If we're talking Super Bowl only performances you cannot forget Phil Simms. I believe he still owns the pass percentage record.
All-time QB rankings are for the most part futile and ridiculous. There are too many other variables involved. And even then someone will argue certain variables to "prove" their point, while completely ignoring other equally valid points because it weakens their argument. "Brady has won 3 titles." How many has he won without Teddy Bruschi, Mike Vrabel, Rodney Harrison, Richard Seymore, Ty Law, etc...? And last I checked, that first Patriot Championship wouldn't have happened without a ridiculous tuck rule that the refs pulled out of their ass (Which I noticed Manning didn't get the benefit of this weekend), or Bledsoe winning that AFC Championship game. Selective amnesia always paints a rose-colored history. "Montana has four titles." Well so did Bradshaw. By the way, Bart Starr has 5 titles but nobody wants to give that the credit it deserves because "Three of those were just pre-Super Bowl NFL titles... blah, blah, blah..." Most of those 'elite' QB's wouldn't have had the success they've had without having a stout defense on their team as well. Some absolutely great QB's didn't have the benefit of that. And you usually don't find great QB's without that particular team they played for having a great head coach. Without Bill Walsh, or Bill Belichick, Montana and Brady probably have no rings. The championship only argument is ridiculous. There are too many other things involved.
Well, from what I understand, it was about how much control over the team Kelly would get and not really about the money. I'm thinking the Eagles ended up giving more control over to Kelly and that's what swayed things.
Broncos sack DB coach. Kaepernick, Harbaugh on SI cover. Chief's new GM plans to take 'best available player' in draft.
Clearly, Chip Kelly has so enjoyed having Monte Kiffin coach a rival defense that he felt the need to keep that going.
Kippers first mock draft has the Chiefs taking a O-tackle. Not really a shocker there.The first three picks are linemen actually. http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draf...701/2013-nfl-draft-mel-kiper-first-mock-draft
it's an easy way to make sure that i keep getting updates in the thread. i have to comment in a thread every so often or it just stops for some reason. so *shrugs*
I don't care if we take best available in the other rounds, but we had better take a QB at #1. I don't care if it's a reach, it's the most important position and we have literally no one. I want to see them get in at least two guys to compete for it.
I'm sorry, but considering, this year, (and possibly next year's draft depending on which QBs decide to comeout then), it'll probably be a couple of years before KC gets to draft a franchise QB. They may have to settle for finding a servicable veteren in the meantime.
On the topic of best ever QBs, nobody ever mentions Otto Graham but he went to the championship game for EVERY YEAR of his career (10) and won seven of them. People claim 'oh the AAFL was rubbish' but the Browns went straight in and won the NFL championship. But nobody cares about Graham, he gets even less mentions than Starr.
people like to talk about players they've actually seen play. it's not really that surprising. even unitas is only grudgingly brought into the conversation.
I'm hoping they go after Alex Smith. I know you are super hung up on drafting a quarterback this year but they are all so mediocre. Geno Smith is just so average.
Yeah, unless there's a surprise Russell Wilson or Tom Brady in the later rounds, I don't see this QB draft class being much in the way of memorable.
Do both. It worked for Seattle. If Geno then surprises you and is the best guy, play him. I don't know why this is such a hard concept for a lot of fans to grasp, but we can and should try as many avenues as possible because it's the most important job on the team.
But if the draft class is as weak as everyone says, they're shooting themselves in the foot if they reach for a QB at #1. They're probably better off taking the best player available first, then grabbing a QB in a later round (Joe Flacco and Russell Wilson were 2nd round picks, after all) and acquiring a veteran also.
If the Chiefs are smart, they'll trade down, get more picks and get a QB in the late first/second round (The QB class sucks this year so they'll be there), or perhaps trade for Matt Flynn and some draft picks.
Because we've seen other teams reach for QBs in years where the draft class is weak and get burned. Remember Sanchez? Leinhart? Quinn?
I'm sure that this draft will produce a quarterback in the 2nd or 3rd rounds who will be generally agreed upon as a good quarterback, and the Sport's Illustrated's Peter King will talk about how how the Chiefs passed on him three times. Hindsight being 20/20 and all.
The trouble is we can't trade down too far because there are a lot of teams pretty desperate for a QB. I have a question... who is worthy of a #1 overall? But yeah, it's just the Chiefs luck to finally have the #1 in the wrong year. Meanwhile, the Colts got to draft Andrew Luck after their only one bad season in forever. Ugh.
Its funny that you bring up Luck since he's not considered the best QB of last year by any of the analysts.
No, he's not. And if I'd had #1 last year I said then I'd draft RGIII anyway. I'm just saying, one team who's had a great QB for a long time having one bad year and intentionally tanking so they can draft another good QB is super lame and lucky. The Chiefs haven't drafted a successful QB since Len Dawson. And we haven't ever had a #1 overall. Just our crappy luck to have it when no one great's coming out.
