The Kansas City Chiefs Quarterback of the Future
aPacificChief comes through yet again for us talking about college quarterbacks and the Kansas City Chiefs. If you're not familiar with aPacificChief's earlier QB FanPost, make sure you check it out.
So for this morning, we've got offense and defense to talk about, with Primetime's defensive coordinator post right below this one.
aPacificChief's full post is after the jump.
-Chris
Matthew Stafford JR (6-3 228lbs 21 yrs old) Georgia
Comp % Passing Yds TD INT
2006 53% 1749 7 13
2007 56% 2523 19 10
2008 61% 3209 22 9
Projected to go in the early 1st round. The only QB to start as a TRUE freshman for the Bulldogs since Quincy Carter. What you like about his numbers is that completion percentage, passing yards, and TD's show a steady improvement, and the INT's numbers also go down every year. It is noted by NFL scouts that Matt has an absolute canon for an arm, but has also shown the ability to take something off and throw a touch pass. The big question on Stafford is his inability to evade the rush, he doesn't show the footwork necessary at times to slide out of the rushing lanes. Has also areas of concern with his mind numbing choices when he throws into coverage
Mark Sanchez JR (6-3 225 23 yrs) USC
2007 65% 695 7 5
2008 66% 3207 34 10
Projected to be in the 1st round. Sanchez has also shown an ability to throw the ball with a lot of zip. Has the tools necessary to play QB in the NFL, but the lack of repetitions on the playing field will hurt his chances for success. History has not favored collegiate quarterbacks who have had only one year of starting experience. Could be the next Akili Smith. Mark needed another year at USC to prove that he has the ability to consistently read defenses, and improve his poise under center. Even Pete Carroll admitted that Sanchez's success in the NFL will be difficult.
Graham Harrell SR (6-3 203 23 yrs old) Texas Tech
2005 67% 422 3 0
2006 66% 4555 38 11
2007 71% 5705 48 14
2008 71% 4747 41 7
Projected in rounds 3 to 4. The biggest question I have about this guy, is his arm strength? I believe the reason that he’s rated so low is because of his lack of velocity on his throws. The lack of arm strength will really hurt his ability to play QB in the NFL effectively. Could be another Danny Wuerffel if his arm is not NFL calibur. Has shown the ablitiy to lead, with the come from behind victory against the then #1 ranked Longhorns. Harrell took the Red Raiders down the field with little time on the clock to steal the win from Texas.
Nathan Brown SR (6-1 214 22yrs old) Central Arkansas
2005 69% 2410 25 10
2006 65% 1858 18 8
2007 69% 3084 26 10
2008 67% 3206 31 4
I love this kid. He comes from a small college program, but has started for the Bears for 4 years and is a graduating senior. If he can prove to the NFL scouts that he has above average arm strength, and has shown an ability to elevate his command in the huddle, Nathan might very well be the steal of the draft. Scouts are kind of hush about this guy maybe in a hope to try and sneak him past other teams. Just wait until after the combine, and the weeks prior to the draft, your going to be hearing a lot more of Nathan Brown. Nathan has already gained some attention of several teams including our own scouts. He was also one of the few Quarterbacks to play well at the Senior bowl. What impressed scouts the most was that this small college prospect did not feel overwhelmed by the other kids from the larger programs.
Nate Davis JR (6-2 217 21 yrs) Ball St.
2006 61% 1975 18 8
2007 57% 3667 30 6
2008 64% 3591 26 8
Rumor is that Jacksonville is in love with this guy, that they sent out several scouts to watch him, and they came back liking what they saw. He has a canon for an arm and can make all the NFL throws. Scouts project him in round 3, but I wouldn't be surprised if we hear his name called late in the 1st round or in the second. Another Junior with potential, but the kid has 3 years of starting experience with improvement in his final year at Ball St. which might help his cause when playing in the pro’s. His numbers all showed improvement which could suggest that his development is continuing to progress.

Pat White SR (6-1 192 23 yrs) West Virginia
2005 57% 828 8 5
2006 66% 1655 13 7
2007 67% 1724 14 4
2008 66% 1844 21 7
Pat is 3 year starter for the Mountaineers. Has shown steady improment throughout his collegiate career. A little bit on the skinny side which might not translate well for him staying healthy in the pro's. Has a built similiar to Brodie Croyle, but without the injury history. Arm strength is adequate according to scouts at the Senior Bowl, and has quick enough feet to evade the rush. Could be considered to move to WR like Randle El or Hines Ward.
Josh Freeman JR (6-6 250 20 yrs) Kansas St.
2006 52% 1780 6 15
2007 63% 3353 18 11
2008 58% 2945 20 8
This guy is raw and needs a lot more coaching and repetition playing the QB position. Projected to go in rounds 2 to 3 simply because of his stature and arm strength. Freeman has a chance to succeed in the NFL if given ample time to develop and with proper coaching. History on the other hand does not favor Freeman. Juniors who do not improve their numbers by the time they make the jump to the NFL have a difficult time adjusting to the level of competition in the NFL. I wish this kid went back to school. The extra year would have allowed him to mature at the QB position on his own terms, while at the same time improving his game.
Rhett Bomar SR (6-2 215 24 yrs) Sam Houston St.
2005 54% 2018 10 10
2006 T R A N S F E R E D
2007 59% 2209 10 6
2008 56% 3355 27 13
A former Okalhoma Sooner before transfering to Sam Houston. Rhett looks good except for his completion percentages. He could never crack 60% barrier which does not bode well for the NFL. Has talent but lacks consistency.
Cullen Harper SR (6-4 230 24 yrs) Clemson
2006 70% 155 2 0
2007 65% 2991 27 6
2008 63% 2395 11 12
What I don’t like about Cullen after studying his numbers was how his decision making skills seem to erode in his senior year. Passing yards and TD's went down, while his Int’s doubled from his Junior year. Arm strength again is the primary concern of the NFL scouts.
Curtis Painter SR (6-4 223 24 yrs) Purdue
2005 52% 932 3 5
2006 59% 3985 22 9
2007 62% 3846 29 11
2008 59% 2400 13 11
I don’t know what happened to this guy? He had the making of being a true #1 QB in the NFL, but he just took a nose dive his senior year. A terrible collapse on a player who should have been ready to make the next step. Hardly what scouts want to see from a senior who’s had 2 years of starting experience. He should not have failed so badly in his final year in college. lf you look at his numbers, he almost had 4k yards in ’06 and again in ’07. The game at this point of his college career should be slowing down for him, but to only have 2400 yards in his senior year is just horrible. Maybe he was hurt? I don’t know, but Painter might still be on the board until maybe the 6th round. He could be the next Kyle Orton.
Tom Brandstater SR (6-5 225 25 yrs) Fresno St.
2005 46% 49 1 1
2006 55% 1490 13 14
2007 63% 2654 15 5
2008 60% 2664 18 12
The Fresno State product looks like maybe he will be selected in the 6th to 7th round area. Could be 2nd string backup in the NFL with a chance to be a number one if he plays in the right system with a strong supporting cast around him.
John Parker Wilson SR (6-2 214 24 yrs) Alabama
2005 63% 98 2 0
2006 57% 2707 17 10
2007 52% 2846 18 12
2008 58% 2243 9 7
In the beginning of the season Wilson looked like he had the making of QB being ready to break out and have a sensational Senior year, but then reality set in and the hype came to a screeching halt. After reviewing his career numbers I think he could have a chance at becoming a starting QB in the right system, or be nothing more than a career backup in the NFL. He seems to lack the superstar qualities needed to be true #1 QB in the NFL. JP's career numbers while at Alabama were impressive, and he did break many of Croyle's passing records, but at this stage of his development JP looks more suited of being a capable "Game Manager" than a QB that you would ask to win the game for you.
Willie Tuitama SR. (6-3 220 22 yrs) Arizona
2005 58% 1105 9 5
2006 56% 1335 7 6
2007 62% 3683 28 12
2008 65% 3039 23 8
Strangely enough he was brought up by a member of AP. I didn’t know much about him up until that point, but Willie has shown improvement in his performance every year as being the starter for the Wildcats. Completion % went up every year and his int’s went down. Questions that need to be answered is his arm strength and leadership qualities. If Willie has above average arm strength, and can command respect in the huddle he very well could become something special at some point in the NFL.
David Johnson SR (6-3 220 23 yrs) Tulsa
2005 68% 236 1 1
2006 64% 180 1 0
2007 50% 56 0 0
2008 65% 4059 46 18
This guy is not found on many draft boards, but I guarantee you the NFL scouts know about him. He’s basically a one year wonder, but he did have a tremendous senior year. He’ll probably could be off the board as early as the 3rd because of his sensational senior year, or slip into rounds 4 thru 6 if his arm strength is lacking. I'm sure some NFL teams would be willing to gamble on a project like Johnson later in the draft.
Hunter Cantwell SR (6-4 236 24 yrs) Louisville
2005 69% 640 3 4
2006 64% 700 5 2
2007 57% 79 0 1
2008 59% 2493 16 16
I don’t think this guy will get drafted. Probably a priority undrafted free agent at best. Hunter’s numbers is not very impressive. He might have a shot at playing in the CFL. I guess he would have been better served transferring out to another college instead of sitting behind Brohm.
***
There you go AP fans your 2009 NFL draft eligible Quarterbacks. For those who need clarification the prospects name is below his picture with his status of being a Junior or Senior, along with that information is his height, weight, and current age.
