The 4-3 vs. the 3-4 in Washington
by mmford10 on Jan 13, 2010 2:01 PM EST
241 comments
This off-season, we have heard rumblings that incoming coach Mike Shanahan was interested in switching the Redskins' defensive base formation from a 4-3 to a 3-4, a major departure from the philosophy that provided the Redskins with top-ranked defenses nearly every year since Joe Gibbs came back.
Initially, switching to a 3-4 in Washington doesn't make a lot of sense to me. London Fletcher, the defense's best player by far, is a perfect fit for a 4-3 where he has a lot of mobility and is the first player on the second level, away from the OL, so he can make a tackle. Also, imagining Phillip Daniels or Albert Haynesworth in a 3-4 doesn't really make sense, and it also means Cornelius Griffin, who is really underrated in my estimation as an asset on the DL, will not see the field much because there isn't a second DT spot.
So what are the benefits of a 3-4? The 3-4 is designed to make blitzing more creative and difficult to contain. With four linebackers, there is more choice in which player gets assigned to coverage and which player can attack the line of scrimmage. Furthermore, it spreads out the offensive line's protection schemes a little more, which makes it harder to protect the quarterback.
The negative of the 3-4 is that there are only three down linemen, which does not exactly play to our strength. We are loaded at DT with Haynesworth, Griffin, Golston and Montgomery, who were all able to rotate in at some point when there were two defensive tackles on the field. When you have those kind of players on the field every down, it is a lot easier to stop the run, because it's harder for the offensive line to move those kind of guys around. However, it is a bit more difficult to rush the passer with four down linemen, rather than a speedy OLB, every play, as we saw this season.
But is the 3-4 defense a good fit with the Redskins? More after the jump.
According to Wikipedia, the Redskins are one of two NFL teams that have never run the 3-4 (the Bears are the other). Several of the league's great defenses -- and several of the teams that are still alive in the playoffs -- use the 3-4. We all know about DeMarcus Ware and the Cowboys' 3-4; the Ravens and Chargers also have mastered the scheme. The Packers, who had the second-ranked defense this year, also used the formation despite having to move personnel around (Aaron Kampman comes to mind). The Steelers, of course, have been using the 3-4 since before most of our readers were born. It works for them pretty well, in what I'd call the understatement of the decade.
As has been reported, Haslett has experience running the 3-4, when he was in Pittsburgh as the DC a long time ago. But he also ran the 4-3 with the Saints, the Rams and apparently last year in the UFL with the Florida franchise.
But let's assume Haslett wants to explore the 3-4 for the Redskins. With our current personnel, it would look something like this. (click link for source)
I would imagine the DL would be Carter, Haynesworth and Daniels. Our OLB would be Brian Orakpo and probably Chris Wilson, given his skill set. Our ILB would be Fletcher and McIntosh (assuming he stays this offseason). Of course, this assumes we make no moves in free agency or the draft (unlikely).
Right away, you see the advantages of the 3-4 in rushing the passer. Haynesworth will be double-teamed, meaning one of those guards will have to pick him up. Say it's the LG, for this play. Then the right DE (or DT, in this graph) and the OLB will both be the responsibility of the LT. Obviously, a running back or someone will want to chip the linebacker. But this formation is what gives DeMarcus Ware, Elvis Dumervil, Terrell Suggs, Lamarr Woodley so much success -- the quarterback will simply not be able to have a lot of time when you have those kind of guys rushing the edge. Putting Orakpo in that spot, frankly, would be unfair for the rest of the league.
The disadvantage comes in the running game. With the LB's split so far out wide, the middle is vulnerable. Of course, the Redskins do enlist the services of a tackling machine in London Fletcher, but the LB's will be more exposed to big OL who can come down the field and take smaller LB's like Fletcher (or HB Blades) completely out of the play, because there are fewer DL, forcing (gulp) LaRon Landry to make tackles closer to the line.
In the NFC East, there is the tough balance of having to stop top running games (Giants, Cowboys, Eagles) versus pressuring some of the best in the league at quarterback (Manning, Romo, McNabb).
However, teams with the right personnel, like the Cowboys, Ravens, and Packers, can stop the run with the 3-4. Four of the top 5 rush defenses -- Green Bay, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Dallas -- ran the 3-4 this year. (The Redskins were 16th against the run, and 8th against the pass, FYI.) They also get a lot of sacks and create havoc for their opponents' quarterbacks.
Each of those teams, though, has the right personnel for the 3-4. Let's take the Ravens. The most important position of the 3-4 is arguably the nose tackle. The Ravens have Ngata and Gregg, perfect fits for that position. They have bigger ILB's -- Ray Lewis and Tavares Gooden, and fast, havoc-wreaking OLB's in Suggs and Jarrett Johnson. The Steelers have Casey Hampton at NT, and then Farrior and Timmons as their ILB's, along with the unbelievable James Harrison and LaMar Woodley at OLB.
I don't see Haynesworth as a true nose tackle, given that his best skills are collapsing the pocket as a pass-rusher and disrupting the middle of the field during run plays. He seems like a prototype 4-3 DT to me. I also don't see Fletcher able to shed a lot of blocks from huge guards or being well-suited to split the middle of the field with another player. I also don't see Phillip Daniels or Cornelius Griffin being good fits for this kind of defense, but they are really well-suited for the 4-3 we've run the past few years. It would seem our defense would be really different in the 3-4, and we may not have the personnel to make a quick adjustment. Given the success of our defense for the last five years, it would be disappointing to see it become anything closer to average than it already is.
So, if any of you made it this far in the post, what do you reader(s) think about the 3-4 in Washington? Could it work? Would we have to draft on defense to adjust? More importantly, can we even afford to do that given the trainwreck of an offensive we have?
Do you even think it will happen? Personally, I don't. Haslett will have to adjust to his personnel if we want to be successful, and our defense seems to hinge (as it should) on the skills of Haynesworth and Fletcher, our two best players.
8 recs |
241 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Not this year.
Putting Orakpo in that spot, frankly, would be unfair for the rest of the league.
I’m not sure how that is, he was burned repeatedly in coverage and it was obvious he didn’t like it. You don’t think other teams will expose that?
Also, where is the depth for when a few of these players get hurt?
I won’t mind them starting to draft for it while still using the 3-4 this year, but were also short on picks. which leaves the ? what about the OL.
It is IMO that another good LB to fill the 3 out will allow Orakpo to stay at DE almost full time and/or also if somehow we come up with maybe a shut down corner. Either one or both of these positions would allow the defense to get better IMO.
+1
I’m not sure how that is, he was burned repeatedly in coverage and it was obvious he didn’t like it. You don’t think other teams will expose that?
Outside of blitzing him every play, ’Rak in coverage is a liability.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Orakpo is only going to get better in coverage
And obviously he won’t be blitzing every play, but he will be able to blitz more often in a 3-4 than he did in a 4-3 because the extra inside linebacker could drop into coverage in Orakpo’s place.
by Martin Shatzer on Jan 13, 2010 8:35 PM EST up reply actions
I would like to see the redskins change to a 3-4
But it may not be in our interest to make a complete switch this year. I personally would like to see them run a hybrid until we can get the personnel together to run the full fledge 3-4 defense.
by JeanBaptiste on Jan 13, 2010 8:45 PM EST up reply actions
which ILB would that be?
Fletcher? He is not very good in coverage. He can tackle in open space, sure. But coverage isn’t his thing. Rocky McIntosh is probably the best bet for coverage.
