Should We Be Disappointed In Dorsey?

by ChiefDJ on Nov 8, 2008 10:16 AM CST

A couple days ago the conversation in one of UCrawfords fanposts developed into whether we should be disappointed with Glenn Dorseys performance this year or not. I decided to do some research on some of the better DTs in the NFL and compare their rookie seasons to Glenn Dorsey's.

Glenn Dorsey 2008 (through 8 games)
0 Sacks
17 Tackles (projected to 34)
5 assts        (projected to 10)
1 fumble caused

Sedrick Ellis 2008 (through 5 games)
1.0 Sacks     (projected to 2.5)
7 Tackles      (projected to 19)
5 assts          (projected to 13)
0 fumbles caused

Warren Sapp 1998 (7 time Pro Bowler)
3.0 sacks
17 tackles
10 assts
0 fumbles caused

Albert Hainesworth 2001 (1 time Pro Bolwer)
1.0 sacks
21 tackles
9 asst
0 fumbles caused

Tommie Harris 2004 (3 time Pro Bowler)
3.5 sacks
28 tackles
15 asst
1 fumble caused

Pat Williams 1998 (2 time Pro Bowler)
3.5 sacks
11 tackles
1 asst
0 fumbled caused

So while to this point he does not have a sack (though its not unimaginable that he could pick up one or two in the next 8 games), he is on pace to surpass all of these other great DTs in tackles compared to their rookie seasons. Whether he will actually do that or not remains to be seen. But I think this shows us that we should not be judging Dorsey too harshly on his rookie season alone.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.

Tweet Comment 19 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

nope

I think he’s doing fine. gettin better each week, remember he doesnt have any other help on the line either. he’s only got tamba. i can see Dorsey doing a lil more damage now , since tamba is on his side of the line now. we’ll see. Dorsey gets his first sack this sunday.

by nfamous209 on Nov 8, 2008 11:24 AM CST reply actions

no help

there is no one else on the line that is going to draw a double team like dorsey can. tank and turk for sure dont make o-linemen fear them so of course their going to concentrate more on dorsey. i agree with nfamous hali moving back to the right will create more one on ones for dorsey and allow us to see his true potential.

by thomas4thehall08 on Nov 8, 2008 12:18 PM CST reply actions

He is having a decent year considering.......

He didn’t play much in the preseason. He is a rookie at DT. The Chiefs defense is not good. He is doing what he is assigned and with help and as the secondary gets better he may get a sack.

by cmpotter on Nov 8, 2008 12:29 PM CST reply actions

No Disappointment...

Everyone on that list that performed better had standout players drawing double teams around them. Dorsey has nothing like that…he will continue to improve…

by woodman212 on Nov 8, 2008 3:39 PM CST reply actions

Just curious...

We all of those DT’s full time starters their rookie year as well?

KC Chiefs Football Blog
Go Chiefs!

by bigknoxy on Nov 8, 2008 5:25 PM CST reply actions

Good question

All we have to go by are Games started and Games played. Tommie Harris for instance started all 16 games. Warren Sapp played in all 16 but only started in 8.

Unfortunately what it doesn’t tell us is how many minutes of each game they actually played. Just because they started or didn’t doesn’t necessarily tell us whether they were getting more or less playing time compared to others.

All but Pat Williams (who unbelievably was an undrafted free agent) were top 15 first round picks, so it stands to reason they all got significant playing time their rookie seasons.

by ChiefDJ on Nov 8, 2008 6:48 PM CST up reply actions

Comparisons

I don’t think Ellis should be in the list, since he’s still in his rookie season as well so we can’t look at his rookie season with any sort of perspective.

As for Dorsey, the lack of sacks concerns me a little, but I think that’s more about problems with the line in general than Dorsey’s ability in particular. Same with the overall run defense. Right now I don’t think we can say that Dorsey will be a great player, because he hasn’t really shown us anything, but I also don’t think he can be considered a bust, because he’s not stinking up the joint…he’s just a rookie lineman who’s not playing like anything special, which isn’t unusual and doesn’t really mean anything (unless he’s a running back, pretty much). That doesn’t really concern me, because I didn’t have expectations he’d be great this year…it just makes him a question mark like any other rookie.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Nov 9, 2008 12:02 AM CST reply actions

The problem

I think what you were eluding to in your previous post was that Herm’s rhetoric doesn’t tell us anything about his true thoughts on the progress of the team. He ends up coming off like a guy who has no idea where the issues are nor knows how to correct them. I suspect he just doesn’t like dealing with the press.

