So why didn't Bill Walsh take Joe Montana with his first pick?

First, the value of the QB position has increased substantially since '79.

Second, that was really a piss poor QB draft.

Joe Montana was the third QB taken in that draft.

Phil Simms and Steve Fuller were the only QBs taken ahead of him.

Heres my deal. I just want to pick a guy who we are not the only ones who think he has the potential to be a great starter. From qb to defensive line. It seems like we are always trying to out smart someone else and it almost always makes us look like a fool. I dont care where a starter is picked as long as he fits that bill.

Sent from my SGH-T499 using Tapatalk

I have watched every minute of every game for the last decade but I've only watched 9 games this year and I have no plans to watch the final two. The only way the Chiefs will merit any attention at all is to draft the best QB with their first pick in the upcoming draft. If you don't have a QB, then you don't have an NFL team.

I would not be bitching about the above. So long as the new GM selects at QB in the first, I will give him the benefit of the doubt on the evaluation, whether it's Wilson, Bray, Murray, Smith, or Barkley, I'm not going to be too concerned.

All of those players are far more talented than any of the shit we have on our roster currently.

There is no reason not to reach and take a QB #1 if you don't have one and there is no Calvin Johnson in the draft anymore with the new wage scale...Andrew Luck makes decent backup money.

This franchise is on life support. The machine that goes peep is barely clicking. If they screw this up its pretty much over for a real long time.

The team isn't going anywhere with Pioli as GM. We hire another GM and HC that are respected and look like they know how to build a team....I'll give them some leeway.

I want them to go QB in round 1 but it's not a deal breaker for me...

if Geno is who we thinks he is (IE checks out at the combine, emerges as the #1 QB in the draft) and we land the #1 pick and don't take him...

I don't care who we have as coach or GM.

I'll be ****ing livid.

Andy Luck's contract is 4 years $22M (fully guaranteed).

We'd have a starting QB for $5.5M for 4 years. If he busts, he makes as much as Kyle Orton.

Every single draft from here until the end of time, as long as their is no Calvin Johnson or FREAK talent, a QB is going #1. I bet, in the next 20 years, a QB goes #1 18 out of 20 times (if not more).

You don't get the #1 pick and have a QB unless your franchise stud goes out in say...the preseason.

Look at the worst teams this year. They have NOTHING at QB.

I guess Detroit has Stafford but at this point...other than a laser, rocket arm...he doesn't appear to be anything better than average. I like him, don't get me wrong, and think he has franchise potential...I think he really just needs a better coaching staff.

the other good thing about not spending $18M a year on a QB for the first 4 years...

there is a salary floor now...you have to spend something like 98% of the cap?

That means we'll be forced to resign our players (Bowe) and go after free agents.

Teams like Denver and New England who pay $20M a year for their QB...that puts them at a slight disadvantage until you think, "oh wait, they have the two best QB's ever" but YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.

Geno, Chip or Shanahan + GM who compliments coach + salary cap floor = insta-rebuild

Absolutely.

Because he could get him in the 3rd.

Geno, Chip and Russ Ball + salary cap floor = insta-rebuild.

Kelly and Ball are my ideal HC+GM candidates. New blood, hungry and innovative.