ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Chiefs Going 3-4 -Adam Shefters Blog (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=202651)

Mr. Kotter 02-18-2009 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiveturkey (Post 5504348)
Why is height so important for a 3-4 DE?

Because smaller DEs can get swallowed up but the tackles in the NFL...UNLESS they are freakish athletes.

See Freeney vs Hali, as evidence. Freeney is freakish; Hali, not so much.

Hali would have to try OLB in a 3-4; depending on speed/quickness he could do it with strong safety support.

'Hamas' Jenkins 02-18-2009 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan (Post 5504396)
I've always thought Raji was the pick. Some don't like the pick, but I think he has PB potential and would be thrilled with drafting him.

Because dropping 100 million dollars on the defensive tackle position is an intelligent way to build a team.

Chiefnj2 02-18-2009 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5504410)
Because dropping 100 million dollars on the defensive tackle position is an intelligent way to build a team.

If the Chiefs took Sanchez or Stafford this year and the kid ended up being a bust and 3 years from now took another top flight QB would you complain about tying up 100 million in QB's?

beach tribe 02-18-2009 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 5504425)
If the Chiefs took Sanchez or Stafford this year and the kid ended up being a bust and 3 years from now took another top flight QB would you complain about tying up 100 million in QB's?

That would be taking a qb every 4th year. Not two DT in in 2 years in the top 5.


I wish they would just work this shit out with these rookie contracts. It's the only thing that football has WRONG.

BigChiefFan 02-18-2009 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5504410)
Because dropping 100 million dollars on the defensive tackle position is an intelligent way to build a team.

I can think of worse ways to do it.

Also if we move to a 3-4, which I believe we will, that money would be used on a dominant NOSE TACKLE and a DE. I put a premium on the lines and don't think it's unwise to become more stout upfront, regardless of scheme.

I'm not in the QB or bust mode like many of you all are. Yes, we absolutely need one(or three ;)), but I don't believe Sanchez is our guy, at least not with our 1st overall pick.

DaneMcCloud 02-18-2009 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 5504425)
If the Chiefs took Sanchez or Stafford this year and the kid ended up being a bust and 3 years from now took another top flight QB would you complain about tying up 100 million in QB's?

Why would you judge a "bust" QB after 3 years?

And yes, the Chargers did it after 4 years, so what's your point?

Chiefnj2 02-18-2009 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 5504458)
Why would you judge a "bust" QB after 3 years?

And yes, the Chargers did it after 4 years, so what's your point?

Try to follow along, people don't think X dollars should be tied up in a certain position. I was wondering if it applied to QB's.

Chiefnj2 02-18-2009 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 5504441)
That would be taking a qb every 4th year. Not two DT in in 2 years in the top 5.


.

Jax took Stroud and Henderson in the top 15 in consecutive years.

'Hamas' Jenkins 02-18-2009 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan (Post 5504457)
I can think of worse ways to do it.

Also if we move to a 3-4, which I believe we will, that money would be used on a dominant NOSE TACKLE and a DE. I put a premium on the lines and don't think it's unwise to become more stout upfront, regardless of scheme.

I'm not in the QB or bust mode like many of you all are. Yes, we absolutely need one(or three ;)), but I don't believe Sanchez is our guy, at least not with our 1st overall pick.

So, we're cool with dumping 50 million on a 3-4 end, and 60 million on a 3-4 NT.

Which is awesome because the 50 million dollar end can't play his position, because he's too goddamned short.

So, you've effectively turned the 50 million dollar end into a less valuable piece of your D than Turk McBride, since he can actually play the position.

This is how teams go 3-13 for a decade, and how they end up in cap hell.

'Hamas' Jenkins 02-18-2009 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 5504477)
Jax took Stroud and Henderson in the top 15 in consecutive years.

Top 15 does not = top 5, dumbass. There is a huge difference in those contracts.

DaneMcCloud 02-18-2009 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 5504470)
Try to follow along, people don't think X dollars should be tied up in a certain position. I was wondering if it applied to QB's.

I'll "try".







And people think I'm a dick.

CupidStunt 02-18-2009 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5504478)
So, you've effectively turned the 50 million dollar end into a less valuable piece of your D than Turk McBride, since he can actually play the position.

Dorsey's contract isn't $50 million, he isn't too short given his arm length, and McBride has shown nothing to make anyone think he can "actually play" 3-4 DE.

Nice try, though.

BigChiefFan 02-18-2009 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5504478)
So, we're cool with dumping 50 million on a 3-4 end, and 60 million on a 3-4 NT.

Which is awesome because the 50 million dollar end can't play his position, because he's too goddamned short.

So, you've effectively turned the 50 million dollar end into a less valuable piece of your D than Turk McBride, since he can actually play the position.

This is how teams go 3-13 for a decade, and how they end up in cap hell.

Sorry, but paying top money for ONE DT and ONE DE on rookie contracts, doesn't put any team in cap Hell.

beach tribe 02-18-2009 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 5504477)
Jax took Stroud and Henderson in the top 15 in consecutive years.

Top 15 is a lot different from top 5.

beach tribe 02-18-2009 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CupidStunt (Post 5504509)
Dorsey's contract isn't $50 million, he isn't too short given his arm length, and McBride has shown nothing to make anyone think he can "actually play" 3-4 DE.

Nice try, though.

Does Dorsey have long arms? Serious question.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:42 PM.

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