PDA

View Full Version : Will the Chiefs Consider a QB Now?


CMR#20
12-12-2011, 11:25 AM
ESPN has reported that Todd Haley has just been fired with 3 games left. Does this mean the Chiefs take a quarterback if their picking high enough?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7344798/kansas-city-chiefs-fire-coach-todd-haley-struggling-team-5-8

vidae
12-12-2011, 11:29 AM
I sure as **** hope so. If we hire Josh ******* McDaniels they'll probably roll with Cassel and we'll suck even worse next year, but if Pioli pulls his head out of his ass and hires a coach who knows what he's doing, I think QB is a very real possibility.

Shane P. Hallam
12-12-2011, 11:29 AM
I think it is possible, but Pioli isn't going anywhere. He may want to stick with Cassel, but if a franchise QB is staring them in the face, it would be tough to pass.

JBCX
12-12-2011, 11:43 AM
Trading up for Matt Barkley. Book it.

jrdrylie
12-12-2011, 11:56 AM
Trading up for Matt Barkley. Book it.

I could see them trading up to three to get him. Minnesota will likely take Matt Kalil. The Rams would have their eye on him. If he is gone, I think the Rams would be very happy to trade back to get better value on Claiborne or Blackmon. And with Miami, Jacksonville, and Washington ahead of them, the Chiefs are going to have to trade up to get a QB unless they really like Tannehill or Jones.

vidae
12-12-2011, 11:56 AM
I'd trade up for any of the big 3 QBs and not even blink (shutup Shane!).

descendency
12-12-2011, 12:00 PM
I could see them trading up to three to get him. Minnesota will likely take Matt Kalil. The Rams would have their eye on him.

What? You must mean another team...

ArkyRamsFan
12-12-2011, 12:18 PM
What? You must mean another team...

He meant the Rams would have their eye on Matt Kalil which is very true. However, should the **** Vikes steal him from his rightful place with the Rams, I am very sure we would be very receptive to trading down, stockpiling more picks (more picks = more opportunities to screw ourselves!) and then select Blackmon or maybe Claiborne.

Also, since tonight's game will be one of epic ugliness, please, please hide your women and your elderly. And do NOT let your children watch as they will probably swear off NFL football forever and go over to the dark side and become soccer fans or something...

PossibleCabbage
12-12-2011, 02:59 PM
I think if Andrew Luck, Matt Barkley, Robert Griffin III, or Landry Jones are available when the Chiefs pick, they will take him.

You might win divisions with Matt Cassel, but you're not going to win championships with him.

vidae
12-12-2011, 03:17 PM
I think if Andrew Luck, Matt Barkley, Robert Griffin III, or Landry Jones are available when the Chiefs pick, they will take him.

You might win divisions with Matt Cassel, but you're not going to win championships with him.

Yeah, that is exactly right. Cassel is not going to win anyone a championship and we all know it. And we actually have some offensive talent.. if only we had a QB to get them the ball.

keylime_5
12-12-2011, 03:46 PM
With where the Chiefs will be picking in round one, the plums of the QB class will be gone. Likely gonna be looking at Landry Jones, Ryan Tannehill types instead of Luck/Barkley/Griffin imo.

FUNBUNCHER
12-12-2011, 04:06 PM
It's Ricky Stanzi time!!!

Give him a shot before drafting a QB.

RaiderNation
12-12-2011, 04:16 PM
I hop Stanzi atleast gets some playing time in these last few games, I think he can develop into a starting QB. If they do opt to take a QB, Landry Jones could have he right value and fit depending on if he declares n

vidae
12-12-2011, 04:16 PM
It's Ricky Stanzi time!!!

Give him a shot before drafting a QB.

Are you being ******* serious? No. Don't give him a shot. I don't care what they think he can be. We're going to be picking top 10 and we'll hopefully have a shot at a QB but you can't **** your franchise over for a god damn 5th rounder.

Jesus, I've seen you say some stupid things in the past but this might take the cake.

