Fisher Willing To Play RT
 

Central Michigan T Eric Fisher said he is willing to play right tackle as a rookie.

"Oh yeah, I think I'm a very versatile player," Fisher said. "I played left tackle in college and hopefully I'll get the opportunity to play it again, but I know there's some great tackles in the league right now, and as a rookie if I had to come in and play right tackle I'd have no problem with that. ... I can play anywhere on the line they need me." Fisher's willingness to play the position may help him become the No. 1 overall selection if left tackle Branden Albert stays and Texas A&M T Luke Joeckel isn't willing to move

Hopefully for another team

I think my hate for the Ty Jack pick will be nothing compared to that over pissing away the 1st pick on a ****ing tackle.

And these tackles are not exactly projected to be the next Orlando Pace. This draft is a nightmare.

No, but I don't see why people are acting like they're going to be Terzelle Jenkins either. I'd either one or both are solid tackles for several years, was it a pissed away pick?

Nice to see a team player

You mean a rookie is coming out and saying the right thing?

http://blogs.commercialappeal.com/tv_muse/shocked.jpg

For first overall money, I'd shovel human excrement.

this will be the most underwhelming draft for the Chiefs in the past 6 years.

Yep, Why else would the Football Gods give KC the 1st overall the year after RG3 and Luck? King Carl cursed this once great franchise by making a deal with the devil and Larry Johnson. Now we all have to pay with our collective soul.

lol. I forgot about that LJ deal. JFC.


the Chiefs will come out of this draft with 1 starter suspect.

What next Andy professes his love of BBQ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

With the First pick in the draft the Kansas City Chiefs select Dave Szott, errr.. Eric Fisher. "May God have mercy on your soul".

People wonder why the "Geno Mafia" acts the way we do. He at least offers the team a legit shot to greatly improve a position of need for the future. Jekyll and company AT BEST offer a minimal future upgrade over the Top 10 Tackle we already have in Albert.

Stop talking sense!

They should take the player with the highest possible upside even if it's a gamble. Geno, Floyd, whomever.

If Albert was really a top-10 tackle, teams would dump a 2nd for him. The market is clearly indicating they don't think he's all that.

No no no...the Talking Heads think we should pick a T.

Most of the starting positions are already set.

Outside of the first pick, the rest is mostly depth.

Hard to get excited about using the first pick of the draft on a "solid" lineman.

I'd rather take a risky QB project with great upside than a "solid" lineman.

Yeah we can get a risky QB in round 2 or 3 (if we had a round 2 pick), but you can pick a solid lineman there too (like Stephenson).

A rookie wants to " help the team"? Shocking.

Geno offers a legit shot at a great improvement, but the tackles who are widely regarded as much better football players offer only a minimal upgrade at best. Geno love is a strange thing.

How does a top LT not help you improve a position of need for the future?

Or are you still in denial about Albert being a little bitch and getting shipped out?

Bingo. The fact that a team would want to spend a 1st rounder on Lane Johnson over a 2nd for Albert, says all.

A QB.

Versus a starting RT/LT.

Think, Pat. It's not that hard to understand why Geno is a much sexier and (it can be argued) smarter pick

Because it's not a position of need. LTs aren't as valuable as they once were. If you have an adequate/good starting LT (which Albert is) you don't need much more than that.

What the ****? How is an LT not as valuable? It's a passing league. The most important positions in the NFL are QB > LT > Pass Rusher > WR

No shit.

http://x88.xanga.com/aa0f92173943027...z220125614.gif

BUT JAKE LONG DID WONDERS FOR MIAMI COMPLETELY TURNED THAT TEAM AROUND

Yes, you moose knuckle, it's a passing league. And guess what! You need a QB worth a **** to compete in a passing league! With Alex Smith and his injury hostory coupled with the potential Geno brings, it should be a no brainer who our pick should be, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT WE HAVE A LEFT TACKLE FRANCHISE TAGGED.

But you know all of that.

It's far more QB >>> pass rusher > LT.

Teams win Super Bowls with elite QBs while also putting pressure on the other team's elite QB.

