I suppose you'll have to define "going nuts"

Right now you're committing the logical fallacy of claiming all bad drafted 1st round QBs were QBs that CP went nuts over. In reality, CP goes nuts over ANY QB within reach in the draft. About the only counter-example I can think of is Tim Tebow in recent years.

Some QBs get more discussion than others due to hardcore backers (Mecca and Sanchez) and virulent haters (all the "true fans" and Sanchez).

So no, you can't just place all the bad QBs on CP and then leave out the good ones. Luck and RGIII have to be considered.

there goes the bible.

And right now you're a part of the problem, not a part of the solution.

The 2004 draft class happens once every... ever. Like it or not, our great QB is going to have to come from one of these "average but probably better than Cassel" QBs if we don't start tanking seasons to get the top QB.

That's where the "legitimately good QBs" are. It makes no sense for you to have these intensely high standards for drafted QBs and then not want to see the team one day be put in the position to go get one.

I'm in if we can get him. I am NOT in the trade away 10 drafts to get him camp at all. Love to have him with the 1st pick plus maybe a sweetener.

We coin flipped with Oakland. It went #3 Ryan #4 McFaillen #5 Dorsey

We technically didn't have a shot at Ryan. Although that should have been another situation where we attempted to trade up.

this thread is all mecca on ryan: http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...ight=matt+ryan

and there are more

you were also wielding your snark in the service of ryan...congrats

I'm not part of anything. My standards aren't that high, there are at least 3-5 QB's worth taking a flier on every draft. The "weak draft class" stuff is always weak. I've always argued that most of the time draft position is not even THAT important. It is... but even in the late first round there are usually guys who become quality players. The difference is teams like the Ravens and Packers draft quality starters, and the Chiefs draft guys who don't contribute.

etc...

etc..

So we should use draft picks to take flier prospects but shouldn't ever roll the dice on a guy that MIGHT need to be drafted 5-10 spots too high?

That was the case with Sanchez, Tannehill, and others. You said we should stop being stupid about QBs who aren't "legitimate"

Which one is it, man?

Wow, I'm really misremembering it badly. He called that one right.

hey, i compare him to pennington in that thread..still not sure if i meant it as a compliment or not...LMAO

it is a riot going back that far in the archives

I never said that. I don't know why you're putting words in my mouth. I would've considered trading an entire draft for Andrew Luck. He is that good. Now someone like Tannehill, I don't know. I know I'm in the minority... I just wasn't crazy about him. He's not horrible by any means, but I definitely wouldn't have made an RGIII trade for him.

But it goes back to that I believe a truly good personnel person could spot the next guy down the line and still make a good pick.

ROFL people were pimping Brohm

You're memory is ****ed.