PatrickWillis
12-12-2011, 04:21 PM
I think they already have one in Stanzi.

ChiFan24
12-12-2011, 04:49 PM
I don't think Haley really had anything to do with Cassel in the first place. I think it will be a Cassel/Orton competition.

AntoinCD
12-12-2011, 04:53 PM
I think if Luck, Barkley and RG3 all declare its likely one will fall past 5 then it may be worth moving up for that player. It would be a very good decision if Pioli gave up a second rounder to move 4 or 5 spots for someone like Barkley

Scotty D
12-12-2011, 05:15 PM
I think its a pretty attractive head coaching position. You have a couple solid veteran QBs (Orton on a 1 year deal?), Charles + Moeaki + Berry coming back from injury, and the opportunity to get your QB of the future. I can't believe I'm saying this but if McDaniels doesn't have GM powers it might not be the worse thing to happen.

FUNBUNCHER
12-12-2011, 05:20 PM
I don't think either Barkley or RGIII falls out of the top 5, and the top four right now IMO looks like Luck/Barkley/RGIII and Kalil.

I'd still play Stanzi the rest of the season before I think about someone like Barkley is an automatic upgrade.

Someone please tell vidae not to meltdown on a message board because he happens to disagree with someone else's opinion.

Some of you guys come off as extremely emotionally fragile.

Scotty D
12-12-2011, 05:23 PM
I don't think either Barkley or RGIII falls out of the top 5, and the top four right now IMO looks like Luck/Barkley/RGIII and Kalil.

I'd still play Stanzi the rest of the season before I think about someone like Barkley is an automatic upgrade.

Someone please tell vidae not to meltdown on a message board because he happens to disagree with someone else's opinion.

Some of you guys come off as extremely emotionally fragile.

vidae may have been a bit harsh but his post is 100 percent correct.

FUNBUNCHER
12-12-2011, 05:35 PM
I thought Stanzi was a 2nd/3rd round prospect last year. Being drafted in the 5th doesn't mean he's not a viable option. But whatever.

vidae
12-12-2011, 05:40 PM
You don't pass on a talent like Barkley or RG3 because you have Ricky Stanzi. You just don't. Period.

And I'm about as emotionally stable as they come, thank you very much!

bored of education
12-12-2011, 05:42 PM
If one of the top three people tend to mention are staring them in the face then they almost in all likely hood will take them. Golden Rule.

PatrickWillis
12-12-2011, 06:51 PM
You don't pass on a talent like Barkley or RG3 because you have Ricky Stanzi. You just don't. Period.

And I'm about as emotionally stable as they come, thank you very much!

Unless you guys don't have a shot at those 2. Which is very possible. What other QB's are really "cant miss" besides those 2 and Luck? I mean I like Cousins and Tannehill as sleepers but if there is a legitimate defensive guy in Round 1 and the big 3 are off the table you gotta go with BPA.

vidae
12-12-2011, 06:54 PM
I disagree. I think the best thing for the long term future of this club is to move up and take a QB.

The Chiefs haven't drafted a QB in the first round since 1983. They took Todd Blackledge over Jim Kelly and Dan Marino. Ouch. It's about time they took a chance on a guy that can be that franchise signal caller.

Scott Wright
12-12-2011, 06:55 PM
I don't think there is any way the Chiefs consider a quarterback in the early rounds, let alone the first round, as long as Scot Pioli is there. A rookie signal caller would likely mean a bad 2012 season, which would mean Pioli is out of a job. Now if Pioli is fired before this year's draft then all bets are off, but as long as Pioli is there it is going to be Cassel in my humble opinion.

vidae
12-12-2011, 06:56 PM
I don't think there is any way the Chiefs consider a quarterback in the early rounds, let alone the first round, as long as Scot Pioli is there. A rookie signal caller would likely mean a bad 2012 season, which would mean Pioli is out of a job. Now if Pioli is fired before this year's draft then all bets are off, but as long as Pioli is there it is going to be Cassel in my humble opinion.

