PDA

View Full Version : So, 2008 draft.....



texaschief
05-17-2007, 03:52 PM
What will we be looking to draft next year? Offensive linemen? Cornerbacks? Runningbacks? Quarterbacks?

I think with the top 10 pick that we'll have next year, if Croyle had a crappy year, we'll see K.C. take a QB in the first round. I also think we'll take a CB before Herm even thinks about the OL. You can proabably let those dreams go.

Anyone know who the top QB prospects for next year are?

wolfpack
05-17-2007, 05:04 PM
just a guess but since hermmie is pure defense and our corners are nearing retirement home age, i`d say a corner.

Chiefsfan27
05-17-2007, 06:48 PM
The top quarterback prospects for next year are
Brian Brohm Louisville- Defenitely the best QB prospect as of now
Chad Henne Michigan
John David Booty USC
Colt Brennan Hawaii
Eric Ainge Tennessee

Canada
05-17-2007, 09:09 PM
Id still like to see what this years draft class is gonna do

Chiefster
05-17-2007, 10:54 PM
Id still like to see what this years draft class is gonna do


Same here; I think next years draft will depend greatly upon what this years glaring needs present.

Coach
05-17-2007, 11:51 PM
Corners, O-Line.

Chiefster
05-17-2007, 11:59 PM
Corners, O-Line.

I kinda thought that this aspect applied to this years draft.

kenny1937
05-18-2007, 03:42 AM
I kinda thought that this aspect applied to this years draft.

Ditto, I expect to see the same old thing next year, defense, defense, and more defense, i don't see the leopard changing his spots. (grin)

:rockon: :character0045: :anim-magicman:

texaschief
05-18-2007, 04:22 AM
Ditto, I expect to see the same old thing next year, defense, defense, and more defense, i don't see the leopard changing his spots. (grin)



How much more defense can you actually draft? We have the safeties, we have 2 young linebackers. A solid DL. the only thing we could draft is a corner or two, maybe a DE replacement (dependant on what Turk/Bell can do) or maybe a young LB to replace an aging Edwards.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Chiefs go WR again. Especially if they can re-sign LJ. If we get another guy good enough to replace Kennison, we'd have Bowe, Webb and then the draft pick as our top 3. that could cause havoc if LJ can catch the ball out of the back field and oh yeah, there's always Gonzo.

I'm a huge defense first guy, but hey, if our O-line is solid this year, lets get the kid a few weapons to work with.

kenny1937
05-18-2007, 04:40 AM
How much more defense can you actually draft? We have the safeties, we have 2 young linebackers. A solid DL. the only thing we could draft is a corner or two, maybe a DE replacement (dependant on what Turk/Bell can do) or maybe a young LB to replace an aging Edwards.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Chiefs go WR again. Especially if they can re-sign LJ. If we get another guy good enough to replace Kennison, we'd have Bowe, Webb and then the draft pick as our top 3. that could cause havoc if LJ can catch the ball out of the back field and oh yeah, there's always Gonzo.

I'm a huge defense first guy, but hey, if our O-line is solid this year, lets get the kid a few weapons to work with.


I have not had time to check the latest news, I didn't know that our o line was solid, if we made some trades or free agency pick ups I just didn't hear about them. Our o line was anything but solid, and that is the point I think that many folks on the board were thinking about, when thay went for some more defense, in this years draft when o line was the serious need. As bad as the need for o line help was, they still went for defense, because they are primarily defense minded, hence the comments tongue in cheek they may be, because they ignored the o line needs this year, and it is almost a forgone conclusion, based on past experiences, that defense will again be the first priority next year, like most of the years we have had to suffer through in the past. Really like posting with you texaschief, keep up the good work.

