PDA

View Full Version : Broncos trade pick to Chiefs ? - Draft Stafford!



Greatspirits
04-08-2009, 04:23 PM
Per Scouts.com
http://profootball.scout.com/2/853317.html

Lonestar
04-08-2009, 04:24 PM
The trade of Jay Cutler from the Denver Broncos to the Chicago Bears will undoubtedly shake up the first round of the 2009 draft in a major way. With the Broncos now holding the No. 12 and 18 selections in the opening frame; look for Denver to make a move up in the draft for one of the two premier quarterbacks, Georgia’s Matthew Stafford or USC’s Mark Sanchez.

In saying that the Broncos could make a move, I foresee a trade that will alter the face of the first round. I predict that the Broncos will trade their two first round picks (No. 12 and 18) to their division rival the Kansas City Chiefs in exchange for the third pick overall. This would be another bold move for the Broncos this offseason, but identifying their next franchise quarterback is crucial for their future success.

The result of the Cutler trade to Chicago and the projected trade that I propose in the first round has caused me to shift gears with some of my selections. We’re less than a month from the biggest offseason spectacle on the NFL calendar, and soon the NFL Universe will be immersed with intrigue as to what will happen.

With that said; the anticipation for draft day gets greater and greater each day and pretty soon the lives of approximately 252 players will be decided. But for now, I predict the outcome of the first 32 picks.


personally I think it is bovine excrement..

BigDaddyBronco
04-08-2009, 04:25 PM
AHHHHHHHHHH!

That would be me screaming at the TV.

G_Money
04-08-2009, 04:26 PM
I would be very, very angry if that happened.

You don't want to be at my draft party if we give 2 first-rounders to the Chiefs for the right to draft Stafford.

~G

Timmy!
04-08-2009, 04:26 PM
I would get extremely drunk, throw things at the tv, and then hang myself.

Nomad
04-08-2009, 04:28 PM
AHHHHHHHHHH!

That would be me screaming at the TV.

We could all meet at Dove Valley and lynch Mcdaniels and Xanders if they do this nonsense! If they move up, get Curry, then why would they in the first place!!!!

G_Money
04-08-2009, 04:28 PM
That would mean we traded Cutler and a 5th for Orton, Stafford, and a third (since we got 2 first rounders but gave up two for Stafford).

That would be...oooh, that better not happen. :tsk:

~G

BroncoWave
04-08-2009, 04:30 PM
I would jump into Lake Ponchartrain if that happened. No thanks. I don't understand why the media is so deadset on us drafting a QB without letting us get a chance to see how good Orton is before wasting a first rounder on a guy who might not even get off the bench for us.

honz
04-08-2009, 04:33 PM
You scared me. I thought we had just moved up to the #3 pick or something...you should make it clearer that this is just speculation in the thread title.

Nomad
04-08-2009, 04:34 PM
I would jump into Lake Ponchartrain if that happened. No thanks. I don't understand why the media is so deadset on us drafting a QB without letting us get a chance to see how good Orton is before wasting a first rounder on a guy who might not even get off the bench for us.

There are some big gators in there!

Watching Stafford with the Bulldogs didn't impress me much and Moreno was there. I agree that the media is overhyping these two QBs!

Broncospsycho77
04-08-2009, 04:35 PM
VERY misleading headline.

Dortoh
04-08-2009, 04:35 PM
Holy crap that was funny

hotcarl
04-08-2009, 04:41 PM
we arent going to pay any high draft picks. not going to happen.

Magnificent Seven
04-08-2009, 04:43 PM
Honestly, I want them to draft Stafford. Therefore, he would have two good backups. I believe that Stafford would be much better than Cutler would.

Mike Nolan will do his job and I can trust him. He knows how to bring the orange crush back and create some monsters in defense. Never know... Rey Maualuga or Brian Cushing could fell to Broncos on NFL Draft Weekend.

