The sad thing is this line could be just as bad next year

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

I didn't say that that sacks numbers changed because of a scheme change. My point was that the defense sucked in the 4-3 last season, so bitching about the change to a 3-4 is just idiotic. Bitching about changing if the 4-3 had been working would at least make sense.

As for the "ass backwards" claim:

• The Steelers are considered a top drafting team. They took corners with picks in the 3rd and 5th rounds, and defensive tackles in the 1st and 6th.
  
  
• The Giants went with defensive backs in rounds 6 and 7, as well as going linebacker in round 2, RB in the 4th and QB in the 5th.
  
  
• The Colts went DT in rounds 2 and 4, and CB in round 3.
  
  
• The Patriots were loaded with 12 picks and could take some gambles, but the team used 6 of those picks on defense, along with one on a long snapper, one on a player recovering from ACL surgery (Tate), and one that was a QB conversion gamble (Edelman)

All that 'great' offense, and top drafting teams were taking multiple defensive players, often at the top of the draft. That's because teams draft according to their plan, and their draft board. That plan differing from a message board poster's preference is not the same as that plan being wrong.

You looking at 4 of the top teams in the league to justify the Chiefs' plan?

You're telling me that because those teams, teams with fewer holes combined than the Chiefs, can be used to illustrate that the Chiefs draft wasn't backasswards?

This team has more holes than the PGA tour.

Thier plan may work, but the value in the last draft was on offense, the value in the next draft is on defense.

A team with as many holes as the Chiefs should have followed a plan that took advantage of that value.

But they pissed on that value because they had to switch immediately.

Quite frankly, I'm not convinced that Pioli is any better than Carl.