The Kansas City Chiefs Select...

[Leon Sandcastle]

Leon Sandcastle is a riser folks.

[bitonti]

all these chiefs fans talking about Brandon Albert. you guys know he's a free agent right?

it's a great OT year it's a terrible QB. Andy sticks at 1 and takes the better player.

[Monomach]

Originally Posted by bitonti

all these chiefs fans talking about Brandon Albert. you guys know he's a free agent right?

it's a great OT year it's a terrible QB. Andy sticks at 1 and takes the better player.

Why would they not just re-sign Albert? Or franchise him? Who lets very good left tackle walk so they can take a risk on one with a draft pick?

Doesn't matter that he's the best player in the draft. No one has any idea whether he'll ever be as good as Albert in the NFL.

This would be like the Bears letting Henry Melton walk and using their first rounder on a DT.

Doesn't make any sense.

[bitonti]

Originally Posted by Monomach

Why would they not just re-sign Albert? Or franchise him? Who lets very good left tackle walk so they can take a risk on one with a draft pick?

Doesn't matter that he's the best player in the draft. No one has any idea whether he'll ever be as good as Albert in the NFL.

Doesn't make any sense.

people don't _know_ if Geno Smith will be better than Ricky Stanzi but that's the draft isn't it? It's all uncertainty.

as for Albert, he had back injuries all year and he wants left tackle money from the free agency market... that's what, 10 mil a year? more? Ryan Clady turned down 50 million over 5 years, meanwhile Andrew Luck made 22 mil at 1.

long story short Joekel is gonna be cheaper, more reliable and probably better than Brandon Albert.

[vidae]

Originally Posted by bitonti

people don't _know_ if Geno Smith will be better than Ricky Stanzi but that's the draft isn't it? It's all uncertainty.

as for Albert, he had back injuries all year and he wants left tackle money from the free agency market... that's what, 10 mil a year? more? Ryan Clady turned down 50 million over 5 years, meanwhile Andrew Luck made 22 mil at 1.

long story short Joekel is gonna be cheaper, more reliable and probably better than Brandon Albert.

He had back injuries all year? I'm starting to wonder if you actually know what you're talking about or if you're spewing random nonsense to make yourself seem more knowledgeable than you actually are.

He missed a few games with a back injury. He doesn't have chronic back problems. He doesn't need surgery. He is already training for next year.

As for the last sentence, that is pure garbage. Will Joeckel be cheaper? Yes. More reliable? Better? You have no way of knowing that, and the fact that you come in here and say it as if it's a fact is laughable.

Everyone is all of the sudden a Chiefs expert now. The Chiefs have the first overall pick and everyone knows the ins and outs of the organization.

[T-RICH49]

well we're not taking a QB or Joeckel...It's Leon Sandcastle baby!!!! lol

[bitonti]

Originally Posted by vidae

He had back injuries all year? I'm starting to wonder if you actually know what you're talking about or if you're spewing random nonsense to make yourself seem more knowledgeable than you actually are.

He missed a few games with a back injury.

It's possible that "missed a few games with a back injury" becomes chronic

here's a good link (from a KC site) that explains it way better

http://arrowheadaddict.com/2013/02/0...efs-offseason/

Originally Posted by vidae

As for the last sentence, that is pure garbage. Will Joeckel be cheaper? Yes. More reliable? Better? You have no way of knowing that, and the fact that you come in here and say it as if it's a fact is laughable.

ok so it's pure garbage but you agree he's gonna be cheaper. So it's not really pure garbage.

As for the better part no we don't know that for sure just like we don't know if Geno Smith is better than Matt cassel. We can guess tho.

[Monomach]

Ricki Stanzi is the Brandon Albert of QBs now. Oh mah gawd.

[nepg]

And Donald Stephenson is cheaper and more proven than Joeckel. There is zero reason to take Joeckel. Zero. Taking an OT there is pretty much never the right move. Even with Jonathan Ogden, the Ravens didn't have a winning record until his 5th year. By then, you're having to pay the guy you draft big money.

