JRid Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2009/10/14/1085358/chiefs-coach-likes-where-glenn The link didn't work in my last post, but this should work hopefully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRid Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 i dont know , id rather have darnell dockett dudes a beast plus he proved himself in last year that hes a dominate DT i think id rather have dockett and babs then rotate jerry in to keep him healthy makes more sense plus as of right now dockett has i think a year left on his contract so we could choose to resign him or let him go apposed to getting dorsey he has a huge contract . I'd love to have Dockett, but I think there is a very small chance that they actually trade him. The other thing is when his contract runs out he will probably want a rediculous contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam25 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 yea true but thats what i mean we can choose to resign him or not rather then taking on dorseys huge contract imo if they actully want to trade dockett i think TD goes after him imho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isproab Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 How about Bump until people stop bringing this up. Why would we trade for a guys that has not produced? He is the last thing we need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam25 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 How about Bump until people stop bringing this up. Why would we trade for a guys that has not produced? He is the last thing we need.^^^^^^ thats what im saying he's done nothing worth trading a first for Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRid Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 yea true but thats what i mean we can choose to resign him or not rather then taking on dorseys huge contract imo if they actully want to trade dockett i think TD goes after him imhoIf TD gets him I will be very happy, but it concerns me that we will have him for one year and then lose him because he wants such a huge contract. I think Dorsey's contract will be easier to deal with, but not sure on that. We will just have to trust TD on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyguy28 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 man i hope they do bring him home that would be great! but what about anderson? they just started him at a new position? do they just give up on him and go with dorsey or just stay with anderson? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyguy28 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 How about Bump until people stop bringing this up. Why would we trade for a guys that has not produced? He is the last thing we need.but he would fit our defense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
804_Falconfan Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 Why would KC be trying to get rid of him in his second year in the league and his first year playing DE? I calling shenanigans on this Dorsey business. And even if he was available I wouldn't want him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRid Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 If you check out the comments at the bottom of the article I posted earlier it seems like most Kansas City fans are against trading Dorsey and are pretty high on him so I'm thinking he is a lot better than some people are thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isproab Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 but he would fit our defense?So what! Just because he fits the system does not mean he is a "Player". He has not proven he is worth his draft status, do I need to go down the list of first round draft picks along the D-line over the last 10 years that didn't pan out? You must understand, there is more to being a good player than size/speed/draft status/college production. You have to transfer all that to the NFL and produce. Dorsey has not done that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyguy28 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 So what! Just because he fits the system does not mean he is a "Player". He has not proven he is worth his draft status, do I need to go down the list of first round draft picks along the D-line over the last 10 years that didn't pan out? You must understand, there is more to being a good player than size/speed/draft status/college production. You have to transfer all that to the NFL and produce. Dorsey has not done that.you do have a point :mellow: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diablo Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 Even though I'd love to get JA off our team I'm not convinced Dorsey is the answer unless KC is willing to give us a great deal. I'd say instead we will have to wait and let TD get us some improved additions next year in the draft targeting the dline, OLB, and the secondary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris D Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 Not going to happen, keep dreaming! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice of Reason Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 So what! Just because he fits the system does not mean he is a "Player". He has not proven he is worth his draft status, do I need to go down the list of first round draft picks along the D-line over the last 10 years that didn't pan out? You must understand, there is more to being a good player than size/speed/draft status/college production. You have to transfer all that to the NFL and produce. Dorsey has not done that.But to be fair, Dorsey has not had a chance to do that. His first year numbers were respectable (actually, very nice comparably speaking for a rookie DT). And after that, the entire coaching staff and FO for that matter changed and the scheme is now totally different. He's not a fit for the 3-4 scheme KC now employs. He never was. And his only year in a 4-3 (the scheme he was drafted for) he produced well.Anyone calling him a bust to this point honestly must either have no idea of these circumstances or their football IQ is very questionable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 The only reason the Chiefs are intersted is because he is a BUST! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isproab Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 But to be fair, Dorsey has not had a chance to do that. His first year numbers were respectable (actually, very nice comparably speaking for a rookie DT). And after that, the entire coaching staff and FO for that matter changed and the scheme is now totally different. He's not a fit for the 3-4 scheme KC now employs. He never was. And his only year in a 4-3 (the scheme he was drafted for) he produced well.Anyone calling him a bust to this point honestly must either have no idea of these circumstances or their football IQ is very questionable.I didn't call him a bust, he is still young and has plenty of time to develope. But given our situation, a smaller Babineaux, a smaller first round pick in Jerry, I don't need to bring in another guy that is smaller and may not be a player. KC's system switch has not put Dorsey in the best situation so that is their fault and I would not give up more than a 3rd for him. That being said, with our current roster I'm not taking a flyer on another smaller DT. If we were to take Dorsey, then we can't afford to draft another DT, forget attemptiong to get a space eater that can stuff the run, you don't have room on the roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goal Line D Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 I'm sensing some serious "man crush" cases in this thread. I'm more than certain that KC's asking compensation will be WAY more than what we would be willing to give up for Dorsey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRid Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 I know there were rumors that we were going to trade our 1st pick this year for Dorsey, but we did not because Jerry was available. I was pretty sure I read somewhere on here since then that it was at least somewhat confirmed. Anybody remember that and know if it was confirmed? If this was the case then I assume TD was liking what he saw in Dorsey his first year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice of Reason Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 I didn't call him a bust, he is still young and has plenty of time to develope. But given our situation, a smaller Babineaux, a smaller first round pick in Jerry, I don't need to bring in another guy that is smaller and may not be a player. KC's system switch has not put Dorsey in the best situation so that is their fault and I would not give up more than a 3rd for him. That being said, with our current roster I'm not taking a flyer on another smaller DT. If we were to take Dorsey, then we can't afford to draft another DT, forget attemptiong to get a space eater that can stuff the run, you don't have room on the roster.Sorry. I wasn't suggesting you said he was a bust. I understand your point. And I agree that the Cheifs have dug this hole so we shouldn't be too quick to bail them out.I also think that we shouldn't give up much to get Dorsey. The suggestions for a JA98 for Dorsey deal are my favorites because we have Davis, Sidbury, Beirmann, and Abe at DE. Plus the rumors are that we are planning to move JA98 inside on a more permanent basis. So our depth actually doesn't change. And remember, Jerry will be coming off an injury next year and might need easing into the starters role. Having another starting caliber DT in here would allow us to take our time with Jerry.But I think your impressions of Dorsey's size are mistaken. He's not really a "smaller" DT. He's been listed anywhere from 295 to 310 lbs. That's about perfect for our scheme. We are not looking for those 350 lbs monsters so I doubt drafting one next year was in the plans at all. In fact, if we were to land Dorsey, we could scratch off DT from our draft list all together. We could then focus on some of our other positions (LBs, CBs, or even trade down all together for more picks).Again, I didn't mean to imply you were the one calling "bust". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtlantaFalconPokerPro Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 Why is it when someone is constantly saying 'trust me' i dont trust them at all?This guy is NOT better than all our DTs. He shows up fat and out of shape to camp and plays like it every week...at least, when he's not injured.Word around the league is he was overrated for his draft position, doesnt study his playbook, plays as an individual and not as a 'team', and is a season-ending injury waiting to happen. He may have BEEN a beast, but chances are he peaked in college and his only way to go is down.All that aside, MAYBE if he came here (practically for free would be the only way i would take this guy) our coaching staff could possibly do something with him to revive his play. He would make a nice addition to our rotation, but he's not better than our DT's and he's surely not the next coming of Christ.I am so glad we passed on this guy.For the 23 million in baggage this guy carries we could bring in a few healthier, hungrier, and smarter players.Plus, you have made it very clear in your posts that your only reason for living is to spew as much garbage about JA98 as you possibly can, perhaps hoping that one day, when and if we do get rid of him, you can jump around in circles screaming "I told you so! I told you so!"Your post and your opinion on Dorsey are complete bs...trust me.Well said, +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millenium falcon Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 dorsey for anderson straight up would be awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blunttokinplaymaker Posted October 17, 2009 Author Share Posted October 17, 2009 (edited) Jesus I never knew how many dumbasses are on on this board. Atlanta must have a terrible education system. Let's start from the beginning. We run a 4-3 defense. This a 1-gap defense.That means it relys on the quickness of the defensive linemen to make plays in the backfield against the run and the pass.In this defense, the UT (Babineaux) is the interior penetrator and the RE (Abraham, Biermann) is the edge rusher. However, for these players to be effective we need a 2 gap NT (Jerry) or power end LE (Anderson, Davis) to hold the point of attack in the run game versus the double team. This leaves the other players in one on one matchups, putting them in position to make plays with their quickness.However, with the injury to Jerry, on run plays Babineaux gets double teamed and on pass plays both Abraham and Babineaux can be double teamed if they use a TE or RB in pass protection. That leaves us with either Biermann/Davis/Sidbury/Anderson and Johnson/Lewis/Walker/Anderson in one on one, with a far less likely chance of making a play than our best players. The trickle down effect of this is huge. It means offensive linemen getting to the linebackers in the run game and pass rushers not getting to the QB.The reason why the Chiefs would be considering trading Glenn Dorsey is because he is an absolute misfit for the 2 gap 3-4 defense they run. Dorsey was drafted by a coaching staff that is no longer in KC that run a 4-3. The new staff runs a 3-4.In the 3-4 your NT must be in the 330lb+ range to take on double teams from centres and guards every play. The NT wins by being an anchor that the O-line cannot push back. Dorsey is a player that wins with exceptional quickness, this is the exact opposite of what a NT must do. Because a NT must be responsible for 2 defensive gaps it needs to "clog space" and not give any ground to the O line. This is why Dorsey cannot be the NT in a 3-4, it is a complete waste of his talents.In the 3-4 your DEs should be in the 6-6 range. Dorsey is 6-1. The DEs do battle with OTs that are 6-5+ and have massive arms. A player who is 6-1 is absolutely wasted as an end in the 3-4. Again, as a D linemen in the 3-4, Dorsey is responsible for holding the point against 2 gaps instead of using his quickness to penetrate like a DT in a 4-3 scheme.Maybe now some of you understand why the Chiefs WOULD trade Dorsey. He has no place on their defense.However, someone like say DE Anderson who is 6-6 290 still very young with potential is a perfect fit for their scheme and not a great one for ours. Andersons never going to be the playmaker in space off the edge, I feel like hed do much better playing inside as an End in the 3-4, and I know that Dorsey already is a better NFL player Edited October 17, 2009 by blunttokinplaymaker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight of God Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 I would not hold my breath at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blunttokinplaymaker Posted October 17, 2009 Author Share Posted October 17, 2009 Bring him home TD! Our injury report will be STACKED!!!!Dorsey has played every game in his NFL career.Swish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.