Chiefs Underclassmen QB's in the draft.

milkman · 02-22-2009, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doomy3

Well, to be fair, when making decisions, history is something that needs to be looked at. If there is completely overwhelming history as there is in this case, there better be NO questions, and I just don't see that being the case here.

Overwhelming history?

That list of QBs has three QBs who I believe were first round picks, of which only one, Alex Smith, might be considered to be on his way to busting.

Reerun_KC · 02-22-2009, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Overwhelming history?

That list of QBs has three QBs who I believe were first round picks, of which only one, Alex Smith, might be considered to be on his way to busting.

That would be considered overhelming?

**doomy3** · 02-22-2009, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

That would be considered overhelming?

Well, if for once in your life you actually knew what you were talking about instead of immediately agreeing with one of about 5 posters, your opinion may actually mean something.

Reerun_KC · 02-22-2009, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doomy3

Well, if for once in your life you actually knew what you were talking about instead of immediately agreeing with one of about 5 posters, your opinion may actually mean something.

Coming from you, that actually means alot...

I failed to realize your opinion is well respected thoughout the NFL... Just like the rest of ours...

**doomy3** · 02-22-2009, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

Coming from you, that actually means alot...

I failed to realize your opinion is well respected thoughout the NFL... Just like the rest of ours...

Hmm, didn't think I said that at all. It's just funny to watch you follow posters who actually make a point, like Milkman, Mecca, Hamas, etc, and just post bullshit that doesn't mean anything at all.

**doomy3** · 02-22-2009, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Overwhelming history?

That list of QBs has three QBs who I believe were first round picks, of which only one, Alex Smith, might be considered to be on his way to busting.

Michael Vick Virginia Tech 2001
Rex Grossman Florida 2003
Ben Roethlisberger Miami (Ohio) 2004
Aaron Rodgers California 2005
Alex Smith Utah 2005
Vince Young Texas 2006
JaMarcus Russell LSU 2007

Well these are all first rounders, so there have been 7 actually since 1998. I would say that all but Ben and Rodgers have been pretty underwhelming, and the jury is still out on Russell.

**DeezNutz** · 02-22-2009, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doomy3

Michael Vick Virginia Tech 2001
Rex Grossman Florida 2003
Ben Roethlisberger Miami (Ohio) 2004
Aaron Rodgers California 2005
Alex Smith Utah 2005
Vince Young Texas 2006
JaMarcus Russell LSU 2007

Well these are all first rounders, so there have been 7 actually since 1998. I would say that all but Ben and Rodgers have been pretty underwhelming, and the jury is still out on Russell.

You're making a very reductive argument here.

So, yes, at first glance one can say only Roethlisberger and Rogers are looking like strong selections. But let's factor in other elements, like the biggest one: what type of offense were these players running in college?

I'm sorry, anyone who couldn't see that Vince Young was going to be a ****ing disaster was a complete idiot, even more than Young himself with his 6 Wonderlic.

You can't just look at this list and say, "Yep. 33% change of success."

But even if you did do that type of half-ass analysis, 33% chance of landing a franchise QB is pretty damn good.

**doomy3** · 02-22-2009, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

You're making a very reductive argument here.

So, yes, at first glance one can say only Roethlisberger and Rogers are looking like strong selections. But let's factor in other elements, like the biggest one: what type of offense were these players running in college?

I'm sorry, anyone who couldn't see that Vince Young was going to be a ****ing disaster was a complete idiot, even more than Young himself with his 6 Wonderlic.

You can't just look at this list and say, "Yep. 33% change of success."

But even if you did do that type of half-ass analysis, 33% chance of landing a franchise QB is pretty damn good.

I'm not attempting to make any kind of an argument on this subject. All I did in this thread was answer the original poster's question and post the facts of who was drafted, and then when Milkman said there were 3 first rounders, I pointed out there were 7. I mean, I understand what you are saying about what kind of offenses these guys were running in college and all that, but it is funny that the only one of these guys who has proven anything, Roethlisberger, also came from a spread offense, and he seems to be OK.

milkman · 02-22-2009, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doomy3

I'm not attempting to make any kind of an argument on this subject. All I did in this thread was answer the original poster's question and post the facts of who was drafted, and then when Milkman said there were 3 first rounders, I pointed out there were 7. I mean, I understand what you are saying about what kind of offenses these guys were running in college and all that, but it is funny that the only one of these guys who has proven anything, Roethlisberger, also came from a spread offense, and he seems to be OK.

Yeah, sorry, I made a cursory glance at the list, and ****ed up.

SenselessChiefsFan · 02-22-2009, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

You're making a very reductive argument here.

So, yes, at first glance one can say only Roethlisberger and Rogers are looking like strong selections. But let's factor in other elements, like the biggest one: what type of offense were these players running in college?

I'm sorry, anyone who couldn't see that Vince Young was going to be a ****ing disaster was a complete idiot, even more than Young himself with his 6 Wonderlic.

You can't just look at this list and say, "Yep. 33% change of success."

But even if you did do that type of half-ass analysis, 33% chance of landing a franchise QB is pretty damn good.

Yet, neither of the guys that are successes, Rothlisberger and Rodgers were top five picks. Neither had that pressure to deal with.

**DeezNutz** · 02-22-2009, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

Yet, neither of the guys that are successes, Rothlisberger and Rodgers were top five picks. Neither had that pressure to deal with.

Is there some new magic pressure that goes with being the #3 overall pick as opposed to the #10?

Did Roethlisberger take the field, at any time, breathing a large sigh of relief that he didn't have to bear that enormous top 5 burden?

I'm sure the fanbase would have been very forgiving because, hey, he was just a shitty #10 overall pick, not a "top 5."

Reerun_KC · 02-22-2009, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Is there some new magic pressure that goes with being the #3 overall pick as opposed to the #10?

Did Roethlisberger take the field, at any time, breathing a large sigh of relief that he didn't have to bear that enormous top 5 risk?

I'm sure the fanbase would have been very forgiving because, hey, he was just a shitty #10 overall pick, not a "top 5."

Look how shitty that Ryan Simms pick was...

he was a very safe pick...

SenselessChiefsFan · 02-22-2009, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

Look how shitty that Ryan Simms pick was...

he was a very safe pick...

No, he was a pick that looked better due to the talent around him.

SenselessChiefsFan · 02-22-2009, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Is there some new magic pressure that goes with being the #3 overall pick as opposed to the #10?

Did Roethlisberger take the field, at any time, breathing a large sigh of relief that he didn't have to bear that enormous top 5 risk?

I'm sure the fanbase would have been very forgiving because, hey, he was just a shitty #10 overall pick, not a "top 5."

Actually, Ben was drafted 11th. And, the team around Ben was better than the team around the Chiefs. He didn't have to be the 'savior'. There is a different mentality there.

**DeezNutz** · 02-22-2009, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

Actually, Ben was drafted 11th. And, the team around Ben was better than the team around the Chiefs. He didn't have to be the 'savior'. There is a different mentality there.

Oh noes111 11th. Even bigger difference. He didn't have the top 10 burden, which is great, but not nearly as overwhelming as top 5. Very sensible.

Who the **** is calling either Stafford or Sanchez a savior? This player would be a piece, an important one I grant you, but a piece of a whole.

But your true argument is starting to reveal itself.

Build the rest of the team first, and then add the QB, right?