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

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by milkman

No, they didn't improve the sacks numbers because of a scheme change.

The sack numbers are improved because Dorsey is devloping into a player that is disruptive on the D-Line.

Had they remained in a 43, and used Dorsey as the UT with Hali as the LDE, the improvement would very likely be much the same as it is now.

The last draft should have been dedicated to offense.
The next to defense.

They appear to be ass backwards.

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.