Calling Out Arrowhead Pride on Glenn Dorsey
by Buck'O on Feb 9, 2010 10:45 PM CST
Email
Print
I love this kid. He was one of the first to openly buy into Todd Haley's approach this year, and after two full years of development, he's showing signs of being good. Damn good! He looks to be on his way to being a dominant 3-4 DE. When he got hurt late in the season, his absence was beyond obvious and it became clear that he is the backbone of what little run defense we currently have.
In my mind, Dorsey has proven his worth and in his upcoming third season, I expect him to continue to evolve into his potential. I watch and I watch and my conclusion each and every time is that his play makes him one of the Chiefs most valuable defenders.
I don't get it fellas. What does this man have to do to win your loyalty? Time and time again, I read comments from the AP membership that we need to trade him. I see these kinds of comments so often in the context of draft related posts that I've actually given up trying to argue against them. In my mind, he's one of the more pivotal players we have, and yet we as fans seem to be deeply divided about him. What gives?
What I want to know is why you think we should keep him or trade him and what you think he's worth. If you're one of those who's convinced he needs to go, who would you would trade him to and for what? Give me all the arguments for and against him because this entire topic is a complete mystery to me.
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.
136 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I dont get the reasons for trading Dorsey at all..
Young.. Improving.. and is already pretty good. I actually did a post about Dorsey myself a while back if you would like to read it…
http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2010/1/7/1239980/glenn-dorsey-then-and-now
Yeah. It was a good post
and by your poll, everyone’s happy with his progress. And yet the trade talks still persist. I’m hoping someone can articulate a lucid argument to make me see that side of it. Until then, I think Madden has permenantly damaged the way people view the game.
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
i dont get it either
Chiefs 2010 big board-
Eric Berry
Dez Bryant
Taylor Mays
Rolando McClain
Russel Okung
yeah i dont understand the trade talks
for one… i dont have enough money to bet that at some point in this season we will see glenn dorsey play a 3tek in romeo’s defense. that in itself makes the ‘he is the prototype 4-3 DT, let him be that’ arguments null and void. why would you NOT want a young, strong, versatile guy on your D-line…?
I obviously voted no…
if rhymes were valiums, i'd be comfortably numb
Should they trade him?
That all depends on what they could receive in return. It’s as simple as that. I personally dont think he is or ever will be elite in a 34 front end and several posts of mine in the past comment extensively on why I feel that way, but dont trade him just for the sake of trading him. If Alex McGee shows something to make the coaches believe that he is every bit as good as Dorsey, then yes, trade him if the compensation for Dorsey is good. But once again, dont just trade him for the sake of trading him.
You're actually one of the guys who has been vocally in favor of trading him
I’m curious what you realistically think we could get for him. From a strategy perspective, how would you approach it, with who would you trade him and what would you do with the compensation?
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
Yes, I am
because I dont think he’s strong enough at the point of attack. He’s ideal for a one-gap defensive scheme because of his quick burst off the ball. That’s what draws him the Warren Sapp comparisons. Unfortunately, he’s asked to play two-gaps and he doesnt have the strength to do that effectively (which means he doesnt penetrate to the backfield, nor does he even stay at the line of scrimmage…he gets pushed back about 3 yards every play). It’s enough of a struggle for him to battle one-on-one with elite left tackles in this league, but to ask him to also try demanding attention from the guard as well is a very difficult challenge.
Despite him being a former 5th overall pick, I think a draft pick in the 30-40 overall range would be reasonable to ask for in return and also adequate enough to find a guy who fits a 3-4 much better and can start immediately. A guy like Jared Odrick from Penn State could be available at the top of round two. I doubt Florida’s Carlos Dunlap drops into round two but it’s sure possible. Worst case scenario, Arthur Jones from Syracuse and Corey Wootton from Northwestern will likely be around at pick 40. Both players have some familiarity in playing the scheme.
Obviously Dorsey’s value is much higher to a 4-3 team, and this draft doesnt offer much for pass-rushing tackles after Suh and Gerald McCoy, who will each be gone in the top five so that raises his stock. Dorsey would be a great fit for Atlanta, but already missing their 2nd this year I doubt they can make a deal for anything, unless they piece together some type of package of future picks and Jamal Anderson who is too big for end and too small for tackle in their 43 defense. FYI- Anderson was a former receiver. He’s a project though and trying to fight off the “bust” label.
I see the reason a lot of fans link Dorsey’s name to Detroit: Gunther and a pick at the top of round two. I’ve read rumors of Mike Singletary wanting to play more 43 in San Fran, so if true, who knows that kind of pieces he would be looking for and they own two picks in round one. Seattle is also an option with the 8th pick in round two. They have two picks in the first round to address other needs. My completely improbable but not impossible longshot is Minnesota with the 30th pick. If Favre returns but Pat Williams retires and they cant resign Jimmy Kennedy, their defensive line is screwed and they may make a trade by feeling the pressure to “win now” while Favre is still around rather than draft a guy who may take a year or two to develop.
I know many people fear that trading Dorsey is a step backwards because KC would be replacing him with a rookie, who most likely takes time to develop and we as fans would have to endure that long waiting period again. However, there has to be a reason KC drafted Alex McGee. A 3rd round pick is too steep for a “situational player”. Also, Miami proved in 2008 that two rookies (Phillip Merling in the 2nd round and Kendall Langford in the 3rd round) can start and have immediate impacts.
But let me repeat my previous post…dont trade Dorsey just for the sake of trading him.
by kc_radrh8r on Feb 9, 2010 11:29 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Hat's off to you
That was indeed a lucid argument.
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
You're welcome
Although I would contend that he has no inside help in terms of the point of attack. With even a moderately improved NT on the line next to him, my hunch is that knock on Dorsey would disappear.
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
Sorry, I can't drop the point of attack thing just yet
Even though it’s hard to judge T-Jax base soley on his rookie year, he did show improvement during the course of the season on the other side. Especially in the last month of the season. He was clearly finding his legs and adjusting to the speed and power of the game. As an individual, he showed signs that he’s going to be good.
