PDA

View Full Version : Adjust the 4-3 and make it a 5-3-3 or a 5-2-4


GP
09-14-2006, 01:04 PM
Why don't we use a 5-3-3 (for run defense) and a 5-2-4 (for pass defense):


Williams(DE)--Kalu(T)--TJ(G)--Payne(NG)--Weaver(G)--Peek/Babin(T)

This lines up 4 guys (Kalu, TJ, Payne, Weaver, and Peek/Babin) on the other team's T, G, C, G, T leaving Mario to line up at either "end" position and therefore free to just blitz the QB or play contain/pursuit on running plays.

The key is that we line up five downlinemen throughout the entire game, and allow Mario to pressure the backfield on each play--He doesn't have to all-out blitz the QB on every play, he could just make sure he is in pursuit of whoever is getting the ball or if he can see it's bootleg, etc. The idea is make Mario a blitzer & containment man to seal off backside runs and/or pursue the Qb or Rb whichever has the ball. The LBs would be required to play more conservatively, however, and they would have to provide some "insurance" on Mario's side if he gambles and loses.

We would still have either 3 LBs or 2 LBs, depending on whether we wanted a run defense or a pass defense. Run defense, we go: 5-3-3 with five down linemen, 3 LBs, 2 CBs, and 1 S. On pass defense, we go: 5-2-4 with five down linemen, 2 LBs, 2 CBs, and 2 S or or 1 S and an extra CB to cover or free up and blitz at the last second...or play cover and let one of the 2 LBs blitz.

To heck with this idea of us rotating in four guys for our 4-3. Adjust the 4-3 and put four down linemen out there with Mario free to do what he did at NC State: Storm the backfield.

What they are doig with Mario is what Washington did with Lavar: They are KILLING his athleticism and playmaking ability. Mario is a guy who needs to line up far outside and beat a man around the edge. That's what he does best.

real
09-14-2006, 01:08 PM
What exactly is "run defense"??? You mean on first and second ? Or do you mean short yardage ?...a 5-3 Would get us absolutely killed in the passing game...If we came out on 1st down in a 5-3, every QB in the leauge would just audible because at that point even if we changed our defense we wouldn't have the personnel to stop the pass.....And if we went with 2 linebackers..then once the RB gets past the DL, there'd only be 2 linebackers and 4 DB's...I think we would get absolutely taken advantage of..JMO...

AtheGreat
09-14-2006, 01:11 PM
What exactly is "run defense"??? You mean on first and second ? Or do you mean short yardage ?...a 5-3 Would get us absolutely killed in the passing game...If we came out on 1st down in a 5-3, every QB in the leauge would just audible because at that point even if we changed our defense we wouldn't have the personnel to stop the pass...



don't worry, our stellar Safties will save our butts each time. :sarcasm:

real
09-14-2006, 01:14 PM
don't worry, our stellar Safties will save our butts each time. :sarcasm:

ha ha...You mean SAFETY...in his 5-3 we'd only have three DB's....arguably the weakest position on the team....we cant afford to play with one safety when we are barely making it with two...

El Tejano
09-14-2006, 01:16 PM
You talking about Can't Cover Brown?

real
09-14-2006, 01:16 PM
You talking about Can't Cover Brown?

ha ha...i like that...

GP
09-14-2006, 01:23 PM
What exactly is "run defense"??? You mean on first and second ? Or do you mean short yardage ?...a 5-3 Would get us absolutely killed in the passing game...If we came out on 1st down in a 5-3, every QB in the leauge would just audible because at that point even if we changed our defense we wouldn't have the personnel to stop the pass.....And if we went with 2 linebackers..then once the RB gets past the DL, there'd only be 2 linebackers and 4 DB's...I think we would get absolutely taken advantage of..JMO...

There would be no weakness on any down. If we had a 5-3-3 on the field, let Demeco make the call as he reads the offense's pre-snap setup and possible audibling:

(1) Opponent lines up to pass against our 5-3-3? Then adjust our lineup to fall back into man or zone or a zone-read so that we can attack the run if they end up running the ball instead of passing.

(2) On third and long, opponent lines up in a heavy set? Let Demeco make the read and adjust our backfield to move up into the box.

We can be taken advantage of in any formation if our main LB (Demeco) doesn't read & recognize...and thus make the proper adjustment(s).