Never know if they can find a way to get Julius Peppers.

I am keeping it positive.

turftoad
04-08-2009, 04:44 PM
You scared me. I thought we had just moved up to the #3 pick or something...you should make it clearer that this is just speculation in the thread title.


VERY misleading headline.

I fixed it. :beer:

Mike
04-08-2009, 04:53 PM
McD would need protective services at home games if that deal went down. Good grief, even thinking about doing that pisses me off.

bcbronc
04-08-2009, 05:13 PM
makes sense I guess. McX could have taken Washington's pick and a different QB, but that would have screwed up the value chart and let KC rob us in this deal. So we took Orton and the lower pick to keep that from happening.

cagey, McDaniels....very, very cagey. ;)

dogfish
04-08-2009, 05:13 PM
You scared me. I thought we had just moved up to the #3 pick or something...you should make it clearer that this is just speculation in the thread title.

yea, now i need a clean pair of drawers-- thanks, greatspirits. . . . :lol:



I fixed it. :beer:

it needs fixed better. . . . like, with the word SPECULATION in it somewhere in big screaming caps. . . .

turftoad
04-08-2009, 05:15 PM
makes sense I guess. McX could have taken Washington's pick and a different QB, but that would have screwed up the value chart and let KC rob us in this deal. So we took Orton and the lower pick to keep that from happening.

cagey, McDaniels....very, very cagey. ;)

I could think of a lot of names I would like to call him but cagey isn't one of them. :D

Lonestar
04-08-2009, 05:24 PM
This makes Zero sense to me..

why make sure we traded for Orton if they could have had better choices with WAS..

And then there are two later rounds QB's in NE that have worked out superbly.. If anything I'd guess they will pick up a sleeper QB in the later rounds on day Two..

Suspect this is nothing from broncos camp otehr thatn misdirection IF it came from there verses this clowns active imagination..

Magnificent Seven
04-08-2009, 05:25 PM
Just get Stafford and we have Mike Nolan. We will be fine.

topscribe
04-08-2009, 05:27 PM
I would get extremely drunk, throw things at the tv, and then hang myself.

Be sure to do it in that order.

You don't want to miss out on the other two . . . :coffee:

-----

dogfish
04-08-2009, 05:28 PM
seriously, this stuff is garbage-- i hope somebody didn't get paid to write this waste, but i'm afraid they probably did. . . if we wanted stafford, why the hell wouldn't we have traded cutler to detroit for the top pick that they're so desperate to get rid of? why do a double trade and take the chance that you don't get him, and enrich one of your division rivals in the process? to save a few million in guaranteed money? last year matt ryan got more years, more money and more money per year at #3 than jake long got at #1 anyways. . . these dipshits that write this stuff probably couldn't name five current broncos starters if you put a gun to their head, let alone discuss orton's stats from last year or doogie's offensive scheme and what type of quarterback he wants. . . their insistence that we MUST be after a QB in the first round is the epitome of blind, stupid over-simplification. . . . :tsk:

Medford Bronco
04-08-2009, 05:30 PM
seriously, this stuff is garbage-- i hope somebody didn't get paid to write this waste, but i'm afraid they probably did. . . if we wanted stafford, why the hell wouldn't we have traded cutler to detroit for the top pick that they're so desperate to get rid of? why do a double trade and take the chance that you don't get him, and enrich one of your division rivals in the process? to save a few million in guaranteed money? last year matt ryan got more years, more money and more money per year at #3 than jake long got at #1 anyways. . . these dipshits that write this stuff probably couldn't name five current broncos starters if you put a gun to their head, let alone discuss orton's stats from last year or doogie's offensive scheme and what type of quarterback he wants. . . their insistence that we MUST be after a QB in the first round is the epitome of blind, stupid over-simplification. . . . :tsk:


Its the media they suck basically at everything from their agendas they usually have

topscribe
04-08-2009, 05:32 PM
seriously, this stuff is garbage-- i hope somebody didn't get paid to write this waste, but i'm afraid they probably did. . . if we wanted stafford, why the hell wouldn't we have traded cutler to detroit for the top pick that they're so desperate to get rid of? why do a double trade and take the chance that you don't get him, and enrich one of your division rivals in the process? to save a few million in guaranteed money? last year matt ryan got more years, more money and more money per year at #3 than jake long got at #1 anyways. . . these dipshits that write this stuff probably couldn't name five current broncos starters if you put a gun to their head, let alone discuss orton's stats from last year or doogie's offensive scheme and what type of quarterback he wants. . . their insistence that we MUST be after a QB in the first round is the epitome of blind, stupid over-simplification. . . . :tsk:

Hell, I probably couldn't list five current Broncos starters if you put a gun to my head! :icon_eek:

-----

Dortoh
04-08-2009, 05:53 PM
I honestly cant stop laughing at this crap.

If we really wanted a QB Jay would be in detroit right now and we would be drafting a #1, #12 and either #20or#33

weazel
04-08-2009, 05:56 PM
I honestly cant stop laughing at this crap.

If we really wanted a QB Jay would be in detroit right now and we would be drafting a #1, #12 and either #20or#33

exactly...

good post

bullis26
04-08-2009, 05:58 PM
I would get extremely drunk, throw things at the tv, and then hang myself.

can i come over if this happens?

D1g1tal j1m
04-08-2009, 06:01 PM
Yeah, that scenario makes loads of sense.
Chefs get Cassels which caused the mess with Cutler and then we go ahead and help them some more with 2 first round picks to help their sorry D. Meanwhile we get a project at QB that will command much cap space just so he can sit behind Orton and Simms while our front 7 on D gets filled with 2nd and 3rd round talent instead of two 1st round talents.

We will not draft a QB in the 1st round. McD will get one on the second day as a developmental project behind Orton & Simms. This was the Patriot way with Brady backing up Drew B and with Cassel backing up Brady.

underrated29
04-08-2009, 06:08 PM
What idiots. Good lord.

1.- we are not trading up for a QB- thats nonsense
2- we would never help out a division rival with 2 #1 picks.
3- Mcd is not this dumb, and jay is worth more than stafford and a 3rd. Thats what we would ultimately get if we were to do this..

Stafford and a 3rd. For Jay cutler.. You have got to be the dumbest Muther Freaker ever to pull that off!

If Mcd did this- i would hire out nuts dog, and coat Mcd in penut butter.

Slick
04-08-2009, 06:10 PM
If you've been a Bronco fan for as long as some of us have, you know that we never won with just a franchise QB. It takes a complete team to compete for championships. I think our guys know this. I agree with most of what has already been posted. We're sitting in pretty good position to improve this team over the next two drafts. I doubt we try to do that by trading away what we got for Cutler.

BroncoJoe
04-08-2009, 06:13 PM
I've never seen ~G post such short posts.

He must be really pissed.

Magnificent Seven
04-08-2009, 06:21 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcvSDUMw-XQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2nVLO39wB4

He is a mobile-quarterback! Great arm.

Greatspirits
04-08-2009, 06:34 PM
Sorry, I didn't want to freak anybody out.

Magnificent Seven
04-08-2009, 06:34 PM
Compare Stafford and Cuter

Matthew Stafford's Career statistics in college

(as of January 2, 2009)
Passing Rushing
Year Comp Att Yards Pct. TDs Int Rating Att Yds Avg TD
2006 135 256 1,749 52.7 7 13 109.0 47 191 4.1 3
2007 194 348 2,523 55.7 19 10 128.9 39 -18 -0.5 2
2008 235 382 3,459 61.5 25 10 153.9 55 40 0.7 1
Totals 564 986 7,731 57.2 51 33 133.4 141 213 1.5 6




