Should we stay 3-4 or go 4-3 on D

[verbalkint1]

There has been a lot of discussion about this already with our search for a DC. Do you think we should be staying 3-4 or converting back to 4-3.

I myself think that with the players we have, and the difficulties in getting a really good NT to anchor a 3-4 we should look at going back to a 4-3, especially as it may just help make our D more balanced again, vs the run and pass.

[Shady]

Voted for the 4-3. I've just not seen enough to convince me that we have the personnel to make the 3-4 work and there's more than enough holes on the team to be wasting time trying to find the right people.

More importantly for me is that I'm not seeing anything from the 3-4 to suggest it's right for us.

Smacks to me of another fad that's passing through the NFL right now.

[DantheMan]

Gone for the 4-3 purely cos we had our best D with JT in his prime terrorising QBs from the end position......however, the 4-3 is no different from the 3-4 in that you have to get the right personnel to make it work.....instead of a stud NT to anchor the 3-4 you have to find a stud (and speedy) MLB (a la Zach) to cover from sideline to sideline......

As long as Parcells is calling the shots though, we will be looking at the 3-4....

[Shady]

Originally Posted by DantheMan

Gone for the 4-3 purely cos we had our best D with JT in his prime terrorising QBs from the end position......

I think Starks and Merling would relish the chance to fill those roles at DE. Soliai hopefully wouldn't look so overmatched and we could find some nice bulk to tie up the other DT slot in the later rounds.

JMHO

[Jeff]

I voted to stay with the 3-4. At the moment we have a pretty terrible LB corps. That could well change with the chance of a couple of stud rookies if that's what we choose to address in the draft. On the line, Starks is a revelation at end, and Langford isn't too far behind him. If they were transposed to a 4-3, I believe their impact would be more limited, as they don't have the speed to turn the corner.

Although the 3-4 is more popular at the moment, that may be in part due to the success for a long time of teams such as Pittsburgh and the Patriots. Who wouldn't be happy with what Pittsburg's D has achieved over the past decade?

It takes time to get all the personnel in place for any scheme. I think that we're 2 LBs, a NT and a FS away from being truly scary on D. Those aren't many pieces, especially if we can get a FA NT such as Wilfork, and then hit LB hard in the draft. We may even have our FS in Clemons, if he can keep progressing.

The 4-3 good times with JT and ZT roaming the field were good indeed, but they were never a truly dominant unit like Baltimore that could overcome the glaring deficiencies of an inept O.

[jetssuck]

Originally Posted by Jeff

I voted to stay with the 3-4. At the moment we have a pretty terrible LB corps. That could well change with the chance of a couple of stud rookies if that's what we choose to address in the draft. On the line, Starks is a revelation at end, and Langford isn't too far behind him. If they were transposed to a 4-3, I believe their impact would be more limited, as they don't have the speed to turn the corner.

Although the 3-4 is more popular at the moment, that may be in part due to the success for a long time of teams such as Pittsburgh and the Patriots. Who wouldn't be happy with what Pittsburg's D has achieved over the past decade?

It takes time to get all the personnel in place for any scheme. I think that we're 2 LBs, a NT and a FS away from being truly scary on D. Those aren't many pieces, especially if we can get a FA NT such as Wilfork, and then hit LB hard in the draft. We may even have our FS in Clemons, if he can keep progressing.

The 4-3 good times with JT and ZT roaming the field were good indeed, but they were never a truly dominant unit like Baltimore that could overcome the glaring deficiencies of an inept O.

This.....going with the Goose on this one. He might be getting old but he still has his moments

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by jetssuck

This.....going with the Goose on this one. He might be getting old but he still has his moments

Cheeky naked old fucker...

[Unlucky 13]

I agree with Jeff. The few good young players that we have on the front seven are more apt to suceed in the 3-4 that we already run, and if you can be a dominant 3-4 front, then the defense can make a real difference.

At our very best a decade ago, we stopped the run and forced incomplete passes most of the time. Rarely did the defense totally destroy the other team and force them to play a style that they were uncomfortable with.

[Armchair QB]

3-4 all the way baby ... yep loved our 4-3 days with the likes of JT, Bowens, Adewale, Zach, Madison & Surtain, but we also went through some pretty so-so stuff before then...

Loving the change up - it's an education, and 3-4 is what Parcells does - can't wait to see what it looks like with all the pieces in place in a season or two.

[MrPhinn]

3-4. But can we pick up some LBs worthy of the system?

[verbalkint1]

It's not the LB's I worry about, if we do not find a guy for that NT pos, it doesn't matter who we get at ILB, we will still be stuck in a 3-4 system without that anchor in the middle of the DL demanding 2 blockers at all times.

[mia320]

We cannot run a 3-4 unless you have linebackers who can stop the run.

With no cap in 2010..say goodbye to Joey Porter and his horrible tackling. Porter goes now with no penalty OR serious dead money torching cap space

[Prestonpete]

prefer to put pressure on the O's line every time. Something I don't think we did this year. Whether that was down to the DC not calling the plays, but I can't remember us blitzing too much, but that could be coz we were weak in the DB field?

[jetssuck]

As someone said.......LB's make the 3-4 go and we need to upgrade ours.

Also, as far as blitzing more........the fallout between Nolan and McDaniels had a lot to do with Nolan wanting to blitz a lot more and McDaniels vetoing it.

I would expect us to really open it up and get after the QB next year and for us to get a lot more pressure.

[jezzsterboy]

Still find it AMAZING that we were in the top 5 "most sacks," team in the NFL even with "Belloni's" under used blitzing schemes?!!! Think we were 3rd?

For me that COULD mean that if we DO have a successful draft in 2010, and DRASTICALLY upgrade our LBs AND with NOLAN being on board, we could be SCARY next season, this time IN A GOOOOOOD WAY!!!!

Also hoping we're gonna get much tighter coverage next season,which again should increase our "coverage sacks,"

Gotta say I'm hopeful for 2010!!

But NO chickens are being counted yet!!!