From the FanPosts. Good stuff here. -Joel
First off, let me say: I don't honestly believe the Chiefs are absolutely sold on Cassel. Part gut instinct, part taking into account what has been said about the QB position over the last month... but I think they'll make an attempt to do something big. I think that might be RG3, but again, it's just a gut feeling.
That said...
If they do decide to roll into 2012 with Cassel as the QB, then I expect a similarly built team to what we had in 2010: a dynamic run game, and a tough defense. In 2010, the Chiefs ran nearly twice as many times as they passed, running 556 times and passing 274 times. This averaged out to about 35 runs per game. Jamaal can't do that alone. No way, not with his future uncertain after coming off a serious injury.
So the apparent goal, with Cassel, should be to run the ball better than anyone else. In today's NFL, that's becoming the exception to the rule, as more teams are moving away from this and becoming more and more pass oriented. If this is the route we are going to take, then we absolutely need to do this better than ANYONE else. Build a run game that is historically badass.
My opinion on how to do this? If Alabama RB Trent Richardson is there at 11/12, the Chiefs have to take him. At first I was just OK with the possibility of him landing in KC. Now I'm sold on it.
I know there is good value back in free agency. I know we can get a decent back later in the draft. But Richardson is a freak athlete, and solid all around RB. He's got a much higher ceiling than any other draft prospect or FA. If he were to split about 40 carries a game with Charles, the Chiefs could absolutely trample teams.
Just imagine it: Jamaal comes in for a series, averaging about 5-6 yards per carry. The defense is forced to chase a speedy, shifty back laterally. A lot. The next series, he gets a breather, and in comes Richardson. Richardson is a strong, abusive back. He would absolutely pound the snot out of teams, and gain positive yards while doing it. Plus he's quick. By the fourth quarter, defenses would be exhausted and beaten up after having to deal with these two all game. And the backs would be fresh.
Tell me that isn't a little intriguing to you.
Plus, Richardson would provide good insurance if Jamaal either isn't 100 percent, or he gets injured again. If we're a team built around the run, and our most dynamic back goes down again, we must have someone who can carry the full load. Richardson can do that. I know a lot of the other free agent RBs probably can too, but I think Richardson will be a more dynamic back in the long run, and a much better fit for our offense.
OK, so why do I think Richardson would be a better choice than any other available target this offseason? What separates him from the rest of the pack?
First, his pure athleticism. Standing at 5'11", weighing in at 224 pounds, he's a short, stout back. He's got that classic prototypical RB build that is similar to guys like Emmitt Smith and Earl Campbell. But his athletic advantage goes well beyond his build. His biggest asset is his strength. It's reported that he can "easily" squat 600 pounds, power cleans 365, and can bench 475. It's also reported that his Strength and Conditioning coach, Scott Cochran, knows he can lift more, but doesn't want to let him. His reasoning being "the last thing I need to do is mess this kid up". Consider all this for a quick moment. Richardson can apparently squat the equivalent weight of two Tyson Jacksons. He could bench press two Derrick Johnsons. That's freaking insane. He could be the strongest player in the NCAA, pound for pound.
It's not just his raw strength though. His weight room work translates to results on the field. He can make crazy 90 degree cuts and burst up the field, keeps a low center of gravity, and has a vicious stiff arm. The first tackler isn't likely to stop him. He breaks a lot of tackles. He falls forward, and can carry a pile of guys with him. He runs HARD. Admittedly, I only watched part of one Bama game this year, and it was the National Championship game, so for the most part I've only heard of Trent. So yesterday, I started looking up articles and videos about him (thus the reason for this post today). It's hard to find anything negative about the guy. All I can really say, is that if you haven't seen him run, watch these:
First, an appetizer:
I just like this clip due to the fact that he absolutely blows this would be "tackler" up with minimal effort. He makes it look too easy.
Up next, a Sports Science clip on him:
Pretty good stuff. Faster than 50 percent of current NFL starters. Exhibits great vision and awareness. On the field, in real time he was getting as low as Foster did wearing light pads in a lab. Not bad. This special makes it apparent that Trent's off the field work in the weight room is clearly translating into solid play on the field.
Finally, a four- minute highlight reel:
You see a lot of his ability here. Strength. Speed. Awareness. He can accelerate quickly through open holes. Has a great burst. He can cut. He moves laterally well and breaks up field with violence. He breaks tackles. Pretty much everything I said above. Trent is a phenomenal runner.
One other quick tidbit, which I was forced to look into after one of our own APers tried to make the point that bigger biceps means more fumbling. Guess how many fumbles Richardson has lost in his career? One. In 586 carries. And that lost fumble was 522 carries ago. He's just not known as a fumbler. And part of the reason why is apparent in his technique. Watching the last clip from above, you see he's damn good with his ball handling fundamentals. He does three things that makes it apparent he's conscious about taking care of the ball, and it just looks like second nature to him:
1. He carries the ball high and tight for the first 10 or so yards past the LoS (where most contact is to be had). His exhibition of this is really apparent in the last several runs in the clip.
2. He commonly uses both hands when approaching big contact. Meaning, when he's approaching more than one defender, he covers the ball. Good technique.
3. He moves the ball to different arms, away from defenders. Another classic move that you want to see a RB do.
These three things are nothing huge. Every NFL RB needs to be able to do these. But these combined with his fumble history really just kills the "bigger biceps = fumbles" argument. If nothing else, it looks like Trent holds the ball like a vise grip. His strength seems to be a huge asset in every aspect of his game.
All this said, there's a damn good chance that Richardson won't even be an option when Pioli is up to pick at 11/12. He's going to be a Combine prodigy, and his draft stock should go up. My hope is that if we really don't do anything to make a considerable move at QB, then Trent falls. It could happen. Like I said, the NFL is moving on to a pass oriented league. RBs seem to have slipped in value over the last 4-5 years. If we're going to go into 2012 with Cassel as the QB, then I'm 100 percent behind building the best run game possible.
If we're going to go against the grain of the current NFL, then let's do it full speed ahead, with not one, but two freak RBs that will strike fear into opposing defenses.
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 | 459 comments
nice research
I wouldn’t hate this pick… but, I’d probably go with Pead/Miller or someone later on… or BGE…
assuming DeCastro, Martin, or Reiff is available at our pick, I think they HAVE to take one of them.
stagdsp - February 16, 2012
I would not be upset with an OL pick.
But, as I’ve said before:
Pioli doesn’t have a track record of taking OL high in the draft. I know that goes both ways (I don’t think he’s ever taken a RB in the first)… BUT he has shown he’ll go after the BPA, and Richardson would fit that if he’s there at 11/12. Plus RB is a need this year. It makes sense.
But all in all, yeah, OL makes sense too.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Laurence Maroney in 06 and Logan Mankins in 05
Mankins was the 32nd pick and Maroney was the 21st
KSU-Chief - February 16, 2012
Mankins is his only high OL player he has drafted
After that the OL is all over the place.
His RB’s went Maroney then a 3rd, two 4th a 6th and two sevenths.
Not that any of that means anything but that is his history with NE.
KSU-Chief - February 16, 2012
Right.
The only thing we definitively know is that we don’t really know what Pioli will do.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
there ya go, man ... now that's the absolute truth of the matter
all of our talking and opinionating is just speculation and means nothing :-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Agreed.
And There’s a damn good chance he’s going to look like a genius no matter what (Berry, Moe, Dex, Asamoah, Lewis)(Baldwin, Hudson, Houston).
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
hopefully...
I’d be giddy with a draft that went something like:
Richardson, RB
Fleener, TE
Mitchell Schwartz, OT
Mike Brewster, C
Brandon Taylor, SS
IF they got a guy like Grubbs in FA, they’d be golden, maybe a Shaun Rogers/Soliai too
stagdsp - February 16, 2012
so, OL still gets addressed
but, you get 2 new playmakers on O, and good depth on D
stagdsp - February 16, 2012
we no getting Fleener with the Maneri move, you know that
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Maneri sucks
SCKSChief - February 16, 2012
aren't we DELIGHTED that's now a TE?
I know I am …
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Must use sarcasm font...please?
I fucking LOATHE that move. Why not waste a position that could be a difference maker so we can get a giant on the field…a giant who can’t figure out OL.
SCKSChief - February 16, 2012
Maneri has his uses
Definitely a better blocker then Pope.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
exactly
as a short yardage extra TE/OT, he’s fine
stagdsp - February 16, 2012
I actually think he'd be perfect in a man scheme for jumbo packages
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
I don't care how you slice it
Maneri’s uses do not make up for or counter act a need for a guy like Fleener. Ever. If Maneri being on the roster costs KC the opportunity to add a guy like Fleener that is just idiocy. You want a short yardage guy as an extra blocker? Use Richardson. If Pioli has any brains he will be replaced as a starter this season.
I just personally hate the idea of removing a truly skilled player from a roster because a guy who will not help the team outside of 3 snaps a game…if that…is “needed”.
SCKSChief - February 17, 2012
Blah blah blah
And he never drafted a safety high until he did
HIV 2 Elway - February 16, 2012
I guess you didnt read the part that said
“Not that any of that means anything but that is his history with NE.”
The conversation was about if he had EVER drafted a RB in the first. I just gave his history in NE. Glad you took that and made a blah blah blah comment on it… Well Done…
KSU-Chief - February 16, 2012
I'm assuming he'd be the BPA if we take him here?
What’s your plan of attack for the OL, go through free agency, 2nd round etc.
severn58 - February 16, 2012
Yep.
Best OL available with our 2nd, plus we need to get some talent in here via FA (I like Nicks, McKenzie and Demetrius Bell). If Cassel is it, then we have to bolster both our OL and RBs. Beef up the OL, get the best stable of backs we can. If we’re going to run, let’s run like no other team has before.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Ok, I'm ready now, let's do this shit!