Now its up to you to decide how the Chiefs fair when they select their Quarterback of the future (QBOTF). Alot of NFL people believe that the Chiefs will be selecting a QB this year we just don’t know in which round? In the eight years that Scott Pioli was VP of player personnel in New England they selected 5 QB's.
The QB's that I would like the Chiefs to select are:
1) Nathan Brown
2) Matt Stafford
3) Nate Davis
4) Graham Harrell.
(UPDATED)
Of course that's not in draft order as Stafford would go high in the 1st round, but rather the list is based according to who I would prefer over the other. So Nathan could be a bargain pick for us in round 3.
Here are more news clippings on Nathan Brown:
Nathan Brown Lights Up Scoreboard (via jpeepz)
If your wondering about some of the remarks I made about who in my opinion has a better chance of succeeding, opposed to those college QB’s who might have a greater probability of failing in the NFL, I refer you to a piece that I wrote a few months back, "What the Chiefs should be looking for in their QB of the Future." I recommend that you read this previous post otherwise half of the points I mentioned in this piece will be misunderstood.
In both posts you’ll see that the odds are better with the Seniors Quarterbacks overall, epecially if the players have 2 to 3 years of starting experience for their respective programs depending on what year they declared for the NFL. The Junior Quarterback can perform well enough in the NFL if they have a minimum of at least 3 years starting experience at college, but the probablility of the Senior QB doing well is a lot higher for them to achieve Super Star status in the NFL. The college QB on the other hand who had basically one tremendous year whether he was a Junior or Senior will suffer from not having enough game experience. These raw QB prospects also will no longer have the benefit of the World League to perfect their skills. Brad Johnson, Kurt Warner, and Jake Delhomme were all beneficiaries of the World League. (UPDATED)
Look at the numbers, and decide for yourself if there is at least a relation to those QB's who are successful in the NFL, oppose to those who were highly rated out of college, but are no longer in the league. The model shows that the graduating QB’s who are Seniors with at least 2 years of starting experience along with the Junior QB's who have 3 full years of experience have a far greater probability of achieving longevity in the NFL.
I researched further into my assumption to see if I had any misleading points in the theory. What I did find was information that was quite astonishing. I present the names of past QB's who not only supported my model of graduating Seniors, but exceeded the minimum of 2 years starting experience and had gone on to have successful careers in the NFL. If you look at the names you will notice that not only did they do well in the league, but they had reached a level of excellence that would one day have them on the ballot for Canton if they are not already enshrined.
Graduating Senior Quarterbacks
Who have had at least 2 years of starting experience in their college programs:
Steve McNair (Sr.) 3 yr starter Alcorn St.
Doug Williams (Sr.) 3 yr starter Grambling
Jim Kelly (Sr.) 3 yrs starter
John Elway (Sr.) 4yr starter
Dan Marino (Sr.) 3yr starter
Brett Favre (Sr.) 4 yr starter So.Miss,
Troy Aikman (Sr.) 2 yr starter
If you look at the names, not only did these QB's have success in the NFL, but its an impressive list of Super Bowl quarterbacks.
I'll go on further with another list of Quarterbacks who are also enjoying a reasonable amount of success. All are Seniors who graduated from college. Another interesting observation is that all the names listed with the exception of Cutler & Gerrard, were all playing in the playoffs.
Active class of graduating Seniors playing in the NFL
Jay Cutler (Sr.) 4 yr starter
Joe Flacco (Sr.) 2yr starter Delaware
Matt Ryan (Sr.) 2yr starter
Jake Delhomme (Sr.) 4yr starter Louisiana-Lafayette
Peyton Manning (Sr.) 4yr starter
Phillip Rivers (Sr.) 4yr starter
Eli Manning (Sr.) 3yr starter
Donovan McNabb (Sr.) 4 yr starter
David Gerrard (SR.) 4 yr starter East Carolina
So you can see for yourself that the level of competition of being in a major conference or a Division II program does not actually hamper the chances for success in the NFL. Provided the college QB has the intangibles of being a true NFL signal caller, and falls into the categories of being a graduating senior with a minimum of 2 years starting experience from their school. The SR QB statistics should also show improvement throughout his collegiate career in order for it to be factored in as part of the equation for grading him.
Could it be a mere coincidence that all were graduating seniors, or is there another common bond that would link these QB’s success? Could it be that they all ended up on good teams in the NFL that’s why they are doing well, or could it be that their QB play has reached a point that they can elevate their team into performing better. I give Dan Marino as my example of how a QB alone can elevate the performance of a team. In Dan's 17 years in the NFL, Marino only had one running back rush for 1000yds in his 17 years, and a defense who ranked in the top 10 in only 4 out of the 17 years. Yet was still able to achieve a 147 wins to 95 loses throughout his career. Marino also was able to make the playoffs 10 times with the Dolphins. Since 2000 after Dan Marino's retirement the Dolphins win/ loss record was meager 72-72.
When the NFL first allowed Juniors into the league.
Since 1989 the NFL has allowed the Juniors to be draft eligible, and in that time we saw many high profile names labeled by the draft experts as can’t miss prospects. Unfortunately those same prospects have subsequently been relabeled by the NFL as Journeymen or flat out busts. That’s 20 years of material to examine and dissect to see if we have enough evidence to support, or dispute the assumption of success being higher for the Senior over the Junior QB with less than 3 years of experience.
Junior Quarterbacks taken in the draft with high expectations.
Here are the names of the Junior QB’s who declared early for the NFL forgoing their final year of eligibility. The list of Junior QB's were all taken in the first two rounds of the draft. Majority of which were all declared by the NFL scouts as can’t miss prospects coming out of college. The players listed in Bold are no longer in the NFL, and the names in Italics are the QB’s currently in the league but struggling:
Michael Vick (Jr.) 2 yr starter
Jamarcus Russell (Jr.) 2 yr starter
Vince Young (Jr.) 2 1/2 yr starter
Tim Couch (Jr.) 2 yr starter
Alex Smith (Jr.) 2 yr starter
Quincy Carter (Jr.) 2 1/2 yr starter (due to injury his JR yr)
Jeff George (Jr.) 2 yr starter
Andre Ware (Jr.) 1 yr starter
Timm Rosenbach (Jr.) 2 yr starter
Ryan Leaf (Jr.) 2yr starter
David Klingler (Jr.) 2 yr starter
Heath Shuler (Jr.) 1 yr starter
Trent Dilfer (Jr.) 2 1/2 yr starter
Drew Bledsoe (Jr.) 3yr starter Wash. St.
Ben Roethlisberger (Jr.) 3yr starter Miami (Ohio)
This list is shocking isn't it?
The only Juniors who were successful were the JR QB's that had 3 full years of starting experience like Drew Bledsoe, Ben Roethlisberger and Aaron Rodgers. Roethlisberger started for Miami (Ohio) for 3 years, but had also been with the program for 4 years because of his redshirt year in 2000. (UPDATED)
It is not impossible for the Junior QB to achieve a certain level of success in the NFL, but I would say what awaits him is not an easy task ahead. Any QB whether Junior or Senior would benefit from being able to mature behind an incumbent QB, but the question then is how long can a team wait if they have already invested millions of dollars on the prospect before they can expect results? It always falls on the bottom line that dictates the willingness and patience of a franchise to develop their QBOTF. You prefer the rookie QB to sit out his first year before taking the field full time.
So many QB’s are rushed into service because of the demand for quality QB's, and most importantly to see if they have what it takes to play in the NFL. The question that Owners and GM's need to ask themselves is, "How can you realistically expect a young QB prospect to succeed if not given the time to properly mature in dealing with adversity while still in college?" The pressure in the NFL is tremendous as is the shortness of people's ability to remain patient if the young QB struggles, just ask Vince Young.
The Senior Quarterbacks that failed to live up to expectations.
I admit the model is not full proof, and has some anomalies, but not enough to discredit the entire theory. There are QB’s I have found who meet the requirements of 2 yrs starting experience, and had also graduated from college. Yet we are still not able to perform on the NFL gridiron. These senior QB’s are Joey Harrington, Cade McNown, and David Carr.
I was confused on why they were not able to succeed when they meet all the requirements. So I asked questions like, was it the teams who drafted them that ruined their careers, or were they lacking in the other intangibles such as arm strength & leadership qualities? Or could it be as simple as being in the wrong place at the wrong time?
I will never know the answers to those questions. What is left is the fact that only 3 out of 18 seniors failed to live up to their draft status. Unlike the Junior QB who had only three of 15 doing well in the league. The probability that a Senior could thrive in the league is an 84% chance of success. Versus the Junior QB (all having 3 yrs of experience) who had the opposite effect of having an only 20% chance of success, and an 80% chance for failure. If I were a gambling man I would take an 84% chance of success on a Senior QB, than on a 20% chance of success with a Junior QB prospect. Especially if I'm dealing with millions of dollars invested by ownership, and the termination of my contract if I made the wrong choice.
The model is only a tool that could add clarity to an already confusing debate on which QB prospect is actually better, and who is more deserving to be labeled a genuine franchise QB. The model is a better form of making an educated choice in a difficult decision. I would rather make a calculated choice on a college QB to be my future leader of the team, than approaching the college prospect as a High RISK High Reward type candidate. As for me that's just another way of saying that I’m not sure, but I think its right?
