| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| If we Draft a QB #1 and let him sit for a year? |
| Alright |
|
42% |
[ 6 ] |
| Mad |
|
57% |
[ 8 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 14 |
|
| Author |
Message |
HiccupGuy
Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 1719
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:33 pm Post subject: How would you feel about this? |
 |
|
|
So say we draft a QB number 1 over all. Then we sign someone off the street someone like Matt Moore, Jason Campbell, or if Alex Smith gets cut. We have the person who we picked up in FA start for a year. Then have the QB we drafted number one over all sit for a year and let him learn from the side line. The following year have him fight for the starting job or start him.
or
Just throw the number one into the fire and start him?
So who would be mad if we drafted a QB number one over all and he has to sit a year? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nicfre2011
Joined: 15 Mar 2011
Posts: 5303
Location: SC
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
In Andy & co. I will trust. I wouldn't want to automatically sit a rookie. If he legitimately lost the starting job through competition in the offseason/training camp, I am ok with him sitting until he gets more experience and can dethrown the incumbent. I wouldn't want a Stanzi situation where the player is relegated to the back end of the roster. Something tells me this regime probably isn't going to prevent anyone from competing.
_________________
Thanks to ryknowssd for the sig!
Trent Baalke for 2013 NFL executive of the year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HiccupGuy
Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 1719
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| nicfre2011 wrote: | | In Andy & co. I will trust. I wouldn't want to automatically sit a rookie. If he legitimately lost the starting job through competition in the offseason/training camp, I am ok with him sitting until he gets more experience and can dethrown the incumbent. I wouldn't want a Stanzi situation where the player is relegated to the back end of the roster. Something tells me this regime probably isn't going to prevent anyone from competing. |
Eh, I was think like him being the number 2 QB on the roster. So if the #1 QB goes down or is just playing awful. The QB we drafted would play.
Nothing like Stanzi who doesn't get to see the light.
I don't know how I would feel if we let him play for his spot. If he looses out I don't want to hurt his confidence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chiefs_5627
Joined: 26 Dec 2007
Posts: 3009
Location: Genoville
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
The only way id be ok with a number 1 overall pick sitting on the bench is if he is absolutely stinking up the place and needs to reflect.
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf5WYigZHME |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikek163
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 4709
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
It really wouldn't fit into Dorsey and Reid's philosophy of drafting BPA then having the guy sit for a year. If Smith or Wilson or Barkley is BPA and is chosen at #1 then he will start. Unless the HC and GM are lying to our faces this is what will happen.
_________________
Knock knock. Who's there? The guy that finished second! The guy that finished second who? Exactly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArrowheadRage58
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 3493
Location: Hate for the Donkeys is at a mile high
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Much like Russel Wilson, if the competition is anywhere close at all, you play the guy with more upside....which is exactly the reason I was lobbying for Stanzi to start 2012. Our staff was so bad, we weren't even willing to give Stanzi a legit chance to show that he was close.
_________________
| fortdetroit wrote: | | I wonder if people realize that Matt Cassel's 2 best seasons of his career are probably better than anything Alex Smith has ever done. |
Last edited by ArrowheadRage58 on Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:47 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arrowhead86
Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 3771
Location: Kansas City
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Mikek163 wrote: | | It really wouldn't fit into Dorsey and Reid's philosophy of drafting BPA then having the guy sit for a year. If Smith or Wilson or Barkley is BPA and is chosen at #1 then he will start. Unless the HC and GM are lying to our faces this is what will happen. |
How does them stating they prefer to take BPA translate into them saying they will play the guy they draft? One week in and we already have ultimatums about their character.. AWESOME!
As for the question at hand.. it depends on our situation. If it is QB I do hope he can start right away, but if he needs a few weeks I won't be opposed.
In Andy I Trust!
_________________
In Andy We Trust!
WCO + 3-4 in KC
Erhardt: Throw to score! Run to win! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikek163
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 4709
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Arrowhead86 wrote: | | Mikek163 wrote: | | It really wouldn't fit into Dorsey and Reid's philosophy of drafting BPA then having the guy sit for a year. If Smith or Wilson or Barkley is BPA and is chosen at #1 then he will start. Unless the HC and GM are lying to our faces this is what will happen. |
How does them stating they prefer to take BPA translate into them saying they will play the guy they draft? One week in and we already have ultimatums about their character.. AWESOME!
