Chiefs Glenn Dorsey's role in the 3-4 - Page 4

**Bowser** · 02-27-2009, 02:01 PM

With Vrabel coming in, I think we can officially say we are going to be a 3-4 team in '09. This leaves Dorsey kind of in positional limbo, according to those who know D-Line play better than I.

What will his role be? No way is he going to be a Haloti Ngata type at tackle, so end it is. What is the problem with Dorsey at end in a 3-4? He couldn't possibly be anymore out of position there than the way they used him last year, right? And isn't one of his strengths rushing the passer?

Please enlighten those of us not as adept at d-line, 4-3/3-4 play.

kcbubb · 02-27-2009, 03:18 PM

oops... I didn't see that you posted that about guards.

**Mr. Kotter** · 02-27-2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb

I actually agree with Hamas on this one. Gholston is still a sick athlete. I think positional value for DE in the 3-4 is not very good either. Even if Dorsey is a good 3-4 DE, he wouldn't be worth the pick. To me, that would be like selecting a guard #5. Maybe not that bad. But if he can play NT and turn into a good one, he would be worth it. But I haven't seen anything to make me believe that he can be a great NT in the 3-4.

I think Dorsey would be a superior athlete to most 3-4 DEs. I understand Hamas's concern about him not getting sacks....but with his disruptive presence, he COULD be a very unique 3-4 DE who gets more sacks than a typical 3-4 DE. If it were to pan out that way, it wouldn't be a bad move at all IMO. It's not ideal, but in no way would I consider it a "wasted" pick....if he has a sort of revolutionary effect on at the 3-4 DE position in the league.

I think you have to try it, if you are committed to the 3-4....I think that's more likely than expecting him to move to a 3-4 NT. If he put on much weight, I think he'd be trading bulk for speed and might end up less effective as a result.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-27-2009, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Kotter

I think Dorsey would be a superior athlete to most 3-4 DEs. I understand Hamas's concern about him not getting sacks....but with his disruptive presence, he COULD be a very unique 3-4 DE who gets more sacks than a typical 3-4 DE. If it were to pan out that way, it wouldn't be a bad move at all IMO. It's not ideal, but in no way would I consider it a "wasted" pick....if he has a sort of revolutionary effect on at the 3-4 DE position in the league.

I think you have to try it, if you are committed to the 3-4....I think that's more likely than expecting him to move to a 3-4 NT. If he put on much weight, I think he'd be trading bulk for speed and might end up less effective as a result.

Unless we add an all-world NT and rush backer, he's going to be facing constant double teams while having to do more than he did as an under tackle in the C2.

Chief_in_Commander · 02-27-2009, 03:29 PM

Dorsey was supposedly supposed to be a stud 4-3 guy with not any 3-4 exp. or promise....and he underperformed badly, how can we expect anything from him now in the 3-4, i just don't see it

htismaqe · 02-27-2009, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerodDenny

Dorsey was supposedly supposed to be a stud 4-3 guy with not any 3-4 exp. or promise....and he underperformed badly, how can we expect anything from him now in the 3-4, i just don't see it

Look at the bright side. He couldn't get much worse.

BradyFTW! · 02-27-2009, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

You don't spend top 5 picks on 3-4 ends, just like you don't spend top five picks on guards.

You don't? That's news to Pioli, who drafted Richard Seymour 6th overall (not quite top-five, but if they had been picking fifth they still would have taken him, without a doubt. Plus, Ty Warren went 13th overall). Seems to me that you don't realize how important DEs are in the 3-4.

**Rain Man** · 02-27-2009, 04:40 PM

It's been said many times that d-linemen often don't catch fire in their rookie season, so I'm willing to wait on Dorsey to develop. And if he was such a stud at DT, it's hard for me to believe that he wouldn't be at least a serviceable 3-4 DE, and likely a good one.

**Rain Man** · 02-27-2009, 04:45 PM

My concern about Dorsey was that he was getting buried by guards. Maybe against tackles that would happen less often, particularly as he learns about the league. Also, he seemed to be doing the patented Tim Krumrie hand-fighting a lot while standing around, as opposed to trying to penetrate. The ball would be snapped and then he would stand up and hand-fight, just like he was taught.

Hammock Parties · 02-27-2009, 04:46 PM

He's ****ed.

Mecca · 02-27-2009, 04:48 PM

You really shouldn't compare him to Dockett, Dockett may be light but he's super strong.

**Mr. Kotter** · 02-27-2009, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Unless we add an all-world NT and rush backer, he's going to be facing constant double teams while having to do more than he did as an under tackle in the C2.

We had better try to add both the NT and rushbacker, or else this move to a 3-4 becomes really pointless. If they are really committed to it, I suspect it's a given that we WILL add those pieces--or at least they will try.

suds79 · 02-27-2009, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb

Even if Dorsey is a good 3-4 DE, he wouldn't be worth the pick. To me, that would be like selecting a guard #5.