The only thing that’d worry me is the talent available at OL in FA and later in the draft. I’ve been giving some thought to the possibility of Nicks playing RT. If he can, epicawesomesaucesupreme, and your plan makes perfect sense.
severn58 - February 16, 2012
Well looky there, he was nothing but a Tackle at Nebraska
http://www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=4&SPID=22&DB_OEM_ID=100&ATCLID=325005&Q_SEASON=2007
severn58 - February 16, 2012
For real, this isn't my first choice.
WE NEED A QB.
But for real, if we’re going to try to win by running, with Cassel, then let’s seriously set ourselves up to trample teams.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
if we're going with Cassel it's even MORE important to doubly improve the OLine
upamtn - February 16, 2012
And WR, and defense, and RB, and TE, and ST's
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
Yep, we have to become the 2001 Ravens.
Easy peasy, right? MUCH easier and less expensive than getting a franchise QB. More reliable, too, just look at how many times the Ravens repeated.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
yeah, add the cost of everything else we'd have to improve
compared to Peyton.
would be an interesting read.
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
Have some faith. It's not impossible to win the Superbowl with a Cassel-calibre QB.
It has happened 3 times in the last 46 years.
saskwatch - February 16, 2012
Cassel > Brad Johnson and Dilfer.
Who’s your third?
nateforchiefs - February 16, 2012
Maybe Rypien?
Although I might argue that Johnson and Dilfer are both better QB’s than Matt Cassel.
saskwatch - February 16, 2012
Whoopie! I can't wait!
Really. I can’t wait that long.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
ok, so we all agree that we need RG3 and Richardson and DeCastro ...
now, how do we make that happen? come on, people … time is running short here! ideas, we need ideas!!!
upamtn - February 16, 2012
I know quite a few ladies who work in the oldest profession in the world...
I bet we can get some leverage on these GM’s!!!
KSU-Chief - February 16, 2012
ok, great idea there ... that's a start! ;-)
anyone else? anyone?
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Ive got 3 pennies and a gum wrapper in my pocket?
TheScreenName - February 16, 2012
awesome! we can use those to trade up for Tampa Bay's first round pick ...
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Who the hell are you, MacGyver?
nateforchiefs - February 16, 2012
Funny, first thing that popped in my head was an old lesson about making a tilt-switch.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
We could trade HIV 2 Elway to the Turf Show Times...
MtHammer - February 16, 2012
If only.
That would be awesome sauce.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Channel the inner NE cheater
SCKSChief - February 16, 2012
If Richardson is there for us AND we could find a trade partner...
Who do you think would be willing to move up if at all to get him?
KSU-Chief - February 16, 2012
Lets all overvalue draft picks!
Then waste them on 1st round RBs!
ArrowDread - February 16, 2012
Totally agree...
RyFo18 - February 16, 2012
Or 1st round safeties!
SCKSChief - February 16, 2012
1st round DEs?
SCKSChief - February 16, 2012
I'm not opposed, much like Stag.
But if this pick were to happen and Pioli were to not have me planning his execution for years while DeCastro develops into an elite guard, he would need to get a great RT in the second round (Glenn, Osemele, Adams, Sanders) and then would have to grab Grubbs or Nicks in the FA. Then I would be absolutely and perfectly fine with the Richardson pick.
Thing is, and there’s no way around it, an RB is only as good as his O-line. Sticking Tom Brady, Walter Payton, and Jerry Rice all on the same team would be useless if we had a bunch of second-stringers up front. As much as we all love to watch the backs run fast and score touchdowns, or for QB’s to throw really far and for a receiver to make a big catch, the only way anything will get done is if you have a dominant O-line. Every single playoff team this year had a great-elite O-line.
Richardson is used to a huge, bruising Alabama line that averages like 320 pounds and can bulldoze any defensive line in the game, it’s gonna be a shock for him to go from that wall of beef to our collection of shrimps we call a line. Before we can get Trent, we have to bulk up and give him a little something to play with.
NigerianNightmare - February 16, 2012
amen, brother!
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Unless his name is Jamaal Charles.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Richardson is NOT Charles.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Never said he was.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
you clear implication with this entire post is that Trent Richardson can make almost anything happen because "he's just THAT good"
is he? is he really? if he gets stuck behind a crappy OLine in the NFL do you REALLY think he’s gonna make a Jamaal Charles impact? really?
we can get a RB anywhere, anytime … hell, if the OLine had been better even TJ could have run for another YPC and all of a sudden he’s awesome instead of horrible
upamtn - February 16, 2012
My clear implication is that I believe he's the best RB available this offseason.
That doesn’t equate to me believing that he’s going to be a rare back that averages 6 yards his career.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
if I may, please?
upamtn - February 16, 2012
I believe are key words there.
Yes, I BELIEVE that Trent has a higher ceiling than any other NCAA/FA RB available. I BELIEVE that Trent could make a huge impact for the Chiefs. If you don;t agree with that, fine, but considering I just layed out a 1000 word post detailing WHY I BELIEVE that, feel free to give me some details as to why you don’t.
And please try to be more original than “He hasn’t played an NFL snap”
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
my apologies, Sir
I believe that if we don’t get DeCastro and a 2nd Round RT we’re gonna be toast regardless of our RB or QB situation :-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
It's all good. Besides,
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
well played!
upamtn - February 16, 2012
lulz
Pacific Chief - February 16, 2012
There, I just rec'd your comment to make up for lambasting your post.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
perfect!
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Here's a link to the Iowa vs Oklahoma game
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmS0XmkMeJ0
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Whoops wrong reply.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Awesome.
Thanks. lol.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
my apologies, Sir
I believe that if we don’t get DeCastro and a 2nd Round RT we’re gonna be toast regardless of our RB or QB situation :-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
I believe that if we don’t get Nicks in FA and a 2nd Round RT
we’re gonna be toast regardless of our RB or QB situation :-)
jcox31mc - February 16, 2012
well, if we get DeCastro instead of Nicks ...
and he’d be easier to get, for sure … and a hella lot cheaper, too
upamtn - February 16, 2012
So you're just using a beloved name to get people's hopes and dreams going?
How very politician of you.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
No, I was specifically speaking about this specific comment:
In which case, yeah, Jamaal Charles is an exception. You’re much too far into my comment there.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
So your intent was just an offhand comment, no bearing on your OWN topic?
I hesitate to believe that.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Believe what you want.
No, I don’t think Trent is as good as Jamaal. Not even close.
Yes, it is a factual statement that Jamaal made this line look better than it is.
Take that however you want. Not sure I deserve being accused of lying though…
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Oh, please.
It’s not lying, it’s debating.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
is THAT what Mitt says?
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Only republicans lie
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
You just called me a politician.
Never known a politician that wasn’t a liar.
And whatever, it’s cool. But I seriously had no intention of putting Trent on the same pedestal as Jamaal. Sorry if you read it that way.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
No, Jamaal is not an exception.
Jamaal would be just like everyone else. Last year he had a line that fit him very well. Every single running back ever, from Jim Brown to Barry Sanders applies to that rule.
NigerianNightmare - February 16, 2012
I think Charles and Sanders are definitely exceptions.
When I watched that early 2010 game against Houston that we SHOULD have won (grumble grumble), it was so obvious that Houston was getting a ton of their rushing yards on the strength of their O line, and we were getting ours purely from our backs making moves and breaking tackles.
Charles was one rush away from breaking a 40-year-old record. He IS exceptional.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Barry Sanders ... oh my yes
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Probably Jim Brown, too, but I didn't see him play so I can't say.
Sanders was ridiculous. He could probably still outrush 90% of the backs playing today.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Barry Sanders is 43 years old
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
His son just enrolled into Stanford
Looks just like his dad on the field too
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
I don't think he quite has the top end speed.
but definitely as shifty
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
Shifty can get you a living in the NFL
See: Dexter McCluster
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Right...
As an Irish fan, I was none to happy about him going there. And you don’t have to have Barry speed to excel in the NFL either.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
Must remember Sanders in 2015
!
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
Well just look at it like this
Stanford as a school is about a thousand times better, not only that but Stanford has the beef up front to turn Sanders Jr. into an absolute college star.
As a USC fan I was equally pissed when Stanford grabbed offensive linemen like Peat & Murphy who were heavy Trojan leans.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Im curious to see how Stanford continues without Luck and Harbaugh
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
As long as they rely on the running game I think they'll be fine. The running game still reigns supreme in the College ranks.
Its what they did even when they had Luck/Harbaugh.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
I dunno, I watched the All-Amerian Bowl and the Junior seemed to be a much more powerful runner.
NigerianNightmare - February 16, 2012
My opinion stands.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Nor will he be around in the 3rd round
SCKSChief - February 16, 2012
Your point?
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Umm...that...he...won't be around in the...third...round...?
Richardson isn’t the same back as Charles. However, if he is a guy that teams want, the 1st round price will have to be paid.
SCKSChief - February 17, 2012
unless your charles, remember 2.7 ypc larry then charles comes in and its 6.3.
chad unit - February 16, 2012
Or Dex
Who averaged 4.5 with the line we have
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
Agreed.
Beef up the OL.
If we’re going to run the ball, we’ll need more than just another badass RB.
But at the same time, better QBs make their lines look better. The same can be said for RBs. guys like Charles and Peterson make their lines look better than they probably are. That said, we ca only benefit from an upgraded OL.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
I agree with this one hundred percent.
Richardson, as it stands right now, would be a commodity. In order to justify it, I think exactly what you stated (or some variation of it) needs to take place. Gotta get stouter up front.
That said, I’d love to have a team that game-planned around two running backs, similar to how Carolina operated the last handful of years.
Chris Sembower - February 16, 2012
If we don't draft him assuming he is available.