As I stated above, when Dorsey went down, the already anemic run defense was noticibly worse in his absence. So here we have two individuals showing good stuff, but as a whole, the unit was still pretty much terrible defending the run. This emphasizes my contention that the NT position is in fact the single greatest weakness on the entire team, and from a weakness at the point of attack standpoint, I say it’s the biggest problem facing not only Dorsey, but T-Jax as well.
That said, wouldn’t you want to see what happens after the team addressed the NT position before shuffling around what little talent we already have?
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
I think Jackson fits the scheme well
even though he looked horrible for most of last year. I’m blaming Clancy on that because I have no idea what in the hell he was trying to accomplish with his “2-4” nickel package. There was absolutely no possible way for Jackson to look good in that. Hell, he even had Jackson playing some nose tackle late in the year. I’ve said all along that I think 3rd overall was a reach for Jackson, but I really do believe he will be a great fit and will look much better with Romeo this year. Addressing nose tackle will only help each of them too, but I’m still hesitant to label Dorsey as a “star”.
Good arguments
I feel about the same…I’m in no hurry to get rid of the guy, but I’m not married to him being a Chief either. I do think he’s worth more than a 2nd round pick though, because in spite of the fact that he doesn’t fit the 3-4 perfectly, he’s still solid there. Keep in mind that Dorsey has 3-4 years remaining on his rookie contract, and he received the majority of his guaranteed money last season, so the team receiving his rights would benefit from that aspect as well. I think when you take those factors into consideration, he probably has a value closer to a mid 1st-round, or a high 2nd and 3rd.
Predictions:
This year will be better
I can only say..........
Junior Siavi, Turk McBride, Tank Tyler. Plenty more draftees that weren’t what we envisioned. Suh is not a 34 NT or DE. Dorsey is our guy. Let him develop with Romeo for a few years.
Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable. Mark Twain
Why couldnt Suh be a nose tackle or 34 end?
The argument is essentially pointless because he wont fall to 5, but I’m curious why fans dont feel he can play in a 34 scheme. He’s actually stronger than most NFL nose tackles, he’s much faster, and has better hands and feet. He just doesnt have a huge stomach. If he gained 30 lbs of fat, then would fans feel he can play it?
Depends on how all that fat affects his natural abilities
I typically don’t like to see weight put on a player for the sake of trying to make them fit a given position. With a natural playing weigh of 291, I think that’s where you want him to play. That said, I don’t like him in the NT fit AT ALL. The only way I see the Chiefs going for a guy like Suh is if they did put him in at DE where yes, I agree, he’s beyond ideal. I just don’t see it happening.
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
And with the compensation
Imagine KC with the 5th overall pick, their pick in round two (36th overall), the Falcons pick in round two (50th overall)…and now add in another pick anywhere between 30-40.
KC could fill a lot of huge needs between NT, DE (if McGee isnt the guy), ILB, OLB, S, OL or WR. We wont fill all our needs in one off-season, but getting four new starters to build for the future doesnt leave many needs for the 2011 off-season.
I'll have to agree
It’s obvious that Dorsey isn’t a bust, remember last offseason? There were threads about trading him away as well. Patience is what we need here. There’s no reason to argue about it anymore, we all know for a fact that Glenn Dorsey will continue to excel at his position. Especially because of our new DC and the possible help in the middle that free agency and the draft will provide. Just sit back and enjoy the show people. Dorsey will be fine.
Lets say we pick hypothetically get Wilfork to play NT...
That means our D-Line will avg 306.33 pounds per starting player… That would have to be the largest front 3 in the league, This doesn’t mean that we are guaranteed to be good, but it is something to think about.
Pitchers and Catchers report February 17th... And so begins my masochistic addiction.
Dorsey is as good as advertised
He was to be a 4/3 tackle and put up respectable rookie stats. He was never expected to be a 3/4 end and put up even better stats. Give the guy a break. He has done nothing other than impress his entire 2 year career. I have no regrets in picking up Dorsey. If he gets less than 7 sacks next year from a blocker soaking position I will be genuinely suprised. The guy is a beast and this season he will be at the QB feast. Letting Mr. Glen go for a role of the draft dice is completely irresponsible and therefor won’t happen.
Yeah...but we beat the donkeys like a rented mule.
Any less than 7 sacks?
Do you realize that Richard Seymour and Aaron Smith have each only recorded seven or more sacks twice in their careers, while Ty Warren and Luis Castillo have only reached seven sacks once each? Considering his assignments, 7 sacks is expecting a bit much…but then again, Hali misses a lot so maybe he pushes the QB into Dorsey.
That's exactly what I'm hoping happens when they play opposite sides.
In fact, that’s how we got a safety this year. One of them chased them into the other. The old DT-Smith formula (Yes, I realize it’s a standard NFL thing).
If the results against Cleveland weren't enough
It was painfully obvious that Dorsey’s absence hurt bad. Nuff said. If that doesn’t convince you he needs to be here nothing will.
OK...the Koolaid buzz is gone now. I'm forced to admit that the state of the team had deteriorated far beyond what I had realized. The good news is I get to start mixing up a fresh batch of koolaid for next year. Oh Yeah!
It's not us who has to be sold
And we are not the experts. I can see scenarios in which they MIGHT be willing to listen – IF and ONLY IF they think Suh is going to be better than Dorsey.
If St Louis takes a QB, and Detriot calls and says heres the #2 and our 2nd OR 3rd pick for the #5 and Dorsey.
I understand we would be using our top pick to use on a position that we already have a very good player (Dorsey). But it is also a VERY important position and we would be getting an extra pick, therefore another (hopefully) starter.
So, would getting Suh and another one of the plethera of 2nd or 3rd round guys we always talk about be worth Dorsey and that #5 pick?
Gunther already said he’d be interested in Dorsey, and they need a LT to protect their franchise QB that ended the year on IR. So Detriot gets Okung and Dorsey for their top two picks.
We would also save a little bit of money by not having Dorsey’s contract AND another top 5 picks also.
I’m not saying this is what we should do – but it’s an argument that has some positive things on both sides.
The contract part makes zero sense.
In your scenario we’d be getting rid of a #5 contract, to obtain a #2 contract. Suh will likely be paid far more than Dorsey.
Zero sense?
Yeah, you trade those two and then you don’t have Dorsey AND a 5th picks contract. Sure it’d be more for Suh, but not more than Dorsey + the 5th pick this year.
Even then Why Suh?
