Question about our defense
From what I am hearing from all the "experts", there is a slight chance Suh or McCoy could fall to the Chiefs at pick #5. I agree with most fans that neither is a true NT in a 3-4 defense, even though I have a huge man-crush on Suh. My question is, what are the chances KC picks one of these two if available and decides to move back to a 4-3 defense? I understand this is not a popular option, but when you think about it, the draft may be pushing us in this direction. We could team Glenn Dorsey with either Suh or McCoy to form one of the best two-tackle duos in the league. It would also help us offset our lack of linebackers as we would only need one ILB. Hali can easily move back to DE, but I am not sure how well Jackson can play DE in a 4-3. Just wondering if anybody has any thought on this?
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.
67 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Won't
Be an option. We’ve come to far with the 3-4. Plus, 3-4 is what Romeo Crennell runs.
by BetterRedThanDead on Mar 12, 2010 1:06 PM CST reply actions
Its not going to happen, but I'm not sure how far we've come with the 31st ranked 34 defense.
Its not like switching would hurt us. We can only drop one.
Biggest problem
was not having all the right key pieces in place for the 4-3. NT and ILB are two of the largest (no pun intended) components of the 3-4. Ron Edwards not taking up blockers, and our ILB’s getting manhandled (in the best of situations) made a lot of that 31’st ranked D possible. Also, not having the proper coordinator hurt us too. Crennell brings a lot to the table on his own, and I think we’ve already got an upgrade over Ron Edwards. Plugging up the middle will give us more pass rush oppertunities, and if we can get just a bit more solid on that front, that’ll make our Pass Defense better. I’d lay that with current people in place that our D will be a lot better.
by BetterRedThanDead on Mar 13, 2010 12:48 AM CST up reply actions
I think Tank Tyler not being true NT material, like we ALL thought in the offseason, was a big setback.
But that was the thing about the 1st offseason. A lot of players in poor condition, and not sure where they’d end up playing or how they’d end up playing at peak physical condition. For instance, Tyler ended up looking like a decent gap-shooting interior lineman, but wasn’t eating up two blockers very often.
And I don’t think Edwards is all THAT bad, but he’s a liability when he’s the ONLY NT on the squad, which was the case in ’09.
This should probably be a fanshot
but Crennel runs a 3-4 as its base defense.
1. Are they an upgrade over what we already have?
2. Do they have high football IQ?
3. Can they make a difference from Day 1?
4. Do they have a history of leadership?
5. Sign him up.
3-4 dilemma
I grow concerned with the 3-4 Nose tackle position. There are 4-5 teams out there (Denver, SD, Buff to name a few) that need this commodity and there aren’t enough Nt’s to go around. Some teams will need to change.
I thought I had it all figured out with the 4-3. We had Dorsey. Hali and J Allen. Things looke great on the D-line. Then we make the switch. Very big move by Pioli. Now he has his 3-4 coach in place. We need 3 players-NT, ilb and safety. We can get 2 for sure this yr. Fill other with free agent (A Davis ilb from denver? or give up 3rd or 4th rounder for Kirk Morrison) Draft Berry and Cody/Cam
Should be an interesting yr but I do believe new coaching staff will acct for an extra win or two, softer schedule will acct for an extra win and new players will acct for an extra win. That puts us at 7-9.
Mr J
KC Chiefs Fan
We didnt have
Allen and Dorsey at the same time. Allen was traded before the draft in which we got dorsey.
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
Not trying to be a dick
I see what you are saying though. Allen Dorsey Tjax Hali would’ve been a sick Dline.
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
I think OLB in a 3-4 is a more natural fit for Hali.
He just seemed way too slow when Herm and co. made him pack on extra weight to play with his hand in the dirt. As for what could’ve been? Well thats all it is and nothing we can do about it now. Id expect to see multiple fronts and looks from our D this year. We should see some 3-4, 4-3, 5-2, and everything in between this year.
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
Hali made All-American
Playing rush end in the Eagle/Stack defense at Penn State. Its a DE/OLB hybrid, though he did play mostly in a 3 pt stance.
by alakan81 on Mar 12, 2010 6:13 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
We're not that far off at this point...
three or four players who know the 3-4 and we will be in much better shape. I am pretty curious as to where we will get our NT of the future. I am betting it is now a 3rd round priority since we got Smith.