Well there you go AP Fans, I only present the numbers and the argument to back up my theory. The decision is now up to you on who is actually a SAFER pick for us to make when the time comes for us to select our QBOTF. But then again the decision is not really ours to make. At least we will know ahead of time if our chances will be a favorable choice, or just a high risk candidate when his name is called in April. So all I can do now is hope that God will bless the decision makers to make the right choice.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.
12 recs |
119 comments
|
Comments
Damn
Great stuff here. I’m re-reading parts of it.
After reading this, I’d put a larger emphasis on Graham Harrell. I know the arm strength could be a problem, but he was able to make the throws in college why can’t he do it in the pros?
Also, on Nathan Brown…I didn’t know anything about him until I looked him up after the Chiefs supposedly talked to him at the Sr. Bowl. Wow. He has all the makings of a steal in the draft.
Matt Stafford’s numbers look good, but I think we can get a similar value later in the draft from someone like Brown.
As far as Josh Freeman goes, I’ve always been a fan. But not a big enough fan to take him on the first day like some (Kiper) are saying he’ll go.
Impressive work, aPacificChief. Lots of content in here to sift through.
by Joel Thorman on Feb 9, 2009 8:15 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Willie Tuitama
That’s HIV’s boy. He’s got solid numbers. With 2 great years it looks like he falls into the reasonable chance of success.
The Curtis Painter situation is strange. Last year at this time I was suggesting the Chiefs select him in the 2nd or 3rd round because he’s got solid numbers. I have no idea what happened.
by Joel Thorman on Feb 9, 2009 8:18 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
OH YEAH!
You take a weekend off to check out the Tucson Gem Show, you come back and Chiefs fans are talking about Tuitama. The beauty of Willie is that we can most likely get him in the 7th round or even as a free agent. He may not be able to come in on day one and light the league up but give him a year learning the ropes and he’ll ball. Low risk, high reward.
by HIV 2 Elway on Feb 9, 2009 2:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Low Risk, High Reward
seems to be Pioli’s modus operandi when drafting QB’s -
I still contend the Chiefs should have drafted Kevin O’Connell…when the Pats picked him, I was like “See? Somebody thinks he’ll be good…I mean, if a guy can make Jeff Webb look good, that’s sayin’ somethin’” =)
by PVChiefsfan on Feb 9, 2009 3:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt Willie will last past the 5th round, I have a feeling he'll be taken somewhere in round 4.
The guy looks to have too much talent to left until the 7th round. Go Pac10!
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 4:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I was surprised he didn't get an intive to the combine.
by HIV 2 Elway on Feb 9, 2009 6:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He didn't? That's a bunch of crap...
Willie more deserving than some of the other prospects. Dude you sure about that?
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 6:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
According to this he didn't...
http://www.nfldraftbible.com/Latest/2009_nfl_scouting_combine_invites.html
There was a post on here about combine invitees and he wasn’t on that one either.
by HIV 2 Elway on Feb 9, 2009 6:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
B..o..g...U..s!
Who the hell is Jason Boltus out of Hartwick? This dude gets an invite, but Tuitama gets snubbed?
Aaron Kampman also was not invited to the combine he’s not doing to bad.
Green Bay Packers selected him in the 5th round in 2002
Career highlights and awards
2x Pro Bowl selection (2006, 2007)
2x Second-team All-Pro selection (2006, 2007)
Selected NFL statistics
Tackles 416
Sacks 50.5
So the combine is nothing to being the true evaluator of college talent, kind of like the Senior Bowl.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 2:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
One thing about the combine...
Many NFL worthy players do not get invited simply because teams try to keep some guys a “secret”. This happens all the time to small school and D2 guys. Pro scouts come see them, realize they have a diamond in the rough and keep it quiet. That happened to a guy i played with, didn’t get invited to combine and everybody thought his chances of being drafted went down. He got drafted in the 5th rnd and will start at DT for the falcons next year. Its a bunch of smoke & mirrors/lies/politics who actually gets invited past the obvious 1st-3rd rnders. Which isn’t a bad thing, but worth noting.
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week."
by bigbe on Feb 12, 2009 2:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Same thing with Brian Johnston out of G. Webb...
He didn’t get invited and, judging from his pro-day numbers, would have lit up the other DE’s his size (except Ghloston and Long) in almost all the combine drills.
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week."
by bigbe on Feb 12, 2009 2:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting point....Could very well be,
but how would a team go about keeping a player from being invited to the combine?
Do teams submit a list of players that they would like to see perform at the combine?
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 12, 2009 9:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Great post
Football outsiders has a similar evaluation of QBs. They show that games started and completion % are the best tools for projecting success in college quarterbacks making the jump to the NFL. It is mentioned here. You have to scroll down to the bottom for this information.
Scouts expected players such as Kyle Boller (48 percent), Jim Druckenmiller (54 percent) and Ryan Leaf (54 percent) to suddenly figure out how to complete passes once they hit the NFL. It isn’t surprising that it didn’t happen. Having a high completion percentage (above 60 percent or so) is no guarantee of success, especially if it was done in a small number of games in a fluky system (Tim Couch being a strong example), but it is a prerequisite for it. Games started are important because the more film that exists of a player in game conditions, the easier it is to find weaknesses that might come out against different opponents or different schemes. When scouts don’t get sufficient information, they place too much weight on “measureables” and off-field workouts, and make mistakes like Couch (26 starters), Leaf (24 starts) or Akili Smith (19 starts).
More often the Sr quarterbacks have more games started and thus more film to evaluate them on, thus making total misses less likely.
The Lewin Career Forecast only applies to the first two rounds because it assumes that with enough game film to judge, scouts can accurate identify players who are “system quarterbacks” and will not succeed in the NFL, and those players appropriately fall on draft day (Colt Brennan being a good example from 2008).
The best evidence that this is one of the better ways to filter college QBs down is by the following statement.
From 1996-2005, the worst quarterback drafted in the top two rounds who had 37 or more college starts and a completion rate above 60 percent was Eli Manning. When the worst projection belongs to a quarterback who just led a two-minute drill to finish off a historic Super Bowl upset, that’s a good projection system.
When the guy with the lowest grade in your system of projected successful qbs is a superbowl winner then you just might have something.
I love the fact that there is beginning to be so much information showing that it is better to take the QBs that have started a long time and matured (SRs). This is my greatest worry about the guys projected in the top 5 and why I feel we should avoid them.
by tevans96 on Feb 9, 2009 8:21 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Yep
Posts like this remind why I think Pioli and Co. will be looking at a Nathan Brown or Nate Davis type. I just don’t see us going QB first.
Nice points, tevans.
by Joel Thorman on Feb 9, 2009 8:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I like Graham Harrell as well...
He has good numbers and from games that I saw (even the game against the Longhorns) I don’t think the arm strength would be a problem. I never heard or seen Nathan Brown play. From what is being said of him, he does sound like a steal and I hope that, even though Haley is looking for his coaching staff he’s also been going over what QB’s are out there in the draft and what could be the biggest steal. It might be Harrell or it might be Brown. We’ll find out draft day.
There's no hope with dope...
by chrisjo07 on Feb 9, 2009 8:24 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Senior Bowl...Hello?
Did you not watch the Senior Bowl? Graham Harrell’s arm strength looked horrible in that game. He is a product of Leach’s System a lot of short throws.
by JZChiefsfan on Feb 9, 2009 11:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
THe Senior Bowl
is one game. It’s also one game with 1 week of 1 a day practice. It’s also 1 game with 1 week of practive with 1 week f working with an entirely new team. It;s also 1 game with 1 week of practive, working with an entirely new team, and an entirely new coach.
It;s also 1 game, with 1 week of practive, an entirely new team, an entirely new coach, and an entirely new offensive and defensive system.
You really can’t watch that one game and draw any real conclusions from it. The scouts go to the senior bowl to watch the practices more than they go to watch the game. You can get some idea about a guys motor, ability to learn, and personal drive to play. You can also begin to see which guys are going to step up and try to lead,l and which guys are content to follow.
Other than watching practice (wich is limited in information gained) there really is no value to the outcome of the Sr. Bowl. I’d put it on par with the Pro Bowl in terms of evaluating players for what they do in the game.
The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw
by Texas Chief on Feb 9, 2009 3:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Senior Bowl
Yes I agree it is only one game and one week. But it is the first time that scouts can see a player in a pro system. Especially for QB’s who in college these days are always in the shotgun. This is just one game, but it takes a player out of the system that he is familiar with, throws him into the fire to test him against some of the best athletes college has to offer. I wasn’t putting as much emphasis on the SENIOR BOWL as I was talking sh*t on Graham Harrell. Harrell is a product of the system. He can’t even throw a 20 yard out. I totally agree with ChiefDJ below.
by JZChiefsfan on Feb 9, 2009 8:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The concerns I have about Harrell
A) The gimmicky Spread system at Texas Tech (which is even MORE gimmicky than most college spread systems).
B) The lack of arm strength is a huge concern. His arm is not just average, it is very nearly below average. Arm strength in the NFL is important because if you have to float passes around to get them down the field, they WILL get intercepted. Its not just about whether he can throw it 70 yards down field, but can he get the ball to the receivers with enough velocity that cornerbacks and safeties aren’t jumping routes all the time.
by ChiefDJ on Feb 9, 2009 7:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Round 3
Should be the earliest we start considering a QB. I like Tuitama (PAC-10!) and we could get him in the late rounds. QB is not our most pressing need right now.
by ArrowDread on Feb 9, 2009 8:36 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Curtis Painter
More troubling was Purdue’s win over Michigan last year with a backup than even the major dip in numbers and lack of wins.