Then Pioli needs to go too. And he can take this whole "Patriots Way" thing with him.

CMR#20
12-12-2011, 07:02 PM
I don't think there is any way the Chiefs consider a quarterback in the early rounds, let alone the first round, as long as Scot Pioli is there. A rookie signal caller would likely mean a bad 2012 season, which would mean Pioli is out of a job. Now if Pioli is fired before this year's draft then all bets are off, but as long as Pioli is there it is going to be Cassel in my humble opinion.

Miami fired Sparano today too and they may take the final signal caller left if Barkley returns. Kansas City will get a new coach and likely get a quarterback like Tyler Bray or Tyler Wilson in 2013 if Matt Cassel doesn't step up.

PatrickWillis
12-12-2011, 07:13 PM
I disagree. I think the best thing for the long term future of this club is to move up and take a QB.

The Chiefs haven't drafted a QB in the first round since 1983. They took Todd Blackledge over Jim Kelly and Dan Marino. Ouch. It's about time they took a chance on a guy that can be that franchise signal caller.

So if the big 3 are off the table, who do you want them to take top 10? Tannehill? Jones? That could end up being a Gabbert situation.

vidae
12-12-2011, 07:14 PM
So if the big 3 are off the table, who do you want them to take top 10? Tannehill? Jones? That could end up being a Gabbert situation.

Or it could end up being a Jake Locker situation! I'd think hard about taking Tannehill there though. I'm a big fan of his.

And nobody looks as bad in the pocket as Gabbert. I honestly wonder how he even got through college ball.

PatrickWillis
12-12-2011, 07:17 PM
Or it could end up being a Jake Locker situation! I'd think hard about taking Tannehill there though. I'm a big fan of his.

And nobody looks as bad in the pocket as Gabbert. I honestly wonder how he even got through college ball.

Agree on Tannehill, but not sure Id want him top 10. I think of him just like Locker last year. Love the upside, wouldn't be "pissed" per se if my team took him in the top 10, but would really try to move back to grab him.

And as for Gabbert, yeah, he sucks. No clue how he was a 1st round grade by some. But the funny thing is Alex Smith looked just as bad in the pocket his rookie season. Don't tell that to the Smithers though. Lmao.

Iamcanadian
12-12-2011, 07:17 PM
I don't think there is any way the Chiefs consider a quarterback in the early rounds, let alone the first round, as long as Scot Pioli is there. A rookie signal caller would likely mean a bad 2012 season, which would mean Pioli is out of a job. Now if Pioli is fired before this year's draft then all bets are off, but as long as Pioli is there it is going to be Cassel in my humble opinion.

Yeah, Pioli tied his shoes to Cassel when he acquired him from the Patriots. Cassel would have to stink big time next year for KC to look elsewhere for the 2013 season.
That is why I think McDaniels will be their new HC. He developed Cassel when he coached him in NE and will give Pioli no trouble for insisting that he remain the starter. Looks like a match made in heaven.

vidae
12-12-2011, 07:29 PM
Match made in heaven? Sure, if you're our 2012 opponents.

If you're the Chiefs as a team, and as a fanbase, that is the worst possible scenario to play out. And fyi, Cassel DID stink big time this year before he got hurt. But sure, we should hire a terrible HC to see if he can make our awful QB suck less.

Hint: he won't be able to.

JBCX
12-12-2011, 07:29 PM
Match made in heaven? Sure, if you're our 2012 opponents.

If you're the Chiefs as a team, and as a fanbase, that is the worst possible scenario to play out. And fyi, Cassel DID stink big time this year before he got hurt. But sure, we should hire a terrible HC to see if he can make our awful QB suck less.

Hint: he won't be able to.

But he went 11-5 with the Patriots in 2008.

Iamcanadian
12-12-2011, 07:39 PM
But he went 11-5 with the Patriots in 2008.