But I GUARANTEE we will continue to get nowhere if all we do is line up Mario and only three other linemen with him. He's not at a stage where he knows how to shake his man or the double-team yet.

I think we need to configure our front linemen differently to produce a better line-of-scrimmage "stand" than what we have been putting out there.

The game is won or lost at the line, IMO. And until we get two more Demeco's at LB...what else can we do? Just pigeon-hole Mario on the line and watch him get schooled every Sunday?

GP
09-14-2006, 01:30 PM
ha ha...You mean SAFETY...in his 5-3 we'd only have three DB's....arguably the weakest position on the team....we cant afford to play with one safety when we are barely making it with two...

We looked better in our defensive backfield in the preseason when we were harassing the other team's QB...forcing premature throws and thus disrupting WRs' routes, helping our CBs out a lot more than we are when our front linemen cannot pressure the QB and therefore allowing the WRs to run our CBs ragged all over the field.

When we got to Bulger, he was throwing high or low, or short, or long. When he had time, he was beating our CBs because of the time the WRs had to finish their routes and confuse our DBs.

And that's how Philly beat us: Constant pressure that kept everything "short," and therefore their DBs never had to really do much more than go "man" and just set up shop within 5-10 yards of the line of scrimmage: Jam up our WRs, chip them off their route (off the snap) and allow the pass rush to hurry the QB into forcing his throws.

You discount our DBs as an argument to my theory, but it's because they are running all over the field and getting beaten in a position where ANY DB would get beaten in the same circumstance. In today's NFL, all WRs have the talent to lose their man if the QB has enough time to throw.

I'm a big fan of doing to others what has been done to us: Pressure the backfield, whether it's pursuing the RB or the QB, on as many downs as possible. Throw in a wrinkle every now and then to keep them guessing (such as showing blitz, but dropping back into zone). What I just described is classic Steelers: They have Palomalu in the position I want Mario to be in: Line up where he sees a weakness, blitz or fake the blitz, and just generally confuse the offense all game long. We have the talent in Kalu, Weaver, Payne, TJ, and Peek/Babin to do this...and it would increase their productivity in the end, as well.

The second half defense we produced was so much like 2005 it's not even funny: Our linemen get no "push," and our LBs and CBs get crossed up or picked, or mismatched for big plays almost all the second half of the game.

No, the key is to win the line of scrimmage and get into the backfield. Without the threat of getting sacked or dropped for a loss on a run, you allow today's NFL QBs and offenses to run you ragged.

BradK10
09-14-2006, 01:33 PM
Theoretically, it sounds nice, but asking your MLB to make that run/pass call just based on presnap reads is ludicrous.

real
09-14-2006, 01:34 PM
(1) Opponent lines up to pass against our 5-3-3? Then adjust our lineup to fall back into man or zone or a zone-read so that we can attack the run if they end up running the ball instead of passing.

How would you know the opponent is lining up to pass ? If a defense knew evertime whether it would be run or pass we wouldn't be having this convo because no one would be able to score on us anyways...

(2) On third and long, opponent lines up in a heavy set? Let Demeco make the read and adjust our backfield to move up into the box.

Im not sure why someone would line up in a heavy set on third and long...if they were doing that; that would mean they were trying to eat clock because they have the game in hand...and it wouldn't matter at that point anyway...


But I GUARANTEE we will continue to get nowhere if all we do is line up Mario and only three other linemen with him. He's not at a stage where he knows how to shake his man or the double-team yet.

LOL...We aren't going to change our whole defensive philosophy and scheme to try and help Mario develop faster... If everyone changed their scheme for their rookie DE...well it would just be crazy....

I think we need to configure our front linemen differently to produce a better line-of-scrimmage "stand" than what we have been putting out there.

We haven't had a lot of problem with the run, which is why I'm even more puzzled at why you'd want to do this...Our problem is with the pass and this defense puts us at a clear disadvantage...

The game is won or lost at the line, IMO. And until we get two more Demeco's at LB...what else can we do? Just pigeon-hole Mario on the line and watch him get schooled every Sunday?

Thats like saying...my girlfriend left me...so all I can do now is jump off this here bridge...Dude...there are other options..lol...calm down....

real
09-14-2006, 01:37 PM
There are so many different reasons that this wouldn't work My head is spinning...

GP
09-14-2006, 01:46 PM
We wouldn't "know" if it was going to be a run or pass, but you can make pretty good guesses based on the information available.

