Watson goes to the Jets. Tribusky to the Browns. Kizer to the Texans.
This is what Terez says about #27:
Originally Posted by :
27. Kansas City Chiefs
QB Patrick Mahomes II, Texas Tech
The pressure is on Alex Smith to deliver, and while he is indeed their quarterback for 2017, the cap-tight Chiefs could save $17 million by releasing him next year. They could also create some cap room by extending him, but the point is, his future will likely be determined by how he fares this season.
That said, someone like Mahomes — who ESPN draft analyst Todd McShay recently called a cross between Brett Favre and Johnny Manziel — could be tempting to the Chiefs, who have done plenty of background work on him. He’s a gunslinger with a cannon for an arm and plus intangibles, but he’s very raw and will likely need at least a year to get accustomed to the lengthy verbiage in coach Andy Reid’s playbook. Mahomes has never had to call lengthy plays with regularity, and that’s something all quarterbacks have to do in Kansas City. The good news is that Reid is very good at scheming up concepts for his quarterbacks, so they often make predetermined reads, and with Mahomes’ arm and willingness to chuck it deep, he could potentially open up the playbook in a way Chiefs fans haven’t seen consistently.
By the way, one other bonus to selecting a quarterback early — he’ll be very cheap for the next five years. For a team that has been tight against the cap for the last several years, that would be a boon.
Of course, other teams watch tape, too, and there’s a chance none of the top four quarterbacks — Mahomes, Kizer, Trubisky and Watson — will be here, especially if Arizona takes a quarterback at No. 13. And if the top four quarterbacks are off the board, the Chiefs might be best served trading down or taking the best player available and perhaps addressing quarterback in one of the next two rounds with the likes of Pittsburgh’s Nathan Peterman, Cal’s Davis Webb, Tennessee’s Josh Dobbs or Miami’s Brad Kaaya.
But let’s say they keep the pick. Possible options include a defensive tackle like Florida’s Caleb Brantley or a cornerback like Washington’s Kevin King, Florida’s Quincy Wilson and Southern California’s Adoree’ Jackson (the Chiefs met with the latter two at the combine, by the way).
I also gave some serious thought here to Stanford’s Christian McCaffrey, because the Chiefs could use a dynamic home-run hitting back after the release of Jamaal Charles. McCaffrey was one of the combine’s top testers at his position and offers unique versatility as a runner and receiver. Still, I just can’t pick him to the Chiefs in the first, because — fun tidbit — Reid and Dorsey have never selected a running back in the first round. Not once, even dating back to the Green Bay and Philadelphia days. So if they did take him this high, they’d be bucking their trend.
Who would you take? Who would you take if no QB was on the board? [Reply]
On a side note, when I was in dental school chase Patton was a year ahead of me in school. He's a great guy and great clinician in Como now btw.
Anyway, we played flag football with the undergrads and 3 of my 4 years we lost to his team either in the finals or the semis. That dude had an unbelievable arm. He and Gabbert were the only 2 guys at mu who apparently could stand on the north goal line and throw it out of faurot.
He always torched us in flag football though. Crazy arm strength [Reply]
Originally Posted by kcchiefsus:
Anyone who think the Chiefs are going to successfully come out of the draft with a legitimate prospect at QB are is fooling themselves.
Cool story bro. Tell it again for the 50th time. Posted via Mobile Device [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
I think mahomes goes top 10
At the end of his pro day he wanted to show teams how far he could throw. 78 yards.. I don't know about top 10, but I think it would take a trade up to get him [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
Which QBs in the modern era have sat for 2 or more years developing and actually became great? If a QB NEEDS 2+ years of developing before he can even hit the field then I doubt he's that good of a prospect to begin with. Posted via Mobile Device
How many top QB picks have busted?
I believe, strongly, that a good number of those busts have busted because they were thrown out there far too early.
I believe that Aaron Rodgers is the only Tedford QB to have success specifically because he was the only one that didn't get thrown out too early. [Reply]
In this article, Reid mentions he wished he would have had Smith as a rookie. Makes you wonder if he would have not played him early, as Smith's biggest weakness is phantom pressure forcing him to take his eyes off of his receivers and giving up on plays way too early. With a year or two on the bench, Smith may not have had this issue, but he does and it appears to be a flaw he will never be able to correct. [Reply]
It's funny watching teams like the Giants and the Steelers seriously consider heirs for their current championship quarterbacks. It's amazing how top teams know the importance of having a plan at QB is so important. On the other hand you have the Chiefs who have never had shit at quarterback and STILL think they can ignore the position. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kcchiefsus:
It's funny watching teams like the Giants and the Steelers seriously consider heirs for their current championship quarterbacks. It's amazing how top teams know the importance of having a plan at QB is so important. On the other hand you have the Chiefs who have never had shit at quarterback and STILL think they can ignore the position.
Draft is still 4 weeks away. The free agent visits and signings lead me to think we are looking QB early this year. By early, I talking one of the top 4. [Reply]
Me either. In fact, if we don't get one of the top 4, I hope we don't even draft one. Seems like it would be a waste of a pick, just like our last 2 or three attempts have been. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Coogs:
Me either. In fact, if we don't get one of the top 4, I hope we don't even draft one. Seems like it would be a waste of a pick, just like our last 2 or three attempts have been.
Yep. Either make a serious attempt at it or don't even bother. Wasting picks on losers like Hogan and Murray just ends up hurting us by giving up the chance to draft real depth at another position. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kcchiefsus:
Yep. Either make a serious attempt at it or don't even bother. Wasting picks on losers like Hogan and Murray just ends up hurting us by giving up the chance to draft real depth at another position.
I don't think Murray was a waste. There are always going to be guys who occasionally fall and end up being great. It was totally worth a 5th round pick to investigate whether or not Murray could take what he did in college into the NFL.
The problem is you can't RELY on those lottery picks and be content with the crap you have. We've been nibbling around the edges of our QB problem, only ever investing low draft stock, hoping to "upgrade" our backups and QB depth (and realistically, we've been pretty fucking unsuccessful at that, opting for Chase fucking Daniel and Nick Foles for years instead of the guys we buy low on).
It's why I do agree with you about later round picks this year and the next. So help me if I see us invest in Nate Peterman so he can "compete with backups," I'm going to put a goddamn ax through my wall [Reply]