If we wait till the 3rd to get a NT
then we must grab the best OL prospect available at 2a or 2b.
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
we'll get one more this year, but I don't think it will be a starter
I think that’s what Shaun Smith was brought in for.
Tweet me @GiftNate
N. Gift
by giftedchiefsfan on Mar 12, 2010 3:18 PM CST up reply actions
Pouncey can play C or G and is one of the right 53.
Hell, he’s one of the few Gators that DID NOT get into trouble.
I feel the offense could ...
…help the def too. If we cancatch a few more passes for first downs, move the change, run the clock with our awesome running game then our def wont be out on the field as long.
Mr J
KC Chiefs Fan
Crennel runs a 3-4 but has run a 4-3 before
I still think his preference would be for a 3-4, and I really don’t see us deviating from that.
What it really comes down to I think is if they feel Suh can play the Nose. If Suh can not only play, but dominate, at NT and he falls, he is ours because he would undoubtedly be the BPA at a position of high need for us there. If the scouts don’t think Suh projects as a stud NT, we’ll probably be in a good position to trade down with one of the best talents in the draft sitting there. Personally, and I say this as an ametuer and not a professional scout, I think Suh can be a dominant NT, and its for the same reasons that he might fall to us. The differences between Suh and McCoy are typically broken down as Suh is better against the run than McCoy, able to read and react, while McCoy is more a more Dorsey-like 3-tech explosive pass rushing DT. Projecting those out to the 3-4, you would put your 3-tech pass-rushing DT at the weakside DE (like we have Dorsey), and then a guy like Suh is either a strongside DE, able to eat the LT and free up the OLB for blitzing against a TE and/or RB or Suh could be, especially on the basis of strong run d, read and react type, a feasible NT option. I am inclined to think that Pioli and Co. have spent a good amount of time analyzing if Suh is dominant NT material, and if he is, we will find a way to snag him.
For justice we must go to Don Pioli
Can you imagine the looks RAC could come up with if we drafted Suh?
It would make it so damn hard to gameplan against us.
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
Exactly.
A lot of people are saying that taking Suh as a NT would be wasting his talents. Now, a lot of them are kinda wrong about him I think in some ways. I see people saying he is best utilized as a 4-3 3-technique DT, which is wrong. McCoy is a better prospect as that, Dorsey was a better prospect as a 3-tech. Suh’s highest conventional value would honestly be as a RDE in a 3-4, where we have Tyson playing. Its a 5-tech that is supposed to specialize in protecting against the run, while the LDE is the one that is supposed to be a better penetrator/pass rusher.
But Pioli has said himself that there isnt one type of NT and that a lot of it depends on the nature of the 3-4 you run. There are variations. Suh might be the greatest value as a 1-tech/UT in a 3-4 under formation. He would easily command two blockers lining up in the 1-tech, the problem you get there is that he would become a 1-gap player. This is how Ratliff in Dallas plays. But that would be just one of the looks. I think he can be a 0-tech, 2-gap NT (kind of the conventional NT, and in the NE model of a Wilfork) and that would be our base. He would probably be a great 1-tech on clear passing downs, but we are only thinking about him if the scouts are convinced that he would be dominant as a 0-tech 2-gap player.
For justice we must go to Don Pioli
I really dont think Suh will drop to 5
but if he does i pray to god we take him, even if Berry is on the board. There is just so many things we could do with him. We could find a scheme to fit our personel and i think there would just be way toooooo much talent on our Dline. Who would you block?
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
Yea but would you take the trade?
I dont know if i could pass on Suh if i was Pioli. All i do know is that the draft needs to hurry up and get here. Enough of speculation, im ready for camp and to see our guys come together as a team.
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
I wouldn't mind seeing Sue at OLB haha
U-N-S-T-O-P-A-B-L-E!!!! The guy has a motor that doesn’t stop…and he’s so fast.
Ya, I know he’s too big, but geez. With his power and speed, it would be to his advantage.