He also took the Chiefs to the playoffs last year. They aren't going to give up on him for next season especially because Pioli traded for him and is responsible for bringing him to KC. He believed strongly in him then and I seriously doubt his support has lessoned.

vidae
12-12-2011, 07:39 PM
But he went 11-5 with the Patriots in 2008.

Oh you're absolutely right. I forgot about that!

He also took the Chiefs to the playoffs last year. They aren't going to give up on him for next season especially because Pioli traded for him and is responsible for bringing him to KC. He believed strongly in him then and I seriously doubt his support has lessoned.

Against quite possibly the most cupcake schedule ever created by the NFL. And why would you doubt that? Cassel was awful this year before he got hurt. It was 2009 all over again. Except this time he had talent at WR, so you can't blame that.

But you're the guy that all but guaranteed Haley was safe, so if you say Cassel is going to stick around I could probably start celebrating his release right now. :D

Scott Wright
12-12-2011, 07:39 PM
Matt Cassel is never going to be Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning or Drew Brees but the Chiefs can win with him. In fact, as long as Kansas City can get healthy and upgrade that offensive line there is no reason why they can't bounce back in a big way next season.

In short, replacing Cassel now would be throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Canadian_draft_fan
12-12-2011, 07:43 PM
Matt Cassel is never going to be Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning or Drew Brees but the Chiefs can win with him. In fact, as long as Kansas City can get healthy and upgrade that offensive line there is no reason why they can't bounce back in a big way next season.

In short, replacing Cassel now would be throwing the baby out with the bath water.
couldn't agree more. Cassel is Pioli's boy and he would have to fail big time in 2012 for the Chiefs to draft a QB. I don't think there is a realistic chance the Chiefs go QB in round 1 in 2012. To be honest I have a bias here -as a Skins fan I want less competition for RGIII, Barkley or Tannehill.

PossibleCabbage
12-12-2011, 07:44 PM
I think probably the best situation for the Chiefs as far as QB is concerned is to trade down (or back up) and land Tannehill. Tannehill absolutely won't be ready to go next year, but Matt Cassel should be good enough to hold the fort until Tannehill is ready.

The Chiefs can certainly bounce back in a big way next year, once all those ACLs heal, but I don't think they're ever going to be a serious superbowl contender until they greatly improve the quarterback position.

Pioli's not going to keep his job long term unless the Chiefs start competing for titles, and that's something he's not going to do if he sticks with Cassel. A greater sin than punting too soon an an average-at-best QB in Cassel, is wasting the pretty talented core of that Chiefs team with an average-at-best QB.

vidae
12-12-2011, 07:45 PM
Matt Cassel is never going to be Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning or Drew Brees but the Chiefs can win with him. In fact, as long as Kansas City can get healthy and upgrade that offensive line there is no reason why they can't bounce back in a big way next season.

In short, replacing Cassel now would be throwing the baby out with the bath water.

If we know that he'll never be an elite QB, what is the point? I'd argue that he isn't even a FRANCHISE QB at this point in time.

We know that Cassel can play well against awful defenses, as evidenced by 2010. And we know that Cassel plays horribly against solid to good defenses, as evidenced by 2009 and 2011 pre-injury.

Is it really worth it to go ahead with a QB you know will never be elite, or even top 10 at his position? I submit that it is not and that it is a massive waste of time.

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater? Sign me up for that.

couldn't agree more. Cassel is Pioli's boy and he would have to fail big time in 2012 for the Chiefs to draft a QB.

He just did that this year. Why wait to draft a QB when we're going to have a top 10 pick?

PatrickWillis
12-12-2011, 07:47 PM
He also took the Chiefs to the playoffs last year. They aren't going to give up on him for next season especially because Pioli traded for him and is responsible for bringing him to KC. He believed strongly in him then and I seriously doubt his support has lessoned.

That's right. Cassell is a PROVEN WINNER. Oh wait....He's never won a playoff game. Hasn't Romo won at least one of those?

TACKLE
12-12-2011, 08:00 PM
Matt Cassel is the next Brody Croyle who was the next Trent Green who was the next Elvin Grbac.....

