Questions Surrounding Dorsey

Well, Dorsey's back in practice. No, he wasn't drafted to be a 3-4 DE, but he'll be playing 3-tech, which is closer to what he's used to than the 5-tech everyone say he's unsuited to play.

In addition to what you said, Randy5k, I'd say that they were small and not deep at DE. I don't think they built a front 4 in depth, and had their scheme in place without the players to fulfill it. Depending on your front 4 to do as much as they were expected to do is something you do AFTER you have the talent in place to pull it off.

I still like Hali and McBride, but I don't think they brought quite enough stout to DE, and being caught in the wash out of a 3-point stance didn't give them the best situation for showing what they could do in space.

Dorsey's numbers are comparable to other quality DT rookies. But until I stop hearing he's icing his shin before and after every practice, I'm not even sure he's the player Carl drafted him to be, let alone a great fit for the 3-4. As for the "question of fit," I think it's a red herring. If he's healthy and in shape, he'll fit.

Nice KCdan Keep em coming.. I like the insight.

Nice points, kcdan58. I try to shy away from comparing the our new-look Chiefs to the Patriots, but sometimes you really just can't help it.

Hopefully, Pioli can implement the same recipe for success in Kansas City as he did in New England.

Kcdan,

You make some thoughtful points and fair analogies - a good read.

This is slightly off topic, but there was no other place to post this...

In reference to the possible Amani Toomer signing, PTF's Gregg Rosenthal adds, 'The strategy is not so different from what Scott Pioli and Bill Belichick did with the Patriots in 2000.

This sparked my curiosity as to who was on the Patriots roster and perhaps some parrallels to this year's team.

I have been back and forth trying to wrap my mind around the idea of being a mediocre/bad team for the next five years+ and whether my heart can handle that. But this mention of the 2000 Patriots and the 2009 Chiefs has me encouraged.

If you look at the Pats roster in 2000. First thing you will notice is it is the first year with new head coach Bill Belicheck and player personnel director Scott Pioli. Granted, BB's genius has since been discovered and there is little to compare between him and Tood Haley. But let's assume they at least both share a drive for winning and are all about football and leave the comparisons there. Not bad.

Secondly, in 2000, Pioli had a very unflashy/unsuccessful draft short of bringing in Tom Brady to the team. Take away the Brady pick, and it's definitely his worst one. Granted the Pats, had a starting QB, but drafting Brady was in retrospect a great football move. This year, Pioli brings in Matt Cassell and feels confident enough to offer him long term compensation. Say what you will about him being unproven, but he was better than any other option on the board at the time, including our QB's on the roster. Also, remember McDaniels single-handedly destroyed the Donks trying to bring in Cassell. Bonus!

Thirdly, the Pats roster in 2000 was made up a of largely unproven mediocre players, sprinkled with some young talent and some veteran leadership. Now, this statement can be made of every team in the league, but looking at the similarities, there were no pro bowlers on the 2000 Patriot roster and it is unlikely there is any on ours. However you can look at their roster in 2000 as a NFL fan and at least identify one player at each position (except TE) and think, "he's good". I think the same thing could be said about our team.

Finally, that team finished the year with 5 wins. I am bouncing around 5-6 for us this year. In 2001, they upset the Rams and were crowned world champs. Now before anyone thinks I'm crazy, I would be very surprised to even make the playoffs next season, but I think we're headed in that direction.

There are a lot of unknowns and unprovens surrounding this team. Including Dorsey, Pendergast, Haley, Cassell, etc...but I don't think there are any more on this team than Holy Pioli had in 2000.

I dont know folks I think you have to look at the motivation factor for any of last years players. No matter how much you make, its not easy to be sent into a meat grinder when you have no hope of winning or having any kind of a meaningful season. If your a shitty teams talent, you have no hope of escape. It will be interesting to see how our guys perform on a team thats been offered a future now.

I don't know if the difference is how they utilized him last year or what, but he was ineffective for long stretches last year. He stood up at the line and was too easy to block most of the time. He was OK laterally at times, but showed no push or penetration up the middle. He spent most of the year completely neutralized by a single blocker at the point of attack.

He may have had as many tackles as other rookie D-linemen, but a DT's job is to allow others to make plays on a consistent basis, and he did not stuff a gap or require double teams.

I'm worried he's an average DL anywhere.

I kinda suspect he has an injury that doesn't stop him from running, but hurts like hell every time he does. A stress fracture that healed poorly, perhaps, possibly because the Chiefs wanted him on the field last season more than they wanted him to heal up. One thing about hairline fractures, though, is that nothing shows up on x-rays until it's been trying to heal itself for a while. Possibly before that point, the coaches just thought he was a malingerer.

I dunno. Just random thoughts. I think he's a premiere d-line talent, and he should have a role to play in the 3-4 and he should be very productive in that role. I just keep coming back to the likelihood that he has an acute injury that has turned into a chronic problem that may not go away any time soon.

Only thing against that is Haley saying none of the players missing the first few days looked like long-term problems.

dorsey had a very good rookie season.
but hes not gonna fit into a 3-4 defense. i think hes gonna be injury prone with them legs!

Why do I keep hearing/reading this crap about Dorsey having a bad/"low impact" rookie season? I've seen several number comparisons showing that Dorsey's rookie stats compared favorably to the rookie stats of many of the top DTs of the last decade or so. Does everyone still have to keep spreading this crap that, somehow, Dorsey wasn't a good player last year?

This reads like front office propaganda. Dorsey wasn't drafted for the 3-4, probably won't fit into it and now is being made look like he's to blame for not fitting in - all so the new regime can save face perhaps? Pitiful stuff.

trade dorsey for boldin straight up!

Hey here we see some real change. In the Carl / Herm era, players like Dorsey and Waters were not going to be traded or sit on the sidelines because they couldnt make weight. Not with the old regime. This year its plenty different and I like it.