Your Top 5 picks for the #3 overall.

[RealSNR]

I'll play along and argue with you, Sackofgoo.

Drafting a QB is smart because:

1) VALUE. The talent/draft position ratio heavily favors one of these two QBs this year.

2) We can do it. We have the money to pay Cassel for a year and have him start. If it works out, then great. If not, then we needed a new QB anyway, and luckily we grabbed one of these two guys, who are INFINITELY better than the QB class in next year's draft.

3) After years of Gannon, Grbac, Bono, hell, even Montana in his old age, don't you think this franchise deserves a QB that the rest of the NFL fears? We arguably have never had one. It's about ****ing time to get one. Cassel (according to even his supporters) is NOT that guy.

There. That's my reasoning. Tell me why Michael Oher makes more sense. Where will he play? RT? LT? G? WR? We have to move Albert if he plays LT. We're getting ****ed if we put him in at RT.

But GOD, at least we didn't PISS AWAY another pick on a damn QB, especially a Latino guy who plays for USC!!!!!!! (your words, not mine, btw)

[Saccopoo]

Originally Posted by SNR

I'll play along and argue with you, Sackofgoo.

Drafting a QB is smart because:

1) VALUE. The talent/draft position ratio heavily favors one of these two QBs this year.

No value if he doesn't play. And neither will beat out Cassel.

2) We can do it. We have the money to pay Cassel for a year and have him start. If it works out, then great. If not, then we needed a new QB anyway, and luckily we grabbed one of these two guys, who are INFINITELY better than the QB class in next year's draft.

So, we have Cassel and you want to draft a QB? Good pick. Again. They won't beat him out. No chance whatsoever. Waste of a pick. It's not like the Chiefs don't have any other needs, because you know we just got Cassel, so you want to pick an unproven rookie QB to sit for a year or more?

3) After years of Gannon, Grbac, Bono, hell, even Montana in his old age, don't you think this franchise deserves a QB that the rest of the NFL fears? We arguably have never had one. It's about ****ing time to get one. Cassel (according to even his supporters) is NOT that guy.

Really? Cassel isn't that guy? And you are absolutely positive that if we draft St. Sanchez or Stafford, that he's going to be the guy? And you know that how?

There. That's my reasoning. Tell me why Michael Oher makes more sense. Where will he play? RT? LT? G? WR? We have to move Albert if he plays LT. We're getting ****ed if we put him in at RT.

So you think that by pissing away our first pick in the draft on an unproven rookie QB when we just picked up Cassel, who just went 11-5, who is an athletic 6'5", 235 lb. that everyone who is anyone that knows anything about the game thinks is going to be a continuation of what he showed up in NE is "reason?"

But I'm sure that in your hypothetical, that Sanchez or Stafford, holding that clipboard on the sideline, watching Cassel run for his life after the Cheifs right side of the line, particularly the RT let yet another end or linebacker through virtually untouched. I'm sure that even considering addressing the offensive line is completely idiotic, especially when we could have this kick ass rookie QB looking good holding a clipboard and fetching coffee for the coach. I tell you what, if not getting my quarterback killed for the third season in a row means putting Albert at RT with someone like Monroe, Smith(s) or Oher at LT versus a rookie qb standing on the sidelines, I'll take the offensive line option all day long.

But GOD, at least we didn't PISS AWAY another pick on a damn QB, especially a Latino guy who plays for USC!!!!!!! (your words, not mine, btw)

Actually, those are your words. I never said "Latino" or "USC." However, I did say that if the Chiefs were so amazingly ignorant to waste (and I mean a complete and utter waste) their first round pick on either Sanchez or Stafford, that they would be essentially pissing away the pick, especially considering how many other needs could be addressed with that pick.

You wanted to play. Game over. You lost.

[RealSNR]

There are Cassel backers right here on this forum saying he'll never be Peyton Manning/Tom Brady, but more of a Matt Hasselbeck type QB. I'm more confident Stafford or Sanchez has the POTENTIAL to be a top 3 QB in the NFL than does Cassel.

