Chiefs Your opinion....Should the Chiefs move to a 3-4? - Page 2

Mr. Kotter · 02-20-2009, 01:37 PM

Maybe I've missed it, and maybe it's a repost....but I'm gonna do it anyway.

I've heard and read the same rumors as everyone else...but still haven't gotten a sense of whether there is really a SERIOUS chance of it happening. My sense is, despite the rumors....that it's unlikely this year; I just don't see it. Maybe they'll head that way, but I can't see it for next year.

Thoughts??? I'm just interested in what others think/are hearing.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-20-2009, 01:56 PM

It's harder to find players for, and we already have players with a great amount of talent who can play in a 4-3.

No.

Mr. Kotter · 02-20-2009, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beach tribe

Only the nose tackle. Everything else is easier to find.

I agree Nose is the most difficult, but aren't press-corners, and Palamalou/Harrison type safties, and beastlike-tweeners with speed for LB....more rare, in general?

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It's harder to find players for, and we already have players with a great amount of talent who can play in a 4-3.

No.

See, that's my take as well. Which is why I find this talk of the 3-4 to be sort of loopy...

**DeezNutz** · 02-20-2009, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Kotter

See, that's my take as well. Which is why I find this talk of the 3-4 to be sort of loopy...

You're misreading his post.

You really think he's praising the exceptional talent of the D in the 4-3?

Mr. Kotter · 02-20-2009, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

You're misreading his post.

You really think he's praising the exceptional talent of the D in the 4-3?

Could be....but, honestly, the talent we DO have is for a 4-3, not close for a 3-4.

Perhaps he's bein' TIC about the AMOUNT of talent....then again, you may be right.

HJ?

Saccopoo · 02-20-2009, 02:05 PM

IMHO, with the personnel we currently have, I would much prefer employing a "46" defense out of a base 4-3. A 3-4 means a scrap of our entire front seven with the possible exception of Tank and Dorsey. And as much problems as we've had with our linebacking corps the last several years, do you really think putting the emphasis on them for running a successful defense (like they would be required to do in a 3-4 system) makes any sense?

BigChiefFan · 02-20-2009, 02:13 PM

LBers are easier to find for a 3-4. It also frees up having to carry 4 DTs, which happens to be a weakness on the team. It would be beneficial to players like Pollard.

Believe or not, I think Dorsey may actually excel as a DE in a 3-4.

EyePod · 02-20-2009, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beach tribe

I think we should use both.

Yep. Hybrid is the way to go. It keeps offenses guessing and causes a lot of problems for them.

EyePod · 02-20-2009, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan

LBers are easier to find for a 3-4. It also frees up having to carry 4 DTs, which happens to be a weakness on the team. It would be beneficial to players like Pollard.

Believe or not, I think Dorsey may actually excel as a DE in a 3-4.

I still don't understand why anyone thinks this. There were a few crappy mocks and pre-draft scouting that had him able to play a DE in the 3-4, but I could never understand why.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-20-2009, 02:34 PM

I, for one, don't see the point in flushing a #5 overall pick down the shitter after one year because our coaching staff isn't competent enough to run a scheme that best suits the little talent we do already have.

Couple that with the fact that Flowers doesn't have the top end speed to be a lockdown, man-only corner, and the difficulty in finding 3-4 talent, and you have a big ****ing problem if you play a 3-4.

Mr. Kotter · 02-20-2009, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan

LBers are easier to find for a 3-4. It also frees up having to carry 4 DTs, which happens to be a weakness on the team. It would be beneficial to players like Pollard.

Believe or not, I think Dorsey may actually excel as a DE in a 3-4.

Compile a list of stud 3-4 LBs.....and then compile a list ot stud 4-3 LBs.

I don't think we have a single 3-4 OLB anywhere close to being on our roster....nor will you find many in FA, last year, this year, or next--they are simply not too common.

I understand the speculation about Pollard, but am not sure you are right; as for Dorsey, I worry about him being swallowed up by NFL tackles (I think he has potential, and could become a PB in a 4-3....but he's not even there yet.)

Just Passin' By · 02-20-2009, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I, for one, don't see the point in flushing a #5 overall pick down the shitter after one year because our coaching staff isn't competent enough to run a scheme that best suits the little talent we do already have.

Couple that with the fact that Flowers doesn't have the top end speed to be a lockdown, man-only corner, and the difficulty in finding 3-4 talent, and you have a big ****ing problem if you play a 3-4.

1.) You don't need corners with "top end" speed to play the 3-4 any more than you need them in a 4-3.