My thing is, why take him away from doing what he has been doing, and doing well just to HOPE that he’ll excel at something that he’s never done before.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
I agree...
Andre Carter and Orakpo each had 10+ sacks with 1-1 coverage and Griff/Haynesworth causing trouble in the middle….why change that (and that was with Sister Mary Blache and his 3 blitzes a game)?
Even though Andre Carter played some LB at San Fran, I remember in training camp last year he said he did not want to move back to LB. Shanahan said he will use players to their strengths and its obvious a 4-3 is that. Haslett is an aggressive guy, so it’ll be nice to see these guys let loose. I think the 3-4 is getting over-hyped. Shanahan said he explored it….which is not forcing it.
"It was one of those things where everyone in the building was suddenly excited again," Cerrato said. "And all the women in the building were the most excited. They couldn't believe we were getting the guy from "Dancing With the Stars."
at 6'6" Haynesworth is too tall
There’s not a single 6’6" NT in the NFL for a reason. Being shorter means having a lower center of gravity which helps win those interior line battles. Most NT’s are 6’0" to 6’3".
Ratliff is certainly the exception to the rule
he is a smallish NT who penetrates. Not sure if Haynesworth can be the same guy though but you make a great point CJ.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 3:10 PM EST up reply actions
Ratliff plays DE
he’s not listed as the NT and he’s also 2" shorter than Haynesworth.
he plays DE? Who plays the nose for them?
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 4:03 PM EST up reply actions
How?
Guys like Ngata and Hampton are said to be what makes those defenses work. Al is certainly big enough for the part, but then again no one has mentioned the possibility of playing Griffin at NT and Haynesworth at strong side end.
while I agree Albert has the girth to hang in there
It’s not the best use of his skills. From what I understand, the NT is supposed to hold blockers in place and clog th middle from QB escapes and draw plays. Albert is a penetrator type who can overpower bigger OT’s. Sticking him in the trenches and taking away what he is best at, disruption, is a poor use of his salary. I could see Griff maybe being a NT type, but I could also see the team scouring the UFA and practice squads for someone who fits the bill.
Or you could look at it this way… you just paid the best rac care driver in the world to join your team. He comes in expecting to driv cars in races, but you tell him that despite that skill set, you would prefer that he get the cars out of the garage and get them out to the racetrack for the other drivers. Yeah the job is important, but not exactly the best use of his skills.
Now before all of you go Ratliff on us all, the Pokes play Ratliff up the middle and rush spencer and ware from the outside. Ratliff uses his sped to take advantage of the OL confusion as choices are made to decide which speed rusher to block.
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
Yep,
Plus Ratliff lines up differently than other NTs to take advantage of his quickness.
He is on either side of the ball, on the guard, in the gaps, and he is so quick and strong, he stunts himself to add to the confusion.
Mostly 3-4 I believe
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
exactly
the NT is the key to making the defense and we’re going to fill the position with someone who can get by. That really sounds like a good plan?
Simply put, being a great NT requires far less than what AH brings
AH is mega-athletic for his size, and his athleticism and speed would be completely wasted at the NT position.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
well put Smuts
am I the only one who though Griff looked horrible this year?
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 14, 2010 1:53 PM EST up reply actions
I remember him being outperformed by Golston
who is a backup. I’ll shut up about it but I thought Griff was atrocious last year and is too old and injury prone to be expected to play a role this season.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 14, 2010 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
Great Post
Informative and well written/thought out. Even if we really, really wanted to go to a 3-4, we couldn’t begin to implement it until after next year if we have any hope of bringing our offense into some level of respectability. Right now, we have a B+ Defense, an C- Offense and a C+ Special teams. Some of our DTs are great special teamers. We could also easily become an A Defense with the addition of a Free Safety and more aggressive coverage schemes.
This means our best hope for our Offense is to get to a C or C+ due to the drain on resources (draft picks) needed to watch our D go to a B-. So basically a 2-4 makes no sense whatsoever for us at this time. Until we can get an Offense that is an A to withstand the Defensive transition, it should not happen.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
by Scott E on Jan 13, 2010 2:28 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I'm intrigued by the 2-4 you mentioned
An innovative new scheme from Hogs Haven.
I agree that we’d need some major personnel changes to make the 3-4 work right away. We’d need to find some big linebackers. Orakpo would need to improve in coverage—I thought he got better as the year went on—but I agree he could be nasty in a 3-4. I have no idea where Carter would fit in. I can’t imagine him working as a linebacker, nor as a true tackle (it sounds to me like the ‘ends’ in a 3-4 need to take on more tackle-like responsibilities.)
Whatever scheme we go with, I’m looking forward to a more attacking style of defense. It’ll help to have some more ‘catching’ style defensive backs as well.
actually it would probably disguise Orakpo's coverage problems.
Guys like Merriman rush about 85% of the time they are in there. Still think he would be better as a DE but he would be better as a 3-4 OLB than a 4-3 OLB.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 3:04 PM EST up reply actions
Well...it is the truth
So basically a 2-4 makes no sense whatsoever for us at this time.
I dare anyone to a debate on the issue. :)
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
First off
thanks for taking the time to post this explanation, along with the graph.
Secondly, I agree completely. Barring some FA and draft moves, the defense we have now is NOT one for the 3-4. The argument about Fletch alone should give anyone enough pause. As good as he is, he will NOT be able to handle a lineman that comes up the field to make the block for the RB.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Good point Rekka
Also, the argument that we would create more sacks goes out the window as soon as the O realizes we are totally vulnerable to the inside running game. If we pinch the middle with our OLBs (Orakpo) not only do we lose the advantage of pressuring the QB, but we also make us more vulnerable to the outside run and passing game due to lack of presence on the outside.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
we were 8th in sacks and things could be better next year when Sacpo is in his second year
pass rush wasn’t a problem this year. Coverage and tackling from the secondary were.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 2:37 PM EST up reply actions
I didn't notice any
coverage or tackling in the secondary last year, so it was kinda hard to judge their effectiveness. :)
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Well written
I don’t think either system is better than the other. You can be succesfull in either they just require dramatically different linemen and linebackers. If we had to completely overhaul a Defense I don’t care which system we use. I just don’t see the need to overhaul the defense. I think there are some mistaken assertions though. If Cornelius Griffin and Phillip Daniels were horses they would be glue by now and we shouldn’t expect them to play any role on this team next year regardless of which system. Carter cannot play end in a 3-4. Atleast one of the DE spots in a 3-4 is basically a second DT so if Griff had any game left he would have a spot. We don’t have much DT depth when you consider Alexander, Monty and Golston are all FA’s(though possibly RFA’s). I really think people are getting ahead of themselves saying Orakpo would flourish in a 3-4. I feel he is best with his hand down and isn’t the same type of player as Suggs or Woodley or even Ware. Different skill set. If you judged last season by what he did as a standup rusher there is not much to be excited about IMO. I’m not sure where Rocky fits in a 3-4 and am super skeptical Carter or Fletch could play in a 3-4. Haynesworth could play DE like BJ Raji did for GB this year. Jarmon is the only guy on the team I can see doing as well in either system. Moving to 3-4 would be like the Al Saunders signing or other ill fated “Shiny toy” football decisions Snyderatto pulled IMO. We should fix the back 4, get a starting caliber OLB and DT and some CB depth and a run stuffing end to replace daniels in case Jarmon’s knee isn’t ready by the start of next year. If we are more aggressive and let Orakpo move down to DE we can see a much better defense IMO. If we were gonna expend alot of resources on D this year I’d rather do it at CB and FS.