There's a pretty good article about what new concepts in quick-pass spread systems and option reads are doing to the importance of the position

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/91...-espn-magazine

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.

Vandenburg > Geno at #1, becasue any quarterback is better than a left tackle according to you.

Your cediliblity = lost

Let's ignore the fact that Andy Reid is sexually attracted to Alex Smith the way Scott Pioli was to Matt Cassel. Let's also ignore the apparent lack of interest in Geno Smith by a good portion of NFL scouts.

I have a pretty good LT who wants to get paid and WILL play for my team for at least one more season since he signed the franchise tag. I've got some meh options at RT who might be good or they might not, but theoretically I should be able to find a reasonable starter out of those three choices (Stephenson, Allen, Schwartz).

So I can solidify either tackle position in a league that doesn't seem to care about great LTs, and where the past several Super Bowl champions have won without top 10 players at the position.

Or I can take the top QB in the class, who only has correctable flaws in his technique, but is a demonstrably hard worker and dedicated football player. I can sit him for one or even two full years under the tutelage of Alex Smith (starter before Kaepernick) and more importantly, Andy Reid and Doug Pederson.

I'm not going to settle for the temporary value of having a slightly improved offensive line (theoretically) that will solidify the group even if Albert leaves. That's what crack whores do. THAT'S what desperate teams do.

Patient teams think about the future that won't always have Derrick Johnson, Tamba Hali, and Jamaal Charles. It knows that Dwayne Bowe and Brandon Flowers have only a few seasons of prime left before their skills may deteriorate. And to make up for those deficiencies, the best way to win through that talent loss is to have a carefully developed starting QB. That's EXACTLY how the Ravens won the Super Bowl.

And if we wait much longer on that QB, it may be too late before the structure we've built collapses like a flan in a cupboard.

Mel Kiper's exact words this morning on Mike and Mike.

I think Geno Smith is going to be a "very good" QB in 3 years.

:stupid:

**** you. I shouldn't have to clarify that I mean the top QB in a class. You know goddamn well I didn't just mean any turd of a QB.

Suddenly we're supposed to hang on Mel Kiper's words? That seems a bit hypocritical.

Mel Kiper was one of the more prominent ones saying he liked Gabbert over Cam Newton.

Yes, you shouldn't have to make cogent arguments at all. We should all just accept your wisdom without question. Get over yourself, girl.

I'm just pointing out what you said, dummy. I see the point you're trying to make, but you picked a laughable player/scenario to try and make that point.

The bottom line is that you buy what the scouts were selling early in the offseason when it comes to Geno.

No you aren't. I didn't say anything like that. I picked that player to make it as easy as possible for morons to understand the point I was making. It seems I can't dumb it down enough for you though.

I didn't even say anything about Vandenberg. He was part of a question I asked. Good lord.

Your point was reeruned and you suck as a human being.

This doesn't mean shit.

There is no need to trade for him now.

That may be true, but you were still embarrassingly wrong.

Not saying we should hang on Mel Kiper's words here.

But this illustrates what I, and others, have said about this class.

People have been looking at this class through prism that has been skewed by recent drafts.

It has only been a recent phenomonom for QBs to start right away and be expected to excel from the very first game.

Prior to the last couple of years, even if QBs were asked to start right away, everyone recognized that there should be a development period.

QBs were drafted high because they had the potential to excel, in time.

Almost every draft expert agrees that Geno has potential.

But now, they downgrade him, and Barkley, and others, because they might not excel immediately.

Eh, you don't suck as a human being, just as a Chiefs fan. Anyone that wants to draft a tackle over a quarterback does, really.

Fine. Let's do this over again, douche. Here's my rewritten version of Post #26 for you. Perfectly clarified and gentle enough for little Patricia's vagina.

Your point ****ing sucks because it said, "AHAHAHAH SNR DIDN'T CLARIFY WHAT KIND OF QB! I GOT HIM NOW! I WIN THE ARGUMENT ON A TECHNICALITY! HOORAY!"