2.) That #5 overall pick didn't get the job done in a 4-3. Worrying that he might not get it done in a 3-4 implies that he's definitely going to get it done in the 4-3. Have you seen some definitive evidence that this is the case?

3.) The difficulty in finding 3-4 linebackers is a definite issue and, with all the teams switching to the 3-4 this season, it's likely that a lot of undersized 4-3 defensive ends will become conversion projects in the very near future.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-20-2009, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan

LBers are easier to find for a 3-4. It also frees up having to carry 4 DTs, which happens to be a weakness on the team. It would be beneficial to players like Pollard.

Believe or not, I think Dorsey may actually excel as a DE in a 3-4.

Because it's easy as shit to find 250 lb. linebackers who can run a 4.6, have an arsenal of pass rushing moves, and can cover backs and tight ends.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-20-2009, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

1.) You don't need corners with "top end" speed to play the 3-4 any more than you need them in a 4-3.

2.) That #5 overall pick didn't get the job done in a 4-3. Worrying that he might not get it done in a 3-4 implies that he's definitely going to get it done in the 4-3. Have you seen some definitive evidence that this is the case?

3.) The difficulty in finding 3-4 linebackers is a definite issue and, with all the teams switching to the 3-4 this season, it's likely that a lot of undersized 4-3 defensive ends will become conversion projects in the very near future.

1. If you blitz a lot, you damn sure do. The 3-4 is generally predicated upon bringing at least 5 in pressure.

2. He was a rookie playing the hardest position to learn on the defense and was put in the wrong position by the coaches.

CoMoChief · 02-20-2009, 02:59 PM

If we can get the right people to play the 3-4 I'm all for it. It's overall a better defense.

The best defenses in the league are 3-4, so why not?

Coogs · 02-20-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I, for one, don't see the point in flushing a #5 overall pick down the shitter after one year because our coaching staff isn't competent enough to run a scheme that best suits the little talent we do already have.

By the same token, if the desire is to move to the 3-4, that should not be scrapped because of the first round draft pick made the previous season. If they want to go to the 3-4, then do it now instead of drafting players to round out the 4-3 system and then start switching it over to the 3-4.

02-20-2009, 01:37 PM
Mr. Kotter Self Ban Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: In some's minds... Casino cash: $3184285	Your opinion....Should the Chiefs move to a 3-4? Maybe I've missed it, and maybe it's a repost....but I'm gonna do it anyway. I've heard and read the same rumors as everyone else...but still haven't gotten a sense of whether there is really a SERIOUS chance of it happening. My sense is, despite the rumors....that it's unlikely this year; I just don't see it. Maybe they'll head that way, but I can't see it for next year. Thoughts??? I'm just interested in what others think/are hearing.
Posts: 46,966

02-20-2009, 01:56 PM	#16
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7129572	It's harder to find players for, and we already have players with a great amount of talent who can play in a 4-3. No. __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 75,083

02-20-2009, 02:05 PM	#20
Saccopoo Kindness in words... Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Zion Casino cash: $10025483	IMHO, with the personnel we currently have, I would much prefer employing a "46" defense out of a base 4-3. A 3-4 means a scrap of our entire front seven with the possible exception of Tank and Dorsey. And as much problems as we've had with our linebacking corps the last several years, do you really think putting the emphasis on them for running a successful defense (like they would be required to do in a 3-4 system) makes any sense?
Posts: 15,450

02-20-2009, 02:13 PM	#21
BigChiefFan MVP Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: In the Top 10 Casino cash: $9924205	LBers are easier to find for a 3-4. It also frees up having to carry 4 DTs, which happens to be a weakness on the team. It would be beneficial to players like Pollard. Believe or not, I think Dorsey may actually excel as a DE in a 3-4. __________________ A 35 year drought can make you thirsty.
Posts: 15,777

02-20-2009, 02:34 PM	#24
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7129572	I, for one, don't see the point in flushing a #5 overall pick down the shitter after one year because our coaching staff isn't competent enough to run a scheme that best suits the little talent we do already have. Couple that with the fact that Flowers doesn't have the top end speed to be a lockdown, man-only corner, and the difficulty in finding 3-4 talent, and you have a big ****ing problem if you play a 3-4. __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 75,083

02-20-2009, 02:59 PM	#29
CoMoChief Mahomes Dynasty Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Parts Unknown Casino cash: $7662254	If we can get the right people to play the 3-4 I'm all for it. It's overall a better defense. The best defenses in the league are 3-4, so why not?
Posts: 39,245