Does Iowa's James Vandenberg also offer a "legit shot to greatly improve" the Chiefs QB position? If the answer is no, then just pointing out that Geno "Slow Eyes" Smith plays QB is not much of an argument. If the answer is yes, you've got an even less proficient eye for talent than a hack like me does.

This makes no sense whatsoever, unless you actually believe James Vandenberg is close to being the QB that Geno Smith is and can potentially be in the NFL.

he's ripping Stanzi and Iowa homers

I don't accept your assessment of Geno Smith.
It's not a given and it's not a premise that goes without saying.
You can't just say he plays the most important position, therefore he's a better pick than any T in the draft.

This is BEP level reasoning.

Often, BEP makes more sense than you do. This would be one of those times.

Not agreeing with how good Geno Smith could be as a pro doesn't mean you're allowed to go full reerun and put him next to James Vandenberg on the QB scale.

I don't think Joeckel is anything special as a top LT prospect. When I think of the top tackles to come out of the draft in past years, I can't think of many I'd prefer Joeckel to. Tyron Smith maybe.

But that doesn't mean I'm allowed to put him next to Colin Brown. That's just ridiculous bullshit.

But here's where this argument falls apart. I agree, an elite QB is more important than an elite LT, but it looks like the Chiefs, and they're not alone, feel there is no elite QB in the draft. It seems they,and others, feel there's no difference making QB, or a QB that now, and in the near future, will be as good as Alex Smith.

You can say you must take the QB that will be really good, and win games for your team, and you'd be right, but you can't just take a QB #1 that you don't believe in. In that case a LT that's close to guaranteed to be good for a while is a better pick.

I didn't do that, you literally did. I asked you a simple question that you haven't answered yet. If you don't think Vandenberg has a legit shot to greatly improve the Chiefs, then there's a problem with your original attempt to talk down to me in post 26.

Majority of fans on this site: "Geno is great!"

Small group: No he's not! I've read he has slow eyes!"

Oh well, that settles it then. Guess we should all just do what the talking heads on television say we should do. Good thing we can't see talent with our own two eyes or we might be free thinkers or some crazy shit like that.

Exactly. I don't think people like SNR are too stupid to understand that, I think they just insist on ignoring it.

If you believed a QB had the potential to be a very good QB in the NFL after a couple of years of development, would you consider him worthy of a top 5 pick?

The majority of the fans here are ****ing idiots. If that is your gauge on what is and isn't a good idea, then may god have mercy on your soul.

Its not just talking heads saying that.

I made my mind about Geno Smith, not based on eyes or footwork, or comp %, but just on what he did in big games. People get on Alex Smith for being a game manager, and not willing the team to wins on his own, well Geno didn't do that either, in fact he was worse at showing up in big games when nothing was going right, neither was he.

It depends on what you mean by very good and how likely he is to achieve that potential. In general, my answer would be yes, of course.