|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-05-2012, 05:24 PM | #16 |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Holland, Michigan
Posts: 5,741
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
I've always hated the three four. I always felt more confident with more bodies on the line.
And to echo what Matty said, without a secondary either will not be effective.
__________________
REDSKINS FAN SINCE 1968 |
Advertisements |
11-05-2012, 06:33 PM | #17 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: RatherbeinDC, TX
Posts: 3,059
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
Yeah it was i meant 97-99. Cowboys swept the SKins that year but that was the last time we won the Division!
__________________
Lafayette, we're here. HTTR. You wern't a bunch of losers on 10-27-14. |
11-05-2012, 06:33 PM | #18 |
Special Teams
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 323
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
It would be better than whats here now. But its a moot point because there is no way Nolan would ever work for Snyder again. And also he wont have any talent to work with on top of his bad experience here.
__________________
I don't have to sell my soul he's already in me I don't need to sell my soul he's already in me I wanna be adored I wanna be adored Stone Roses "I wanna be adored" |
11-05-2012, 06:47 PM | #19 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 22,341
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
Regardless of the defensive scheme, this team needs to desperately to fix its secondary starting with both safeties. That said, I think we have the makings of an excellent 4-3 D-line with Orakpo and Kerrigan as DEs and a combination of Cofield, Carriker, Bowen, and Jenkins as DTs. I think the challenge with our current personnel would be the LBs. We would need a SLB, WLB, and a MLB (to replace Fletcher). I don't know how well our current crop of LBs would fit in that scheme. Still, I think it may be easier to find 4-3 LBs than to find a true 3-4 NT that this team has never found.
__________________
R.I.P. #21 |
11-05-2012, 10:17 PM | #20 |
Special Teams
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 246
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
Yes, I agree that the 3-4 switch was a colossal mistake from the beginning. Too many resources were wasted trying to convert when defense wasn't the primary problem.
Switching back to a 4-3 shouldn't be too complicated, but the team now has to think about replacing the entire secondary and getting another linebacker or 2 to make it work. The secondary is just a mess, so that has to be priority number 1 this offseason. They would also need to release Carriker to free up salary space as he would be the odd man out. At this point, I would be fine with going to a 4-3 after the bye and letting Robinson and Riley play on the outside with Fletch in the middle. Alexander can also play, but he isn't really starting caliber for the long term. Fletch will need to be replaced next year in my opinion as he is rapidly slowing down due to age and wear-n-tear. I do not however believe Shanahan will make the switch back because it will be an open admission of failure. I also don't believe he will replace Haslett until the season ends because I think he blames injuries and lack of quality personnel more than coaching. Snyder will probably have to bring a hammer down to force a change, and Haslett and D.Smith will then take the fall. It's just too hard to reasonably fathom how bad this defense is after all the resources spent on it. Mind numbing really. |
11-05-2012, 10:30 PM | #21 |
Playmaker
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,754
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
|
11-05-2012, 10:32 PM | #22 |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,518
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
I'm amazed that some think changing to a 4-3 right now will improve things. Amazed.
|
11-05-2012, 10:35 PM | #23 |
Quietly Dominating the East
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Naples, Florida
Posts: 10,675
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
There is no limit to the wisdom found...in these humble pages.
__________________
Goodbye Sean..........Vaya Con Dios thankyou Joe....... “God made certain people to play football. He was one of them.” – Joe Gibbs |
11-05-2012, 10:51 PM | #24 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,754
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
Quote:
And four stiffs off the street for our secondary. |
|
11-05-2012, 11:23 PM | #25 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 36
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
People make too much out of the 3-4 vs. 4-3. IN terms of run fits, we were fine before, we're fine now. We can't pressure or cover anyone, which would be the case regardless of the system we're running. Obviously we attempted this by drafting Kerrigan, but we need more pass rushers than just the pair we have. We have to beable to come from all angles.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
11-05-2012, 11:38 PM | #26 |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,526
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
People don't realize 3-4 or 4-3, it doesn't matter what formation you line up in, its the coaching and the players and frankly we don't have either really.
__________________
"Anyones better than Madieu Williams" |
11-06-2012, 01:04 PM | #27 |
The Starter
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,097
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
I agree. San Fran runs a great 3-4 because of fantastic coaching and they have the best players for each role. The giants run a great 4-3 (when they want to) but also have an amazing defensive line. The bears have a great defensive scheme as well. Both schemes can work if you have the right players. Right now we do not have the best players or good coaching. You need one to be good, you need both to be great.
|
11-06-2012, 02:05 PM | #28 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 4,101
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
Quote:
There are many ways to make the defense better. It doesn't matter if the Redskins are running the 34, 43, or the 46. The players that are put in place simply have to be better than what we have right now in order for the system to work. |
|
11-06-2012, 02:21 PM | #29 |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,230
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
it's simple, when i switch kerrigan to de on madden he goes to 99 ovr. you can't argue w numbers like that...
__________________
9 21 28 33 42 43 44 49 65 81 |
11-06-2012, 05:25 PM | #30 |
Special Teams
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 246
|
Re: Switch to 3-4 Defense a Failure
In my opinion, the 3-4 is fine if you have either a superior DE or NT to go along with a very strong linebacking corps. Every team rushes 4 men as a basic package, and the goal is to apply consistant pressure with a 4 man rush. It makes the blitz so much more effective.
The problem is logistical. It is increasingly difficult to find a 6-4, 300 lb 3-4 DE who can take on double teams and still get penetration. Teams like SF, Hou, Ari, and SD have those superior players. Other teams like Pit and GB have 330 lb 3-4 NT's who can consistantly take on double teams and push the pocket. Those teams can get constant pressure with a 4 man rush, and their blitzes work. The Redskins don't have those guys in the front 3, all can be handled with a single blocker. When the Skins rush their 4th guy, it is an easy pickup for the O-line. They have to rush 5 guys to apply any pressure, and only then will the blitz be effective with 6-7 rushers whereas other strong defenses get it with 5. It is much easier to find a 6-1, 300 pounder who can play 4-3 DT and get penetration beating a single blocker than a 6-2, 330 lb 3-4 NT who can consistantly occupy 2 blockers. And it is easier to get a 6-3, 260 lb 4-3 DE who can speed rush past 1 blocker than a 6-5, 300 lb 3-4 DE who can consistantly take doubles. 4-3 teams are just easier to build, and compounding the problem is most college teams want lighter, speedier defenders to attack the wide open college game. Alabama is a rare exception that runs a base 3-4, but Saban can have his choice of any kid in the country to fit his scheme. Most college teams want their kids on the track getting quicker and faster as opposed to the dining room getting bigger. It is still about getting consistant pressure with a 4 man rush, and if you can find those guys, the 3-4 works fine. The Skins don't have them, and they need to find them. Otherwise a 4 man front with Kerrigan, Orakpo, Cofield, and Bowen/Jenkins would appear to be their best course going forward. All are 4-3 players ideally as better penetrators rather than occupiers. My opinion only. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|