I hope we don’t end up regretting it. I would kick myself if we passed on Richardson and he turned into another Emmitt. I would not be against this but would really like to see us either pick up Nicks or a decent RT via free agency. Better yet both then I would be fully on board. Just the Chiefs interviewing Routt makes me think they may be a little more active this year in Free agency. I would love to see O-line addressed in Free agency. Draft Richardson round one. The top available LB round 2. The defense could have the rest of the picks unless we decide we need another TE.
GO CHIEFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Routerunner - February 16, 2012
Emmitt had the best run-blocking line of his time. No other line was even close.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
2003 Chiefs?
Probably not, but they were awful close. As were the 1984 Rams and 1978 Patriots. The deal with Dallas’ line then was that they were so damn gigantic. Even in today’s league they’d be top 3 in combined weight but in the early 90’s a 290 pounds guard was considered very big. The Cowboy’s already had guys like Larry Allen, Nate Newton and Erik Williams who were anywhere from 335 pounds to 400 pounds.
When it comes to run-blocking, pure size and strength beats out almost everything else.
NigerianNightmare - February 16, 2012
"Of his time."
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Whoops, gotta disagree with that last sentence.
I live in St. Joe, Missouri. I see multiple 350 pounders every day who have no business being anywhere near a football field.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
It may not be popular, but I have always said Emmitt Smith is the most overated NFL player in history.
He was good, but that line made him great. Barry Sanders would have ran for way more yards than Smith did behind that line.
saskwatch - February 16, 2012
Sanders would have been linsane behind that line.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Yep.
nateforchiefs - February 16, 2012
as NN said above, if we don't improve the OLine, dramatically, we could have Emmitt Smith ... and Adrian Peterson ... and Jim Brown hisself
and still not do anything
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Our line isn't THAT bad
Let’s not get carried away. They’re about an average NFL line.
Dex averaged 4.5 YPC behind them, and we were far from leading the league in sacks allowed.
There’s certainly room for improvement, but that last statement was completely ridiculous.
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
I don't care if he is the love child of Adrian Peterson and Barry Sanders
Todays NFL the run is used to set up the pass, and that’s about it. We had the #1 rushing offense in the land 2 years ago and all it did was get us blown out in the playoffs against a physical front 7. How you beat a physical front 7 is to spread them out with a verticle passing attack which we won’t have if this pick is used on a running back.
Plus as it’s been mentioned a gazillion times before, running backs are a dime a dozen and can be found anywhere through the draft.
craig in calgary - February 16, 2012
I don't think there's going to be anyone available at No 11 that helps us with a vertical passing game
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
Not at 11.
In my mind it’s used as leverage to move up to get RGIII, or down to get Foles and an additional 2nd round pick.
That’s how my top 2 scenarios play out.
craig in calgary - February 16, 2012
Where is Foles projected to go?
I see it with RG3, I just think outside of him and Luck, everyone else has a couple of years to go and that’s wasting valuable time in our ‘window’. JMO.
Maybe Maneri signals that we’re going to use more double TE sets, could possibly be to have more of a power running game. But that’s looking too much into a positional change of a guy that played as mnay snaps as Cassel had 20+ yard passes.
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
2nd maybe, or 3rd
last I heard
could always change, of course … guys move up, down, all around
upamtn - February 16, 2012
What's up with Tannehill sky-rocketing?
This years’ Ponder?
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
yeah ... but remember, just because on blogger (mocker/so-called expert) says so doesn't mean it's true
or that it will happen
upamtn - February 16, 2012
And even if it does happen.
It doesn’t mean it should.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
true
I think most teams’ boards are set before the combine, like they say all the time. The huge jumps leading up is these experts finding out more info on what teams boards really look like.
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
Especially at a position like QB.
What can you really learn about a QB at the Combine that you don’t already know other than maybe his real height and weight.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
jamaal wont be right
it’s a 2 yr injury, esp for a RB. get trent r. as insurance.
michaelaglover - February 16, 2012
So by that rationale we should be taking a safety in the first.
Since Berry’s injury was the same.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
No, tight end.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Tight end, albeit not in the first but in the early rounds.
Actually make a ton more sense to me than RB.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Interviews.
More important than every other part of the combine.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
agree
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
True.
But if a guy hasn’t shown me what I want to see on tape in terms of arm strength, accuracy, etc, I’m not going to be swayed into taking him earlier by an interview.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Piss test.
nateforchiefs - February 16, 2012
Just ask Justin Houston.
saskwatch - February 16, 2012
That was awesome
for us.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Maybe Trent will spark one up before the combine?
I’m dreaming big today.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
I've been meaning to build a pot gun.
Building through the draft, and sniping.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
all any of them need to do is come to AP and they;ll find out what our ideal board looks like
seriously … Casserly over at WalterFootball with this Tennehill crap? not a chance and we all know it
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Tannehill sucks!!!!
14 ints last year, 12 in aTm’s 6 losses (5 by less than a td, wonder who is to blame?)
TEXAN_CHIEF - February 16, 2012
He's been considered a high first rounder for a while now
Because of the Ponder/Locker effect.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
I said in the first paragraph that I want/think the Chiefs will move for RG3.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
fair enough ... though he's gonna be expensive
and if he costs us the chance to really dramatically improve the OLine then we aren’t gonna do very well anyway
upamtn - February 16, 2012
What about BJ Coleman in the middle rounds
I haven’t seen anything with him, but I work with two huge Vols fans and they love the kid. Do you gentlemen know anything about him?
TheValleybetterthanPAC12 - February 16, 2012
ugh, nevermind
Pulled the east-west shrine game. Looks like he forces the ball a lot,
TheValleybetterthanPAC12 - February 16, 2012
I know nothing about him
and who are you calling a gentleman? you take that back right now! :-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
That was because we started Jamaal, and because the defense couldn't hold up.
The offense was meant for TJ to soften up a defense, then stick in Jamaal to slash them and change up the pace.
And like I’ve said 1,000 times before, don’t pass up a good player when you see one. If a guy has the potential to become an elite player as opposed to another guy you draft because he’s a “need”, then you’re making a mistake.
And every position is “dime in a dozen”. Just because Tom Brady was the 199th pick, or because Marc Bulger and Joe Montana were late round picks does that mean the Colts should just pass up on Luck because there is potentially an even better QB later in the round?
NigerianNightmare - February 16, 2012
and it's why we shouldn't pass on DeCastro if he's there :-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
and it's why we shouldn't pass on Nicks in FA if he's there :-)
jcox31mc - February 16, 2012
Ummmm
it’s a lot easier to name elite RBs who were taken outside of the first round than it is QBs. To rattle off three names and act like that proves something is pretty negligent.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
To be fair, the Chiefs were squarely in that Ravens game most of the first half using the very strategy you are bashing.
I’m not advocating for more of the same, but I think at this point it needs to be more about balance than about creating a dynamic vertical passing attack. Heck, an improvement to a solid passing team with the running attack this team could theoretically have would be monumental.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
we were in that Ravens game for one quarter ... at that point we were already getting beat up like a punk kid in a gym being schooled by Joe Frazier
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Point being:
The running game was absolutely working in that game. Charles was absolutely ripping them until he fumbled. It’s not like they couldn’t run the ball on Baltimore.
The problem was clearly the passing game. My point is, there’s no need to try to turn KC into the Saints or Packers. They just need more balance.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
but they couldn't gain another ground yard on them after that ...
one good run does not = successfully running the ball
upamtn - February 16, 2012
I'm not going to pull up the play-by-play to check.
But if memory serves me correctly it was more than one run. Once they got behind Cassel started throwing picks and that was all she wrote.
Again, my point is that they need balance. I think trying to shift this offense to a Saints style attack would be a mistake.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
That's pretty much how I remember it.
Charles didn’t have just one good run. Ups might be thinking of Richardson in the championship game…..
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
It is hard to run the ball when there is no respect by the defense for your passing game.
saskwatch - February 16, 2012
Did the run set up the pass for us in 2010?
And I don’t know how I can make it any clearer, but:
I 100% agree that we need to replace our QB. 100%. That’s my first priority, that’s what I WANT done more than anything else.
And not all backs are the same. Again, if we’re going to commit to running, I’d much rather have a freak athlete than just any other back.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
They have one.
His name is Jamaal Charles. How about putting some guys in front of him who can actually block?
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
How many times is Jamaal going to run the ball per game?
How many times did we run per game in 2010?
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Yes, #11 pick for a backup!
HIV 2 Elway - February 16, 2012
He's only split carries with Jamaal 1/2 the time...
Does that even qualify as a back up? Or is that a dual back?
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Dual backup :)
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Because title matters a lot when you're getting carries
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
I get your point, he can't take all the carries.
My point is, they don’t need to waste a first round pick on a back to take the rest. Especially when guys like McCluster and Battle actually looked pretty decent this year and there’s plenty of FA’s and mid-round backs that I’d be fine with.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Agreed, Battle can do what Jones did in 2010.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
True.
My whole point in all of this was that if we’re going into 2012 with Cassel, then we’re going to need an insane run game. Battle and Dex can’t offer us that. And what if Jamaal gets hurt again?
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
I would argue that if you're going into 2012 with Cassel at QB.
It is more important to have a great line than add another elite back.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Why can't we have both?
An OL and another elite back?
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Show me the OT you are going to sign in FA or draft later.
Because I’m not seeing them.
I can however show you a host of RB’s I would sign or draft after filling needs on the o-line.
Plus, there’s other needs to fill on this team.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Demetrius Bell or Kareem McKenzie in FA.
Draft: Zebrie Sanders. Mike Adams.
Sanders seems like a solid pick because he was a swing tackle. Has some ability at both LT and RT, but looks to be a solid NFL RT. A little light at 308, but is only like 10 lbs lighter than Albert. 2nd round prospect.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
No thanks on McKenzie.
