Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The 46 Defense.....


Best Answer CashNewton22, 09 July 2013 - 11:13 AM

Appreciate the conversation without flaming, lots of respected posters weighing in...

I'd like to reply to most of yous but I'm on my phone so I'm not....

@Frash & FootballCzar -I was going to post that in reply in the AM, thanks Emory...
@PhillyB -cant tell if serious/Futurama pic
@Cyberjag -it has been, will post link tomorrow...
@CashNewtn22 -like I said, I believe we will see 46 looks, it will not be our base D... "We're all out of bubblegum" if you will...


I got you man....hopefully we won't have to see to much of it but I'm positive it can be a great "change of pace" defense if you will from time to time. Go to the full post


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#11 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,421
  • Reputation: 2,152
  • LocationAt the lake
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 08:18 PM

Agree with those that said we won't be running the 4-6 much at all.  It was great in its day but that was almost 40 years ago.  Plus it doesn't work against spread offenses or those who pass quickly and dump the ball over the oncoming pass rush.

But we will use some of the concepts of the 4-6 which is to routinely rush 5-6 guys to disrupt the quarterback.  

 

In the 4-6, the 6 guys close to the line are not all linemen but often 4 linemen and 2 linebackers lined up close to the line of scrimmage.  This is not that much different than many blitzing 4-3s who routinely send linebackers blitzing.  But it won't be the 4-6 which also has characteristics like shifting the line to the weak side  with the weakside DE playing a wide 9 and putting both linebackers on the strong side of the formation. Problems are numerous most notably linebackers covering receivers in 3 and 4 receiver sets and difficulty against west coast offenses and spread offenses.  If you get past the rush there is no one there to tackle anyone since the secondary is playing man not zone.  And the list goes on.

We won't be running this much at all.



#12 PhillyB

PhillyB

    sườn núi phía đông thứ ba của mặt trời

  • Joined: 29-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 22,926
  • Reputation: 18,359
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 08:25 PM

cant wait to run a 46 and see a couple lobs to receivers running quick slants against josh norman



#13 Pejorative Miscreant

Pejorative Miscreant

    Cold Ass Honky

  • Joined: 01-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,390
  • Reputation: 858
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 08:56 PM

I think it prudent to make your base defensive package effective and then work on the nuances.  First thought is to get Nak and Norman to give less than a 20 or 30 yard cushion.  After that lets work on the wrinkles.



#14 SIGCHI222

SIGCHI222

    the illustrious potentate

  • Joined: 15-February 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,126
  • Reputation: 4,011
  • LocationShelby
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:12 PM

<“I’ve seen what a feeding frenzy looks like,” Gettleman has said.  “We had a game against Philadelphia a few years back where we had 12 sacks, and we had a game against Chicago where we sacked Cutler 10 times.  I really believe in it.  Can it mask issues in the secondary?  Of course it does.”>

 

I think Dave has Chico's ear and I think you can expect a lot of pressure regardless of scheme.

 



#15 FootballCzar

FootballCzar

    Posted Up and Scopin'

  • Joined: 23-March 11
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 165
  • Reputation: 307
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:14 PM

Here's how you defend the spread using the 46

 



#16 SIGCHI222

SIGCHI222

    the illustrious potentate

  • Joined: 15-February 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,126
  • Reputation: 4,011
  • LocationShelby
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:30 PM

Here's how you defend the spread using the 46

 

 

OK.  Three things. 

 

Number one - I enjoyed the video, it really explained a lot.  Pie for you.

Number two - The things it explained made me want to avoid it at almost all costs (too much risk).

Number three - I couldn't help but notice that your avatar in the #5 jersey looks similar to the guy doing the video.

 



#17 Cyberjag

Cyberjag

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,829
  • Reputation: 638
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:53 PM

I kind of think that if the 46 was a viable defense, someone would have used it in the last 25 years...



#18 CashNewton22

CashNewton22

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 02-May 12
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 111
  • Reputation: 57
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:54 PM

I think it would be cool to mix it in in certain games for sure but I don't think it's something that would be effective enough to be your base defense in today's game.

#19 j2sgam

j2sgam

    cant beat the original...

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,116
  • Reputation: 596
  • Locationtryin to figure it out...
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 10:33 PM

Appreciate the conversation without flaming, lots of respected posters weighing in...

I'd like to reply to most of yous but I'm on my phone so I'm not....

@Frash & FootballCzar -I was going to post that in reply in the AM, thanks Emory...
@PhillyB -cant tell if serious/Futurama pic
@Cyberjag -it has been, will post link tomorrow...
@CashNewtn22 -like I said, I believe we will see 46 looks, it will not be our base D... "We're all out of bubblegum" if you will...

#20 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,421
  • Reputation: 2,152
  • LocationAt the lake
HUDDLER

Posted 08 July 2013 - 10:48 PM

I kind of think that if the 46 was a viable defense, someone would have used it in the last 25 years...

It is used by the Jets under Ryan and by Cleveland when Rob Ryan was there. If you said used by anyone not named Ryan in the last 25 years you might have a point. Lol.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users