Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

Let's talk about possibly evolving to a 3-4 in the future


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
47 replies to this topic

#37 Xrated

Xrated

    Pie Eater

  • Joined: 12-October 11
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 193
  • Reputation: 16
HUDDLER

Posted 22 October 2011 - 06:13 PM

if we change to a 3-4 it would set us back 2-3 years on defence

#38 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    Blazing Trails Thru the NFC South

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,335
  • Reputation: 4,589
HUDDLER

Posted 22 October 2011 - 06:23 PM

There are advantages to either defense and frankly you can run an aggressive 4-3 which is just as effective as a 3-4. You will note that while some teams are going to a 3-4, teams like New England are going to more of a 4-3.

Why are they doing that.......



A lot of excellent points as usual in your entire post, I won't quote the whole thing.

Just a couple thoughts, I think Belicheck siad somewhere they went to a 4-3 this season because due to the lockout he felt it would be easier for his players to hit the field running in a 4-3 because of less practice/prep time.
Ed Reed and Troy Palamalu are simply the best at their positions there is, I'm sure you plug either of those guys in our current D and they raise hell to opposong Os. Their talent is not unique to a 3-4 and our D would be so much better with either of these guys, they simply do things at safety others dont.
Nose tackles are a bitch to come by but we are also intimately familiar with how difficult it is to to land quality DTs.
I like the size of the LBer pool coming out of College every year though and putting 4 on the field may be easier than 2 quality DTs out of College, especially in later rounds.
2 more cents......

#39 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    Blazing Trails Thru the NFC South

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,335
  • Reputation: 4,589
HUDDLER

Posted 22 October 2011 - 06:24 PM

if we change to a 3-4 it would set us back 2-3 years on defence


Simply don't agree with this line of thinking as the Green Bay Packers have proven otherwise.

#40 natty

natty

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,803
  • Reputation: 552
HUDDLER

Posted 22 October 2011 - 07:51 PM

I disagree with the notion that a 3-4 creates more confusion in than a 4-3. 4-3 DEs drop into coverage a hell of a lot more than they used to, what does it matter if a player has their hand in the dirt before the snap? To me it's more about cost and availability in personnel. Traditional 4-3 DE that are dominate are much harder to find and as a result are expensive as poo. Need a 3-4 DE? Just draft nearly any NFL caliber DT. On the flip side, NTs fit for a 3-4 are harder to find and are more expensive. It's just a matter of where you want to spend your money and where you've already spent money. Neither are inherently better against the run or pass.

#41 rico6

rico6

    Shit.

  • Joined: 03-August 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,776
  • Reputation: 232
HUDDLER

Posted 22 October 2011 - 11:38 PM

There are advantages to either defense and frankly you can run an aggressive 4-3 which is just as effective as a 3-4. You will note that while some teams are going to a 3-4, teams like New England are going to more of a 4-3.

Why are they doing that??? It really goes back to the age old argument of whether you should fit your scheme to your personnel or find the personnel to the scheme you choose to run.
If you can find a 330 lb nose tackle who has the power and speed of Ngata and you can find two DEs who are in the 300 lb range who are athletic and quick, you are set for the traditional 2 gap 3-4. Can you get by with guys who are not ideal? Absolutely, there are guys in the 300 lb range who can handle the nose tackle role and guys in the 280 range who could handle the DE role in a 3-4.

Why doesn't everyone go to a 3-4?? It is harder to find draft picks who can fit the 3-4 than it is to find guys who fit the 4-3. Why?? Most college teams run the 4-3 and the tendency of late has been to find smaller quicker guys who can rush the passer and keep up with all the no huddle spread offenses which are cropping up everywhere. Plus most college D linemen are more used to a one gap attacking style of defense rather than a 2 gap read and react style. How many quintessential nose tackles can you find who could run a 3-4 in a particular draft?? 1 or 2 at most?? And how many of these guys actually show up in free agency given the best ones get snapped up in the first round and teams lucky enough to find a good one keep them.

Why do the Panthers run a 4-3 rather than a 3-4 right now?? We really don't have the personnel to run a 3-4 right now. Are we one or two guys away?? Actually not. And I would disagree with the OP that our secondary is adequate ( and it isn't the corners).