No 3-4
I votye to stay with the 4-3 for a lot of the reasons you pointed out. It seems to me its usually the alignee that makes a defense good not the alignment.
Recommend! Excellent post: Does it really matter?
The Redskins IMO should remain a base 4-3 defense but with the defensive setups today the base is nothing more than that a base defense so the team can show what it’s depth chart is and where…the better coaches select plays to the players strengths instead of systems over the players. Blache relied on a solid system; Williams before him had various systems which he played depending on the situation and the players he had avaialble.
Look at NO they run a base 4-3 defense, Gregg Williams
How did they play against Buffalo this year…a hybrid 3-4 based on what he thought was the best defense to use against the Bills…Williams stated he has a defensive scheme where the has no LB a 4-7…the package does not matter what matter is putting the players in the position to be succesful.
Keeping the Redskins a 4-3 defense with many modification is the best choice, IMO
Recommening/clicking "Rec" absolutely does matter
Among all the SB Nation sites, the ones w/ the most Recs bubble up to the SB Nation brass for homepage consideration.
"It was one of those things where everyone in the building was suddenly excited again," Cerrato said. "And all the women in the building were the most excited. They couldn't believe we were getting the guy from "Dancing With the Stars."
by Kevin Ewoldt on Jan 13, 2010 2:54 PM EST up reply actions
Bad wording-Two seperate thought
Two statements condensed:
Recommend! Excellent Post: Action completed by Recommending the post.
Does it really matter? Title of post on the comment for 3-4 defense or 4-3 defense.
Yes Yes Yes
I love these type of things that GW does.
You can rush effectively with 4 down linemen
does anyone remember what Spags did with the Giants stockpiling DE’s and moving them inside to DT on pass plays?
3-4
On Redskins Insider…their poll has most fans WANTING the 3-4. The big highlight from that post is that Haynesworth was used in a 3-4 in Tennessee.
If London Fletcher can take on Brandon Jacobs, I don’t think he’ll have a problem shaking off lineman….he’s great at getting to the ball.
After all, it all comes down to what defense Dan Snyder wants out there.
"It was one of those things where everyone in the building was suddenly excited again," Cerrato said. "And all the women in the building were the most excited. They couldn't believe we were getting the guy from "Dancing With the Stars."
I think alot of the people on RI and some here
are basically mini Snyders. 3-4 is hot right now so of course the Skins have to go out and get it. London Fletcher might be able to do it if they gat another huge ILB. Often in a 3-4 the TED lb acts as like a fullback taking on blocks allowing the other ILB to go sideline to sideline.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 3:00 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
ooooh
low blow
I think alot of the people on RI and some here
are basically mini Snyders.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
wasn't meant to be insulting to anyone
just saying we exhibit alot of the same behavior sometimes.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 3:09 PM EST up reply actions
I think he was talking about Ken/Sugar
"It was one of those things where everyone in the building was suddenly excited again," Cerrato said. "And all the women in the building were the most excited. They couldn't believe we were getting the guy from "Dancing With the Stars."
by Kevin Ewoldt on Jan 13, 2010 3:11 PM EST up reply actions
hahahaah
no def. not talking about anyone in particular. I just don’t feel any more comfortable with RI making the decisions than I would with Snyder.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 3:12 PM EST up reply actions
I believe
there is something fundamentally correct in your assessment.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
I agree with him as well
but still, being called a mini snyder when he’s already being compared to napolean? I imagine it would sting a little.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Very Accurate statement
High priced Free agents
Throwing the Kitchen Sink at hot players
QB play, looking for a better option than Campbell right now—>Snyder tried that last summer
are basically mini Snyders.
But even the RI post says that
the 3-4 was just a situational package and Haynesworth was NOT the nose tackle, he was one of the ends.
yeah Reid def. sold it as an easier conversion than I see it.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 4:04 PM EST up reply actions
Reid is lazy, not very insightful
But better than La Canfora, IMO. I agree about RI readership, though.
I mentioned in another post
that if need be one of the front 4 lineman, like Alexander or even a Golston, can back-off the line into very short coverage when we either get fooled from thinking it was a run or to fool the offense at times. GW did and still does this with the Saints at times and I love it.
Kinda seems foolish I know but it worked brillaintly at times when he was here.
In a Pittsburg game
About 7 players were standing up a few yards behind the usual position for the hands on the ground defensive players. They would fake various ones moving to three point stances and the opposing quarterback or the center didn’t know what to do (audible) or blocking assignments. The opponent ended up calling time out. It was hard to say what the defense was eventually – 3-4 or 4-3. A guessing game was going on.
by Jefferson1935 on Jan 13, 2010 7:22 PM EST up reply actions
3-4 notes to consider
I’ve been doing some digging on the 3-4 and here are some tidbits I’ve found:
“The nose tackle and the inside linebackers, those are three guys that are very important. But when you go through it, the nose tackle is probably the single-most important guy." —Joe Collier, Denver Broncos assistant (1969-1988), architect of the "Orange Crush Defense”"
“The 3-4 nose tackle is considered the most physically demanding position in football.”
“The ideal nose tackle has to be much bigger than 4-3 DTs, weighing around 330 pounds or more. Ted Washington is considered the prototypical nose tackle of this era. "In his prime, Ted Washington was the ideal guy," says an AFC pro personnel director. "He was huge, had long arms, and you couldn’t budge him. He could hold off a 320-pound lineman with one hand and make the tackle with the other."6 Since most college teams run a 4-3 defense, most college DTs are more of a 4-3 tackle than a true nose tackle, which makes good 3-4 NTs hard to find.”
Too bad we don’t have a NT. Problem #1 and it’s a major problem – a real show stopper.
“I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3-4. " —Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3-4 defenses with the New England Patriots.”
Fletcher is awesome and I like McIntosh but after that were very thin. Problem #2.
“Linemen in 3-4 schemes tend to be larger than their 4-3 counterparts to take up more space and guard more territory along the defensive front.”
Well that rules out all of our defensive linemen except Haynesworth.
I’ve read articles that say Orakpo and Carter would be the OLBs and that’s a problem because 1 of the OLBs is going to have coverage responsibilities and neither has demonstrated any ability to do so. Problem # 3 and it’s significant.
Now we can’t forget that landry needs to move back to strong safety so we still need a FS regardless of what defense we run.
I can see it all now, we draft Berry the FS with the 4th pick, burn another pick to get a NT, then use another pick to get an OLB that can cover…great except our OL is even worse than last year. Is VC still here? Didn’t he get fired?
awesome job
pulling these quotes together.
Daniels, Alexander and Jarmon could all fit the 3-4 lineman mold, and I would be reasonably comfortable with Alexander and Jarmon as our starters down the line if we did go that route, but the lack of quality LBs is the real sticking point.
After everything Shanahan has said about making decisions about scheme the right way, I’m finding it harder and harder to believe that we would actually implement the 34, at least for next year.
We gotta remember also that no one with any authority or insider knowledge has said this, its all media speculation.
lack of a true NY is important
I’d much rather see Haynesworth at DE. If we can’t pick up a true NT in FA then I see this as a very poor move.
I talked to my friend who is a die hard Steelers fan and asked him about Casey Hampton and his opinion was that he’s at the age where he’s slowed down and now he’s also having weight problems. Who was the last Steeler cast away we signed….ARE? That makes me mucg less enthusiastic about Hampton.
on a related note
How should we counter the 3-4 defense?
here’s what 1 source (http://www.milehighreport.com/2008/5/7/481970/mhr-university-modern-3-4) claimed:
“OK, the 3-4 systems sound cool. How are they stopped? There are many traits shared by the systems that make them vulnerable. Of course a coach makes adjustments based on personnel and film, but here are the common, over arching approaches offenses take.