We don’t really NEED him. He would be a want, a sexy, although alright pick. We need to go off of what we NEED. We’ve drafted DL past couple years and getting tired of it. As well as because we don’t NEED DL anymore.
"Charles In Charge"
"Defense Wins Championships"
The point of the post was to consider in which scenario would we trade Dorsey
I never said this is what we should do. All I was saying is if PIOLI thinks “Suh will be much better than Dorsey”, and Detriot calls-he would listen.
That's pretty much my reasoning, too, Baha.
I’m not stuck on anybody, if an upgrade falls in my lap.
And I’d like to see Dorsey get better push heads-up on the left tackle.
I think he’s honoring the 2 gaps better than kcrdrh8er, though. And I’m not positive that on those plays where I didn’t like his push that it wasn’t just a case of his staying at home and honoring his assignment, rather than going for the glory and abandoning his assignment.
Ala DJ
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 13, 2010 9:13 PM CST up reply actions
And "last couple of years" is NOTHING. Totally new regime.
Totally different defense.
The force-multiplier implications of the line positions PLUS the fact that they are only ONE year into their 3-4 build.
I disagree with the notion that KC doesn’t need DL, anymore.
You can DEFinitely make a strong case for Dorsey being a strength, but I’m with baha07, when he points out that if KC thinks they have a clear upgrade at such a key position, then they should go after it.
Personally, I think that NT is the next greatest priority for the DL, and that Dorsey isn’t a weak link. But I also didn’t see a particularly great push from his bull rush, although Hali was pretty good at challenging the edge (just wish he could finish tackles on the QB when he DOES get there, and had a little more power for the inside move).
When you’re team-building, and you don’t quite get the pieces right in the middle (and on the edge), then you’ll spend the next 4 or 5 or 10 years looking for Mr. Goodbar at LB, and never QUITE getting him. When you DO get it right in the middle and on the perimeter, everything you do at LB just magically seems to work…
So, who needs to "be sold" on Dorsey?
Todd Haley, and he’s already said GD is “a core player”.
He also said that he wanted Clancy Pendergast to stay on with the team, and
that he had no contact with Crennel. Hmmmmm….
What if Crennel thinks Suh will be the most dominating 3-4 end in the game for years to come
and Pioli agrees…do you ignore Detriot if they call and offer more picks?
just trying to provoke thought..
I thought the point was to figure a scenario in which we would trade Dorsey.
I'd think that Haley would also need to weigh in too ;)
Well, sure as long as the compensation was appropriate but do you? Do you really think Suh would be dominant to the extent that trading away a guy like Dorsey, who’s clearly comming into his own and is entering his third year for the sake of a rookie who will most likely take a couple of year to hit his stride? I’d say the compensation would have to be massive. Cost prohibitive to just about every team out there.
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
I agree
IMO – Suh will be very very good.
At the expense of trading Dorsey? – No idea. I’m not the Gm and I’m not the expert. But
if it’s a wash, we get an extra pick and save a little but of money by not having the #5 pick this year and Dorsey’s contract.
I’d personally take McClain and I’ve said that before. It comes down to how good do they feel Suh will be in comparison to Dorsey in the long term and short term.
So would a 2nd AND 3rd be massive enough in this scenario for you?
Just ideas people, not saying this is what we should do.
I like the idea of stacking up picks. A lot. This is a deep defensively rich draft.
The more picks the more shots at building something lasting here in KC. It’s tempting. Again, I’m with you as far as not getting too intense about it one way or the other. It’s Pioli’s baby. I only hope whatever he does is for our betterment and he gets it right.
I say trade...
Dorsey to Detroit for a swap in the 1st and their 2nd rounder. Detroit #1 need is a LT. They aren’t going to get one at the top of the 2nd (top tier at least) and if they get Dorsey w/ their 2nd they won’t want to draft at #2 anyway. They can get Okung or Davis at 5 and be happy. If St. Louis doesn’t take a QB (which they should) then I say we take McCoy who looks almost as good as Suh and would fit the 3-4 to a T as well. Then, we can possibly address NT and or OL with our early 2nd rounders. Off topic, but if Kyle Wilson (CB, Boise St) falls to us at the top of the 2nd I’m pulling the trigger immediately.
by I_Bleed_Red. on Feb 10, 2010 6:06 PM CST up reply actions
really i don't see why we don't make the same trade
With St. Louis. They wanted Dorsey 2 yrs ago but the ownership put their hands into the mix and took Long.
by mcclanahanman on Feb 10, 2010 10:56 PM CST up reply actions
Well I am not sold on Dorsey with this new scheme we're trying to run.
There is no question that without him in the Cleveland game we did worse. No question. But with Dorsey we were 31st against the run. With Dorsey. Dorsey is a part of a defense that ranked 31st against the run. Now in all fairness, he may just be surrounded by such crap players that he looks worse than he is. Or, that may not be the case at all.
The real truth is, Dorsey has no stats that have earned him any accolades. He just helped us not be dead last on defense in the NFL. Instead he helped us be 31st. So. Whether or not he can become that guy we need, remains to be seen. I’m not saying trade him by any means. But whatever happens, is whatever happens. I mean without Dorsey what would happen? We slip to 32nd? Whooooo, no not that please.
Again, I am done with this bullshit mentality here in KC that someone who doesn’t absolutley suck ass, is good enough for our Chiefs. If that’s how you feel, good for you. Not me though. I want the best players at all positions on our team. No one deserves that title on our team. No one. We were 31st. So let’s not get all gaga over a guy that helped our defense average 156 + yards given up per game average in the regular season. Now if we were a top 5 defense, then I would have a completely different attitude towards this all. But what are we clamoring for? Not to lose a guy that helped us be only 2nd worse in the entire league?
I don’t care if they bring in bozo the clown to replace him. I don’t. I don’t care if he stays or goes. I’m not on one side or the other about Dorsey. He’s just a so so player on a lousy defense. It’s impossible to know for sure his true worth or lack thereof at this point. Pioli and Haley will do whatever they feel will give us the best chance to succeed. Whether or not that includes Dorsey or anybody else we currently have on defense other than the Brandon’s remains to be seen. There is no point in arguing about whether or not to keep anyone on our defense other than the Brandons at this point. Even Tyson Jackson is an unknown still.