That's all it is anyways: Calculated risks and guesses based on the best information available. Do you think when our defensive coordinator calls a defensive play, and the QB breaks the huddle as the players approach the line, that we are just sitting on that play and saying, "Well, I hope we picked the right defensive play?"

Surely we're like most other teams who use hand signals (by the LB, usually) and vocal audibles to re-align the players: To shift the linemen, to shift the LBs, to completely switch into a different coverage scheme, etc.?

Are YOu telling all of us that we pick a play and just sit on it? That's a far bigger risk than anything I have said. I don't think defenses line up and say, "This is what we picked, and hopefully the play is just what we knew it would be..."

In my theory, we present a line of scrimmage "stand" that is completely adjustable up until the snap. The 5-3-3 base package on 1st and 2nd downs allows for an extra LB (to help cover the run, which is percentage-wise the safest bet on longer downs) compared to the 5-2-4 which would be the base package for 3rd and long situations.

Heck, isn't it Georgia Tech that uses a weird defense that only has 1 LB and the rest are DBs and down linemen? And they harassed the heck out of Notre Dame.

I saw footage of Mario being put on the very end of the line, almost always standing up before the snap, and getting into the backfield to make the play(s). Calling it "foolish" to re-align our players JUSt for Mario is foolish in-of-itself, IMO, because we drafted a Beast and we're seeing a kitten out there.

No shame in trying to compensate for Mario's learning curve. One day he WILL be able to line up anywhere and dominate. It just won't be anytime this season if they keep this same stuff up that has him getting dominated on almost every play.

BradK10
09-14-2006, 01:54 PM
That was Mississippi St. with Joe Lee Dunn as D-Co that ran a 5-1-5. Two of the DB's were hybrid Safety/LB types that lined up in the flats. Fun defense to watch...

Cjeremy635
09-14-2006, 01:54 PM
I'm sure it was tried on Madden and probably had some success..lol. I know that's how most people on this board base the success or failure of a player in the NFL. It's a shame I don't play video games or I could have gotten the new head coach job. Who knows? A couple of hours ago, I read a post in a thread about how Gado was going to be effective in our backfield because when they plugged him into their Madden game it worked terrifically. Are you SERIOUS????? Not to be disrespectful, but the people making the decisions about how to run the schemes on this team are professionals. This isn't their hobby. It's their career, income, reputation, passion, food/money for their family's that drive them to make the right decisions on how to run this organization the best way that they think they can produce a winning product. So for us "fans" to sit here and argue if so and so even wiped his arse long enough is rediculous. Seriously, it seems like it's coming to that. "No man, he should have used 2-ply and made 6 wipes". "Are you kidding me, I use 6-ply and it works wonders, he has no clue what he's doing in there!" I don't mean to rant guys, but THROW ME A FREAKIN' BONE HERE. :wild:

GP
09-14-2006, 01:54 PM
And BTW,

At least this thread topic involves dialogue and discussion and analysis, rather than "OMG, we traded Morency for Gado? Now...how do we pronounce Gado's name?"

I enjoy reading the responses to my thread on this topic. I agree with some of you that it does put pressure on our DBs, but I also think what we're doing right now is putting just as much pressure on them anyways.

It'd be nice to see Mario and Babin/Peek getting past the line of scrimmage like they were drafted to do. Do we have to stock our defensive backfield with top 10 Dbacks over the next four years to finally get good coverage out of them? I don;t think we have to. I think we can pressure the backfield and let those guys jam the WRs at the line, take gambles of their own a few times throughout the game.

The worst position to be on in this teams' current state-of-being is at DB: They have the worst job of anybody because they are in a no-win situation from the beginning.

BradK10
09-14-2006, 01:57 PM
It would also help if Babin had another pass rush move other than run as fast as he can straight up the field 5 yds past the QB :)

GP
09-14-2006, 02:01 PM
LOL. I think it was Tejano who said he played Madden and someone performed well.

That's not how I analyze. I watch the games on TV, and I don't look at singular performances (as in, how many times a player did x-y-z).

I look at the overall picture, the 100-foot view from the sky. And I see a front line that is getting stonewalled and LBs and DBs who are trying their best to guess where the WRs are going to go. All of it, IMO, is a true recipe for disaster. QBs are smart enough these days to take an extra second and burn the DBs no matter how well-aligned they are, or how talented they are: It;s the nature of the beast in today's NFL: Extra time for a QB = WRs running a DB ragged until they find some open field and sit down for a pass.