They've accepted mediocrity at the QB position for too long and it's time that they step up and go after their franchise QB. Cassel isn't good enough to win a championship and probably not a playoff game so how can they move forward with him long term? Hel isn't a 'franchise QB' so the Chiefs need to follow the Golden Rule.

ChiFan24
12-13-2011, 02:38 AM
Matt Cassel is never going to be Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning or Drew Brees but the Chiefs can win with him. In fact, as long as Kansas City can get healthy and upgrade that offensive line there is no reason why they can't bounce back in a big way next season.

In short, replacing Cassel now would be throwing the baby out with the bath water.

You severely underestimate how bad Matt Cassel really is.

Regardless, you're right that Pioli won't actively try to replace him.

Iamcanadian
12-13-2011, 07:51 AM
Match made in heaven? Sure, if you're our 2012 opponents.

If you're the Chiefs as a team, and as a fanbase, that is the worst possible scenario to play out. And fyi, Cassel DID stink big time this year before he got hurt. But sure, we should hire a terrible HC to see if he can make our awful QB suck less.

Hint: he won't be able to.

Listen to yourself, now you know what the GM should do and can guarantee that a QB who went to the playoffs the year before doesn't have the ability to do it again.
Who made you the all seeing eye who is infallible when it comes to his team. Sounds just like a homer to me who is way too close to the situation and thinks he knows best, what is needed.
Unfortunately, teams rarely listen to their fans, they have their own plans and attempt to carry them out in their own way.
Whether you like it or not, Pioli is tied at the hip to Cassel, he convinced his owner to open the pocket book and sign him at all costs. Pioli couldn't get his HC in bed with his ideas so he fired him and will most likely bring in somebody who he has had a relationship with and who will support Pioli in insisting that Cassel be the starter.
Pioli has shown a definite affinity for hiring ex NE staff, and McDaniels is sitting right there for him to hire. Seems like a natural progression to me, although Mangini just might sneak in.
Now, I might agree with you about Cassel's potential but I along with you don't make those decisions, the GM does and will no matter how strongly you feel on the matter.

Iamcanadian
12-13-2011, 08:07 AM
That's right. Cassell is a PROVEN WINNER. Oh wait....He's never won a playoff game. Hasn't Romo won at least one of those?

The list of QB's in the NFL who have never won a playoff game is significant, many are on teams like KC who are young and inexperienced and need time to learn how to win big games.
How many years was Brees in the league before he won a playoff game. how about Alex Smith or Freeman etc. etc.
Eli was a starter for 4 seasons before he did anything, ditto for Rivers.
It simply isn't as easy as you want to make out.
You only find out after time, if a QB has what it takes. Cassel has had 1 eleven win season and 1 ten game winning season and you simply want to write him off.

vidae
12-13-2011, 12:15 PM
I still don't get why Pioli is tied to the hip of Cassel. Cassel has already earned most of his big money. If we cut him today we'd owe him peanuts.

He isn't tied to anyone for any reason. Period.

RWills
12-13-2011, 12:51 PM
I still don't get why Pioli is tied to the hip of Cassel. Cassel has already earned most of his big money. If we cut him today we'd owe him peanuts.

He isn't tied to anyone for any reason. Period.

Matt Cassell for 5M 1 year deal is a bargain for a starter and not bad at all as a back up, considering what some of these back-ups are getting paid.

I agree that if Landry Jones is there they will take him and sit him for next year ala Locker or can trade down for Tannenhill or wait till round 2 for Foles.

Cassell will be back as the starter in 2012 but 2013 is completely open, IF someone is there at round 1 or 2 I think they would take said player....but they will not trade up

ChiFan24
12-14-2011, 03:00 AM
I still don't get why Pioli is tied to the hip of Cassel. Cassel has already earned most of his big money. If we cut him today we'd owe him peanuts.

He isn't tied to anyone for any reason. Period.

He thinks Cassel is good. That's why.