He looked pretty over the hill for the Giants.
I’m not a fan of Sanders personally. No way Adams makes it to the 2nd round.
I’d much rather get a FA guard and take a RT in round 1. Something like Albert/Grubbs/Hudson/Asamoah/Martin looks pretty good. Or even a guy like Kraig Urbik for LG.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Well of course.
I give 4 names that would be considerable upgrades to Brich and you give vague answers not liking any of them.
Didn’t see that coming.
Tomahawk29 - February 17, 2012
What are you trying to say?
nateforchiefs - February 16, 2012
Nice post....Rec'd
Wouldn’t hate the pick because he’ll be a good player. And I don’t mind the idea of taking safe picks in the top 15. He’s a safe pick.
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
You could say that about any of 30 guys, though.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
yup
I’m vanilla about the draft this year to be honest. Only way to screw it up is to have a player that doesn’t work out and produce. Only positions I don’t see right there are NT, OLB, WR and QB.
Any of the OL talked about and Richardson I would be happy with.
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
It's a weak tackle class at the top.
The top rated guy, Kalil, is 290 lbs. I know height/weight doesn’t count for a whole lot, but it’s saying something about the rest of the class that a weedy guy is the consensus top tackle. Other years, the top tackle has NO flaws.
Trade down or trade up. We’ve got no business picking at 11/12.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
I liked Martin when I watched Stanford, but most people are much higher on Reiff
DeCastro would be nice but that’s really high for an interior lineman, even a really good one.
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
Reiff really sounds like a good fit.
Can play both tackle spots and isn’t as much of a finesse guy as Martin.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
I've heard bad things happened to him when he came up against top competition.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
I watched one game for Iowa
And Reiff got shoved back consistently, not sure what team they were playing but it was early/mid season and that stuck with me.
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
btw, you have more mail
upamtn - February 16, 2012
crap, lemme check
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
Good info, I'm going more off of what I've read than game tape.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Nebraska handled him well too
That was last game of the season
nateforchiefs - February 16, 2012
Here's a game
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmS0XmkMeJ0
Iowa vs Oklahoma
That bull rush just kills him
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
that was a game I watched him all game, his name was mentioned to kc so I checked him out happened to be that game.
I been set on not wanting him ever since.
chad unit - February 16, 2012
Running Backs...
This position is pretty overrated if you ask me, and a first round running back is a waste. I am stealing all of this from a person’s twitter timeline (@FantasyDouche, who I strongly recommend you follow). He posted all of this yesterday:
“I will re-register my objection over teams taking running backs in the first round instead of OL or DL. Your honor I strenuously object.”
“Here’s a fun exercise. Who was the last great RB to win a Super Bowl? Marshall Faulk right? But prior to joining the pass happy Rams…”
“… Faulk had been part of two consecutive Colts teams that had finished 3-13 in both ’97 and ’98”
“Prior to that, Terrell Davis had been an important part of two SB winners, but the Denver run game didn’t slow down much without TD”
“Here are the lead RBs from recent SB winners: ’11 NYG – Bradshaw (7th rd), ’10 James Starks (6th rd), ’09 Saints PT Cruiser (undrafted)
“’08 Steelers – Willie Parker (undrafted), ’07 NYG Jacobs (4th rd), ’06 Colts Addai (1st rd) ’05 Steelers Parker (undrafted)”
“Here are the highly drafted RBs from SB winners: Corey Dillon ’04 Pats (2nd round pick), Jamaal Lewis ’00 Ravens, A. Smith ’01, ’03 Pats.”
“However, note that of the group of highly drafted RBs, only Addai and J. Lewis won SBs with the teams that drafted them.”
“Corey Dillon was originally drafted by the Bengals, and Antowain Smith was originally drafted by the Bills.”
“So basically it’s a bunch of scrub running backs, or “one man’s trash” type running backs who have been on the SB winners."
“Basically, taking a running back with a top 10 pick is like the guy who has the shitty car with the sick rims.”
I get what the author is saying that we need a strong running game if Cassel is QB, but wait until a later round to get a running back or address it in free agency.
RyFo18 - February 16, 2012
If Richardson is such a unique talent, they why did his backup Lacy average over a yard more per rush?
Don’t come with the “because Richardson distracted the defense.” I saw this identical thing last year, only the names were Ingram/Richardson instead of Richardson/Lacy. And Ingram went on to be the fourth best back on his NFL team, before he got injured.
Shake the stars out of your eyes, Tomahawk.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
But Richardson can lift a lot of weight
HIV 2 Elway - February 16, 2012
Greatest running back of all time, if only somebody had given him a chance:
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
duly wreck'd!
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Get to da choppa!
Scott B. - February 16, 2012
Throws the knife in the guy pinning him on the wall, "stick around"
chad unit - February 16, 2012
Not once did I mention anything about numerical yards in this post.
You can see the strengths that Trent has as a RB. He breaks tackles. He’s fast. He doesn’t fumble. He constantly moves forward. You can see that he’s a talented back. If you can’t see that, shake the scales out of yours.
And about Ingram: He was the 28th pick. Trent likely won’t make it out of the top 10. Ingram played on a pass happy team. Plenty of variables play into the differences between the two.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Law-Firm doesn't fumble and he breaks tackles ... just curious, what pick was he?
oh yeah, UDFA
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Two completely different drafts.
That might have something to do with where Ingram was drafted. All offseason they were saying he would likely go to Miami.
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
So numbers are a mirage? Lacy didn't really run farther every time he touched the ball?
You didn’t actually base a large part of your opinion on how much weight Richardson can lift?
Doesn’t matter what kind of NFL team Ingram plays on, three other backs on that SAME team ran batter than he did.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
I could use your same argument and say Jonathan Dwyer should be starting over Mendenhall b/c he’s averaging 7.7 YPC compared to Mendenall’s 4.1 YPC.
Except for the fact that numbers don’t tell you everything.
Iczer - February 16, 2012
Heh, he's only had 25 career rushing attempts.
Sproles had 87, Thomas had 110, Ivory had 79, and Ingram had 122 last year. That’s fairly even. And once Ingram went out, those other backs were taking the short-yardage situations he would have been in, so situations were also similar.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Matt Cassel threw 27 TDs and only 7 INTs in 2010. Made the Pro Bowl even.
But what did your eyes tell you about Cassel?
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Uh...that he wouldn't be a good running back?
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
I dunno.
I’m pretty sure he had the highest ypc for us on a couple of games this year…
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Seriously though,
I can’t argue with your ypc stat. Yes, Lacy had a higher average. But he also carried the ball about a third to a half as many times. It happens a lot in the NFL – 3rd down backs can and sometimes do tend to have higher ypc than the primary back. Did Sproles ever out ypc LT? Can’t say for sure, but I would venture to say yes. Does that mean I’d take Sproles over LT in his prime. Hell no.
And still, looking at Trent, I see a hell of a lot of raw talent and potential there. He’s going to be a great NFL RB, IMO.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
I would take Sproles over Tomlinson.
But I’m a Tomlinson hater. I always thought he was a decent defensive back playing the wrong position.
For me, it’s not really how great Richardson is going to be, it’s how much more difference he’d make than Martin or Miller or Pead.
The best all-around back in the league by consensus the last few years has been AP. But the Vikes sure went downhill fast when Favre went, even though AP was still there and running well.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
An elite QB made that big of a difference?
Yeah, I agree. Unfortunately if we don’t get an elite QB, then what? That’s where I’m coming from. I would never, ever, ever, at any time, ever suggest that we need another stud QB to pair with Charles at the expense of an 11th overall pick… but if we’re going to have Cassel, we’re going to run the ball close to 40 times a game, as evidenced by 2010. If we’re trying to win it all with a run game, IMO, let’s make this a crazy insane run game that should just trample the shit out of everyone.
If we’re going to do it, let’s at least attempt to do it right. Not just a “good enough” RB to pair with Charles. Let’s get the absolute best one we can.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Nice post Tomahawk
How does beating your head against the wall feel :)
My head is still bruised
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
Thanks Steve.
And honestly it feels good.
Better than beating my head against the DeCastro Wall.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Still bruised from your Ingram posts last year?
He did not help the Saints much this year.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
LMJ earlier this week
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
I'm not a big fan, but I won't be part of that wall either.
As long as he’s drafted in the third.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
That's where we disagree.
Why go after the “best” RB when the best in the league right now has already shown he can’t carry a team?
I’m not arguing that Richardson isn’t better than everybody else. I’m arguing that even if he is, that will not win us any more games.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
I dunno...
IMO, the best in the league was injured from the 1st quarter of week 2 this year. Jamaal was huge for us. He accounted for something like 40% of our offensive production in 2010. What if we would have had Jamaal all year? I dare say we would have easily won the division again.
I daresay that the best CAN carry a team.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
And again I say, Richardson is not Charles.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Neither is Battle, Pead, Miller, etc
wasn’t Pead injured for a number of games last season?
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
That's just it, we're not going to duplicate Charles,
so why spend 1200 points worth of draft pick trying?
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Charles just missed 15 and 3/4 of his games in 2011
And that left us up shit creek without a paddle. We need to try like hell to duplicate a back that can carry us in the event that he gets hurt again.
Best case scenario: we end up with 2 badass dual threat RBs, and in the event that one gets hurt, we still have another one to keep abusing teams with.
Worst case scenario: We end up with Charles and a pretty good back that we spent an 11th round pick on when what we really needed was a QB that we couldn’t get.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
agree
It goes to the Teams Identity, the Chiefs rush the ball better than anyone else in the NFL.
or at least that is my hope since we throw the ball with the worst of them also
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
But unless you have Charles, your NFL team does not depend primarily on the back for your rushing identity.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Without Charles we looked like toast
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
Toast, indeed. Burnt, unbuttered toast.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
yet you shoot down every possibility at some help for Charles?
