Getting to know the Jim Johnson 4-3
Posted 19 January 2011 - 03:35 AM
A WHOLE PIE!
Jim Johnson's defense isn't called "aggressive" just because they blitz the poo out of you alone, no, it's a little bit more complex than that. It's also mentally aggressive in addition to it's physical blitzing form. JJ's defense is considered the 4-3 counterpart to Dick LeBeau's 3-4 in Pittsburgh, and the mismatches involved are conceived in an effort to try to get a 2nd down advantage. A written piece from probably the only Eagles fan with an IQ over -34:
DO NOT CONTINUE UNTIL YOU'VE READ THIS WHOLE THING
Finished? Are you sure? Ok. That was scouted from a game against the Seahawks in 2008, when JJ was still alive and running the defense. This tells you this isn't no bend-but-don't-break zone cover scheme. Now lets get down to the base formation:
READ THIS WHOLE THING 3 xxxTIMESxxx, then scroll scroll scroll
It says SF was running it so this might have been written prior to 2007 before they switched to 3-4, but this is the best reference I could find. I know reading this is going to galvanize the interest of Fairley fanatics, whom are automatically going to look at the diagram and assume he is going to step into that delicious looking NT spot between the center and right guard and anchor the line and ********* the QB with his big toe, instead of reading the text under it. I say this because I estimate at least 25% of the Huddle population doesn't know what a gap is and 75% don't know what a technique is. The position the NT spot is in is the 1-technique. Fairley played in the 3-technique spot in Auburn, which is exactly where the UT is lined up. A lot of scouts have speculated that he is strictly a 3-tech DT at the pro level, kinda like Warren Sapp was, or for a more recent draft comparison, Gerald McCoy, whom TB drafted to fill that spot on their Tampa 2.
Now onto the linebackers, you might think this is crazy but Beason needs to either gain 20 lbs or play WLB. The MLB is called to blitz the most out of the 3 and Beason's skills might be better suited to the Will position. Ideally in this defense you want someone that reminds you of Jeremiah Trotter playing the Mike, and he tipped the scales at well over 260. Even when they had Stewart Bradley in there he was almost up to that, Look for us to possibly draft someone like Martez Wilson (Illinois) if he falls down to the top of the third. He has the size and versatility to play either MLB or SLB, and is a solid run blitzer and pass rusher. For an enhanced look at him, watch this...
Dan Connor or Davis if we still keep him might just end up at SLB
Here's a look at why I'm emphasizing getting a bigger MLB
This was also from 2008. I realize McDermott hasn't been successful but the Eagles haven't really followed the design of that defense recently, because they sometimes skimp on linebacker talent. It's pretty much the key piece of this defense. As far as FA options go both Chris Gocong and Stewart Bradley are scheduled to drop into the open market and both have experience in this system and have worked with McDermott so I wouldn't be surprised if we picked them up.
Posted 19 January 2011 - 04:02 AM
I was thinking while reading that, though, that both of our safeties look perfect for this scheme - at least on paper.
Posted 19 January 2011 - 04:31 AM
Posted 19 January 2011 - 04:31 AM
Besides the defence doesn't depend on MLB size. In 2007 the Eagles had a top ten defence, who was sixth in run and 9th in sacks. And that was with Omar Gaither who is nearly the exact size of Beason.
Personally I think Rivera and McDermott will adjust the defence to take advantage of the players we have. But as of right now anything is possible.
Posted 19 January 2011 - 04:35 AM
Posted 19 January 2011 - 05:05 AM
I'm excited for change.
Posted 19 January 2011 - 05:49 AM
Posted 19 January 2011 - 08:02 AM
Posted 19 January 2011 - 08:11 AM
The real lesson Trotter provides is that JJ was resourceful enough to figure out how to use him in this scheme, rather then seeing him as limited and casting him off. I think that was one of Fox's fatal flaws, you either fit into to role he wanted you for or you sat/were gone. I suspect Rivera will be much more resourceful when it comes to the use of the personnel he has, just like JJ was.
Edited by CatMan72, 19 January 2011 - 08:15 AM.
Posted 19 January 2011 - 08:12 AM
Posted 19 January 2011 - 08:19 AM
Posted 19 January 2011 - 08:27 AM
Posted 19 January 2011 - 08:28 AM
Beason is perfect for any position that demands aggressively pursuing the ball carrier, side line to side line running and man coverage (not so hot in zone imo). If he has someone sweeping up in case his aggression is exploited then is just about an ideal linebacker, however this year teams exploited him and his aggressive instincts.
I honestly felt we had the best balance with Beason, Connor, Anderson for our scheme this year. Reading what you dug up does force us to consider who is really ideal for that kind of scheme and where do they fit. I think we need to try to re-sign Anderson as he would be pretty much a shoe in for either OLB position, I think TD only fits in the WLB.
Fairly would be perfect for the UT position, who played that position for the Eagles during JJ's time? And more recently? Just wondering what kind of player they traditionally looked for.
Zone corners. Should allow Munnerlyn to keep his place. Not sure it's really worth Gamble, as he isn't a big 'tackler'. However the Eagles did go out and pursue Asante...
Johnson and Trent Cole are so similar it's scary. Cole was about the only guy who was better than Johnson in both facets of the game, CJ could have the perfect scheme drawn up for him...
Posted 19 January 2011 - 08:32 AM
Posted 19 January 2011 - 08:38 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users