Two TE sets – the 3-4 killer. Take out the FB and add a second TE. The common outside blitzes by the Phillips and the Lebeau are rendered less effective. This is the most common approach, and great blockers like DEN TE Graham are perfect for this.
Run the ball, run it up the middle, and run it with power.
Skip the sceens and use both the FB and HB as pass blockers. Vary the TE frequently between pass blocking and receiving (throw some confusion back at the 3-4). Keep passes up the sideline, where you don’t burn the clock so much, and where the zones are less frequent."
2 TE sets and power running? Sign me up!
We're already there
with the addition of an O-line.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
The Cowboys destroyed the Eagles Blitz happy scheme
with a power running game. Get back to the hogs, and force 8-9 in the box to stop our run.
If I only had an example of this
A team running a 3-4 Defense and allowing an offense to run the ball effectively up the middle. Damn, why is that so familar…I’m not talking about the dregs of the NFL, I’m talking top flight with top flight players.
New England: 3-4 with Vince Wilfork at NT
234 yards rushing by Baltimore and the beat down of New England last weekend. Running the ball up the middle.
One slight nit
You open up by saying that only 2 teams regularly play 4-3 (Chicago and Skins). Then make the claim that 4 out of 5 of the top rush defenses were of the 3-4 variety. Well, statistically, the best the 4-3 could do would be 2 out of 5 in any category you care to measure. So doesn’t really mean that much.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
He said
only 2 teams have never run the 3-4 as their base defense. That doesn’t mean that WAS and CHI are the only teams running a 4-3.
You nit my nit?
How darest thou. But I bet the statistics are only slightly different with a surplus of teams running 3-4.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
The 3-4 is not the majority defense
you just think that so many teams are running it because its the fashion right now to talk about it. I read an article on ESPN a while back after Green Bay made the switch talking about how the NFL had reached its 3-4 “carrying capacity” (a good Malthusian term for you) because of the limited availability of the special types of defenders the 3-4 requires.
When you consider that the upper limit is being reached in
player availability for a 3-4 Malthusian system and that our teams’ Maslowian Hierarchy of Needs points in exactly the opposite direction – to the pool of offensive linemen, it is amazing that we are even having this discussion about transitioning to a 3-4.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Exactly.
Its silly, to tell you the truth. We all know what Malthus says will happen to a closed population (i.e the NFL) when we exceed carrying capacity!
And any plan worth a damn
will point to our personnel needs using a simple hierarchy of needs. Comparison of our offensive needs at O-lineman vs 3-4 linemen in a system that has reached its capacity is essentially a null set.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Only
because cowshit appears to be very high up in their hierarchy of needs, despite an extended carrying capacity.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
I'm sorry
I just made myself laugh with that one. :)
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
those don't count ScottE
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Ahhh mannn...
No HHLOD recs for Scott E today? Damn!
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
That's low, dr
I’m suspecting you are a Notre Dame fan. And I resent the comparison to LJP’s modus operandi! I’ll take the hit for an honest misinterpretation, though.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Penn State!
Notre Dame sucks
the sock does fit LJP
it normally does not fit you…great posts and comments
We Own, Penn State!! oh wait
not so much anymore….:)
Actually, State College and environs is a great place to be during football season. Have seen many games with JoePa on the sidelines over the years.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
I have spent 3 years watching the Niners try to transition to a 3-4
and they have spent a ton of FA money and draft picks doing so and still aren’t there. Maybe that biases me a little. I think either system can be succesful and have nothing against the 3-4 but it is a rough transistion and shouldn’t be undertaken if you don’t have to blow up the front 7 anyways.
NO it doesn't bias you
You are exactly right. I’ve taken notice to this also. I’ve said that it is a 3 year transition, maybe I should have included the words"at least."
I can’t imagine the amount of picks it will take to get the 3-4 inplace for us. Haslett will be long gone before he gets it right.
the SF defense has improved
this year they had the following placings:
Pts Allowed 4
Yards Allowed 15
Yards per Play 7
1st Downs 6
Rush TDs Allowed 15
Pass TDs Allowed 2
Not bad but how could you be terrible on defense with Singletary as the coach. He’s probably clobber them personally if they were awful. :P
Points allowed vs Yards Allowed
smells of bend but don’t break. UGGHH!!.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Also
compare their Rushing TDs to ours this year. Please someone?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
also their offense could run the ball meaning they weren't on the field as much
Their defense isn’t that great if you see them every weekend like I do. They’re numbers are inflated by playing the Rams and Seahawks twice. They still need pass rushing OLB’s. It has been a constant search to find a LB who can take on all the blocks for Willis(Best ILB in the NFL IMHO). Finding a NT took a long time. They don’t suck but after throwing mega contracts(J. Smith, Clements) and using lots of early picks they are still transistioning and not all that great of a D. I mean Nolan started converting like 4 years ago.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 4:10 PM EST up reply actions
they were rated 15th
that’s not the same as giving up 15 TDs. Technically they were tied for 14th/15th & 16th as Bengals and Jaguars also gave up 12 rushing TDs.
First, I have to say that I am not happy with the Haslett signing.
Once Zimmer was gone, I wish Shanahan would have at least interviewed Perry Fewell for the job. It sounds like Haslett was a done deal from the get.
I cannot see how this team can go 3-4, we just don’t have the personnel.
We have no true NT, Carter can’t play OLB, Orakpo shouldn’t either. Fletcher will get creamed in the middle, and he is our team leader out there. We have no FS to trust for all the blitz packages we would be running. It would be a disaster, I think, to attempt a 3-4. I don’t even see how we can effectively run a hybrid 4-3,3-4 for fear of confusion and missed assignments.
UGHH!! This seems like a Mark Brunnel, Jim Zorn moment!
again
Jay Ratliff wasn’t a “true nosetackle.” That’s why Parcells got Jason Ferguson to begin with. I’m not saying that we should definitely make the switch, but I do believe our better players can make the transition. Orakpo can be every bit as good as DeMarcus Ware, and Ray Lewis isn’t much bigger than Fletch, and he seems to do OK in the 3-4.
Ray has been playing at
260-265 lbs this year and last after playing most of his career around 255. Fletch is listed at 245 which seems more than I can believe. But even Lewis has stated that the extra 10lbs was significant in his ability to play the run. Just some info.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Ray Lewis is a football god.
I like Fletch, but Lewis is an Animal made for 3-4. Fletch is more cerebral, he is the general out there getting everyone in place. I think he would be lost out there in a 3-4.
The only guy on the roster who could potentially play NT is Montgomery.
If we could sign Casey Hampton, and a Ryan Clark or Darren Sharper, then maybe.
Shanahan has to be thinking longer term. Stay with the 4-3 this year, then when we replace Fletcher, Carter, Griffen, we can then transform into a 3-4.
Like I say
the further in the future we go without going to the 3-4, the better. Once we fix the O I guess I could suffer the transition, which seems a pointless thing to do at best.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
agree on Fletcher
but Lewis has 950 lbs of linemen in front of him (Gregg, Edwards, Ngata) and at best, with Haynesworth, Alexander and Jarmon on the DL, Fletcher would have 898. I’m sure Haynesworth could hold his own but Jarmon is pretty light to play 3-4 DL. Or do we shuffle him off to the sidelines?
