Vilma And The 3-4: MERGED

[lancemehl]

I really dont understand why you insist on railing against the 3-4. The scheme works, it worked for the Jets, and Tangini will continue to bring in players that better suit the scheme so it works even better in the future. If your argument against the 3-4 is that Vilma wasnt productive enough then I think you need to rethink your football priorities.

We were 24th in the league against the run.Willis NcGahee torched us,Ronnie Brown torched us.It did NOT work.

[#27TheDominator]

I have to agree with Gibbon. Personally, I prefer the 4-3. You can get as much ability to mask coverages out of other systems. That's one of the points of the 4-6, which Baltimore has recently run. Still, to say this D didn't work is going a bit too far. Mangini seems fairly flexible with it, so I'm happy even though I never liked those Parcells/Belly defenses. No matter how good they were.

[Gibbon]

I never said the 3-4 sucks,it sucks for us.Only a handful of teams are suited for it.The pats have Wilfork,the chargers have williams clogging the middle at 350lbs. and playing the role of LT is the best defensive player in the game.

Us plaing the 3-4 is like Michael Vick playing the wco. or Bledsoe running the option,sure the 49ers built a dynasty on the WCO and Nebraska has won national titles with the option,but.........

So if the Jets draft, sign, or develop a NT that you think is better suited for the 3-4 than Robertson then you'll be all for the system????

This was season one. What makes you so sure the Jets wont acquire the very players you say they are missing in the off season?

[lancemehl]

because the 3-4 is the better defense.

not for us.For the Pats with Wilfork,yes,for the chargers with williams and Merrimen,yes.

For us,no.And as exhibit A I submit our 24th overall ranking against the run.

For exhibit B,I submit Ronnie Brown's only decent games were against us where he looked like Jim Brown.Also McGahee running wild.

I could go down the list of running backs who smoked us this year.The 3-4 did NOT work for us,because we don't have the guys.

Maybe I'll be wrong after we use valuable draft picks revamping the defensive personnel.But I thought we just used a #4 and whatever for Vilma who had a monster rookie season.

[Gibbon]

We were 24th in the league against the run.Willis NcGahee torched us,Ronnie Brown torched us.It did NOT work.

Aha, yes we were 24th in the League at the end of the season, but I believe after the first 8 games we were 29th or 30th against the run. So, the defense did improve as the season went along and the players became more comfortable and fluent within the system.

Here's what matters much more than out Defenses rank against the run . . . our record. The Jets won 10 games with the 3-4 and were in every game they lost except 2.

[lancemehl]

So if the Jets draft, sign, or develop a NT that you think is better suited for the 3-4 than Robertson then you'll be all for the system????

This was season one. What makes you so sure the Jets wont acquire the very players you say they are missing in the off season?

I guess,it's a shame that our stud linebacker and our #4 pick who was starting to develop are wasted.

I admit,that I'm not a defensive football coach,but I've not seen enough evidence to suggest that the 3-4 is that much superior that it validates wasting players like that.In fact,the opposite is true.Only 5 teams use it(the steelers are switching this year),the two superbowl teams use 4-3.

and from a fans standpoint,I've always enjoyed watching the 4-3 going back to the sack exchange.

As far as acquiring that NT.I don't know where he is.Outside of Demarcus Tyler I don't see any in the draft.I believe if we stayed in the 4-3 we had a dam good defense.better than 20th overall,24th against the run.

[lancemehl]

Here's what matters much more than out Defenses rank against the run . . . our record. The Jets won 10 games with the 3-4 and were in every game they lost except 2.

right,could you imagine if we'd been able to stop the run.McGahee for example.

[drago]

Aha, yes we were 24th in the League at the end of the season, but I believe after the first 8 games we were 29th or 30th against the run. So, the defense did improve as the season went along and the players became more comfortable and fluent within the system.

Here's what matters much more than out Defenses rank against the run . . . our record. The Jets won 10 games with the 3-4 and were in every game they lost except 2.