Still as a 6th rounder, he might be a steal, especially if we keep this spread offense.
by Official Arrowhead Pride Parade on Feb 9, 2009 10:02 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Painter and the kid out of Clemson
would be good pickups.
Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.
by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 9, 2009 5:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You do, why do you think so?
Just interested to hear your opinion on the two college QB’s.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 6:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Painter and Harper
Painter has all the tools you are looking for with NFL caliber arm strength and above average accuracy, so everything else comes down to coaching. What has affected his performance more than anything is his release, which is slow. He won’t be a starter until he takes care of that, but he has a great football intelligence and mindset. When he has a chance to set his feet his accuracy is amazing. If he works with a QB coach for a year or so he will be a legitimate starter in this league.
Harper is a similar story, but the knock against him is that he only has two years of college QBing under his belt. He also has a long release, but it is smooth and just needs a couple of tweaks. He is also very football intelligent and managed to set 21 Clemson records in his first season off the bench (they have some good weapons though, something to keep in mind). I would take Painter before Harper based on arm-strength, since Harper is more of a Pennington style QB. His accuracy and efficiency is stunning, however, and his leadership and pocket presence are up there as well. In his first season off the bench he was voted a permanent captain by his teammates. Harper had a crap week of practice at the Senior Bowl, but the best pass of the week belonged to him, a deep route at that, and most of the gripes against him were that he didn’t “wow” anybody. Who cares. He was completing balls all over the place, and showed that he could be relied upon to find the last option if he needed to. I am hoping that Harper ends up ina situation like KC where he has a chance to compete right away to be the starter, because I think he has the right mindset to get it done, and unlike Painter (who has more overall potential) Harper doesn’t have as steep of a set of drawbacks to overcome.
Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.
by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 9, 2009 8:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Good points, and an interesting analysis on the two prospects.
Do you know what happened to Painter during his Senior year? How come his numbers had such a steep drop from the previous two years?
I think Painter has some interesting qualities to. Could be worth a look in the 7th round. Has any team ever taken two QB’s in the same draft?
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 6:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Painter has a lightning quick release??
You mighta read something there wrong, his problem is that his reads and progressions really slowed up in his senior year.
The guy runs out of the shotgun with quick slants like crazy, big guy, but raises some concerns if we don’t keep the spread to a degree
by Official Arrowhead Pride Parade on Feb 10, 2009 6:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Couldn't Painter be like another Purdue prospect who had slow progressions?
More Jim Everette like than a Drew Brees type?
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 6:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The slow release
came up in the Texas vs. the nation game, and may have had something to do with his shoulder, which I think was separated. But there is no doubt he wasn’t playing well enough even before the injury. As to the specific problem, form the outside looking in, it was the whole sheang. He made terrible decisions, his accuracy was all over the place…ugh. The oline looked terrible to me, but I didn’t look at any of them specifically, so I don’t know if it was injuries or what, but Painter wasn’t the first QB that had his shoulder separated behind that line….
Harper also had a shoulder injury, but he had his from earlier in the season.
Are you saying that Painter’s release looks lightning fast to you(guys)?? Cause from what I have seen he really needs to shorten it. I will say that the difference in his throws and throwing motion is night and day between being set and throwing on the move. I agree that playing out of the shotgun definitely is his good side.
Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.
by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 10, 2009 8:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
QB
Everytime i see article on college qbs going to the draft some how stafford is getting bashed which scares me if that guy slides down to number 3 we are going to have our hands tied and most likely select him I hope that is not the case I was not impressed with his bowl performance at all
by sexassassin on Feb 9, 2009 10:04 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I don't think we'll select him
His numbers translate similar to that of Nathan Brown and Nate Davis who can be found much later.
This post helped reaffirm my thought that the Chiefs won’t go QB #1 overall.
by Joel Thorman on Feb 9, 2009 10:07 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We concur...
New GM, new offensive/development minded HC, new DC, smells a LOT like trading down and late round qbs if at all.
by Official Arrowhead Pride Parade on Feb 9, 2009 10:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
On the flip side of that
Haley didn’t have success with a young QB. Leinart sat the bench while a veteran led them to the Super Bowl.
by Joel Thorman on Feb 9, 2009 10:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
All depends on the offense we run, and MORE IMPORTANTLY
what responsible goddamn personnel director do about our O-line, if we’re still a spread, go young, keep tyler, if we tighten down, get cassel(?) or at least someone who can call the x’s & o’s without turning it over.
by Official Arrowhead Pride Parade on Feb 9, 2009 10:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Normally new HC/GM = new QB
Isn’t it traditional thinking that when a team gets a new GM and a new HC that typically they go out and get their own guy at QB. Especially when supposedly you can’t pass on a Franchise QB when your drafting in the top 5 of the draft. Thank God that there are no QB’s worth taking in top 5 this year. IMO I think Stafford will go to the Lions, so the Chiefs definitely won’t go QB at #3. Plus with what primetime said, why not go after a Nathan Brown in a later round if he has similar value to Stafford. Pioli’s style does seem to be to take QB’s in the later rounds, but he has never been in a position before where he did not have a Franchise QB in place. Which is why if Stafford falls in the draft to us at #3 it proves to be a very scary scenario for the Chiefs b/c I think that we have dire needs elsewhere such as DE/LB and O-line.
by JZChiefsfan on Feb 9, 2009 12:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Qb
I agree 100% but their are a lot of people that still say kc cannot groom a franchise qb or draft a qb and make him a starter that kind of bugs me as well because I would like to have a qb i know who will show up on sunday like a brett or an eli or even a peyton . And i know this year for qb sucks but I just hope we get a every sunday starter who we dont have to change our entire game plan for because he cant take a snap under center its a major crutch .
by sexassassin on Feb 9, 2009 10:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not so sure that the QB crop is as bad as people make it out.
Who says its a weak class for QB’s? The scouts? We had a lot of 1st round busts because of scouts opinions.
I think that because the college prospects are not big names from major programs they are just simply overlooked. McNair, Doug Williams, Kurt Warner, Joe Flacco, came from small schools and were able to hang with the big boys.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 4:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Considering Pioli found Brady in R6 & Cassel in R7
there’s no need for us to waste our 1st pick on a QB (though I do like Stafford)
by KansasCityShuffle on Feb 9, 2009 12:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So if Stafford is the exact equivellent of Nathan Brown and Nate Davis
Why is he going in the top 3 and the other guys going in the 4th or 5th round?
It’s not all just about the numbers.
by ChiefDJ on Feb 9, 2009 7:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Could it be that Stafford played in the SEC?
While Brown and Davis came from smaller programs. The production was about the same when you compare the 3 QB’s together.
I wouldn’t say exact equivellent, because each QB would have their own strengths and weaknesses. I guess it depend mostly on who which QB would better fit the needs of that particular team selecting them.
I think also that NFL GM’s get a rock hard WOODY when a young QB has an absolute rock for an arm.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 9:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm trying to keep an open mind about all the QB options
Last year I shut down on Matt Ryan because I had the “we have bigger needs than QB” thinking and I think I was wrong about that (of course we won’t know for a couple years whether he just had a good rookie year or really is a good QB).
So I’m trying to keep an open mind about all the QB options out there, even some of the less popular ones.
I just want to continue to caution about falling in love with bargain QBs in the mid to late rounds because of the 1st round QB bust fear. Good QBs have been found throughout the draft, but as bad as the bust rate for 1st round QBs is, its MUCH greater for mid to late round QBs. So yes we might find a jewel in the middle rounds, but we could also be drafting a bust there instead of a Brandon Carr or Jared Allen as well.
It all comes down to what guy has the tools and abilities to not just be a bargain game manager, but REALLY has the potential to be the next franchise QB in the NFL.
by ChiefDJ on Feb 9, 2009 10:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Man.
I really think this is a dry year for QBs. I dont particulally think to highly of any of them, but nobody thought Tom Brady, or Matt Castle werew gonna be very good either. Then again thats why we got Mr. Pioli.
Toby J. Neal
by chiefs24 on Feb 9, 2009 10:24 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Also,
I think it would be in the Chiefs best intrest to go with a person like Castle, instead of one of these fellas.
Toby J. Neal
by chiefs24 on Feb 9, 2009 10:28 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Judging by Pioli's past history
He’ll probably go after a QB in the draft instead of one via FA.
by Joel Thorman on Feb 9, 2009 10:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We WILL draft a QB, somewhere, in the 2009 draft
I will be surprised if it is on the first day – a 3rd or 4th (or even later) seems more likely.
by PVChiefsfan on Feb 9, 2009 10:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude I hope your right about drafting a QB vs. taking a FA
Tried that done that with Carl. Need to try something different.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 6:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I dont know if i believe in castle
He has the most deadlyest offensive line recievers and a pretty good run game. We dont have a run game and we have a pretty weak line as it stands now. I think castle would get crushed but he will do alot better than any of these rookies would thats for sure.
by sexassassin on Feb 9, 2009 10:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This post was awesome but where's the O-line posts people?
