Jump to content

Marrone confirms change in defensive scheme and other stuff

Pitta

By Pitta
in The Stadium Wall Archives

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

YoloinOhio Hall of Famer

YoloinOhio

Posted
Posted (edited)

Post #37 and we finally have a winner! Reading is fundamental folks.

This post "wins" what? The Bills aren't a 3-4 team so why do they need a 3-4 DC?. But you still haven't provided your list of 3-4 DCs who were available when the Bills needed one, if the base scheme is what overrides all.

 

The bolded is pure irony.

Edited by YoloinOhio
Link to comment
Share on other sites
K-9 Hall of Famer

K-9

Posted
Posted

Took 36 posts for someone to finally agree somewhat with him.

Look at what Kelly the Dog said. We ran more 4-3 last year anyway.

 

Stupid rehash.

I'm out.

 

Agree. Some people are just too simplistic and rigid in their thinking. How's this: Mario with his hand down means 43, Mario standing up equals 34.

 

It's all about game situation and sub-packages, anyway. Regardless, I'm positive Schwartz brings expert knowledge on every defensive alignment ever played.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Big Cat Hall of Famer

The Big Cat

Posted
Posted

Do people seriously think we ran a 3-4 last year?

 

Took 3 !@#$ing pages to get this.

 

Not only did we rarely run the 3-4, we rarely had 3 LB's on the field too!

 

I thought we were beyond the 3-4 v 4-3 arguments!

 

Jeebus.

 

Not an x's and o's guru but I feel like the most common defense, i.e. base, I saw last year was the nickel!

 

EXACTLY!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bangarang Hall of Famer

Bangarang

Posted
Posted

Not an x's and o's guru but I feel like the most common defense, i.e. base, I saw last year was the nickel!

 

Base defense was nickel defense. Most of the time it was Mario, Kyle, Dareus, and either Branch or Hughes on the line with Lawson and Kiko as our LBs.

 

I don't recall a single time we ran a true 3-4 look. When people say we were a hybrid defense last year, I think that had more to do with our linebacker and safety roles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Big Turk Hall of Famer

Big Turk

Posted
Posted

 

 

Finally enjoy a modicum of success on defense, turn around and hire a replacement that runs a completely different scheme after having already changed schemes each year for the past 4 seasons, sounds legit.

 

 

 

Thanks for taking the time out to respond with your literary essay; unfortunately I read none of it.

 

Luckily I read it for you and agree with his post. The 4-3 vs 3-4 argument is essentially irrelevant based on how often teams are in the base defense now, which is under 50%...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bangarang Hall of Famer

Bangarang

Posted
Posted

I am boggled by this thread. We didn't run a 4-3 or 3-4 last year. We ran a mixture of every scheme, lineup and coverage.

We will again do this for 2014.

 

Marrone already confirmed that we're not going to be a multiple defense next year. We're going to be more of a true 4-3 defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boyst Hall of Famer

boyst

Posted
Posted

Marrone already confirmed that we're not going to be a multiple defense next year. We're going to be more of a true 4-3 defense.

I'll believe it when I see it.

We have too much versatility on defense to not include nickel and dime, as well as 33monster defenses.

 

It may be a base 43 but it will have more then one flavor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thebandit27 Hall of Famer

thebandit27

Posted
Posted

Marrone already confirmed that we're not going to be a multiple defense next year. We're going to be more of a true 4-3 defense.

 

Not from anything I've read:

 

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2014/1/27/5352166/jim-schwartz-defense-wide-9-wont-define-buffalo-bills-system

 

"We've never put a label on it," Schwartz said of the system. "It’s going to be opponent-specific. It’s going to be multi-dimensional enough to be able to do that - I mentioned before, trying to put players in good positions, and positions that fit their capabilities. We’re an attack scheme... whatever anybody wants to tag the system with as far as a name, it won’t be us."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
K-9 Hall of Famer

K-9

Posted
Posted

Marrone already confirmed that we're not going to be a multiple defense next year. We're going to be more of a true 4-3 defense.

 

Once again, it's all about game situation and sub packages. You think a team is gonna be in a 43 front when the offense presents 3 or more WRs in a spread formation? Good luck with that.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nucci Hall of Famer

nucci

Posted
Posted

Marrone already confirmed that we're not going to be a multiple defense next year. We're going to be more of a true 4-3 defense.

Hard to be a true 4-3 when most if not all teams play 3 WRs for most of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bangarang Hall of Famer

Bangarang

Posted
Posted

Apparently people are misunderstanding what I said or I did not communicate it well.

 

Marrone's quote from yesterday's meetings

Last year we were basically a two-linebacker team. Manny played on the line, and we had two linebackers in the back going against 21 and 12 personnel.

“Now we have a little bit more of a switch to a three-linebacker approach — three players back there. We won’t be multiple. But that would be the biggest difference.

 

 

I never said that we won't be in nickel or dime or have any other personnel packages. Obviously we're not going to exclusively be lined up in a traditional 4-3 front but in comparison to last year, the 4-3 will be our base and you will see a lot more 4-3 looks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...