As for the question at hand.. it depends on our situation. If it is QB I do hope he can start right away, but if he needs a few weeks I won't be opposed.
In Andy I Trust! |
So your argument is that the #1 player in the NFL draft who will be drafted by BPA standards will sit out the first year? Because that is what happens in the NFL?
Also, this isn't a weeks judgement. I have followed Philly / Reid my entire life (as long as I have followed the Chiefs) and I have done my homework on Dorsey too. Me using the term "lying to our faces" is just proving my point that if a QB is taken with the #1 pick, he will start day 1.
I would say I guarantee it. But that won't matter much around these parts. So I will end my stance here.
_________________
Knock knock. Who's there? The guy that finished second! The guy that finished second who? Exactly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OILCHIEFS
Joined: 02 Feb 2011
Posts: 1306
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Honestly I would be okay with it but only if the vet they bring is is good enough to drive an offense. There isn't many people who could that are available.
Maybe Vick, Flynn or Alex Smith are the only one i would be okay with if they played well for us in TC. Aside from them i dont really see anyone available that will be worth starting of Geno Smith  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArrowheadRage58
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 3493
Location: Hate for the Donkeys is at a mile high
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Mikek163 wrote: | | Arrowhead86 wrote: | | Mikek163 wrote: | | It really wouldn't fit into Dorsey and Reid's philosophy of drafting BPA then having the guy sit for a year. If Smith or Wilson or Barkley is BPA and is chosen at #1 then he will start. Unless the HC and GM are lying to our faces this is what will happen. |
How does them stating they prefer to take BPA translate into them saying they will play the guy they draft? One week in and we already have ultimatums about their character.. AWESOME!
As for the question at hand.. it depends on our situation. If it is QB I do hope he can start right away, but if he needs a few weeks I won't be opposed.
In Andy I Trust! |
So your argument is that the #1 player in the NFL draft who will be drafted by BPA standards will sit out the first year? Because that is what happens in the NFL?
Also, this isn't a weeks judgement. I have followed Philly / Reid my entire life (as long as I have followed the Chiefs) and I have done my homework on Dorsey too. Me using the term "lying to our faces" is just proving my point that if a QB is taken with the #1 pick, he will start day 1.
I would say I guarantee it. But that won't matter much around these parts. So I will end my stance here. |
Wasn't Carson Palmer a BPA that sat? Not saying Reid would do it, just sayin.
_________________
| fortdetroit wrote: | | I wonder if people realize that Matt Cassel's 2 best seasons of his career are probably better than anything Alex Smith has ever done. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arrowhead86
Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 3771
Location: Kansas City
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Mikek163 wrote: | | Arrowhead86 wrote: | | Mikek163 wrote: | | It really wouldn't fit into Dorsey and Reid's philosophy of drafting BPA then having the guy sit for a year. If Smith or Wilson or Barkley is BPA and is chosen at #1 then he will start. Unless the HC and GM are lying to our faces this is what will happen. |
How does them stating they prefer to take BPA translate into them saying they will play the guy they draft? One week in and we already have ultimatums about their character.. AWESOME!
As for the question at hand.. it depends on our situation. If it is QB I do hope he can start right away, but if he needs a few weeks I won't be opposed.
In Andy I Trust! |
So your argument is that the #1 player in the NFL draft who will be drafted by BPA standards will sit out the first year? Because that is what happens in the NFL?
Also, this isn't a weeks judgement. I have followed Philly / Reid my entire life (as long as I have followed the Chiefs) and I have done my homework on Dorsey too. Me using the term "lying to our faces" is just proving my point that if a QB is taken with the #1 pick, he will start day 1.
I would say I guarantee it. But that won't matter much around these parts. So I will end my stance here. |
My argument was that they would not be liars! And if you have followed him, you recall that McNabb, drafted #2 overall, did not start day one.
It wasn't the idea, it was that if they failed to start him for whatever reason you'd view them as liars.
_________________
In Andy We Trust!
WCO + 3-4 in KC
Erhardt: Throw to score! Run to win! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikek163
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 4709
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Arrowhead86 wrote: | | Mikek163 wrote: | | Arrowhead86 wrote: | | Mikek163 wrote: | | It really wouldn't fit into Dorsey and Reid's philosophy of drafting BPA then having the guy sit for a year. If Smith or Wilson or Barkley is BPA and is chosen at #1 then he will start. Unless the HC and GM are lying to our faces this is what will happen. |
How does them stating they prefer to take BPA translate into them saying they will play the guy they draft? One week in and we already have ultimatums about their character.. AWESOME!