Good point.

If you all think the 4-3 is so much better for us, what players are you talking about? Since the 04 run, we lost 2 of the 4 linemen. Who would replace them? VonOlhoffen? And lets not forget Bryan Thomas as a downlinemen, he was just steller.

and Barton is getting up there in age, i wouldn't want to see him on the outside. however, at inside, he was very effective.

Lets face it, we are no more prepared to sit in a 4-3 than a 3-4. At least the 3-4 has a much greater upside

[oktaren]

not for us.For the Pats with Wilfork,yes,for the chargers with williams and Merrimen,yes.

For us,no.And as exhibit A I submit our 24th overall ranking against the run.

For exhibit B,I submit Ronnie Brown's only decent games were against us where he looked like Jim Brown.Also McGahee running wild.

I could go down the list of running backs who smoked us this year.The 3-4 did NOT work for us,because we don't have the guys.

Maybe I'll be wrong after we use valuable draft picks revamping the defensive personnel.But I thought we just used a #4 and whatever for Vilma who had a monster rookie season.

actually i think it is ALWAYS better...i would never run the 4-3 if i had the choice.

as for exhibit a and b...our run defense has not been very good for a while, and most of that was at times when we ran a 4-3. mcgahee has always had huge games against us, it doesn't matter what defense we ran.

as for vilma...we used the 12th pick on him, not the 4th. and he did have a very good rookie season. his second season was not as good and that was in the 4-3. this year he was about the same as last year in my opinion. eithe way, he isn't a great fit for the 3-4 and i would trade him if we could get a good first round pick for him. or how about to the lions for shaun rogers with maybe picks involved? he is a good big dt and supposedly he is on the outs with marinelli.

[lancemehl]

as for vilma...we used the 12th pick on him, not the 4th.

I was talking about D-Rob,that makes a #4 and a #12 pick that are invisible in this defense.

[mangenious420]

I was talking about D-Rob,that makes a #4 and a #12 pick that are invisible in this defense.

Invisible? Your talking about the same Vilma who led us in tackling this year right?

[drago]

as for vilma...we used the 12th pick on him, not the 4th. and he did have a very good rookie season. his second season was not as good and that was in the 4-3. this year he was about the same as last year in my opinion.

His second season he had over 200 tackles and made the pro bowl. I don't know of his take aways or anything, but 200 tackles is not a bad season.

[KSJets]

not for us.For the Pats with Wilfork,yes,for the chargers with williams and Merrimen,yes.

For us,no.And as exhibit A I submit our 24th overall ranking against the run.

For exhibit B,I submit Ronnie Brown's only decent games were against us where he looked like Jim Brown.Also McGahee running wild.

I could go down the list of running backs who smoked us this year.The 3-4 did NOT work for us,because we don't have the guys.

Maybe I'll be wrong after we use valuable draft picks revamping the defensive personnel.But I thought we just used a #4 and whatever for Vilma who had a monster rookie season.

Our D sucked using the 4-3 in recent years except for 2004. We don't have the players for the 3-4? Unfortunately, we don't have the players for a 4-3 either right now.

[KSJets]

the two superbowl teams use 4-3.

Yes they are, but it's the same defense we tried to run when Herm was here and it didn't work either.

[Gibbon]

These are Vilma's stats according to NFL.com:

04

107 total tackles

77 solos

30 assists

2 sacks

3 ints

2 passes defended

0 forced fumbles

05

169 total tackles

124 solos

45 assists

.5 sacks

1 interception

5 passes defended

4 forced fumbles

06

113 total tackles

66 solos

47 assists

0 sacks

1 interception

4 passes defended

1 forced fumble

Everyone seems convinced that the 3-4 prevented Vilma from making the impact plays he made in 05, but the numbers dont support that argument. The only impact number that is appreciably different are forced fumbles and I think you could argue that any player making 169 tackles is going to have more opportunities to force fumbles than one making 113. There is a, of course, a significant difference in the total number of tackles and the solo to assist ration, but this can be attributed to improved team defense.

