He wasn't being used as a 1 gapper last year, they had him playing heavy and straight up over a guard.

I'll honestly be surprised if he succeeds in a 3-4 everything it puts focus on are things he was never known for.

Maybe when Sapp was still playing. I doubt he haunts anybody's dreams nowadays. (Except possibly Claythan's);)

Well, I guess whether we like it or not, we're finding out!

I know the post has gone light years away from this but the bottom line is Sapp is a fat ass loud mouth eater of swiss rolls....

Thanks. I stand corrected.

Which?

It depends. Defensive Linemen don't get alot of love in a 3-4 two gap system. Generally speaking their stats will suffer compared to a 1 gapper, who has far more opportunity to get into the backfield for sacks or run stops before the play even has much of a chance to develop.

Alot of people thought Vince Wilfork was wasted in a two gap style, as he is massive AND pretty quick in a short burst. But he's also a superb two gapper, which speaks to his strength.

I can't speak for Dorsey, specifically, but if he has the size/strength to perform well as a 3-4 DE, then his stats may suffer, but the defense may be fine with him there.

Fans have alot more visibility and love for a guy who compiles 10 sacks in a noisy way than for a guy who does his job, holds the point of attack, but doesn't get many sacks. The Ty Warrens of the world...

I know diddily about Dorsey, so I looked him up. at 6'1" and 297, he's both shorter and a bit lighter than you'd like for a 3-4 DE. That's more of a 4-3 DE size.

If he has good lower body strength and either or both of good hands and/or long arms, however, he might be able to do well as a 3-4 DE.

He's 30 pounds too light to be a NG. Not sure if his frame could handle that much more bulk.

Sully

Sully and I talked about this last night.....we realized my confusion was that I thought Dorsey was supposed to be explosive in attacking the QB, when his specialty was collapsing the pocket. It all makes a lot more sense to me now that I have this differential clarified.

But, like I told Sully, you can't build a defense around 1 player, right? I think great players end up great because they are versatile in their talents. Let's hope Dorsey is that way.

Sully and Jilly. Sounds like a match made in heaven.

ROFL Depends on what story you get

That is not true.

DT was as far from versatile as one could be.

I think it's true. You're statement is just about as backed up as mine.

How do you figure?
You said great players are great because they are versatile.
DT is an example of the fallacy of that statement.

Jim Brown, Jerry Rice, Dwight Freeny, Randy Moss are other examples.

Versatility is a great attribute, and can lead to greatness, but it is not necessary to achieve greatness.