PDA

View Full Version : Bradford going back to Oklahoma. Does that change anything for Thigpen?



Big Daddy Tek
01-14-2009, 06:05 PM
With Bradford going back to Oklahoma, I think that might have a pretty big impact on what the Chiefs will do. Since the Lions will almost definitly pick up stafford at #1, their will be no other QB that the Chiefs could take at three. I think that the only reason we made it a possibility is because their was gonna be two QB's available. Now that their is only one, the Lions get him and the Chiefs must look elsewhere. Considering that it would take two 1st rounders for Pioli to get Cassell, I think Thigpen will be the guy next year.

KristofLaw
01-14-2009, 06:09 PM
That's great!!! Now the Chiefs can focus on needs for certain, unless they trade up. In my opinion we should trade down unless we want Oher or Crabtree.

hometeam
01-14-2009, 07:04 PM
I have a feeling Pioli would not take a QB at #3 anyway. I could be wrong but look at the pats past drafts, Pioli has everything to do with them, and with finding brady in the seventh, im willing to go out on a limb and say he will be looking for a mid/low round QB with all the right stuff to make him look like a genius.

Bigmoe
01-14-2009, 08:21 PM
I admit that I was hoping Bradford would stay. I hope now to see the Chiefs trade down and still get one the top O-lineman or maybe Curry. But this all hinges on who they sign in FA.

jap1
01-14-2009, 08:36 PM
I hope Mark Sanchez, USC stays in too. A lot of people think if he declares we might take him. I hope he stays. I like Sanchez a lot, but we need to build our lines before we can put all our eggs into the QB basket.

slimdagreat
01-14-2009, 08:45 PM
This is a good thing. The Chiefs have gaping holes at both lines and at LB, so I'm glad they'll now be forced to draft somebody thats not a QB.

With McCoy and bradford being available next year, maybe then we could look to upgrade the QB position, but I think we have much more pressing needs.

bigpoppachief
01-14-2009, 09:03 PM
i think Pioli is just what the chiefs needed. He is a NOW football guy not someone who made a team great 10 years ago. i think Pioli will be smarter about rebuilding and understand that you need to mix some vets in with youngesters because let's face it young talent needs to win to get better because we all know how it feels to lose in sports and it is depressing whther you have a good game or not lol

texaschief
01-14-2009, 09:10 PM
Sanchez declared. Stafford and Sanchez will be the top two QBs.

I highly doubt Pioli allows the organization to draft a QB in the top 3. This is the guy who's credited for finding Brady and Cassel late in the draft. I doubt the guy goes QB #3.

I don't think judging Thigpen's ability to perform in a pro style system based on the one game at the beginning of the season during his first pro start behind a line who hadn't been together too long against Atlanta is fair.

We need to go another position in the draft. As I've said before, I think the safest position to draft at #3 would be a LT and move Albert. RT and RG are both positions that need to be filled before next season begins. LG is a position that will need to be addressed in the future as well. So moving Albert to guard wouldn't be awful. Taking a guard at #15 in the draft is a little high, but if Albert could turn out to be great, it could be worth it.

hometeam
01-14-2009, 09:36 PM
I agree with the above, Albert can play at his natural position, we can scoop up LT and let FA/other rounds and player development take care of the rest of it for this year. No matter how cliche it is its always true, the battles start in the trenches.

Nel Toille
01-14-2009, 10:07 PM
With Bradford going back to Oklahoma, I think that might have a pretty big impact on what the Chiefs will do. Since the Lions will almost definitly pick up stafford at #1, their will be no other QB that the Chiefs could take at three. I think that the only reason we made it a possibility is because their was gonna be two QB's available. Now that their is only one, the Lions get him and the Chiefs must look elsewhere. Considering that it would take two 1st rounders for Pioli to get Cassell, I think Thigpen will be the guy next year.
I agree. I personally thought that Bradford was our only choice. Stafford is good but, like you said, he'll go number one.

leaves
01-15-2009, 12:28 PM
I'm glad he stayed, I would hope Thigpen gets the go. Another thing to remember is that an immobile qb is gonna suck for us at this point and if a qb throws to hard (ex= Croyle) Bowe won't hold onto it.

leoness8
01-15-2009, 08:00 PM
Yeah Sanchez seems like a solid QB. Even if he does declare..it wouldnt be totally bad to draft him anyway. This way he would get a year under the system and in the nfl which would advance the quarterback situation for the following year. He would be great behind Tyler Thigpen for the time being...

kcmostwanted
01-16-2009, 03:34 PM
We can all express how we feel about drafting a QB at the #3 spot but the question is: How does Scott feel about not having a Franchise QB in his clubhouse?