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
No, just the expensive ones.
Tomahawk wants to spend 1200 draft points on a 15 carry guy. That’s about four hundred more points than the rest of our entire draft put together! It doesn’t add up.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Pioli spent 450 points on less?
Dex saved our ass this year
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
He did? I don't remember us being in the playoffs.
Or even being very good, especially not on offense.
Dex will be a force unto his own when we get an offense that can threaten down the field and open up the short stuff. And a QB who can throw to short guys.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Whatever
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
Because you can’t be a good player if your team didn’t make the playoffs.
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
The discussion was value to the team.
Individual talent doesn’t necessarily have much correlation to getting your team over the hump.
Brsrkr - February 17, 2012
So we should add mediocre talent to positional needs to get us over the hump then?
It doesn’t matter how talented the individuals we add are? So do the individual talents of Berry, Houston, Lewis, DJ, Charles, Bowe, etc. not matter to the overall quality of the team? I call BS.
Tomahawk29 - February 17, 2012
Absolutely.
It’s a team sport. The goal is to win championships, not collect stats. The Right 53, and all those other cliches.
If there’s a choice between the most talented player at his position who might give us one more win, and the tenth most talented player at his position who might give us five more wins, then hands-down you pick the guy who’ll give you more wins. That’s why the draft isn’t a pure BPA strategy.
Brsrkr - February 17, 2012
If we can't use that 11th pick to get RG3, then we should use it to try to get Barkley or another QB next year.
Hmmm, I was just thinking….how would Richardson’s pay as an 11/12th pick compare to Charles’?
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Are you volunteering to look that up, lol?
I imagine it should be cheaper considering the rookie cap.
And how would you propose using our 11th/12th this year to get a guy that is coming out next year? Especially considering he might very well be the #1 overall, and we don’’t know who will have that pick.?
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
I probably will, when I get home. Work computer won't go to Rotoworld.
We could trade down in the first round in exchange for future picks. Could do the same in the second round, and still get good RT and guard prospects this year, and have at least two extra picks next year for trading.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
That's ballsy.
Considering that there’s no guarantee we’d be able to trade with anyone for one of next years QBs. I wouldn’t neccessarily be against it, but the fanbase will likely be pissed if we outright trade picks away for next year. Pioli would definitely be getting death threats.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
It's the Patriot way....
And actually, it was H2E’s idea this year before I’d thought about it. Thus the ballsiness.
Pats trade for stockpiles every year since they first got good. Now if they see a guy they want, at any pick in any year, they can go get him without giving away their whole draft. That’s the way a good team should be because they might have just a couple specific needs in a year, and don’t really need to draft any Gabe Millers in the fifth round.
We’re just starting to enter the maintenance phase for our team, being that the only clear-cut need for a new starter is at RT and the rest of the obvious holes are at depth, so we need to start changing our draft economics.
The only fans who would be pissed are the ones with irreconcilable man-crushes.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Yeah, I can see this.
Like I said below, we’re not hurting that badly for anything other than QB that would make that big of an impact for us at 11th. BPA, trade back, OL, whatever. Until the QB is addressed, we’re doing things the hard way, which honestly, was my whole mindset when writing this post. If we’re going the hard way, and not getting a QB, then let’s try to make the most insane run game ever witnessed.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Is RT worth 1200 points?
We may have had the worst overall starting RT in 2011, He was not the worst RT in the world.
We did have the worst Starting trio of QB’s in 2011 also. They just might have mad Barry look bad :)
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
I don't want to spend 1200 points on a RT, either.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Looked it up.
Charles has a six year, $27.92M deal. Last year’s 11th pick, Watt, has a four year, $11.23M contract. And Ponder, last year’s 12th, has a four year, $10.15M contract. So at least it looks like Richardson won’t be making as much as Charles if we picked him, though I’m not sure how much rookie salaries are scheduled to go up this year.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
No but he has the potential to be better
and is a much more complete back already.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
If you think Richardson is going to be better than Charles, then we're done.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
He can be
Are you Nostradamus or something? T-Rich could become the best running back to ever play the game, the potential is massive.
Now will he reach it? I don’t know, but what I do know is Richardson is much more complete now then in comparison to Jamaal.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
The last T-Rich we had
did pretty well for us. Just saying
Eastcoastransplant - February 17, 2012
The REAL T-Rich was an UDFA.
Just saying.
Brsrkr - February 17, 2012
He will alwasy be T-Rich, and no one will take that away from him.
NigerianNightmare - February 17, 2012
No one in FA is a back that can carry a team.
But someone in the draft might be….
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
And again, I'm not saying as good as Charles.
But he could be similar to Charles. Similar in that he could carry a team.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Charles is the only back doing that right now. Maybe MJD.
AP isn’t doing it, and he’s the most similar to Richardson, except he’s faster and better. Very long odds that Richardson could carry a team.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
If Richardson the Best RB in college ball last year
Can’t, then I guess there ain’t one :(
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
Gore too, IMO.
Yeah, their D was huge, but Gore carried that O.
Might be able to make a case for McFadden too, but he just can’t stay healthy. And Bush is pretty valuable.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Gore has had his health troubles, too.
Funny thing how so many of those team-carrying RBs have injury problems.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Shitty year for RBs.
Smart teams need to start stockpiling good ones. It’s a luxury, but would be well worth it.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
And I'm saying that without any mention of Richardson.
All teams that don’t have Bradys, Breeses and Rodgerses should have at least 2 solid backs.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
You'd take a 3rd down back over a HOFer
Ahahahahahahahaha
Okay buddy
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
You clearly do not remember Tomlinson's prime well
That’s just ridiculous. No offense.
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
I did preface by saying I'm a Tomlinson hater, which implies bias.
Primarily, I think he single-handedly kept SD out of the Superbowl with his locker room diva act. I could make a case that he was twice the cancer that LJ ever could be.
As for on the field, I always hated how he’d run for 1, 2, 1.5, and then luck into finding a hole and use his CB-ish speed to break a 50 yarder. His average came from having two or three big runs per game, and nada otherwise. I don’t think that’s a sign of a “great” back, I think it’s a sign of a good sprinter. Of course, Charles does the same thing, and Sanders used to, and Tomlinson has become more well-rounded later in his career, so I realize that I’m nitpicking. But I’m nitpicking because I really, legitimately don’t like the guy, and that has nothing to do with the team he played for.
Brsrkr - February 17, 2012
That's a decent argument
Although I disagree strongly about the JC part. I don’t remember where, but I saw that he definitely does NOT get his yards through just a few long carries a game.
MNchiefsfan - February 18, 2012
Lacy wasn't the starting running back, that's why.
And Ingram has knee injury issues, Richardson does not.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
So that's why Charles was so good in 2010? Because he wasn't the starter?
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
He was only the starter half the time
So yeah I guess, then again comparing the situations of Lacy-Richardson to Charles-Jones is ridiculous. No where close to the same.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Actually, I started out comparing Lacy-Richardson to Richardson-Ingram. Eerily similar.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
But you brought up Charles...
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
I've been pretty ardently against taking any back in the first round.
Heck even the 2nd round. The only way I’d really soften on this idea is if they filled A LOT of their other needs through FA. Even then I’d have a hard time swallowing this.
I see what you are saying in that if they are going to try to run teams to death, they need to have a GREAT running game. I just don’t think that’s the right approach. I’m hoping that Romeo, and more specifically Daboll, realize that you need at least some semblance of balance towards the pass to succeed in this league. That and I also don’t think they have a dominant running game with a couple of upgrades on the o-line, even with Charles back.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Enjoyed the read..REC!
I wouldnt mind this pick at all. Gives us a nice one two punch.
TheScreenName - February 16, 2012
RB worst position to draft in 1st rd
1970-2006 174 rbs drafted in the 1st rd only 58 (1/3) were starters 5 or more years vs about 60% for all other postions. Pass.
TEXAN_CHIEF - February 16, 2012
our window is about five years right now
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
Pioli has said specifically that he is not building for a window.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Doesn't mean he doesn't see it
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
If he can build specifically to take advantage of a window, and not compromise the long term health of the team,
well, that would be something to see.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
NFL is also changing to more of a dual backfield because of the shelf life issue.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Worst. Case. Scenario.
Get a world class o-line and it doens’t matter who the RB is.
HIV 2 Elway - February 16, 2012
+1
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
This, and this again.
I’d be pissed if we went RB in the first. If we absolutely cannot/will not fix the damn QB situation then go beef, beef, and more beef. Beyond QB, nothing else will make this offense better than a great O-line.
TheScootness - February 16, 2012
At the very least...
if they give Cassel a good o-line to work with, that should take away one more excuse for him if he has a rough season.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
I think the time for excuses is over
I know what you’re saying but the dude has had 3 seasons and no improvement. Sure he was injured part of the year but he didn’t do shit before then anyway. It wasn’t the o-line, it was him. It wasn’t drops or playcalling or anything else, it was him. It’s over. I know you know that and I think everyone else does too (besides maybe Aiken). It’s not about taking away his excuses, it’s about trying to win despite him.
If we don’t replace him this year then at least beef up the line to top-5 status and hope they find a replacement in 2013.
TheScootness - February 16, 2012
They need o-line regardless.
One of the worst parts of Cassel getting hurt this year, other than the whole Palko fiasco, was that it prevented the front office from getting another season’s worth of tape on him to evaluate. Could have gotten this out of the way already.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
I get ya
But if the coaches and GM haven’t seen enough already to know what’s going on then there’s something wrong. He’s had enough time, even without this half season.
And yes, watching Palko was terrible. As bad as Cassel frustrates me, it’s nothing compared to that.
