Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

the 3-4

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by zimonami View Post
    I can't help but think of LT, Carson, Reasons and Banks. One of the greatest LB corps of all time. It's not entirely fair to compare the guys we have now... but, they do come up woefully short. Regardless, we had a below average group before Beason came around, and only 3 playing at a time. To go to a 3-4 with this crew isn't a good idea. We have more depth on the DL, so we need to stay with a 4-3. Besides, I like heavier LB's inside in the 3-4, to fill the middle gaps. Beason @ 235, to me, fits more at OLB in the 3-4. Herzlich is the only heavier LB. Actually, Herzlich might do better in a 3-4. You'd have to keep Beason inside, too.
    I always liked the 3-4 but we can't really look at our personnel and figure out who would be adequate in a new scheme. We need dominant players whatever the scheme and we just don't have them at LB right now. An example is Herzlich. Maybe he would be somewhat more productive in a 3-4 but you can't compare him to Reasons or HOF Harry Carson. I think Beason would be our 3rd ILB on that '86 team and Jaquan Williams would be pretty much equal to Andy Headen.

    I think the key to any scheme is talent where we are thin at LB. I'm not sure that any of our guys go from good to great in a change of scheme.
    Our DL is less complicated but we lack a sure bet at NT which is so critical in the 3-4.

    To get from 4-3 to a 3-4 and be really good when we arrive would probably take 3-4 years of major overhaul.

    Go Blue!!
    No one remembers who came in second.

    Comment

    Working...
    X