Halfway Home: Chiefs Have Five Sacks in 2009
by Joel Thorman on Oct 6, 2009 11:21 AM CDT
in 2009 Campaign
48 comments
Yes, folks, the Kansas City Chiefs are well on their way to forgetting their record for futility in 2008 where they only sacked the quarterback an NFL record low 10 times.
(People forget that the original record was set in a 12 game season almost 30 years ago)
The Chiefs defense has tallied five sacks in four games this season. That puts the projected total at 20, or double their previous year's total.
Some of that can be contributed to the scheme, some of it can be contributed to the players and some to the coaching. Whatever it is, it's working better than last year. It's certainly not perfect. Not by a long shot. But the Chiefs are making progress and leading the way is defensive-end-turned-linebacker Tamba Hali.
Seriously. Did any of you expect Tamba Hali to amount to anything as an outside 'backer in a 3-4 defense? I'll admit it. I didn't. I mean, what is there about Hali prior to the change that would indicate he would make this transition so well? There's nothing. I didn't think he had the speed or experience necessary to make the switch but he's proving me wrong (and I'm fine with that).
In the predator position this season, he's been the biggest bright spot on the defense. Two sacks (team leader through four games) and two forced fumbles (team leader through four games) are making a few folks take notice, including head coach Todd Haley.
I was one of the folks that pointed to Hali's statistical regression (8.5/8/2 sacks in three years) as a reason for him to be given the boot sooner rather than later. This year? He's on pace for eight sacks. Well done, Mr. Hali.
Haley has been complimentary of Hali this season and for good reason. To my recollection, Hali hasn't spoken to the media for some time and has worked hard since the switch to the 3-4. Sounds like chef Haley's recipe for success.
0 recs |
48 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Thank you Carl Peterson
If we still had Jared Allen, we would’ve had almost that many from just one game.
Instead, we have Branden Albert, who has probably given up about 5 sacks already, and Brad Cottam and Jamaal Charles. Had we not had the 2nd #1 pick, we would’ve probably drafted Ryan Clady after trading down from #5, obtaining the best young LT in the league. Instead, he’ll play most of his best years with division rival Denver, while we pay huge bucks to an underachieving DT playing DE. Meanwhile, Cottam rides the pine and Charles fumbles games away.
If Dorsey & Charles don’t pan out, this will go down as one of the worst trades in NFL history. I have more faith that Charles will be a better player for us than Dorsey, but I’m hoping they both turn into Pro Bowlers.
by HTrayne on Oct 6, 2009 11:26 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Well
There’s a valid argument that LTs are more important than DEs (though I can honestly see both sides to the argument).
What’s more indicative of the type of player Albert is….16 games last season or four this season? I’ll choose the former.
by Joel Thorman on Oct 6, 2009 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I only kind of agree with that.
Our defense was respectable when JA was here. We wouldn’t have fallen as far as we have with him on our team. If we had NOT picked up Dorsey at #5 last year, we could have gotten Clady at LT with that pick and he really is much better than Albert (at least for now)
by Chiefsfan1970 on Oct 6, 2009 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes and JA is much better that Dorsey will ever be.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Oct 6, 2009 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey people
lets remember Albert was our pick from the trade NOT Dorsey we chose Dorsey on our own.
Although I guess I agree we would not have taken him if we kept Allen but whose to say we could have traded out of the 5th spot anyway, I doubt we would have also
if we didnt trade out of the tops spot you dont pass up what is considered hands down the best player in the draft
Great players dont win championships.....Great TEAMS win championships
by DT58forever on Oct 6, 2009 11:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
different scheme
different responsibility, different expectations. allen is a premier pass rusher and dorsey isn’t. if you say that, i’ll listen. but because they are both defensive ends doesn’t mean they are asked to do the same things. did you know that when the chiefs were 4-12 and the defense still sucked there was talk about switching to a 3-4 and a reporter asked jared allen what he thought of the 3-4 and he said, “the 3-4 is awesome. i can’t play in it, but it’s awesome.” in other words, he knows what he is and he is very good at it but to compare him to dorsey is like comparing apples to oranges. both fruit but we all know they’re different
Never kick a fresh turd on a hot day.
Harry S. Truman
by kcguy on Oct 6, 2009 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
he was drafted as a DT, now he switches to DE in the 3-4 which is more like a DT in the 4-3 than a DE in the 4-3. he’ll do fine last year was his rookie year, and I know everyone wants to see production from a top 5 pick but it doesn’t always happen. He just switched to a new scheme and new pos.; just show a little patience people.
by E.C. on Oct 6, 2009 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
When you have an effective defense with a stud player like Jared Allen...
There is NO reason to switch from the 4-3. I f we were still in the middle of the pack defensively, we would still be running a 4-3, regardless of the new management.
by Chiefsfan1970 on Oct 6, 2009 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
but we weren't in the middle of the pack and we didn't have JA
so what better time to do what new management thinks is better and what they are comfortable with
by E.C. on Oct 6, 2009 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I am saying is if we had kept Jared Allen...