Can we say right now that Tyler Thigpen is a franchise QB??.. maybe not.. but at the same time we can't say Matthew Stafford and Mark Sanchez are either... The difference between these 2 QB and Thigpen is that they've played in a Pro-style offense during college so the change wouldn't be as extreme.

I think Sanchez would have the highest upside because he's been in the pro-style for 3+ years at USC but has had very limited playing time to show what he can really do.
What I do worry about is the fact that he's had such great athletes around him that he hasn't had to really carry a team on his back. This kindof falls into the Bradford situation: Great O-line, No pressure and barely ever sacked so how's he going to do when NFL defenses put pressure on him.

I know that many people have mentioned waiting until next year to draft a QB but I think this would be the year to draft either Sanchez (hopefully) or Stafford (Hopefully Detriot takes him) because next year's crop of QB are all spread offense QB's, and I think the adjustment to pro-style is alot easier said than done. If we wait until next year to draft a spread QB then we'd probably have to wait till 2011 before he can adjust to the pro-style and that's too long for me and the majority of Chiefs fans to wait....
All I'm saying is we have to go the Cleveland Brown route and draft a QB even though we have a decent one in town already because it could be a fluke. Let's not put all our eggs in the Brodie Croyle (or in this case Tyler Thigpen) basket again.

yashi
01-16-2009, 04:18 PM
We can all express how we feel about drafting a QB at the #3 spot but the question is: How does Scott feel about not having a Franchise QB in his clubhouse?

Can we say right now that Tyler Thigpen is a franchise QB??.. maybe not.. but at the same time we can't say Matthew Stafford and Mark Sanchez are either... The difference between these 2 QB and Thigpen is that they've played in a Pro-style offense during college so the change wouldn't be as extreme.

I think Sanchez would have the highest upside because he's been in the pro-style for 3+ years at USC but has had very limited playing time to show what he can really do.
What I do worry about is the fact that he's had such great athletes around him that he hasn't had to really carry a team on his back. This kindof falls into the Bradford situation: Great O-line, No pressure and barely ever sacked so how's he going to do when NFL defenses put pressure on him.

I know that many people have mentioned waiting until next year to draft a QB but I think this would be the year to draft either Sanchez (hopefully) or Stafford (Hopefully Detriot takes him) because next year's crop of QB are all spread offense QB's, and I think the adjustment to pro-style is alot easier said than done. If we wait until next year to draft a spread QB then we'd probably have to wait till 2011 before he can adjust to the pro-style and that's too long for me and the majority of Chiefs fans to wait....
All I'm saying is we have to go the Cleveland Brown route and draft a QB even though we have a decent one in town already because it could be a fluke. Let's not put all our eggs in the Brodie Croyle (or in this case Tyler Thigpen) basket again.

I don't understand the comparison between Croyle and Thigpen. Croyle has done absolutely nothing in 3 seasons (6 touchdowns). Thigpen has really only played this season, and had 22 total touchdowns.

Having a franchise QB without a solid line to protect him is worthless, even detrimental to his career. The Texans went ahead and took a "surefire" franchise QB to start the team off on the right note. Sounds like a good move right? Now Carr's had a terrible, banged up career and his timing in the pocket is permanately ruined because of it. What looked like a potential hall of famer at the NFL Draft has turned into a scrub backup for the Giants.

I was thrilled that Bradford stayed in school, so that we wouldn't be able to draft him. Honestly, how many QBs have been successful without a full 4 years of eligibility in college? I agree with Pete Carroll in that Sanchez going pro was a huge mistake. Now I just hope we don't end up drafting him.

jmlamerson
01-16-2009, 04:22 PM
I don't understand the comparison between Croyle and Thigpen. Croyle has done absolutely nothing in 3 seasons (6 touchdowns). Thigpen has really only played this season, and had 22 total touchdowns.

