Terez says "the Chiefs have done plenty of background on" Mahomes.

[Direckshun]

Here's his 1st round mock:

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/nfl...139261678.html

Watson goes to the Jets. Tribusky to the Browns. Kizer to the Texans.

This is what Terez says about #27:

27. Kansas City Chiefs

QB Patrick Mahomes II, Texas Tech

The pressure is on Alex Smith to deliver, and while he is indeed their quarterback for 2017, the cap-tight Chiefs could save $17 million by releasing him next year. They could also create some cap room by extending him, but the point is, his future will likely be determined by how he fares this season.

That said, someone like Mahomes — who ESPN draft analyst Todd McShay recently called a cross between Brett Favre and Johnny Manziel — could be tempting to the Chiefs, who have done plenty of background work on him. He’s a gunslinger with a cannon for an arm and plus intangibles, but he’s very raw and will likely need at least a year to get accustomed to the lengthy verbiage in coach Andy Reid’s playbook. Mahomes has never had to call lengthy plays with regularity, and that’s something all quarterbacks have to do in Kansas City. The good news is that Reid is very good at scheming up concepts for his quarterbacks, so they often make predetermined reads, and with Mahomes’ arm and willingness to chuck it deep, he could potentially open up the playbook in a way Chiefs fans haven’t seen consistently.

By the way, one other bonus to selecting a quarterback early — he’ll be very cheap for the next five years. For a team that has been tight against the cap for the last several years, that would be a boon.

Of course, other teams watch tape, too, and there’s a chance none of the top four quarterbacks — Mahomes, Kizer, Trubisky and Watson — will be here, especially if Arizona takes a quarterback at No. 13. And if the top four quarterbacks are off the board, the Chiefs might be best served trading down or taking the best player available and perhaps addressing quarterback in one of the next two rounds with the likes of Pittsburgh’s Nathan Peterman, Cal’s Davis Webb, Tennessee’s Josh Dobbs or Miami’s Brad Kaaya.

But let’s say they keep the pick. Possible options include a defensive tackle like Florida’s Caleb Brantley or a cornerback like Washington’s Kevin King, Florida’s Quincy Wilson and Southern California’s Adoree’ Jackson (the Chiefs met with the latter two at the combine, by the way).

I also gave some serious thought here to Stanford’s Christian McCaffrey, because the Chiefs could use a dynamic home-run hitting back after the release of Jamaal Charles. McCaffrey was one of the combine’s top testers at his position and offers unique versatility as a runner and receiver. Still, I just can’t pick him to the Chiefs in the first, because — fun tidbit — Reid and Dorsey have never selected a running back in the first round. Not once, even dating back to the Green Bay and Philadelphia days. So if they did take him this high, they’d be bucking their trend.

Who would you take? Who would you take if no QB was on the board?

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

So who do his yards come at the expense of?

Because 'Even Steven' under center is incapable of producing MORE yards or points, he just produces them differently regardless of the weapons we have. So if you bring in McCaffrey, his yardage will just come at the expense of Ware, Kelce, Hill, Maclin and Conley. It will not come in addition to their yards.

Alex Smith is incapable of being more productive than average regardless of the weapons you give him. Surround him with HoFers and he's throwing for 3800 yards and running for 200 more while being responsible for somewhere between 18 and 23 TDs.

Give him utter tripe and he's throwing for 3300 yards while running for 400 more and being responsible for somwhere between 17 and 22 total TDs.

Stop bothering. Stop getting him linemen. Stop getting him receivers or running backs. Stop using capital to try to improve his situation because it just doesn't goddamn matter - he is going to throw for 220-230 YPG and run for another 20ish. And if the passing yards go up, the rushing yards will come down. You're looking at 230-240 yards per game in total offense from Alex Smith regardless of who you give him.

So burning another 1st round pick on him would be goddamn reeruned because in the end, all it's going to do is change the 'how' on the yardage and points, it ain't gonna change the 'how much'. And it won't change the 'when' - which is to say that when we need him most, he'll turtle and dump it off while your shiny first round draft pick is running uncovered down the center of the field.

He's the absolute pinnacle of mediocrity. I've never seen anything like it.

This may be the most concise summation of Alex Smith ever put into words.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

So who do his yards come at the expense of?

Because 'Even Steven' under center is incapable of producing MORE yards or points, he just produces them differently regardless of the weapons we have. So if you bring in McCaffrey, his yardage will just come at the expense of Ware, Kelce, Hill, Maclin and Conley. It will not come in addition to their yards.

Alex Smith is incapable of being more productive than average regardless of the weapons you give him. Surround him with HoFers and he's throwing for 3800 yards and running for 200 more while being responsible for somewhere between 18 and 23 TDs.

Give him utter tripe and he's throwing for 3300 yards while running for 400 more and being responsible for somwhere between 17 and 22 total TDs.

