what's with all the Orton isn't the answer talk?

[DaWolf]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Did we ever stop to think that maybe the fact that they haven't drafted a 1st round QB is an indicator that they haven't properly evaluated the position and we shouldn't use their inability to evaluate as justification for not taking one.

You are only justified in taking one if you evaluate the guy properly. For example, if I am a QB starved organization, and I allow myself to drool over JaMarcus Russel's workout and draft him No 1 overall instead of Calvin Johnsnon, just because I feel the need to draft a QB in the first round and want to roll the dice, and get intoxicated with visions of JaMarcus leading my franchise for the next decade because of all of his physical tools, then I should lose my job. You are better off with Kyle Orton/Calvin Johnson than you are with Russell.

Again, this is not to say you don't take a guy in the first round, it is to say that when you do, or when you trade your entire draft for one, you better be sure that guy is gonna be the difference maker between being an OK team and being a Super Bowl contender. Otherwise you've just set your franchise back another 3-5 years and wasted a first.

Easier said than done of course, QB is a tough position to project from college to NFL. But that guy better be worth that pick. If I have the ability to trade up for Andrew Luck, or if I have a conviction about RGIII, do I go out and try to make it happen? Yeah. But if I am not in a position to take those guys, do I draft Landry Jones because he's there? Not if I am not sold on Landry Jones being a SIGNIFICANT upgrade over who I have at this level, and not if there is a better player available that will also help my team. I mean, I'm not going to sit here and give Jacksonville props for drafting and whiffing on Gabbert because they at least tried to replace Gerrard. They got it wrong, and set their franchise further back. In my book, you don't get brownie points for trying, you better do it right...

[Sutter Cane]

Originally Posted by DaWolf

You are only justified in taking one if you evaluate the guy properly. For example, if I am a QB starved organization, and I allow myself to drool over JaMarcus Russel's workout and draft him No 1 overall instead of Calvin Johnsnon, just because I feel the need to draft a QB in the first round and want to roll the dice, and get intoxicated with visions of JaMarcus leading my franchise for the next decade because of all of his physical tools, then I should lose my job. You are better off with Kyle Orton/Calvin Johnson than you are with Russell.

Again, this is not to say you don't take a guy in the first round, it is to say that when you do, or when you trade your entire draft for one, you better be sure that guy is gonna be the difference maker between being an OK team and being a Super Bowl contender. Otherwise you've just set your franchise back another 3-5 years and wasted a first.

Easier said than done of course, QB is a tough position to project from college to NFL. But that guy better be worth that pick. If I have the ability to trade up for Andrew Luck, or if I have a conviction about RGIII, do I go out and try to make it happen? Yeah. But if I am not in a position to take those guys, do I draft Landry Jones because he's there? Not if I am not sold on Landry Jones being a SIGNIFICANT upgrade over who I have at this level, and not if there is a better player available that will also help my team. I mean, I'm not going to sit here and give Jacksonville props for drafting and whiffing on Gabbert because they at least tried to replace Gerrard. They got it wrong, and set their franchise further back. In my book, you don't get brownie points for trying, you better do it right...

Pretty much my thoughts on the subject as well.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by DaWolf

You are only justified in taking one if you evaluate the guy properly. For example, if I am a QB starved organization, and I allow myself to drool over JaMarcus Russel's workout and draft him No 1 overall instead of Calvin Johnsnon, just because I feel the need to draft a QB in the first round and want to roll the dice, and get intoxicated with visions of JaMarcus leading my franchise for the next decade because of all of his physical tools, then I should lose my job. You are better off with Kyle Orton/Calvin Johnson than you are with Russell.

Again, this is not to say you don't take a guy in the first round, it is to say that when you do, or when you trade your entire draft for one, you better be sure that guy is gonna be the difference maker between being an OK team and being a Super Bowl contender. Otherwise you've just set your franchise back another 3-5 years and wasted a first.

