Exactly.

Not one ****ing legitimate argument.

You ask these dipshits to provide it and then ask them to suggest who they think is worth the #1 if Geno isn't and they sink back into the slime pits from whence they came.

I wasn't impressed with Geno Saturday, but those stats are impressive. I have seen very little of his play and have been getting excited over him just from reports of people here.

Those stats speak for themselves though.

Baby Lee is right... at this time last year in most fans eyes RGIII was clearly number 2, and some people liked him better than Luck. I don't know why people keep saying differently. I really don't care what McShay had to say.

I don't think Geno is either of those guys. It infuriates people to say this for some reason... but I don't think he was quite as sharp once the Heisman spotlight went on him and teams started preparing for him better. That said, when he's on his accuracy is tremendous. Absolutely tremendous A+ top shelf. For that reason alone he's worth a high draft pick.

How about comparing Geno's career stats to the last two high profile three year starters at the QB position:

Geno Smith (career):

985/1461
67.4% completion
11,658 yards
8.0 ypa
98 TDs
21 Ints
153.7 QB rating

Andrew Luck (career):

713/1064
67.0% completion
9430 yards
8.9 ypa
82 TDs
22 Ints
162.8 rating

Robert Griffin (career)

800/1192
67.1% completion
10,366 yards
8.7 ypa
78 TDs
17 Ints
158.9 rating

My thought not to draft Geno Smith at number one isn't about Geno, but more about the player that we will bypass to draft him...and I don't want us to let him go. Star Lotulelei is above Geno Smith at his position. He's more of a game changer. I can handle rolling the dice with our high 2nd round pick on a QB, because I, like many, think that's the place in this particular draft to draft a QB. Maybe we can even move up and pick in the middle of the first round and pick Geno there. Can you imagine Star AND Geno? I can.

WTF, we're paying attention to what the hairdo says all of the sudden?

Kiper's never right about anything.

I already told you. I don't like the way he processes information. The gap between what he sees and how he reacts is too long and he's prone to shitting the bed under pressure. If someone were to put together a lowlight reel of him you'd clearly see this. I said the same thing about Quinn when he came out of college and everyone had him as a surefire NFL star. The hallmark of a QB isn't their arm, accuracy, leadership, or size. It's how they process and see information under pressure.

There any number of defenders with superior upside. The team does need a QB in the worst way. No argument here, but you have an entire draft to get one and if Andy Reid is head coach he'll definitely find one.

Akili Smith is an example of over-reaching for a position of need and having it blow up in your face. I think Geno would be far better than Akili, but you don't know if he'll be a world-beater or not until he gets in a system and plays. That's why I think Bruce Ariens would be a fantastic fit -- he develops around the QB position and does it with coaching that fits the strengths of the signal-caller.

At this time last year, I would bet people here has seen TEN TIMES the number of games of Robert Griffin than they have of Geno now.

This fanbase knew RG3 MUCH BETTER because he played in the Big 12.

So at the end of the day, the only objective comparison is to look at what guys like Kiper and McShay had to say. On their boards, he was NOT 2. He wasn't even TEN.

As for the "infuriates" comment, nobody gets infuriated when you put up a legit criticism like you just did there. What is infuriating is people repeating misinformation over and over.

Geno, Barkley, Wilson, and Bray will be gone by no. 10. You have to take a QB at no. 1.

Yeah, Andy Reid found so many QBs in Philly. :rolleyes:

Star is not better than Geno at his position.

You could even make a legitimate arguement that Ohio State's John Hankins is a better prospect at the same position as Starlite.

Star is dominant in one on one situations, but he's not an upfield penetrating type of defensive tackle in the mold of Glenn Dorsey or Ndamukong Suh. He'll hold a gap like a mofo though as he absolutely demands a double team. He will get frustrated and nullified by doubles though if there is a talented guard/center opposite him - something that he'll see every single game in the NFL. He's a very solid prospect and will end up being a very good NT in either a 34 or 43, but he's not an end (John Hankins is a bit more explosive than Lotulelei and fits that better though neither one is ideal in length for a five tech).

And, for the record, I've watched nearly every single game Star has played in in his career.

I don't know, I took on quite a bit of rage a few weeks ago suggesting that. He kind of fell off the Heisman train. Still though, I don't even need to see stats... college stats can be wonky anyway. Geno played this year in a conference that didn't play a lick of D against each other.

Either way, his accuracy is tremendous. I don't know why people keep comparing him to Luck, or Rodgers, or anyone. He's his own guy. Luck is a robot built to play QB, just flawless, and RGIII's athleticism is about 14 out of 10. But Geno has accuracy. When he's cooking he puts the ball on the money every time. He doesn't have to learn that. He just needs to be put in a position where he can succeed.

Some valid statements, though I think accuracy is more important than you do. Especially for the Chiefs. Teams stacked defenses because they knew we'd only go deep 1-2 times a game (if at all) because our game plans never asked that from our QBs because none of them could make the deep (defined as 15+ yards) throws. So they would play single-safety sets and 9 guys at the line knowing that even if their LBs had to drop into coverage they wouldn't have to drop far. Bringing someone like Geno in to exploit this kind of defense would make the Chiefs much more dynamic in all phases of the game. You want to protect against Geno's deeper throws and Jamaal Charles is going to eat you alive. Play against the run and I have no doubt that Geno could put the ball where it needs to be over the LBs.

WTF is this notion of an 'objective comparison?'

One side is skeptical of how convinced some are that Geno 'absolutely cannot miss, . . . .but if he does no big deal.'

Those convinced rebut with 'yeah, well people weren't sold on RGIII last year.'

'Yeah we were.'

'Well Kiper wasn't, and you don't count because you saw lots and lots of RGIII'

AGAIN, FTR, I'm not anti-Geno. I'm anti-failure to perform due diligence and cruise into the draft with this 'he's gonna be great, everyone else sucks, and it doesn't matter if he's a total bust because it's the gamble we HAVE TO take' attitude. That's just begging for him to be the next Akili Carr-Leaf.