TheScootness - February 16, 2012
This
Pimp oline helps QB and RB. And extra RB with a weak oline just helps the other team load more guys in the box.
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
Personally, I don't think Richardson will fall to us anyway. But, that's just me.
Scott B. - February 16, 2012
You raise a good point.
They should probably pull a Ditka and trade this year’s entire draft to go get him.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Hell yeah.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Deja Vu?
Wasnt there a Trent Richardson post yesterday or the day before?
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
And many more to come...
Scott B. - February 16, 2012
Tis the season.
saskwatch - February 16, 2012
True enough
But there’s like 200 guys to talk about. Lets get off this ones nuts already.
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
Brb, I'm going to go write up "Should Cassel be the starting QB in 2012" for the front page.
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
I was hoping for a Peyton Manning update.
saskwatch - February 16, 2012
Day isn't over yet.
Scott B. - February 16, 2012
Sources: Jack Bicknell talked to Eli about talking to Peyton about the Chiefs
Jim Bob confirms.
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
LOL
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Cassel is only part one of a series that I plan on releasing over the next few hours
Part 1: “Should Cassel be our QB in 2012”
Part 2: “Why drafting RGIII isn’t optional”
Part 3: “Manning”
Part 4: “RGIII has to be the next QB in KC”
Part 5: “Options to trade up for RGIII and signing Manning at the same time”
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
options for trading up to RG3 and getting Manning and Luck and Richardson and DeCastro at the same time
and a CB to be drafted later ;-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
throw in a switch to the 4/3
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
All joking aside, one thing I would sincerely like to see.
Is an actual well thought out idea of what it would take to trade up to #2 to get Griffin. It’s hard for me to fully evaluate that possibility until someone can give me a ballpark idea of what it would cost.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
According to the Value chart, probably switch firsts this year, first next year and maybe about a third.
saskwatch - February 16, 2012
You could be waiting awhile because it doesn't exist.
The market for QBs this year through the draft and FA is so shallow that the only way to get there is to sell the farm for a guy that probably has a 50-60% chance of busting out of the league. Lets wait until next year and get some legit competition in here to push Cassel or replace him for this season.
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
"Sell the farm" isn't a well thought out idea like polo asked for.
The second is worth 2600 points, the 12th is worth 1200 points. So it would probably take our second this year plus our first next year plus a later round pick to even the scales.
If I remember correctly, that’s about what the Giants gave to trade for Eli, basically moving from four to one.
If there’s a pick-bidding war, then we’d have to include a player or two that other teams can’t offer, or consider giving up our second next year as well as this year.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
That's the thing.
I can see it taking a good bit more than what the “chart” indicates because of the widespread need for QBs.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
It depends on how many teams fill that need before the draft.
GB is right in saying that the FA market is shallow for QBs. But it’s ALWAYS shallow for QBs. There’s Orton, Flynn, Alex Smith, Campbell, and Grossman. Also Peyton if he checks out. If things go well, we might only be bidding against one or two other teams.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
You're right, it's hard to tell who will be looking at him in the first.
I honestly have no idea who will be.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
The chart means little to nothing now.
I mean its used as a guideline but when theres so few legitimate options at QB the price is going to go up. For a team around pick ten it will cost maybe a little less then what Atlanta coughed up last year to move from 26/27 to 3(?).
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
Easy
Tag Bowe. Then trade him to the Rams and switch firsts with them. We get RG3.
See? No problem.
Scott B. - February 16, 2012
Well, dammit, you're making me do arithmetic.....
The Browns had the sixth pick, and the Falcons traded them the 27, 59, and 124 picks. That left the Browns 562 points short. The Falcons made that up with first and fourth rounders in this year’s draft, which would project to the 27th and 123rd picks and add up to 729 points. So, the Falcons “overpaid” by 167 points, or about a mid-third rounder. But they didn’t really overpay by exactly 167 points since two of those picks were future picks and would be valued a little less than that 167 point projection.
Here’s where I’m getting my info, I wouldn’t mind at all if you checked my math since I don’t usually trust my own arithmetic.
2011 trades
value chart
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Looks good to me
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
I'm all for that plan.
The more positions this team is able to sort out on both offense and defense, the more willing I would be in the future to spend picks ot move up and get an elite QB if need be.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
The trouble comes if we become a good team...
If we draft at, say, 25, then that pick is worth about 500 points less than our #11/12 this year. To make up that difference, we’d have to throw in the 25th picks in the second, third, and fifth rounds…. three more picks than we’d have to trade now.
You want to talk about selling the farm, that would definitely come if we waited until we were a winning team to try and move up.
The 11/12 pick is a very valuable resource, and a team that has doubts about its quarterback should NOT be using that resource on a #2 running back. Or a guard, Ups :)
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
agree, agree
kcsno56 - February 16, 2012
I also agree.
But if we don’t get that QB? Then what? That’s my point.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
then build for the future
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
As Severn would say, we're fooked.
Fooked till we do. Because I don’t see the NFL going back toward a run-first league now, there’s much more money to be made by encouraging the passing game.
I’m not dead set on selling our souls to get RG3 this year. But our constant, primary goal should be to find a franchise QB, and the fastest and surest way to do that by far is to draft one of the two or three most highly rated QBs in any given year.
Like I’ve said elsewhere, a solid team without an elite QB will always finish between 5-11 and 11-5.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Or... you could be the change you're looking for
And write a post yourself :)
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
recently, yeah
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Front page blip about two mocks having us take him.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
And I just saw I made front page.
I’m no longer an AP virgin. Yay.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
saw that ... congrats! well earned, my friend! :-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
I will reitterate...
If the Chiefs take a WR or RB in the first round, I am fucking done.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
one "t" there buddy ;-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
no one asked you Pam
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
nobody has to ask me, Betty
it’s a public service announcement
upamtn - February 16, 2012
I wouldn't be done as a fan.
But I might be done believing in Pioli.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
I swear I wont watch a game next year.
Cant root for a team, when I have such a massive philosophical difference
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
Who is Done and is she hot?
GenericBrand - February 16, 2012
What about a first round DE?
That hold you over for a bit?
TheScootness - February 16, 2012
Drafting in the trenches is always better than drafting a RB
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
Don't let the door hit you on your way out then, and don't jump back on the bandwagon if we start winning
Go cheer for Tebow or jump on the Giants bandwagon.
KC_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
haha, amen..
Stick it out buddy, no matter what the outcome is. Stick true to your clothes.
GaryfromIA - February 16, 2012
Who was the last RB that took a team to the playoffs?
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
Jamaal Charles?
MtHammer - February 16, 2012
He didn't really do it by himself
and Im all for taking 3rd round running backs.
I can’t think a bigger waste of a draft pick than throwing draft picks at a position with the shortest shelf life.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
Yes he did.
But there ain’t no other Jamaal Charleses.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
No one ever does it "all by them selves" but Charles was easily the single biggest reason the Chiefs made the playoffs in 2010.
That being said, I’m with you on 1st round running backs. I won’t riot if we draft Richardson, but it’s not where I’d go.
MtHammer - February 16, 2012
Fair enough...
but drafting RB a year after drafting a WR in the first round will send me into a fucking rage.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
I can understand that
But to be fair, we technically got a WR and a SOLB with one pick… that mitigates it quite a bit IMO
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
Hahaha, exactly
Also See: Denver(Tebow/McGahee/Whoever)
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Frank Gore.
Made it all the way to the Conference Championship too.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
This year?
That team has FAR more than just Frank Gore going for them.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
You mean like run the ball AND play defense?
What an original concept. Wish I’d have thought of that… oh, wait.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
The #4 defense in total yards and #2 in total points. That's a little beyond just playing defense.
Plus, Vernon Davis says hi.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
And what about us?
Without Berry, we were the 11th overall defense, in total yards. And that was only 1/2 of a productive year from Houston. We are damn close to being able to play defense at the same level as SF.
And Davis amassed a whopping 250 more yards and 3 more TDs than Moeaki did his rookie year. Not that impressive.
The similarities between the Niners and Chiefs are actually quite shocking. Killer run game, good defense, average QB. And they went down to the wire in a conference championship, only losing to the soon to be SB champs by a couple of ST blunders.
The Niners and Chiefs are crazy similar teams.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Big difference is that the Niners have a QB with some tools....
Even so, so what if we’re similar to the Niners? Just means that we will ALMOST make it.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Don't know about you,
But I would absolutely LOVE for the Chiefs to be in the AFC Champ game, even if it meant we lost in the final couple of minutes.
That’s something I don’t understand. Rather than ALMOST make it, would you prefer we just said “fuckit” and wallow in our QB mediocrity until something better comes along? Hell no. Almost is better than sitting at home in January, watching other teams play.
And Alex Smith is very Matt Cassel-esque. Cassel has tools. Smith has tools. Neither are consistently good with those tools.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Almost is nothing, when it's going to be "almost" forever. Or 43 years.
You’re the one saying “fuckit” by giving up resources that could be used to build toward a championship team, to instead build toward a tad above mediocrity. It’s the height of irony that you base your entire point around “we’re going to be stuck with Cassel” and then accuse me of saying “fuckit.”
Nobody remembers who was the conference champs. SB winners go down on the front pages of the books.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
I don't want to be stuck with Cassel. I'm not sure if I can make that any clearer.
But if we don’t use that 11/12 overall on a QB, we could take a goddam kicker and still likely make the playoffs this year.
That’s the bottom line. If we don’t get a QB, we could take a OT, OG, RB, WR, TE, or even a punter, and we still wouldn’t improve that much that it honestly matters. We’ll be at mediocrity or slightly above until we get the QB.
So honestly what does it matter? RB 11th overall. OT 11th overall. Without a QB our chances are still going to be similar to SF’s experience this year.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Yeah they did it the old fashioned way
Even though this isn’t the 80s anymore.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
ALMOST did it.....
