Gary A. Vasquez-US PRESSWIRE
From the FanPosts -Joel
If you ask a Chiefs fan, any Chiefs fan, about the Chiefs' biggest need this offseason every single one will tell you, "a new QB". It is the one thing Chiefs fans unanimously agree on. What we do not agree on, however, is who that QB should be.
The question of who the Chiefs' next QB should be is one of the biggest debates on Arrowhead Pride in the seven years I have been a member of this site. There are several reasons this debate is so important. First, it is obvious the level of quarterback play the Chiefs have received from Matt Cassel and Brady Quinn the past two years is unacceptable. Second, this team is built to win now. The AFC West is experiencing a down cycle, with the Broncos the only good team in the division. The Chiefs won the AFC West in 2010 and outside of the QB position the roster is one of the most talented in the NFL.
Third, and this get its own paragraph because it is most important, the Chiefs have the first overall pick in the NFL draft for the first time in franchise history. Of the approximately 400 draft hopefuls, the Chiefs could select any one of them. In a poll I conducted about a month ago, 48% of you want Geno Smith to be the Chiefs' next QB. There's nothing wrong with that view, he is generally regarded as the best QB prospect in this year's draft. Those of you who want Smith argue the Chiefs should take him first overall as it is the team's most pressing need. In a different draft, that would be a perfectly valid argument. However, that's not the case this year.
This year there is not QB worth taking first overall. Period. The quarterbacks this year just aren't any good, and what's more is that is a pretty unanimous feeling throughout the pundit world. In all of the various rankings lists of NFL prospects, there is no QB ranked in the top 10. In fact, the highest Geno Smith is ranked in any list in 13th. He is generally ranked in the high teens to the low 20's, if he is even ranked at all. Let's take a little tour around the internet, shall we?
Mel Kiper's big board is devoid of any QB's. Todd McShay ranks Smith 23rd, Barkley is not in his top 32. Scouts Inc. ranks Smith 23rd, Barkley is again not in the top 32. SI.com's Chris Burke has Smith 20th, Barkley 37th. NFL.com's Gil Brandt leaves both Smith and Barkley off his rankings. CBSSports.com (courtesy of NFLDraftScout.com) ranks Smith 14th and Barkley 19th. Draftcountdown.com has Smith 13th and Barkley 19th.
I'm not a football expert. I don't get paid to watch hours of film to evaluate players and come up with draft rankings. But that is the "experts" job and not one of them says Smith is even a top-10 player in this year's draft. In talking about who the Chiefs' next QB should be, shouldn't it mean something that most pundits don't see Smith as even a top-20 player?
I saw an argument on one of the comment threads for drafting a QB with the first pick. The argument went like this: drafting a non-QB first overall is like a man with a broken leg and a paper cut treating the paper cut first. It's an interesting argument, but here is my rebuttal: drafting Smith (or Barkley) first overall is like treating the broken leg with a band-aid. It's a misuse of resources.
I want to make clear that I have no problem with the Chiefs drafting Geno Smith or any other QB in this draft. I just have a problem if they do it first overall. If the Chiefs trade down or trade back into the first round to take a QB that would be fine. But the Chiefs have the opportunity to draft the very best player in this draft, be that Star Lotulelei, Luke Joeckel, Dee Milliner, or any of about a half dozen other prospects. Why waste that opportunity on the 23rd best player?
The Chiefs need better QB play, which (probably) means they need a new quarterback. But taking one first overall is wasting the pick.