Plus we don’t have an OLB who can cover.
I think Jarmon
is around 280-290, and I remember them saying last year that he is gonna put on more weight.
As for a coverage OLB, we only need one. I don’t know if Wilson can cover, because they refused to keep him there. But Rocky could do it if we played him there, or we could sign a FA. Rak would be rushing the passer 95% of the time.
I wouldn't mind
us running a hybrid 3-4 scheme. Obviously we’re not set up for it completely yet. But doing what Parcells did in Dallas, which was to flip between it and the 3-4 would be OK with me. I think all the best defenses are running it, and it you can cause the most havoc out of it. As for our personnel, yes we would definitely need depth at LB. But I think Jarmon would be a good 3-4 end, and Wilson and Rak could make good OLB’s in the defense. Obviously I would be most excited about Rak being mentioned with guys like DeMarcus Ware, Terrell Suggs, James Harrison, Shawne Merriman.
FYI there are variations on the 3-4
not every 3-4 scheme is a 2 gap scheme, sometimes it’s a 1 gap.
Packer fan here
Hey guys, perhaps I can add a little to convince you one way or another. As previously indicated, the 3-4 will only work if you have the right personnel. The same applies for the 4-3. Although it has been hot lately, I must warn you, teams have been picking up on it. Pittsburgh and Arizona did an excellent job dissecting our D by spreading the field. I do recall scouts saying Brian Orakpo is the prototypical 3-4 OLB, so that works in your favor. As for the rest, well, that’s up to the coaches to decide. I disagree that one scheme works better than another for stopping the run. Green Bay is the perfect example. Last year in the 4-3, I believe they were ranked around #26 in stopping the run. This year in the first year in the 3-4 they ranked #1 in stopping the run. What GB has though, are a lot of big guys in the trenches and small speedy LB’s.
Personally, I’d like to see Orakpo in the 3-4. I know people are divided over Haynesworth being a NT. The truth is, you never know how they’ll turn out. I thought Ryan Pickett would be an awful NT, but he turned out to be really good. Last year DT Johnny Jolly was awful, in the 3-4 as a DE, he turned out pretty good. They are both Free Agents after this season, so I’m hoping we resign them.
Good luck Redskin fans. I hope my input helped a little.
Go Pack!
thanks
and interesting comments.
I’m not totally opposed to the 3-4 defense, just making the transition now when the OL is shot and we have other needs on offense. With Aaron Rodgers at QB you guys are set at QB and with the #3 scoring offense this year you can afford to spend a lot of effort (FA signings & draft picks) on defense but we really need to fix other areas.
Ha
We don’t go after Free Agents. When we do, it’s a shocker and is almost never a good player. The only one I can really think of is Charles Woodson. Obviously that was a huge signing for us, but he’s the only one. Green Bay builds through the draft and only through the draft. I wish they were a little more active in Free Agency.
Go Pack!
Thanks Packer fan, having a meltdown here.
Haynesworth will never go for NT. He’ll gain another 30 lbs and slug through the game.
We are paying him $100m to make plays, put him somewhere to be a playmaker, not NT.
You struggled the year before alot cuz you traded that guy to Cleveland and had no replacement
adding a potential DROY in Matthews and a stud like Raji in the first round also helped.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 4:14 PM EST up reply actions
That was Corey Williams
Yes, he was a major reason, but I think our D ranked around the late teens when we had him. Nothing special. He is a good name to bring up though. He is a very good 4-3 DT, but he has struggled mightily in his transition to a 3-4 DE.
Go Pack!
no, he's shorter
by 2" and only 10 lbs lighter.
In fairness to the 3-4
the top 7 teams in terms of points allowed, which is the ultimate stat for a defense IMO, all ran the 3-4 defense.
The top 1/2 of the league in terms of points allowed was:
New York Jets, 3-4
Dallas Cowboys, 3-4
Baltimore Ravens, 3-4
San Francisco 49ers, 3-4
New England Patriots, 3-4
Cincinnati Bengals, 3-4
Green Bay Packers, 3-4
Indianapolis Colts, 4-3
Carolina Panthers, 4-3
Minnesota Vikings, 4-3
San Diego Chargers, 3-4 (I think, not sure)
Denver Broncos, 3-4
Pittsburgh Steelers, 3-4
Atlanta Falcons, 4-3
I’m not opposed to the 3-4 because I think it doesn’t work. I’m opposed to making massive changes to the 1 thing that seems to be working on the team. We can’t possibly fix the OL, pick up a FS, and rework the defense all at once.
I agree
“I’m not opposed to the 3-4 because I think it doesn’t work. I’m opposed to making massive changes to the 1 thing that seems to be working on the team. We can’t possibly fix the OL, pick up a FS, and rework the defense all at once.”
very well put.
by BrandonLloyd on Jan 13, 2010 4:03 PM EST up reply actions
Chargers do run the 3-4.
It comes down to personnel, The NT is such a crucial position, those teams have good ones.
In this years draft, there are only a few good ones; Dan Williams-top 20, Terrance cody-top25, Phil Taylor-3rd round, and as a late round reach Cam Thomas.
College teams rarely run the 3-4. Not sure where these teams are going to get their next NT.
haha
you just thought about the ex gf again
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
That cloying insidious little bitch!
And quite the hottie, I might add.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
weak, very weak
so that only leaves the top #1, 2, 3, 4, 5 defenses as 3-4 defense while the best 4-3 defense rolls in at 6, the Bengals.
yes so where are yours?
so the details, which you over looked, are that the top 5 defenses are all 3-4 defenses.
I can think of a couple of counter points myself but that wasn’t the point in my original post.
Just bustin' your balls man, calm down
There’s also alot more to those stats than meets the eye. Do you really think that SanFran had an elite defense this past year? Or perhaps their stats were inflated a bit by playing St. Louis and Seattle twice. New England was also not an elite defense—look what happened to them against Baltimore and New Orleans. But, New England did get to play the Bills, Miami and NYJ twice, none of which are known for scoring alot of points. There’s just more to it than meets the eye, is all.
agreed the SF defense isn't all that good
but what about the Jets? Granted when you have a CB like Revis who can shout down any WR, your defense can do a lot of things.
To me it’s all about personnel and using a scheme that emphasizes their strengths and hides their weaknesses.
1 advantage that 3-4 proponents claim is that it’s easier to find 3-4 personnel because so few teams run the 3-4 compared to the 4-3. I doubt that is true anymore.
Um, they have the 4th rated defense
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
depends on what you use as a measurement
personally being #1 in points allowed matters most to me as I stated in my reply to this post.
I like the 4-6 defense!
skip the 3-4 and go right for the 4-6!
Can't we agree that either system works
and it’s a matter of the DC and the players in it?
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 14, 2010 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
kinda my point
people equate Blache with all 4-3 when the Eagles run the most aggressive 4-3 pretty much ever. You don’t have to switch systems to get pressure(which is where we excelled this year people forget).
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 14, 2010 2:04 PM EST up reply actions
Exactly
I’m not opposed to the 3-4 because I think it doesn’t work. I’m opposed to making massive changes to the 1 thing that seems to be working on the team. We can’t possibly fix the OL, pick up a FS, and rework the defense all at once.
by ReggieBullits on Jan 13, 2010 4:10 PM EST up reply actions
points allowed is a horrible stat for defense
just cuz alot of 3-4 teams finished near the top this year doesn’t really mean anything.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 4:16 PM EST up reply actions
Well...