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Two botched Special Teams plays, with a back-up special teamer
AWAY….
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
So were we.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
So very true
:(
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
And it was still 100% worth it.
I’d take Joe Montana right now as is if it meant we won a couple of playoff games again.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Actually, I was talking about this year and the Raiders and Maneri.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
OHHHHH.
Yeah, that sucked too. Not quite as bad, because we really would have been spanked in the playoffs anyway.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Well, maybe..... We would have played the Steelers in KC.....
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
We lit up Denver just a week prior and almost beat Pittsburgh with PALKO.
I think we’d have won our first playoff game in a while.
NigerianNightmare - February 16, 2012
Beating a team with a FB playing QB 7-3 isn't lighting anyone up.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
Sorry, our defense lit them up.
NigerianNightmare - February 16, 2012
Agreed.
And, yes, we might have beaten PIT. Might. But I doubt it.
Tomahawk29 - February 16, 2012
also its moot...
cause its not happening.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
I wonder what the discussions at Silver and Black Pride are about their draft pick
BJ Kissel - February 16, 2012
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Heh
SCKSChief - February 16, 2012
Who's really fast that will be around in the 7th round?
Kmillz2525 - February 16, 2012
Al Davis is dead
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
still?
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Unfortunately
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Not that i'm against it but
We will have to have the line to do it. No longer can we have 2 lineman that can’t go one on one with my grandma because they are so light. We need beef and we can not afford to have Richardson pass blocking when we run play action or when we need to pass so if in FA we can get Ben Grubbs or Nicks and then draft a RT i’m fine with it but that’s a big if. If not we have to take Decastro and build the Oline so we can run and still pass.
Kmillz2525 - February 16, 2012
Nice work
Rec
SCKSChief - February 16, 2012
Trent Richardson is fine by me in the first, just hope he's there.
I wouldn’t even mind if we waited until the third round before we even looked at an offensive lineman.
KC_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
Brilliant.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
If it was still the Eighties.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Or the 2010s
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Nope, NFL hasn't gone back to run-first and slow defenses yet.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Yet
You don’t know the future
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
No, but I can follow the money.
The money does not point to run-first and slow defenses.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Why do the defenses have to be slow
Are offenses that much slower in comparison to defenses?
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
It used to be a truism that all the best athletes played on offense.
Except for the linemen. That’s more even now, there are better athletes at LB and DB across the board than there were in the Eighties. And they’re not going to slow down again because defenses need that speed to keep up with the increased passing.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
In my opinion, the league is changing
There are less and less Adrian Peterson/Terrell Davis type backs that will carry the ball 300+ times a year. The running game is getting more specific, using different style of RB’s for different play calls.
History, as of late, has shown that you can get VERY productive and VERY successful running backs late in the draft. If I were to spend a first round pick on an freak of nature athlete…he’d be on the Defensive side of the ball. Just saying, the value is in the late rounds. No need to draft Arian Foster in the 1st round when you can find him out of the draft :) (extreme/rare example, but still true)
Brad-KC - February 16, 2012
I've seen ole Walter over at WalterFootball
making the argument that KC needs to go with Richardson if he is there “because you don’t take Levi Brown over Adrian Peterson as the Cardinals did”. Three problems with this theory:
1. I don’t think Trent Richardson is Adrian Peterson.
2. I don’t think Reiff or Martin is Levi Brown.
3. I don’t think Levi Brown is this bad if he had been playing RT all along like he should have.
polodude017 - February 16, 2012
Terrell Davis was a 6th round draft pick
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
Even better for my argument.
But my point with Davis is he was a feature back that carried the ball a TON. There aren’t a lot of those anymore.
Brad-KC - February 16, 2012
Well... Except you mentioned a guy that went in the top ten with a guy who was drafted like 193rd overall.
I completely agree on waiting on RB, there just isn’t any value there at RB in the first round. The only way I take Trent Richardson in the first round if Im the Chiefs is if we trade down to 32 and he’s still there then.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
And?
Here I’ll break it down for you.
AP and TD = power running backs. Feature back. 300+ carries
Compared to the current trend in the NFL where you have multiple backs that are more specialized.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ is the only thing I was trying to explain. Had absolutely nothing to do with where they were drafted.
Brad-KC - February 16, 2012
But no one cares if a team takes a RB in the 6th round.
But since Richardson will be a first round running back it applies.
I think the number of carries going down has more to do with teams throwing more than there being less power backs.
I would imagine that most first string running backs are still getting the same percentage of carries, there are just less carries total, because its been proven that you pass to get the lead and run to protect it, unlike what teams used to do which was run to establish a passing game.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
oh my god dude....you just don't get it. Again, the draft pick in the AP/TD scenario do not apply to my argument
They are used to describe a style of running this is becoming extinct in the NFL. If you want to argue against that.. (like you did) great. Discussions are fun.
Brad-KC - February 16, 2012
I don't think you get it.
It doesn’t matter what style of running back.
The style isn’t going away, the carries are going away. there are still plenty of old school types of running backs like MJD, Gore, Michael Turner.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
And part of the post specificaly stated that Cassel as QB
requires a running game to make up for his failings.
It’s not us posters that propose RB’s to help the Chiefs because it is the wise decision. It is Pioli sticking with Cassel that says we need to get RB’s. Good ones
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
Or we could draft line improve the RB's now
and have an established line when we finally get a QB
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
meaning that if we improve the line, we improve the RB's
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
yes
upamtn - February 16, 2012
yes
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
JC didn't need a good O-line
I don’t get the we gotta build the Offensive line mindset.
We fix it this year and then Albert leaves next year, we must fix it again, then in 2014 we have to replace other pieces.
Like Pink Floyd say “Will we always be building the wall”
sorta
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
the OLine was much gooder in 2010 than in 2011
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Why does Albert leave?
and the Oline last year was better than this year
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
to both
Was th o-line better last year cause JC was running behind it? Are you all saying that replacing Waters with Asamoah was a mistake?
Albert will be a FA next year
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
But that doesn't mean Albert leaves.
If anything, the Chiefs have shown to extend their guys.
And its probably a little of both, but replacing Waters with Asamoah may have been a long term move rather than a one year thing. Yeah, Waters probably would have been the better play this year. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t a good move. I also think Weigmann (I have no idea how to spell his name) really fell off
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
It will take some work and cash to get Albert to stay.
Even if it ends up being easy, it’s still some effort into keeping the O line together. And after Albert, there’ll be another piece that needs maintenance….
Five guys = five times the maintenance. Find a franchise QB, and leave him alone for six years.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
x
Come on. Likely we can’t get the franchise QB this year. So you have to invest in the positions that will affect the most positions.
And once you have 5 Olineman, its not that uncommon to keep them together, and if one of them leaves its much easier to plug one position than have to rebuild an entire line.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
We have 5 lineman now
we have invested 3 years in both our tackles and a 3rd round in our LG and a 2nd in our future Center.
Must be time to maintain that which we built ?
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
There is a difference between investing time and draft
Richardson shouldn’t hardly be playing in the NFL.
Personally I want DeCastro.
Thats the guy, for me. If not him I’d rather just trade down. I also wouldn’t mind LT and maybe Albert gets moved to guard, but I like Albert at LT, so I dunno. But I don’t think playing Richardson means we have invested anything at the position.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
Didn't work out so well for our 2003 line, though.
I mean, it sounds good in theory, and I like how I can always count on that gif when you bother to come around, but I’m just going by what I see. I see several teams right now that can get to and win a SB on the strength of their QB, but I don’t know that I see any that can do the same just on the strength of their O line. Or their RB. And I can’t remember seeing a championship O line maintained for years on end since the Cowboys did it.
If we can’t get a franchise QB this year, that doesn’t stop us from leveraging the 11/12 pick to save up for one next year, or the year after. In today’s NFL, that needs to be the primary goal. But we don’t have to go all in, we can still build/maintain the Oline while focusing on finding a QB.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Yeah
I post that gif whenever I come aroundand how do you reckon we leverage this pick into a QB next year, save the pick?
I’ve already said Im all for trading down and picking up more picks. I don’t see anyone really giving anything up substantial to get that pick.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
Well, trading down is how I'd leverage it.
I think if a team was to trade up to 11/12, it would be a good team who wants something specific. Like Atlanta wanting a receiver. This year, maybe GB wants a CB or pass rusher. Hell, maybe NE wants a CB or a pass rusher. Detroit needs a CB. Pitt could use a good O lineman. Anyway, I’m thinking we’d be looking toward the better, more complete teams near the bottom of the round. That would still let us pick up a good guard or RT.
I could be wrong, though, could be some team wants to move up just a few spots to leapfrog somebody like we did for Albert. Never can really tell until the draft unfolds, but there should be opportunity there.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Sorry, trade down for future picks.
Not for extra picks this year. Hopefully we can trade with somebody who will suck next year.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Sign Routt
Tag and trade Carr to NE
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
That will work
if NE doesn’t sign Routt first.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Get Ups back here to delete your comment before Hoodie sees it.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
I know some on AP that are against starting to rookie O-lineman
I would also if they were side by side
But
upgrade LG and Center and RT in one season would be a massive clusterfuck
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
Hey, how about we draft Martin to play LT and move Albert to RT,
then Richardson can play guard. But RG because he’s used to that side, then Asamoah can move to LG, and we have Hudson at center. BOOM goes the dynamite!
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Hudson will be the Center...
and Im not in favor of changing that many positions, and Im willing to roll will either Lilja, or whoever we go with at RT for a year.