Should he stay or should he go?? Who cares, we’re 31st on defense. There’s nowhere to go but up from here.
only problem with your reply....
So.
can’t be a sentence by itself….lmao
Winning begins with Attitude - Haley and Pioli will be winners in KC!
I'll forever be a Chiefs fan! Only God himself could take that away from me, but when I get to my great reward, I'll rejoin two bigger fans, my Mom and Dad.
Good morning to you too my man!
No post would be complete without you dropping by for a long-winded comment. Many Thanks ;)
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
Long-winded, blow hard
How long CAN you hold your breath anyway?
Just curious…
:-)
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius
by ArrowSpread on Feb 10, 2010 11:40 AM CST up reply actions
so,
so…
(so)
as I was saying,
Winning begins with Attitude - Haley and Pioli will be winners in KC!
I'll forever be a Chiefs fan! Only God himself could take that away from me, but when I get to my great reward, I'll rejoin two bigger fans, my Mom and Dad.
Top Player of the Draft
Dorsey was considered by many the best in the draft. Most people talked to him similar to Suh. Dorsey is a talented defender entering his third year. We would be crazy to get rid of him and he is talented beyond most anyone on our team. Rookies overall do not perform to the level vets do. So we are going to trade top 5 talent to get more rookies. Even with more draft picks there is no guarantee that they are going to even work out. We know Dorsey can play. Give him a little bit to become a legend. By trading him we are once again starting over…ugh
by groundedchevy on Feb 10, 2010 1:06 PM CST up reply actions
Correctamundo.
I’ll be absolutely-fucking-commit-a-felony-irate if we trade ANOTHER Chief away just to have him excel in a new system and achieve more than he did here…. Jared Allen…. Kawika Mitchell…. Scott Fujita… the list goes on. I’m sick of all the crap drafts we’ve had over the years only to trade away the few gems that we found in those dark years. This shit has to stop.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 1:36 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
New schemes
is the exact reason that those players were better after leaving Kansas City. Well, Allen was already good, but Fujita fit better in Dallas and New Orleans, and Mitchell moved back to OLB with the Giants and now Bills. Dorsey is a “GOOD” player in a 34. He’s not bad, but he’s not great. He’s just GOOD. However, he could excel as an under tackle in a 43.
A new scheme is exactly why Kendrell Bell didnt fit in Kansas City too. Some players are so good that they can play in any scheme, but most players rely on a scheme specific to their skill set. That’s why Priest Holmes excelled with Vermiel. So did Casey Weigman, yet he struggled with Herm but became good again under McDaniels in Denver.
Okay:
Fujita’s career year was with us in 2003, where he amassed 111 total tackles and 4 sacks. The following year in KC, he had 90 tackles and 4.5 sacks. He then floundered in Dallas with 53 tackles and 2 sacks, then went to NO where his tackle production jumped to around the 90s again. So yes, scheme does matter. When here, he was a really good LB, but got thrown under the bus by Gunther for the flavor of the month (Kendrell Bell). Fujita didn’t “fit better” somewhere else. He fit just fine here.
Your scheme argument doesn’t really work on Dorsey though: He had a pretty good rookie career, and had a really solid sophomore year in a new scheme. As mentioned by me elsewhere, he was in the top 14% among DL for tackles. That’s pretty darn impressive… and that was with Pendergast “coaching” him. I get the impression that Dorsey is just a really good football player (obviously why he was a top 5 pick) that is versatile at different spots on the DL. Just because a bunch of talking heads think he’d be a really great 43 DT doesn’t mean he can’t/won’t be able to transition into a really great 34 DE (which we might have begun to witness). There’s no sense in trying to hog tie him to one specific scheme when it’s pretty obvious that he’s capable of playing in multiple schemes.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 3:55 PM CST up reply actions
I'm just trying point out
that recording tackles doesnt necessarily mean the player is doing his assigned job well. Obvioulsy it’s everyone’s job on defense to make a tackle, but to say that Fujita’s “best year” was in 2003 because that’s the year he had 111 tackles is a bit far-fetched. I liked him a lot in KC and honestly I was pissed when they dumped him to Dallas for a 7th round pick just to dump him. However, there’s a lot more to the game than just tackles. Fujita has been excellent in coverage for New Orleans and has done a good job of covering tight ends, covering backs in the flats and covering hook zones. Since his tackle numbers have dropped from 96 to 95 to 81 to 58 in the past four years, does that automatically mean he’s on the decline? No. It means in that particular scheme he’s doing what is asked of him, which is funnel the ball away from the edge and move it inward to a player like Jonathan Vilma.
For all we know, he could have abandoned his assignments often in 2003 and left the defense vulnerable. I have no idea if there is any truth to that, but it’s possible. Unless one of us was the calling the plays in 2003, we dont know for certain that he did his assignments.
When grading film in football, it comes down to a few things…alignment, assignment, result and effort. At least that’s how we graded. A guy may have made the tackle so we gave him a “+” in effort and result, but he may be lined up incorrectly at the snap and ignored his assignment, in which he received a “-” in that category. I dont know Dorsey’s responsibilities for each particular snap because I wasnt the one calling the plays, but generally speaking, I dont feel that he played that spectacular.
It seems that Fujita is quite content with himself
Self-assured is the term I think. Maybe he just didn’t fit with the crap that the Chiefs were putting out then and told them so. Thus, Shipped out for any pick.
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 10, 2010 4:47 PM CST up reply actions
But we do know
That in Clancy’s odd (can we call it “pinched”?) 3-4, his absence in the Cleveland game made for a MASSIVE difference. Might speak more to Gales’ ineptitude more than Dorsey’s ability, but it showed that he helps somewhat.
"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
Gales isn't/wasn't any good.
But we forget that Cleveland ran over more than just the Chiefs down the stretch.
Oh come on....
Yes, coverage is important and yada yada yah. But come on man. A LB accumulates almost 100 tackles per season for the majority of his career so you question whether or not he was playing his assignment correctly? First off, I’d have to say that the guy is doing everything asked of him because he’s been a starter for a long time. He wouldn’t last if he wasn’t a good LB.