Our defense wouldn’t be the bottom feeders of the NFL and we would not have switched. When we had JA, we were middle of the pack and getting better…Then, Carl happened.
by Chiefsfan1970 on Oct 6, 2009 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah I agree
If we still had allen we would probably be better. that being said I was pissed of we traded him at first, but was really happy with what we got; he didn’t want to be here anyway, so probably was just gonna screw up the locker room even more than it was and it’s hard to say how a pick worked out in the first year and a quarter and most people seem to like Albert. Not sure who the other pick was (Flowers?), if so, he seems pretty good too.
by E.C. on Oct 6, 2009 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if...
if we hadnt of traded J “to the crybaby” A, herm would still be calling the shots. id say even though there r some big growing pains this year, we r in a better place. remember, the chiefs went 4-12 with JA leading the league in sacks.
but hey, maybe pioli comes in anyways with a new head coach if we had kept JA. JA is still gone with that…maybe we get a better price for him but he is still gone none the less. now i know whats creeping into ur mind, “well pioli would have used the picks to get better players.” many people forget that in the first draft, pioli was still using herm’s scouts because he got into the position so late. most of those scouts r now gone but theres a good chance that he would have still taken players that were scouted poorly.
on another note, herm has never been able to build a line to protect his QB’s. should we actually have a lot of hope in a O lineman he drafted. sadly, i really dont.
by MountainManMike on Oct 7, 2009 1:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"when in Rome"
Ron Burgandy haha
Great players dont win championships.....Great TEAMS win championships
by DT58forever on Oct 6, 2009 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's EXACTLY what I'm saying.
We picked Albert with the pick we got for Allen. Had we not taken Dorsey at #5, we could have had Clady at LT which would have been a pretty nice upgrade IMO. It’s not that I think Dorsey sucks or anything but, he has definitely NOT lived up to his draft status.
by Chiefsfan1970 on Oct 6, 2009 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
First off, I want to say that Dorsey has been making plays at DE, he looks to be getting more and more comfortable and just missed 2 sacks yesterday
As for that draft pick, cmon people, teams were called STUPID for passing on Dorsey…he was the cant miss top defender…Dont get me wrong im glad oakland nabbed fumble machine mcfadden, but based on our 5th pick, having a 2nd pick to look at Albert or Otah…I personally feel that Dorsey was a no brainer if you thought he was as dominant as he was in college which people did think.
He may still be a force at DE, In fact hes been our best end thus far.
by SDChief on Oct 6, 2009 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobodys calling thoes teams stupid for passing on Dorsey now...
Just misses 2 sacks? Great! Maybe he can have the most just misses by the end of the year.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Oct 6, 2009 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Many of you don't understand
That Jared Allen would be doubled if he was a chief. The Vikings have GREAT, I repeat GREAT DT’s. That will allow JA to wreak havoc like we saw last night.
by jk86 on Oct 6, 2009 12:18 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Very true,
they flush & he gets to yank the chain!
by ttownmikey on Oct 6, 2009 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
AND
Allen is a 4-3 DE…
With the 3-4 switch, he wouldn’t have a position, anyway.
Do you really think he could be a LB?
* "I doubt anyone will miss Connor Barth except UCrawford"
* the LB corps may become the biggest strength of the Chiefs in 2009
* The OL is NOT as bad as you think it is... give it time, and you'll see improvement this season
by stagdsp on Oct 6, 2009 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude we were taking Dorsey with or without Allen
We would have traded up our first to get him. Herm saw Warren Sapp in him and you don’t pass on that when he falls to you
Time is a great teacher... unfortunately it kills all it's pupils.
by 808NaNz808 on Oct 6, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm NOT saying Dorsey is a bust but...
When you are a top 5 draft pick and making that kind of money, you should have a bigger impact on the defense than he has. He is playing okay but, there are a lot of 3rd and 4th round players out there who can get the job done just as well as he has so far.
by Chiefsfan1970 on Oct 6, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keep it up Hali
now if some way this next off season we could get Ware from dallas i know it wont happen but if it did woo buddy our OLBs would be killer
by redmedicone on Oct 6, 2009 11:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
20 sacks is still a very low number of sacks.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Oct 6, 2009 11:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That's what I was going to say
Going from worse to bad is not something to smile at
by golfbard on Oct 6, 2009 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep...besides sacks are overrated...
Getting pressure on the QB is not. And we aren’t getting nearly enough pressure on the QB…regardless how many sacks we have.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Oct 6, 2009 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last year...
Only 3 teams had less than 20 sacks.
Bengals-17
Browns -17
Chiefs-10
And 16 teams had 30 or more. So no…being on pace for 20 sacks is nothing to brag about.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Oct 6, 2009 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
dont think anyone is bragging
I think its taking positives and looking at improvement.
since if this team doesnt win 8-10 games with junk, haley is hated by the fan base…and cassel becomes a scapegoat…I am getting to the point where I really wonder what happened to the KC fan base…the extreme hate that comes out on gamedays around here now is just not good.
not AP that is, but just in general. I just hope chief fans realize they need to stick behind their team, or else we are no better than charger fans who will stop going to games if the team isnt a playoff team.
