Chiefs focused on Mahomes, McCaffrey, and Cunningham in RD1

[pugsnotdrugs19]

SEE POST #11 FIRST

... the word in the Chiefs building is that they would like to trade up for QB Patrick Mahomes or RB Christian McCaffrey in the first round. If this falls through, he said they like ILB Zach Cunningham a lot as well.

[RealSNR]

Oh, and this is my last comment.

Another draft strategy the Browns have tried a lot is when they get a top 5 or 10 pick in the 1st round and they need a QB, they trade DOWN and acquire lots of picks. It seems somewhat decent at first. If you have needs everywhere on the team, get some more spins at the wheel and try to find more quality players. It makes sense on paper.

But the Browns have used this strategy MULTIPLE times and whiffed on all of the times they've employed it.

What's interesting is that while they've diversified their QB strategies very well in that span, there is ONE QB draft strategy they seem to like more than the others. They tend to love the idea of trading down for picks, and then using picks to trade back into the first round to take the leftovers of the 1st rounders in a given QB draft class. That's how ALL THREE of their bust 1st round QBs were acquired in the last 8 years.

Guess what they haven't tried much of? Standing your ground when you get a high pick, and just ****ing drafting the best QB that comes to you with that selection.

They're the Browns, so I'm not saying that's going to be the solution to all of their problems. But it's something they haven't tried at all since Tim Couch. That's the only instance of them drafting a QB with a top 5 pick.

And the Browns have had PLENTY of top 5 picks since that 1999 draft.

Or, you know, they could also sign shitty free agent QBs and trade for backups like they've been doing for a long time as well. It hasn't been entirely all about the bust QBs.

[Chief Roundup]

I remember the SB commentators talking about how many players from the Browns were on the Patriots and Falcons rosters. I don't remember the number but it amazing at how many quality players the Browns did not, would not or could not retain.

[RunKC]

Terez Paylor just released his 3rd mock and mocked us Tyus Bowser. Love this kids game, but would still like Webb first.

My god if we take a pussy ass shrimp ILB like Zach Cunningham over a QB or edge rusher with the talent there, I think that's grounds for outrage.

Fortunately Dorsey isn't stupid.

[TEX]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

And Laz, I don't know how many ****ing times I have to pound this into your tiny brain.

The Browns suck enormous amounts of wastewater. That kind of franchise ineptitude isn't the result of drafting a few bust QBs every couple of years. That's the kind of ineptitude that's the result of just BAD ****ING DRAFTING.

Here's a list of all their 1st round picks in the past 8 years. Find for me all of the draft hits they've had.

Corey Coleman
Danny Shelton
Cameron Erving
Justin Gilbert
Johnny Manziel
Barkevious Mingo
Trent Richardson
Brandon Weeden
Phil Taylor
Joe Haden
Alex Mack
Joe Thomas
Brady Quinn
Kameron Wimbley

If the Browns could hit on 1/3 of those 1st rounders (and actually freaking keep them), they wouldn't be this ****ing terrible. Your sound strategy of building the team through the draft and getting the QB only when the time is right is only sound if you hit or at least don't bust on the majority of your 1st rounders. And you also have to draft well in the 2nd - 7th rounds, which, again, the Browns can't ****ing do.

In that span of bust QBs, the Browns have ALSO traded for a ton of backups, signed a bunch of free agents, and drafted their fair share of lottery ticket 4th-7th round QBs. They have tried ALL strategies of finding a QB.

They just ****ing suck. That's reality. They suck at EVERYTHING. They suck at drafting offense, defense. They suck at finding good head coaches, and they tend to fire guys who approach doing well. They suck at free agency. They suck at EVERYTHING.

That's why they suck. Not because they whiffed on a couple first round QBs. Do you REALLY think that if they did the responsible thing and drafted other positions besides QB with those whopping THREE 1st rounders in those 8 years that they'd be a rousing success story? Let's say they draft and HIT on those three picks with non-QB positions. Are you really telling me they'd be in the playoff hunt occasionally and be an otherwise respectable franchise?

Get the **** out with this, "HERP YOU WANNA DRAFT PROJECT QBS WHO BUST WELCOME TO CLEVELAND BROWNS TERRITORY CHIEFS FANS DERP"

It's ****ing stupid.

This is full of awesomeness!

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

If we bust on this one you'll want to draft another in 2 years.

Never stops, which is exactly what Cleveland does.

I want a great QB too. I just don't subscribe to the notion of drafting one high in the draft just because people are tired of not taking one.

Is there a big substantive difference between contintually drafting QBs and them turning out to be busts and continually trading for another team's backup and it ultimately being a bust?

Beyond regular season records and five playoff extra playoff appearances, there's not that much difference between KC and Cleveland, so....

