Giants Pregame Thread

[MTK]

I’m praying for a switch to the 4-3 so in 5 years or so we can hear about how we need to switch back to a 3-4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by MTK

I’m praying for a switch to the 4-3 so in 5 years or so we can hear about how we need to switch back to a 3-4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Meks]

Originally Posted by MTK

I’m praying for a switch to the 4-3 so in 5 years or so we can hear about how we need to switch back to a 3-4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

the right coach with the right scheme will run a lot of different formations and packages but would also use the players to the best of their potential .... so we'd see both but with the correct people in the right places at the right times

[DYoungJelly]

Originally Posted by MTK

I’m praying for a switch to the 4-3 so in 5 years or so we can hear about how we need to switch back to a 3-4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're always so dismissive of this discussion.

Is the roster better suited for a 3-4?

[FrenchSkin]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

You're always so dismissive of this discussion.

Is the roster better suited for a 3-4?

Yeah I don't think it's that ridiculous to think switching to a 4-3 would indeed make quite a difference. Sheehan and Cooley have both been advocating for it for quite some time.
Now, the priority absolutely is for the guys to be well coached. But I don't think this discussion is irrelevant at all.

Plus, I've often read here, as an argument for "it wouldn't change much", that we already play a lot of snaps in a 4-3... which is false: we rarely do. We do run a lot of snaps in Nickel 4-2-5 but very rarely in a 4-3. You have to think it does make quite a difference against the run.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

You're always so dismissive of this discussion.



Is the roster better suited for a 3-4?

I just think it’s funny since people were clamoring for the 3-4 for years.

And I think it’s more important who’s coaching the D vs the base alignment we run about 30% of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FrenchSkin]

Originally Posted by MTK

I just think it’s funny since people were clamoring for the 3-4 for years.

And I think it’s more important who’s coaching the D vs the base alignment we run about 30% of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thats 100 % on point. But I don't think anybody here would take Manusky in a 4-3 vs virtually anybody else in a 3-4.

[DYoungJelly]

Originally Posted by MTK

I just think it’s funny since people were clamoring for the 3-4 for years.

And I think it’s more important who’s coaching the D vs the base alignment we run about 30% of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe a 4-3 is better over the long run not because of any schematic advantage. Baltimore has had a very good defense for over a decade in the 3-4.

I believe it's better because the available personnel coming out of the draft fit the requirements of a 4-3 better.

We haven't had that unicorn who is a long, twitchy, natural olb the whole time we have been a 3-4.

We haven't had that 375lb immovable object to gum up the middle. Pot Roast was so out of shape he couldn't be effective two plays in a row.

We haven't had the incredibly fast ilb who are heat seeking missiles a 3-4 requires. Our two fastest ilbs have been Keenan Robinson and Cole Holcolm. Arguably, if someone (Fletcher) has great instincts and knowledge, it can make up for speed.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[DYoungJelly]

Originally Posted by MTK

I just think it’s funny since people were clamoring for the 3-4 for years.

And I think it’s more important who’s coaching the D vs the base alignment we run about 30% of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

30%...

Just heard on Sheehan's pod ( 12-20-19 @ 1 hour and 6 min) from Friday that Sweat dropped into coverage 12 times against the eagles.

Just put into text for posterity you're ok with that.

That the 3-4 isn't a big deal...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[mooby]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

You're always so dismissive of this discussion.

Is the roster better suited for a 3-4?

We've had a base 3-4 for 10 years now and not once has our D ranked in the top ten for anything.

Everybody knows you don't stay in the 3-4 alignment except a small percentage of the time.

I agree, if our personnel is better suited for a base 4-3 we need to switch.