2013 Season wrap up. Some ?'s answerd some new ones going into next year.

[Beerman]

The only reason some we're looking to move to a 4-3 was when we thought we were switching coordinators. Pags job is safe IMO so don't see a change in the future.

[Boltjolt]

the notes don't mention anything about Defensive scheme for next year. Not that I am 100% in favor of it- or expect it- but switching to the 4-3 makes sense for a number of reasons. Most importantly the lack of pass rushing OLBs available. we haven't had enough for YEARS and it shows in our lack of pass rush. We've got guys in Luiget, Reyes, Lissemore, Geathers that might just be better 4-3 DTs than 3-4 DEs, but guys like Freeney, Guy, Cam, Ingram, JJ, Tourek could be better as DEs than OLBs. We also wouldn't be talking about drafting NT so much if we went 4-3 with existing players. May be time to dust off the tapes and see what Rivera was doing towards the end with his hybrid 3-4/4-3 for clues how to use exisitng guys we have better.

Why should it? Its not an issue to them but it did mention that they said many times the defense has been getting better. Benching Cox, and getting Ingram and JJ back helps alot.

No it doesnt make any sense to switch back. Freeney is a 34 year old player who at the most has 1 more year here....if that. As for a hybrid defense....we didnt play ANY 3-4 at all against Denver when we beat them. Multiple DB sets and using Weddle as a LB at times. Theres no need to switch. Just let the coaches get better players and work their schemes as they see fit. Are you going to tell me Te'o would make a better MLB in a 4-3 too? He actually came from a 3-4 at Notre Dame as did Geathers at Georgia and Lissimore played in Dallas' 3-4 at DE.
The players you mentioned just might be good as OLBs too. How would you know if Tourek Williams makes a better DE? He has looked better as he gets more time and he is still adapting to the NFL. Maybe he is getting there i that regard.

Most DE's come from a 4-3. It doesnt mean they wont make it as OLB's. River adapted to a new offense as did Mathews and both are thriving. Its not new for defenders to do the same.

Ive got no problem with 3-4's. Only about 5 to 10 teams use them yearly and it seems there is always a 3-4 team in the SB all the time. Pittsburgh, New England, Baltimore...how many rings they got between them since 2000? The Saints are doing it this year for the first time and will be playoff bound. They found some guys and they are making it work. Junior Galetes career high sack total before this year was 5...as a 4-3 DE. Never before played OLB.

[SDFan]

so you are arguing we have a great pass rush with plently of above average OLBs- so no reason to change a thing since "the defense is getting better"?

[Boltjolt]

so you are arguing we have a great pass rush with plently of above average OLBs- so no reason to change a thing since "the defense is getting better"?

:facepalm: Really? Thats not even my quote. Thats what you got out of it ?

[Stinky Wizzleteats+]

Popcorn! Peanuts! Crrraxkerrrjacks!!!

Get um here1!!!11!!1I

Good reasons for both, but why keep Pegano and ask him to change scheems?

[Stinky Wizzleteats+]

Popcorn! Peanuts! Crrraxkerrrjacks!!!

Get um here1!!!11!!1I

Good reasons for both, but why keep Pegano and ask him to change scheems?

[blahblahblah]

Why should it? Its not an issue to them but it did mention that they said many times the defense has been getting better. Benching Cox, and getting Ingram and JJ back helps alot.

No it doesnt make any sense to switch back. Freeney is a 34 year old player who at the most has 1 more year here....if that. As for a hybrid defense....we didnt play ANY 3-4 at all against Denver when we beat them. Multiple DB sets and using Weddle as a LB at times. Theres no need to switch. Just let the coaches get better players and work their schemes as they see fit. Are you going to tell me Te'o would make a better MLB in a 4-3 too? He actually came from a 3-4 at Notre Dame as did Geathers at Georgia and Lissimore played in Dallas' 3-4 at DE.
The players you mentioned just might be good as OLBs too. How would you know if Tourek Williams makes a better DE? He has looked better as he gets more time and he is still adapting to the NFL. Maybe he is getting there i that regard.

Most DE's come from a 4-3. It doesnt mean they wont make it as OLB's. River adapted to a new offense as did Mathews and both are thriving. Its not new for defenders to do the same.

Ive got no problem with 3-4's. Only about 5 to 10 teams use them yearly and it seems there is always a 3-4 team in the SB all the time. Pittsburgh, New England, Baltimore...how many rings they got between them since 2000? The Saints are doing it this year for the first time and will be playoff bound. They found some guys and they are making it work. Junior Galetes career high sack total before this year was 5...as a 4-3 DE. Never before played OLB.

More teams have been switching to some type of 34.

