year and a bunch of our draft next year.

I would give our 1st, 2nd and next year's first for Minnesota's pick. That should be able to get Griffin unless somebody offers the Rams something better.

Something like:

Our 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 6th in 2012 and our 1st, 3rd, 4th in 2013

For Luck.

And even that probably won't be enough :(

Huh?

The reason I believe that players would be an attrctive part of the package to the Colts is the fact that draft picks take some time to develop, especially on the DL, which is where I think they'll target the most for improvement in defense.

They also saw how valuable a safety id in today's NFL first hand.

If the first pick is in play, and they pay Manning the bonus, they'll be in win now mode.

They need players that contribute right away.

This.

Saw it on the crawler about ten minutes ago
Posted via Mobile Device

i saw Tony Dungy talking about the Colts and the 1st pick and he said RG3 had moved ahead of Luck as the number one overall pick in his opinion.

Okay.

But I can't quite figure out what you said.

You re-sign Orton.

Keep Stanzi, Cassel and Palko on the roster and let them duke it out for a roster spot with whatever new guys come in. Cut whoever doesn't make it.

Bring in new guys via the draft.

Scientifically assess your best chance of getting a top QB. As I mentioned in another thread, that may not be trading up to get the top prospects if you're giving up a ton of picks. You may be able to pour those picks into quarterbacks and sort them out until you get the right QB. But either way, invest draft picks into getting QB prospects that you can evaluate as you search for the right guy.

Substitute "#" for "no."

I say just resign Orton, draft Tannehill.

This team is sorely lacking depth in many areas like OL, S, NT, LB. Not really in a position to give up draft picks yet.

resign orton, insert cassel into starting role. draft ol

Mort reporting irsay will pick luck number. one
Posted via Mobile Device

It stings to give up Berry but you do what you gatta do.

I'd make a move for Manning.

With this team, an 80% Manning can win you a Superbowl.

Oh, thanks.
That helps.

And thanks for pointing out I'm a dumbass.

This
Posted via Mobile Device

Just say no to Manning.

Then Manning retires after winning a SB......and then what?

The problem with that is it's not going to be a fair competition at all. Cassel's clearly going to win due to coaches wanting "experience" at the position. If you kept Stanzi, THAT would be a slight risk, after all.

This. He won't even make the physical. He'll retire in May or June.

You guys stretching for Luck, just want in your left hands, handshake yourselves, and clean up afterward.

Trent Richardson or some big-ass OT is what you'll get, for your time and effort.

Reasons Milkman?
Posted via Mobile Device

Honestly I'd soak up Cassel's contract and just keep him as a backup....first I'd ask him to restructure though. He'd be a good backup. It's the best insurance policy you can have IMO.

Cut Palko, Put Stanzi on PS, draft Tannehill.
Orton
Cassel
Tannehill

Suddenly our QB situation is no longer a situation, and we can focus on other areas.

This is a team that is built for competing for the next 8 10 years.

You bring in Manning, with no clear plan for the future after Manning retires, you limit your window to 3 years, 4 years max.

It's the same thing they did with Montana.

It's the same thing the the Cardinals did with Warner.

You bring in an aging QB, if it doesn't work out in the limited window, you're ****ed for years after.

And in the SB era, only 3 or 4 QBs over the age of 33 have won the SB, and only 1 of those was on a team that brought him in late in his career.

You go with Cassel or Orton.

You don't keep both.

If they are both in camp, you cut the guy that loses the competition.

Then you've got the wrong coaches.

The traditional formula for contending teams is that you've got your starter, you've got your developmental guy, and you've got an experienced or otherwise highly capable backup. The last two duke it out for second string. I kind of like that formula. Maybe if you're rebuilding you go with two developmental guys, but no coach should ever throw in the towel before the season starts, so let's go with the traditional formula.

You've got Orton as the starter, clearly.

You've got Stanzi or another non-1st round drafted rookie (3rd-7th round, maybe as high as 2nd) as the developmental guy. Maybe if Palko outplays Stanzi he's the developmental guy, but with his lack of arm strength I think he's no longer in contention for this role. He has no long-term upside.

For the experienced or highly capable backup, you go with either Cassel (experience), a highly drafted rookie (1st or 2nd round), or Palko. Most likely Palko won't beat out Cassel, though he should still have the chance. If you bring in a 1st round rookie, or maybe a 2nd round rookie, he can compete for this role as "highly capable" rather than experienced.

The ideal solution would be keeping Orton and then having a 1st-round rookie backing him up and either Stanzi or another rookie as the developmental guy. But even though I think it's a good strategy, I doubt that we'll draft two QBs this year.

Yep it's on espn.com now.
Posted via Mobile Device

Let Orton walk, take the comp pick in 2013. Trade whoever and whatever it takes to get to #2 or #3 and take Griffin. Keep Cassel as the starter until the bye next year, then insert Griffin after he's had some time to acclimate to the system. Cut Cassel after 2012, keeping Stanzi as the primary backup for Griffin going forward. Maybe the team could make some noise by 2014.

Wtf? If we win a Superbowl, who cares?
Posted via Mobile Device

Fair enough. I'll get Manning, if he's healthy, and draft a QB in 2013 and let him set and watch Manning.