[stumppy]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

Chiefs DL drafted between 1st-3rd rounds, 2001-2009

3. Eric Downing (2001)
1. Ryan Sims (2002)
2. Eddie Freeman (2002)
2. Junior Siavii (2004)
1. Tamba Hali (2006)
2. Turk McBride (2007)
3. Tank Tyler (2007)
1. Glenn Dorsey (2008)
1. Tyson Jackson (2009)
3. Alex Magee (2009)

BUT DON'T YOU ****ING DARE SPEND 2 HIGH PICKS IN THE SPAN OF 3 DRAFTS ON THE QB POSITION! DON'T YOU DARE!

That's about what I've been thinking too.

[Red Dawg]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

Is there a big substantive difference between contintually drafting QBs and them turning out to be busts and continually trading for another team's backup and it ultimately being a bust?

Beyond regular season records and five playoff extra playoff appearances, there's not that much difference between KC and Cleveland, so....

I have said the same many times. If you never win then title then your team is a loser. 47 years and no title is no better than and any other team that's in the same boat. Playoff games are worthless if you never break through and win a title even once.

We haven't won a home playoff game in we over 20 effing years and have been given numerous chances.

[Bewbies]

Man, they were 1-10 on those DL picks. That IS Browns bad.

[kcchiefsus]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

Oh, and this is my last comment.

Another draft strategy the Browns have tried a lot is when they get a top 5 or 10 pick in the 1st round and they need a QB, they trade DOWN and acquire lots of picks. It seems somewhat decent at first. If you have needs everywhere on the team, get some more spins at the wheel and try to find more quality players. It makes sense on paper.

But the Browns have used this strategy MULTIPLE times and whiffed on all of the times they've employed it.

What's interesting is that while they've diversified their QB strategies very well in that span, there is ONE QB draft strategy they seem to like more than the others. They tend to love the idea of trading down for picks, and then using picks to trade back into the first round to take the leftovers of the 1st rounders in a given QB draft class. That's how ALL THREE of their bust 1st round QBs were acquired in the last 8 years.

Guess what they haven't tried much of? Standing your ground when you get a high pick, and just ****ing drafting the best QB that comes to you with that selection.

They're the Browns, so I'm not saying that's going to be the solution to all of their problems. But it's something they haven't tried at all since Tim Couch. That's the only instance of them drafting a QB with a top 5 pick.

And the Browns have had PLENTY of top 5 picks since that 1999 draft.

Or, you know, they could also sign shitty free agent QBs and trade for backups like they've been doing for a long time as well. It hasn't been entirely all about the bust QBs.

Shitty free agents and trade for backups

That sounds familiar...

[kcchiefsus]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

If we bust on this one you'll want to draft another in 2 years.

Never stops, which is exactly what Cleveland does.

I want a great QB too. I just don't subscribe to the notion of drafting one high in the draft just because people are tired of not taking one.

You're the biggest ****ing reerun on here.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Doing it just to say you did it is perfectly viable and justified at this point, and is in fact a more valid argument than ANY opposing viewpoint on the subject.
There is no reason to wait until next year.
None at all.

[MahiMike]

Originally Posted by staylor26

If Webb is your guy, you take him at 27 so you have the 5th year option. **** having to trade up in the 2nd while only getting 4 years.

I don't get this logic. Who cares about controlling these guys. All that matters is getting the guy. If he turns out to be our savior, pay him.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by MahiMike

I don't get this logic. Who cares about controlling these guys. All that matters is getting the guy. If he turns out to be our savior, pay him.

The QB we have likely won't start for at least a year, maybe two. The benefit of drafting a QB is that rookie contract. You also don't want to be in a situation where you only have two years to decide on whether to give them a big second contract.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by MahiMike

I don't get this logic. Who cares about controlling these guys. All that matters is getting the guy. If he turns out to be our savior, pay him.

If you only have the 2nd rounder, you can end up like the Broncos did with Osweiler.

They ended up getting lucky and making the right call, because all the reports were that they were interested in giving him a multi-year deal worth 8-figures AAV and rolling with him as the starter... they just didn't anticipate he'd receive an offer as big as the Texans threw at him.

The fact that Elway wanted to keep him aboard as the starter means they thought he had it in him, but he didn't have enough time to evaluate if he was a TRUE starting QB in the longterm. It could have ended up burning Denver pretty hard if Osweiler was as good as Elway thought, or if they bit on the contract and he turned out like he did.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by MahiMike

I don't get this logic. Who cares about controlling these guys. All that matters is getting the guy. If he turns out to be our savior, pay him.

Then you might want to read up on the salary cap.

That extra year saves them like 15-ish million against the salary cap on a great QB for that 5th year.

Heck, nowadays it might save them 15 million for an above-average QB.


Not to mention that it gives you one more year to work with in case some injury or something messes with your evaluation time.