Second, look at his game started totals for the years he didn’t get around 90 tackles each season. Figure his average is about 100 tackles for a full 16 games started season. that averages to about 6 tackles per game. In 2009 he started 11 games and got 58 tackles. So he missed 5 games. 6 × 5 = 30, so add 30 tackles to his total and…. he was on track for an 88 tackle season.
In 2008, he missed 2 games and got 81 tackles… add 12 for the 2 games he missed and he was on track for 93 tackles.
The guy is a consistent starter. And he helped a team win a super bowl. I’m just pissed that we let another guy go that would have been able to help this team immensely. And for what? A free agent that couldn’t man up and play here? Lesson to learn here: Don’t release/trade good talent for an unknown return. It’s bitten us in the ass more times than I can count.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 5:07 PM CST up reply actions
Some say Dorsey is so so, some say just good.
I say he’s one of our top 3 defenders. So.
Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable. Mark Twain
I have to disagree Kray.
Dorsey and Flowers are the only indispensable players on our defense. Look at some of my other comments in this thread to see why I think that. The guy just had a pretty darn good year in a new system at a new position. And that was including a couple of games missed because of injury.
Also, the saying “Rome wasn’t built in a day” is applicable to this. You can’t be overly harsh on an individual because he was teamed up with a bunch of losers that were among the worst. Dorsey was a key part in keeping this team from having not only the 32 ranked run D, but possibly one of the worst rushing Ds of all time. This was evidenced when his injury caused him to miss two games and the Donkeys and Brown put up 200+ rushing yards on us.
You can’t sit here and say… “well he was on a bad team, so he sucks, so we can do without him”. Your team will never be built if you can’t evaluate and determine who the keepers are so that you can build around them. Dorsey, IMO, is one of the keepers. Put a beast mode NT next to him and see what happens when he isn’t getting double teamed all day.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 2:21 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
Wanted to say it
Just didn’t have the patience. Totally agree.
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius
With a beast NT
and in his 2nd year, TJ may look indispensable too.
Rec
totally agree on all points
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 10, 2010 4:48 PM CST up reply actions
I don't get
why Suh can’t play a 3-4 DE? Ty Warren is listed at 6’5 300 lbs, Suh is listed at 6’4 305 lbs. Are people contending he’s not big enough to play RDE in a 3-4? I would counter he’s a better fit than Dorsey on the outside. Plus I think Suh has twice the athleticism.
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Feb 10, 2010 12:28 PM CST reply actions
I think most actually do feel Suh is an ideal 3-4 DE
Most of the argument comes down to drafting him to be our NT. Some think he’d be great and others… not so much. This was one of my motives for the post. It’s been argued that we could trade Dorsey to clear the way for drafting Suh to play DE. So are you saying you’re in that camp? I’m curious what compensation you think would be necessary to make moving Dorsey a worthwhile endeavor.
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
I'm just trying to keep an open mind
If say McCoy was the first to come off the board, we gave them Dorsey and our #5, they gave us their #2 (to draft Suh) and their 2nd rounder I would be happier than a fat kid with cake. I personally don’t like Pioli salvaging Edwards picks and selling them for parts but as great of a talent as Dorsey is, if he’s not a natural fit at DE then why force it?
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Feb 10, 2010 12:59 PM CST up reply actions
Suh
How is Suh a natural fit? This is a one of the more ignorant agruments I’ve read. Dorsey 6’1" 297…Suh 6’4" 300…not a whole lot of difference. Either way you at sticking a 4-3 DT in to a 3-4 DE position. No one knows if he will fail or succeed. What we do know is that Dorsey can play the position. Far less risk. Tyson Jackson was the best fit 3-4 DE in the draft and even he is going to take a few years to develop. So you we want to get rid of our only solid 3-4 DE to have another project to set up back another few years. The only reason everyone want Suh is cause the media has hyped him up so much. Do you not remember having the same response to Dorsey a few years ago? Read their Draft scouting reports…that in itself will tell you we are talking about similar players. Just one has 2 years experience (1 as a 3-4 DE) and the other is rookie with no experience much less 3-4 experience. So what would be the advantage?
by groundedchevy on Feb 10, 2010 1:14 PM CST up reply actions
Dorsey was the best player to come out of his class
but he’s not in the same echelon as Suh who’s touted as being the type of player that comes out once every 10 years? I would argue Suh’s skillset is a lot different than Dorsey’s. Glenn is traditionally too short to play DE in a 3-4 scheme. He is/was your prototypical pass rushing DT in a 4-3 scheme and nowhere in his scouting reports coming out of college was he projected to go to a 3-4 team. Suh’s superior athleticism is a better fit for the position and give him greater versatility on the defensive line and within the system. I’m not one of those unrealistic Chiefs fans that expects us to be winning a championship anytime soon. I don’t really have a problem with trading in the brand new luxury automobile for a better model that’s suited for the job and is two years newer. I understand the “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” philosophy, but this team is broke in so many places you can’t keep a closed mind to upgrading the team in a number of positions if it means getting rid of players you have emotional attachments to.
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Feb 10, 2010 1:44 PM CST up reply actions
Best in the last 10 years
Same thing was said about Dorsey the year he went out. I don’t read many scouting reports but the ones I’ve read about Dorsey and the ones I’ve read about Suh are quite similar.
Overall: One, if not the top, DT prospects to enter the NFL in the past 10 years, Dorsey showed the ability to dominate in the SEC when healthy. There are some concerns that he does not protect his legs adequately due to his injury history. He projects to work in any defense, but his best position would be as a three technique in the 3-4 defense as he excels when able to operate in space.
The above was a report for Dorsey on Feb. 16 08 from the War room. Once again real similar to what is being said of Suh. Every year there is a defensive player that “only comes around every 10 years.” Football is a team sport and there are so many factors that cause a player to succeed ot fail in the NFL. Coaching, Scheme, and players around him. Any player that goes in the first round has talent to succeed. The question is will the be put in a position to succeed.
by groundedchevy on Feb 10, 2010 1:53 PM CST up reply actions
That's soo ignorant
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Feb 10, 2010 2:10 PM CST up reply actions
it was a payback statement
I understand the arguement is about position I just want to add that Crick/Krick played on that Nebraska D-line too and he looked damn good also. Suh might miss Crick alot next year.
