Would a 4-3 be better for us?

The 3-4 base front is just the old 5-2 with two outside linebackers instead of defensive ends. The defensive tackles (called ends nowadays) line up in 4-technique and the nose in 0-tech, the same in both.

This needs to happen in ANY case. Hence the excitement generated by Berry and Hayden (sp?). But some more elite speed being added in the 2nd or 3rd would also do some good to the overall unit. Mainly want to see a D that can come FORWARD when you’re foolish enough to try ‘n’ spread things out. Make extra wides mean the offense is losing too much in protection for the payoff in open receivers. Last 10 years (give or take), the KC D has had to back off and give free releases all across the line against extra wides.

But I’m not talking an overhaul, breeder. NT and DB are priorities, followed by rush LB. The ILBs we have and could obtain for relatively little, should suffice. I like Dansby, but I’d rather not see KC spend $10 million-plus at ILB before trenches and perimeter are SERIOUSLY upgraded, by which time we probably feel a lot better about the ILB we already have.

NT is pretty important, and seems THE most likely “big move” Pioli might make in FA. I don’t think our GM’s afraid to spend a draft pick on a FA – just not a lot of ‘em, and only for the sure thing, and only if there’s an extra player thrown in. Wilfork, Hampton, Pickett definitely in that mix.

And I ain’t as worked up as everyone else about ILB high in the draft. And if the front 5 can get more pressure on its own, ALL the current DBs, zone-, man-, whichever, are going to play better, so incremental improvement in the secondary might be plenty, and certainly seems doable. A serious upgrade/value pick @ rush OLB could probably be had in 2nd or 3rd. I’d even be OK with moving up a few slots if it brought Brandon Graham into the fold.

so far, I’ve been ABYSMAL at predicting Pioli.

My recent rants for rush LB are an evolution in my thinking. I think it likely that the guys who were saying it 2 months or more ago have mostly moved on to other things, while I’ve been struck since by seeing what a Mathis (more DE than OLB) or Suggs (again, a bit more DE in his game) can bring to the strong side and the D as a whole.

And I’m VERY slow to be critical of our ILBs biting on the play-fake and being a step late in their drops or taking poor angles, because of the train wreck that’s been taking place in front of them. Chiefs haven’t yet set the table for ILB and by the time they do, we likely find that goin’ high-dollar at ILB is unnecessary.

no matter what happens i’m trusting crennell!

….in the 4-3 than making one of them take on 2 blockers in the 3-4. That said IF I were to take SUH and run a 3-4, I would put SUH at the NT spot because I think his ability to shed blockers and get pressure would create total chaos for an o-line.