Chiefs Chiefs listing McCluster as a WR - Page 45

**petegz28** · 04-23-2010, 04:52 PM

Just reported on 810

chiefzilla1501 · 04-24-2010, 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

The list of people willing to part with a 2nd for ANY HB was pretty ****ing short...

For Sproles? That was the tender San Diego was asking for and most people seemed willing to do it. He gives you a returner, a 3rd down back, a passing down back, and a 4-receiver set option. Much of the same stuff McCluster does.

**Rausch** · 04-24-2010, 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

For Sproles? That was the tender San Diego was asking for and most people seemed willing to do it. He gives you a returner, a 3rd down back, a passing down back, and a 4-receiver set option. Much of the same stuff McCluster does.

And most of us would have passed...

chiefzilla1501 · 04-24-2010, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

And most of us would have passed...

That's great to know.

Given that almost nobody outside of KC is saying this was a reach.

And given that Philly, a team that clearly has no idea how to draft players, wanted him too.

**Rausch** · 04-24-2010, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

And given that Philly, a team that clearly has no idea how to draft players, wanted him too.

What part of THEY HAVE 30 LESS ****ING NEEDS AS A TEAM do you not get?...

chiefzilla1501 · 04-24-2010, 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

What part of THEY HAVE 30 LESS ****ING NEEDS AS A TEAM do you not get?...

And why are you so obsessed with a needs-based draft? Was this team ever going to be in a position to make a Super Bowl this year? No. So who cares if maybe their interior run defense looks soft in a year when they weren't a contender anyway. Get them either this year or next year, but don't forcefit just to fill a need. We'll likely have a more open free agent market and another year to draft. And the truth is, in these rounds, more than 2/3 of these players are never going to be any better than role players anyway.

I wanted Jimmy Clausen too and while I'm upset about not taking him, there has to be something up if he's passed up almost 50 times. But that's a backup over a starter, because he has PLAYMAKER CAPABILITY.

For as much shit as we're giving for the McCluster and the Moeaki pick, do they both make a Charlie Weis offense better? If they are as advertised, they will be significant contributors.

kcxiv · 04-24-2010, 04:12 AM

lol. Everyone outside of Chiefsplanet seems to love the pick for the Chiefs. I dont knwo how he will do. I Understand what the Chiefs are wanting to do with him and he can in theory make us a dangerous team. So i will see how it pans out.

You know though. Chiefsplanet knows more about football then anyplace else. Doesnt matter if your job is scouting players, if your job is watching NFL/College players. Chiefsplanet, the place where fans know more then NFL GM's and scouts.

Coach · 04-24-2010, 04:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

He's ****ing Dante Hall with much less speed and much more natural ability as a pass catcher.

Really?

Dante Hall was 4.41

McCluster was 4.4 during his pro-day workout in Oxford.

**Rausch** · 04-24-2010, 04:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

And why are you so obsessed with a needs-based draft? Was this team ever going to be in a position to make a Super Bowl this year? No. So who cares if maybe their interior run defense looks soft in a year when they weren't a contender anyway. Get them either this year or next year, but don't forcefit just to fill a need. We'll likely have a more open free agent market and another year to draft. And the truth is, in these rounds, more than 2/3 of these players are never going to be any better than role players anyway.

I wanted Jimmy Clausen too and while I'm upset about not taking him, there has to be something up if he's passed up almost 50 times. But that's a backup over a starter, because he has PLAYMAKER CAPABILITY.

For as much shit as we're giving for the McCluster and the Moeaki pick, do they both make a Charlie Weis offense better? If they are as advertised, they will be significant contributors.

Ok, here it is:

We wanted a playmaker on offense. I can see that. I agreed. Hell, I was begging to draft one at WR.

We didn't. We took a guy who's a solid pass catching HB that we HOPE can make the transition to WR with 2A.

Really? With all the talent sitting there we think a HB moved to Wide ****ing reciever is the best move!?!

Oh no, not done.

The Moeaki pick isn't stupid on just the the basic common sense level that he's NEVER ****ING HEALHTY. Nein.

****ING NEIN. That's not enough stupid. WE PACK IT ALL IN THIS DRAFT. Come to find out he's also super undersized and can't block for $3it! WE JUST DRAFTED A TE THAT CAN'T BLOCK FOR A BALL-HUGGING QB THAT LOVES TO TAKE SACKS! And that's his UPSIDE!

Better, this draft does it get.

We draft a corner, much like our last corner, smart and ready to learn...

**Tribal Warfare** · 04-24-2010, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

Really?

Dante Hall was 4.41

McCluster was 4.4 during his pro-day workout in Oxford.

McCluster ran a 4.58 at the combine

Coach · 04-24-2010, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribal Warfare

McCluster ran a 4.58 at the combine

Yes, at the Combine in Feb.

However, his Pro Day workout at Ole Miss was 4.4 in March.

**Rausch** · 04-24-2010, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

Yes, at the Combine in Feb.