Very simply put, the object of the game is to score more points than the opponent, right? I can kind of agree that points allowed isn’t the best gauge of a scheme’s effectiveness, but it’s certainly not a useless stat.
by ReggieBullits on Jan 13, 2010 4:25 PM EST up reply actions
I never said useless
it’s just too simple a stat for a complex analysis. The performance of the Offense plays into it SO MUCH. It should be factored in with lots of other stats. The only stats I go by is the Football Outsiders which takes into account so many other variables and adjusts for strength of schedule.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 13, 2010 4:28 PM EST up reply actions
what info are you using to compare defenses?
your rule of thumb? Talk about a useless stat!
My test ...
Is the totality of the circumstances.
Hey, it worked in law school!
you're are ridiculous
what is the defense out there for then? Humor?
I don't understand you aFan4Life
I explained what stats I used. I explained myself pretty clearly.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 14, 2010 1:58 PM EST up reply actions
Other factors
Most teams need to have balance between offensive and defensive success to keep the score down. The Ravens of a few years back and a few other teams with outstanding defenses haven’t
needed as much offensive help in the passing game, but had good running games (clock eaters).
Just to add to the confusion I added time of possession (TOP) and turnover ratio:
The top 1/2 of the league***************Ave*****Turnover
in terms of points allowed was:********TOP/G**Ratio
New York Jets, 3-4**********************33:02***+1
Dallas Cowboys, 3-4********************39:34***+2
Baltimore Ravens, 3-4*******************32:21**+10
San Francisco 49ers, 3-4****************29:46***+9
New England Patriots, 3-4***************33:05***+6
Cincinnati Bengals, 3-4******************32:28 *0
Green Bay Packers, 3-4****************29:51**+24
Indianapolis Colts, 4-3*******************27:40***+2
Carolina Panthers, 4-3*******************30:12***+6
Minnesota Vikings, 4-3*******************32:51***+6
San Diego Chargers, 3-4 (not sure)*****29:58***+8
Denver Broncos, 3-4********************30:11***+7
Pittsburgh Steelers, 3-4******************32:51***-3
Atlanta Falcons, 4-3*********************29:53***+3
New York Giants,??*********************31:41***-7
New Orleans Saints*********************31:36***+11
by Jefferson1935 on Jan 13, 2010 9:11 PM EST up reply actions
those are good stats to include
but the defense has very little impact on TOP – that’s mostly on the offense. Sure it helps the defense if the offense hangs on to the ball for long drives, in fact that’s 1 reason why I prefer a power running team but the defense doesn’t influence the TOP.
As far as turnover ratio, and it’s not really a ratio, it’s just a simple difference, those vary wildly from year to year so it’s hard to use it as a stat.
I do find it interesting that GB was ranked 7th in points allowed, the defense had a +24 turnover ‘ratio’ and their offense was 3rd in scoring this year but they only won 9 games???
Something is very odd there!
It also helps TOP to have a defense that doesn't allow the other team
to hang onto the ball for long drives, unlike the Greg Blache philosophy.
yes, very true
That’s why I was curious as to what out TOP was.
Personally I hate the bend but don’t break mentality that Blache was going with. If I’m on defense I want to aggressively go after the other guy, not sit back and try to counter whatever he’s doing.
and how did our defense do in those stats?
I’m very curious about our TOP. Where did you get the stats?
With the hiring of Spanos as LB Coach
It appears it’s already been decided. You wouldn’t hire a 3-4 guy to coach 4-3 LBs, right?
RI
Spanos has been with the Steelers for 15 years and earned two Super Bowl rings there. He coached under Jim Haslett for three seasons when Haslett was defensive coordinator there.
I don’t like this at all, for all the reasons that have already been stated.
I think Shanahan is going to tear this team down.
And start from scratch. Identify a few core players, Orakpo, Haynesworth, McIntosh, Landry, Hall, then blow it up and start all over.
On offense……….?? Keep…….???? and start all over.
great- he will be 60 years old starting a 5 year plan. guess what happens when it is all together- assuming he can draft properly? what a cluster…
by les boulez bomber on Jan 13, 2010 7:46 PM EST up reply actions
teams get built quicker than 5 years
look at the Falcons or Dolphins or Jets
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
and then next year
when we have an awful record because we spent a bunch of effort (FA, draft picks) on rebuilding the defense so the OL is still awful and so is the rest of the offense we can do it all over again.
Wait, this IS the VC / Snyder plan! I get it now.
The point is not winning games, much less going to the playoffs or winning a SB, it’s about having fun rebuilding every 1-2 years.
I've criticized Snyder for playing Madden with this team
But now its looking more like Tinker Toys or Pick-up Sticks.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
I think alot of people equate Blatche's flaws with flaws in the 4-3
You can disguise blitzes and be aggressive in either scheme. Jim Johnson was lights out for Philly for years while employing an ultra aggressive 4-3. Just cuz Blatche never adjusted or got creative doesn’t mean you can’t do that stuff in a 4-3. I would have rather gotten an Eagles assistant.
+100
Many teams: Panthers, Vikings, Eagles, Giants (usually) run 4-3 schemes and are very effective.
"I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3-4. " —Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3-4 defenses with the New England Patriots."
That’s a 3-4 coach, not a 4-3 coach trying to justify the 4-3.
There is no inherent superiority of eithher system, it’s all about using the scheme that will work with the players you have. What we have are 4-3 players. It really is that simple.
Great post man. I enjoyed your analysis and think it’s pretty spot on. The only reason to change schemes is if the coach thinks he’ll be able to create the best defense in that system. I’m not sure why they would go 3-4. If they are blowing this team up it’ll be a moot discussion though.
The Beat Box aka skins secondary.
I disagree with a couple of your statements.
Putting Orakpo in that spot, frankly, would be unfair for the rest of the league.
When he came out of college into the draft, most talent evaluators said he would be a good 3-4OLB but is best suited for 4-3 DE. Although, Blache has not used him as a 4-3 DE on every down, so maybe now he has learned to be better in pass protection and run defense
I don’t see Haynesworth as a true nose tackle, given that his best skills are collapsing the pocket as a pass-rusher and disrupting the middle of the field during run plays. He seems like a prototype 4-3 DT to me.
He played 3-4 NT with Tennessee and was put on the All AP defense for the two last years of his contract, not to mention without Haynesworth, Tennessee D is horrible.
And I would think Montgomery would play DE and NT in and out throughout the game.
Orakpo!!! Russel Okung next year!
Tennessee's base defense
is 4-3. he wasn’t playing NT all the time.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
by Rekka on Jan 13, 2010 5:29 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I've only seen him play on the right side of the line with 3 other guys
plus maybe a blitzer or two.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
This isn't true
He played 3-4 NT with Tennessee
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Jan 14, 2010 9:08 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
You are correct
Haynesworth is not a NT, he is a 3-tech DT, and using him at NT is a less than optimal match for his skillset.
Ryan Succop will be the kicker for the AFC in the 2011 Pro Bowl
by PVChiefsfan on Jan 14, 2010 10:36 AM EST up reply actions
This misconception is all Jason Reid's fault
with that misleading article he wrote about the team switching. Journalists are so annoying sometimes, just like the people who believe everything they read without question.
I would erect a temple in my Florida room for you
except I don’t feel comfortable with the word “erect” on this blog.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Awesome, awesome post. Rec’d for sure.
