Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

How difficult to go back to a 4/3 D?


Jmac
 Share

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Beast_3000 said:

We never picked up a true 1-technique nose tackle after cutting McCall. I’m surprised the run defense wasn’t exposed more often this year. Nevertheless a 3-4 would work much better with a pro typical 335- 345 pound hog mollie that can take on a double team, without getting pushed around. 

If the reports about Evero staying are true I expect the new GM to help support the 3-4 conversion by bringing in another edge and a 3-4 nose tackle.

This^^^ We need a true NT and probably 1 more LB everybody else is okay.. Probably need another OLB but NT and MLB are important to stop the run..

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supposedly, when Tepper wanted Ron to switch to 3-4, Ron went along with it because 3-4 OLB edge rushers were easier to find than traditional 4-3 bookend DEs. Hence the drafting of Burns. Who knows how much of that is true. I was hoping to see Burns thrive this year. At this point it would probably be another step back if we switched back.

Edited by Khaki Lackey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF Evero is here next season it will still be the 3-4 base package.  Luvu is playing out of position but it's what we had to do losing Shaq so early in the season.  We need a Will Anderson/Dallas Turner type of guy opposite Burns at OLB.  Matos plays well enough for 3-4 DE.  Getting some upgrades along the DL/OLB you'll see a difference in this scheme.  I think they should stick with it and give it support, instead of switching schemes again and then bargain bin shopping for players that fit that scheme.  That being said, if we go with another DC and they have a different scheme then that is what we are going to go with..

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Steelo said:

IF Evero is here next season it will still be the 3-4 base package.  Luvu is playing out of position but it's what we had to do losing Shaq so early in the season.  We need a Will Anderson/Dallas Turner type of guy opposite Burns at OLB.  Matos plays well enough for 3-4 DE.  Getting some upgrades along the DL/OLB you'll see a difference in this scheme.  I think they should stick with it and give it support, instead of switching schemes again and then bargain bin shopping for players that fit that scheme.  That being said, if we go with another DC and they have a different scheme then that is what we are going to go with..

Yeah switching schemes again is a silly idea. The pass defense actually has been surprisingly decent. We need Shaq back at ILB.  I hope Envero sticks around and if he does the 3-4 will likely also stick. A big NT to clog up the middle frees up Brown to do Brown things like ragdolling Olinemen. 

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm only partial to the defense that works and what defense we run will be determined by whoever we keep or sign as our DC. But regardless of what we run, if our defense doesn't make contact until after the receiver catch the ball and make a football move, it doesn't matter what we call it bc it ain't working. We need a upper management and coaching staff foundation with an Identity to build towards...

Edited by PantherPhann89
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are in the first year of running a true 3-4 and our defense has done pretty damn well, despite not having the right pieces at several positions. Get a nose tackle, another ILB (possibly two if we cut shaq), and one or two edge rushers depending on whether we resign burns or not and our D will be very good. Top priority has to be a nose tackle though - you look at all the great 3-4 defenses that have existed and you will find the common theme was they all had a very good run stopping, blocker eating nose tackle to clear the way for the linebackers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Maybe, but a player can also bust for a lot of reasons.  And I'm not about to go look up the stats of all the 1st round WR busts, but I'd be surprised if they had the sustained output and success in college that T-Mac had.  Those early WR busts are usually guys who had one breakout season and then were highly drafted because of physical potential, not already built out ability. I'm not even saying T-Mac is 100% going to have a better career than Chark (although I obviously think he will). I'm just saying that right now, his skill level and ability is better than Chark's ever was, and I don't understand how anyone is arguing against that, not because of T-Mac, but because of who Chark himself was.   If you want to take the argument that you can't say ANY player who hasn't played a down yet can't be considered better than someone who has, then so be it (even though I'd say that's a dumb stance anyways). At his peak ability, Chark was more like a #3 WR than anything else, he was the definition of a league average WR.  If you don't think a Top 10 selected WR with his tape is better than that just because they haven't played in the NFL yet, then you're just stuck on the "he hasn't played a down yet" idea and can't evaluate them as players and abilities.
    • And you would've probably said the same thing about a lot of highly drafted WRs who busted.
    • dude..........   You are way to emotional here
×
×
  • Create New...