Chiefs Chiefs lose to Denver and draft 3rd or 2nd - Page 11

**cdcox** · 12-27-2009, 03:14 PM

Berry?

Hoover · 12-27-2009, 04:23 PM

We need a playmaker period. That means Berry if he is there.

HolmeZz · 12-27-2009, 04:24 PM

I'm a Notre Dame fan.

There shouldn't be any talk of us taking Clausen. I don't like taking quarterbacks in the top half of the draft unless it's blatantly evident that there's something that sets them apart from the bulk of the quarterbacks in the league. I didn't get that feeling with Jimmy. He could turn out to be really good, but I wouldn't be confident enough in believing that will be the case to take him high in the draft(not that I think we should be looking QB anyway. Berry should be our man).

Coogs · 12-27-2009, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoover

We need a playmaker period. That means Berry if he is there.

Or a QB.

KC kid · 12-27-2009, 04:25 PM

The thing about drafting a QB is Cassel will be 28 next year. You could always say that you want the new QB to have a year behind Cassel.

Coogs · 12-27-2009, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolmeZz

I'm a Notre Dame fan.

There shouldn't be any talk of us taking Clausen. I don't like taking quarterbacks in the top half of the draft unless it's blatantly evident that there's something that sets them apart from the bulk of the quarterbacks in the league. I didn't get that feeling with Jimmy. He could still be good, but I wouldn't be confident enough in believing that will be the case to take him high in the draft(not that I think we should be looking QB anyway. Berry should be our man).

That's your opinion, and that is fine. I just don't happen to agree. We need a QB in a big way, Cassel be damned!

Coogs · 12-27-2009, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC kid

The thing about drafting a QB is Cassel will be 28 next year. You could always say that you want the new QB to have a year behind Cassel.

Yep!

KC kid · 12-27-2009, 04:28 PM

If you take a QB and Cassel struggles, you covered your ass.

If you take a QB and Cassel does awesom, you have trade bait.

**notorious** · 12-27-2009, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

Just saying man, if we have a chance at the guy it couldn't be all bad. Locker either if he comes out, and Casserly said earlier today that he still might.

Locker needs some good coaching and a few years before he becomes a starter.

With that said, do you really want our coaching staff coming within 50 feet of a QB that needs coaching?

Mecca · 12-27-2009, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolmeZz

I'm a Notre Dame fan.

There shouldn't be any talk of us taking Clausen. I don't like taking quarterbacks in the top half of the draft unless it's blatantly evident that there's something that sets them apart from the bulk of the quarterbacks in the league. I didn't get that feeling with Jimmy. He could turn out to be really good, but I wouldn't be confident enough in believing that will be the case to take him high in the draft(not that I think we should be looking QB anyway. Berry should be our man).

Isn't that philosophy why we haven't had a QB in forever?

Pablo · 12-27-2009, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Isn't that philosophy why we haven't had a QB in forever?

Yeah, we want the perfect prospect otherwise we're not all that interested.

And aside from Stafford and Palmer I don't know two better pure prospects for the QB position in forever...and we didn't really have a shot at them anyhow.

Coogs · 12-27-2009, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notorious

Locker needs some good coaching and a few years before he becomes a starter.

With that said, do you really want our coaching staff coming within 50 feet of a QB that needs coaching?

Yes. And if they can not do it, then find a coaching staff that can do it. It is not really rocket science. The teams with the franchise QB are usually in the hunt for the title.

ChiefsCountry · 12-27-2009, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

That is not exactly what the report says.

Thats my report on him.

Coogs · 12-27-2009, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PostRockPablo

Yeah, we want the perfect prospect otherwise we're not all that interested.

And aside from Stafford and Palmer I don't know two better pure prospects for the QB position in forever...and we didn't really have a shot at them anyhow.

We probably could have traded up for Stafford. We just didn't.

chiefzilla1501 · 12-27-2009, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC kid

If you take a QB and Cassel struggles, you covered your ass.

If you take a QB and Cassel does awesom, you have trade bait.

The concern is sinking so much money into 2 QBs who don't turn out to be QBOTFs. If they don't think Clausen is QBOTF material, then I'd rather move on and take a QB in the 2nd to compete with Cassel. Eitiher way, I agree we have to bring in true competition. In Miami's case, it really worked out in getting them Henne.

Mecca · 12-27-2009, 04:33 PM

It doesn't matter who the prospect is our fan base will not want them. When everyone thought we'd have a chance at Stafford he was repeatedly railed, then it switched to Sanchez, the year before it was "I don't want Matt Ryan" it will happen every year.

A good majority of this fan base is far to scared to want to take a QB, Carl had this base pegged they like the safe vet QB's more.

12-27-2009, 03:14 PM
cdcox www.nfl-forecast.com Join Date: Sep 2000 Casino cash: $-618231	Chiefs lose to Denver and draft 3rd or 2nd Berry?
Posts: 46,037

12-27-2009, 04:23 PM	#151
Hoover Rufus Dawes Jr. Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $-2191821	We need a playmaker period. That means Berry if he is there.
Posts: 18,023

12-27-2009, 04:24 PM	#152
HolmeZz i guess its bittersweet poetry Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: NeW HaVeN, CT Casino cash: $10004900	I'm a Notre Dame fan. There shouldn't be any talk of us taking Clausen. I don't like taking quarterbacks in the top half of the draft unless it's blatantly evident that there's something that sets them apart from the bulk of the quarterbacks in the league. I didn't get that feeling with Jimmy. He could turn out to be really good, but I wouldn't be confident enough in believing that will be the case to take him high in the draft(not that I think we should be looking QB anyway. Berry should be our man).
Posts: 16,520

12-27-2009, 04:25 PM	#154
KC kid Veteran Join Date: Oct 2003 Casino cash: $10004940	The thing about drafting a QB is Cassel will be 28 next year. You could always say that you want the new QB to have a year behind Cassel.
Posts: 1,374

12-27-2009, 04:28 PM	#157
KC kid Veteran Join Date: Oct 2003 Casino cash: $10004940	If you take a QB and Cassel struggles, you covered your ass. If you take a QB and Cassel does awesom, you have trade bait.
Posts: 1,374

12-27-2009, 04:33 PM	#165
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-742950	It doesn't matter who the prospect is our fan base will not want them. When everyone thought we'd have a chance at Stafford he was repeatedly railed, then it switched to Sanchez, the year before it was "I don't want Matt Ryan" it will happen every year. A good majority of this fan base is far to scared to want to take a QB, Carl had this base pegged they like the safe vet QB's more.
Posts: 115,382