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 10, 2010 4:53 PM CST up reply actions
Well then that's a misprint
because very rarely do you see a 3-tech in a 34 defense. A 3-tech is called the “under” tackle in a 43.
Here’s espn’s scouting report of Dorsey when he came out of LSU…
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=3354754&categoryid=3353364
Believe that termonology works for both..
The term “3-tech” refers to being shaded just to the outside shoulder of the Guard, having inside position in the B gap.
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius
Believe me, I know what it means
Sam Adams is the only guy I can think of who played it in a 34 defense. Because of the rarity of it being used in a 34, I doubt that scouting report above truly intended to imply that Dorsey best fits as a 34 3-technique player.
Are you saying its a rarity for a DE to line up in the 3-tech in the 34?
I thought that was the natural position for a DE in the 34.
Or am I missing what you’re conveying…
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius
I'd say it's usually
directly over the tackle, or slightly outside of him…you see inside of the tackle, but it’s just not as frequent.
But after watching what Clancy did
nobody knew where guys were going to line up, or even who would be lining up for that matter.
Guess that makes sense, now that I'm actually looking at a diagram
Playing the 3-tech in a 34, provided the NT is right over the Center, would create a spacing problem.
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius
But Clacy actually ran that
Why?…I have no idea. It left huge holes outside the offensive tackle big enough to drive a damn bus through. It’s no wonder that Tamba was statistically the worst OLB against the run. I have a strong feeling that most of the things we saw last year, we wont see again. That was the poorest executed 34 front I’ve ever seen in my life. Yes, there were learning curves for the entire team, but Clancy did a shit-ass job.
My Point with the scouting report
My point was that ever one gets a hard on for the top prospects in the draft, and that most scouting reports don’t mean a whole lot. If you wanted to base your opinion on scouting reports…Dorsey’s and Suh’s don’t look much different. I do agree with your last post on Clancy 10 fold.
by groundedchevy on Feb 10, 2010 4:45 PM CST up reply actions
We can definitely agree there
Been calling for Clancy’s head since round 1 of Chiefs vs Raiders.
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius
Agreed.
And as to why….maybe to try to help cover the gaping hole at NT? Who knows.
And your comments about Dorsey not being strong enough (both in here and in my post from last week) are, as I have stated, valid. Just hard to really say keep/trade/cut certain players when it’s an odd system with several weak links. I know the “wait ’til next year” adage is one nobody likes to see/hear, but if there’s a time for it, it’s now.
Let Romeo try to instill a different (hopefully better) scheme and see what comes of it.
"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
I'm Hoping
That Romeo and Pleasant can work some magic with the D-line and that Thomas can do the same for the secondary. We probably need another DB to work with and definitely another NT prospect but maybe what we have with some real coaching will be 100% better than what we saw in 2009
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 10, 2010 4:59 PM CST up reply actions
I think they can
I’d like to see KC aggressively go after one of the free agent safeties (Nick Collins or O.J. Atogwe) while still drafting one in round 2 (I’m kind of liking LSU safety Chad Jones). With the 1st rounder and the other 2nd rounder, I dont care what they do as long as they address either OL, WR, NT, OLB or ILB…or some player at another position who amazingly dropped in the draft that nobody expected to and is too good to pass up.
And if they go after Berry in round 1, I wont complain with that.
I like Chad to
Need a young guy to give the hits out of the SS position, Can cover the TE’s to Plus
Geaux Chiefs
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 10, 2010 5:37 PM CST up reply actions
We did tend to under Peterson
To draft a FS/SS combo in the same year.
Maybe it was scripted :)
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 10, 2010 5:38 PM CST up reply actions
Perhaps the "why" lies in your comment earlier...
Dorsey isn’t strong enough at the point of attack, and it’s too much to ask for a 1-GAP DE to play directly over the more elite Tackles in the NFL.
So the base 34 gets ‘pinched’ to play to Dorsey’s strengths? Or did he run this same ‘pinched’ scheme in Zona also…
"The first step to penetration... must not be lateral"
-Confucius
He ran it in AZ too
but it was flipped to the other side. It actually worked well with Darnell Dockett and the edge had Travis LaBoy rushing.
Last year's 3-4 didn't have a NT.
And the one we had was usually cheatin’ to the strong side, Dorsey was cheatin’ to HIS left, and Hali was mostly upright DE.
Sometimes we DID see Edwards in 0-tech, and Dorsey in 4- or 5-. Those are the plays where I felt there wasn’t a great push.
As for Hali, I think that when he set the edge and directed the run back inside, there was no help, there, as often as not, and, imo, mostly because Edwards was gettin’ manhandled by single-block from the C.
Sealing off the run from the inside-out was not all that great. Again, I don’t think that Dorsey was THE weak link, and he IS very athletic, but does he do it by playing BIG or by playing QUICK? I’d say it’s MOSTLY playing QUICK, which brings us back to gap-shooting 4-3 DT.
And I also thought that most of the time, there were 2 or 3 blockers available to take Jackson out of most plays, without really losing anything because single blocks were handling the other 2 (or 3, counting Hali) guys. To MY eye, there was pretty much ONE guy up front who was eating up 2 or 3 blockers every play – the rookie T-Jax.
I STILL don’t fault Pendergast for doing what he did with what he had. Krumrie and Pendergast might share responsibility for their players not playing the assigned roles better, but at game-time, it looked like Pendergast was pretty much calling it the way he had to.
Well
I don’t know what to say :(
Dorsey and Hali and Edwards all were not performing adequately.
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 13, 2010 10:54 PM CST up reply actions
How can you say "He's not a natural fit"
The guy just had a very respectable year in a system and position that he’s never played before. He finished ranked 17th among ALL defensive linemen for tackles with 54 total…. which is only 12 behind the #1 DL tackler, BUF’s Kyle Williams.