Easier said than done of course, QB is a tough position to project from college to NFL. But that guy better be worth that pick. If I have the ability to trade up for Andrew Luck, or if I have a conviction about RGIII, do I go out and try to make it happen? Yeah. But if I am not in a position to take those guys, do I draft Landry Jones because he's there? Not if I am not sold on Landry Jones being a SIGNIFICANT upgrade over who I have at this level, and not if there is a better player available that will also help my team. I mean, I'm not going to sit here and give Jacksonville props for drafting and whiffing on Gabbert because they at least tried to replace Gerrard. They got it wrong, and set their franchise further back. In my book, you don't get brownie points for trying, you better do it right...

You don't just pick any swinging dick, but I'll let you in on a little secret: every QB prospect has flaws, and if this fanbase has demonstrated anything, it's the ability to say, "yeah, well, I'm not ready to draft a guy who lacks _____" where the blank changes every year. There are certain guys like Jamarcus Russell who should send up huge red flags to anyone, but you can't sit here and honestly say that the Chiefs have tried to make QB a priority in the draft. If they had, they would have either drafted one when he fell to or near them, or traded up for one.

We're not talking about taking Jim Druckenmiller or Landry Jones b/c he's the highest rated guy, it's realizing the importance of the position and doing everything possible to get the guy you think has the goods. It's precisely the opposite of settling.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Did we ever stop to think that maybe the fact that they haven't drafted a 1st round QB is an indicator that they haven't properly evaluated the position and we shouldn't use their inability to evaluate as justification for not taking one.

I would think that knowing your limitations in evaluating the QB position would be a great justification for not taking one.

That said, you need to start going after the source of the problem AND FIND someone who can evaluate QB's instead of running from the problem and avoiding it.

[O.city]

wasn't the passing game ranked like 30 in the league?


And that with the best running game in the league and 8 in the box

[CrazyHorse]

Originally Posted by O.city

wasn't the passing game ranked like 30 in the league?


And that with the best running game in the league and 8 in the box

16th overall

With the Chiefs being in the top 8 in throws over 40 yards.
Middle of the road in sacks at 39
O line pass blocking ranking 25th
Completion percentage at 55%. Only the Raiders were worse. However, we
-were 1st in the league in dropped passes.


http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorysta..._PASSER_RATING

If you look at the numbers you'll see Cassels numbers were middle of the pack or better with the exception of completion pertcentage. He was also one of the best red zone QBs in the league.

Does that mean he's great QB? Of course not. But it does say he made the team better instead of worse. The O iine was the worst unit on the team, and almost the worst in the league.

This will translate into poor play for anyone behind center. Especially a rook.

Now before everyone goes off the deep end, Im not saying I wouldn't want a new QB. I would love the prospect of developing our own. What I am saying though is regardless who you get, with the current O line expect that QB to produce at a mediocre to bottom of the league level.

Also people need to quit blaming everything that goes wrong on the QB. For god sake there are other positions on the team. He grades out as mediocre to slightly above average in nearly every category. Which I agree is not good enough. However, the O line grades out as one of the worst in the game. You can spin it any way you want, but the numbers tell a story that are in line with what I see on the field every Sunday.

We have a terrible O line with a mediocre to slightly above average QB. You put a rookie back there and he's liable to look more like David Carr than Andy Dalton. QB is only a fraction of the answer for the Chiefs.

This is just my opinion based on the numbers, and what I see. Try not to get too bent out of shape over it.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by CrazyHorse

If you look at the numbers you'll Cassels numbers were middle of the pack or better with the exception of completion pertcentage.

What?

Cassel was 24th in yards per game.

We have a terrible O line

As it's been proven all year long, we really don't. We had an excellent game Sunday and on the year are ranked in the top 10 in pass blocking efficiency.

Cassel is our biggest problem.

His last 11 games are complete dogshit and nowhere near "mediocre."

56% completion percentage
1,898 yards
5.9 yards per attempt
10 TD
14 INT
65.9 QB rating

[whoman69]

Cassel 25th in rating (76.6), 28th in YPA (6.37), 28th in yards per game (190), 20th in completion % (59.5).