We could make other team's QBs look like Carr a lot more of we did to them what they do to us. That's all I am saying. And I don;t think our LBs (other than Demeco) has the talent and gut instincts to provide the rush that we need. That's why we drafted Mario, and they are mis-using him just as NC State mis-used him until they finally figure out to place him far outside and let him pressure the backfield.

Check it: Mario wasn't always sacking the QB in his highlight reels last season. He was in the backfield disrupting running plays, harassing the QB into making bad decisions, and containing trick plays that took a awhile to develop, etc. And IIRC, most of those highlight plays were when he was standing up, on the far outside end, and not inside with a hand on the ground.

You can see it in his eyes: He's not at ALL comfortable with how he's being utilized. Watch his body language after yet another play where he's been mis-aligned and played out of position, resulting in him getting doubled or owned by his man. Those eyes and that body language says, "When will they figure out what my coaches at NC State figured out?"

And until we get some more Demeco's at LB, and until we get some more legitimate linemen than what we have, to compliment Mario (just as Moulds compliments AJ) then the 4-3 as we know it will continue to disappoint.

GP
09-14-2006, 02:03 PM
It would also help if Babin had another pass rush move other than run as fast as he can straight up the field 5 yds past the QB :)

You know what? I see Babin, for the most part, as just about the only player in our defense who is actually the nearest to the QB or runner on plays when he's in there.

I think he's actually doing his part more than he was last year.

That's just me, though.

real
09-14-2006, 02:07 PM
Im sorry...but I think that would be a horrible defense...

I think with your defense you are assuming a lot of things that aren't neccessarily true...

1) more people on the line = more pressure


2) more people on the line= better run defense

neither one of these theories are neccessarily true...

I can understand asking for a more agressive defense..more blitzes and such...but if we ran this defense I GAURANTEE we would loose every game...:twocents:

rmartin65
09-14-2006, 02:09 PM
We would get crushed passing. Just LB blitzes would help the 43

GP
09-14-2006, 02:10 PM
Im sorry...but I think that would be a horrible defense...

I think with your defense you are assuming a lot of things that aren't neccessarily true...

1) more people on the line = more pressure


2) more people on the line= better run defense

neither one of these theories are neccessarily true...

I can understand asking for a more agressive defense..more blitzes and such...but if we ran this defense I GAURANTEE we would loose every game...:twocents:

How is it wrong for us to have Mario doing the blitzing, whereby you have a Db doing the blitzing? That's wasting a DB who ought to be in coverage.

OK, so let's say Mario lines up to blitz (in my defensive theory) and a TE gets motioned and lines up to pick up Mario. Let Mario man-up on the TE and send the DB in on a delayed blitz or something.

There are infinite number of pick-up schemes and strategies.

Cjeremy635
09-14-2006, 02:12 PM
LOL. I think it was Tejano who said he played Madden and someone performed well.

That's not how I analyze. I watch the games on TV, and I don't look at singular performances (as in, how many times a player did x-y-z).

I look at the overall picture, the 100-foot view from the sky. And I see a front line that is getting stonewalled and LBs and DBs who are trying their best to guess where the WRs are going to go. All of it, IMO, is a true recipe for disaster. QBs are smart enough these days to take an extra second and burn the DBs no matter how well-aligned they are, or how talented they are: It;s the nature of the beast in today's NFL: Extra time for a QB = WRs running a DB ragged until they find some open field and sit down for a pass.

We could make other team's QBs look like Carr a lot more of we did to them what they do to us. That's all I am saying. And I don;t think our LBs (other than Demeco) has the talent and gut instincts to provide the rush that we need. That's why we drafted Mario, and they are mis-using him just as NC State mis-used him until they finally figure out to place him far outside and let him pressure the backfield.

Check it: Mario wasn't always sacking the QB in his highlight reels last season. He was in the backfield disrupting running plays, harassing the QB into making bad decisions, and containing trick plays that took a awhile to develop, etc. And IIRC, most of those highlight plays were when he was standing up, on the far outside end, and not inside with a hand on the ground.