Do the math there…. 32 teams, most have 4-3 defenses, so just guess that 24 teams run a 4-3, 8 run a 3-4. That’s (24 × 4) + (8 × 3) = 120 starting defensive linemen in the NFL. 17 / 120 = 0.141. So Dorsey was around the top 14% of D linemen in tackles. That’s pretty darn good for a sophomore lineman playing a new position in a new scheme with a new coach. He seems like a natural lineman no matter where you put him.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 1:50 PM CST up reply actions
+1
plus he was didn’t play ll 16 games this year
by groundedchevy on Feb 10, 2010 1:54 PM CST up reply actions
You won't find me calling Dorsey
bad at what he does or referring to him as anything but a baller, I just question like many is he being used to the best of his abilities and would he have more value to a team that would? Those numbers you crunch should only raise his value and appeal to teams which run the 4-3. I like Dorsey, thought he was a great draft pick, but don’t think it’s unreasonable to question whether or not he’s a fit in this system when the architects are using his game for something it wasn’t really designed for
D.J. #56 - Pay The Man & Play The Man
The only thing more lame than mock draft's is the sarcasm font.
by KansasCityShuffle on Feb 10, 2010 1:58 PM CST up reply actions
Ok, that's understandable.
My only argument to that is that we have him now, and he’s a proven player. There’s no need to go mucking up the line when we’re (hopefully) one NT away from having what could be one of the best 3-4 lines in the league. Would Suh be nice to have? Sure, but the cost would be too much, and the pick just wouldn’t be practical. We already have our book end DE’s , and one of them (Dorsey) has proven himself, IMO. No need to go shaking up one of the only solid positions on our defense. Get the stud NT and see if the two top 5 picks from the last 2 years develop into beastly defenders.
Again, I’d just point out that Dorsey had a very solid year as a sophomore playing in a new position and a new scheme. It’s kind of hard to argue that playing as a 3-4 DE isn’t coming naturally to him.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 2:08 PM CST up reply actions
Well there's yer problem:
I see these kinds of comments so often in the context of draft related posts that I’ve actually given up trying to argue against them
Draft related posts are mostly occupied by people that are addicted to fantasy RPGs. One second you get a “we will trade our 5th overall for their 13th overall and their 2nd and 3rd as well.” and then two posts later you get “Let’s trade DJ to TB and swap firsts, followed by a 360 double tuck quadruple backflip and ‘BOOM!’ we get Eric Berry”.
Not only are the trade talks insane, but some of the draft prospect talk is asinine as well. I don’t know how many times I’ve read “Okung isn’t a franchise LT, because he’s not Joe Thomas”. Can’t find any evidence of anyone that actually scouts these guys that thinks Okung isn’t worthy of a 5th overall. He’s talked about as a guy that will make a smooth transition and will pay dividends quickly in his rookie year…. i.e., an instant impact, and thus a top 5 pick would be understandable. The real reason so many people on here try to write Okung off as a soon to be bust (or find reasons to not draft him) is because they have a guy they want more (Berry, McClain, etc.), so they feel the need to dislike the guy and justify their preferred pick. Honestly I don’t give a shit who we draft as long as he makes the team better. I’ll follow the boards just so I know who’s out there, but the simple fact is that if they’re a top 15 prospect, they’ll be worthy of our pick. Sorry that rant was a little off subject…. back to Dorsey.
I get that it’s all speculation, but a lot of the draft trade talks is soooooo outlandish it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. What will KC do in the draft? Who knows, but I’m almost willing to guarantee that unless some team gives up everything they have (including their first born son), Glenn Dorsey will be a Chief next year. He’s an important part of this team, as was evidenced by his absence. Prior to his injury, he was in 10th place for tackles by DL for the entire NFL, and his absence was evident after teams ran the ball at will on us much worse than they were doing prior to his injury. Bottom line: Glenn Dorsey is one of the foundation pieces of this team. He’s not going any where unless Pioli commits highway robbery.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 1:29 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Hey wait. I like where your going with this RNG. Highway robbery. That just might work.
Hmmm. I’ll work on a map for the sewer systems in KC. You work on the getaway car. I like this. We just STEAL the players we want before the draft. It’s perfect. It can’t fail.
That's pretty much exactly where I stand
Granted, I have man-love for Berry, but I’d be happy with McClain as well. I’ve argued against both Suh and Okung on numerous occasions, always openly acknowleding the fact they both men are beasts, but neither satisfy a major need on the roster.
Lol. See my comment to tomahawk44 at the top ot the thread about madden ruining the way people view the game. I’m right there with ya :)
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
Oh, I hear ya.
Berry would be an excellent addition, and he’s the pick I’m rooting for. I’ve argued numerous times that a game changing safety can be the heart of a defense, which is something we need as much as a NT (a guy that is the heart and elevates the unit). Steve Atwater…. Troy Polamalu…. Ed Reed…. Bob Sanders. Top notch safeties can elevate a team. That said, even if we don’t draft Berry (even if he’s on the board) I won’t be mad. Pioli has a plan, and his career as a GM is riding on this draft. He’s going to build this team, so I’ll gladly watch him do it however he sees fit. People might be outraged if Okung is selected, but I won’t really care. We’ll upgrade a line that (regardless of what everyone thinks) really needs help. Okung at LT, Albert at LG, ______ at C, Waters at RG and O’Call at RT would be a very strong OL. Charles and Cassel would look pretty darn good if they were behind a better OL than what they had this year.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 3:17 PM CST up reply actions
Okay I was going to argue, but not now totally agree
Any of the top prospects will help the Chiefs.
even Bradford :)
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 10, 2010 5:05 PM CST up reply actions
Touche.
OK, let me reiterate: Every position is up for an upgrade with our 1st rounder except for QB, RB and DE. I would be seriously surprised if Pioli drafted any of those positions at the #5 overall.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 5:31 PM CST up reply actions
Tank Tyler also had a lot of tackles
I find it ironic that when he was traded away, everyone said that the reason he had so many tackles was because he wasnt doing his job well. Now Dorsey is applauded for his amount of tackles? I’m not trying to call you out specifically Red N Gold Beast, I just remember this point from September and wanted to bring it out. It seems like 80% of Chiefs fans sway from one side to another. I probably come off as stubborn and narrow-minded to many, but at least my mind is made up on how I feel. Regardless of what decision is made with Dorsey, I wont lose any sleep over it. I certainly have my personal beliefs and opinions and I feel that I have merit to what I say, but it’s not my decision to make, nor anyone else on here, so I dont see why everyone is so hell-bent on this issue.
Probably because Tyler wasn't a #5 overall pick.