We’re losing, and Oakland is losing, but at least we’re trying to piece it together from the bottom, Oakland will keep overpaying vets.
by SDChief on Oct 6, 2009 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Forced fumbles are not overrated.
I wish the rest of the front would swat at the ball like Tamba does.
Cantaloupe? More like wontaloupe. Lazy ass melons.
by cucuybird on Oct 6, 2009 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
(and I'm fine with that).
whew!
Hali was always fast, he just struck us a player who couldn’t manage NFL level containment and was always a second too late in rushing the passer. Clearly we might have underestimated his football IQ.
by Official Arrowhead Pride Parade on Oct 6, 2009 11:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think at best
he’s a complimentary pass rusher. He’s not someone that offensive coordinators have to stay up extra hours and game plan around like Jared Allen.
by golfbard on Oct 6, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll admit
I’ve been incorrect thus far in my analysis of Tamba in the 3-4.
2 sacks in 4 games isn’t great, but those were some pretty damn good offensive lines he’s seen so far. It would be fantastic if he could grab double-digit sacks and make me and the other doubters eat crow.
"I don't know if I want to go to New York. They'll have to pay me a lot more money because I like it here in Kansas City." -- Roger Maris
by KaloPhoenix on Oct 6, 2009 11:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
how did u not see this coming
Tambia has a great motor OK speed but dosent have the size to dominat at DE which is why is said from last season that they should stand him up and let him rush. He will have more then 8 sacks by years end because they will see some pretty bad Olines..all the foot geeks around the leaguse said he will be a great 3-4 rush linebacker u have 2 look at the player at what they do best..
South Side D
by doriang03 on Oct 6, 2009 11:50 AM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Can we
please stop bitching, Ok 20 sacks is not a lot but it is X2 what we did last year So thats a huge improvement I dont care who you are.
Plus its the begining of the season were gonna become more and more familiar with our D and we will get better, whose to say we dont get 30 we dont know,
So can we wait a couple more games before we bash our team for being on pace to double what we did last year….Thanks
Great players dont win championships.....Great TEAMS win championships
by DT58forever on Oct 6, 2009 11:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
yes 20 sacks is better than 10....congratz we are on pace to double the worst sack team ever...
But there are only 4 teams with less sacks than we have on the year. It’s better than being as bad as we were last year….but still its pretty poor.
Don't Fuccop Succop
by chicks_love_chiefs on Oct 6, 2009 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Posted below before I read this.
Agreed. Only three teams had less than 20 last year. 35-45 is average.
by ELGee on Oct 6, 2009 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
but look how bad we were last year
you can’t expect it to change overnight. so far we’re better in that department than we were last year. i personally agree that those numbers will continue to get better as the year goes on; we have a new system, players switching pos and we are still bringing guys in.
by E.C. on Oct 6, 2009 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Joel and Chris keep trying to bring stuff to make us feel better about our team.
But there are just too many glass half empty kind of people.
I can see it now, when we win the SB, People will say but it took us over 40 years to do it again, or we only won by a few points we should have won by 20.
Chiefs set an NFL record,most roster changes in 1 season.
by bringbacktheglory on Oct 6, 2009 12:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
20 for a season is still terrible.
Isn’t it?
by ELGee on Oct 6, 2009 12:19 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Just a bit...
over one a game average. Not sure what is considered average per year for a defense.
by dragon6172 on Oct 6, 2009 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes it is,
but when it was 10 a year ago, it’s still an improvment. I think those numbers will improve as the year goes on; we’ll keep getting better and the players will get more comfortable together, not to mention the teams we’ve been playing have mostly been pretty damn good teams.
by E.C. on Oct 6, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sacks and pressure
It’s clear that the Chiefs are better at pressuring the QB and getting sacks in 2009 as compared to 2008.
Of course, they still have room for improvement, and shouldn’t be satisfied with their current pace.
But, improvement is improvement, and Hali has done a good job with the transition
* "I doubt anyone will miss Connor Barth except UCrawford"
* the LB corps may become the biggest strength of the Chiefs in 2009
* The OL is NOT as bad as you think it is... give it time, and you'll see improvement this season
by stagdsp on Oct 6, 2009 12:46 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
But just remember
our defense isn’t improving in any way. At all. Even though their numbers may have gone up versus last year, which would suggest improvement, there’s been no improvement. Even though that gain has come against better opponents, still, that gain is not a gain.
This suit is NOT black.
http://hardwoodparoxysm.com
by Ridiculous Matt on Oct 6, 2009 12:55 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
also
I have decided not to read comments until Wed from now on….still hurts to much Monday and the negative and uninformed people are still around on Tuesday.
by The IT Guy on Oct 6, 2009 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hali's accomplished that against very good olines as well.
"Success is never ending, failure is never final."
by GenericBrand on Oct 6, 2009 1:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
