Jump to content

Chan thinking of going to 4-3 defense?


Cereal

Recommended Posts

Amazing how many could have told you this 6 months ago. I could have saved them a lot of time by telling them like almost every NFL commentator also said "The Bills have the least amount of talent to convert to a 3-4" Coaches really seem to be so full of themselves and how smart they are that they can convert anyone to the system they want. A good coach sees the talent and asks how he can get them to be most successful. Having C Kelsay as an OLB is certainly not the best position for him to succeed. LBs were clearly a deficiency on the team so why go to a 3-4 when they are the most important and you know every center in the league will play KW one on one and he will not be double teamed....I like his heart a lot he is just no NT. Hadn't played it before so maybe they should have thought why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perry had Aaron Schobel. Take a mediocre defense, subtract the best pass rusher, and it's going to drop a step.

 

Honestly, the best thing for the defense is to be good enough to play both 4-3 and 3-4 depending on the situation - the Patriots did it in their best defensive days and the Ravens have done it before. It's tough from a talent perspective, and needs a real coach to run it, so I don't think we're there. But our current talent is so muddled between 4/3 and 3/4 I don't really care which one we choose, as long as we go with the goal to get good at it. Ideally, we could have Mike Singletary or John Fox running the defense next year.

 

singletary are you kidding me. as a coach he is the laughing stock of the league right now.

 

did you hear Madden rip him apart yesterday about his coaching abilities?

 

no thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This season has proven to me that, as I suspected, there is very little difference between the 3-4 and the 4-3. You got 7 hulking men either rushing the quarterback or dropping into coverage, trying to tackle people. How they line up is pretty inconsequential. We run the 3-4 (I guess), but most of the time it looks like a 5-2. I love how football know-it-alls try to pretend like there is such a huge difference like they're converting from playing rugby to playing tennis or something. It's all the same. I like the idea of getting Williams and Troup on the field at the same time though.

 

M L, I read a lot of your comments and respect your opinions. But I've got to totally disagree with you in this one. How you line up is crucial and there are vast differences between the defenses. Not only from how you line up, but from a responsibilities and player skill set perspective. If I were to name our defense it would be a 4-3, we are definitely NOT a 3-4 defense. Yes, I notice we are in a 5-2 setup which is increasingly further away from the 3-4. This is when we start bringing the safety down to have some of the LB responsibilities (Scott).

 

The huge difference beyond philosophy is the type of player needed for the OLB. Could you imagine Bruce Smith trying to play OLB in a 3-4 which entails having the coverage responsibilities? If the skill sets Bruce had were leaned upon to cover the TE etc., it would be easier to compare Tennis and Rugby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The comment on this week's ESPN Power Rankings states: "Chan Gailey is thinking of going back to a 4-3 defense -- five weeks too late. (Clayton)"

 

Now, I don't have the time to catch up on every little bit of news and rumors here, but is there any truth to this? Or it is just some stupid little comment? I didn't imagine that Chan would actually be considering giving up on the 3-4.

 

Thanks,

Cereal

Not surprising since he has changed his mind on just about every other thing that he has said since he has been here. His moronic insistence on switching to the 3-4 is a big part of the reason this defense has been struggling so much, they don't have the personnel for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perry Fewell laughs at this.

 

He was somehow able to use this "no talent" D to the effect that they only gave up 20 ppg. Whoever our DC is has "coached" the same crew to giving up 32 ppg---far and away the worst in the league.

 

Well were minus the only pass rush threatt we had difference betweeen a guy you must scheme for guys you don't

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah cause he was such a vaunted player.....

 

Not fully the point. If you're switching back to 4-3, why dump a DE even if he's mediocre? It's not like Maybin will pick up the slack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perry had Aaron Schobel. Take a mediocre defense, subtract the best pass rusher, and it's going to drop a step.

 

Honestly, the best thing for the defense is to be good enough to play both 4-3 and 3-4 depending on the situation - the Patriots did it in their best defensive days and the Ravens have done it before. It's tough from a talent perspective, and needs a real coach to run it, so I don't think we're there. But our current talent is so muddled between 4/3 and 3/4 I don't really care which one we choose, as long as we go with the goal to get good at it. Ideally, we could have Mike Singletary or John Fox running the defense next year.

 

You can also add this year's schedule being the 3rd toughest in the league. Although, we haven't even hit the worst part of it yet :bag:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The comment on this week's ESPN Power Rankings states: "Chan Gailey is thinking of going back to a 4-3 defense -- five weeks too late. (Clayton)"

 

Now, I don't have the time to catch up on every little bit of news and rumors here, but is there any truth to this? Or it is just some stupid little comment? I didn't imagine that Chan would actually be considering giving up on the 3-4.

 

Thanks,

Cereal

 

John Wawrow reporting that the change is confirmed.

 

Can't say I am surprised. Given our lack of talent on D last year, changing schemes, getting a few personnel to fit it and adding a new DC was too much to do. We should have started off with the 4-3 this year anyway and then transitioned to the 3-4 as player slots were filled.

If the 4-3 does not show any dividends, my guess is that George Edwards gets the axe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

M L, I read a lot of your comments and respect your opinions. But I've got to totally disagree with you in this one. How you line up is crucial and there are vast differences between the defenses. Not only from how you line up, but from a responsibilities and player skill set perspective. If I were to name our defense it would be a 4-3, we are definitely NOT a 3-4 defense. Yes, I notice we are in a 5-2 setup which is increasingly further away from the 3-4. This is when we start bringing the safety down to have some of the LB responsibilities (Scott).

 

The huge difference beyond philosophy is the type of player needed for the OLB. Could you imagine Bruce Smith trying to play OLB in a 3-4 which entails having the coverage responsibilities? If the skill sets Bruce had were leaned upon to cover the TE etc., it would be easier to compare Tennis and Rugby.

 

I hear ya, I realize there's a vast difference between a big Defensive End in a 3-4 and say, Keith Ellison. I never said that players are interchangeable between different positions. I guess my point was more that to the untrained eye, our defense is gonna be pretty much the same. By just watching a game, I couldn't tell you if they were running a 3-4 or a 5-1 (which it looks like a lot of the time when they play 5 CB's).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know people are getting on CG for switching mid-stream again, but I get the sense that the move was made to see if they could make use of our undersized ends, especially Maybin. People, including myself did think that Maybin may be a better fit as an OLB in a 3-4 and have a chance to be an impact player off the edge. Now that he has shown absolutely no indication of being a productive player as an OLB or otherwise they have decided to switch to the 4-3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perry had Aaron Schobel. Take a mediocre defense, subtract the best pass rusher, and it's going to drop a step.

 

Honestly, the best thing for the defense is to be good enough to play both 4-3 and 3-4 depending on the situation - the Patriots did it in their best defensive days and the Ravens have done it before. It's tough from a talent perspective, and needs a real coach to run it, so I don't think we're there. But our current talent is so muddled between 4/3 and 3/4 I don't really care which one we choose, as long as we go with the goal to get good at it. Ideally, we could have Mike Singletary or John Fox running the defense next year.

+1

The fastest way to improve this team next year is to hire a star def. co-ordinator.

That would have a bigger impact than a rookie qb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...