As for the question at hand.. it depends on our situation. If it is QB I do hope he can start right away, but if he needs a few weeks I won't be opposed.
In Andy I Trust! |
So your argument is that the #1 player in the NFL draft who will be drafted by BPA standards will sit out the first year? Because that is what happens in the NFL?
Also, this isn't a weeks judgement. I have followed Philly / Reid my entire life (as long as I have followed the Chiefs) and I have done my homework on Dorsey too. Me using the term "lying to our faces" is just proving my point that if a QB is taken with the #1 pick, he will start day 1.
I would say I guarantee it. But that won't matter much around these parts. So I will end my stance here. |
My argument was that they would not be liars! And if you have followed him, you recall that McNabb, drafted #2 overall, did not start day one.
It wasn't the idea, it was that if they failed to start him for whatever reason you'd view them as liars. |
I guess you either misread what I was saying / implying or I said it improperly or a bit of both.
_________________
Knock knock. Who's there? The guy that finished second! The guy that finished second who? Exactly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arrowhead86
Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 3771
Location: Kansas City
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Mikek163 wrote: | | Arrowhead86 wrote: | | Mikek163 wrote: | | Arrowhead86 wrote: | | Mikek163 wrote: | | It really wouldn't fit into Dorsey and Reid's philosophy of drafting BPA then having the guy sit for a year. If Smith or Wilson or Barkley is BPA and is chosen at #1 then he will start. Unless the HC and GM are lying to our faces this is what will happen. |
How does them stating they prefer to take BPA translate into them saying they will play the guy they draft? One week in and we already have ultimatums about their character.. AWESOME!
As for the question at hand.. it depends on our situation. If it is QB I do hope he can start right away, but if he needs a few weeks I won't be opposed.
In Andy I Trust! |
So your argument is that the #1 player in the NFL draft who will be drafted by BPA standards will sit out the first year? Because that is what happens in the NFL?
Also, this isn't a weeks judgement. I have followed Philly / Reid my entire life (as long as I have followed the Chiefs) and I have done my homework on Dorsey too. Me using the term "lying to our faces" is just proving my point that if a QB is taken with the #1 pick, he will start day 1.
I would say I guarantee it. But that won't matter much around these parts. So I will end my stance here. |
My argument was that they would not be liars! And if you have followed him, you recall that McNabb, drafted #2 overall, did not start day one.
It wasn't the idea, it was that if they failed to start him for whatever reason you'd view them as liars. |
I guess you either misread what I was saying / implying or I said it improperly or a bit of both. |
No worries. My apologies for any misunderstanding.
_________________
In Andy We Trust!
WCO + 3-4 in KC
Erhardt: Throw to score! Run to win! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rumless
Joined: 01 Sep 2012
Posts: 1037
Location: Chiefs Kingdom
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
If I were an NFL coach, here would be my philosophy.
I don't want to sit a QB for a year just because it's been done before. I don't want to start a QB in his first year just because he was drafted high. I want to play the best quarterback today. If that's the stopgap, so be it. It's not a crime. Start the guy who gives you the best chance of success on a given Sunday.
_________________
| aceinthehouse wrote: | I personally do NOT think Lewis is the Greatest MLBer ever.
In fact, I'm not sure he's better than our very own London Fletcher. |
Live/Steam Username: Cragfox |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArrowheadRage58
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 3493
Location: Hate for the Donkeys is at a mile high
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Rumless wrote: | If I were an NFL coach, here would be my philosophy.
I don't want to sit a QB for a year just because it's been done before. I don't want to start a QB in his first year just because he was drafted high. I want to play the best quarterback today. If that's the stopgap, so be it. It's not a crime. Start the guy who gives you the best chance of success on a given Sunday. |
But don't you think if it's close, you give it to the rookie with upside regardless if you think the vet will give you the best chance the first 4 or 5 games. I predicted and I think Peter Carroll thot that Flynn would give him the best chance at first but that Wilson would surpass that by mid-season.
_________________
| fortdetroit wrote: | | I wonder if people realize that Matt Cassel's 2 best seasons of his career are probably better than anything Alex Smith has ever done. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