[H.O.O.D]

Originally Posted by bitonti

people don't _know_ if Geno Smith will be better than Ricky Stanzi but that's the draft isn't it? It's all uncertainty.

as for Albert, he had back injuries all year and he wants left tackle money from the free agency market... that's what, 10 mil a year? more? Ryan Clady turned down 50 million over 5 years, meanwhile Andrew Luck made 22 mil at 1.

long story short Joekel is gonna be cheaper, more reliable and probably better than Brandon Albert.

QB is the most important position and it's smarter to resign your tackle and gamble on a QB then it is to gamble on the tackle and move forward with the current QB's you have. You need a QB to win in this league and KC lacks that.

Long story short aside from being cheaper, we don't know if Joeckel will be better or more reliable that's simply a guess on your part.

[bitonti]

Originally Posted by H.O.O.D

Long story short aside from being cheaper, we don't know if Joeckel will be better or more reliable that's simply a guess on your part.

we could say the same about the QB. there's no hard proof that Geno Smith is better than existing QB's on the roster. Just like there's no proof Joekel is better than Donald Stephenson.

end of the day I just dont see the value of Geno Smith at 1. He's not an RG3 type of prospect.

[descendency]

The reality is you have to take the best player for what you want to do on the field. If you take anything else and the guy is less than what you thought he would be - you're screwed and will be helping the next group to come through pick top 5.

Whoever that is, you have to take him #1 if you are KC, unless you feel you get a better value from a trade. (Flacco to the Chiefs?)

[WCH]

Originally Posted by Leon Sandcastle

Leon Sandcastle is a riser folks.

We know that's you, PrimeTime.

[D-Unit]

KC fans will be hating Geno Smith in 4-5 years... but "he's the right pick!" lol.

Even if it's not Joeckel... take someone else that will help you. In ALL of college football he's the only guy out there that can help you???

[T-RICH49]

Originally Posted by bitonti

It's possible that "missed a few games with a back injury" becomes chronic

here's a good link (from a KC site) that explains it way better

http://arrowheadaddict.com/2013/02/0...efs-offseason/



ok so it's pure garbage but you agree he's gonna be cheaper. So it's not really pure garbage.

As for the better part no we don't know that for sure just like we don't know if Geno Smith is better than Matt cassel. We can guess tho.

ANYBODY is better then Matt Cassel

[vidae]

Originally Posted by bitonti

we could say the same about the QB. there's no hard proof that Geno Smith is better than existing QB's on the roster. Just like there's no proof Joekel is better than Donald Stephenson.

end of the day I just dont see the value of Geno Smith at 1. He's not an RG3 type of prospect.

RG3 wasn't an RG3 level prospect in February.

Originally Posted by D-Unit

KC fans will be hating Geno Smith in 4-5 years... but "he's the right pick!" lol.

Even if it's not Joeckel... take someone else that will help you. In ALL of college football he's the only guy out there that can help you???

Who would help more than a QB? Name them. I've specifically asked you this before and got no answer. You think Star would help more than a QB? Wrong. OT? Wrong again. We don't need an OLB, there is no high rated WR (yet), no CB in the top 5 (yet).. so right now, who do you take? I'm honestly asking you.

[Attyla the Hawk]

Originally Posted by vidae

You think Star would help more than a QB? Wrong. OT? Wrong again.

I don't think either of those prospects/positions would be more helpful than a QB

I do however think that 3 years from now, KC would be looking for a QB in round 1. Whereas if they take Star or Joeckel, they'll be looking at extending his rookie deal.

[Forenci]

Originally Posted by vidae

RG3 wasn't an RG3 level prospect in February.



Who would help more than a QB? Name them. I've specifically asked you this before and got no answer. You think Star would help more than a QB? Wrong. OT? Wrong again. We don't need an OLB, there is no high rated WR (yet), no CB in the top 5 (yet).. so right now, who do you take? I'm honestly asking you.

Here's my problem. And this has been my only problem because I think 100% no questions asked the Chiefs should take Geno Smith at QB with the first overall pick. But here's my question:

Why are you rationalizing or arguing it like this?

The question should not be: who could we take that's better or helps the Chiefs more? The question should be: do we think Geno Smith can be a franchise quarterback? That is the only question that matters. If the answer is no then taking someone else who the Chiefs think will be a good is the better choice. If the Chiefs think there is no franchise QB and (assuming they are correct) then whoever they take will automatically be better than any QB they pick. If they take Geno simply for the sake of taking a QB then you've only hurt your team even more for missing out one someone who could have been an upgrade for your team.