:rockon: :character0045:

Coach
05-18-2007, 09:16 AM
I have not had time to check the latest news, I didn't know that our o line was solid, if we made some trades or free agency pick ups I just didn't hear about them. Our o line was anything but solid, and that is the point I think that many folks on the board were thinking about, when thay went for some more defense, in this years draft when o line was the serious need. As bad as the need for o line help was, they still went for defense, because they are primarily defense minded, hence the comments tongue in cheek they may be, because they ignored the o line needs this year, and it is almost a forgone conclusion, based on past experiences, that defense will again be the first priority next year, like most of the years we have had to suffer through in the past. Really like posting with you texaschief, keep up the good work.

:rockon: :character0045:


I don't think that the O-Line people that were left in the draft in the 3rd and 4th round would have started or potentially have even made the roster. Obviously there can be hidden gems, but the sure things were well gone. The biggest question mark was whether we should have taken Joe Staley in the 1st rd. We instead took another major need which was WR. If Bowe works out, then Queen Carl made the right decision. If Bowe is a bust, then everyone will look at this draft as a bust.

Everyone keeps ripping on Carl for taking a kicker, but I think the kicking game is extemely important. How many times did Tynes only get the kickoff to the 15-20 yr line last year. If we could find a guy who could consistently put kickoffs in the end-zone, it would make our defense that much better. If he can kick 50 yd'ers as well, then that kicker might just have been a steal.

Back to the post, I think depth at corner is needed and O-line for the obvious reasons we are all talking about.

Chiefster
05-18-2007, 09:30 AM
I don't think that the O-Line people that were left in the draft in the 3rd and 4th round would have started or potentially have even made the roster. Obviously there can be hidden gems, but the sure things were well gone. The biggest question mark was whether we should have taken Joe Staley in the 1st rd. We instead took another major need which was WR. If Bowe works out, then Queen Carl made the right decision. If Bowe is a bust, then everyone will look at this draft as a bust.

Everyone keeps ripping on Carl for taking a kicker, but I think the kicking game is extemely important. How many times did Tynes only get the kickoff to the 15-20 yr line last year. If we could find a guy who could consistently put kickoffs in the end-zone, it would make our defense that much better. If he can kick 50 yd'ers as well, then that kicker might just have been a steal.

Back to the post, I think depth at corner is needed and O-line for the obvious reasons we are all talking about.


I couldn't agree more, I hope the "O" line off season acquisitions pan out this season; it would be a pleasant surprise! If not, then the "O" line must be a priority in the "08" draft. IMHO

texaschief
05-18-2007, 06:31 PM
I didn't know that our o line was solid, if we made some trades or free agency pick ups I just didn't hear about them. Our o line was anything but solid, and that is the point I think that many folks on the board were thinking about, when thay went for some more defense, in this years draft when o line was the serious need. As bad as the need for o line help was, they still went for defense, because they are primarily defense minded,


You didn't know our offensive line was solid because most people don't recognize one when they see it. Is the line stacked with perinnial pro bowlers? no. I understand we don't have Roaf and Shields anymore.

Ever wonder why those guys don't play anymore? They realize thier bodies can't hold up any longer. they can't play the position the way it needs to be played, and they understand that.

Most people would tell you they'd rather have Roaf and Shields at half strength than other players at full. That's just ignorant. While those players were good, every player in the NFL is a GREAT football player with amazing talent. Our O-line is plenty talented to run the watered down offense Herm is installing.

The Chiefs entire projected starting O-Line has starting experience. What is the real problem? They don't have a Willie Roaf type LT? I just think it's way too early to say the Chiefs have a bad O-line.

Look at the projected line:

RT-Chris Terry-8 year pro- 80 starts
RG-John Welborne-9 year pro-79 starts
C-Casey Wiegmann-12 year pro-120 starts
LG-Brian Waters-8 year pro- 86 starts
LT-Damion McIntosh-8 year pro- 80 starts
BlockingTE- Jason Dunn- 11 year pro
RecievingTE- Tony Gonzales- 11 year pro

So, looking at that line and seeing 3 new starters who most Chief fans haven't seen play thier position before, tell me; why, in your mind, is this line who has a combined 67 years of experience and at least 500 starts not a SOLID line? i understand it's not the All-Pro line we've seen in years past, but why is it not a solid line? just curious.