The main problem is that having only 3 DL puts a lot of responsibility for gap control on them and our current guys haven't been getting the job done. There are natural "bubbles" over the guards where OL leak to the second level if not controlled. Our MLBs aren't big enough to take on blockers like they need to be, either. I would want one of the MLBs in the 260-270 range to really step in and fill the hole. Levon Kirkland type player.

I also believe a 34 reduces pass rushing opportunities, which is why teams switch to 4 down linemen in nickle/dime situations.

[Stinky Wizzleteats+]

In terms of salery distribution and the new rules favoring the offence what distribution modle would best suite todays nfl? Its not 50/50 anymore..

[blahblahblah]

In terms of salery distribution and the new rules favoring the offence what distribution modle would best suite todays nfl? Its not 50/50 anymore..

It depends on the players you have and who is available but I favor a 1-gap risk/reward style with zone coverage. It will give up some big plays but has more potential for drive stopping big plays.

We're not really set up for that, either. Our defensive personnel don't fit together very well, so it's time to go one way or the other.

The benefit of the 34 is that you have more range and read/react at the second level due to the extra LB to cut down on big plays, but in the modern NFL that seems like a finger in the dike.

[Boltjolt]

It depends on the players you have and who is available but I favor a 1-gap risk/reward style with zone coverage. It will give up some big plays but has more potential for drive stopping big plays.

We're not really set up for that, either. Our defensive personnel don't fit together very well, so it's time to go one way or the other.

The benefit of the 34 is that you have more range and read/react at the second level due to the extra LB to cut down on big plays, but in the modern NFL that seems like a finger in the dike.

So because YOU prefer a 1 gap, we should think about going one way or the other? I believe Wade is the only one that runs a 1 gap. I think the other guys that run a 3-4 have done well and have rings.
You know, if we get a HC that just wants to switch it up, id have no problem but we dont. Its the posters in forums that keep bringing it up for whatever reason. And we dont run base 3-4 all game long. Asside from Pittsburgh i dont think any do. Not sure they even do but i dont pay attention to every one of their games.

Just get better players ...not English who was always hurt or a 35 year old Spikes and the defense can thrive. The Saints have 246 lb David Hawthorne at ILB and he is a stud there. First year in a 3-4. 241 lb Curtis Lofton is their other ILB and he has 119 tackles. First year in a 3-4. Steelers ILB Lawrence Timmons is 235 lbs, been playing in a 3-4 his whole NFL career. Agree that is a bit light but you dont need 270 lb ILB's, but sure if you can find one athletic enough, why not? Ingram is athletic enough.
The Jets biggest ILB is 250 lbs. Ray Lewis was 245-250 lbs. Those teams have some of the most successful 3-4 defensive coaches around.

[blahblahblah]

So because YOU prefer a 1 gap, we should think about going one way or the other? I believe Wade is the only one that runs a 1 gap. I think the other guys that run a 3-4 have done well and have rings.
You know, if we get a HC that just wants to switch it up, id have no problem but we dont. Its the posters in forums that keep bringing it up for whatever reason. And we dont run base 3-4 all game long. Asside from Pittsburgh i dont think any do. Not sure they even do but i dont pay attention to every one of their games.

Just get better players ...not English who was always hurt or a 35 year old Spikes and the defense can thrive. The Saints have 246 lb David Hawthorne at ILB and he is a stud there. First year in a 3-4. 241 lb Curtis Lofton is their other ILB and he has 119 tackles. First year in a 3-4. Steelers ILB Lawrence Timmons is 235 lbs, been playing in a 3-4 his whole NFL career. Agree that is a bit light but you dont need 270 lb ILB's, but sure if you can find one athletic enough, why not? Ingram is athletic enough.
The Jets biggest ILB is 250 lbs. Ray Lewis was 245-250 lbs. Those teams have some of the most successful 3-4 defensive coaches around.

Should I state someone else's opinions and preferences in response to a carte blanche question? Sheesh.

With the current rule set and salary cap distribution (taking into account general player availability and pay scales) I prefer that type of scheme. That is not taking into account current personnel, just where I would go if building a D from scratch.

In our current system, with our current personnel, we need a bigger MLB because the DEs don't control the gaps. We essentially need a hole plugger because they leak so much, which is why we're being gouged in the middle of the field. I'm aware of the typical setup, our current personnel set isn't particularly apt at either the first or second level for "typical". There are 5 OL on the other side of the ball, and SOMEBODY has to take them on.

[Formula 21]

We have a decent swing tackle. His name is Mike Harris.

There's a lot to like about mike harris. But I don't believe he has the feet or arm length (33 1/2") to play tackle.