Jay Cutler's Career statistics in college

College statistics (Vanderbilt)
Passing Rushing
Year CMP ATT CMP% YDS YPA TD INT SACK EFF[5] ATT YDS AVG TD
2002 103 212 48.6 1433 6.8 10 9 17 112.4 123 393 3.2 9
2003 187 327 57.2 2347 7.2 18 13 16 127.7 115 299 2.6 1
2004 147 241 61.0 1844 7.7 10 5 24 134.8 109 349 3.2 6
2005 273 462 59.1 3073 6.7 21 9 23 126.1 106 215 2.0 1

turftoad
04-08-2009, 06:38 PM
Compare Stafford and Cuter

Matthew Stafford's Career statistics in college

(as of January 2, 2009)
Passing Rushing
Year Comp Att Yards Pct. TDs Int Rating Att Yds Avg TD
2006 135 256 1,749 52.7 7 13 109.0 47 191 4.1 3
2007 194 348 2,523 55.7 19 10 128.9 39 -18 -0.5 2
2008 235 382 3,459 61.5 25 10 153.9 55 40 0.7 1
Totals 564 986 7,731 57.2 51 33 133.4 141 213 1.5 6




Jay Cutler's Career statistics in college

College statistics (Vanderbilt)
Passing Rushing
Year CMP ATT CMP% YDS YPA TD INT SACK EFF[5] ATT YDS AVG TD
2002 103 212 48.6 1433 6.8 10 9 17 112.4 123 393 3.2 9
2003 187 327 57.2 2347 7.2 18 13 16 127.7 115 299 2.6 1
2004 147 241 61.0 1844 7.7 10 5 24 134.8 109 349 3.2 6
2005 273 462 59.1 3073 6.7 21 9 23 126.1 106 215 2.0 1

:tsk:

Medford Bronco
04-08-2009, 06:39 PM
I've never seen ~G post such short posts.

He must be really pissed.

Lol that is true.

I think G is one of the most intelligent football fan that I have
ever seen. He should write a book, it would be fantastic.

He certainly has more of a clue than the liberal media does
who only care about their agenda that they want to push on us.

slim
04-08-2009, 06:41 PM
Compare Stafford and Cuter

Matthew Stafford's Career statistics in college

(as of January 2, 2009)
Passing Rushing
Year Comp Att Yards Pct. TDs Int Rating Att Yds Avg TD
2006 135 256 1,749 52.7 7 13 109.0 47 191 4.1 3
2007 194 348 2,523 55.7 19 10 128.9 39 -18 -0.5 2
2008 235 382 3,459 61.5 25 10 153.9 55 40 0.7 1
Totals 564 986 7,731 57.2 51 33 133.4 141 213 1.5 6




Jay Cutler's Career statistics in college

College statistics (Vanderbilt)
Passing Rushing
Year CMP ATT CMP% YDS YPA TD INT SACK EFF[5] ATT YDS AVG TD
2002 103 212 48.6 1433 6.8 10 9 17 112.4 123 393 3.2 9
2003 187 327 57.2 2347 7.2 18 13 16 127.7 115 299 2.6 1
2004 147 241 61.0 1844 7.7 10 5 24 134.8 109 349 3.2 6
2005 273 462 59.1 3073 6.7 21 9 23 126.1 106 215 2.0 1


I like your enthusiasm, but we are not going to draft Stafford.

Medford Bronco
04-08-2009, 06:46 PM
I like your enthusiasm, but we are not going to draft Stafford.

not when our front still sucks and there are so many holes it is not even funny. We are even weak at CB besides Bailey. Too many defensive holes to fill not to try to load up there. One would think but what do we know, we are not media members

Broncospsycho77
04-08-2009, 06:47 PM
Stafford would be a great pick if our defense wasn't so horrific.

Magnificent Seven
04-08-2009, 06:53 PM
Again, I trust Mike Nolan.

Medford Bronco
04-08-2009, 06:59 PM
Stafford would be a great pick if our defense wasn't so horrific.

Defense, you mean we had one of those last year.

It sure did not seem like it. :lol:

I was afraid to us this smilie:defense: because when you give up over 400 pts it laughable that it was even on this board as a smilie

Medford Bronco
04-08-2009, 07:00 PM
Again, I trust Mike Nolan.

I do as well, however Vince Lombardi, Tom Landry and Buddy Ryan would have had a hard time with that trash we has on D last year.

At least No Nate Webster, that is addition by subtraction.

turftoad
04-08-2009, 07:01 PM
Again, I trust Mike Nolan.

Me too. But, Nolan still needs some talent to work with.

KCL
04-08-2009, 07:03 PM
I would get extremely drunk, throw things at the tv, and then hang myself.

And I a Chiefs fan would save you from hurting yourself so you could be sure to see the results of this...

I did read this yesterday on our local Star website...Interesting.

Medford Bronco
04-08-2009, 07:11 PM
And I a Chiefs fan would save you from hurting yourself so you could be sure to see the results of this...

I did read this yesterday on our local Star website...Interesting.

Nooooo :lol:

I want to keep our picks and you guys need help as well and
could use the high pick to get Cassel a weapon to throw to
or even help on D. I think that Pioli is someone who would love extra picks because he has has a lot of succes with them and him and McD do have
a history as well. We shall see.

shank
04-08-2009, 07:23 PM
i would destroy something beautiful

KCL
04-08-2009, 07:25 PM
Nooooo :lol:

I want to keep our picks and you guys need help as well and
could use the high pick to get Cassel a weapon to throw to
or even help on D. I think that Pioli is someone who would love extra picks because he has has a lot of succes with them and him and McD do have
a history as well. We shall see.

Help on D is more like it...he has the weapons to throw to.Also need some help on the O line.

KCL
04-08-2009, 07:34 PM
http://chiefsblog.kansascity.com/?q=node/761

If Broncos call, Chiefs should answer it

It won't happen because it would take an incredible amount of nerve by both parties, but the Chiefs should take the deal if Denver offers it's two first-round picks (12 and 18) in exchange for Kansas City's first-rounder (3).

There's strength in numbers and that's what the Chiefs need right now, as many potential good players as they can get their hands on. Other than acquiring Mike Vrabel, a short-term fix at best, I don't see where they've done much so far to fix their horrible defense.

Denver might be thinking the same thing because the Broncos' defense last season wasn't much better than KC's. Believe it or not, the Broncos seem to genuinely think Kyle Orton might be their solution at QB.

Normally, I'd say the deal would have no chance of happening, even if both sides are dying to make it. There's a lot of risk in making a trade that could set up a division rival for success for a lot of years.

But the decision-makers here, Scott Pioli and Josh McDaniels, are from the Bill Belichick tree and he isn't afraid to make a trade with anyone. He picked up, or rather stole, Wes Welker from the division rival Dolphins a couple of years back. So maybe Pioli and McDaniels don't have the fears that often seem to paralyze NFL officials and prevent these sorts of trades from happening.
Submitted by Adam Teicher on April 6, 2009 - 9:37am.

KCL
04-08-2009, 07:51 PM
can i come over if this happens?

That's sick...:shocked: :lol:

KCL
04-08-2009, 07:52 PM
Sorry, I didn't want to freak anybody out.

Don't worry...most of them have been freaked out for awhile now.

ikillz0mbies
04-08-2009, 08:01 PM
This would make me sick. As I previously stated, the Broncos 2 1st round picks is the ultimate opportunity to shore up a defense for the next 10 years or so. They better not throw away that opportunity to draft Sanchez or Stafford. I would not be a happy man and would rather swallow my pride and have Cutler back.

LRtagger
04-08-2009, 08:36 PM
According to PFT, the Lions are close to finalizing a contract with Stafford.

If we were to move up to get Sanchez, it would more than likely be with Jax, not KC and in that scenario all we would really have to give up would be our #12 and our first 3rd round pick.

getlynched47
04-08-2009, 08:40 PM
I'll vomit if we trade up for Sanchez or Stafford.

Superchop 7
04-08-2009, 08:42 PM
Too stupid to do.

The only guy worth that move is Curry.

DenBronx
04-08-2009, 08:50 PM
two words...

SMOKE SCREEN

if were trading up that far then his name better ryhme with schmaron burry.

jrelway
04-08-2009, 09:11 PM
i dont know if its been said already but if we wanted a early ass pick, why didnt we deal cutler to detroit? if we trade both our 1st for KCs 1st, that just proves right there that xanders and mcdaniels need to eat some serious shit.

Shazam!
04-08-2009, 09:12 PM
This will not happen. Denver wouldn't help a divisional rival. Even if they wanted their pick, giving KC two 1sts would be a taker for them and improve them with two theoretically good players. This thankfully is just speculation. If it did happen I'd be furious.

NO SANCHEZ EITHER PLEASE. There are other capable QBs they can take.

DenBronx
04-08-2009, 09:30 PM
This will not happen. Denver wouldn't help a divisional rival. Even if they wanted their pick, giving KC two 1sts would be a taker for them and improve them with two theoretically good players. This thankfully is just speculation. If it did happen I'd be furious.

NO SANCHEZ EITHER PLEASE. There are other capable QBs they can take.

like rhet bomar in the 4th!

Ravage!!!
04-08-2009, 09:31 PM
would be a stupid move for sure. I would be more inclined to believe that the Chiefs trade Cassel to the Broncos for their first, and then the Chiefs pick Sanchez at 3 and use our 12 or 18th on defense.

KCL
04-08-2009, 09:32 PM
would be a stupid move for sure. I would be more inclined to believe that the Chiefs trade Cassel to the Broncos for their first, and then the Chiefs pick Sanchez at 3 and use our 12 or 18th on defense.

Cassel to the Broncos....:shocked: ah here we go again...:heh:

getlynched47
04-08-2009, 09:34 PM
The Broncos are bringing in that Texas A&M quarterback for a private workout. Late round gem?? Maybe...

Rick
04-08-2009, 09:46 PM
YES!

I am sure this will happen.

The chiefs are a division rival!

The Cheifs just got a supposedly decent QB for next to nothing!

They have a gm that knows what to do with draft picks and we are going to send them 2 first rounders for a chance to draft a QB when we just sent one packing.

I know this HAS to be true!

topscribe
04-08-2009, 11:04 PM
Compare Stafford and Cuter

Matthew Stafford's Career statistics in college

(as of January 2, 2009)
Passing Rushing
Year Comp Att Yards Pct. TDs Int Rating Att Yds Avg TD
2006 135 256 1,749 52.7 7 13 109.0 47 191 4.1 3
2007 194 348 2,523 55.7 19 10 128.9 39 -18 -0.5 2
2008 235 382 3,459 61.5 25 10 153.9 55 40 0.7 1
Totals 564 986 7,731 57.2 51 33 133.4 141 213 1.5 6




Jay Cutler's Career statistics in college

College statistics (Vanderbilt)
Passing Rushing
Year CMP ATT CMP% YDS YPA TD INT SACK EFF[5] ATT YDS AVG TD
2002 103 212 48.6 1433 6.8 10 9 17 112.4 123 393 3.2 9
2003 187 327 57.2 2347 7.2 18 13 16 127.7 115 299 2.6 1
2004 147 241 61.0 1844 7.7 10 5 24 134.8 109 349 3.2 6
2005 273 462 59.1 3073 6.7 21 9 23 126.1 106 215 2.0 1

The only way I could possibly give that credibility is if they both had played
at Vandy or both at Georgia. That's the mistake the teams who drafted
Young and Leinart made. They forgot to consider the respective supporting
casts in their comparisons.

BTW, how did Cutler spill over into this thread, anyway? :confused:

-----

gobroncsnv
04-08-2009, 11:47 PM
I'd say we look at offensive draft picks MAYBE after we get to the 5th round... D is still our biggest problem, even without a "franchise" QB. Been a lot of teams look pretty good with a Franchise QB, but more teams have won with a great D than not. (and more teams have lost without one.) Please make all of these "draft a QB" threads die so that nobody in the decision making circle even gets a chance to read them. Mods, help us out here!!

Northman
04-08-2009, 11:51 PM
I seriously doubt the Chiefs are gonna want to deal with a division rival. I just dont see it.

topscribe
04-09-2009, 01:35 AM
I'd say we look at offensive draft picks MAYBE after we get to the 5th round... D is still our biggest problem, even without a "franchise" QB. Been a lot of teams look pretty good with a Franchise QB, but more teams have won with a great D than not. (and more teams have lost without one.) Please make all of these "draft a QB" threads die so that nobody in the decision making circle even gets a chance to read them. Mods, help us out here!!

I doubt that anybody in the FO will be swayed by what they see on this board, even if they were to look. :lol:

-----

Elevation inc
04-09-2009, 05:03 AM
if we trade our 2 picks to trade up to get sanchez or stafford, it will officially be the end of the MCD era. that is about as stupid a result that could happen from this whole trade ordeal. DEFENSE, DEFENSE, DEFENSE

We can win with orton or simms if we fix our defense and help the run game. you trade picks away and you instantly take away the ability to win next year, especially with a green rook like sanchez.


seriously pick 12- top Defensive talent
pick 18- Franchise runner

the sceanrio above improves are team much more than rookie matt stafford or mark sanchez....

broncophan
04-09-2009, 07:03 AM
I feel the same way now as I did back when Plummer was our qb............and that is.........
the last thing this team needs is to draft a qb..........there are way too many issues and I think/hope Orton/Simms will get us through this season....and prob. next season as we at least get to a point where we start winning more than we lose.

Broncolingus
04-09-2009, 07:12 AM
I doubt that anybody in the FO will be swayed by what they see on this board, even if they were to look. :lol:

-----

What?

I've been writing all this shit for NO REASON???

Damn it!!!!

Broncolingus
04-09-2009, 07:14 AM
I feel the same way now as I did back when Plummer was our qb............and that is.........
the last thing this team needs is to draft a qb..........there are way too many issues and I think/hope Orton/Simms will get us through this season....and prob. next season as we at least get to a point where we start winning more than we lose.

GP...

Mucho agreeo...

claymore
04-09-2009, 07:48 AM
QB class next year is better, and we havent seen what Orton can do.

Chiefs would jump on this because a pick that high costs to much money, and the chances of the pick being a bust is the same as it is as 12, and 18.

If we did this I would be allot more angry than I was about the Cutler debacle.

TXBRONC
04-09-2009, 08:50 AM
I don't see us trading up to get him or Sanchez. The only way I could see Denver taking him or Sanchez is if they are best pick available at 12. Even then I wouldn't be surprised if Denver attempted to trade down so that they didn't have to take Sanchez.

DallasChief
04-09-2009, 09:13 AM
QB class next year is better, and we havent seen what Orton can do.

Chiefs would jump on this because a pick that high costs to much money, and the chances of the pick being a bust is the same as it is as 12, and 18.

If we did this I would be allot more angry than I was about the Cutler debacle.

But would it bring you to tears like the Cutler trade did?

claymore
04-09-2009, 09:36 AM
But would it bring you to tears like the Cutler trade did?

Yes. But these would be anger tears instead.

LRtagger
04-09-2009, 09:37 AM
How could you be so heartless Clay

claymore
04-09-2009, 09:39 AM
How could you be so heartless Clay

I am a Republican. This is how we are.