Because of all the interest in this thread, I've place all of the video content of Patrick Mahomes II's college career, and draft day goodness into a single post that can be found here. Enjoy! [Reply]
Originally Posted by RealSNR:
Oh, and if we're in the business of making baseless claims and predictions, I've got a pretty good one.
Alex Smith regressed last year. The offense was the worst we've seen in the Reid era. He's already starting to slow down.
He'll be his usual self in 2017, but we're certainly not going to see a dramatic improvement from last year unless he starts using his legs as a weapon again.
He's not going to do anything to make Dorsey say, "Now hold on... maybe we should keep him around another year..." If Mahomes is ready in one year, he's in, and Alex is getting his ass traded to offset the cost of trading up for our new QB.
I'm betting they are planning on using a pick from Smith to move back into the first next year. It's a great plan.
Originally Posted by TigerUppercut:
Not as wrong as a moron who thinks antibiotics should not be given to sick people when they're indicated. So there's that.
Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO:
The difference in one year and three is two years. Two chances at super bowls. Two years of cost savings at the position. Two years of money to keep players. Two years of play to help decide on the fifth year option. It's actually the difference between 15 and 17 years...
You don't try to save money on the most important position unless you have zero choice but to play a newbie. If you're evaluating talent for a 5th year option then you be patient and then give him 2-2.5 years to show his worth. it's not about quantity, it's quality, clearly. [Reply]
And there's also the reality that his hands are barely larger than Kaeps and equal to Bridgewater's. How he does throwing an NFL football in cold/wet conditions is a complete question...
Rodgers on the other hand has almost a full inch on him at 10 1/8 [Reply]
Originally Posted by RealSNR:
You're the moron who looks at an apple and calls it an orange.
"College fan comes by to express how much they liked a player we drafted because he was good for that team in college? No different than 49er fans who irrationally loved Alex Smith because he was really nice who converted to being Chiefs fans!"
No, I'm the guy who made a joke.
Check around. I've been a fan since '88, and been here since the first day it existed. I've never complained about new fans, no matter the origin. Not once. Not even when all the girls started showing up with Chiefs jerseys everywhere in the early 90s because 'Montana's so cute. . .'
If you didn't have a stick so far up your ass, you'd see that 'Mahomo' is just plain funny, given the history of the board. [Reply]
Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
If we could get a first for Smith in 2018..... well that would just be spectacular.
I doubt there would be much market for his services as a starter....how many teams trade for a limited 34 year old?
I think it's more likely he just gets cut and signs as a backup, and Tiger goes off to tell another board how he's going to beat out their starter any day now, he's that good! [Reply]
Originally Posted by TigerUppercut:
You don't try to save money on the most important position.
That's exactly what they are doing. The plan is to upgrade and save money. That's why you draft to replace. That's why you spend two firsts and a third. The picks are the capital rather than cash. Alex Smith's 20 million next year isn't happening. He's also not getting extended for dead money the next year.
They have drafted a year ahead to let the guys go.
Everything points to you being wrong here. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TigerUppercut:
We got Smith for two seconds, how do you fetch a first for an aging QB? That would be the most magical thing Dorsey will have achieved
Do you purposely try to come off as dense? [Reply]
Originally Posted by DRM08:
Heck, I don't remember him being that skinny in college either. Combine results on Google seem to indicate 241 pounds at the time.
I thought so, too. The weight # has to be a misprint. [Reply]