Who is the most important guy in Baltimore's and Pittsburgh's secondary that when they are out instantly changes the defense significantly. That would be the safeties- Ed Reed and Troy Polumalu. Reed is a free safety while Polumalu is a strong safety Both of those guys are arguably one of the most important players in their back seven. While they serve somewhat different roles, teams that play the 3-4 and play mostly a fire zone concept have to have great safety play. What position is aguably average at best on our team right now?? Safety play at both positions.

Do we have the linebackers to run a 3-4?? We do have some that would transition such as Beason and Gaithers and maybe Anderson at the ILB positions. But honestly do we have great candidates at the OLB position?? Most players we have been discussing are actually DEs like Johnson and undersized DEs or tweeners like Norwood. Could they do the job in time with opportunity to learn the position? Or could Johnson be an OLB like Harrison for the Steelers who rushes the passer most of the time. Absolutely. But we are likely 2 OLBs away because you need both starters and suitable backups in the event of injury.

Do we need a NT?? Hard to say until Edwards come back next year. But if we could find a NT in the first or second round next year who would be a dominant players for years, it would be a great pickup. Whether we stay 4-3 or go to a 3-4 we need a dominant NT. If Edwards is that guy, so much the better.

How about the corners. Actually I think the corners would be okay if the safety play were much better. Particularly if Hogan pans out as hoped. Plus pressure on the opposing QB makes decent corners better.

So do we have the personnel to run a 3-4. Actually we do. Do we have the personnel to run a great 3-4 right now??? No we don't. We need upgrades at several positions or guys to improve and expand their skills sets so they can do it more or do it better.

And before people start posting that we have the guys for the 3-4 by looking at weight and height of teams like Baltimore or Pittsburgh and saying we have guys with the same size and weights, get real. I can find a bunch of guys who are 6'3" and 330 lbs in the stands, but it doesn't mean they can start at NT for us. In other words every 4-3 linebacker who is 245 lbs can't play ILB or OLB in a 3-4 just because a well known 3-4 team has a guy who is in that range playing OLB.

Just my 2 cents...


Good God.

Common sense does exist around here.

#42 pantherclaw

pantherclaw

    Wise Ass

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 7,528
  • Reputation: 1,224
SUPPORTER

Posted 23 October 2011 - 05:51 AM

I don't see the point at all. Why risk production of some very talented players who we know are good in the 4-3.
All this team needs is a good Dt, and some luck with health to become a talented defense again.

don't worry, the 4~3 will still be our base defense. They just want to get to the point they can play and execute both.

A lot of our guys, with the proper coaching, will be able to play both. How well? That is the big unknown.

#43 ladypanther

ladypanther

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 5,344
  • Reputation: 1,628
SUPPORTER

Posted 23 October 2011 - 07:39 AM

Rivera said the Panthers would continue to "tinker with" the 3-4 defense but plan to keep the 4-3 as their base this season and in future years. "It's a good change-up," Rivera said. "It gives us a good mix-up. It does present some problems for offenses at times."





Read more: http://www.charlotte...l#ixzz1bbl5eCWO

#44 iamcline

iamcline

    Thou shalt not spilleth thy Red Bull!

  • Joined: 30-August 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,858
  • Reputation: 542
HUDDLER

Posted 23 October 2011 - 07:42 AM

We have a hard enough time substituting after plays, need to implement that in our defense before we go with a 3-4.

#45 pantherclaw

pantherclaw

    Wise Ass

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 7,528
  • Reputation: 1,224
SUPPORTER

Posted 23 October 2011 - 09:21 AM

eric norwood is built to play a 3-4 outside lb perfectly, he has the speed, all he needs to do is put on about 10 pounds.

and know how to play OLB in a 3-4.

#46 Snake

Snake

    Rivera did What???

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,993
  • Reputation: 1,395
HUDDLER

Posted 23 October 2011 - 09:43 AM

I dont see why we cant just use both. Allot of Defenses do and we have the personnel to do both.

#47 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 14,030
  • Reputation: 443
HUDDLER

Posted 23 October 2011 - 10:44 AM

agreed. surely we can run two schemes just as poorly as one.

#48 chknwing

chknwing

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 04-May 09
  • posts: 8,811
  • Reputation: 7,036
SUPPORTER

Posted 23 October 2011 - 10:45 AM

wont do much with 3-4 this week as Frank Kearse is out.