There wasn’t nearly as much invested in Tyler as there is in Dorsey. Big issue there. It would look incredibly retarded if KC would have traded their first rounder from a year before. That’s almost unheard of. These first round picks are chosen to be the corner stones of a team… and freaking out after one year of play because you want to gamble on someone else makes your organization look foolish and unstable.
It’s one thing to trade away a mediocre player that will likely never be anything more than mediocre. It’s a completely different animal when you trade away a mediocre player that has the potential to develop into a game changing pro bowler.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 4:05 PM CST up reply actions
Much agreed
but considering it was different management who drafted Dorsey, I doubt that Pioli and Haley feel any sense of obligation to keep him around. Trading Tyson Jackson would make them look dumber than Al Davis, but moving Dorsey would be generally accepted throughout the league since he wasnt “their guy”.
Generally agree with this and your previous.
People point to tackles, and it’s part of the game, but it isn’t all of the game. There’s the ebb and flow in the trenches that matters as much or more. Fact is, there was 1 guy who DEFINITELY looked like a 3-4 lineman last year, and it was Tyson Jackson. I’m not throwin’ Dorsey under the bus, and I’m willing to wait and see what we have after a NT is added, but I’m not certain he’s the long-term answer at 3-4 DE, either.
Said it a hundred times
Dorsey to Tampa for their two high second round picks #35 and #43, after we sign a 3-4 DE and a NT. Tampa would do this because they will most likely miss out on McCoy and Suh. We should do this since #1 we are a 3-4 team, #2 we save money on the cap that would pay for a real 3-4 DE, #3 by doing this we upgrade three positions, #4 a deep draft means we get better players this year for much cheaper prices-ie Brandon Spikes.
You really think a team would give up TWO 2nd round picks for Dorsey?
I guess that would qualify as the highway robbery I was speaking of earlier (see above)….. but I seriously doubt that it will happen…. because that’s one of the insane trade talks I also mentioned above that only happen in peoples’ dreams.
My sentiments are likely to be summed up with one of these 2 quotes:
"Shut the f--- up."- Matt Cassel
"WHAT THE F---?!?!"- Todd Haley
by Red N Gold Beast on Feb 10, 2010 5:34 PM CST up reply actions
Sometimes we are over-optimistic
I tend to agree, RNGB, the proposed scenario is a bit unrealistic. 2010 will be a very deep draft, and 2nd round picks will be prized highly.
OTOH, Dorsey for TB’s second pick in Round 2? I’d do that if I was their GM and missed out on a DT in the first round— I doubt that there will be any DT prospects nearly that good by the mid-2nd round. If the Buc’s finish the 2nd round with Berry, Dorsey and a early 2nd round player from this draft…. that’s TERRIFIC value. If Pioli went in that direction I expect he’d only close if he got another pick or two in later rounds, along with the 43rd…. which could be tough for the Bucs, since they gave up some of those in trades last year.
On the general question of ‘Dorsey stay or go?’ I’m fairly agnostic: I agree that he helped the KC defense a lot last year, but I also agree that he’s basically playing out of position, and given his productivity in 2009, would have a chance to develop to an All-Pro level as a 4-3 DT (as he was originally envisioned). So yeah, he’s turning into a great player for KC, but he’d probably be better in a 4-3.
Well that would be great for TB
I don’t really care if TB has a great draft. Dorsey for the late TB 2nd is an insult (43 pick)
maybe the 2nd best player on the 31st ranked defense for a late 2nd?
Now a defense is a team effort and a 31st ranking is probaly not a whole lot worse than the 20th ranked defense in any given year cause from 32-20 means you didn’t make the playoffs. A few plays or more can change that ranking.
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 10, 2010 10:46 PM CST up reply actions
Well
If Dorsey were in this year’s draft he would go top ten, so if you look at the trade chart the Buc’s would be getting steal of a deal for Dorsey. If I were a Buc’s fan I would like that trade, and it would jump start our team.
Having extra picks, that are high in a deep draft is more than just extra picks. Having these extra picks allows us close the gap between BPA and our actual needs
Buck please post more often! Rec
Damn takes a fever or some illness to cause you to stir the site. Well, except
when you do it from the comments :)
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
Much appreciated Steve
Sad part is that most of the time i work something up and somebody else posts something on the same topic. I try to keep it to specific enough topics to generate debate. This one did turn out pretty good. I got exactly what I was going for. It’s not so much what I said in the post as it is the debate in the comments. We have some damn good members here that really know their stuff!
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
I agree
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 10, 2010 5:58 PM CST up reply actions
I personally think that it would be a huge mistake for us to trade Dorsey. As someone stated earlier, Im tired of starting the race over letting our players be developed somewhere else.
No one thought Dorsey would do as well as he did, and he got better as the season went on. This is his second year, and his first at the position. I read in a post that Dorsey is constantly driven back 3 yards, and that is not true. He struggled at times, but he held his own more often than not.
A bird in the hand beats 2 in the bush. We have no idea what Suh will do. We know what Dorsey is doing.
I dont think anyone is completely untradeable for the right deal, but other than someone else selling the farm, I dont want to see Dorsey traded. We only have a few players that are showing real progress, and Dorsey is one of them.
Thank you!
I’ve been wondering the same thing. What is the deal with all of these “Trade Away Dorsey” mumblings.
I still can't say I agree with it
but it did turn into a pretty good debate.
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
you should have an option that says HELL NO
dorsey = improving
dorsey = haley’s core player
dorsey = young
dorsey = BEAST
You're a goddamn quarterback! You know what that means? It's the top spot, kid. It's the guy who takes the fall. It's the guy everybody's looking at first - the leader of a team - who will support you when they understand you. Who will break their ribs and their noses and their necks for you, because they believe. 'Cause you make them believe. That's a quarterback.
--- Any given sunday
Cassel can lead us.
I can dig it
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
NT should help Dorsey and Jackson.
I think Dorsey showed last season how valuable he is to the defense, when he was out for a couple of games. Jackson progressed as the season went on, and I don’t see him as a bust. People forget the main role of a 3-4 DE, to eat up blockers, not to have great sack numbers, and I think with a more dominant NT to take some pressure off of both, they will only be better, which, in turn will help the both the LB’s and secondary.
Tamba Hali
Tamba has done nothing but impress this year. What Clady did happened all damn year.
"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
