Quote:
Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan
That's unfair. Some would just like a little longer college resume.
Not to mention, if my team is going to draft a QB top five... I want him to be a prototypical game changing type of QB. I want a strong arm.
Stafford would have been great, strong arm and a long resume proving that he can overcome difficulties.
Sanchez struggled to win the starting job and then was on a team vastly superior to those other teams in the Pac 10.
Sanchez may turn out to be great, but if I am picking a QB top five, I want more.
I think Cassel has similar physical ability, plus a year starting in the NFL, a history of persistence to overcome adversity, and a proven work ethic.
All at a lesser draft and paycheck price. (given that their contracts are similar now, and Sahnchez would have gotten more at the #3 spot)
|
That's fine. I understand your points about Sanchez.
But let's be frank. There's no perfect prospect. Thus, you've just set up a straw man. For Sanchez, it's arm strength and the "superior" talent that was around him.
When it looked like Stafford might be a legit option for the Chiefs, there were countless posts criticizing his decision-making ability and inability to win with "superior" SEC talent.
It will never end. There will always be an excuse to avoid the n00b QB. Why do I say this? Because this fanbase is not used to drafting and really trying to develop a legit young QB, since we haven't done it since '83. 1980mother****ing3.
And, surprise, we didn't do it, again. Fine. Let's hope Cassel kicks supreme ass.
But let's not play this ****ing game about trying to claim that Sanchez wasn't a fantastic prospect. Key word, "prospect."