This post made my day, because he really hits on a point most Chiefs fans are too drowned in koolaid to understand.

And the troll cast out his line.....

Because we passed on guys like Rodgers, Flacco, Kaepernick, Wilson, Dalton and Brees because "they weren't good enough"

At some point, the excuse makes the regime seem like a bunch of pussies that are scared to take a chance in a league that rewards teams that take risks.

It's sad that this fanbase drools over players that weren't good enough for other teams, but deem every quarterback in the draft "not good enough"

False equivalency.

And it's just plain silly how you're STILL playing up this Tom Brady shit as anything else but blind luck.

Guess what? The Rams had to sign Kurt Warner and put faith in him as the back up to Trent Green. Are you going to say that's luck, but Tom Brady isn't?

Oh. NOOOOOWWW I remember why I called you illogical.

That post right there earns him at least a douche nomination...wow

It's not a false equivalency at all, and you're smart enough to know that.

I'm not playing anything up. I'm responding to some really stupid posts by people by giving what should be obvious answers.

Why would I say that was luck for the Rams? Warner earned his spot. He wasn't just randomly picked out of a lineup.

That's the tip of the iceberg for him, but I just figured he would just a nomination as a badge of honor.

Kaepernick, Wilson, Dalton and Brees were all taken after the first round. Rodgers was taken 24th in the same draft where Alex Smith went #1 overall, and Flacco was taken at 18, well behind Matt Ryan.

How is that illogical? He makes a good point.

So many people are over here saying we HAVE to select a QB with our pick, acting like we've tossed every pick in every draft away.

The reality of it is, we've built some pretty damned good teams passing on "sure thing" QB's that didn't turn out to be a "sure thing", and we've also passed on guys who became great talents. But what irks me, is people don't understand that we didn't pass on them because they weren't good enough, we passed on them because at that time, we didn't need them in their raw form, and we had no concrete indication that they'd ever become "what they are".

The thing is, when you have a franchise QB, or you think you do, you generally don't draft QB's inside of the fourth round unless either A. he's a highly talented Project QB, or because you're ready to start grooming his heir.

So far, our Front Office, Coaching Staff, and Owners have thought every year that we had our guy with Cassel, and with Green, and so forth, but the reality is, we've just had re-tread QB's who were good enough to make us forget about setting up a franchise guy for the future, but not good enough to keep us competitive for year after year.

I really have to explain this to you?

Team X has a starting QB still in his prime with a Super Bowl appearance to his name. The team is consistently putting up winning seasons and playoff appearances. In one draft, they are given a compensatory selection, with which they see this QB prospect that they kinda like. They say, "Why not? Never hurts to draft a QB, and this guy looks pretty good for a 6th rounder." That pick ends up winning them three Super Bowls. His name gets mentioned in conversations about the greatest QB to ever play the game.

And you say there's no luck involved.


...Ooooooooookay

Now I know you're not talking to me, you should use Quotes more often . LMAO

Where did I say there was no luck involved? At some level, every pick is lucky. The Colts are lucky they drafted #1 in the years of Manning and Luck. The Chiefs aren't lucky in that way.

What I said was that saying they were lucky is stupid, specifically because

It's illogical because it spits in the face of the fact that great QBs make up such a ****ing huge portion of the Super Bowl Winning probability pie.

The reason why 30 years of failure/30 years of no 1st round QB works is because the first round TENDS TO BE where these guys are to be found. At the very least, drafting a QB in the first round shows that the team is very conscious of how important the QB position is.

If there were the same success rate for teams that vacate all of their draft picks and then win the Super Bowl, MAYBE you'd have an argument.

Until we see some data on that, then yes, it absolutely is a false equivalence.

It's not a false equivalence and, again, you're smart enough to know that. You are also smart enough to know that you find SB winning QBs outside the first round just about as often as you find them inside the first round. The data backs that up.

If it was all about being taken #1, or even taken in the first round, Alex Smith would still be in SF.