Astrobot Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Next years first for Dorsey is a bargain IMO! I've already seen 2010 mocks where we take a DT in the first round. Here's an experienced DT who is a known quantity and who'd look good now rather than 3 years from now. Especially with Schobel-Stroud-Maybin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL/A.../wwhi051409.htm The falcons reportedly had a deal in place for their 1st and 3rd for dorsey. The deal was cancelled when DT Jerry was available in the first round. I suspect he could be had for next years first. NO---only because of the money.If money not a factor...I'd say yeah for a 2nd next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 http://www.scoresreport.com/2009/04/26/was...lmost-a-falcon/ This article says that he has 18 mil guaranteed left...AND KC would be on the hook for all of it. You guys think this is true? I can never trust writers anymore on salary cap issues (or contract terms of that matter) because they are so complicated that I don't think even Roger Goodell knows. I don't think KC would have ever considered trading him at any price if they had 18 mil on their books they couldn't get rid of....I think most teams would trade away any number of picks if they could get their hands on 18 mil. Besides, DT struggle in their first year, and I think Dorsey has enormous upside. And why can't they fit him in their new system, because he's not a NT? I'm so sick of teams throwing away good players because they don't fit the system. Build a damn system around your players! first of all....KC is NOT on the "hook" for the guaranteed money, unless they want to be.......you are confusing signing bonus and guaranteed money...two completely seperate things. in that potential trade with Atlanta, the falcons were demanding that KC remain responsible for the guaranteed portion, which was an option if BOTH sides agreed to that. Without such agreement, whatever guaranteed money remaining on the deal, goes with him to the new team if a trade is made. If KC just flat out "cut" him, then they are responsible for the remaining guaranteed money. KC would probably keep him before they ate the guaranteed money. lets just say hypothetically he signs a 5yr/$50mil deal with $23 guaranteed. Lets say he got $10 mil signing bonus leaving $40 mil left. his pay could be structured as $1 mil first year ($11 mil cash) all guaranteed, $8mil second year with $6 mil guaranteed, $9 mil third year with $6 mil guaranteed , $10 mil fourth year with no guarantee. and $12 mil fifth year no guarantee. they guaranteed $23 mil in first 3 years. he could be cut in 4th year. take albert haynesworth contract....7yr/ + $100 mil.......he will only see 4 years of that deal paying a total of $48mil for a $12 mil per year average. his salary in year 5 is $29 mil....lol...he will never see it and be cut after 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 A qualified yes- if he checks out medically and the Bills think he's a difference maker- I've seen the highlights, but I didn't really get to watch him in college- he didn't stand out in the couple of KCs games I saw- his measureables from the combine were not overly impressive- there were rumors of knee problems- there were rumors that he was less than rigorous in training and diet- so if the Bills have him pegged as a couple steps up from Williams and McCargo they could offer next years 1st, money shouldn't be to extreme KC paid the signing bonus, so around 30mil for 5 years with a lot of the money going in the finale two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 According to Kansas City Star writer Jason Whitlock, Chiefs first-round pick Glenn Dorsey has been a bust through seven weeks. Whitlock says Dorsey's footwork is "horrid" and his first step is "slow and often misdirected." The numbers back up Whitlock's assertion. Dorsey has no sacks and KC's run defense surrenders an NFL worst 6.4 yards per carry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VJ91 Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL/A.../wwhi051409.htm The falcons reportedly had a deal in place for their 1st and 3rd for dorsey. The deal was cancelled when DT Jerry was available in the first round. I suspect he could be had for next years first. I would trade next year's number one for Dorsey in a heart beat. He was the 5th player taken in the '08 draft. He may have "struggled" with the Chiefs pathetic defense in his rookie season, but just think about lining him up next to Stroud this coming season. He could forget about switching to end, and play his natural tackle postition. The biggest obstacle would of course be his contract, since the Bills already have two first round picks to sign from this draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDD Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 I'd trade McCargo and a set of tires for Dorsey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VJ91 Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 According to Kansas City Star writer Jason Whitlock, Chiefs first-round pick Glenn Dorsey has been a bust through seven weeks. Whitlock says Dorsey's footwork is "horrid" and his first step is "slow and often misdirected." The numbers back up Whitlock's assertion. Dorsey has no sacks and KC's run defense surrenders an NFL worst 6.4 yards per carry. Wow, a bust after seven whole games? Playing with that talent laden Chiefs defense? Why, Dorsey should have had 12 sacks, 120 tackles and 53 solo tackles behind the line of scrimmage after 7 damn football games, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 For Dorsey i would give up a second and maybe a fifth. He is not worth our first or even next years second and third. We need a DT but not to the point that we need to sell the farm to get him. Dorsey is a square peg in a round hole in KC. He isn't fast enough to play DE and isn't able to clog up the middle like a true nose tackle. Don't get me wrong I think he fits perfectly with us. He is good at rushing in a two gap system and he can hold the line well. Him and Stroud along with Maybin and a healthy Schoble makes me confident in our D-line and since we have Kyle Williams in a pass rush role that he excels in. I don't think the Bills want this guy even if he was available for a second and a fifth. He is on a big rookie contract and its still a good amount of picks to give up and since the Bills don't like to trade high picks ( Anything above a third ) for any player it doesn't look like they will pull the trigger on this guy. KC will trade this guy to a team like Washington for like two seconds and a third. I think they want to get Value for this guy instead of playing him in a system he is not fit for. Also Dorsey is not a bust he didn't have a great rookie year but DT is a position where it takes time to become dominant very few DT come in right away and become a top ten dominator. It takes two to three years for a DT to fully develop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts