Kansas City sent quarterback Todd Blackledge to Pittsburgh…
Kansas City sent quarterback Todd Blackledge to Pittsburgh for the 96th pick in the 1988 draft, ending a disappointing tenure for the former No. 7 overall selection. The Chiefs used the pick on J.R. Ambrose, who did not become a significant NFL player, but they still recovered draft capital for a quarterback whose starting opportunity had largely disappeared. That gives Kansas City only a narrow edge.
Kansas City Chiefs Received
- pick 1988 fourth round pick (#96-J.R. Ambrose)
Pittsburgh Steelers Received
- player Todd Blackledge
Trade Analysis
This was a modest trade between teams trying to reset a disappointing quarterback situation. Kansas City had selected Todd Blackledge seventh overall in 1983, but his Chiefs career never matched that investment. By spring 1988, the club was willing to move him for Pittsburgh's fourth-round selection, No. 96 overall.
Pittsburgh had recently moved on from Mark Malone and needed competition for Bubby Brister. Blackledge provided that option, but his Steelers tenure was short and statistically poor. Across the 1988 and 1989 seasons he appeared in six games, made five starts and finished 2-3 in those starts. He completed 43.2 percent of his passes for 776 yards, three touchdowns and six interceptions. That is not enough production to make a fourth-round acquisition look like a win, even though the price was manageable.
Kansas City used the acquired pick on J.R. Ambrose. Ambrose did not develop into a meaningful NFL contributor, so the Chiefs cannot claim that they turned Blackledge into a valuable building block. Their benefit was more basic: they obtained a draft choice for a quarterback who had not worked out and whose role was ending.
Neither side created much lasting football value. Pittsburgh received a temporary quarterback option and sacrificed a mid-round pick; Kansas City received that pick but did little with it. The Chiefs get the slight edge because recovering an asset for an unsuccessful former first-rounder was preferable to paying a pick for five low-efficiency starts. The narrow C-plus to C spread reflects how little separation the actual outcomes produced.