OK lets see it

[Dave Lane]

Whos got some kick butt video of the greatest LB in NFL history Aaron Curry? What I've found is really pretty unimpressive. I can't see in film why he's ranked so highly. Anyone have some good video they can point me too?

[Saccopoo]

Originally Posted by pestilenceaf23

Would you be happy if we flipped Cassel for a 1st round pick in the 15-18 range and drafted Andre Smith.

A (Sanchez) - B (Cassel) + C (Smith at RT) = F (as in findtheDr is at it again)

No, but we should draft Sanchez and HOLD THIS MOTHER ****ING DRAFT HOSTAGE!!!!!!!!!!!

HOSTAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!1!!ELEVEN!!1!!

[Saccopoo]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Or you just sit the QB for a year, you dumb mother****er. Because there is only one round of the draft and we cannot draft a RT any where but 3.

BUT PEOPLE SAID THAT THEY WOULDN'T DRAFT PHIL LOADHOLT EVEN IF HE WAS THE LAST TACKLE ON THE PLANET AND WE DIDN'T HAVE A TACKLE! AND HE'S THE BEST RT IN THE DRAFT!

Of course, had we not traded for Sloppy Seconds Cassel, we could have just went Sanchez, Meredith in the first two rounds and fixed both for less money and gotten younger, but why do that when you can go with the incestuous route of the Parcells tree and all their cousin-****ing?

MEREDITH OVER LOADHOLT?! ARE YOU NUTS OR SOMETHING?!

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Saccogoo

I think I just vomited in my mouth a little.

Why? What if you could get a late 1st for Cassel? That might be one of the best moves in the history of the Chiefs.

See the thing is that Cassel isn't proven, despite how people want to act like he is. If the Chiefs flip him for a better pick than they gave up, that's an AWESOME move, plain and simple.

[kcbubb]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

If you draft him to play OLB, he's a horribly risky pick with little upside at 3

How can one of the best athletes in the draft have little upside???? I can see risky from the OLB position but the risk is mitigated to a certain extent that you can still obtain good value for him by sliding him inside. He does have enough ability to have a great upside as an OLB.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

If you draft him to play ILB, he's a safe pick with little impact on the field.

ILB have shown to have about #10 pick value in most drafts. You still get some value out of him if he plays inside.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

If you draft him at #3, you're an idiot. Period.

Just because someone doesn't want a QB doesn't make them an idiot.

Anyone who has played football knows that you don't undermine your leader on the field. Cassel would have no authority in the huddle. Every time he makes a mistake, the camera would pan over to Sanchez on the sideline. That is not how you build a team. And Pioli will not do that unless he has one of the QBs traded prior to picking Sanchez.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Why? What if you could get a late 1st for Cassel? That might be one of the best moves in the history of the Chiefs.

See the thing is that Cassel isn't proven, despite how people want to act like he is. If the Chiefs flip him for a better pick than they gave up, that's an AWESOME move, plain and simple.

There is still this idea in the back of my mind that Pioli did this on purpose. He didn't know how the QB situation would play in the draft....and the Patriots accepted his offer of a 2nd round pick. Maybe he's thinking that he actually can trade Cassel to another team for a 1st round pick on draft day.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Saccogoo

No, but we should draft Sanchez and HOLD THIS MOTHER ****ING DRAFT HOSTAGE!!!!!!!!!!!

HOSTAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!1!!ELEVEN!!1!!

[Saccopoo]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Why? What if you could get a late 1st for Cassel? That might be one of the best moves in the history of the Chiefs.

See the thing is that Cassel isn't proven, despite how people want to act like he is. If the Chiefs flip him for a better pick than they gave up, that's an AWESOME move, plain and simple.

Are you serious? Seriously. You'd really rather have Sanchez (because if Detroit doesn't take Stafford, they should just send in the B2's and carpet bomb the whole city) over Cassel? An unproven (truly unproven) one year starter in college whose had minor leg injuries over a 6'5", 235 lb. athletic guy who just went 11-5 in his first season as a starter in the NFL and who has mentored under the one of the best quarterbacks ever?

This is were I have a problem with drafting Sanchez. He's not the same guy that Cassel is, and I don't see him ever going beyond what Cassel already is. I mean, if the Chiefs didn't trade for Cassel, and they didn't draft Sanchez, I'd be driving I-70 with a car full of matches and gasoline and burn Arrowhead to the ****in' ground. But it just doesn't make sense now that we have Cassel. No sense whatsoever. And the "hold the draft hostage" bullshit is inane blather at best. And holding out hope that they haven't given Cassel a long term because they are only planning to play him one year or trade him for picks and that they draft Sanchez rather than keep Cassel is the very definition of reeruned.

[philfree]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Why? What if you could get a late 1st for Cassel? That might be one of the best moves in the history of the Chiefs.

See the thing is that Cassel isn't proven, despite how people want to act like he is. If the Chiefs flip him for a better pick than they gave up, that's an AWESOME move, plain and simple.

IMO making moves like that wouldn't go over very well with the players. It could undermine some trust when players and agents are dealing with Pioli. I'm not gonna say it's not a possibility because I have no clue to what Pioli will do but I think it's a risky move for Pioli our 1st year GM. Unless Cassel was in on it all along but I really doubt that.