Having a franchise QB without a solid line to protect him is worthless, even detrimental to his career. The Texans went ahead and took a "surefire" franchise QB to start the team off on the right note. Sounds like a good move right? Now Carr's had a terrible, banged up career and his timing in the pocket is permanately ruined because of it. What looked like a potential hall of famer at the NFL Draft has turned into a scrub backup for the Giants.

I was thrilled that Bradford stayed in school, so that we wouldn't be able to draft him. Honestly, how many QBs have been successful without a full 4 years of eligibility in college? I agree with Pete Carroll in that Sanchez going pro was a huge mistake. Now I just hope we don't end up drafting him.

I wouldn't mind talking Sanchez in the 2nd, and frankly, I do think he lasts that long. Except for the Lions, I can't think of that many teams who would pick a QB high. Maybe the Vikings or Bucs would reach for him, but I don't think so.

I don't think anyone believes he's a top-5 guy.

jap1
01-16-2009, 04:52 PM
I wouldn't mind talking Sanchez in the 2nd, and frankly, I do think he lasts that long. Except for the Lions, I can't think of that many teams who would pick a QB high. Maybe the Vikings or Bucs would reach for him, but I don't think so.

I don't think anyone believes he's a top-5 guy.

ESPN's analysts are debating whether he or Stafford will go number one. Most agree that Stafford will be number one, but some say that Sanchez could impress enough at the combine to raise eyebrows. But, if the Lions dont take him, and we dont take him, there is a good chance he has a "Brady Quinn" style fall into the 2nd round.

If he is available in the 2nd AND we fix the OL AND get some LBs and DL in FA, I wouldnt ***** about picking him up and letting him sit for at least one year. But only if we fix the OL and D front seven first. I like him alot, but I wouldnt spend 1st round money on him.

chiefnut
01-16-2009, 05:12 PM
i say keep Thigpen, draft areas of need first, OL,DE, LB, then depth @ DB QB WR and all the above. remember leinert was to be a plug in qb and is ridin the pine, sanchez may suffer a similar fate.

jmlamerson
01-16-2009, 05:14 PM
ESPN's analysts are debating whether he or Stafford will go number one. Most agree that Stafford will be number one, but some say that Sanchez could impress enough at the combine to raise eyebrows. But, if the Lions dont take him, and we dont take him, there is a good chance he has a "Brady Quinn" style fall into the 2nd round.

If he is available in the 2nd AND we fix the OL AND get some LBs and DL in FA, I wouldnt ***** about picking him up and letting him sit for at least one year. But only if we fix the OL and D front seven first. I like him alot, but I wouldnt spend 1st round money on him.

Wow. I can't believe he's projected that high. Nothing against him, but he's not NFL ready right now. I guess some team like the Jets might pick him as the QBOTF, but 3 is way, way, way too high for him.

KCCAT21
01-16-2009, 05:18 PM
I don't think there is a qb in this draft worth taking as high as we are drafting. Hopefully Pioli can find lighting in a bottle again with the 199th, or whatever our late round picks are and get us someone like Brady. I know it doesn't happen very often, but lets try. I heard Clark say Pioli likes to take a qb every year. Not necessarily with the top picks but he likes to take one and see if he can find the next Brady. I think until they think there is a "can't miss" qb out there keep looking and fill our needs.

yashi
01-16-2009, 05:22 PM
Pioli has also never taken a QB higher than the 49th overall pick, which was last year with Kevin O'Connell... something to keep in mind.

Bike
01-16-2009, 09:09 PM
Sanchez did the smart thing in declaring this year as next year he would have to contend with Bradford, Tebow, Harrell - but this year he is guarenteed to be the 2nd qb taken...

KristofLaw
01-17-2009, 11:20 AM
Barring an injury, next year we're really gonna have to trade up for Bradford. I'd pull outta the draft if Detroit was sitting there licking there chops too.