You know you're probably right.

But right now I think Pioli & Haley are far more concerned with implementing the system they want rather than letting their philosophy be dictated by a top 5 pick just last year who they had nothing to do with.

Dorsey will just have to be stout at DE and work with the position. There's no other choice.

If knowing we're going to a 3-4 and we could do it all over again would we pick somebody different? Yeah probably.

But hindsight is 20/20. Shoot if we could play that game we would of either made a move for Ryan or drafted Flacco.

aturnis · 02-27-2009, 05:01 PM

Either a short DE(shortest starting 3-4 DE is 6'3", most are 6'5", Dorsey is 6'1")...or he could put on 30 lbs. and try to play NT. I'd think they'll try to see if he can play DE though.

kstater · 02-27-2009, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerodDenny

Dorsey was supposedly supposed to be a stud 4-3 guy with not any 3-4 exp. or promise....and he underperformed badly, how can we expect anything from him now in the 3-4, i just don't see it

Wait, as a rookie DT, Dorsey underperformed? Not just underperformed, but underperformed badly?

Chris Meck · 02-27-2009, 05:17 PM

I really think that Vrabel is being brought in to be a situational pass rusher. I wouldn't expect that we go to a 3-4 as our base defensive set as it doesn't fit our front 7 personnel very well. I could see using a hybrid or occasional look, but not as our basic defensive set.

Vrabel, as I see it, is a 3rd down DE in a 4-3, and would probably be fairly effective at that at this stage of his career. His intangibles also are a big bonus.

02-27-2009, 02:01 PM
Bowser sorta mod-ish Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: KC North Casino cash: $3441616	Glenn Dorsey's role in the 3-4 With Vrabel coming in, I think we can officially say we are going to be a 3-4 team in '09. This leaves Dorsey kind of in positional limbo, according to those who know D-Line play better than I. What will his role be? No way is he going to be a Haloti Ngata type at tackle, so end it is. What is the problem with Dorsey at end in a 3-4? He couldn't possibly be anymore out of position there than the way they used him last year, right? And isn't one of his strengths rushing the passer? Please enlighten those of us not as adept at d-line, 4-3/3-4 play.
Posts: 100,647

02-27-2009, 03:18 PM	#46
kcbubb Veteran Join Date: Nov 2008 Casino cash: $6096719	oops... I didn't see that you posted that about guards.
Posts: 2,358

02-27-2009, 03:29 PM	#49
Chief_in_Commander Not Enlisted Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Kansas City Casino cash: $10015275	Dorsey was supposedly supposed to be a stud 4-3 guy with not any 3-4 exp. or promise....and he underperformed badly, how can we expect anything from him now in the 3-4, i just don't see it
Posts: 672

02-27-2009, 04:40 PM	#52
Rain Man NFL's #1 Ermines Fan Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: My house Casino cash: $3318491 VARSITY	It's been said many times that d-linemen often don't catch fire in their rookie season, so I'm willing to wait on Dorsey to develop. And if he was such a stud at DT, it's hard for me to believe that he wouldn't be at least a serviceable 3-4 DE, and likely a good one. __________________ I'm putting random letters here as a celebration of free speech: xigrakgrah misorojeq rkemeseit.
Posts: 141,427

02-27-2009, 04:45 PM	#53
Rain Man NFL's #1 Ermines Fan Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: My house Casino cash: $3318491 VARSITY	My concern about Dorsey was that he was getting buried by guards. Maybe against tackles that would happen less often, particularly as he learns about the league. Also, he seemed to be doing the patented Tim Krumrie hand-fighting a lot while standing around, as opposed to trying to penetrate. The ball would be snapped and then he would stand up and hand-fight, just like he was taught. __________________ I'm putting random letters here as a celebration of free speech: xigrakgrah misorojeq rkemeseit.
Posts: 141,427

02-27-2009, 04:46 PM	#54
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4710478	He's ****ed. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 277,900

02-27-2009, 04:48 PM	#55
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2617050	You really shouldn't compare him to Dockett, Dockett may be light but he's super strong.
Posts: 110,936

02-27-2009, 05:01 PM	#58
aturnis MVP Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Iowa Casino cash: $9975811	Either a short DE(shortest starting 3-4 DE is 6'3", most are 6'5", Dorsey is 6'1")...or he could put on 30 lbs. and try to play NT. I'd think they'll try to see if he can play DE though.
Posts: 13,873

02-27-2009, 05:17 PM	#60
Chris Meck MVP Join Date: May 2001 Location: midtown KC Casino cash: $1934910	I really think that Vrabel is being brought in to be a situational pass rusher. I wouldn't expect that we go to a 3-4 as our base defensive set as it doesn't fit our front 7 personnel very well. I could see using a hybrid or occasional look, but not as our basic defensive set. Vrabel, as I see it, is a 3rd down DE in a 4-3, and would probably be fairly effective at that at this stage of his career. His intangibles also are a big bonus.
Posts: 17,526