Chiefster
05-18-2007, 07:01 PM
You didn't know our offensive line was solid because most people don't recognize one when they see it. Is the line stacked with perinnial pro bowlers? no. I understand we don't have Roaf and Shields anymore.

Ever wonder why those guys don't play anymore? They realize thier bodies can't hold up any longer. they can't play the position the way it needs to be played, and they understand that.

Most people would tell you they'd rather have Roaf and Shields at half strength than other players at full. That's just ignorant. While those players were good, every player in the NFL is a GREAT football player with amazing talent. Our O-line is plenty talented to run the watered down offense Herm is installing.

The Chiefs entire projected starting O-Line has starting experience. What is the real problem? They don't have a Willie Roaf type LT? I just think it's way too early to say the Chiefs have a bad O-line.

Look at the projected line:

RT-Chris Terry-8 year pro- 80 starts
RG-John Welborne-9 year pro-79 starts
C-Casey Wiegmann-12 year pro-120 starts
LG-Brian Waters-8 year pro- 86 starts
LT-Damion McIntosh-8 year pro- 80 starts
BlockingTE- Jason Dunn- 11 year pro
RecievingTE- Tony Gonzales- 11 year pro

So, looking at that line and seeing 3 new starters who most Chief fans haven't seen play thier position before, tell me; why, in your mind, is this line who has a combined 67 years of experience and at least 500 starts not a SOLID line? i understand it's not the All-Pro line we've seen in years past, but why is it not a solid line? just curious.

Good Post; you know your football.

1. Roaf and Shields "were good"??? Complete understatement. Every NFL player is "GREAT"??? Bit of an overstatement. IMHO

2. While the number of starts may initially look impressive on the surface; your talking on average about 10 starts a season which means that even given that particular scenario while they would have started the majority of any given season it also means that each one of them would have spent at least six weeks either injured or backing up the guy in front of them.

However, you make an excelent point about simply taking for grant it that our "O" line will completely flop, and they do have a lot of experience playing in the NFL.

texaschief
05-18-2007, 08:49 PM
2. While the number of starts may initially look impressive on the surface; your talking about on average about 10 starts a season which means that even given that particular scenario while they would have started the majority of any given season it also means that each one of them would have spent at least six weeks either injured or backing up the guy in front of them.



Well, not really. Because if you just take the number of starts and average them out by the number of players, it doesn't tell the truth. I didn't factor in any starts by Dunn. Which any Chiefs fan will tell you, he doesn't really start. But he's huge in our run game. Also, Chris Terry was out for a couple seasons. He was suspended for one and barely played for the Chiefs last year because he didn't know the system. Welbourn started almost all the games he played in from 2000 to 2003. Excluding his rookie season, since he came to K.C., he's been a role position player. But he was a really good guard in Philly. i also guessed at the amount of starts for Gonzo. So really, when these players were and are "starters" they completed MOST of thier seasons as a starter. But you are right. not all. but the numbers you came up with are skewed.

Chiefster
05-18-2007, 11:41 PM
Well, not really. Because if you just take the number of starts and average them out by the number of players, it doesn't tell the truth. I didn't factor in any starts by Dunn. Which any Chiefs fan will tell you, he doesn't really start. But he's huge in our run game. Also, Chris Terry was out for a couple seasons. He was suspended for one and barely played for the Chiefs last year because he didn't know the system. Welbourn started almost all the games he played in from 2000 to 2003. Excluding his rookie season, since he came to K.C., he's been a role position player. But he was a really good guard in Philly. i also guessed at the amount of starts for Gonzo. So really, when these players were and are "starters" they completed MOST of thier seasons as a starter. But you are right. not all. but the numbers you came up with are skewed.