The bottom line to me is that the 3-4 did not negatively Vilma's performance in a way that hurt the team.

[mangenious420]

New rule for the nation. Don't start bashing Vilma in the 3-4 when he still led the damn team in tackles.

[Jetfan16]

Wow. Just wow.

i'm sorry that you accept missing a wide open sack in a playoff game that directly led to 3 points and turned the whole complexion of the game around in their favor, a game that we had started to take control of, and wouldve been in full control of had he not missed the sack. you're right though, Vilma is the best linebacker in the history of the world.

[mangenious420]

i'm sorry that you accept missing a wide open sack in a playoff game that directly led to 3 points and turned the whole complexion of the game around in their favor, a game that we had started to take control of, and wouldve been in full control of had he not missed the sack. you're right though, Vilma is the best linebacker in the history of the world.

Is he better than atleast half the LB's in this league JetsFan?

[ECURB]

We were 24th in the league against the run.Willis NcGahee torched us,Ronnie Brown torched us.It did NOT work.

Vilma only seems to have done so bad this year becuase of how great he did the year before... its all relative to the last thought in your mind... this year he played about the level he did he rookie year, which would make sense considering its a new system.

04' - 107 Tackles / 2 sacks / 3INTS / 2 Pass Def

05' - 169 Tackles / 0.5 sacks / 0 INTS / 5 Pass Def

06' - 113 Tackles / 0 Sacks / 1 INTS / 4 Pass Def

OK so from 05' to 06' his tackles went down, he didnt get sacks in his pro-bowl year either, he had an INT this season and didnt in his pro-bowl year and his pass Def went down...

So the ONLY thing that he was lacking from his pro-bowl year VS this year was tackles.... and people actually want to get rid of him???

You also forget that our offense when working is made to eat up the clock, in his Pro-Bowl year our defense was out on the field A LOT... and teams were running A LOT... this causes a lot of tackles for short gain and tackles for a loss, hell just a lot of tackles...

This year we actually had an offense and forced other teams to throw a little...

05' and 06' were almost identical years for Vilma IMO, if our D was in the same positions it were in last year (offense just running out the clock, they already won) for most of the year he would have had the extra 50 tackles...

Stop throwing Vilma under the bus, it doesnt make any sense.

[mangenious420]

Stop throwing Vilma under the bus, it doesnt make any sense.

I mean really, your going to throw anyone under the bus at least make it Penny.

[Jetfan16]

Is he better than atleast half the LB's in this league JetsFan?

i dont know, im not some kind of football scout for christ sake. all i know is that guy doesnt make plays, hes invisible. somehow he racks up a ****load of tackles, so i guess that makes him "good", but hes not a playmaker, sorry. id take Bruschi, Colvin, Vrabel over him in a heartbeat, and thats just players from one team in our division. Vilma is alright, but highly overrated. i mean, when you watch other teams play, a lot of them have a linebacker or defender who you just think is going to make a big play or a big hit or something happen at any moment. Vilma on the other hand is just kind of there, making tackles on running backs 6 yards past the line of scrimmage. and i dont think you have to be a football genius to realize if a player is a true playmaker or not, Vilma simply isnt. forget about even watching his games, just look at the stats, the sacks, the picks, the forced fumbles, all non existent.

[lancemehl]

These are Vilma's stats according to NFL.com:

04

107 total tackles

77 solos

30 assists

2 sacks

3 ints

2 passes defended

0 forced fumbles

05

169 total tackles

124 solos

45 assists

.5 sacks

1 interception

5 passes defended

4 forced fumbles

06

113 total tackles

66 solos

47 assists

0 sacks

1 interception

4 passes defended

1 forced fumble

Everyone seems convinced that the 3-4 prevented Vilma from making the impact plays he made in 05, but the numbers dont support that argument. The only impact number that is appreciably different are forced fumbles and I think you could argue that any player making 169 tackles is going to have more opportunities to force fumbles than one making 113. There is a, of course, a significant difference in the total number of tackles and the solo to assist ration, but this can be attributed to improved team defense.

