PDA

View Full Version : My defensive change



TooStupid
12-24-2012, 01:18 PM
Since we've had no rush and poor linebacking, with virtually no underneath coverage, I would have switched to a 3-4. Alternate Joseph and Canty at Nose. Put Kiwi back at DE along with Ojomo. Let Tuck and the girl Osi spell them. Play Rivers, Boley, Paysinger and Williams at LB or whatever combination was healthy. That would allow the safties and corners to cover anything deep without having to constantly worry about underneath routes. Thats why they get burned all thew time.

TroyArcher
12-24-2012, 01:21 PM
Can't be any worse than the crap they been rolling out the past few weeks.

brad
12-24-2012, 01:22 PM
The LBs aren't good enough now, and you want to increase their role without bringing in new talent? Not going to even start on the D-line... where none of our linemen are for the 3-4

BJacobs aka The Problem
12-24-2012, 01:30 PM
Didn't they line up with 4 LB, 4 DL at one point and still couldn't stop the run?

Toadofsteel
12-24-2012, 01:32 PM
Didn't they line up with 4 LB, 4 DL at one point and still couldn't stop the run?They did half-decent, considering that Ray Rice was in their backfield. But Webby getting burned again and again meant that we couldn't ever truly sell out vs the run.

gmen0820
12-24-2012, 01:36 PM
Resign Phillips on the cheap, cut Osi, Tuck, Webster, completely restructure Boley and Canty and have a solid draft board. Make solid moves in FA, nothing too flashy though.

lavar2
12-24-2012, 01:41 PM
Since we've had no rush and poor linebacking, with virtually no underneath coverage, I would have switched to a 3-4. Alternate Joseph and Canty at Nose. Put Kiwi back at DE along with Ojomo. Let Tuck and the girl Osi spell them. Play Rivers, Boley, Paysinger and Williams at LB or whatever combination was healthy. That would allow the safties and corners to cover anything deep without having to constantly worry about underneath routes. Thats why they get burned all thew time.

Not trying to cramp your style but that is not how a 3-4 defense is built. No way could Kiwi/Osi/Ojomo play DE in a 3-4 scheme.They would be outside linebacker and only Kiwi has the talent or cover skills to pull it off. Next only Joseph may be able to play the nose as Canty is a 3-tech defensive tackle and would be a DE in that scheme like he was in Dallas. Tuck may be able to fit that role because of his size but probably not. Next you would need some big physical linebackers to put in the middle, only of whom maybe Blackburn would fit the bill.

Lastly, not many teams run a 3-4 these days because they like having four down to rush the passer and easily being able to substitute their linebackers for defensive backs that can play in coverage and space. That is why only about 7 or 8 teams still run the 3-4 defense in the nfl. Sorry but I don't think the 3-4 is the answer. Too much personnel change and doesn't make a ton of sense in today's NFL.

BJacobs aka The Problem
12-24-2012, 01:43 PM
They did half-decent, considering that Ray Rice was in their backfield. But Webby getting burned again and again meant that we couldn't ever truly sell out vs the run.

Ahh. Makes sense.

On a side note, I don't think we have the personnel to run a 3-4. I think opposing offenses would have an easier time running up the middle if they switched to a 3-4. Who'd be the two ILB's? Rivers and Boley? If an O-lineman got to the second level against that tandem, that would be a huge problem.

Toadofsteel
12-24-2012, 01:48 PM
Ahh. Makes sense.

On a side note, I don't think we have the personnel to run a 3-4. I think opposing offenses would have an easier time running up the middle if they switched to a 3-4. Who'd be the two ILB's? Rivers and Boley? If an O-lineman got to the second level against that tandem, that would be a huge problem.

No, we absolutely dont have the personnel to run a base 3-4. We would need to spend our entire draft on a 3-4 DT and linebackers. Not going to happen, when we need to spend all 7 draft picks on OL.

That said, as a thought experiment, if a rule was passed forcing all defenses to run a base 3-4 with their existing players, here's how I would line them up:
Canty-Linval-Kuhn
Boley-Williams-Blackburn-JPP

Yeah, I smh at that too...

All that said, I did like the 4-4 "penny" package that PF brought out, it showed that he was trying to put the best players possible out there to stop the run. But then Webby failed. PF at least tries to game plan against the opposing team (his players just quit on him), which is why I'm less adamant about wanting him gone as I am with Killdrive who does the same damn thing that never works...

lavar2
12-24-2012, 01:55 PM
Honestly that 3-4 d-line would not be too bad. I think Canty/linval/Kuhn could actually do a pretty good job. Its the linebackers you would have to worry about JPP/Kiwi could probably do it on the outside but those middle backers. Geez, good luck.

TooStupid
12-24-2012, 07:45 PM
Not trying to cramp your style but that is not how a 3-4 defense is built. No way could Kiwi/Osi/Ojomo play DE in a 3-4 scheme.They would be outside linebacker and only Kiwi has the talent or cover skills to pull it off. Next only Joseph may be able to play the nose as Canty is a 3-tech defensive tackle and would be a DE in that scheme like he was in Dallas. Tuck may be able to fit that role because of his size but probably not. Next you would need some big physical linebackers to put in the middle, only of whom maybe Blackburn would fit the bill.

Lastly, not many teams run a 3-4 these days because they like having four down to rush the passer and easily being able to substitute their linebackers for defensive backs that can play in coverage and space. That is why only about 7 or 8 teams still run the 3-4 defense in the nfl. Sorry but I don't think the 3-4 is the answer. Too much personnel change and doesn't make a ton of sense in today's NFL.


We gave up 500+ yards Whats not going to work? I did forget about JPP. You can rightly say we cant do this and we cant do that, but what we have is not working. Fewel has done nothing but the same crap game after game. I wouldnt give a rats *** if the players didnt like it. Id put 11 rookies in there and do no worse then 500 yards.
,

jaxnygmen
12-24-2012, 08:28 PM
All the LB's are average. I am not sure williams or paysinger are good enough. Boley has proved that he is just average. We need better players on Defense in so many positions. This directly reflects the poor drafts Reese has had.

TooStupid
12-24-2012, 08:36 PM
All the LB's are average. I am not sure williams or paysinger are good enough. Boley has proved that he is just average. We need better players on Defense in so many positions. This directly reflects the poor drafts Reese has had.

Think Spags first three games. Defense giving up 40 points per. Players looked bad. Next thing you know they start buying into the system and we have a great D. Fewels system of play soft is not being bought into and it shows. You'll never get rid of all the players, but if you keep Fewel, you'll waste any new ones that end up here.

DVision
12-24-2012, 08:52 PM
They did half-decent, considering that Ray Rice was in their backfield. But Webby getting burned again and again meant that we couldn't ever truly sell out vs the run.

Your kidding right? Having two rushers go for 100+ is half decent to you? They went with a 4-4 a bunch in this game and still got punched in the mouth. Webby sucked! He had no help because we went with a single safety! He's not a shutdown corner and Rolle is not a sideline to sideline safety! Those 4 LBer's sucked as a group!

lavar2
12-24-2012, 09:29 PM
Well what we have now isn't working but if you throw our current roster into a 3-4 roster it will work even less. 500 yards would turn into 800 and you'd be looking at 50 point losses every week. Your never as good as you think you are and your never as bad as you think are either. Do changes need to be made? Absolutely. Wholesale, drastic ones like these? No.