We forget that Damion Macintosh is still our starting RT??
by Official Arrowhead Pride Parade on Feb 9, 2009 10:42 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I don't think it is far-fetched to predict that our #3 pick will be a Left Tackle
the new pick and Albert will fight it out for the starting LT spot – the loser will go to RT (unless Albert is the loser…in that case he might go to guard)
by PVChiefsfan on Feb 9, 2009 11:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If we go LT with our #3
down the road were going to have to let go of one of them and settle for a late day 1 pick. There will be no competition for LT, Albert will move there he’s more versatile than an of the O-Linemen in this draft. There’s no way in HELL we put all of Alberts talent at RG, you could find a solid right guard in the second and third rounds. Max Unger could be a legitimate RG. But drafting a LT is a little amateur for the likes of Scott Pioli.
by 808NaNz808 on Feb 9, 2009 12:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Why would we have to let one of them go down the road?
Albert wasn’t drafted too high for a RT’s position and a #3 pick on a LT obviously is about normal. 1st round book ends on on our o-line is what this franchise needs if we ever want to get back to the “glory days” of Tate & Roaf
by KansasCityShuffle on Feb 9, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tate=Tait
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 4:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We will pick the BPA at #3
If that is a Left Tackle, we will find a way to utilize both the new draftee and Albert in the best way possible
by PVChiefsfan on Feb 9, 2009 1:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
It also depends on which OT Pioli likes there. If its Smith of Bama, he’d be a perfect NFL RT anyway, and he will at the very least start out there, with the possibility of the two flipping down the road.
RT is an extremely valueable position in today’s NFL, more and more teams are trying to attack both edges equally, and gone are the days where you had one pass rushing DE and one bigger, run-stuffing DE. I think Curry is the most likely pick at #3, but if its not him, I bet we go OT.
by kcsno56 on Feb 10, 2009 10:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Im with you
If we dont go with Curry, then we go OT.
by Lvl.99 on Feb 11, 2009 2:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't agree with BPA
I don’t think it’s any more realistic than drafting purely on the basis of need. It’s more like a combination of BPA, Need, cap space impact and overall value (nb – Long-term!). I’m telling you guys, do not be surprised if we draft O-line or D-line. The probability is extremely high.
by Buck'O on Feb 10, 2009 3:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I like
Pat White in a late rd.
Young, dope & flashy.
by Young Ace on Feb 9, 2009 11:11 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
He's an ATHLETE
I hope if we pick him up that he goes to WR, playing him at QB may just leave us with a FIR (frequently Injured Reserved) player like Brodie. He might make some noise as a kick returner/wide receiver he could be the next Joshua Cribbs. The dudes athleticism is enough of a case for me, he’ll have somewhere to play in the NFL.
by 808NaNz808 on Feb 9, 2009 12:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Great post
States facts on all options. Instead of just cramming your Fav QB on everyone. Love to see this kind of post for our other positrions. Also like a later round QB, Brown, Davis, Tuitama? Like white maybe for all around player.
I like soup!!!
by toecutter on Feb 9, 2009 11:15 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Glad you enjoyed the post....it took a looong time to put together...
I thought that the theory would fall apart at several points of my research, but it was able to hold… thank goodness for that otherwise a lot of the work would have been for not.
I love the 3 QB’s you mentioned also, but I think Davis is being targeted by Jacksonville and might be gone early. Tuitama and Brown could be available for us at the top of the 3rd round, but I favor Brown the most because he’s the most unknown prospect. Willie has been in the National spot light a little more than Brown who was not as heavily scouted at C. Arkansas.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 5:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
we need a free agent post time to get the rumors started
I still believe someone in the kc organization reads this site everything we have all predicted has come true so lets get the free agent rumors started.
by sexassassin on Feb 9, 2009 11:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
!!???
I think Tuitama will fall to Free Agency, he’s worth a shot in training camp
by 808NaNz808 on Feb 9, 2009 12:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for this!
I can see us not drafting a QB at all. After complete renovation of our management, our QB’s have to be thinking to themselves about the opportunities at hand. Seeing a future for the Chiefs is a big, big deal for our players. This has not been the case for quite some time now. I think we will see players across the board step it up next year simply because of the expectations and support behind them. It’s a feeling of “we can be great” and “I can be a part of greatness”. I’m confident this is running through many of our players minds, as well as FA’s minds. It’s now a time where people want to be a part of the Chiefs. This is nothing short of a miracle after years of disappointment. Opportunity for greatness is overlooked by many AP fans, but I can assure you not by the players. Thanks again for this post.
"if our players are half as excited as I am right this moment then TonyG will win his first playoff game next season. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind."
by Chiefs_swagger on Feb 9, 2009 12:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Your welcome! and I'm glad you enjoyed the post.
For the sake of the sanity of the team I hope they do draft a QB this year. We need more competition for Thigpen. Don’t think that the other QB’s available in FA would offer something better than what Thigpen could do for us.
As Clark said when he was looking for a GM, we need a fresh set of eyes to evaluate our team from outside and not within the organization. We could turn that around and say that we could also use a fresh set of eyes from a rookie QB with youthful optimism.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 5:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
great post
If you don't feed your fish, they die.
by nayjevin on Feb 9, 2009 9:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
GREAT post
Very informative and well researched. It is nice to see people that actually do their homework.
KC Chiefs Football Blog
Go Chiefs!
by bigknoxy on Feb 9, 2009 12:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I've heard Nate Davis is a stud
Let’s go for it.
Call me Pacman...cuz I MAKE IT RAIN!
by mistamic on Feb 9, 2009 1:05 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Harrell is a bum
and was a product of a great college system. Please Pioli, just say no to Harrell.
by paratrooper on Feb 9, 2009 2:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I don’t see him as much of an upgrade over Thigpen. Neither one can play under center. Harrell has better accuracy, but less of an arm and less mobility. He just doesn’t seem like he has the upside we would want in a late round guy. I’d much rather have Brown.
Ten sacks in a season! For crying out loud that's what I used to average per game using DT in Techmo Bowl!
by KCporkchop on Feb 9, 2009 2:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
I think Harrell might be more of a gamble than Brown. Only because Graham has played in a major conference and was still not that highly regarded by the pro teams. Unlike Brown coming from a small school and was not as heavily targeted by the 32 while in college.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 5:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
the tide is turning
I can see exactly what chief swagger is talking about i can feel in the press and friends that i talk to the chiefs are slowing but surely is going to be the hot place to play and i cant wait till we get back to our winning ways. And i do see guys like pioli who will expect everyone to step up their game and take it to the next level .
by sexassassin on Feb 9, 2009 1:34 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Amazing Post - rec
This kind of information puts my mind at ease because it illustrates a couple of really important things. Spending the #3 pick in the draft on QB doesn’t make sense when we can get a similar caliber QB on the second day. It also demonstrates that there is enough value at QB in the later rounds to warrant moving in that direction rather than spending a fortune on a guy like Cassel. Not that either of those moves would be characteristic of Pioli, but this just demonstrates why one WOULD NOT go big on QB this off-season.
by Buck'O on Feb 9, 2009 3:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Right on....!!!
My sentiments exactly, why overpay for something that could be just as good later in the draft. Use the higher draft picks on the other positions that everybody else is gunning for.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 9, 2009 6:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not at all familiar with Brown at all
but I like that idea a lot. I would hope to get him later than 3d rd though. Is he a pro style qb? I remain very skeptical of the running style or wildcat style guys.
Feb 13!!
by kabrink on Feb 9, 2009 7:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
I think Brown is exactly the kind of value guy we can expect to see on the second day of the draft. He has all of the intangibles and he wouldn’t come in with the pressure of being expected to start right away. He brings enough to push Thigpen who is an otherwise serviceable QB in development. Remember, they’re trying to establish continuity. That means no rocking the boat if they don’t have to.
by Buck'O on Feb 10, 2009 3:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank YOU!
aPacificChief you did a helluva job researching and tabulating a lot of data, did it systematically and compiled a great argument. Thanks. After reading this post and everyone’s responses I am put much more at east about what we are going to do in the draft. I think (going with Pioli’s MO) we won’t be grabbing Stafford at #3 if he were there. Nor do I think (again going on our needs and Pioli’s MO) do we grab one till rounds 4 or lower. Why? Well again, Pioli’s MO. But also because when you look at the numbers as you have so eloquently laid out, and our needs, we can do better, get more bang for the buck, by getting a QB later. Low risk, high reward.
Brown, Painter, Davis, Tuitama, all seem like logical later round choices depending on who is the BPA at that pick. Curry, seems more like a logical #3 pick, or better yet, trading down and filling more holes with more picks.
In any event, thanks for the post and keep up the awesome job. And AP thanks for just being the shit! Cuz w/o you all, I’d get way too much work done towards my masters/teaching cred, and really who wants that to happen?
by Eastcoastransplant on Feb 9, 2009 8:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I have a few issues
In your “What the Chiefs Should Be Looking For” post, my original problem with the data was that it seems “Cherry Picked.” All of your examples prove your point very well. However, for me to be able to consider that data I would have to see EVERY QB picked each year with their College Stats (Class, Starting Seasons, school) and then make my judgment. I mean, I get what you’re getting at, I just need all the factors 1st.