Jaguars are taking Geno and getting new Jerseys. It's a better time than ever to bandwagon to the SeahawksSouth.

OK, well I agree with most of that. The only part I might have disagreement on is whether the Chiefs front office is smart enough to see it too. I think they are and I think that after taking that into consideration, if they think highly enough of Geno Smith or any other QB, they'll draft him. Maybe you agree and we don't disagree at all.

If the Chiefs see it like you do, I'm sure they'll do the right thing. And if they see Eric Fisher as a decade-long anchor who can make his entire side of the line better due to his outstanding athleticism, his inspirational leadership and his coachability while worrying that Geno Smith might not have the leadership intangibles or that his decision making is too slow to have a great chance of realizing his physical potential, they might take the tackle. Furthermore, if they think more highly of Alex Smith than you or PGM do, even a Geno Smith that they think can achieve his potential might not seem like a "great improvement at a position of need" to them.

Who the hell is Mel Kiper Jr. ???



/Bill Tobin

It wasn't a technicality. It illustrates the fundamental flaw you Geno Mafia types always suffer from in your arguments. You think your assessment is ground truth and you incorporate it into your childish arguments in a way that establishes as a premise that anyone who disagrees with or questions the important part of the argument (how good is Geno Smith?) is wrong and pretends that the only thing left to argue about is whether or not QB is a more important position than Tackle.

Andy obviously does think more of Alex Smith than I do. And if Alex Smith is unprecedentedly all that Reid thinks he is/can be, then fine.

We're still in the position where we just drafted a RT at 1.1. And the scary thing is that I prefer that to drafting him and trading Albert just so we can tell people, "We didn't reach on value! We got a LEFT tackle. A LEFT tackle. Those are always good, yeah?"

Sigh. How far my standards have fallen. At least Fisher isn't Joeckel.

So Lane Johnson says the Eagles are really thinking about taking him #4.

And in your attempt to illustrate that, you used a wacky and extreme example far out in left field that doesn't even remotely come close to a successful counterexample.

Also, I just love this:

That's EXACTLY what you do in the DC forum minus the rape talk.

Just as you (I think correctly) explain that LT is becoming less important than it once was, RT is becoming more important. In today's NFL, with TEs playing all over the place and pass rushers moving from side to side, you need more of an ambidextrous line, IMO. The blind side is still the blind side so there will always be a bit of a difference, but I think that difference is becoming smaller. That said, just because the guy you draft plays RT this year, doesn't mean that's where he'll stay, as you well know.

The more extreme the example, the more clear the point. If I use Matt Barkley instead, someone who likes both better than a Tackle, doesn't have to confront the point at all.

See? You're arguing on that technicality again. I didn't qualify that I meant a top QB in a draft class or any QB with a ceiling as high as Geno's is with a reasonable chance of high achievement. I CLEARLY meant it, and anybody else would have let it slide, because arguing against it is worthless. After all, that's what this is all about. Geno Smith versus any tackle. Geno Smith is a QB. Hitting on a QB in the draft is worth 20 times the value of a tackle.

That kind of hyperbole doesn't really help your argument, and it's not going to change the mind of anyone who is on the fence.

And this is coming from a guy who really wants the Chiefs to draft Geno Smith.

Most of the arguments you make about Geno Smith are compelling. You really should stick to those, rather than comparing Andy Reid to Scott Pioli.

Did somebody say FISH????
<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>
Never mind.

You don't get to join an argument I'm in the middle of and change the premise of the argument without even being explicit about it. You responded to a post I made where I explicitly claimed that the tackles are widely regarded as better football players. If you want to reject my premise and go off on a tangent, that's fine, but don't expect me to give your alt-universe takes the time of day, particularly if you're not going to address my point directly first.

Thought you're taking Dion Jordan, you said? Jesus make up your mind.

But Schefter said if we dont take Joeckel than the Jags will.

Now Jeremiah is saying hes hearing a lot of buzz of us taking Fisher. Blackmon be ready for the joker.

Anyone that has the frame of mind, of rather taking a LT over a QB, is certifiable.