Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by citizenthom, Jan 6, 2013.
Sapp never played any position but DT.
My bad. I thought Oakland might have had a 3-4 when Sapp signed with them. All the same...
Haven't you heard? 3-4 is a magic defence that automatically transforms your team into the top #5!!!
3-4 defense is not the solution it's good for disguising schemes and blitz that's about it.
4-3 is very successful with the right personal. Give us a big defensive tackle that can collapse the pocket, and two corners that can play man coverage and we are set.
The way many teams run the 3-4 makes it basically a distinction without a difference.
Most teams 4th LB plays the Jack/Rush/etc position which is essential a DE. And one of the 3-4 DEs is bigger and plays basically the same position as a traditional 4-3 DT.
I just don't see why everyone thinks that its going to be a difference maker.
The issues you've identified are real problems for us, but IMO it's always best to maximize what you've got. We've got 4 good LB's so we need to play them if we can.
In my scenario we have Ayers & Wimbley at OLB, McCarthy & Brown inside with Spoon/Diles subbing in.
Then at DL we have our 2 best pass rushers Morgan & Klug at DE's, and Casey/Martin at NT.
There's more juice to be squeezed from the LB group than any other, it's best we use all that talent to our advantage. We don't have 4 DL who are that good, we have 2 or 3. We're asking too much of the 4 D-Linemen we have, Wimbley is ok, but he gets tangled up too much at the LoS as a DE, give him a chance with a running start and a busy LT chasing Klug around.
I don't hate the 4-3, but our roster looks more like a 3-4 to me, so play to our strengths.
Having 4 LB's playing gets more speed on the field, and speed kills in football.
The reason its a good idea is 1.) Gray's 4-3 stinks, even without the missed tackles it's still a crappy scheme he has. 2.) Like I've said before, exchanging a DE for a LB adds more speed to our team, and for a group thats going to miss tackles, you want speed on the field so we can swarm the ball and gang tackle. That's really how you cover up for the fact we miss a bunch of tackles, you have a lot of guys near the ball.
My problem with the 4-3 is that it is much harder to find the talent that makes it work. Finding elite DEs and shutdown CBs is tough in the draft and they are expensive to keep.
It is easier to find rush Lbers
LOL, yeah, just ask the Bronocos
1. You do not need shut down corners for a 4-3. There are different ways to play the 4-3. The Tony Dungy/Monty Kiffin style does not use shut down corners.
2. It may be a little easier to get outside rush LBs. It is however much much easier to get 4-3 DT than it is to get 3-4 NT or DE.
3. Most of our current front 7 players are ill suited to the 3-4. We were able to get steals like Mike Martin, Zach Brown, Colin McCarthy because so many teams have jumped on the 3-4 bandwagon. All were taken lower their their ability warrented. Derick Morgan is also not suited to the 3-4. Too small to be a 3-4 DE and not athletic enough to play OLB.
The only decent front 7 players on our roster who are suited to 3-4 are Sen'derick Marks (Who would be just as good either way), Akeen Ayers and Wimbley. Better to do a hybrid D and use Ayers the way the Brocos are using Von Miller.
Separate names with a comma.