On this article you left out a few guys that meet your criteria:
Wilson, Painter, Bomar, White, Brown and Harrell all meet 3+ years starting and are seniors. On the cusp are Tuitama (Sr., 2 years starting but got obvious playing time his 1st Two) and Brandstater (Sr., 2 yrs + 1 year w/ substantial playing time). Yet Stafford made your list as a Junior w/ 2 years + 1 substantial time year. I know you mentioned school being a factor but I didn’t see any info regarding schools on your 1st post or for everyone on this one (meaning your examples)
I’m sorry if anyone has already made these points or you’ve already refuted them because I haven’t read the other 55 comments yet…
I have to admit that I came into these 2 Posts a bit critical. I just remembered having a discussion with you and your argument had no corpus. It has just stuck w/ me that you made your case comparing Cassel to Thigpen w/ such comments as:
-“It also helps having Moss and Welker with a solid running option.” [Tony & Bowe were both in the top 10 w/ receptions]
-“…because a simple screen pass that turns out to 90 yard gain is also placed into the passing stats.” [Faulk (NE’s rec. RB) longest reception: 22yds, Morris’ Long: 42]
-when “What solid run option do they have?” was asked, you answered w/ “Sammy Morris (727yds) or Kevin Faulk (507 yds)” [SM + KF = 1,234yds; LJ + JC = 1,231 (Thiggy was our #2 rusher w/ 386 btw)]
-" Do you mean LJ measly 874 yards rushing is better?
Their in the playoffs, and were debating who will be our number 1 choice come draft day." [ Do I need to point this one out?]
-“Because most of Charles runs was on 3rd and long from draw plays. When teams were playing pass first.” [Jamaal Charles on 3rd and 8+
5carries for 72 yards (20% of his yardage, 7% of his carries)]
http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2009/1/2/707339/the-case-for-thigpen#11107812
I’m not trying to be a dick, man. But until proven otherwise, I gotta come into your data as if you were Mortensen right now…
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 1:26 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
There was nothing in his original post comparing Thigpen with Cassell
This was all about QB draft prospects and some good data on QBs that came out as Juniors vs QBs that came out as Seniors.
Personally I’m still not sold that failure is automatic for any QB that comes out as a Junior. This has nothing to do with Pacifics post, it was a very good one and the statistics are very real. However, is the bust ratio for Juniors REALLY that much worse than for QBs in general, which by itself is very high?
Most of the guys on that list had low completion%s in college (Ryan Leaf, Michael Vick) or were one year wonders that came out while they were hot (Vince Young), things that lead to failure in the NFL for ANY QB coming out regardless of whether they are a Junior or Senior.
And what it all comes down to is coaching. A good coach makes a good player. Most of the Juniors that were listed came out as high 1st round picks going to bad teams with bad coaches. In that sense, its no different than a big Senior QB going to a bad team and becoming a bust.
by ChiefDJ on Feb 10, 2009 6:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey DJ how come my entire post came out in a block quote format? ....wierd.
The Thigpen Cassel debate was not from these posts, but from further back. Something I guess he thought I left him hanging.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 7:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't buy it.....that coaching alone will make the QB
I think its the other way around….its the QB that makes the coach look like a genius.
Because Peyton Manning’s coach his first four years in the NFL was with Jim Mora (aka PLAYOFFS?).
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 7:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2009/1/2/707339/the-case-for-thigpen#11107812
Also, as I mentioned below, my argument had nothing to do w/ Jr’s accomplishments in the NFL. I only brought up that he bases his criteria and whole theory upon Jrs vs Srs… and then does the opposite w/ Stafford. I’m I the only one that finds that ironic?! Did I miss somewhere where he mentioned that Stafford is his exception rather than the rule?? Am I missing something?
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 3:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Are you having trouble following this line of thought?
Did I miss somewhere where he mentioned that Stafford is his exception rather than the rule?? Am I missing something?
why I favor Seniors Quarterbacks overall, and why I like players who have 2 to 3 years of starting experience for their respective programs DEPENDING on what year they declared for the NFL. The Junior Quarterback can perform well enough in the NFL if they have a minimum of at least 3 years starting experience at college, but its the Senior QB who have a higher chance of reaching Super Star status in the NFL.
I also listed Nate Davis from Ball St as another favorite. He to is a Junior QB with 3 years starting experience.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 3:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Again Full of Contradictions, Again Further Proving My Point.
The QB’s that I would like the Chiefs to select is based on the model of Senior over Junior, and total years started while at their respective college programs. They are:
1) Nathan Brown
2) Matt Stafford
3) Nate Davis
4) Graham Harrell.
Thank You again for making my argument. (once again thank you for also pointing out another one of your mistakes I missed cuz it’s hard to keep up)
So you say Brown is your #1 guy you want us to take. Cool. Fits your method. But then Stafford is #2 on your QB draft board. Does not meet your criteria. And you follow that up w/ Davis @ #3 who also does not fit your criteria. And then put another guy who DOES at the bottom of your list.
So you SAY you want the Kansas City Chiefs to select Matt Stafford AND Nate Davis, even though YOU claim they will be a servicable to Moderate NFL QB, over multiple other candidates (including Graham Harrel) that you say have the potential and/or should be “superstar” or elite (best chances@ least) NFL QB’s, based on YOUR very OWN formula?!
I mean come on man… you even rebuttle contradicting yourself. I mean you specifically say “Senior over Junior” yet only one Senior is over a Junior.
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 4:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe I'm confused
I thought the criteria was 3 years starting which Stafford and Nate Davis both have.
by Joel Thorman on Feb 10, 2009 4:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Read slowly for better comprehension.
I’m not going to bother explaining myself if you continue under this tunnel mentality o trying to prove a point that doesn’t exist.
For the last time, Stafford and Davis have 3 years starting experience. As does Bledsoe & Rodgers. Why use our 3rd pick on a player who would be good (which I believe Stafford could be). When we could use a 3rd round pick on a QB who could be equally good down the road?
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 4:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Look at your own writing again!
You say based on your Senior over Junior theory…. and Immediatly following do the opposite. Do you only read every other word or something?!
I get the 3 year thing!!!! You say “based on the model of SENIOR over JUNIOR…” and proceed to put TWO Juniors over a (technically multiple) senior with the same starting experience! You ALSO even said not based on DRAFT ORDER but your own preference…. WTF?! You just can’t take any critcism, you aren’t taking the point you’re just pissed I’m calling you out.
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 5:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I put two Juniors over the other prospects because the 3yr startering Juniors show consistent improvement over some of the Seniors.
I said Senior over Junior, not Senior “ONLY” over Junior.
You just can’t take any critcism, you aren’t taking the point you’re just pissed I’m calling you out.
I can take critcism when the reasoning is valid, not because you can’t understand the points that I have made.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 5:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
or when you just make it up as you go
You keep making up new things you said as you go when you never said them before. Then your whole basis is shot now. you might as well make it 3yrs playing time minimum w/ improvement then Sr over Jr as a tie breaker.
Then by your new standards you left out Bomar and White. Both Seniors w/ 3 years starting and improved each year. I guess this is why Harrel dropped below 2 juniors for you, huh? But maybe his lack of a passing yards, 7 less TD’s (and 7 fewer picks) his senior year is due to:
Texas Tech Rushing
2007- 246 ATT 771 YARDS 18 TD
2008- 317 ATT 1532 Yards 28 TD
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 6:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude .....its hopeless to try and explain things to you.
Bomars 56% completion percentage is not an improvement, and on White 1800 passing yards does not seem impressive to me. If you prefer them go ahead, but I wouldn’t support the Chiefs taking them to play QB for us.
If White wants to play WR for us I’d consider taking him, but not as a QB.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 6:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So then TIME isn't the answer!
"So what the heck is that attribute already?" It’s quite simple really, its PLAYING TIME!
So then explain what exactly you discovered?! The same thing as everyone else? What a break through! A QB who has more experience, who has gotten better since they were 18, and enters the draft more mature is likely to be a better player! Wow! I’ve never heard anyone mention how “he’s only a junior” or “he’s only started 1 year” or that “had he performed better his senior year compared to his junior he would have been drafted higher”!
I don’t know where I got the idea of Senior over Junior and a minimum 3 years starting only from….
based on the model of Senior over Junior
The NFL is littered with JR QB’s who have failed to live up to their labels of being a Franchise QB coming out of college.
and in case you missed it:
"So what the heck is that attribute already?" It’s quite simple really, its PLAYING TIME!
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 7:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude if you want to be recognized by the community contribute to its success.
Don’t just sit on your high horse and make comment after comment simply just to gain notoriety. Others who have brought up arguments had areas that needed to be resolved before both parties were able to come to a conclusion. With this exchange that doesn’t seem the case.
This exchange seems to be a lot more personal on your part, seriously where does all this hostility come from? It seems as if you have issue after issue, if its not one thing its another. Then you go into I’m not actually addressing the point. I admit I got lost with all the different points you are actually trying to make.
1st I need to put all the QB’s taken throughout the modern draft in order to put credibility to the argument.
2nd The RB situation with LJ, Charles vs. SM & KF
3rd Cassel vs Thigpen
4th The difference of the 1st post and the 2nd post and its points
5th The Senior vs Junior QB comparison and the so called contradicting parts.
6th Why did I use Marc Bulger, Tom Brady, Andrew Walter and Kyle Orton as examples which was from the first post, but did not include in the second post. Again I only went back 10 years, but started to notice that the QB being successful was majority Senior and not Junior. But I also did admit that the Junior could not be ruled out entirely if they presented the right tools to succeed.