And no, I have no inside knowledge of the situation and I could be totally wrong. But generally, when you draft a QB that probably would have been a UDFA, then trade a second round pick for that QB, then win your division with that QB, odds are that you like the guy and you won't reverse your opinion on him a year later.

And again, this has nothing to do with my personal opinion of Matt Cassel.

TonyGfortheTD
12-14-2011, 03:23 AM
So if the big 3 are off the table, who do you want them to take top 10? Tannehill? Jones? That could end up being a Gabbert situation.

Even if Pioli absolutely hated Cassel, I couldn't see him drafting either Tannehill or Jones. If he was going to go against his own philosophy and take a QB in the first, he'd absolutely would want one he'd feel comfortable that could start Week 1.

Neither fit that description.

As for the likely hood of drafting a QB, I wouldn't keep it off the table. The team ultimately belongs to Clark Hunt and I think he's pissed they don't have a franchise QB.

KCStud
12-20-2011, 02:49 AM
Isn't it amazing what a QB who can actually play can do with this offense? And that's without Charles or Moeaki.

I think Orton is the starter next year and Cassel is cut unless he restructures his contract because there's no way he's getting $5.25 million next season. Just isn't happening.

I would love the team to trade up and take Barkley because the guy runs the pro style offense perfectly and would do great with our supporting cast.

Honestly, KC will probably draft an OT or NT in the first round. BPA is very likely.

Brothgar
12-20-2011, 09:55 AM
Well there are a few things I have to think of here. First when was the last time Pioli traded up for anything let alone a QB? Secondly the way I see it Stanzi can't be given a shot until they are officially out of the playoffs at best he gets one garbage time game to show what he has but in all likelihood we will see Kyle Orton the rest of the way through. I think there could be a real QB controversy if Orton can win out if that happens your dreams of drafting a QB are essentially nil.

FUNBUNCHER
12-20-2011, 11:24 AM
I disagree. I think the best thing for the long term future of this club is to move up and take a QB.

The Chiefs haven't drafted a QB in the first round since 1983. They took Todd Blackledge over Jim Kelly and Dan Marino. Ouch. It's about time they took a chance on a guy that can be that franchise signal caller.

Ouch.

Now I know why you were pissed about my jocking Stanzi. He's status quo, not an obvious upgrade.

As a Skins fan, I too have franchise-QB-envy and want the Shanahan to do everything possible to snag one of the top 3 in 2012.

The Chiefs have been a successful franchise IMO the last 20 years with 2nd tier QBs, but if they ever had a bonafide top 5-10 NFL QB, you wonder how many more SBs they'd have by now.

DraftSavant
12-20-2011, 11:31 AM
Ouch.

Now I know why you were pissed about my jocking Stanzi. He's status quo, not an obvious upgrade.

As a Skins fan, I too have franchise-QB-envy and want the Shanahan to do everything possible to snag one of the top 3 in 2012.

The Chiefs have been a successful franchise IMO the last 20 years with 2nd tier QBs, but if they ever had a bonafide top 5-10 NFL QB, you wonder how many more SBs they'd have by now.

I think I'd put Trent Green in that 5-10 range. He just had an absolute craptastic defense to deal with, and that team wasn't built for long-term success.

FUNBUNCHER
12-20-2011, 11:46 AM
I have a blind spot for Trent Green's post Redskin career(!)lol

Now Carlos Rogers is gonna make the pro bowl as a 49er, but for some reason Shahanan and Haslett thought Josh Wilson was an upgrade over 'Los.
ARGH.

ChiefMojo
12-27-2011, 11:06 AM
I doubt the Chiefs draft a QB in the 1st round now. With Barkley staying and likely no chance at Luck/RGIII then I see the Chiefs taking a RT or even possibly a NT/3-4 ILB. Best bet would be someone like Martin or Rieff if I were to guess. This would be the perfect year for KC to actually now take a OT.