You can see it in his eyes: He's not at ALL comfortable with how he's being utilized. Watch his body language after yet another play where he's been mis-aligned and played out of position, resulting in him getting doubled or owned by his man. Those eyes and that body language says, "When will they figure out what my coaches at NC State figured out?"

And until we get some more Demeco's at LB, and until we get some more legitimate linemen than what we have, to compliment Mario (just as Moulds compliments AJ) then the 4-3 as we know it will continue to disappoint.


I agree with you here. He's stated that he feels more comfortable in the DE position. It's where he's played and where he has the most experience at.

AlbinoRat
09-14-2006, 02:16 PM
First thing I found wrong with any of your posts on this thread shaffer, you want a rookie calling plays. enough said lets move on. secondly, if we put five guys or eight on the line it wont matter, those three receivers dont take too long to get open, were talking 4 seconds tops, every play. if anything, put your three best run stoppers on the line and drop 5 dbs back everyplay, doubling two receivers every time. personally, id rather take the risk of being beat on the ground for once instead of through the air for the ninth time against the colts. manning doesnt need much time at all, so odds are, we dont get much pressure this week. i like your style of thinking though, maybe its not best to bring it up right before we play the best passing attack in the nfl.

real
09-14-2006, 02:18 PM
How is it wrong for us to have Mario doing the blitzing, whereby you have a Db doing the blitzing? That's wasting a DB who ought to be in coverage.

OK, so let's say Mario lines up to blitz (in my defensive theory) and a TE gets motioned and lines up to pick up Mario. Let Mario man-up on the TE and send the DB in on a delayed blitz or something.

There are infinite number of pick-up schemes and strategies.

Forget the tight end...If a team came ou in a spread formation or even a three wide reciever set what are you going to do ? Change to tour 5-2-4...That wouldn't help you because you wouldn't have the right personnel on the field...Having your base defense as a 5-3 would not work in the NFL unless you have a safety playing linebacker and a linebacker playing DL....but to have 5 true DL in the game for your base defense will cost you...and I know mario Played some LB in college, but I honestly would not want him covering any TE in the leauge besides bruener and he's on our team....And speaking of that...If we will be forced to put Mario on TE's in your 5-3 whats the point of it anyways ?? I thought the point was to make mario comfortable and to get a rush...your doing the exact opposite of both by having Mario get burned by TE's all day...

real
09-14-2006, 02:23 PM
The only thing you'd accomplish by lining up in a 5-3 is seeing how well the other team can audible...because why would they ever run against it ? I could possibly see it if you had a stand up LB as your 5 dL but that would just be an inverted 4-3...but 5 DL??? they'd just pass all day against our three DB's....

GP
09-14-2006, 03:28 PM
Forget the tight end...If a team came ou in a spread formation or even a three wide reciever set what are you going to do ? Change to tour 5-2-4...That wouldn't help you because you wouldn't have the right personnel on the field...Having your base defense as a 5-3 would not work in the NFL unless you have a safety playing linebacker and a linebacker playing DL....but to have 5 true DL in the game for your base defense will cost you...and I know mario Played some LB in college, but I honestly would not want him covering any TE in the leauge besides bruener and he's on our team....And speaking of that...If we will be forced to put Mario on TE's in your 5-3 whats the point of it anyways ?? I thought the point was to make mario comfortable and to get a rush...your doing the exact opposite of both by having Mario get burned by TE's all day...

Like I said before: I think your line of thinking is that whatever we are showing is what we stick with at the snap. Mario doesn't have to stay "with" the TE, but he can jam him and release to go into the backfield juuuuust enough to throw the TE off his route, disrupt the timing of the Qb, while one of the LBs slides over to truly "cover" the TE once Mario has released and is now coming hard at the QB.

My theory is predicated on the idea that we control the line of scrimmage and force QBs to make hard decisions, decisions such as: Do I go to a 3-step drop and try quick slants? Our answer to that is the LBs and Dbs crowding up and forcing the Qb to thread the needle on every play. That's what Alabama did to Texas Tech...I would think Demeco would be very familiar with this type of philospohy.

And to the person who said "Have a rookie making those audibles/reads? Forget it.." Kubiak and his staff have made it very clear that they DO trust Demeco to come in and play like a veteran, that he IS that qualified. And I think his stats against the Eagles show that assessment to be accurate.

face it, this is a "pick your poison" situation we have right now: Get burned by controlling the line of scrimmage with a wall of linemen, two of which are fast enough to cover TE's (Peek and Babin), or...try the same old four-man rush and a weak DB blitz that hasn't been working with any consistency at all.