7th I thought you only wanted Senior QB’s and not JR’s. Which is wrong, because I said they could succeed, although present a much higher risk to the team selecting them.
8th In the list of preferred QB’s two Juniors were present when I presumably wanted only SR’s, and that being contradictory to all my points.
I also did say, "Its not impossible for the Junior QB to achieve a certain level of success in the NFL, but I would say what awaits him is an extremely difficult task ahead.
9th On why Harrell was below two other Junior QB’s?
Here’s why I did that,
"The biggest question I have about this guy, is his arm strength? I believe the reason that he’s rated so low is because of his lack of velocity on his throws."
The two Junior QB’s ahead of him have better intangibles like having stronger arm.
10th So then explain what exactly you discovered?! The same thing as everyone else? What a break through!
Then why do teams still take guys like Akili Smith and others have guys like Sanchez rated so high if everybody knows that more playing experience helps.
11th "He performed better his senior year compared to his junior he would have been drafted higher"!
Improvement from SO, to JR, and SR does factor in to see if the player has improved. The statement was never on where the prospect deserved to be selected, I just projected it because that’s what the scouts are saying they might fall.
What we should be looking for is not only the statistics (just used as an indicator of progress), but the other qualities such has height, weight, 40 time, arm strength, leadership qualities, and poise under difficult circumstances. I used the numbers only to help prove a point of how the QB did in college and how its might translate to the pro game. I’m not saying its the one only rule for success of the college QB, or that all JR QB’s are predestined to fail.
I also admitted in the post that it is not fool proof, but best used as a tool along with other standard measuring criteria to better judge a young prospect.
If you disagree, hey your entitled to your opinion as does everyone here. I’ll leave it at that, I’ve got far better things to do with my time than to continue with such a fruitless exchange.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 11, 2009 5:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
*huff* I'm done.
1. No. I didn’t say at all. Just w/ in a standard frame. Not picked and chosen because they fit your point. I.E. give a bigger and/or better sample study. It’s like saying, “all M&M’s are blue” and then proving it by showing me only 6 blue M&M’s. (don’t try to argue w/ me that M&M’s are not blue now, it’s a metaphor)
2. For the Last time (and hundredth), that had nothing to do with anything besides showing false and misinterpreted information that you have presented in the past. The RB situation showed “facts” you brought in to make a point that was completely irrelevant to your case (and then I showed why they were irrelevant next to them). Had nothing to do with drafting quarterbacks.
3. Thigpen vs Cassel was only mentioned to show reference to the topic of the “RB situation.” Nothing more. (like I said before) So you would know where to reference the information.
4. You say one thing in your first post and a couple more things in your second, which I didn’t have a problem with, until you started to bring contradicting arguments and claims for your reasoning behind certain thoughts when you were debating with me. When I showed a discrepancy, you brought in a new claim/standard that wasn’t there before.
5,8 & 9 I don’t see how you don’t understand the reasoning by now. You blatantly say Senior over Junior and how the NFL is riddled w/ “JR” busts, but then show that YOU prefer 2 juniors over a (and others) senior. I already showed you your statements. I was only going by what your theory claimed.
11. again, you are taking something out of context. I never said that you made those (3) statements. They were showing how those statements are practically a draft cliche. And that they’re new analyzing standards you use that had nothing to do with this “playing time” and “Sr. vs Jr.” theory you have originally.
Like I keep saying. You said you have a “new” theory on projected busts and superstars based on, originally at least, 3 years playing time and entering the draft as a Senior rather than underclassman. (You also later mentioned in this ‘fan post’ that you like players (seniors) w/ 2-3 years playing experience, which only broadens the availability of such players.)
The only Junior QB’s who had a reasonable amount of success were Drew Bledsoe, Trent Dilfer and Aaron Rodgers.
I favor Seniors Quarterbacks overall, and why I like players who have 2 to 3 years of starting experience for their respective programs depending on what year they declared for the NFL.
Again and again, you keep take this entire debate off topic because you keep taking statements out of context and responding w/ rebuttals that have nothing to do with the original point or reason the information or statement was presented. Every time I try to bring you back and you turn around and do it again. I’m done. There is no getting to you. I have taking your point everytime, the only problem is every point you keep making in reply is irrelevant. And if you do make a claim that is close to the topic, it is completely new and was not originally in your “theory” or argument before.
My issues w/ this theory are:
1. Bigger/Better sample study. If it better supports your argument, cool.
2. Clearly define your criteria/standards and stick by it. If your theory is that Senior QB’s w/ 2-3 years playing experience tend not to be busts and do tend to be superstars then use that and stick with it. You said TIME is the answer. The one common factor. Prove it.
3. You prefer Seniors w/ 2-3 years exp over juniors. You say juniors can be serviceable if they started for at least 3 years. You then rated 2 junior QB’s with 3 years of experience over 8 senior QB’s with 2-3 years experience. How is that NOT contradicting?
I don’t care about all the other points. Stop arguing them. All I ask is that you address these 3 issues.
(God I have wasted WAY too much time on this shit!)
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 11, 2009 1:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Whether your convinced or not is really none of my concern.
my original problem with the data was that it seems "Cherry Picked." All of your examples prove your point very well. However, for me to be able to consider that data I would have to see EVERY QB picked each year with their College StatsI figure since your on AP you have access to the internet. If you want further information by all means go on and research it for yourself. If you find something that refutes my argument by all means bring it up for debate, but for you to say that you need more information from me to present so you can be convinced just strikes me as just being too lazy to do the work yourself. I’m not your mother who’s gonna go back step by step until you understand my points.
Cherry Picked? I chose to purposefully highlight the QB’s who were selected in the first two rounds of the draft, and not the other QB’s selected through all seven rounds. The reason why I structured my argument in such a way was to emphasis that teams would scrutinize those QB prospects more thoroughly than the other QB’s taken elsewhere in the draft. Hence the theory that the team drafting a QB in the first two rounds would expect to get it right on the prospect otherwise why invest a high round pick.
In my 1st post I went back only 10 years, this last piece I went back further on when the NFL first allowed Juniors into the league. The reason why I expanded my theory was the further I went back in history I started to notice that Junior QB’s were not actually reaching super star status, but seemed to be just good enough not great.
Wilson, Painter, Bomar, White, Brown and Harrell all meet 3+ years starting and are seniors. On the cusp are Tuitama (Sr., 2 years starting but got obvious playing time his 1st Two) and Brandstater (Sr., 2 yrs + 1 year w/ substantial playing time). Yet Stafford made your list as a Junior w/ 2 years + 1 substantial time year. I know you mentioned school being a factor but I didn’t see any info regarding schools on your 1st post or for everyone on this one (meaning your examples)This is what happens when people don’t take the time to read the entire post thoroughly.
As you can see I’ve addressed your area’s of question with these entries:In both posts you’ll see why I favor Seniors Quarterbacks overall, and why I like players who have 2 to 3 years of starting experience for their respective programs depending on what year they declared for the NFL. The Junior Quarterback can perform well enough in the NFL if they have a minimum of at least 3 years starting experience at college, but its the Senior QB who have a higher chance of reaching Super Star status in the NFL.
So you can see for yourself that the level of competition of being in a major conference or a Division II program does not actually hamper the chances for success in the NFL. Provided the college QB has the intangibles of being a true NFL signal caller, and falls into the categories of being a graduating senior with the minimum of 2 years starting experience from their school.
Also, Tuitama & Nathan Brown were 4 year starters for their programs and are both graduating Seniors. Not 2 year starters with significant playing time their freshman and sophomore years.
I have to admit that I came into these 2 Posts a bit critical. I just remembered having a discussion with you and your argument had no corpus.I think the critism was more based on the previous debate than on these current posts.
-"It also helps having Moss and Welker with a solid running option."
-"What solid run option do they have?"
-"Sammy Morris (727yds) or Kevin Faulk (507 yds)"I never knew that the debate continued? I continued on other further posts. I’m not even sure what your trying to point out with this line of thought? Because I said a solid ( meaning a good to average) threat, not a dominate running game.
My point was that NE was 11-5 and had a shot at the playoffs while were a lowly 2-14. I also found with my research on QB’s, another interesting observation on the fallacy of needing a 1000yard rusher to advance deep into the playoffs, and thereby giving the team a better chance of winning the Super Bowl. Because teams without a 1000yd rusher won the Super Bowl 7 times.
Here’s the list of Super Bowl teams who won the Lombardi without a 1000yd rusher:
1969 Chief
Garret 734 yards 4.4 avg
Holmes 612 yds 4.1 avg
McVea 500 yds 4.7 avg1988 Redskins
Rogers 613 yds 3.8 avg
Vital 346 yds 4.3 avg
Bryant 406 yds 5.3 avg1991 Giants
Anderson 784 yds 3.5 avg
Hampton 455 yds 4.2 avg1995 49ners
Waters 877 yds 3.7 avg
Floyd 305 yds 3.5 avg1997 Packers
Bennett 899 yds 4.0 avg
Levens 566 yds 4.7 avg2003 Buccaneers
Pittman 718 yds 3.5 avg
Alstott 548 yds 3.8 avg2004 Patriots
Smith 642 yds 3.5 avg
Faulk 638 yds 3.6 avg
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 7:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And unlike Mort.... I base my argument with facts...not sensational headlines
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 7:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
wow man...