The question for the Chiefs now is not what QB they draft but who will they keep between Cassel and Orton? Either they re-sign Orton or let him go for a compensation pick. In Cassel's case he is either the starter with the release of Orton, he restructures his contract and becomes the back-up to Orton or he is outright released.

vidae
12-27-2011, 11:11 AM
Barkley going back to school really hurt our chances to take one. If I had to guess I'd say we took Reiff or Poe in the first, with an outside shot at "reaching" for Tannehill, which I'd be happy with. I like him a lot.

Ouch.

Now I know why you were pissed about my jocking Stanzi. He's status quo, not an obvious upgrade.

That is exactly it. This is what we've been doing for almost 30 years. It's getting old and we have exactly 0 championships to show for it. I'm just sick of it.

ChiefMojo
12-27-2011, 11:14 AM
Tannehill is fine but I don't want to draft him in the 1st round to be honest. I feel like he is nothing more than a Ponder type pick. Just a reach to grab a decent QB. I don't see him much better than Stanzi to be honest.

I'd much rather move forth with either Cassel or Orton than draft Tannehill. Which leads back to the point of drafting a RT/NT/3-4 ILB in the 1st.

vidae
12-27-2011, 11:16 AM
Moving forward with "ok" QBs is why we're never a threat to do anything in the post-season. Hell, we're not even a threat to get there and it all starts with QB play.

I dunno. Maybe I'm being extreme here, I'm just sick of the same crap every year. Nothing changes and it's frustrating.

shylo3716
12-27-2011, 11:21 AM
Moving forward with "ok" QBs is why we're never a threat to do anything in the post-season. Hell, we're not even a threat to get there and it all starts with QB play.

I dunno. Maybe I'm being extreme here, I'm just sick of the same crap every year. Nothing changes and it's frustrating.

Why don't you guys just trade for a guy who has been sitting around holding the clipboard. Plenty serviceable guys around the league that could flourish if given the opportunity.

onejayhawk
12-27-2011, 11:38 AM
Tannehill is fine but I don't want to draft him in the 1st round to be honest. I feel like he is nothing more than a Ponder type pick. Just a reach to grab a decent QB. I don't see him much better than Stanzi to be honest.

I'd much rather move forth with either Cassel or Orton than draft Tannehill. Which leads back to the point of drafting a RT/NT/3-4 ILB in the 1st.

Talk about positions usually taken in rounds 2-5.

I'll second drafting Tannehill, but would not mind using the 1st pick. I disagree on the type of Qb he is. At the least he has a better arm than Ponder.

J

PossibleCabbage
12-27-2011, 12:14 PM
Talk about positions usually taken in rounds 2-5.

NTs are first round picks, in the case of special prospects, they can be high first round picks. It's among the most important positions on the defense.

descendency
12-27-2011, 12:48 PM
Tannehill is a much better QB physically than Ponder.

Tannehill just suffers from some serious green-ness at the QB position. He has his great games and his terrible games. Just prepare for a mix of great and bad.

TACKLE
12-27-2011, 01:10 PM
Tannehill is a much better QB physically than Ponder.

Tannehill just suffers from some serious green-ness at the QB position. He has his great games and his terrible games. Just prepare for a mix of great and bad.

True but if a team has a plan for developing him and are patient, the payoff could be big. He's very talented and does things innately well, such as his movement in the pocket, better than a lot of far more 'seasoned' QB's.

ChiefMojo
12-27-2011, 02:31 PM
Which is why I'd much rather take him if he was in the 2nd round. I don't want a QB that you have to groom being the Chiefs 1st round pick. Either the 1st round QB plays right away or you don't use that pick on a QB at all. We have more dire needs then to see a 1st rounder sit on the bench for a year or so. The need of a quality starting RT or NT out weigh grooming a 1st round QB.

Also I just don't believe Tannehill is worth a top 15 pick... just my opinion.

AntoinCD
12-27-2011, 02:36 PM
Which is why I'd much rather take him if he was in the 2nd round. I don't want a QB that you have to groom being the Chiefs 1st round pick. Either the 1st round QB plays right away or you don't use that pick on a QB at all. We have more dire needs then to see a 1st rounder sit on the bench for a year or so. The need of a quality starting RT or NT out weigh grooming a 1st round QB.

