ChiefsPlanet
Page 2 of 7 1 2 3456 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs How would you like Pat Williams at NT? (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=247441)

Hammock Parties 07-22-2011 10:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy (Post 7763757)
When I watched the Vikings last year they got ran all over. He would also have to move from a 4-3 DT to a 3-4 DT. I'm still voting no on the old fat guy.
#9 run D.

Skyy God 07-22-2011 10:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy (Post 7763757)
When I watched the Vikings last year they got ran all over. He would also have to move from a 4-3 DT to a 3-4 DT. I'm still voting no on the old fat guy.
Williams played more snaps in 2010 than 2009..... perhaps the Vikes weren't smart with his use.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog...-old-solution/

rocknrolla 07-22-2011 10:24 AM
It sounds like a Pioli move, if he still has gas in the tank. One or two year contract. minimal risk. I have no problem with it.

BigCatDaddy 07-22-2011 10:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pittsie (Post 7763781)
Williams played more snaps in 2010 than 2009..... perhaps the Vikes weren't smart with his use.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog...-old-solution/
That translates to a 3-4 DT that can't push the pocket on pass plays.

ChiefGator 07-22-2011 10:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy (Post 7763796)
That translates to a 3-4 DT that can't push the pocket on pass plays.
Run stopper only.

BigCatDaddy 07-22-2011 10:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefGator (Post 7763799)
Run stopper only.
So just play him on 3rd and 1?

Skyy God 07-22-2011 10:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy (Post 7763796)
That translates to a 3-4 DT that can't push the pocket on pass plays.
And your problem with that is? It's not like 3-down NTs are available in FA.

MIAdragon 07-22-2011 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pittsie (Post 7763764)
Durability has not been an issue.... he's missed 3 games since 2002.
FYP

I don't see that continuing much longer at 39 and counting.

mnchiefsguy 07-22-2011 10:42 AM
Honestly, given that the Chiefs may have to spend 20 million or more just to get to the minimum salary floor of a potential new cba, I would have no problem signing him to a two-year deal, with maybe a team option for a third year.

Mr_Tomahawk 07-22-2011 10:45 AM
Why not....it isn't like we are stacked at the position anyways...

Mr. Laz 07-22-2011 10:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO (Post 7763755)
IN

but just on a 1 or 2 year deal
Yep ... if they want to bring in Williams instead of bringing back Ron Edwards then it's all good.

Only a short deal though because i don't think Pat Williams has much left.

SAUTO 07-22-2011 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laz (Post 7763827)
Yep ... if they want to bring in Williams instead of bringing back Ron Edwards then it's all good.

Only a short deal though because i don't think Pat Williams has much left.
yep, we cant do both. we need to at least be able to see what powe has.

Chief Roundup 07-22-2011 10:56 AM
Don't mind the idea but he is a 4-3 DT not a 3-4 NT. Has he ever played that position? We always hear about the 3-4 NT is much harder than 4-3 DT because of the double teams and chips.

Chiefnj2 07-22-2011 10:59 AM
No thanks. Develop a younger player for the long haul.

RealSNR 07-22-2011 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 7763851)
No thanks. Develop a younger player for the long haul.
Maybe he can teach Powe how to read


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:29 PM.
Page 2 of 7 1 2 3456 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.