Let me start by saying that there are so many things wrong with your reply that I know Im gonna miss a few things.
Now you ARE being the dick. And I love that you think you need to hold my hand through YOUR points, yet your entire reply had nothing to do with mine.
My point also had nothing to do with laziness. As I said, you made good points that reinforced your theory (and I did already read the section you suggested). YOU are the one bringing out your new “theory” of analyzing QB prospects, mom. If you wanted to make your analysis more reputable, then YOU should have shown a list of all QB’s (through a given period) that met your criteria. Not just the ones that you felt proved your point. That’s what I was saying.
I chose to purposefully highlight the QB’s who were selected in the first two rounds of the draft, and not the other QB’s selected through all seven rounds.
Yet you used Marc Bulger, Tom Brady, Andruw Walter and Kyle Orton in “What the Chiefs…” post.
I said nothing about juniors other than the fact, as you stated again, you say they don’t meet your ultimate criteria. Yet you listed Stafford in your top 4 QB’s (as your #2 guy). That was my only point. Nothing Else regarding Jrs. The other point was there were other SENIORS that met your criteria but were omitted in your preferences (which in itself completely goes against your own theory). Sorry that I mentioned schools. I thought that was included in your analysis based on post #1 in your first paragraph after the intro. If school has nothing to do w/ your analysis than by all means leave it out (i would actually agree).
Don’t know much about Tuitama or Brown. Sorry. But it also proves my point further then.
In regards to my being critical comment: Yes. It had EVERYTHING to do w/ the Thiggy vs Cassel comments. That was my point of why I was critical BEFORE reading these 2 posts. Okay… Good job though, you were close to getting that one. Just didn’t quite make it.
I got the point of Solid and not dominate (had nothing to do w/ my point again). Yet you used those as examples for NE being more efficient than KC in those areas. And as I stated and showed, you were completely wrong. You also did not say anything about being contenders for the playoffs. You said:
Their in the playoffs, and were debating who will be our number 1 choice come draft day.
I understand you were also just making another observation w/ superbowl team stats but it had nothing to do with anything I’ve said, again.
You are just further proving to me your inability to comprehend and analyze data. Therefor reinforcing my opinion.
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Son..... don't you know its not good to talk to your mother like that?
Yet you used Marc Bulger, Tom Brady, Andruw Walter and Kyle Orton in "What the Chiefs…" post.
I said nothing about juniors other than the fact, as you stated again, you say they don’t meet your ultimate criteria.During my first post I was looking at just starting experience, and not whether if they were Junior or Senior QB’s. It was later when I did further research did I notice that Juniors were not doing to well as compared to Seniors.
In my 1st post I went back only 10 years, this last piece I went back further on when the NFL first allowed Juniors into the league. The reason why I expanded my theory was the further I went back in history I started to notice that Junior QB’s were not actually reaching super star status, but seemed to be just good enough not great.On Stafford, I listed him because I still think he has a chance to become something in the NFL. My point on why I place Brown ahead of him was that we could get similiar value without having to risk using our 3rd pick.
Yes. It had EVERYTHING to do w/ the Thiggy vs Cassel comments.How? Because my two posts was based on starting experience not just potential. Thigpen started for 2 1/2 years in college, while Cassel only backed up during his entire career at USC and NE.
Yet you used those as examples for NE being more efficient than KC in those areas.Is that what all this is about? Being more efficient? My point wasen’t meant that NE was more efficient than KC when it came to running, but more that they at least were consistent in threatening the opponents with a more balanced attack. KC on the other hand had more difficulty running in the 3rd and 4th QTRs when we couldn’t consistently pass the ball, I could be wrong about that but that’s what I meant.
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 3:46 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
What the crap is wrong with the block qoutes?
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 3:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The whole thing has been block quoted
If you take the first
and the lastit should work. It’s a little screwy sometimes.
by Joel Thorman on Feb 10, 2009 3:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Whoops
Meant to say more. Take off the first (blockquote) and the last (blockquote) and you should be good. It’s a little screwy sometimes.
by Joel Thorman on Feb 10, 2009 3:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But I didn't have a block qoute on the last parts of the post?
Why then did it block qoute the entire post?
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 4:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you got to check if you use multiple block quotes
I noticed if I block quote 2x, it automatically put one at the end for some reason. So just delete it.
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 5:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
OH MY God!
(each number referring to quote and answer)
1. I used those examples of your statement regarding ONLY using 1st TWO round draft choices. Also in this VERY piece you advise us to refer to your previous post. I then am only going to take what you say between both and put them together, since you used them both to explain your point. *Though that had nothing to do with the Jr vs Sr analysis but only the fact that you said FIRST TWO ROUNDS. Even walking you through doesn’t help.
2. So Stafford IS the exception to your rule. You think he has a “chance” even though he doesn’t fit into your theory. You just have a hunch.
3. NO. Because, AGAIN, the entire reason I used the TT vs MC debate was to prove WHY I was critical of your thought process AND credibility based on my 1st impression of you. It had nothing to do w/ using Thigpen OR Cassel in this formula. Got It?!
4. NO!!!!! You used piss poor examples and made up your own facts (the 90yd screen passes and Charles’ phantom 3rd down carries and yardage). For the 30th time those were examples of your lack of credibility in analyzing. That’s what it was all about. No doubt the Patriots had a more “balanced” team, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EITHER DISCUSSION.
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 4:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
this was supposed to be a reply
to your “son…. Im a woman” post.
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 4:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently were not on the same page here, because your points are not coherent, and are jumping from one topic to another.
OMG Exactly!!
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 10, 2009 5:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
because you keep doing it!
I keep trying to bring YOU back to my original intentions and you keep taking them to somewhere in Left Field w/ you. How many times do I have to prove what you reply is irrelevant? If you’d like I can go back and count.
FYI, my original criticism was that for you to make your criteria more credible, you would need to show all examples over a given case. And stick with it. If you want to take it from the last 10 years then you should show ALL QB’s for the last 10 years compared to your formula. If you want to just stick w/ 1st or 2nd round picks then do just 1st or 2nd round picks. Or both. Not just the ones that prove your case. That was it.
My second point in my original comment was explaining WHY i came into your post (in particular) more critical than I may have been with, say maybe ROC 27 or someone else, was because of my first impression with your analytical ability. And that’s why I showed the examples from Thiggy vs Cassel.
Every comment you leave i refute exactly, line-by-line. You make new claims and mistaken points every time. When you use my quotes you answer in completely wrong context. Go ahead, look at this very thread right here. I ask a question and you answer what you want. Is this Palin?!
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 10, 2009 6:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So
Dustin, why don’t you put away your hard on and write your own post then. We’d all be willing to read your own thoughts on what our Chiefs ought to do. We pretty much got it that you disagree with PacChief and it’s a pretty silly, circular argument at this point.
Feb 13!!
by kabrink on Feb 10, 2009 11:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Big Talk There...
And for the record, if it was possible for us to have this discussion between the 2 of us, I would. I was NOT, by any means, trying to call the guy out “publicly.” If PacChief had an E-mail shown on his profile, I would have done this that way.
by Dustin SLO,CA on Feb 11, 2009 12:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ha ha... you study numbers. Thats funny.
Let’s base our QBOTF on stats from college… lol
we have our QBOTF in Tyler Thigpen. It took McNabb, Brees, Favre, Elway, Montana, Palmer, Pennington, Brady (insert current good QB) 3 years to put up the numbers Thigpen put up this year…. essentially his first year considering he was on IR last year and he was on a horrible team with really only 2 offensive weapons. (bowe, gonz).
Cullen Harper will have the best career out of this class. His coach was a headcase and the whole team was effected for the worse. That’s why I laugh at you when you say you “studied his stats.”
by odendin on Feb 11, 2009 2:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
kid is a decent QB
but he can’t stay on the field for an entire game let alone season. I actually like Croyle and think he has a good upside. If he wasn’t so injury prone I would say he had a good shot at starting next year. Truth is i don’t think Pioli will trust his new toy in the hands of someone who can’t stay healthy.
by KCCheeze on Feb 17, 2009 7:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
John Parker Wilson, Matt Stafford, Pat White and Hunter Cantwell
Will be terrible, terrible NFL QBs.
Im stunned at the hype that Stafford gets. Its unreal. Kid is terrible.
im not impressed with your performance
by troy145 on Feb 14, 2009 1:58 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Curtis Painter
First of all let me tell everyone I am not a Curtis Painter fan…but as I recall his Junior season was pretty good at Purdue. Does anyone know what happened to him during his senior year? He fell off the radar screen.
To be the man you got to beat the man!!!!
by Major Tom on Feb 14, 2009 9:05 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
A dude from the AP community mentioned something about having a shoulder injury.
If that’s true, then his statistics would have been greatly affected by the injury. I think Painter might be a nice gamble in the 6th or 7th round. He did have great stats his Soph and Junior years.
Has any team ever drafted two QB’s in the same draft?
Opinions are like A--holes, everyones got one.
by aPacificChief on Feb 15, 2009 3:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
good points but i think we should start by getting rid of Larry Johnson
by the mawbster on Feb 14, 2009 1:21 PM CST reply actions 0 recs





































