Thread: Chiefs Chiefs sign Zach Thomas
View Single Post
Old 04-12-2009, 09:19 AM   #213
bringbackmarty bringbackmarty is offline
Gonna go back in time....
 
bringbackmarty's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Kansas City
Casino cash: $1225510
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 View Post
There's a few things wrong with that.

First, Tank at End isn't a reach. I think he's better suited as a backup nose if he puts up pounds, but DEs in a 3-4 fit more of the mold of a DT. The only concern might be that he's a little short for the position. Beisel starting is not a stretch either. He's experienced in this system--he started for a few games in New England as an ILB. DJ and Zach Thomas are coverage guys, Beisel is the DE converted into a LB. I don't know that Beisel starts, but I think he sees a lot of reps as the more stout, run-stopper than DJ or Zach Thomas.

But most importantly, Vrabel is not a guy you want to play OLB in a 4-3. He's not a great OLB in a pure OLB sense of the word. He's a pass rusher who can play OLB when called upon to mix things up. What's more likely is that Zach Thomas plays the middle and DJ and Demorrio play on the outside in a 4-3. But again, I believe that this hybrid defense is a stopgap until they have the resources to load up on 3-4 personnel. That's why you get stopgaps like Vrabel and Zach Thomas to hold a short-term defense until you can build the real one. I guarantee this team is full-blown 3-4 within the next 2-3 years.
I don't think we have the personnel to run either, and vrabel would be outside in obvious passing situations regardless of which scheme was being run. Maybe we sub someone in for him and\or thomas when it's first down.

Tank is not agile enough to play end in any system, no matter what his weight. Think completely inneffective like alphonso Boone. Dorsey is just plain wrong for the 3\4.

We can't afford for Vrabel and Thomas to be only "situational' next year if we don't get some good meat for the lines.
Posts: 3,085
bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.bringbackmarty would the whole thing.
    Reply With Quote