Also we know more about how Cassel will play in the NFL then we do Sanchez because he's done it. IMO there is so much more risk with Sanchez there's no way I spend the #3 on him.


PhilFree

[kcbubb]

Originally Posted by pestilenceaf23

There is still this idea in the back of my mind that Pioli did this on purpose. He didn't know how the QB situation would play in the draft....and the Patriots accepted his offer of a 2nd round pick. Maybe he's thinking that he actually can trade Cassel to another team for a 1st round pick on draft day.

I think he just likes the idea of getting Cassel for a 2nd and only having to commit 14 MM to him. That's great for us bc if he turns into a good QB then we franchise him again or sign him to a long term deal. If he sucks, we can let him walk and we aren't committed to a huge contract with lots of guaranteed money.

That's much better than signing Sanchez who is a big risk to a big long term contract. Sanchez is not a only a risk bc of lack of experience but also because of his knees and possible injury problems.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Saccogoo

Are you serious? Seriously. You'd really rather have Sanchez (because if Detroit doesn't take Stafford, they should just send in the B2's and carpet bomb the whole city) over Cassel? An unproven (truly unproven) one year starter in college whose had minor leg injuries over a 6'5", 235 lb. athletic guy who just went 11-5 in his first season as a starter in the NFL and who has mentored under the one of the best quarterbacks ever?

This is were I have a problem with drafting Sanchez. He's not the same guy that Cassel is, and I don't see him ever going beyond what Cassel already is. I mean, if the Chiefs didn't trade for Cassel, and they didn't draft Sanchez, I'd be driving I-70 with a car full of matches and gasoline and burn Arrowhead to the ****in' ground. But it just doesn't make sense now that we have Cassel. No sense whatsoever. And the "hold the draft hostage" bullshit is inane blather at best. And holding out hope that they haven't given Cassel a long term because they are only planning to play him one year or trade him for picks and that they draft Sanchez rather than keep Cassel is the very definition of reeruned.

Yeah, because Cassel was so ****ing good. I forgot about how good his college career was, and how he did so much with so little in NE, and how he didn't take more sacks than anyone in the league last year, and how he had more yardage after the catch than anyone last year, and how he couldn't operate out of any set but the shotgun, and how he won 5 fewer games than the guy he replaced.

[Saccopoo]

Originally Posted by pestilenceaf23

There is still this idea in the back of my mind that Pioli did this on purpose. He didn't know how the QB situation would play in the draft....and the Patriots accepted his offer of a 2nd round pick. Maybe he's thinking that he actually can trade Cassel to another team for a 1st round pick on draft day.

Which, in this just wonderful scenario, means that Croyle or Thigpen will be starting for the Chiefs this next season, unless you plan on a rookie quarterback kicking so much ass behind that awesome offensive line.

That would be just super. I am giddy with excitement thinking about those picturesque, patented Thigpen passes, flying through the air, with end over end aesthetic beauty, ten yards behind or in front of the receiver or into the stands or the press box or the parking lot...*grabs a bottle of lotion, a box of kleenex and the TIVO and heads for the bathroom*

Thanks Pestilence - I needed some fantasy this afternoon.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by kcbubb

I think he just likes the idea of getting Cassel for a 2nd and only having to commit 14 MM to him. That's great for us bc if he turns into a good QB then we franchise him again or sign him to a long term deal. If he sucks, we can let him walk and we aren't committed to a huge contract with lots of guaranteed money.

That's much better than signing Sanchez who is a big risk to a big long term contract. Sanchez is not a only a risk bc of lack of experience but also because of his knees and possible injury problems.

If we don't trade him, we've committed at least 30 MM to him over the next two years, and that's not considering if we don't rework his contract.

And Sanchez never missed a game because of his "knee injury" last year.

[kcbubb]

the point is that Cassel is easier to move on from. Both QBs could be busts. but if they are you aren't as committed to Cassel.

Cassel shows just as much upside to me as Sanchez and he is less risky. He's also cheaper. And you get to keep your #3 pick with Cassel.

Also, Sanchez is probably not the starter day one.

[Saccopoo]

Originally Posted by kcbubb

I think he just likes the idea of getting Cassel for a 2nd and only having to commit 14 MM to him. That's great for us bc if he turns into a good QB then we franchise him again or sign him to a long term deal. If he sucks, we can let him walk and we aren't committed to a huge contract with lots of guaranteed money.

That's much better than signing Sanchez who is a big risk to a big long term contract. Sanchez is not a only a risk bc of lack of experience but also because of his knees and possible injury problems.

Excellent theory there Bubb! Kudos.

And if he does struggle in his second season in the same manner as, say, Derek Anderson, we can look at drafting a proven quality quarterback in next years draft like Sam Bradford. And I'd give up my Jermaine Gresham dream for a shot at Bradford - if Cassel doesn't pan out, but my guess is that he'll be just fine.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by Saccogoo

Excellent theory there Bubb! Kudos.

And if he does struggle in his second season in the same manner as, say, Derek Anderson, we can look at drafting a proven quality quarterback in next years draft like Sam Bradford. And I'd give up my Jermaine Gresham dream for a shot at Bradford - if Cassel doesn't pan out, but my guess is that he'll be just fine.