What a Difference a Year Makes


Last year Scott Pioli selected Tyson Jackson from LSU with the #3 pick in the NFL Draft. A pick that wasn't on anyone's radar unless the Chiefs traded down.

Fans where shocked.

And why shouldn't they be. Tyson Jackson was slotted by many NFL Draft experts to go anywhere from pic 12 to pic 15. Anyone that follows the draft knows that picking a player slotted that low at #3 is going to be called a "reach". And that is just what a lot of fans said.

What a difference a year makes.

After all the puzzled looks about taking a player that was slotted that low at the #3 position, a large number of Chiefs fans are clamoring for Scott Pioli to "reach" come this April.

2010 College Prospects

D. Williams
R. McClain
D. Bryant
T. Cody
projected 15-25 projected 11-15
projected 12-15
projected 20-42

*projections based on mock draft reviews and player projections.

Most everyone in Chiefs nation thinks Scott Pioli is a man with a plan. That plan directs his evaluation and selection of college players despite where someone else has "slotted" a particular player.

But what about the fans?

Often times fans appear to be just as erratic as the general managers they complain about. One year they want a player because the Chiefs are in great need at a particular position. Then the next year they state you can't "reach", you must take the best available player. So, which is it?

There would seem to be four prevailing philosophies out there.

  1. Draft the best available player.
  2. Draft for need.
  3. Draft for need when the player you like is a reach and draft the best available player when the player you like is the best available player.
  4. You don't have a philosophy but you will know the player when you see him. (aka my wife)

So what are fans supposed to think? Do you pass on game changing talent just because it is not a player of need?

2010 College Prospects

I. Suh
G. McCoy
R. Okung
Eric Berry
B. Bulaga
projected 1-5 projected 1-5
projected 1-5
projected 5-10
projected 5-10

*projections based on mock draft reviews and player projections.

The players above are all thought to be value picks. There has been some question about whether a safety should be taken at #5. But there is no doubt that Eric Berry has game changing talent.

Last year many fans wanted to reach for a verity of different players. They wanted what they considered, need. After the selection of Tyson Jackson some fans tried to justify the pick by stating...

The supposed deficiency of our offensive line is blown way out of preportion. In my mind, the addition of Mike Goff to RG will do wonders for us. He’s not a superstar player, but he’s a rock solid anchor for that position. He will drastically improve Rudy Niswangers play at Center.

AP member post

Now that Niswanger has a full year under his belt AND Goff and Waters surrounding him, I have a feeling he’s gonna do just fine.

AP member post

We probably all agree that the cornerstone of any of these philosophies is proper position evaluation.

The more one ponders the more it becomes evident that there are problems with holding any of the philosophies above. If you draft the best available player then you are simply selecting whomever falls to you. I don't know about you, but I don't like my GM being a reactionary manager. The proactive style always seemed to draw me more.

How affective is drafting with a reactionary style in the long run, anyway? It would seem that you end up with a hodgepodge of "best available players" with no continuity. Sounds like the Redskins to me.

The Redskins are filled with "best available players" (granted a lot of them were free agents) that have no cohesion. Where is the Mike Vrabel on the Redskins? Where is the Larry Foote? Where are the Tyson Jacksons? The players that hold it all together.

Drafting for need doesn't seem to be much better. If you draft for need you would seem to pass on a lot of game changing talent. I don't know what you think but it seems to me that game changing talent wins Super Bowls. You know, the mismatches. The, we can't handle that guy. The difference makers.

How many teams in the NFL have passed on a franchise quarterback because they thought they had a decent "game manager" and had other needs?

It would seem that each philosophy has its drawbacks.

So, do you go with value? Or do you go with need?

And will the answer be different next year?

Past Bewsaf Posts:

Last 4 Posts
Research Articles Satire/Other Player Evaluation

*A.P. Fanz Diagnosed with Mock Draft Orgasmic Disorder (satire)

*Critics Say You Don't Move Offensive Lineman In The NFL

*For the Ship with No Port, No Wind is Favorable

*Once Upon A Time - A Turn Around

*We Have Met the Enemy and He is Us

*Historical Draft Reactions of Three Floundering Teams

*Should Floundering Teams Shoot the Moon for a Franchise QB?

*Is Taking a QB in Rounds 2-4 the Answer?

*The Kansas City Chiefs are Taking Applications

*A Fans Letter to Clark Hunt (venting humor)

*A Chiefs Fan Obituary (satire)

*A Chiefs Dear John (rated R)

*What You Look For in an NFL Offensive Lineman - The Basics

*If You Can't Beat Them...Zone Them

*Breaking Down the O-Line - Season Review


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.