Ok…I’m sure we’d find a spot for him somewhere. (passing downs 4-3 DT hehe)
Tweet me @GiftNate
N. Gift
by giftedchiefsfan on Mar 12, 2010 3:23 PM CST up reply actions
Suh, not Sue...haha
Tweet me @GiftNate
N. Gift
by giftedchiefsfan on Mar 12, 2010 3:24 PM CST up reply actions
how do you do? my name is Suh ... and DON'T fuck it up!
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
Whitlock Rocks!
hi, Mo!
5 minutes!!!
I'm sure they find a way to utilize him if he falls to KC.
Opposing offenses would have more problems dealing with this NT who isn’t just a NT than Crennel would have finding ways to make him fit.
Suh is not gonna fall to #5
take that to the bank
McCoy might though it’s doubtful … he doesn’t project as a NT and KC won’t take him, instead taking Berry to fill the Safety position
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
Whitlock Rocks!
hi, Mo!
5 minutes!!!
Well...
Like I said, McCoy is faster, more-explosive, and a better 3-tech than Suh. Sorry, I just really think that. Your prototype Tampa-2, 3-tech is a faster, pass-rushing DT. McCoy is faster than Suh by all indications and considered the better pure pass-rusher. Suh is considered the better run-stuffer and more capable of commanding the double team. The team in front of us thats really looking at DT it seems is Tampa, and I think McCoy fits their defense better than Suh. If Detroit goes LT to protect Stafford, and STL goes Bradford, I think TB takes McCoy and I can’t see WASH investing in another DT after spending a 100 mil on Haynesworth. Suh sits in our laps and I think he is so versatile that he is unquestionably our pick, IF and only IF he can play the 0-tech.
For justice we must go to Don Pioli
Sudden, good assessment of Suh vs McCoy
as AP’s “pretend GM for the Lions” for our own mock draft, and having been over to Pride of Detroit a few times lately, I can pretty much say that the Lions WILL take Suh if he’s there at the #2 pick
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
Whitlock Rocks!
hi, Mo!
5 minutes!!!
I think its highly likely they will pick Suh
but i also think it would be highly stupid.
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
what, stupid for the Lions to take the (close to unquestionably) BPA?
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
Whitlock Rocks!
hi, Mo!
5 minutes!!!
He is the BPA
but I bet if you asked thier QB he would think it was stupid. Im sure many would find it stupid if they didn’t invest in a LT to protect him.
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
Thats why most mocks have them taking a LT now.
But I don’t know. Granted, the fanbase doesnt make the pick, and the front office in Detroit surely could be thinking they need to protect their $60 million dollar man who was almost killed last year. But Jim ’the Codester" Schwatrz is a defensive guy and might be foaming at the mouth to get his own Haynesworth in the form of Ndominating Suh. Plus, that defense was horrid last year.
The mystery is what their offseason signings say about their interests in the draft. They traded for DT Corey Williams from Cleveland and signed DE Vanden Bosch. It seems to show them addressing D through trade and FA and they haven’t really made any moves for Oline help, which begs the question. Plus, a guy like Okung is universally regarded as the safest pick, and in Detroit after a decade of Millen gambling on risky WRs, there might be a premium on playing it safe. They went after Burleson, presumably indicating that they wanna be a passing team and give Stafford some options, but they need to keep him upright for that.
All I know is that its hilarious because we have our franchise LT (no matter what the know-nothing mockers out there think about Branden Albert), and we traded up two spots with Detroit for him and they picked the LT out of BC with that later pick and I don’t think that’s worked out well for them.
For justice we must go to Don Pioli
The logical choice for DET is Okung.
Thats my whole point although i could see them taking Suh.
Don't blame me, I voted for content of character.
