The problem with Dorsey

[StcChief]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Glenn Dorsey through 7 games: 18 tackles, 14 solo, 0 sacks

The rest of these guys rookie year, 16 game:

Warren Sapp - 27 tackles, 3 sacks, 1 int
Albert Haynesworth, 30 tackles, 21 solo, 1 sack
Tommie Harris - 43 tackles, 28 solo, 3.5 sacks
Casey Hampton - 22 tackles, 9 solo, 1 sack
Kris Jenkins - 34 tackles, 27 solo, 2 sacks
Marcus Stroud - 25 tackles, 21 solo, 0 sacks

Some guys take off right away (Kevin Williams, John Henderson) but others take some time to develop.

at this point no concern.....

wonder who those sacks were against.... a real database could help alot with these questions.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Glenn Dorsey through 7 games: 18 tackles, 14 solo, 0 sacks

The rest of these guys rookie year, 16 game:

Warren Sapp - 27 tackles, 3 sacks, 1 int
Albert Haynesworth, 30 tackles, 21 solo, 1 sack
Tommie Harris - 43 tackles, 28 solo, 3.5 sacks
Casey Hampton - 22 tackles, 9 solo, 1 sack
Kris Jenkins - 34 tackles, 27 solo, 2 sacks
Marcus Stroud - 25 tackles, 21 solo, 0 sacks

Some guys take off right away (Kevin Williams, John Henderson) but others take some time to develop.

Tackles are such an unreliable indicator. KC is on pace to be the worst run defense in the history of the NFL in terms of ypc. It doesn't matter if he has 100 tackles if they are 6 yards downfield.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Tackles are such an unreliable indicator. KC is on pace to be the worst run defense in the history of the NFL in terms of ypc. It doesn't matter if he has 100 tackles if they are 6 yards downfield.

really? a DT with 100 tackles wouldnt mean anything?
No matter where 100 tackles are made by a Dt would be VERY impressive. just means shit is all around him.
Do you actualy think that if he has a better season than all those guys on the list that it wouldnt mean much?
Do you think the LBs should be blamed at all?

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

really? a DT with 100 tackles wouldnt mean anything?
No matter where 100 tackles are made by a Dt would be VERY impressive. just means shit is all around him.
Do you actualy think that if he has a better season than all those guys on the list that it wouldnt mean much?
Do you think the LBs should be blamed at all?

I'm not sure you can judge a "better" season by tackles. If he finishes with the same # of tackles that Haynesworth had as a rookie, but KC sets the record for worst ypc and teams ran the ball 100 more times against KC, I don't think you could consider him having a better or equal season than Haynesworth.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

I'm not sure you can judge a "better" season by tackles. If he finishes with the same # of tackles that Haynesworth had as a rookie, but KC sets the record for worst ypc and teams ran the ball 100 more times against KC, I don't think you could consider him having a better or equal season than Haynesworth.

are you talking individual or team as in "better season". and it's almost universally understood that our LBs are the reason for such a shitty run d

[CupidStunt]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Tackles are such an unreliable indicator. KC is on pace to be the worst run defense in the history of the NFL in terms of ypc. It doesn't matter if he has 100 tackles if they are 6 yards downfield.

Agreed, but I've noted when following GameCenter that a lot of his actual tackles made are for very short gains.

I think what we're seeing out of Dorsey is feast and famine but only just barely, i.e. 10% feast, 90% famine. I've seen a couple stout plays, but mostly not.

And I do think it's coaching. SEVEN games. Honestly not concerned because my opinion of him at this time last year was that he was the best player in the country, and one doesn't just lose that ability. I would be concerned if I thought he sucked back in March, and I might say he's proving me right, but it simply takes time.

[blueballs]

Who got the double team

[SAUTO]

and how many people around here wanted NOTHING to do with faneca?

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

and how many people around here wanted NOTHING to do with faneca?

He's old.

[Chief Faithful]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

and how many people around here wanted NOTHING to do with faneca?

I'm one who wanted nothing to do with Faneca. I'm sick of the George Allen approach of selling the future for now. This team needed to be rebuilt.

Faneca is old and would required a very large contract. Then he would last just long enough to need to be replaced just as the team was coming out of rebuilding. Better to find a young long term solution during the rebuilding phase.

Plugging holes with aging free agents is the best path to mediocrity. Look at what Faneca and Farve did for the Jets. Ran up their salary cap and made them a .500 team.

[PhillyChiefFan]

Especially with Sapp, that surprises me.

[blueballs]

Faneca would just take away learning snaps
like Favre is

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by blueballs

Faneca would just take away learning snaps
like Favre is

from who? jones??

[milkman]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

from who? jones??

The thought process was that people expected the Chiefs to be more aggressive in the draft in selecting the O-Line position.

Had most known that the only O-Lineman taken in this draft were going to be Albert and Richardson, they would probably have been for a more aggressive approach in free agency.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by milkman

The thought process was that people expected the Chiefs to be more aggressive in the draft in selecting the O-Line position.

Had most known that the only O-Lineman taken in this draft were going to be Albert and Richardson, they would probably have been for a more aggressive approach in free agency.

awwww i recall people saying faneca was a scrub. but the REAL problem was people expecting carl and herm to do the right thing