And trust me, the Chiefs were the worst team in the NFL. I'm pretty sure they could find somebody to take that would be an upgrade for your team.

That has been, and always will be my argument for this. Don't sweat who might be better for your team. QB is your number one need by far, but if the Chiefs organization believe that none of these guys are going to be elite QB's then they are not hurting themselves by taking someone else.

[D-Unit]

Originally Posted by vidae

RG3 wasn't an RG3 level prospect in February.



Who would help more than a QB? Name them. I've specifically asked you this before and got no answer. You think Star would help more than a QB? Wrong. OT? Wrong again. We don't need an OLB, there is no high rated WR (yet), no CB in the top 5 (yet).. so right now, who do you take? I'm honestly asking you.

The best pick for you guys is Matt Barkley.

If you're going to fight the fight for QB. You might as well fight for the right guy.

[Brothgar]

Originally Posted by Forenci

Here's my problem. And this has been my only problem because I think 100% no questions asked the Chiefs should take Geno Smith at QB with the first overall pick. But here's my question:

Why are you rationalizing or arguing it like this?

The question should not be: who could we take that's better or helps the Chiefs more? The question should be: do we think Geno Smith can be a franchise quarterback? That is the only question that matters. If the answer is no then taking someone else who the Chiefs think will be a good is the better choice. If the Chiefs think there is no franchise QB and (assuming they are correct) then whoever they take will automatically be better than any QB they pick. If they take Geno simply for the sake of taking a QB then you've only hurt your team even more for missing out one someone who could have been an upgrade for your team.

And trust me, the Chiefs were the worst team in the NFL. I'm pretty sure they could find somebody to take that would be an upgrade for your team.

That has been, and always will be my argument for this. Don't sweat who might be better for your team. QB is your number one need by far, but if the Chiefs organization believe that none of these guys are going to be elite QB's then they are not hurting themselves by taking someone else.

You'd think that but go through the roster unless you are honestly considering Chance Warmack #1 overall there isn't a ton of needs.

[vidae]

Originally Posted by Forenci

Here's my problem. And this has been my only problem because I think 100% no questions asked the Chiefs should take Geno Smith at QB with the first overall pick. But here's my question:

Why are you rationalizing or arguing it like this?

The question should not be: who could we take that's better or helps the Chiefs more? The question should be: do we think Geno Smith can be a franchise quarterback?

Well yeah, I don't disagree with you here, but I'm rationalizing it like this because *I* think Geno is a franchise QB. *I* would pound the table for Geno personally.

Originally Posted by D-Unit

The best pick for you guys is Matt Barkley.

If you're going to fight the fight. You might as well fight for the right guy.

Not sure if you're being serious here.

[SAGA45]

Originally Posted by D-Unit

The best pick for you guys is Matt Barkley.

And you base that one what exactly?

[mightytitan9]

I understand what you're saying Forenci, would the Raiders have been better taking JaMarcus Russell or Calvin Johnson for example.

If the Chiefs believe in Smith (or whoever) then I'm sure everyone will support the selection, but they can't go into it saying they are drafting a QB before grading them properly

[scottyboy]

wait, so because Geno isn't one of the best QB prospects in the last decade, he's not worth the number one pick?

OH.

this is getting absurd. the lack of actual football logic and then matt barkley pimping is getting way out of hand

[SAGA45]

Originally Posted by mightytitan9

I understand what you're saying Forenci, would the Raiders have been better taking JaMarcus Russell or Calvin Johnson for example.

It's interesting that though many feel there's no franchise QB available...there's no franchise quality player available at any other position either including OT. While there is no Luck or RG3...there's also no Joe Thomas, Pat Willis, Von Miller, AP, Suh, or Calvin Johnson, etc either. There is no can't-miss/once-in-a-decade prospect at ANY position. So it then becomes what is KC's most urgent need + what position is the most important on the field. We all know the answer to both of those questions - Quarterback. If they've got Geno as the top QB in this class then they take him.