You don't value the future of a long-term prospect at QB? No, Cassel will likely start this year. If he does well, he will start the year after that, too. But if he's mediocre, we're pretty much stuck with him. I don't know of many other good opportunities to find a QB like Stafford or Sanchez, where we can find ourselves with a draft position high enough to get the guy we want.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by SNR

There are Cassel backers right here on this forum saying he'll never be Peyton Manning/Tom Brady, but more of a Matt Hasselbeck type QB. I'm more confident Stafford or Sanchez has the POTENTIAL to be a top 3 QB in the NFL than does Cassel.

You don't value the future of a long-term prospect at QB? No, Cassel will likely start this year. If he does well, he will start the year after that, too. But if he's mediocre, we're pretty much stuck with him. I don't know of many other good opportunities to find a QB like Stafford or Sanchez, where we can find ourselves with a draft position high enough to get the guy we want.

Dude, you know that these guys don't look past 2009. It's like the NFL will cease to exist after this season.

I'm enjoying watching the Curry-or-bust crowd paint themselves into a corner. They're pinning their hopes on a GM that is impossible to get a read on picking an ILB in the Top 3 for the first time in 20 years.

Come draft day, if it's ANYONE but Curry, there are going to be a lot of sandy ****ing vags around here. Wait, there already are...

[The Bad Guy]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Come draft day, if it's ANYONE but Curry, there are going to be a lot of sandy ****ing vags around here. Wait, there already are...

If we don't draft Stafford/Sanchez or trade down, there's going to be a mass pile on of itchy assholes in here as well.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy

If we don't draft Stafford/Sanchez or trade down, there's going to be a mass pile on of itchy assholes in here as well.

C'mon, Frank.

You're too ****ing smart to fall for this shit.

Look around.

The QB guys have acknowledged that it's a long shot - and have listed other players they'd prefer if Pioli chose not to go QB at #3.

I've yet to read a SINGLE post where a QB backer has painted himself into a corner by claiming QB-or-bust.

Whereas MANY members of the Curry crowd have done EXACTLY that - say that there is NO POSSIBLE WAY we take a QB at #3, and say that Curry is the ONLY player worth that pick.

How anyone can think they know what Scott Pioli WILL do on draft day is amazing to me. The guy is as unpredictable as they come. But according to some on here, there is a ZERO% chance that he takes a QB, and it's a stone cold LOCK that we take Curry.

Foolish.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

C'mon, Frank.

You're too ****ing smart to fall for this shit.

Look around.

The QB guys have acknowledged that it's a long shot - and have listed other players they'd prefer if Pioli chose not to go QB at #3.

I've yet to read a SINGLE post where a QB backer has painted himself into a corner by claiming QB-or-bust.

Whereas MANY members of the Curry crowd have done EXACTLY that - say that there is NO POSSIBLE WAY we take a QB at #3, and say that Curry is the ONLY player worth that pick.

How anyone can think they know what Scott Pioli WILL do on draft day is amazing to me. The guy is as unpredictable as they come. But according to some on here, there is a ZERO% chance that he takes a QB, and it's a stone cold LOCK that we take Curry.

Foolish.

Who said Curry is the ONLY player worth the #3 pick?

[kcbubb]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

C'mon, Frank.

You're too ****ing smart to fall for this shit.

Look around.

The QB guys have acknowledged that it's a long shot - and have listed other players they'd prefer if Pioli chose not to go QB at #3.

I've yet to read a SINGLE post where a QB backer has painted himself into a corner by claiming QB-or-bust.

Whereas MANY members of the Curry crowd have done EXACTLY that - say that there is NO POSSIBLE WAY we take a QB at #3, and say that Curry is the ONLY player worth that pick.

How anyone can think they know what Scott Pioli WILL do on draft day is amazing to me. The guy is as unpredictable as they come. But according to some on here, there is a ZERO% chance that he takes a QB, and it's a stone cold LOCK that we take Curry.

Foolish.

that is the most likely scenario. The chiefs will draft Curry because there won't be any trade down offers that are worth it. I won't thrilled with the pick, but I will be happy with it, because I think that he will be a contributor for many years. I also think that he has more upside and versatility than many people give him credit for. He's the type of guy that I want on my team.

[The Bad Guy]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

C'mon, Frank.

You're too ****ing smart to fall for this shit.

Look around.

The QB guys have acknowledged that it's a long shot - and have listed other players they'd prefer if Pioli chose not to go QB at #3.