However, his Pro Day workout at Ole Miss was 4.4 in March.

I'd point out 4 reasons why you shouldn't believe that number but it's just counter-productive.

He's a Chief now.

Long live the king...

Coach · 04-24-2010, 04:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

I'd point out 4 reasons why you shouldn't believe that number but it's just counter-productive.

He's a Chief now.

Long live the king...

Well, then I'll point out 4 reasons why you should believe that number.

1. Lance Long and Bobby Wade screens from the WR spot. When that happened, the Chiefs constantly lost yardage becuase of those two shits couldn't even make people miss.

2. Lack of playmakers in the offense, other than Jamal Charles. God knows this offense need some playmakers in a bad way.

3. Don't have to watch Bobby Wade trying to return kicks/punts.

4. What happens if for some reason, Thomas Jones finally hit that age wall? Then you want to hand the ball to Kolby Smith? Javarris Williams? Hell, even Tim Castille?

**** no.

Long live the Queen.

**Rausch** · 04-24-2010, 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

Well, then I'll point out 4 reasons why you should believe that number.

1. Lance Long and Bobby Wade screens from the WR spot. When that happened, the Chiefs constantly lost yardage becuase of those two shits couldn't even make people miss.

They were the most purple turd from the Turkey. True 'dat. Their suck doesn't improve his speed.

Not seeing the argument here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

2. Lack of playmakers in the offense, other than Jamal Charles. God knows this offense need some playmakers in a bad way.

Agreed.

He's a playmaker.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

3. Don't have to watch Bobby Wade trying to return kicks/punts.

WTF did Charles stop returning kicks?

I know he wasn't perfect and he was the starter but...damn...it's ALL YOU HAVE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

4. What happens if for some reason, Thomas Jones finally hit that age wall? Then you want to hand the ball to Kolby Smith? Javarris Williams? Hell, even Tim Castille?

**** no.

That's why I thought taking a phat-back in the late rounds might be a good idea...

Coach · 04-24-2010, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

Not seeing the argument here.

Then I guess you are content with seeing Bobby Wade and Lance Long continue to lose yardage, becuase they could not make defenders miss? Fair enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

Agreed.

He's a playmaker.

Thank you. That's what the offense is missing, other than Charles. The Chiefs NEED playmakers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

WTF did Charles stop returning kicks?

I know he wasn't perfect and he was the starter but...damn...it's ALL YOU HAVE.

But at the same time, do you really want to overwork Charles? It's nice to have somebody else, other than Charles at times, to do the kick return duties that isn't Bobby Wade.

Try kicking off to Charles or McCluster. Pick your poison. And I don't think Charles ACTUALLY returned a punt. Don't know why, but I don't think punt returning is his natural thing. Usually, it's Bobby Wade or somebody else doing that, and they sucked HARD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

That's why I thought taking a phat-back in the late rounds might be a good idea...

Sure, and nothing wrong with that, but it's nice to have an option on a player who can do some serious damage if somebody misses him on the open field, and has the game-breaking ability that the Chiefs sorely lacked on the slot position.

Thing is though, I'm glad the Chiefs didn't pick any projects. They seemed to do that alot in the 2nd round. Too many of them flamed out in our own very eyes. See Bartee, Savaii, etc.

**Rausch** · 04-24-2010, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

But at the same time, do you really want to overwork Charles? It's nice to have somebody else, other than Charles at times, to do the punt/kick duties that isn't Bobby Wade.

Take what you have, use them the best you can, and win the ****ing game.

THE END.

I don't want to hear this next season or rebuilding or we're saving this guy for.....**** you, WIN THE GAME.

EVERY WEEK.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach

Sure, and nothing wrong with that, but it's nice to have an option on a player who can do some serious damage if somebody misses him on the open field, and has the game-breaking ability that the Chiefs sorely lacked on the slot position.

Definitely.

I just threw out the idea that we might spend a late pick on a phat-back. We didn't, we tossed an early pick at a hopeful playmaker.

I can't fault them for that either. I really can't fault them for that when I'm not at all sure what it is our new OC is even trying to build.

Hell, guy's only been on the job for 3 or 4 months and 0 games...

04-23-2010, 04:52 PM
petegz28 Supporter Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Olathe, Ks Casino cash: $-1145873	Chiefs listing McCluster as a WR Just reported on 810
Posts: 132,519

04-24-2010, 04:12 AM	#666
kcxiv In Search of a Life Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Central Valley, Cali Casino cash: $8697996	lol. Everyone outside of Chiefsplanet seems to love the pick for the Chiefs. I dont knwo how he will do. I Understand what the Chiefs are wanting to do with him and he can in theory make us a dangerous team. So i will see how it pans out. You know though. Chiefsplanet knows more about football then anyplace else. Doesnt matter if your job is scouting players, if your job is watching NFL/College players. Chiefsplanet, the place where fans know more then NFL GM's and scouts.
Posts: 29,111