[CrazyHorse]

Originally Posted by whoman69

Cassel 25th in rating (76.6), 28th in YPA (6.37), 28th in yards per game (190), 20th in completion % (59.5).

The numbers I used were from 2010. Those are that is what the arguements in this thread were based on. Hid comp% was lower and he had his run game and the line played better. This line wouldnt place 25th this season. It would be lower Im sure. He was 25th in rating then too. 16th yards per game.

We need a better QB no matter how you slice it.

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by CrazyHorse

16th overall

With the Chiefs being in the top 8 in throws over 40 yards.
Middle of the road in sacks at 39
O line pass blocking ranking 25th
Completion percentage at 55%. Only the Raiders were worse. However, we
-were 1st in the league in dropped passes.


http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorysta..._PASSER_RATING

If you look at the numbers you'll see Cassels numbers were middle of the pack or better with the exception of completion pertcentage. He was also one of the best red zone QBs in the league.

Does that mean he's great QB? Of course not. But it does say he made the team better instead of worse. The O iine was the worst unit on the team, and almost the worst in the league.

This will translate into poor play for anyone behind center. Especially a rook.

Now before everyone goes off the deep end, Im not saying I wouldn't want a new QB. I would love the prospect of developing our own. What I am saying though is regardless who you get, with the current O line expect that QB to produce at a mediocre to bottom of the league level.

Also people need to quit blaming everything that goes wrong on the QB. For god sake there are other positions on the team. He grades out as mediocre to slightly above average in nearly every category. Which I agree is not good enough. However, the O line grades out as one of the worst in the game. You can spin it any way you want, but the numbers tell a story that are in line with what I see on the field every Sunday.

We have a terrible O line with a mediocre to slightly above average QB. You put a rookie back there and he's liable to look more like David Carr than Andy Dalton. QB is only a fraction of the answer for the Chiefs.

This is just my opinion based on the numbers, and what I see. Try not to get too bent out of shape over it.

Terrible OL? Did you watch the game Sunday? Looked to me like Orton had all day back there.

[CrazyHorse]

Originally Posted by Dave

Terrible OL? Did you watch the game Sunday? Looked to me like Orton had all day back there.

Im sorry. I was basing it on more than one game. Also left a link up so you could look at the numbers for yourself. I recommend you check out how each lineman grades out as well.

You dont have to take my word for it. The proof is easy to find (if youre willing to see it). Some are so invested in tyhier opinion, the obvious has become a rare affair.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by CrazyHorse

Im sorry. I was basing it on more than one game. Also left a link up so you could look at the numbers for yourself. I recommend you check out how each lineman grades out as well.

You dont have to take my word for it. The proof is easy to find (if youre willing to see it). Some are so invested in tyhier opinion, the obvious has become a rare affair.

I don't really care about whatever numbers you provided.

I don't understand how you can watch Cassel and reach the conclusion he isn't among the worst in the league, especially after seeing how much better a mediocre QB performed, and how much better the O-Line performed with that mediocre QB.

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by CrazyHorse

Im sorry. I was basing it on more than one game. Also left a link up so you could look at the numbers for yourself. I recommend you check out how each lineman grades out as well.

You dont have to take my word for it. The proof is easy to find (if youre willing to see it). Some are so invested in tyhier opinion, the obvious has become a rare affair.

I don't need any ****ing numbers to tell me Orton played better Sunday than Cassel has EVER played as a Chief.

How many times was Orton sacked?

[milkman]

Originally Posted by CrazyHorse

.

This is just my opinion based on the numbers, and what I see. Try not to get too bent out of shape over it.

When's the last time you had your eyes checked?

[CrazyHorse]

Originally Posted by milkman

When's the last time you had your eyes checked?

My agenda colored glasses are broken. That and I am not compelled to argue all the time. It makes for a more accurate point of view. A more enjoyable experience on Sundays and a lower post count. In a word......open minded. Okay, two words.