I'd rather see us utilize Mario in a position where a team's offense has to put an extra TE to block Mario, rather than see Mario and three down linemen get stood up at the line of scrimmage and the QB freakin' JOGGING around in the pocket all day until he finally finds a guy 20 yds. downfield.

It's a pick your poison deal, IMO. I choose to at least attempt to throw the offense into a bad rhythm. This sort of defense might not work well against Rams and Colts, but against other teams I think it would work well enough to throw them off and get them out of sync.

real
09-14-2006, 03:36 PM
I am sorry..I just don't see this working...If you did run 5 DL out there, It may confuse the offense for a play or two, and I think thats unlikely...But C'mon...this is the NFL not college, or highschool...There is absolutely no way you can put 5 DL on the field as your base defense unless one of them is like a LB....It puts you at a clear disadvantage...If Mario isn't ever going to hold tightends don't you think the offense would pick up on that ? If someone put 5 DL on the field would you run or pass ? that means you are relegating yourself to 3 LB and 3 DB's...two corners presumably and one safety...I can even see the 5-2...not as a base defense...but the 5-2 would be better than a 5-3.....one on one coverage with lewis sanders...C.C being the only safety valve...Teams would have 500 passing yards on us every sunday...

real
09-14-2006, 03:37 PM
And why would putting 5 DL force them to put a TE on Mario ? last time I checked there were 5 OL...so if we don't blitz conceivably they's have everyone blocked...

TheCD
09-14-2006, 03:54 PM
You're idea sounds good in theory...overload the offensive line with too many guys to block and someone's guarunteed to get through. But the problem with that is that if they know we're doing this to get just Mario through, they'd probably do something like have a guard push his man inside and quickly help the tackle defend Mario.

Of course...even if that doesn't work, quick slant patterns can burn a DB easily if executed correctly.


Just out of curiosity, what would you do if the offense came out with 5 WR's?

College Texan
09-14-2006, 03:54 PM
I think we would be better off running a nickle package for most the game, but not the way we've been running it with mario in the middle and Peak and Babin on the outside, but with two run stuffing DT's (Robaire, Payne) Mario as LDE, and a run stuffing end, Weaver on the weak side. And we would keep DeMeco as the Weakside LB and Greenwood on the strong side. The added pass rush will come from the nickle corner (Simmons),a blitzing safety, or if there's a single-back set, a blitzing LB. I also prefer to play D-Rob on the left side at all times. This defense should give us the speed we would need to rush the QB and the size up front to stop the run and let our LB's roam.

real
09-14-2006, 04:18 PM
I think we would be better off running a nickle package for most the game, but not the way we've been running it with mario in the middle and Peak and Babin on the outside, but with two run stuffing DT's (Robaire, Payne) Mario as LDE, and a run stuffing end, Weaver on the weak side. And we would keep DeMeco as the Weakside LB and Greenwood on the strong side. The added pass rush will come from the nickle corner (Simmons),a blitzing safety, or if there's a single-back set, a blitzing LB. I also prefer to play D-Rob on the left side at all times. This defense should give us the speed we would need to rush the QB and the size up front to stop the run and let our LB's roam.

You do know we cut him right?

AlbinoRat
09-14-2006, 04:34 PM
"Just out of curiosity, what would you do if the offense came out with 5 WR's?"

2 Defensive Lineman who drop back and spy on Manning.
4 Starting Defensive Backs.
Nickel Back
Lastly, the 5 fastest guys I find and double team every receiver.

It's a theory, it's probably wrong.

South Texan
09-14-2006, 04:51 PM
And BTW,

At least this thread topic involves dialogue and discussion and analysis, rather than "OMG, we traded Morency for Gado? Now...how do we pronounce Gado's name?"


Well, if he has better stats than Reggie, then you jumble the letters and pronouce it: a God

HJam72
09-14-2006, 05:11 PM
I don't think this is nearly as bad an idea as many of you are saying. We'd get more sacks, but we'd get burned in the passing game more often as well. By the same token, we'd get more tackles for loss, but give up more long running plays. Honestly, I think we'd come out about the same in the end. I remember loving that Buddy Ryan defense, but they had corners that could take on anybody and relish it and safety(s) that would crack a RB's shoulder pads.

