Comments on: Chiefs Defense Hits Historic Low in Loss to Cleveland

By: Double D

Double D — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 21:52:41 +0000

I agree that it takes minimum 2-3 years to fully develop a DL however I also firmly believe that anybody drafted in the first round, particularly a top 5 pick< should provide immediate help in the position for which they are drafted. That has not happened with Tyson.

There were much better options than Tyson. I can name at least 5 players off the top of my head that would have been better choices for the Chiefs without even taking into consideration their rookie year performances. In other words, guys that I argued we should take at the time. If you factor in actual rookie year performances to date, that number probably jumps to about 10.

I guess what I’m saying is that the talent evaluation process and skills under the new regime so far raise a lot a question marks and in general leave much to be desired.

By: Patrick Allen

Patrick Allen — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 21:05:58 +0000

Defensive lineman often take time to develop in the NFL.

Dorsey has shown steady improvement in his second year and in a new position. I see no reason to worry about TJ unless he fails to show progress next year. It should take about 3 years for him to develop.

By: Double D

Double D — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 17:46:58 +0000

With the loss to Cleveland, we just pretty much guaranteed ourselves the #4 pick in the upcoming draft. What does everyone think the chances are that Pioli will over-react to yesterday’s game by reaching for a SS with that pick instead of addressing the real problems up front? Don’t think he’ll reach? See Tyson Jackson . . .

By: Patrick Allen

Patrick Allen — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:56:30 +0000

Tim:

I’m not saying I don’t wish we still had Pollard, because I do. I think he provided nice depth and hard hits but he is also the top most burned Safety in the league this year.

We would probably be better off if we still had Pollard but not by much.