Sudden ... you know, it's really funny you put it like that, here's why ...
as you said, the fanbase doesn’t make the choices in Detroit, just as the fanbase doesn’t make the decisions here for the Chiefs … now, that said, I think we all agree on a couple of things …
1) our defense was atrocious last year
2) our OLine wasn’t much better and it’s a good idea to keep Cassel upright
now, their fanbase is seemingly “ok” with their OLine, at least for now … and yeah they would be “playing it safe” grabbing Okung … but then too, they have a LT that they think is very good so why SHOULD they go Okung instead of BPA with Suh, regardless of who they’ve already signed for their DLine?
now compare that to the Chiefs and those of us here on AP … we SUPPOSEDLY have a "franchise LT in Albert, but it’s a sure bet that someone with Okung’s talent would go a long ways to improving OUR Oline, with Albert moving to LG where he played in college … and WE do NOT have the “luxury” of getting Suh (in all liklihood) and besides, he’s not projected as NT (our position of greatest need)
and think about it: we’ve signed Shaun Smith already while Wade Smith has walked and Ryan Lilja is still out there …
and I think it’s equally “hilarious” that you mock those who DO think Okung would be a good and safe pick for our team … I’m one of those who thnk Okung would be a kickass pick (wouldn’t rade to get him, but if he was there at #5 and Pioli took him, I wouldn’t argue one bit) … and I think it’s odd that you think Albert is a “franchise” LT, as he didn’t overwhelm a lot of people last year that I recall (he wasn’t horrible by any means, but so far I don;’t equate him to Willie Roaf)
and our team has gone DLine and DLine and Dline recently and you know what? I can’t see it’s worked out all THAT well for us either
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
Whitlock Rocks!
hi, Mo!
5 minutes!!!
Agree
I stopped on who I projected awhile back.
Okung would be a good lineman to add to the Chiefs O-line. Period.
Anyway, any of the top guys would work out for the 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 Mar 12, 2010 7:07 PM CST up reply actions
Yes, he would, and I wouldn't argue, much, even though from my distant perspective,
I see Berry as the greater value in the 1st, because he’ll be good, and is likely to be great, and I didn’t see the left side as the weak link in KC’s protections or run-blocking last year.
One thing
and I think it’s odd that you think Albert is a "franchise" LT, as he didn’t overwhelm a lot of people last year that I recall (he wasn’t horrible by any means, but so far I don;’t equate him to Willie Roaf)
There is a huge gap between “franchise LT” and “Willie Roaf”.
There are several LT’s who play very well for 8 or more years for the same team and make a few Pro Bowls – who I would consider franchise LT’s…but a lot of those guys won’t make the Hall of Fame like Roaf will
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
Why did New Orleans trade him conditionally
an injury.
I am all for Willie Roaf in the Hall of Fame.
I lost my point and I lost your point.
Albert can be a Willie Roaf type player in 10 years or so.
The issue I see is that Willie played at the weight Willie played at.
The Chiefs have an idea of a weight they want Albert to play at.
Maybe good maybe bad.
Albert won’t be a Road Grader at the ZB LT Weight allowance.
Maybe Willie and Albert will have totally different methods to get to the same place Canton Ohio
"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 Mar 12, 2010 8:49 PM CST up reply actions
PVC lets win 4 Super Bowls and Albert will be in the HOF :)
"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 Mar 12, 2010 8:50 PM CST up reply actions
Or C or S or SS or N
Tweet me @GiftNate
N. Gift
by giftedchiefsfan on Mar 12, 2010 3:25 PM CST up reply actions
this HAS been discussed a LOT
NO, they won’t go back to a 4-3
but, I believe that IF Suh were to drop… they’d make a NT out of him, even though it isn’t ideal, he’s a special player to build around
* KC now has the best coaching staff in the league
* 9-7 is a real possibility in 2010 IF the Chiefs get 4 new starters
* keep Albert at LT, upgrade the positions that NEED upgrading.C, RG, NT, S, LB
I agree they'll stick with the 3-4
and if Suh falls to #5, I agree that he’d be our NT
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
spelz ... I'm really really really curious to know what "experts" say Suh will fall to #5
can you give us a link, please?
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
Whitlock Rocks!
hi, Mo!
5 minutes!!!
No specific source
but I keep hearing draft analysts mention Bradford, Clauson, Berry, Pierre-Paul, Davis, Okung along with McCoy and Suh as all possible top five choices. If you look at ESPN’s top five, they have McCoy and Suh at #1 and #2 but don’t have either QB in the top five. QB could easily go #1 and #4. There is a chance, slim I know that either McCoy or Suh falls to #5. Like I said I doubt either does, but Dorsey wasn’t supposed to fall to us two years ago either.
oh, sorry ... I thought you had something or someone specific in mind
sure, I think many of us could rattle off a dozen or so names who COULD go in the Top 5 … so what
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
Whitlock Rocks!
hi, Mo!
5 minutes!!!
Good Question Spelz... re. 4-3
I know its been talked about a lot.
Especially with Suh and McCoy projected to go in the top 5, but
I don’t expect either to fall to 5 -
Even if one does I say we pass;
We’re still trying to transition Dorsey into a 3-4 Tackle as opposed to the 4-3 variety he was drafted for.
Official Member of the "Draft Eric Berry" Fanclub
...you had me at Berry!
by chiefsfan62 on Mar 12, 2010 2:18 PM CST via mobile reply actions
I think they'd take Suh if he fell to #5, and they'd have one helluva front line, whatever you called the D.
But Dorsey might become expendable in a year or two in that scenario, if not sooner.
Tyson Jackson played LDE in a 4-3 in college
I can imagine worse things than a d-line of
TJ_________Suh__________Dorsey__________Hali
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
+1
Talk about having our d-line set for the next 10 years. Wow, imagine if we still had Jared Allen. We might have been able to get 40+ sacks a year just from our d-line.
Damn that one hurt Wilson
"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 Mar 12, 2010 6:56 PM CST up reply actions
out Hali back uo on a 4-3 line and you end up, with our current players, one damn weak trio of LBs
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
Whitlock Rocks!
hi, Mo!
5 minutes!!!
hey guys...this is professional football....
It’s not supposed to be easy. the 3-4 or 5-2 or whatever you want to call it has always been a difficult defense to play well…However, if you can execute it with the right personnel, it’s awfully dang potent.
That’s why so many teams are going back to it. The 4-3 is effective too with the right personnel…But then again, 5 on the line beats 4 on the line in running plays no matter how you draw it up. And if you can effectively stop the run….you force the pass. It becomes predictable. Then the pass becomes easier to stop. That’s my defensive philosophy.
The challenge for the professionals is to find the guys that fit the 3-4. If they don’t fit then you train them so they do fit. Professional football scouts and coaches find the guys and train the guys and put them in the right situation so they can win.
The players have to be willing to conform to the position the coaches want them in. They have to work together as a team. It’s very difficult to do, but thats why they are professionals, and why they get paid the big bucks.
That being said, I don’t think Pioli, Haley and Crennel will change their philosophy. Our team won’t challenge for a championship until we get the pieces fit together. I think they’ve made progress this off season so far. More progress is to be made…we shall see how it goes…
Tweet me @GiftNate
N. Gift
by giftedchiefsfan on Mar 12, 2010 3:15 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
well said ... you truly ARE gifted ... rec'd!
"I shall conquer untruth by truth" - Mahatma Gandhi
Whitlock Rocks!
hi, Mo!
5 minutes!!!
The 3-4 two-gap is much more of a "team defense"
Both in that it requires a great deal of cooperation and it can also somewhat mask deficiencies of individual players as long as everybody is doing their job.
So, as has been said, it is difficult to find guys that not only fit the physical requirements but also have the instincts and football intelligence to execute consistently. This is also why it usually takes players a few years in the system to really get it down pat.
When you get it right, the 3-4 is definitely greater than the sum of its parts.
by alakan81 on Mar 12, 2010 6:31 PM CST via mobile reply actions
And you can pick players for the job description more easily, imo.
A big part of the move to the 3-4 is the 4-3 asks for too much from its DEs. Tough to be stout against the run and still be quick enough in space to finish plays on the ballcarrier/QB in the backfield. Sad, really, seeing somebody like Gunther Cunningham casting about vainly for Mr. Goodbar, only to see a quick-footed QB sidestep a lunging D-Lineman and make the play, while his entire d-line is picking itself back up off the turf.
gee how many years
are we going to draft DT’s and DE’s in the 1st round it’s been what now 3 or 4 yrs in a row? starting with Herm and his 4-3, we then switch to 4-3 (Herm’s wasted picks) and we still haven’t got it done yet.
No
Too much of an open commitment in the 34 direction. We just picked up an NT and we’re bound to draft another one. Once that’s done the deal is sealed.
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!

by 
