I've yet to read a SINGLE post where a QB backer has painted himself into a corner by claiming QB-or-bust.

Whereas MANY members of the Curry crowd have done EXACTLY that - say that there is NO POSSIBLE WAY we take a QB at #3, and say that Curry is the ONLY player worth that pick.

How anyone can think they know what Scott Pioli WILL do on draft day is amazing to me. The guy is as unpredictable as they come. But according to some on here, there is a ZERO% chance that he takes a QB, and it's a stone cold LOCK that we take Curry.

Foolish.

I don't think Curry is the only way you go. I think there are numerous directions (I actually wouldn't mind Crabtree). I know Pioli is unpredictable, but with the way he gushed over Cassel in his intro PC, and then giving up a 2nd rounder for him, I just can't believe he would take a QB.

You'll see on April 25th at around 1 how much of the "longshot" QB guys there were that are all bent out of shape that we don't have Stafford or Sanchez.

[Saccopoo]

Originally Posted by SNR

There are Cassel backers right here on this forum saying he'll never be Peyton Manning/Tom Brady, but more of a Matt Hasselbeck type QB. I'm more confident Stafford or Sanchez has the POTENTIAL to be a top 3 QB in the NFL than does Cassel.

I seem to remember a guy named Hasselbeck being in the Super Bowl a few years back, with a legit chance to win it baring some questionable calls. If Cassel is that level of mediocrity, I'll take it.

And again, I want to know what makes you think that either Sanchez or Stafford has the potential to be a TOP 3 quarterback in this league, let alone be better than Cassel, who just went 11-5 in his first year as a starter? Please, pretty please with sugar on top, enlighten me.

You don't value the future of a long-term prospect at QB? No, Cassel will likely start this year. If he does well, he will start the year after that, too. But if he's mediocre, we're pretty much stuck with him. I don't know of many other good opportunities to find a QB like Stafford or Sanchez, where we can find ourselves with a draft position high enough to get the guy we want.

Who is this "WE?" Seems like the guys in charge of the Chiefs were pretty pleased to get Cassel. Seems like McDaniels preferred Cassel over a young, cannon-armed "franchise" quarterback. Seems like everyone prior to the Chiefs trade for Cassel that knew anything about football stated that if a team wanted to get a qb of the future for this next season, Matt Cassel was the guy because you didn't want to risk it on an unproven rookie. So, I ask again, what qualities does either Stafford or Sanchez possess that makes them a more attractive option than Matt Cassel at quarterback?

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Saccogoo

But I'm sure that in your hypothetical, that Sanchez or Stafford, holding that clipboard on the sideline, watching Cassel run for his life after the Cheifs right side of the line, particularly the RT let yet another end or linebacker through virtually untouched. I'm sure that even considering addressing the offensive line is completely idiotic, especially when we could have this kick ass rookie QB looking good holding a clipboard and fetching coffee for the coach. I tell you what, if not getting my quarterback killed for the third season in a row means putting Albert at RT with someone like Monroe, Smith(s) or Oher at LT versus a rookie qb standing on the sidelines, I'll take the offensive line option all day long.



Actually, those are your words. I never said "Latino" or "USC." However, I did say that if the Chiefs were so amazingly ignorant to waste (and I mean a complete and utter waste) their first round pick on either Sanchez or Stafford, that they would be essentially pissing away the pick, especially considering how many other needs could be addressed with that pick.

You wanted to play. Game over. You lost.

Well, gee, now that you mention that Cassel will get beheaded by defenses if he doesn't have a proper line protecting him, that makes a lot of sense. QB drafters just didn't think of that possibility.

Cassel doesn't need a first round pick at every line position to have a good line. This draft is rich in Oline talent into the deeper rounds. Besides, Oher needs a lot of work, and likely wouldn't have a good rookie season. So much for your, "I want to protect my QB next season" argument. If that weren't enough, there's also the fact that YOU DON'T ****IN SPEND A TOP 5 PICK IN THE DRAFT ON A RIGHT TACKLE. You just don't. Ever.

Lastly, you were the guy talking about how sexy Mark Sanchez is, and how people like him because they're gay for him. I know you're not being serious, but can you at least not be serious in a way that will be funny? Otherwise you're just spouting nonsense, which makes you look really stupid.