This team doesn't have to have Manning to win a SB.

I don't think I'd trade our best your defensive player for 1 glory year, then be worse off afterwards....esp when Manning has neck problems, which isn't a minor issue.

Manning will cost you a first and a 3rd. no need to give them Berry or Bowe.

I agree mostly with this. I cannot stand to have Cassel in this line-up. He has a low enough cap number that teams may want to trade for him, especially teams that are looking for a stop gap if their young QB stumbles (Jax, Minn) or if they're looking for a relatively low priced backup. I can see no reason Orton would want to resign if you have Cassel as well. Palko brings nothing to the plate. He's not fighting for anything.

I would not overpay a first for a QB not rated that high, whether it be Tannenhill or Wilson.

I still cannot agree with trading the farm to get a top pick. If we are trading our top talent and leaving ourselves without picks to help this team for next two to three years, we quickly become the Colts. Difference is the Colts are who they are and still have their picks.

Manning doesn't cost you anything but money because the Colts aren't going to spend a $28 million bonus on a player they are going to trade. He's either a FA or a Colt. Keep up.

I'll take Cassel over Orton any day of the week.

They both suck. Neither is going to lead you to a Super Bowl. Which one is likely to have the shortest time frame to prove themselves before the team moves in another direction - Cassel.

Orton buys 3 more years of mediocrity. If Cassel sucks this year there is a better chance management finally learns its lesson.

Would this get us the first rounf pick
first and second 2012
second and third 2013
third and fourth 2014
I would be willing to do something like this but to give up multiple first rounds for any QB is not worth it. There will be other after luck and Im willing to wait instead of giving up to much at once for a unproven QB. I would a do the first 2 for manning.

Yep. Package the picks and take the best QB prospect. 40 years plus and the organization still hasn't done dick.

The best move is to trade either Bowe or Carr because one of them can be franchised and cost us zilch against the cap. That or trade a player with a low cap implication. I'd have to do alot more research to look at all the contracts to know who that is.

Free Agent targets...

HB Marshawn Lynch
TE:Jermichael Finley, Greg Olsen, Marcedes Lewis, or Joel Dreesen. We should be able to pick up one of them.
ILBer: Jon Beason or Stephen Tulloch. LBer corp would be one of the best in the NFL.
FS:Michael Griffin
SS:Troy Polamula

I'm not suggesting we should pick up all these players, but these guys would definitely be who I would target to improve our team.

Once again, Manning will not be traded. The Colts owe him $28 million if they pick up his option.

Manning wont be traded. If hes on another team next year, its because he got cut.
Posted via Mobile Device

I'm still shocked people really think Manning would come to KC.

It's one thing to 'suck for Luck' when you're already 0-3, 0-4 on the season. It's another altogether to tank a season in January.

Dumb, dumb, dumb

Plan A: If Manning is retained in Indy, swap firsts and offer Bowe, 1sts in 2013/2014 and 2nds in 2013/2014 for the #1 pick.

Plan B: If Manning is not retained in Indy or the Colts make it clear they're drafting Luck, swap firsts with Minnesota and offer them a 2nd this year and a 1st next year for RG3.

There is no Plan C.

Release Palko, let Orton walk, sign a decent backup, keep Cassel until a starter goes down to injury somewhere else, and trade him for a mid/late round pick.

Your QB's are Luck/RG3, Stanzi, and a backup

RGIII is the only hope. We need to pull this off
Posted via Mobile Device

lol I'm starting to think this is true.

Maybe crennel will help in this...
Posted via Mobile Device

offering whatever it takes to get the number 2 pick. What would that be? Let's say you offer this years 1st and 2nd, and next years 1st. The Rams are going to have a number of teams calling them to move up, some of those teams are going to make offers just as good if not better than yours. What if the Rams have a player in mind and they don't think he'll be available at 11 or 12, so they take a deal from the Redskins? I could see them taking less in a trade to not move so far down.

I'm just saying offering whatever it takes doesn't mean anything, with all the other teams willing to do the same thing. This is the stuff I think about when people say, just trade up.

Joe Montana did.

This Defense could easily, with a few players in this draft become dominate. If Romeo stays on at least as DC.

The offensive talent on this team is astronomically better than was on the '93 '94 roster for Joe to work with.

Not saying I want Peyton or that he will. Just comparing.

Just a reminder what the Falcons did last season.

Moved up from 26th to 6th overall in the 1st rd, swapping those picks.

Then traded last year's 2nd and 4th rounders and this year's 1st and 4th rounders for a WR!

Jeez, just make a trade already Scott it's for a QB!!!!!!! :p

But seriously, If someone is willing to give up that much to get their Franchise QB a weapon, you would think a Franchise would want to give up more to get said QB.

I remember thinking how crazy that was from both sides.

RG3, you're our only hope.

http://www.echoesandmirrors.com/wp-c...mb-300x198.jpg

To be sure I understand, you're proposing paying 3 1st round picks, 2 2nd round picks, and Bowe for Luck? If I'm reading that correctly, I wouldn't buy into that. Way too expensive.

**** that.
Posted via Mobile Device

If I were the CHiefs GM?


I'd fire myself and go jump off the tallest building in downtown KC, hoping my savior Matt Cassel allows me to sprout wings.