The Chiefs are taking Geno #1; bank on it

[Fat Elvis]

Andy loves him some QBs. And KC has been a bottomless pit of QB suckage. While folks initially freaked out over the ASmith signing (me included), once they locked up Bowe and Albert, it seemed pretty clear that Geno will be the choice at #1.

People say you don't draft a QB #1 to sit on the bench, the first pick of the draft isn't a backup QB. They are right. They say ASmith will be the starter, especially given his compensation. They are right. Ummm, does that mean that Geno is being groomed for a year or two behind Alex? Not necessarily.

What? That is nonsense!

Only in the traditional sense.

I think Reid and Dorsey are thinking waaay outside the box on this one.

If (when) the Chiefs draft Geno, the whole idea of a "backup" QB will be shook up. "Backup" will be a matter of semantics. "Starting" will be a matter of semantics as well.

Reid and Dorsey both see the need for 2 "starting caliber" QBs on a team in today's NFL. San Fran proved beyond a shadow of a doubt last year that it really pays to have 2 QBs on your team who can start for you.

If one "starting caliber" QB goes down, you have another "starting caliber" QB ready to be plugged in and the team doesn't miss a beat.

It has been repeated ad nauseum on this board that the QB is the most important position in all of football. When you have an offense that is predicated on throwing the football 40+ times a game, you can't afford to have a dropoff in productivity should one of your QBs goes down for a time, otherwise your season is effectively over.

Reid and Dorsey get this.

As fans, especially Cheifs fans, we need to rethink our conceptions of "backup" and "starting" and realizing we are entering an era of "starting caliber" QBs.

We are being built to win.

We are being built to win even in the face of adverse contingencies.

We are going to win.

And I like it.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

close to the same roster.


well except at the MOST IMPORTANT POSITION.

Well, I've read all over Chiefsplanet that Alex Smith is Matt Cassel.

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

and better coaching

This was an excuse made in 2009 by so many people "They'll win more games on COACHING ALONE".

But this time around, I do believe that's true.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

So, ah...Geno it is then. Cool.
Posted via Mobile Device

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Canofbier

I disagree when it comes to the QB position. You draft for long-term potential, not immediate gratification.

Great. So, you draft a guy #1 overall that can't start in the NFL from Day One and needs a year to sit and learn.

Congratulations! You've not only chosen poorly and overdrafted a player, you now only have three years to find out if he's your future, instead of four.

[Canofbier]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Great. So, you draft a guy #1 overall that can't start in the NFL from Day One and needs a year to sit and learn.

Congratulations! You've not only chosen poorly and overdrafted a player, you now only have three years to find out if he's your future, instead of four.

I think it's pretty unanimous that Barkley is by far the most "NFL-ready" QB in this class, and would have the least amount of adjustments to be successful in an NFL offense in his first year.

Why, then, is he not the unanimous #1 QB? It's because "NFL-readiness" is less important than long-term potential.

[The Franchise]

Look at what we're losing from that 2-14 roster.

Ryan Lilja, G
Glenn Dorsey, DT
Peyton Hillis, RB
Abram Elam, FS.
Steve Breaston
Kevin Boss, TE
Brandon Siler, ILB
Jake O'Connell, TE
Russ Hochstein, G/C
Brady Quinn, QB
Shaun Smith, NT
Edgar Jones, DE/OLB
Travis Daniels, FS
Bryan Mattison, G
Martin Rucker, TE

[DaneMcCloud]

[quote=Canofbier;9470873]I think it's pretty unanimous that Barkley is by far the most "NFL-ready" QB in this class, and would have the least amount of adjustments to be successful in an NFL offense in his first year.


That's completely untrue.

Barkley won't be able to throw for scouts until March 27th. He didn't play in USC's bowl game, didn't play against Notre Dame and had an "off" year as compared to 2011. No one knows if they're getting the QB from 2012 or the guy from 2011. Plus, his arm strength was questioned before the injury and will be under even more scrutiny now.

Originally Posted by Canofbier

Why, then, is he not the unanimous #1 QB? It's because "NFL-readiness" is less important than long-term potential.

That's bullshit. Complete, unadulterated bullshit.

This isn't 2003. Any team that needs a starting QB likely sucks ass. If the available QB needs to sit a year, you don't take him #1 overall.

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

Look at what we're losing from that 2-14 roster.

Ryan Lilja, G
Glenn Dorsey, DT
Peyton Hillis, RB
Abram Elam, FS.
Steve Breaston
Kevin Boss, TE
Brandon Siler, ILB
Jake O'Connell, TE
Russ Hochstein, G/C
Brady Quinn, QB
Shaun Smith, NT
Edgar Jones, DE/OLB
Travis Daniels, FS
Bryan Mattison, G
Martin Rucker, TE

Don't forget Matt Cassell biggest turd of them all.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by Sweet Dick Willie

So, ah...Geno it is then. Cool.
Posted via Mobile Device

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Great. So, you draft a guy #1 overall that can't start in the NFL from Day One and needs a year to sit and learn.