GP
09-14-2006, 06:58 PM
I don't think this is nearly as bad an idea as many of you are saying. We'd get more sacks, but we'd get burned in the passing game more often as well. By the same token, we'd get more tackles for loss, but give up more long running plays. Honestly, I think we'd come out about the same in the end. I remember loving that Buddy Ryan defense, but they had corners that could take on anybody and relish it and safety(s) that would crack a RB's shoulder pads.

Did you see McCleon crack Holt and cause him to stay down for a second, and the same with Kevin Curtis, and then he smacked one of their Qbs in the back of the ribs in the preseason?

Our defensive backs were putting licks on guys when the front line was pressuring the QB.

I liked the 46 Defense Buddy Ryan used. I think my idea of a 5-3-3 or 5-2-4 helps the defensive backs to stay fairly "even" with a receiver, especially with the 5-yard bump rule that they are getting against a WR off the snap.

Man, if we cannot jam a WR and at least knock him off his route a little bit, and then at the same time be getting upfield pressure from our linemen...then it doesn't matter what defense format we use, we're going to lose the battle in today's NFL.

I just think Mario is dealing with the pressure of being the top pick, the pressure of learning a new defense, and then having the o line gunning for him every time. The coaches need to do SOMETHING to get him some mismatches. NC State's coaches realized how to best use Mario, and hopefully our coaches will forego the musical chairs philosophy and just line him up outside and turn him loose.

HJam72
09-15-2006, 08:21 AM
I'm up for trying it. I just need to see the proof when and if they ever do.

real
09-15-2006, 08:23 AM
Is this madness still going on...

HJam72
09-15-2006, 08:26 AM
Is this madness still going on...

It's Mario Madness! :shoot: :wacko: :fireball:

Wharton
09-15-2006, 10:45 AM
We use to run a 52 defense back in high school (three down linemen (1 nose guard, 2 tackles), 2 defensive ends, with a Sam & Willie linebackers). Its very similar to a 3-4 with the exception our defensive ends were always on the line of scrimmage (sometimes standing, sometimes down). Usually, outside linebackers in a 3-4 are standing just off the line.

It was great high school ball, which, at the time, was heavily run orientated. The three down linemen and Mike were responsible for runs between the tackles. Defensive ends had contain and blitz responsibility. Willie was a free roamer.

The defense was fairly flexible. We blitzed allot and could move in & out of 4-3 easily.

Don't know how it would work at the professional level.

real
09-15-2006, 11:10 AM
Don't know how it would work at the professional level.

That's the question...I think it can be ran at times(5-3)...but only in certain situations...like 3rd and 2...

dat_boy_yec
09-15-2006, 11:41 AM
Okay, I'm surprised you even considered this idea and the line-up you had would doom this to failure. Kalu at DT? First off when they line up at the line it makes it easier for the o-line to identify who it is they have to block. You make it a one on one situation up front and rely on our D-line to get the job done. First off Kalu is a DE and you would be making a huge mistake putting him at DT. IF and this is a big if you wanted to use this formation you would need to put another DT out there not Kalu. Then if they had a running back back there they have someone to help in case one of our guys does get into the backfield. So if our line can't get there how are you going to apply pressure to the QB. Then how would you deal with the TE they could easily open a whole and get yards in the running game because in a base formation you use a TE as an lead blocker and you have a huge disadvantage. The thing that a five man front takes away from you is the element of manueverability, because you have five linemen you won't be in an optimum position to deal with every situation.

real
09-15-2006, 11:43 AM
Okay, I'm surprised you even considered this idea and the line-up you had would doom this to failure. Kalu at DT? First off when they line up at the line it makes it easier for the o-line to identify who it is they have to block. You make it a one on one situation up front and rely on our D-line to get the job done. First off Kalu is a DE and you would be making a huge mistake putting him at DT. IF and this is a big if you wanted to use this formation you would need to put another DT out there not Kalu. Then if they had a running back back there they have someone to help in case one of our guys does get into the backfield. So if our line can't get there how are you going to apply pressure to the QB. Then how would you deal with the TE they could easily open a whole and get yards in the running game because in a base formation you use a TE as an lead blocker and you have a huge disadvantage. The thing that a five man front takes away from you is the element of manueverability, because you have five linemen you won't be in an optimum position to deal with every situation.


ahhh...the voice of reason...