Im not sure what I want to happen with the Skins, but for me the best example is Green Bay this year. Their defense was swarming every play and really dominated in basically every aspect of the game. If we could get even close to what they accomplished this year the experiment would be a success. But I do agree that 92 is a better 4-3 DT and that we should just play to our strengths
Fehr is fair, but I like Laich
they gave up 51 points in their first round playoff loss. case closed on GB!
by les boulez bomber on Jan 13, 2010 7:48 PM EST up reply actions
I agree
and with an offense that ranked 3rd in scoring, the defense was 7th in points allowed and had a +24 turnover ‘ratio’ there is something odd going on in GB.
How do you lose 7 games and get immediately booted out of the playoffs with a team like that? Because statistics are not the truth, they’re just a way to try and understand what’s going on. As much as I like using statistics, they must be looked at carefully.
1 game sample size?
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
I agree with both statements
but it does make me think something odd is going on in GB. Sometimes stats are misleading, hence the saying: “lies, damned lies, and statistics”.
I never watch GB games unless they are playing a team I like. While I don’t hate them, I don’t particularly like them either.
I would love to rade QBs with them though!
That's not smart logic
You don’t look at one game to form an analysis.
Take into account for sure. Give it extra weight even. But it doesn’t undermine a season of stats.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
If you were looking purely for a statistical analysis, I'd agree
but this is football, and in the end their season came down to the defense needing to step up and make a couple stops, and they were unable to do it. What good is a #2 defense if it gives up 51 points in the wild-card round?
great defenses
stand up and make a stand when it’s needed and the GB defense collapsed.
I stopped reading here:
If you were looking purely for a statistical analysis, I’d agree
cmon man. Don’t gimmie that ‘clutch, big play ’he’s just a winnner’’ stuff. Their defense had an awful day, but by no means does it mean the had an awful or even bad year.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
Didn't say they did
If we played football on paper, I’d be all for the stats. They did play well all year, but then an opponent exposed them for what they were.
you think that performance is indicitave of their true talent
I think their stats are.
agree to disagree.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
I think their stats this year are misleading
when you have the #3 scoring defense and supposedly an elite defense, how do you only win 9 games? If their team has a weakness it sure isn’t on offense. Maybe it’s special teams, I don’t know.
my bad, they won 11 games
a little under achieving when you have the #3 scoring offense but their offense still isn’t the weakness in their team.
#2 ranked defense
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
an inconsistent #2, as BayArea said
but still, elite.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
just not elite when it counts
and that’s called watching the rest of the playoffs from home, just like us 4-12 team fans.
Ugh.
You can have your miniature sample size and your rhetoric about “winner clutch crunch time go to guy” blah blah
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
Ugh returned
and you can have your “we’re elite but we can’t win a playoff game even though that’s what the whole season is about”. They played the enemic Bears twice and the Lions twice so there’s 4 games where a lot of defenses would look elite. They also played the Browns Seahawks and Buccaneers so 7 games and poor teams – not so impressive.
Research how footballoutsiders does their rankings
it takes opponent into account.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
agreed with smuts
strength of schedule was taken into account and they still got a #2 rating. One game is too small of a smaple size. Just because GB was a great defense doesn’t mean it hurt the “don’t switch to 3-4 argument” Do we wanna use 2 1st rounders on Front 7 players next year like they did?
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 15, 2010 1:03 PM EST up reply actions
I have
I’ve known about the website for quite some time now. I just don’t think statistics ever tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. They had several games where the defense was absolutely horrid. If you take out the Bears, Lions, Buccaneers and seahawks game they averaged giving up 38 points a game.
The insiders stats don’t adjust enough for poor teams.
the outsiders you mean?
Also aren’t you the same guy trumpeting the super flawed points given up stat?
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 15, 2010 3:19 PM EST up reply actions
Many people
focused on Whisenhunt’s superb O-plan for the game and that it was completely different from the vanilla set they ran the week before when they lost to GB.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Wisenhunt was very tricky
I think it was smart of him to sandbag the first game and then pull all the stops out in the 2nd game. Why tip your hand the first game?
GB had the 2nd highest variance according to Football Outsiders
which means there Defense was the second most inconsistent. Some of that might have been schedule and growing pains but they were up and down all year.
by BayAreaBullet on Jan 14, 2010 2:08 PM EST up reply actions
crazy
"The winner will be showered with praise; the loser will be taunted and booed until my throat is sore!"
this can work
The idea that our depth at DT is a liability rather than asset in a 3-4 seems odd to me. The type of player that typically plays 3-4 DE compared to 4-3 personnel is more like a DT than an end. Haynesworth at NT, Griffin and Golston at end will suffocate the run, leaving Orakpo, who, being a brutal end by nature and now trained up to serve in an OLB position, free to wreak havoc as an ideal 3-4 OLB. In the offseason, focus on conditioning Jeremy Jarmon in the same way, and hopefully Carter can adapt to the position as well. Then while Fletcher is certainly the perfect 4-3 MLB, he’s also just plain great and I think could adapt easily to the new scheme. He and McIntosh fill the middle together. My only real concern is depth at ILB. We have enough 4-3 DTs to make a reliable crew of down linemen, and enough 4-3 DE/OLB flex players that could adapt to 3-4 OLB, we just need one or two guys to come in, or step up, as a reliable backup ILB.
May make sense
but only if we’re really going to commit to it long term. It comes down to the whole deciding what our personnel are suited for rather than trying to force them into something that isn’t right for their skills and talents.
as a fan that has suffered through their less than mediocre performances for the past 18 years, i just have no interest in watching them tread water at best for the next five years putting pieces together with a coach that is 60 years old in his first season and has five years of head coaching left at best. the defense is not the problem. plug the holes, fix the line and lets go out and win some football games. we fans deserve it.
by les boulez bomber on Jan 13, 2010 7:52 PM EST reply actions
Mike Shanahan won't be 60 til Dec. 2011 I think
He only has 5 years of head coaching left at best? Really?
60 years old in his first season is accurate. thanks for confirming. yes, and head coaches are pretty much extinct at 65. are there any in the league right now? i cant think of any off the top of my head. and sure there are exceptions, like joe gibbs and bill parcells. neither of them coached straight through from 60-65 without retiring (and in bills case having a heart attack or two). that job is at least an 18 hour per day job. this isnt college. so u might pull out some extreme exception but the odds overwhelmingly favor he is gone five years from now. its a 3-5 year plan at best. what i am saying is after 18 years of crap, i m not interested in waiting for unnecessary changes because a coach can only win his way. i will check back when they have a ready product and see what they look like. trust me, i will know if they get better before that. i cant sit through more planned years of mediocrity. i have better things to do with my life and money. only my immediate family gets unconditional love. lol hopefully, we are jumping the gun and hypothesizing over nothing. but yeah, overhauling the only good aspect of the team with the roster limitations that exist in the face of an overwhelming need to address other areas is just plain stupid.
by les boulez bomber on Jan 14, 2010 7:06 AM EST up reply actions
3-4
I think the 3-4 is a stupid fad. Last thing the Skins need. Shanahan also doesn’t know shit about defense so why would he trust him overhauling our defense. Also Orakpo would not be a great OLB in 3-4, he can’t cover or run stop for shit. He’s purely a hand in the ground pass rusher and he only makes plays by beating tackles he does not have an overall skill set. He’s one dimensional, rush the passer, leave his hand in the ground and let him do that.
stats disagree with you
I think the 3-4 is a stupid fad.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
3-4 has ben around since the 1940s
and it’s been used in the NFL for decades.