Congratulations! You've not only chosen poorly and overdrafted a player, you now only have three years to find out if he's your future, instead of four.

Who's the best player in the draft? Let's just say for the sake of argument that it's Luke Joeckel.

In the scenario that the Chiefs take the best player at a valuable position at #1, that player they take either plays guard his rookie year or he sits on the bench.

According to you, the Chiefs overdrafted the best overall player.

Your philosophy sounds great. It really does. The problem is the Chiefs are an entirely unique situation. No pre-packaged franchise-building strategy applies this year to them. They've just got to play it by ear, make one decision at a time, and do the best they can to acquire talent, then see where they're at in 2014.

It's the PERFECT scenario to draft QB at #1. Who the **** is going to blame them? There is no "coulda shoulda woulda" game that the draft guys can play. They can't say, "Oof. Should have taken the tackle and let him go masturbate on the bench for a year. Should have drafted a non-elite player at a non-priority position. Should have taken a pass rusher that would only play on 3rd downs. Should have taken the 4th defensive linemen in the 1st round in 6 years."

By taking the QB, they're STOCKED at options for several years. They can completely check "QB" off the list of needs for many seasons, and possibly an entire decade if Geno or Alex turn out to be phenomenal players.

[FRCDFED]

Originally Posted by KC Tattoo

Don't forget Matt Cassell biggest turd of them all.

What about "one who shoots himself in the head?"

[FRCDFED]

Originally Posted by SNR

Who's the best player in the draft? Let's just say for the sake of argument that it's Luke Joeckel.

In the scenario that the Chiefs take the best player at a valuable position at #1, that player they take either plays guard his rookie year or he sits on the bench.

According to you, the Chiefs overdrafted the best overall player.

Your philosophy sounds great. It really does. The problem is the Chiefs are an entirely unique situation. No pre-packaged franchise-building strategy applies this year to them. They've just got to play it by ear, make one decision at a time, and do the best they can to acquire talent, then see where they're at in 2014.

The J-E-T-S want a QB BAD! I wouldn't be surprised if they ended up being our trade partner. They are beyond desperate at this point.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by SNR

Who's the best player in the draft? Let's just say for the sake of argument that it's Luke Joeckel.

In the scenario that the Chiefs take the best player at a valuable position at #1, that player they take either plays guard his rookie year or he sits on the bench.

According to you, the Chiefs overdrafted the best overall player.

Your philosophy sounds great. It really does. The problem is the Chiefs are an entirely unique situation. No pre-packaged franchise-building strategy applies this year to them. They've just got to play it by ear, make one decision at a time, and do the best they can to acquire talent, then see where they're at in 2014.

I don't care who the Chiefs pick at #1 overall. I really don't. I hope they can find a trade partner but if they can't, whomever they choose must be ready to start Day One, Game One.

Guys must contribute immediately. You can't draft them with the notion of sitting first rounders for a year because then, you've only got them for three more years. First round draft picks receive four year contracts, with a fifth year as a team option. The option year has to be exercised by the team after the end of year three, but before the start of year four. Draftees taken in rounds 2 through 7 receive four year contracts, period. Undrafted free agents get three year contracts, period.

So if you draft a QB #1 overall and sit him for a year, you're giving yourself two years in which to determine if he's the future of the franchise.

That is extremely risky, IMO.

[bowener]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

Look at what we're losing from that 2-14 roster.

Ryan Lilja, G
Glenn Dorsey, DT
Peyton Hillis, RB
Abram Elam, FS.
Steve Breaston
Kevin Boss, TE
Brandon Siler, ILB
Jake O'Connell, TE
Russ Hochstein, G/C
Brady Quinn, QB
Shaun Smith, NT
Edgar Jones, DE/OLB
Travis Daniels, FS
Bryan Mattison, G
Martin Rucker, TE

Oh my god, this is like releasing that huge nasty shit you've been holding in for hours. So cathartic and magical.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Shall I say it? Yep; "TOO RISKIES"! Lol...
Posted via Mobile Device

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I don't care who the Chiefs pick at #1 overall. I really don't. I hope they can find a trade partner but if they can't, whomever they choose must be ready to start Day One, Game One.

Guys must contribute immediately. You can't draft them with the notion of sitting first rounders for a year because then, you've only got them for three more years. First round draft picks receive four year contracts, with a fifth year as a team option. The option year has to be exercised by the team after the end of year three, but before the start of year four. Draftees taken in rounds 2 through 7 receive four year contracts, period. Undrafted free agents get three year contracts, period.

So if you draft a QB #1 overall and sit him for a year, you're giving yourself two years in which to determine if he's the future of the franchise.

That is extremely risky, IMO.

Would it be better keep Matt Cassell as back up to Alex Smith? I mean come on now. Better have a QB potential on this roster that can be better for the future if/when Alex Smith fails. Can we wait till next year and draft QB with our first who is going be available that we can take? The Chiefs don't take opportunity to draft QB in the first round and this year could and should be that year. If we wait another year we just wont do it and they will continue to rehash other teams QBs.