ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   NFL Draft Would you take a modern-day Art Still with the #3 pick? (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=201996)

cdcox 02-08-2009 11:20 AM

Would you take a modern-day Art Still with the #3 pick?
 
So would you take a guy guaranteed to have an equivalent career as Art Still with the 3rd overall pick of the draft, over whoever you favor now?

For those of you that didn't see him play, he was a LDE with 48.5 career sacks, not including his first 4 years, when the NFL was not recording sacks. Considering that sacks were not counted during his best year of 1980, I think he probably had around 75 career sacks. He went to 4 pro-bowls and in 1980 he was named to several all-conference and all-NFL teams. Of the years where his sacks were recorded he had 14.5 in 1984 and 10.5 in 1986, with 4 to 6 sacks in the other years. But his real strength was in the running game. He anchored the left side of the line against the run for a decade. He was probably one of the best run defenders at DE that I've ever seen. He had the ability to hold his ground and slip off the block just at the right moment to pull down the RB for little or no gain. Surrounding talent around him was bad at the beginning of his career but got better when Bill Mass came.

If you draft Stills, he will be exactly the kind of player he was when he played: no better or no worse. Do you take him over whomever you currently like in this draft?

milkman 02-08-2009 11:22 AM

I'm a big fan of Still, but no.

cdcox 02-08-2009 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 5469260)
I'm a big fan of Still, but no.

Kind of where I am. I'm willing to roll the dice and try to get someone who has much more impact. Still was an overall #2 pick. While he had a really good career, I'm not sure he quite lived up to that pick. However, James Lofton is the only player that would have been a reasonable draft target at that position that I would have taken over Stills, in hindsight.

Ebolapox 02-08-2009 11:29 AM

nope.

Deberg_1990 02-08-2009 11:30 AM

Not over a franchise QB.

Why didnt the Cowboys select DT over Aikman in 89?

OnTheWarpath15 02-08-2009 11:57 AM

No.

teedubya 02-08-2009 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 5469285)
Not over a franchise QB.

Why didnt the Cowboys select DT over Aikman in 89?


I like this:


1 Dallas Cowboys Troy Aikman Quarterback UCLA Hall of Famer
2 Green Bay Packers Tony Mandarich Offensive Tackle Michigan State BUST
3 Detroit Lions Barry Sanders [3] Running Back Oklahoma State HALL OF FAMER
4 Kansas City Chiefs Derrick Thomas Linebacker Alabama HALL OF FAMER
5 Atlanta Falcons Deion Sanders Cornerback Florida State Perennial Pro Bowler

cdcox 02-08-2009 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ari Chi3fs (Post 5469367)
I like this:


1 Dallas Cowboys Troy Aikman Quarterback UCLA Hall of Famer
2 Green Bay Packers Tony Mandarich Offensive Tackle Michigan State BUST
3 Detroit Lions Barry Sanders [3] Running Back Oklahoma State HALL OF FAMER
4 Kansas City Chiefs Derrick Thomas Linebacker Alabama HALL OF FAMER
5 Atlanta Falcons Deion Sanders Cornerback Florida State Perennial Pro Bowler

I think that might be the best top 5 ever with 4 out of 5 making the HOF (eventually) and only one bust.

StcChief 02-08-2009 12:04 PM

no. our #3 better be QB or BPA. trade down for more depending on LJ/TG situation.

shaneo69 02-08-2009 12:10 PM

Art Still was pretty good in his day. The guy who I used to share Chiefs season tickets with had St. Louis football Cardinals season tickets back in the '80's, and he said Still was the only guy who ever dominated Dan Dierdorf.

They played the 3-4 when Still was here, so I would consider him more of a Richard Seymour type. Hell yeah, I'd take that guy at #3 this year. Still had a couple off years when he became a vegetarian and went on an all-berry diet, I think he played a couple years in the 252 pound range, which was too light, even for back then.

IIRC, there was some discussion about taking Wes Chandler with that pick in 1978, but I think the Chiefs were happy they took Still. It would have been nice if they would've kept him and let him play opposite Neil and Derrick in '89-'90.

Just curious...why didn't you ask if we would take Neil Smith with the #3 pick? Is there a guy in this draft who reminds you more of Still than Smith?

DaneMcCloud 02-08-2009 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaneo69 (Post 5469384)
Just curious...why didn't you ask if we would take Neil Smith with the #3 pick? Is there a guy in this draft who reminds you more of Still than Smith?

There's not a guy at #3 that will have anywhere near the careers of either Neil Smith or Art Still.

cdcox 02-08-2009 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaneo69 (Post 5469384)
Just curious...why didn't you ask if we would take Neil Smith with the #3 pick? Is there a guy in this draft who reminds you more of Still than Smith?

No particular reason other than Still came to mind (due to the greatest Chiefs by decade thread) and Smith did not.

Skip Towne 02-08-2009 12:39 PM

Stills didn't like to practice but he really didn't need to.

kcchiefsus 02-08-2009 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 5469390)
There's not a guy at #3 that will have anywhere near the careers of either Neil Smith or Art Still.

I just love how you already know this as a fact.

DaneMcCloud 02-08-2009 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcchiefsus (Post 5469615)
I just love how you already know this as a fact.

If you think there's a 100 sack guy sitting at #3 in the 2009 NFL Draft, you are completely delusional.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:44 AM.

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