Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Trasistioning to a 3-4 defense...


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 SorthNarolina

SorthNarolina

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,407 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 08:34 PM

I was thinking about this just now and for the longest time I have poo pooed the 3-4 ideas and I believe I am still in favor of staying a 4-3. But a 3-4 doesn't sound as crazy as it used to. I'll name a few reasons.

Pros

1. Thomas Davis doesn't fit a 3-4, but his contract is up at the end of this year. So it's not like their is a penalty for getting rid of him, his contract would be comparable to the contract for a top 3-4 backer. He wouldn't want to stay anyway.

2. Jon Beason doesn't really fit too well but I think he is good enough to be effective. It's not ideal but I think he can handle it.

3. We could get Dan Connor on the field more often.

4. We don't have anybody committed at DT most guy's this year have their contracts end in 2011. So you could add in some 3-4 guys easy.

5. Eric Norwood and Dan Connor fit better in a 3-4.

6. We have a ton of cap room to bring in whoever we want.

Cons

1. Dan Connor and Jon Beason probably couldn't be consistently effective blizters.

2. I don't see Everette Brown working out at OLB.

3. New system.

4. We'd be inefficiently using the talents of Beason, Davis, and Anderson.

So overall I'm not in favor of it. But I don't see it being a total trainwreck like my previous thoughts on it. It could be done and it work out well within a season or two.

#2 SOJA

SOJA

    King McNutt 2016

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,157 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 08:36 PM

It's definitely possible, but are personnel doesn't match it at all. It would take more than two years to build a competent defense. Our defense isn't awful and actually is playing pretty well considering how young they are. It sucks Connor can't play more but depth is not a bad thing.

#3 pantherfan49

pantherfan49

    Angry inventor

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,308 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 08:41 PM

We now have 2 3-4 OLBers- Jason Williams and Nic Harris

#4 Squirrel

Squirrel

    Drink a beer and relax

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,177 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 08:44 PM

Sorry we are going to the 3-3-5.

#5 Brokenbad

Brokenbad

    Cam is my hero

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,550 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 08:49 PM

Sorry we are going to the 3-3-5.


This.

What about 3-3 with four db's and a "monster" (Start Beason, Davis, and Anderson. Bring in a ringer to rush from the outside like Hardy, Brown, etc.)

#6 Joscott

Joscott

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 979 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 08:51 PM

It would be way to much of an overhaul on this team. I mean the heart and sole of this D would have to put on about 10-20 more pounds of muscle to really be an effective every down guy. Let's not even get started on the line and secondary. Even the guys that are big enough, I don't really think you want them starting. Complete overhaul and a long process just to get the right guys in and filter out the ones that are not fit for it.

#7 natty

natty

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,731 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 08:52 PM

Pros:

Beason Conner

Cons:

Everything else

#8 magnus

magnus

    Eternal Gameface

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 09:30 PM

so the best thing to say about it is that most of what we have doesn't fit, so that leaves space for the massive changes needed to make it work.

#9 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,303 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 28 November 2010 - 09:35 PM

Cut the entire front 7 and you can run a 3-4

Saying it's not that "hard" makes you look stupid.

#10 ARSEN

ARSEN

    Banned

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,189 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 10:08 PM

Godfrey would be terrible for 3-4... Charles Johnson would be a good DE in 3-4. We got no good LB's for 3-4. We also have no NT or another DE or any depth.

#11 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,303 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 28 November 2010 - 10:11 PM

No charles johnson wouldn't be a good DE.

WTF people.

#12 Baschski

Baschski

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,837 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 10:17 PM

In regards to the LB position, our top 3 linebackers are much more suited to a 4-3 and would struggle in a 3-4. The only linebackers we have that may be suited to a 3-4 are second and third string guys, so it makes no sense from a linebacker standpoint.

D-line needs a complete overhaul regardless, but Johnson and Hardy are going to be our best DE's next year (barring a FA signing) and neither of them would do well in a 3-4.

#13 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,303 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 28 November 2010 - 10:18 PM

Jason Williams sucked ass in a 3-4 btw.

#14 Dpantherman

Dpantherman

    certified pee-on

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,437 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 10:19 PM

3-4 defense is now becoming the equivalent of all black uniforms and logo on the field threads.

#15 thunderraiden

thunderraiden

    Thunder God Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,668 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 10:40 PM

so you're saying you want to sacrifice another season where are defense loses all our games after we just finished a season where our offense cost us all our games?


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.