Pat Mahomes and the Kansas City Swifties Thread

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
I'm not sure why they are saying hi as the patriots already had their FQB and a winning franchise. Plus, jimmy wasn't the top qb in that draft. what about all the other QBs they drafted, they were great right?

No, they had Dilfer at QB. Then they drafted a nobody named Brady, and then they kept drafting guys and trading them for more than they had paid. Smart management is very important. Do you think it was dumb of them to draft Cassell in the 7th and then trade him for the 34th pick?

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
I'm not sure why they are saying hi as the patriots already had their FQB and a winning franchise. Plus, jimmy wasn't the top qb in that draft. what about all the other QBs they drafted, they were great right?

No, they had Dilfer at QB. Then they drafted a nobody named Brady, and then they kept drafting guys and trading them for more than they had paid. Smart management is very important. Do you think it was dumb of them to draft Cassell in the 7th and then trade him for the 34th pick?

Dilfer at QB huh

Your post has nothing to do with what Charlie is talking about.. If you are desperate for a QB, you don't draft a QB late. Staying with a QB who can win some games, but can't get you over the hump is just shooting themselves in the foot.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
I'm not sure why they are saying hi as the patriots already had their FQB and a winning franchise. Plus, jimmy wasn't the top qb in that draft. what about all the other QBs they drafted, they were great right?

No, they had Dilfer at QB. Then they drafted a nobody named Brady, and then they kept drafting guys and trading them for more than they had paid. Smart management is very important. Do you think it was dumb of them to draft Cassell in the 7th and then trade him for the 34th pick?

Dilfer at QB huh

Your post has nothing to do with what Charlie is talking about.. If you are desperate for a QB, you don't draft a QB late. Staying with a QB who can win some games, but can't get you over the hump is just shooting themselves in the foot.

So Belichick loved Dilfer so much he waited to draft Brady...and then lucked out? LOL! If you see a player you like...you draft them. Not sure what your issue is...oh wait...yes I do!

Why are Trent Dilfer and Belichick mentioned in the same sentence?

This arguement is beyond ridiculous. Teams that are desperate for franchise quarterbacks dont wait for later rounds to draft them.

That is why these Jimmy G and Aaron Rodgers type examples are ridiculous. Yes, the Pats and Pack got all time greats late in the draft/first round. But those teams already had their franchise QB in place. Why is that so difficult for people to understand?

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Why are Trent Dilfer and Belichick mentioned in the same sentence?

This arguement is beyond ridiculous. Teams that are desperate for franchise quarterbacks dont wait for later rounds to draft them.

That is why these Jimmy G and Aaron Rodgers type examples are ridiculous. Yes, the Pats and Pack got all time greats late in the draft/first round. But those teams already had their franchise QB in place. Why is that so difficult for people to understand?

Steve knows

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Why are Trent Dilfer and Belichick mentioned in the same sentence?

This arguement is beyond ridiculous. Teams that are desperate for franchise quarterbacks dont wait for later rounds to draft them.

That is why these Jimmy G and Aaron Rodgers type examples are ridiculous. Yes, the Pats and Pack got all time greats late in the draft/first round. But those teams already had their franchise QB in place. Why is that so difficult for people to understand?

Do we even know what the argument is about? IDK

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Why are Trent Dilfer and Belichick mentioned in the same sentence?

This arguement is beyond ridiculous. Teams that are desperate for franchise quarterbacks dont wait for later rounds to draft them.

That is why these Jimmy G and Aaron Rodgers type examples are ridiculous. Yes, the Pats and Pack got all time greats late in the draft/first round. But those teams already had their franchise QB in place. Why is that so difficult for people to understand?

Do we even know what the argument is about? IDK

it's about a segment of Charlie's wonderful post

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Why are Trent Dilfer and Belichick mentioned in the same sentence?

This arguement is beyond ridiculous. Teams that are desperate for franchise quarterbacks dont wait for later rounds to draft them.

That is why these Jimmy G and Aaron Rodgers type examples are ridiculous. Yes, the Pats and Pack got all time greats late in the draft/first round. But those teams already had their franchise QB in place. Why is that so difficult for people to understand?

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Why are Trent Dilfer and Belichick mentioned in the same sentence?

This arguement is beyond ridiculous. Teams that are desperate for franchise quarterbacks dont wait for later rounds to draft them.

That is why these Jimmy G and Aaron Rodgers type examples are ridiculous. Yes, the Pats and Pack got all time greats late in the draft/first round. But those teams already had their franchise QB in place. Why is that so difficult for people to understand?

Do we even know what the argument is about? IDK

it's about a segment of Charlie's wonderful post

FTFY

I was driving around Scottsdale, and the sports talk radio host ironically started talking about finding franchise QBs in the draft.

"If you are a team in need of a franchise QB, it is an astronomical risk to try to find one outside the top of the first round."

"Look at the history of the league. There are very few examples of a team desperate for a FQB who look to find him outside of the first round."

And this part was my favorite....

"Almost 100% of the time a franchise QB is found in the 2nd, 3rd round or later, the team which drafts him is not in need of a FQB. They are luxury picks that just happen to work out."

I wish every one of you was listening too. It was perfect haha

The point that Verb made, and one that is often made when debating Smith's merits, is that a franchise is better off being a perennial loser (so that they have a chance to draft in the top 10 to get a franchise QB) then they are being a perennial middle of the pack/playoff team that doesn't win it all (because that means drafting later in the first round and not as good of a chance for a franchise QB).

The bottom line is that is LOSER mentality and there is simply no factual basis that consistently drafting in the top 10 has given teams more chances at franchise QB's. Just take a look at the best QB's of all time, and look where there drafted - it's all over the place. Sure, it can be stated that drafting early in the first round is a better chance, but it is not significant enough to warrant being a perennial loser in order to do so. It is certainly not an "astronomical risk" lol.

The teams that suck on purpose so that they can draft higher pretty much always suck. Loser mentality = losing.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I was driving around Scottsdale, and the sports talk radio host ironically started talking about finding franchise QBs in the draft.

"If you are a team in need of a franchise QB, it is an astronomical risk to try to find one outside the top of the first round."

"Look at the history of the league. There are very few examples of a team desperate for a FQB who look to find him outside of the first round."

And this part was my favorite....

"Almost 100% of the time a franchise QB is found in the 2nd, 3rd round or later, the team which drafts him is not in need of a FQB. They are luxury picks that just happen to work out."

I wish every one of you was listening too. It was perfect haha

Tom Brady and jimmy g say hi...lol sorry i couldn't resist

Originally posted by Furlow:
The point that Verb made, and one that is often made when debating Smith's merits, is that a franchise is better off being a perennial loser (so that they have a chance to draft in the top 10 to get a franchise QB) then they are being a perennial middle of the pack/playoff team that doesn't win it all (because that means drafting later in the first round and not as good of a chance for a franchise QB).

The bottom line is that is LOSER mentality and there is simply no factual basis that consistently drafting in the top 10 has given teams more chances at franchise QB's. Just take a look at the best QB's of all time, and look where there drafted - it's all over the place. Sure, it can be stated that drafting early in the first round is a better chance, but it is not significant enough to warrant being a perennial loser in order to do so. It is certainly not an "astronomical risk" lol.

The teams that suck on purpose so that they can draft higher pretty much always suck. Loser mentality = losing.

he didn't say that at all.

he's saying holding onto Smith too long and hoping you get to the promise land is asinine. It's better just to cut ties.

Which there is some truth to that. My opinion of Smith today is If Smith a 14 yr vet can't do it in the first two years..it's time to move on

i know you shaking your head in denial, but c'mon. Maybe this is the year, but i willing to bet it's not as history has already proven that

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Furlow:

The point that Verb made, and one that is often made when debating Smith's merits, is that a franchise is better off being a perennial loser (so that they have a chance to draft in the top 10 to get a franchise QB) then they are being a perennial middle of the pack/playoff team that doesn't win it all (because that means drafting later in the first round and not as good of a chance for a franchise QB).

The bottom line is that is LOSER mentality and there is simply no factual basis that consistently drafting in the top 10 has given teams more chances at franchise QB's. Just take a look at the best QB's of all time, and look where there drafted - it's all over the place. Sure, it can be stated that drafting early in the first round is a better chance, but it is not significant enough to warrant being a perennial loser in order to do so. It is certainly not an "astronomical risk" lol.

The teams that suck on purpose so that they can draft higher pretty much always suck. Loser mentality = losing.

he didn't say that at all.

he's saying holding onto Smith too long and hoping you get to the promise land is asinine. It's better just to cut ties. Which there is some truth to that. If Smith a 14 yr vet can't do it in the first two years..it's time to move on

i know you shaking your head in denial, but c'mon. Maybe this is the year, but i willing to bet it's not as history has already proven that

That's what he implied, and what you and SWH are vehemently arguing. Now you're trying to change the debate AGAIN. Bro, seriously??

If it's not about losing, then why does "having a QB like Smith mean you lose a chance at a QB like JG?"

You're all over the place, as usual.

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Furlow:
The point that Verb made, and one that is often made when debating Smith's merits, is that a franchise is better off being a perennial loser (so that they have a chance to draft in the top 10 to get a franchise QB) then they are being a perennial middle of the pack/playoff team that doesn't win it all (because that means drafting later in the first round and not as good of a chance for a franchise QB).

The bottom line is that is LOSER mentality and there is simply no factual basis that consistently drafting in the top 10 has given teams more chances at franchise QB's. Just take a look at the best QB's of all time, and look where there drafted - it's all over the place. Sure, it can be stated that drafting early in the first round is a better chance, but it is not significant enough to warrant being a perennial loser in order to do so. It is certainly not an "astronomical risk" lol.

The teams that suck on purpose so that they can draft higher pretty much always suck. Loser mentality = losing.

he didn't say that at all.

he's saying holding onto Smith too long and hoping you get to the promise land is asinine. It's better just to cut ties. Which there is some truth to that. If Smith a 14 yr vet can't do it in the first two years..it's time to move on

i know you shaking your head in denial, but c'mon. Maybe this is the year, but i willing to bet it's not as history has already proven that

That's what he implied, and what you and SWH are vehemently arguing. Now you're trying to change the debate AGAIN. Bro, seriously??

If it's not about losing, then why does "having a QB like Smith mean you lose a chance at a QB like JG?"

You're all over the place, as usual.

i pretty much said the same thing you replied to the first time. If you can't understand having a QB play well enough to not be a bad team and play bad enough to not win when it counts.. you will always put yourself in a bad draft position to get a QB who can get you over the hump.

no one said you have to be a loser..but youre too stuck on that idea to really think outside of the box..

but here you go adding nothing again as usual