Also I just don't believe Tannehill is worth a top 15 pick... just my opinion.

I really disagree with this. If you are confident in your development plan and believe that this will make this prospect your franchise QB then for damn sure it's worth a first round pick. I think people have just seen more and more players come in from day one but realistically not everyone will be able to. Good GMs and personnel people will look at the long term more than the short term

ChiefMojo
12-27-2011, 02:39 PM
Just think the Tannehill pick would be a BAD pick for KC! If no Luck or RGIII, move onto another position of need. Sadly I value Cassel and Orton higher than Tannehill and I've seen a lot of Tannehill through the years being in BIG XII country. Guess I've seen to many of his bad games to scare the living crap out of me.

AntoinCD
12-27-2011, 02:44 PM
Just think the Tannehill pick would be a BAD pick for KC! If no Luck or RGIII, move onto another position of need. Sadly I value Cassel and Orton higher than Tannehill and I've seen a lot of Tannehill through the years being in BIG XII country. Guess I've seen to many of his bad games to scare the living crap out of me.

Sure that's where it gets tougher to evaluate value wise. If you don't think Tannenhill is the guy you don't do it in the first, although I would also then be of the opinion that you don't take him in the second either. Unless you are confident that he can be a franchise QB then I wouldn't spend more than a mid rounder on him.

Firstly you waste a valuable pick on him when you could look elsewhere, and secondly you kinda have to play it out with him to see what he has. Then you get into the sort of routine Cleveland has been in for years were they are stuck with mediocrity because they took a guy they weren't necessarily in love with.

If you evaluate a QB and think he is the guy for your franchise then IMO you can't reach high enough on him

LonghornsLegend
12-27-2011, 04:05 PM
Are you being ******* serious? No. Don't give him a shot. I don't care what they think he can be. We're going to be picking top 10 and we'll hopefully have a shot at a QB but you can't **** your franchise over for a god damn 5th rounder.

Jesus, I've seen you say some stupid things in the past but this might take the cake.


This. I like Stanzi but he shouldn't alter any QB plans. If you happen to end up with 2 good QB's awesome, there are worse things to happen. But if you have a QB come along you like, you don't pass because you took Stanzi in the 5th round prior. Stanzi could be attractive trade bait for someone, a valuable long term back-up who knows the system, or challenge the new rookie QB if he plays well enough.


Alot of options, but none of them involve passing up an elite QB.

A Perfect Score
12-27-2011, 04:07 PM
After seeing what Kolb got, I'd be stashing mid level QB's left, right and center, giving them small amounts of playing time against weak opponents, hyping the hell out of them to the media and shipping them all off for second rounders and pro bowl CBs.

That's most definitely what the Chiefs should do with Stanzamerica. Then they should draft RGIII and have a real QB for once.

Caulibflower
12-27-2011, 04:18 PM
After seeing what Kolb got, I'd be stashing mid level QB's left, right and center, giving them small amounts of playing time against weak opponents, hyping the hell out of them to the media and shipping them all off for second rounders and pro bowl CBs.


GM: Look! So-and-so has compiled an 89.8 QB rating in limited playing time! That's purdy good! And He's 2-1 in his starts! I think he's got some potential! I like a guy who's been in the league a couple years!

*trades for a guy who should be a backup and puts his franchise back two years*

onejayhawk
12-28-2011, 06:12 AM
NTs are first round picks, in the case of special prospects, they can be high first round picks. It's among the most important positions on the defense.

Any "Special" player can go higher. Mayo is an ILB for example. Raji is a NT. Eric Berry is a SS. However, I see no special players in the draft at those positions.

The best NT is Poe, and I would have trouble grading him higher than Phil Taylor. Scott may disagree, because I know he thinks Poe is elite, but even he does not say top 10. However, the 2nd round has several good RT/NT possibilities.

J