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

    • Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...