Seems to me that the first QB KC has tried to develop in years, should get the benefit of the doubt if he shows signs of improvement.

Maybe CP knows the market better than we give him credit for?

:eek:

Maybe he made the fans this way?

Stop putting ourselves in this position? :shrug:

Maybe I wasn't clear. I'm agreeing with you. Nobody can say he is reliable.

YES! ABSOLUTELY! My vote for post of the year!! :clap:



No, I really don't think that. I've just seen that bullshit on this thread on three different occasions already, and wanted to join in.

For as good as he is I'd say to an extent yes, he has a tendency to disappear without other players around him and numerous other teams have excellent MLB play with later picks used.

Its not that those guys like Urlacher are not talented. But for non pass rushing linebackers, theres not that big of a difference between a 1st round guy and a 3rd or 4th round guy. Not enough to make a huge difference.


But its probably a safe draft pick first round. You dont see too many linebackers bust big time unless its injury. Not nearly as many as other positions.

Like say Brian Urlacher was a top 10 pick.....would you rather have him there or Lofa Tutupu in the 2nd?

Tutupu is going to be really good this year. He flies under a lot of folks' radar, but look out for seattle LB corps.

Arizona is deep at linebacker and may have to cut or slip onto the practice squad Ali Highsmith who was undrafted but has had a great camp and played really well in the preseason.

He would be one to watch.

I also think that Wes Dacus could develop into a good linebacker.

Ang

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26290833/?GT1=43001
This dude is available

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - A Puerto Rican man has been granted his wish to remain standing — even in death.

A funeral home used a special embalming treatment to keep the corpse of 24-year-old Angel Pantoja Medina standing upright for his three-day wake.

Yes sir. IMO if you're going to use your 1st rounder on a LB there has to be a HUGE discrepancy between him and the pack, he has to stand far far out. If not, it's best to use that pick trying to find the next Roaf, Peyton, Neil Smith, or Champ Bailey.

That said, I don't think people (especially Carl Peterson) give the MLB position as much credit as it deserves. That lone position can be a lynch pin of a successful defense.

Qaulity MLB's stop the run and the short pass, and those two attributes keep the chains from moving and halt drives before they begin.

Another big item that teams like us miss out on when we don't have a stellar MLB, is the punishment that a true stud at that position doles out. When you have a Ray Lewis or Urlacher up the middle, consistently laying wood on running backs, slot receivers, tight ends, gaurds, and centers, it can damn near incapacitate an offense by the 4th quarter.

I hate watching receivers catch slant routes over the middle on us, only to be slowly drug down by their jersey. A slant route over the middle should scare the sh*t out of a receiver, and his head oughta roll clear to the sidelines if he dares raise his arms to catch the ball over the middle.

If you can intimidate an opposing team, you can dictate the game to them, and right now the Chiefs aren't intimidating anyone.

When the Chiefs lineup in as much zone as they do, they're gonna get beat by slants the route itself lends itself to kicking a zones ass.

Doesnt the nature of a cover 2 lend itself to giving up smaller plays/longer drives?

Basically, it was a defense designed to play the 49ers/WCO because of all if it's throws to the flats and all that.

If a team is very vertical with you in the passing game you'll have issues unless your team is full of elite players.

So the defensive scheme creates issues with a vertical passing game, as well as difficulty stopping shorter slants ? Your interpretation sounds bad for the Chiefs, issues with vertical passing, issues with short slants, ouch.

On the earlier note, I understand that zone D makes a slant that much more effective. IMO this actually helps my point, that we are missing the boat by not acquiring a heavy hitting scary MLB.

How you ask?

Ok, a receiver comes across the middle, and he has some room due to the zone defense, BUT if we had a monster MLB.......

1. The ball might be dropped as the receiver "hears footsteps" of the big monster coming for him.

2. The ball might be caught, but then immediately jarred loose by the big fella layin a Mega Hit on the b*stard, sending the ball to the turf and the receiver to sideline with concussion.

3. Later in the game, slot receivers may run their routes more timidly across the middle, fearing the big whammy....

4. D backs and OLBs don't bite as hard on play action, knowing that even if the ball IS handed off, Dorsey and our MLB behind him will take care of it. Creating less of a chance of a CB getting burned for a td on a play action fly route.

5. If you have a quality MLB, opposing O-lines have to honor his potential blitz, limiting all-out double teams on Dorsey.

It's just my opinion, but I really feel the Chiefs have to find a stud for the middle, or they will suffer in many different aspects of the game from the lack of this lynch pin position.