Stop bothering. Stop getting him linemen. Stop getting him receivers or running backs. Stop using capital to try to improve his situation because it just doesn't goddamn matter - he is going to throw for 220-230 YPG and run for another 20ish. And if the passing yards go up, the rushing yards will come down. You're looking at 230-240 yards per game in total offense from Alex Smith regardless of who you give him.

So burning another 1st round pick on him would be goddamn reeruned because in the end, all it's going to do is change the 'how' on the yardage and points, it ain't gonna change the 'how much'. And it won't change the 'when' - which is to say that when we need him most, he'll turtle and dump it off while your shiny first round draft pick is running uncovered down the center of the field.

He's the absolute pinnacle of mediocrity. I've never seen anything like it.

While what you say is true why not get things in place as it only will take one hit for Alex to go down and the Big arm of Tyler bray to step in to hit all these receivers with deep balls.

[Mr. Laz]

I just don't see it.

Reid wanted a low risk,low reward character quarterback as HIS guys when he came to KC.

People now think that he is going to go for a boom/bust guy now?

I guess maybe he wanted to stabilize the team first.

It's just as likely that he just doesn't want a pain in the ass guy at QB that he has to worry about all the time.

Imo if Reid really goes for a QB in the draft it will be a more conservative pick.

[Coogs]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

I just don't see it.

Reid wanted a low risk,low reward character quarterback as HIS guys when he came to KC.

People now think that he is going to go for a boom/bust guy now?

I guess maybe he wanted to stabilize the team first.

It's just as likely that he just doesn't want a pain in the ass guy at QB that he has to worry about all the time.

Imo if Reid really goes for a QB in the draft it will be a more conservative pick.

Pick the best QB. Not the one who best fits the "West Coast" offense.

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by Coogs

Pick the best QB. Not the one who best fits the "West Coast" offense.

That goes hand in hand. If the QB cannot have success in the system he will not be "the best". There is a reason that teams bring in certain OC based on their QB.

[raybec 4]

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

That goes hand in hand. If the QB cannot have success in the system he will not be "the best". There is a reason that teams bring in certain OC based on their QB.

What team has done that?

[RippedmyFlesh]

Originally Posted by Coogs

Pick the best QB. Not the one who best fits the "West Coast" offense.

Reid's teams with mcnabb moved the ball and he was the polar opposite of smith. So I think the playbook is big enough to take advantage of a different style qb than smith.Sadly I kind of agree with Laz that reid may not have the patience anymore to develop a young starter.

[milkman]

Why do people act like Reid is some old fart that lacks patience?

He's 58 years old, with plenty of time to develop a QB.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by milkman

Why do people act like Reid is some old fart that lacks patience?

He's 58 years old, with plenty of time to develop a QB.

I personally don't want a QB that takes more than one year on the bench to be the starter. Call me impatient but if they need to sit for more than that, I don't want them.
Posted via Mobile Device

[milkman]

Originally Posted by -King-

I personally don't want a QB that takes more than one year on the bench to be the starter. Call me impatient but if they need to sit for more than that, I don't want them.
Posted via Mobile Device

Nothing personal, but I don't give a rat's ass about your lack of patience.

If I see a QB that I think has the potential to be an elite QB, but I feel he needs 2 years to develop before he hits the field, then I'm taking him.

[SAGA45]

I think Reid is swayed more by high football intelligence and acumen as well as experience in a pro style offense. I don't doubt that whichever QB the Chiefs draft (if they draft one) will have those boxes checked above all else.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by SAGA45

I think Reid is swayed more by high football intelligence and acumen as well as experience in a pro style offense. I don't doubt that whichever QB the Chiefs draft (if they draft one) will have those boxes checked above all else.

Peterman or Dobbs

[Bewbies]

Originally Posted by -King-

I personally don't want a QB that takes more than one year on the bench to be the starter. Call me impatient but if they need to sit for more than that, I don't want them.
Posted via Mobile Device

I'm sure Packers fans really regret waiting on Aaron Rodgers. He's probably the exception, but who gives a shit if you've got a wait before you get a decade of greatness?

[-King-]

Originally Posted by Bewbies

I'm sure Packers fans really regret waiting on Aaron Rodgers. He's probably the exception, but who gives a shit if you've got a wait before you get a decade of greatness?

Yeah because the chiefs and Packers are totally in the same position. Alex Smith and favre are totally the same and the Packers totally planned having favre flake on retiring for 3 years and Rodgers having to sit on the bench for that long.

Good comparison bro.
Posted via Mobile Device

[-King-]

Originally Posted by milkman

Nothing personal, but I don't give a rat's ass about your lack of patience.

If I see a QB that I think has the potential to be an elite QB, but I feel he needs 2 years to develop before he hits the field, then I'm taking him.

Which QBs in the modern era have sat for 2 or more years developing and actually became great? If a QB NEEDS 2+ years of developing before he can even hit the field then I doubt he's that good of a prospect to begin with.
Posted via Mobile Device