Disguised as the Fun 'N Gun!!
…or maybe not. :)
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Fuck the 3-4
The only way this abomination, this sorry excuse of a system works is if you have all of the following: tweener OLBs, huge MLBs that can fend of OGs to make plays, fat ass defensive linemen that can’t rush the passer and can only occupy blockers, cover 2 safties, zone coverage corners, and a general lack of talent that needs to be hidden. We have none of these. I repeat: NONE OF THESE. The only two players that this maybe possibly could work for is Osackpo and Mcintosh but no one else. I repeat: NO ONE ELSE ON OUR TEAM FITS THE 3-4 DEFENSE. God bless Fletcher and everything he can do, but he cannot fend off OGs all game long. Carter is not a LB, and Osackpo should be playing DE, so we have 2 great pass rushing DEs. WHAT SYSTEM COULD POSSIBLY NEED 2 GREAT PASS RUSHING DEs? OH YEAH THE 4-3. We have 4 strong safeties on our team and no free safties. Yeah yeah yeah doughty and horton haul ass all the time but they just don’t have the ability to cover in a cover 2 defense the 3-4 mainly uses. and don’t get me started on landry potentially playing in a 3-4…HE CANT COVER PLAY HIM CLOSE TO THE LINE IN A 4-3 AS A SS WITH A FS THAT CAN COVER DEEP LIKE IDK…ERIC BERRY MAYBE Everyone knows our corners our man to man press coverage guys. Remember when deangelo hall played bump coverage on steve smith in the carolina game and shut him down? Our retarded defensive coaches didn’t realize that every single one of our top corners (Hall, Smoot, Rogers) are man to man guys that are at their worst when they start 15 yards off the line and back up or play zone coverage. DOES THAT SOUND LIKE 3-4 CORNERS TO YOU??? I DONT THINK SO. Oh yeah and the only fat guy we have is Albert Haynesworth WHO JUST SO HAPPENS TO BE THE BEST PASS RUSHING DT IN THE NFL NOT SOME FAT STOP GAP WHO RETARDED BLATCHE THOUGHT HE WAS. Again doesn’t sound like 3-4 personnel to me. Oh yeah and unfortunately we have an immense amount of talent on the defensive side of the ball that doesn’t need to be hidden, so I guess we are just going to not have to be retarded like Blatche and actually play them in a moderate blitzing 4-3 system with man to man coverage with a FS patrolling deep in center field and a SS prowling as the 8th man in the box. The only thing really missing for us to have the perfect Defense right now is a center field FS (Eric Berry anyone?), starting OLB to replace Osackpo so he moves to DE permenently (Chris Wilson might be able to step up, or just simply sign a decent one in FA), and some CB depth and a replacement for Rogers (I think we should let him walk in FA he can’t get an INT to save his life, actually if that were true he would’ve been dead for years now, so nevemind how about he cant get INT to save his job). The only requirement we might possibly maybe consieveably fit is the tweener OLB which is a huge stretch because Osackpo weighs 10 pounds more than Carter who is only a slightly undersized prototype 4-3 DE and Mcintosh is your prototypical large tack machine 4-3 OLB, not the speedy rusher 3-4 type. In conclusion the 3-4 doesn’t fit us at all and if we switched our defense would immediately become our weakness and suck huge elephant testicles, and we are one impact starter (FS), two adequate starters (OLB & CB), and a little depth (CB & LB) away from having the perfect defense if the coaches, unlike dumbass blatche, use our personnel in the right way. Fuck the 3-4.
by Area 51 Forever on Jan 14, 2010 7:52 PM EST reply actions
Well said!
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” Keep the 4-3 and make improvements (where needed) in the secondary to turn our slightly above mediocre defense into a great defense. Someone needs to make sure Uncle Dan doesn’t take advantage of the (possible) uncapped season ahead of us, by trying to “buy” a winning franchise. That doesn’t work! (See last 10 years). Sorry for digressing. Going to a 3-4 with the personnel we have now will not work. It will be a huge waste of talent, time and money. It will also turn us into one of the mediocre or below mediocre defenses within the league. Good post Area 51.
you need some paragraph returns man.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
Defense
I don’t think our defense needs much in the way of players; what we need – and probably now have – is a good coach. Shanahan should concentrate on the offense.
this is how it would stack up
it would be griffin or haynesworth at de…the other at nt and golston or jarmon at de…phillips will not be back … they probably will move carter to olb like they did before he came to washington at his old team..(which is why he left) or they could put carter inside lb will be fletcher and perhaps mchintosh if he stays if not h.b blades can fill in..albeit to small ilbs’ are not the way to go in a 4lb set..i’d like to see smoot move to fs if we keep him so landry can play is pre sean taylor possition at ss. and hall and rogers at cb..off the subject i hope was picks the beast available OT in the draft..but if they do not and go after the best player available..please pick eric berry FS out of tennessee..i know we have worse needs but we do not need to draft a qb that is either not going to play for 2yrs or be on his back cus we can’t block for him..at pick 4 we could trade down get a strarting OL and some picks or if we pick a guy..pick one that will be the best player on our team like sean taylor was for 10yrs..fletcher can only lead the defense for so long get eric berry if you don’t get an OL
i think skins should stay with 4-3
should stay 4-3 and move orakpo to de where will be all pro..say goodbye to phillips rotate the de’s with jarmon off the bench and andre carter ..we could start chris wilson at one old or get a free agent….fletch in the middle rocky on the other outside…DRAFT eric berry i know we need the bad ass okla st. OT and ill take him if we are drafting for need..but if we are staying at the 4 position in the draft take the best player available a guy that will in 3yrs be the best fs in the league eric berry ..he is the closest thing to sean taylor that’s come out of the draft and a true fs we could have him or put smoot at fs hall and rogers at cb and landry back to his natural SS spot..and i HATE to say this but we strongly may consider trading portis..don’t waive him…cus we have to pay is last two yrs off and in an uncapped year it’s like wasting money he’s still 28..but if someone wants him let him go..we also could and i don’t wanna think about it but trade cooley..think about it he’s prolly the most attractive player to other teams we have a muliyear probowler young ..we have a up rising player in davis who could start on alot of teams..he arguably had a the best second half of year of any te in the league..if we can get a second rounder or a starting OL out of him..we might have to entertain it..also get rid of kelly or thomas..we dont’ need em both one has to step up..thomas showd big plays last year and he should run kickoffs deangelo can do pr duty..i’d like to see us get the best avail OL in free agency this year or trade to get em and get eric berry..or a OT in the draft..please no QB if we do get a QB get claussen..68% passer in pro west coast offense ..bradford only operates out of shotgun had shakey arm strength before the surgery..
What if?
What if they draft Berry? Replace “(gulp) LaRon Landry” with “(gulp) Eric Berry,” and you’re talking about two totally different gulps. I would love it if they got him at the 4 spot (even though I would love it even more if they traded down and drafted an o-line with the extra picks). He looks like a classic “best available” draft pick, and the Skins D has lacked an identity (other than “bend don’t break, slog it out, somehow don’t ever cause turnovers”) since Sean Taylor left us. Berry is a safety in a similar mold.
I mean, we all agree that a switch to a 3-4 is not a great idea with the current personnel, but clearly the current personnel, especially the aging D-line, are not going to be around forever anyway. The announced switch to a 3-4 is the first in a series of moves. Any chatter about what kinds of moves will be next? I would love it if this was a precursor to drafting Berry.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Hogs Haven
Related FanShots on Hogs Haven
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