Im not saying address both, this team has plenty of other needs too.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
and by default improve the QB
more time to throw = better QB play
better running game = less pressure on the WRs
upamtn - February 16, 2012
no
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
but even the best QB's don't automatically win w/o a good or better running game
Rogers had an ungodly good year … for all the good it did the Packers
Stafford tossed for 5,000 yards, wow … the Lions still have no running game, they’re one-dimensional
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Those teams also struggled on defense.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
you mean the Ravens?
yeah, struggling defense for sure ;-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
No, the two teams you JUST mentioned, the Packers and the Lions.
Trying to confuse me won’t work, it’s only 5:19 and I haven’t had a drop to drink yet.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
Great job Tomahawk, sorry I missed the first 100 comments of discussion but wreckage is due.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
I agree about the amount of carries our RB's will need and agree charles can't do it himself.
I would really like to see someone like bejarvis green-ellis come in to take those hard carries away from charles and does not cost draft picks to get.
I think green-ellis is exactly the kind of back we need to compliment charles.
If we got richardson i would want him to get atleast 20+ carries for our team and that would take away carries for jamal. I dont like that idea. give me a back that can get plugged in down in the redzone and you dont have to worry about fumbles or getting just tore up cause his size.
richardson is a stud though just not in the same category as adrian peterson in my view.
chad unit - February 16, 2012
Welcome, newby.
I dig the handle.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
whats a handle?
chad unit - February 16, 2012
Your username I believe
Its what guys with CB Radios would call the names for themselves way back when.
Just saw Smokey and the Bandit so yeah.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Candy cane, Candy cane, remember that movie?
chad unit - February 16, 2012
"Way back when?"
No, that seems like just yesterday…..
…………..
Damn I’m old.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
compared to some of us it WAS yesterday
upamtn - February 16, 2012
I'm confused about your response:
“If we got richardson i would want him to get atleast 20+ carries for our team and that would take away carries for jamal. I dont like that idea.”
Typo?
Pacific Chief - February 16, 2012
now im confused what I was typing.
meant if we got richardson I would expect him to be the featured back and I dont like that idea since we already got charles I think we just need a compliment to charles not so much another stud.
chad unit - February 16, 2012
Good read Tomahawk.
Those videos are definitely an eye opener. Like you, I never really watched the kid play ball other than the National Championship. He is a beast, that’s for sure. Personally, I’d be happy with an Oline player over a RB, but if we got T-Rex I’ll be just as giddy.
GaryfromIA - February 16, 2012
Good post
and great use of video to augment your points. I believe we need the help at Oline then RB at this point, though.
Pacific Chief - February 16, 2012
FYI, Tom ... wreck'd for being a damned fine post, even though I disagree with the idea, the post is excellent :-)
upamtn - February 16, 2012
Unless we move up to get RGIII, the draft is not going to have that great an effect
this year. The place that the Chief’s really have a big opportunity to improve is if they do something big in FA, with players that will be around for at least 3-4 years.
jcox31mc - February 16, 2012
Agree but you have the wrong QB we need to move up to get
saints_chiefsfan1979 - February 16, 2012
I would never take a RB with the 11th pick these days
Especially with all the needs we have. Not only that, there are to many elite RB’s taken in later rounds to lead me to believe you need to select 1 that high. If Lamichal James is there in the 3rd , then I would grab him in a NY minute. But , I wouldn’t take any RB this year at 11 , no way
saints_chiefsfan1979 - February 16, 2012
Yeah, RB is overrated in today's league
A much better investment would be in building a dominant OL that any RB can flourish in. I think we need to bring in a veteran RB to complement JC. Few rookies are able to step in right away and carry the load, and with JC probably not returning to full steam next year, we are going to need some help.
Nick Britt - February 16, 2012
LMJ?
Not sure if I agree with that. We don’t need anymore small / light RBs
Brad-KC - February 16, 2012
That doesn't mean you don't go after a power back later
But, I like explosive versitile backs. That seems to be where the league is going
saints_chiefsfan1979 - February 16, 2012
That's why i like Doug Martin, or Chris Polk.
Physical, almost Thomas Jones-like (in his prime, of course) but still have great breakaway speed.
NigerianNightmare - February 16, 2012
So we're going to go after two RBs?
Are we running the ball 60 times a game? (although with Cassel we may have to…)
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
no but you need to keep guys fresh
I don’t see a problem with getting James and going after a bigger back in the 7th round. Right now we only have 2 backs under contract
saints_chiefsfan1979 - February 17, 2012
Who are these big backs under contract?
Pretty sure Jones/McClain/Battle are all FAs.
ChiefWarPaint - February 17, 2012
2 backs period
saints_chiefsfan1979 - February 17, 2012
why not?
Speed plays anywhere.
I think change of pace backs are overrated, I’d rather have 2 fast running backs to not let a defense rest.
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
sooooo
we already have Dex and Jamaal…. what good would another light running back do for us…especially in the 3rd round…. LMJ isn’t going to be a goal line/short hard threat. A big bruiser is.
Brad-KC - February 16, 2012
If we had an O-line that could hold their own, we could just go over the top.
The problem isn’t the backs… Its the lack of a push, you know the kind of problem that lets to field goals get blocked in the same game.
Or we could just give the rock to McClain
averagegatsby - February 16, 2012
still need blockers up front
OLine
DeCastro
make it so, Mr Data
upamtn - February 16, 2012
We are debating WWI vs WWII
trench warfare vs Blitzkreig
I prefer mobile warfare
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
you can be as mobile as you want but if you can't get past the other guy's defenses you still lose
upamtn - February 16, 2012
You go around them
Maginot Line remember !
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
lol Maginot Line...
How much did France spend on that fiasco???
Pacific Chief - February 16, 2012
All of it, I think.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
James , Dex, Charles that would be a lot of speed to stop
not to mention they can line up in the slot ,return kicks etc.. All of which richardson can’t do
saints_chiefsfan1979 - February 16, 2012
Richardson returned kicks
He’s pretty good in the pass game, and he’s got more speed then given credit for.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
It'd be fun to see wheel routes to each side of the field a dozen times a game :)
That’d open up a defense…
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
It would if you had a QB that could get them the ball
saints_chiefsfan1979 - February 16, 2012
We need to do that. Charles is an outstanding receiver, for a RB.
Brsrkr - February 17, 2012
Who wouldn't love to Richardson as a Chief, but I posted this B4 from Walter Football
and I believe that there will be a couple of these backs that really do well also. Compare:
Trent Richardson, RB Alabama Height: 5-11 Weight: 220 40 Time: 4.49
Lamar Miller, RB Miami Height: 5-11 Weight: 212 40 Time: 4.46
Chris Polk, RB Washington Height: 5-11 Weight: 222 40 Time: 4.46
David Wilson, RB, Virginia Tech Height: 5-11 Weight: 222 40 Time: 4.45
LaMichael James, RB Oregon Height: 5-9 Weight: 185 40 Time: 4.38
Doug Martin, RB Boise State Height: 5-9 Weight: 215 40 Time: 4.46
Bernard Pierce, RB Temple Height: 6-0 Weight: 217 40 Time: 4.51
Isaiah Pead, RB Cincinnati Height: 5-10 Weight: 200 40 Time: 4.41
Charles, Jamaal Chief’s 5-11 199
McClain, La’Ron Chief’s 6-0 260
McCluster, Dexter Chief’s 5-8 170
Battle, Jackie Chief’s 6-2 238
Draughn, Shaun Chief’s 6-0 205
jcox31mc - February 16, 2012
I like Bobby Rainey
I can’t believe he wasn’t invited to the combine. He is a 212 4.45 guy with great hands
saints_chiefsfan1979 - February 16, 2012
He looked pretty average in the East/West game.
I liked what I read about him, so I was watching for him. But he didn’t really wow me.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
like most of these guys will be as pro's
never did much in college and won’t do much in the NFL
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
Sorry Cox
I was pretty much enraged at the moment.
This is a good list
Steve_Chiefs - February 16, 2012
we do not need another running back this season especially at 1st round.
Defense is getting better. remember siler and berry were not there when the chiefs D started to come i to their own. Battle proved he could be reliable back ie fumble problems that plagued his career early.
We need PROTECTiON for whoever the mediocre QB is starting for us. IF we dont take a shot at RG3 (IMO i think we will try to get RG3) but if there is no QB available for us at 10-11 pick then OL is the best choice it helps passing and running game.
Sinny - February 16, 2012
Siler is coming back from an Achilles Rupture
The chances of him being ready for TC aren’t the greatest, neither are his chances for returning to previous form.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
We should draft an ILB first, then. As insurance.
Brsrkr - February 16, 2012
I'm down
Hightower looks pretty good, and I expect him to do better in the combine then most people think.
ChiefWarPaint - February 16, 2012
Chris Polk in the second...
… Oline is the most pressing need in the first. We may need a new waterboy soon, too.
Pacific Chief - February 16, 2012
Hm
I do say that he has some pretty amazing balance
ScoutSoldier - February 16, 2012 via mobile
Nice post T29
I’d still rather go O-line than RB if that’s the route we’re headed, but I see the reasoning.
And it’s not like there aren’t good linemen to be had in FA…
MNchiefsfan - February 16, 2012
I'm down, that dude is a beast.
kc_okerix - February 17, 2012
If we become a run-first team (again),
we need to ensure our opposition can’t run the score up on us. We have to be within 14 points of our opponent so that, like the 49ers this year, we don’t have to change our game plan and play a format we’re unaccustomed to.
In order to do this, we need to keep Carr and get a top-5 coverage linebacker. the new wave in the nfl is big, fast tight ends running routes down the middle, and we need someone to cover them. I just keep remembering Todd Heap destroying us in the playoffs and forcing us to use Cassel as a passer instead of a game manager.
If Crennel decides to do this, I’m all for Richardson. He was a lot of fun to watch in college.
1kmilesfromkc - February 19, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Arrowhead Pride to post a comment.