The "IF no QB with the 1st pick" poll

[Frankie]

Scenario (hypothetical):

It has become obvious that the Chiefs will pass on a QB with the top pick and will address the QB need (a) later in round 1, (b) in round 2, or (c) by signing a veteran. No trade down is planned either.

There seems to be the following three names on top of the draft. Among these three which one would you want the Chiefs to use their 1st pick on:

1- LT Luke Joekel (meaning Albert will walk)

2- DE Star Lotulelei (meaning T-Jax will be cut)

3- Jarvis Jones (meaning we are thinking transition to 43 soon)

4- Other (name and explain)

KEEP IN MIND

This is not a Geno Smith, Tyler Wilson discussion. Keep that argument in the hundreds of other threads about it. This is about IF WE DON'T PICK A QB AT THE TOP! Just curious to know which of the picks mentioned makes more sense compared to the others IYO. If you are a staunch Geno fan, for example, this does not paint you as a traitor to the cause.

[Frankie]

Originally Posted by Bowser

For ****'s sake, why?

This is what is wrong with this fan base. Ignore the most important position on the field just to throw another ****ing defensive tackle from a high pick into the mix. This is how we've become programmed over the years.

I sincerely hope you're trolling, Frankie.

Which one of THE OTHER TWO do you prefer then? Joekel or Jones? Tell you what, name anybody else who is NOT A QB per the conditions of this topic.

[Bowser]

If we don't take a quarterback first overall, then I will have my doubts if we have upgraded over the last regime with the new regime.

[Bowser]

Originally Posted by Frankie

Which one of THE OTHER TWO do you prefer then? Joekel or Jones? Tell you what, name anybody else who is NOT A QB per the conditions of this topic.

Joeckel reminds me of Robert Gallery coming out of Iowa. He only gave up one sack his entire college career, then proceeded to suck so bad at tackle that htey moved himto guard. Just re-sign Albert and be done with it.

In this sad hypothetical, give me the best pass rusher between Jones and Moore. Then give me a fifth of 151 rum to drown my sorrows in.

[seclark]

i don't know, man...i really think they need to take a qb.
sec

[DJ's left nut]

Demontre Moore.

Hali's not getting younger and he's only one more lost step away from not being an effective standup pass-rusher anymore, IMO.

Moore serves a season-long apprenticeship under Hali with the idea that Hali eventually moves back to the D-line as a 1-gap 3-4 end (though at 6'3'' without a monster reach, he may not make that transition terribly well).

Really, the answer should probably be Joeckel. If you don't take the QB, you take the LT instead and use the money you save by not re-signing Albert to perhaps re-do some contracts in a manner that will allow us some clean cap space for the next couple of years (hoping that a good FA QB option surfaces), but I just cannot get myself to say 'draft Joeckel'.

The answer is to take the damn quarterback.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Thread=ballz.
Posted via Mobile Device

[ptlyon]

Originally Posted by Ebolapox

this gives mother****er a WHOLE new meaning, by the way.

This

[ptlyon]

Originally Posted by Bowser

If we don't take a quarterback first overall, then I will have my doubts if we have upgraded over the last regime with the new regime.

And definitely this

[KCDC]

Originally Posted by Bowser

There is no other pick. There is no need on this team greater than our need at quarterback. Don't buy the talk the windowlickers throw out about how no QB is worth the top pick this year. If a QB is good enough to be picked anywhere in the top 20, then for this team, he's good enough to be picked first overall.

This. There is no other option to selecting a QB except giving up hope.

It used to be in the last 20 years that only three positions justified a #1 pick: QB, LT, or pass rusher.

The NFL has evolved and the positional value of a QB is now far greater than it was when "conventional wisdom" came up with the foregoing.

QB is success-determinative. There is no other position on the field that will dictate success. You can win by using an average LT easier than winning with an average QB.

It has to be a QB for a team whose most desperate need is QB. It is too bad that there is no consensus QB superstar in this draft, but the choices are good enough to justify taking the QB #1.

[the Talking Can]

we have a top 7 LT

we have 3 probowl LBs

we've spent 3 top 11 picks on the DL in 5 years, including last ****ing year

i can't even hypothetically entertain such a ****ing disaster scenario

[DeezNutz]

If no QB, the pick is Milliner, and it's not close. Then, I'm assuming we're drafting a QB in round 2.

I won't immediately call for the heads of Reid and Dorsey, but they have to be right. That round 2 QB would have to be tits, and he'd have to achieve this status in year one.

[DoucheMcCloud]

Originally Posted by CHENZ A!

**** it, I won't even care. Draft Milliner I guess then.

If the Chiefs pass on a QB at #1 overall, I expect them to trade back and take Milliner. He has the potential to be an above average starter opposite Flowers, which would only leave a few holes on defense to fill (Safety and ILB).

[duncan_idaho]

In this scenario...

I probably stop fvcking paying attention to the Chiefs, because it looks like this regime is just like the last one (at least in my mind).

[Dave]

None.

Kill it with fire.

[Strongside]

Dee Milliner. We be hurtin' at CB.