Gholston theory

[tooge]

I have heard the rumors that Herm is really high on Gholston. I think it is a complete smokescreen. Herm has talked about drafting guys for their system for the last 2 years, and Gholston just plain doesn't fit the chiefs 4-3/cover 2 system. I dont think they have any interest at all in him. It is just a play to try to get NE, whose system he fits perfectly, to be a potential trade partner. Will the trade happen? Who knows, it all depends if Long is there or not. If so, certainly they take him, if not, I bet they are trying real hard to trade back 2 spots where they will end up taking Clady or Albert and gain an extra 2nd rounder. I will absolutely shit my shorts if Gholston is a chief.

[Sure-Oz]

I think we can do much worse than gholston at 5

[Archie Bunker]

Hopefully you'll need clean shorts.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Sure-Oz

I think we can do much worse than gholston at 5

Yep, and their names are Clady, Albert and Otah.

[tooge]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yep, and their names are Clady, Albert and Otah.

those guys are reaches but at least they fit the chiefs system. I would rather they get Ellis, clady, or Albert or trade back. I have just read so many reports on Gholston that say that he is a one trick pony and a workout warrior. If the chiefs ran a 3-4 I would be fine with him, but Hali isn't that big, and with Gholston on the other side, you end up with two run liabilities. If the Cheifs do select Gholston, I hope I am totally wrong, but it doesn't get me excited at all.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by tooge

those guys are reaches but at least they fit the chiefs system. I would rather they get Ellis, clady, or Albert or trade back. I have just read so many reports on Gholston that say that he is a one trick pony and a workout warrior. If the chiefs ran a 3-4 I would be fine with him, but Hali isn't that big, and with Gholston on the other side, you end up with two run liabilities. If the Chiefs do select Gholston, I hope I am totally wrong, but it doesn't get me excited at all.

Clady is better suited for a zone blocking scheme, not the power downhill blocking scheme we run.

And regarding Gholston, he's the same size as Jared Allen.

Allen played at 265 last year (listed at 270) and Gholston's combine weight is 266.

[Brock]

If Gholston doesn't fit the system, then neither does Jared Allen. Good thing we got rid of him.

[tomahawk kid]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Clady is better suited for a zone blocking scheme, not the power downhill blocking scheme we run.

And regarding Gholston, he's the same size as Jared Allen.

Allen played at 265 last year (listed at 270) and Gholston's combine weight is 266.

I thought Gailey's system used a form of zone blocking.

Am I totally wrong here?

[El Jefe]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yep, and their names are Clady, Albert and Otah.

Man one heck of a QFT and a side of REP for you good sir.

[BigDaddyChief]

Alot of you guys seem to know quite a bit about Gholston and these other prospects, but the fact of the matter is non of us are pro scouts and even those guys don't know how a player will be in the next level. I do however know about the Chiefs and I have a few thoughts on some of the points I read in this thread: Gholston may be a physical freak, but do we really want someone who takes more plays off than he doesn't! Chris Long sounds like a safe bet (if he's there), with a motor that doesn't quit first play to last. Hmmm, sounds like another great player I love. Speaking of Jared, people in here saying he's the same size as Gholston. Uhhh...no. Jared's 6'6", and he was 280, I don't care what they listed him at. Lastly, does anyone else in here think we should take Matt Ryan if possible? Before you jump down my throat let me explain why we should:
A) He's the right value at #5
B) He's physically gifted and a prototypical size
C) We haven't had a good franchise QB since Len Dawson (Joe doesn't count, Trent was pretty good but benefited from system)
D) We haven't had the opportunity to draft a potentially great QB in a long time
E) He has a great head on his shoulders. I've been following his blog and interviews. Great attitude, smart kid. A good mind is the most important attribute for a QB
F) QB is the most important position in professional sports! Jury's still out on Brodie

[Tribal Warfare]

Originally Posted by BigDaddyChief

mind is the most important attribute for a QB
F) QB is the most important position in professional sports! Jury's still out on Brodie

It will be on Matt Ryan too

[Ultra Peanut]

Originally Posted by BigDaddyChief

Lastly, does anyone else in here think we should take Matt Ryan if possible? Before you jump down my throat let me explain why we should:
A) He's the right value at #5

I abso-****ing-lutely disagree. He's far too iffy to be worth going after when there are actual elite-level talents available, and spending #5 QB money on him is just crazy. He may be the best of a weak crop (I still think Brohm is more likely to be a solid NFL QB than Ryan), but that doesn't mean you should just cross your fingers and wish for the best.

C) We haven't had a good franchise QB since Len Dawson (Joe doesn't count, Trent was pretty good but benefited from system)
D) We haven't had the opportunity to draft a potentially great QB in a long time

We don't this year, either. Again, if you want to take a QB, that's fine, but do it at a reasonable spot. Take Brohm at 17 or later, but don't turn down the very rare chance to get someone like Gholston or Dorsey just because you're jonesing for a QB and there's a warm body who plays the position around.

E) He has a great head on his shoulders. I've been following his blog and interviews. Great attitude, smart kid. A good mind is the most important attribute for a QB

Joey Harrington was beyond clutch in college and is a smart, charming, laid-back guy. That didn't make him the stud I wanted him to be.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by BigDaddyChief

Alot of you guys seem to know quite a bit about Gholston and these other prospects, but the fact of the matter is non of us are pro scouts and even those guys don't know how a player will be in the next level. I do however know about the Chiefs and I have a few thoughts on some of the points I read in this thread: Gholston may be a physical freak, but do we really want someone who takes more plays off than he doesn't! Chris Long sounds like a safe bet (if he's there), with a motor that doesn't quit first play to last. Hmmm, sounds like another great player I love. Speaking of Jared, people in here saying he's the same size as Gholston. Uhhh...no. Jared's 6'6", and he was 280, I don't care what they listed him at. Lastly, does anyone else in here think we should take Matt Ryan if possible? Before you jump down my throat let me explain why we should:
A) He's the right value at #5
B) He's physically gifted and a prototypical size
C) We haven't had a good franchise QB since Len Dawson (Joe doesn't count, Trent was pretty good but benefited from system)
D) We haven't had the opportunity to draft a potentially great QB in a long time
E) He has a great head on his shoulders. I've been following his blog and interviews. Great attitude, smart kid. A good mind is the most important attribute for a QB
F) QB is the most important position in professional sports! Jury's still out on Brodie

1) n00b
2) Allen played at 265 last year
3) Gholston takes plays off but apparently has a "relentless" "outstanding" and "superb" motor. Ok...
4) Die, n00b, die.

[StcChief]

Gholston would be fine....I don't think HERM is blowing smoke here. like we need more draft picks that Carl will have trouble arm twisting to sign by TC

[penguinz]

Gholston fits the Cover 2 scheme perfectly.