As for Dorsey, I appreciate these stats. They make me feel pretty good about his progress.

Overall, I’m pretty pleased with where the team is at. The secondary is beat up right now and I expect we’ll be outplayed today as a result, but we should be able to get something going offensively again. I have high expectations for the team this second half of the season.

by ChiefsDude on Nov 9, 2008 9:45 AM CST up reply actions

You're Correct

That was what I was trying to say in the original. Personally I think the people bagging on Dorsey are overreacting to his lack of performance by calling him a bust, but I think there are deficiencies in his game that need to be corrected (mainly because he’s a rookie, which is fine) and I question this coaching staff’s ability to identify and correct them. Excluding the rookies (Johnston, Dorsey) I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that any improvement we’ve seen from this line has been marginal at best, they certainly aren’t helping the defense that much, and I question whether Krumrie, Cunningham, or Edwards have any clue how to address it. The run D’s looked good in one game this year…and while Dorsey shouldn’t be reasonably expected to play great against the run as a rookie, if Herm’s thinking that anyone upfront is solid on a line looking to give up almost 3,000 yards rushing, he’s just not paying attention.

And I think that’s a really good observation you made that his answers are probably due to him getting sick of dealing with the press. Problem is, that’s also his job…if he doesn’t feel like giving straight answers or putting much thought into what he’s saying, then I don’t really have a lot of sympathy for him, nor do I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt for being a particularly bright coach. Not to kick off a political debate, but his answers strike me a bit like Donald Rumsfeld’s answers during his press conference…he gave evasive responses most of the time and got into sparring sessions with reporters because he didn’t want them zeroing in on the areas where he was really screwing up. I just see the vague answer tactic as a tool that a lot of frauds use to try and get by.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Nov 9, 2008 11:13 AM CST up reply actions

Coaches are required to meet with the press

They are not required to reveal the shortcomings of the team as though no one can see them if he doesn’t tell them. Some coaches choose to do that, many others choose not to. Herm chooses not to.

by ChiefDJ on Nov 9, 2008 12:13 PM CST up reply actions

Ellis

I think the reason Ellis was included was that he was considered to be fairly close to Dorsey in the running for best DT in the draft. I don’t think many, if any, argued that Ellis should have gone before Dorsey, but he was still considered elite. It could have been that if Dorsey had gone higher that maybe the Chiefs should have looked at Ellis at 5.

by Ochophosphate on Nov 9, 2008 11:39 AM CST up reply actions

I Wouldn't Have Been Disappointed With Ellis

I prefer Dorsey, but Ellis has been good as well (although health has been an issue for him this year). We probably couldn’t have made too bad of a choice with any of the top players in the draft we were looking at (the Longs, Dorsey, Ellis, or Matt Ryan).

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Nov 9, 2008 12:08 PM CST up reply actions

Sounds like he still might be suffering from that injury

Can’t remember where I heard that, but if now, I think that could factor in as well. He’s gonna be fine.

-cw

"If there’s a god he’s laughing at us and our football team." - Ben Folds

by webby37 on Nov 9, 2008 10:14 AM CST reply actions

Dorsey got his sack today

he had a solid performance today and continues to grow week to week. Even without the sack he blew up some plays on defense today, Looked good.

by KCCheeze on Nov 9, 2008 7:10 PM CST up reply actions

Great Post

Thanks for the stats. I think Dorsey will be a stud.

by schraggyj on Nov 9, 2008 8:46 PM CST reply actions

Still Loving the Post

The ultimate reason we are so concerned with Dorsey in particular is that Sims busted us a few years ago. Keep in mind, outside of Jason Whitlock saying that he isn’t sold on Dorsey, there is no bust talk coming out of the organization. Nobody calling Dorsey out in public. He didn’t show up overweight to camp. And, my favorite, here are Sims stats:

5 Tackles
1 Assist
6 Total
No Sacks…No Nothing.

by schraggyj on Nov 10, 2008 8:57 AM CST reply actions

Is there a reason

we are not playing Dorsey as a 3-tech guy?

yes, he is getting much better at tying up the center and LG (our 3rd string LB’s and 2nd string safeties were able to make several tackles on LT solely because Dorsey kept the LG from moving to the second level), but didn’t we draft him to be the penetrating DT?

by PVChiefsfan on Nov 10, 2008 11:02 AM CST reply actions