Yeah, it's fuzzy math, but I was just taking the number of starts you came up with for each player as compared with the number of years each one has been in the league individually, and come up with about ten starts a season per player on average.

chief31
05-20-2007, 11:36 PM
You didn't know our offensive line was solid because most people don't recognize one when they see it. Is the line stacked with perinnial pro bowlers? no. I understand we don't have Roaf and Shields anymore.

Ever wonder why those guys don't play anymore? They realize thier bodies can't hold up any longer. they can't play the position the way it needs to be played, and they understand that.

Most people would tell you they'd rather have Roaf and Shields at half strength than other players at full. That's just ignorant. While those players were good, every player in the NFL is a GREAT football player with amazing talent. Our O-line is plenty talented to run the watered down offense Herm is installing.

The Chiefs entire projected starting O-Line has starting experience. What is the real problem? They don't have a Willie Roaf type LT? I just think it's way too early to say the Chiefs have a bad O-line.

Look at the projected line:

RT-Chris Terry-8 year pro- 80 starts
RG-John Welborne-9 year pro-79 starts
C-Casey Wiegmann-12 year pro-120 starts
LG-Brian Waters-8 year pro- 86 starts
LT-Damion McIntosh-8 year pro- 80 starts
BlockingTE- Jason Dunn- 11 year pro
RecievingTE- Tony Gonzales- 11 year pro

So, looking at that line and seeing 3 new starters who most Chief fans haven't seen play thier position before, tell me; why, in your mind, is this line who has a combined 67 years of experience and at least 500 starts not a SOLID line? i understand it's not the All-Pro line we've seen in years past, but why is it not a solid line? just curious.

Qick answer, because Macintosh is a poor pass-protector, while Terry hasn't been playing.(Similar to Turley) No tackles = No time in the pocket.

Seriously, do the Chiefs pay you? You have more positive spin, than Carl Petersen, himself. Not intending to insult, just wondering how you can't see the forest? Yet, at the beginning of this post, you mentioned that you expect us to draft in the top ten, in '08. With a top ten defense and a "solid" O-line, adding L.J., Gonzales and Bowe, how does the math work?

Chiefster
05-21-2007, 12:00 AM
Qick answer, because Macintosh is a poor pass-protector, while Terry hasn't been playing.(Similar to Turley) No tackles = No time in the pocket.

Seriously, do the Chiefs pay you? You have more positive spin, than Carl Petersen, himself. Not intending to insult, just wondering how you can't see the forest? Yet, at the beginning of this post, you mentioned that you expect us to draft in the top ten, in '08. With a top ten defense and a "solid" O-line, adding L.J., Gonzales and Bowe, how does the math work?


LOL!!

I think he's just tryin to provide some balance to all us nay sayers.

texaschief
05-21-2007, 01:14 AM
Yet, at the beginning of this post, you mentioned that you expect us to draft in the top ten, in '08. With a top ten defense and a "solid" O-line, adding L.J., Gonzales and Bowe, how does the math work?

a solid team will land you with a solid season. maybe an 8-8 or even a playoff 9-7 team, which is what the Chiefs would have if they didn't have an undersized, "rookie" QB. that's why i asked who the top QB prospects were. I could be totally wrong, but i don't know what Herm sees in Croyle. I was pissed when they drafted him and even more pissed that he actually has the faith of the head coach. But, I'm not at practice and he did find Chad Pennington. Pennington was a good choice if he could've stayed healthy. I've got the same concerns with Croyle. The guy's got 2 bad knees and according to you, "no pass blockers."

Although, i've got to say, the pass protection at tackle won't be as big of a problem as you think. Only on 3rd down may you actually see some problems, assuming you're right. The opposing DEs will be too worried about stopping the run to try and gamble on sacking the QB on non-obvious passing downs.

So, that's why i don't think they'll do very well. They'll have a first year starter at QB.

And if that's not enough, just look at the damn schedule. If you're honest with yourself, you know the Chiefs will be doing extremely well to finish at .500. So, if something happens like suspensions or injuries, yeah, they'll probably be in the bottom third of the league.

But i doubt it's because the Chiefs will have an "awful" O-line.