Andy, Open it up!

**Stevie Ray** · 08-20-2015, 09:23 PM

The QB competition ..... open it up.

If it's truly about putting the best team on the field, then why not have a fair, unbiased competition at QB?

Is Smith so good that nobody else deserves a chance to compete for the starting job? Ha, I doubt it. The facts certainly don't support that.

It's obvious that the pass offense has been the weakest link on the team.

For the past 2 years, the rush offense has been top 10 ranked; the defense has been top 10 ranked; the special teams have been top 5 ranked in returns, and the Chiefs have gotten 15 return TDs (kickoff, punt, fumble, INT) the past 2 years -- that's #1 in the NFL over that span.

The pass offense has been ranked 24th and 29th.
Is the QB position not accountable to that?

Why shouldn't Chase Daniel (and to a lesser extent, Aaron Murray) get a legitimate shot to win the job?

**Stevie Ray** · 08-25-2015, 04:20 AM

Originally Posted by matthewschiefs

Agree with you here 100%

I gave Stevie my advice and now I will give those who take big issue with him some

If his post bug you that much there is ignore. Or if you chose to not take that option and see a post that he makes that gets under your skin before replying take a little walk do a quick errand before replying give yourself a cool down time. This is just a forum on the internet no big deal

Exactly. As I've said, we don't have to agree. I'm just giving people the facts and an objective analysis of the facts. Don't shoot the messenger.

I think fans generally want to believe that the Chiefs will be a good team and have a successful season. Any opinion that doesn't line up with that belief, whether factually based or not, is going to be met with resistance.

Whether we agree or disagree on Alex Smith's individual ability, the Chiefs still have a chance to have a great year.

**Stevie Ray** · 08-27-2015, 03:18 AM

Chiefs have not won a football game with a QB drafted by the organization, in any round, since 1987.

1987!! Some of ya'll weren't even born then.

There can't possibly be another franchise the values the QB position less than the KC Chiefs. Sorry, but it's just frustrating.

**matthewschiefs** · 08-27-2015, 03:42 AM

Originally Posted by Stevie Ray

Chiefs have not won a football game with a QB drafted by the organization, in any round, since 1987.

1987!! Some of ya'll weren't even born then.

There can't possibly be another franchise the values the QB position less than the KC Chiefs. Sorry, but it's just frustrating.

This IMO is one of the MOST useless stats in the world

WHO CARES where the QB came from that won games. They have been to the playoffs MANY times since then they have won AFC West titles since then. Do those somehow mean less because of where the QB came from? It's just a pointless stat. Wins are wins no matter what.

This is also something common in those who insist that you must draft a QB. Well there are some teams who have been more successful going the rout of the Chiefs. The Saints and Cards fit that. Both have been to the superbowl the saints won the super bowl Do those not count because they didn't draft the QB that took them there?

I will just never understand the big fuss made about this

**slc chief** · 08-27-2015, 07:47 AM

Originally Posted by matthewschiefs

This IMO is one of the MOST useless stats in the world

WHO CARES where the QB came from that won games. They have been to the playoffs MANY times since then they have won AFC West titles since then. Do those somehow mean less because of where the QB came from? It's just a pointless stat. Wins are wins no matter what.

This is also something common in those who insist that you must draft a QB. Well there are some teams who have been more successful going the rout of the Chiefs. The Saints and Cards fit that. Both have been to the superbowl the saints won the super bowl Do those not count because they didn't draft the QB that took them there?

I will just never understand the big fuss made about this

The big fuss about that is .that is two teams out of how many superbowls. Drafting and grooming/building around a qb is a much more effective method for success.

**Stevie Ray** · 08-27-2015, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by matthewschiefs

This IMO is one of the MOST useless stats in the world WHO CARES where the QB came from that won games.

It's useful because it makes a statement in and of itself.

In the grand scheme of things does it matter by which avenue the players you win with were acquired? No, but that's not why the stat is being pointed out.

Originally Posted by matthewschiefs

This is also something common in those who insist that you must draft a QB.

That's a slight misrepresentation. It's not as if the argument has ever been that it's impossible to get it done without drafting your own QB. It's a matter of probabilities and tilting the odds in favor of success. The idea that there is more than one way to skin a cat isn't being opposed.

It's easy to lose context in these types of discussions, so I understand why you took it the way you did.

**Stevie Ray** · 08-27-2015, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by slc chief

The big fuss about that is .that is two teams out of how many superbowls. Drafting and grooming/building around a qb is a much more effective method for success.

Bingo!

You said it much more precise and effective than I ever could. I tend to take the long winded way around to making a simple point.

Wish I would've read ahead and saw yours 1st. I should just delete mine.

Thanks.

**brdempsey69** · 08-27-2015, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by slc chief

The big fuss about that is .that is two teams out of how many superbowls. Drafting and grooming/building around a qb is a much more effective method for success.

No, it is not an "effective method for success" where Kansas City is concerned. It has backfired miserably for over 4 decades for the Chiefs. ZERO for 17 drafting QB's since 1970, with Murray being candidate #18.

**Eydugstr** · 08-27-2015, 04:12 PM

Originally Posted by brdempsey69

No, it is not an "effective method for success" where Kansas City is concerned. It has backfired miserably for over 4 decades for the Chiefs. ZERO for 17 drafting QB's since 1970, with Murray being candidate #18.

Unfortunately, this is the case. My hopes with Andy Reid is that he'll be the coach that breaks that curse.

**slc chief** · 08-27-2015, 06:20 PM

Originally Posted by brdempsey69

No, it is not an "effective method for success" where Kansas City is concerned. It has backfired miserably for over 4 decades for the Chiefs. ZERO for 17 drafting QB's since 1970, with Murray being candidate #18.

If not effective why are the Patriots packers colts steelers and now Seahawks consistent superbowl contenders uh because they have drafted solid qbs not even debatable.it has back fired on kc due to poor scouting bad luck and a lack of the right circumstances surrounding these draft picks. Why the hell do you think Reid drafted Murray and picked brey up as soon as he could. He gets it. The hard part about it you never know with these kids coming out of college sometimes you get a sure thing like luck and sometimes you get a lucky diamond in the rough like brady. Either way once you have a young qbotf your franchise is set for years to come. On the flip side sometimes you do get a free agent qb that comes to the right situation and flourishes. But that doesn't usually take 4 years to do so