The bottom line to me is that the 3-4 did not negatively Vilma's performance in a way that hurt the team.

you see,now i see something totally different.I see the numbers absolutely supporting the argument.

169 dropped to 113.the number of solos cut in half.

My argument is that the 3-4 does not use our talent efficiently,similar to the wco with michael vick.These numbers show exactly that.Look again at the number of solos.

[lancemehl]

05' and 06' were almost identical years for Vilma IMO, .

First off,these threads were merged.Boom Boom said to trade Vilma.I'm saying we should have gone 4-3.I like Vilma......in the 4-3.

But,look at your statement above,then look at the numbers posted for Vilma in 05-06,then look again at your post,then look at the #'s again,then tell me if you stand by that statement.

In the 4-3 Vilma was put in a position to stop a play 124 times,as indicated by his solo tackles.That number was cut in half in 06,where he was 2nd or 3rd man to the play,piling on.That's not a playmaker.

In other words solo tackles=big plays for a linebacker.

Big plays in 05 in the 4-3,which he thrived in in college,124.

In 06,66

[mangenious420]

i dont know, im not some kind of football scout for christ sake. all i know is that guy doesnt make plays, hes invisible. somehow he racks up a ****load of tackles, so i guess that makes him "good", but hes not a playmaker, sorry. id take Bruschi, Colvin, Vrabel over him in a heartbeat, and thats just players from one team in our division. Vilma is alright, but highly overrated. i mean, when you watch other teams play, a lot of them have a linebacker or defender who you just think is going to make a big play or a big hit or something happen at any moment. Vilma on the other hand is just kind of there, making tackles on running backs 6 yards past the line of scrimmage. and i dont think you have to be a football genius to realize if a player is a true playmaker or not, Vilma simply isnt. forget about even watching his games, just look at the stats, the sacks, the picks, the forced fumbles, all non existent.

Again you say he's invisible. You and Lance can argue with me and my buddy ecurb when Vilma (the guy your bashing) doesnt lead the jets (your favorite team) in tackles.

[lancemehl]

Again you say he's invisible. You and Lance can argue with me and my buddy ecurb when Vilma (the guy your bashing) doesnt lead the jets (your favorite team) in tackles.

Mangeious,looking at the numbers and watching the games,was Vilma more effective in the 4-3 or the 3-4?that's my argument.I think you're getting my argument mixed up.I love Vilma,I want to play a 4-3 so he can get 124 solo tackles,not 66.

don't lump me with someone saying vilma's no good.i think he's great.

[Gibbon]

you see,now i see something totally different.I see the numbers absolutely supporting the argument.

169 dropped to 113.the number of solos cut in half.

My argument is that the 3-4 does not use our talent efficiently,similar to the wco with michael vick.These numbers show exactly that.Look again at the number of solos.

But the 169 total and 124 solos came while playing for a bad team that was devastated by injuries. This is why tackle numbers are misleading. Players who play for bad teams get more of them. The longer the D is on the field the more opportunities an individual has to make tackles. Just because they make more under those circumstances doesnt mean when they make fewer for an improved team and defense that their talent is being wasted.

The impact plays are a better measure.

[mangenious420]

Mangeious,looking at the numbers and watching the games,was Vilma more effective in the 4-3 or the 3-4?that's my argument.I think you're getting my argument mixed up.I love Vilma,I want to play a 4-3 so he can get 124 solo tackles,not 66.

And that's a fair arguement my friend, im with you on that. But we have a 3-4 coach who isn't going anywhere. So we have to get used to it.

[Gibbon]

i dont know, im not some kind of football scout for christ sake. all i know is that guy doesnt make plays, hes invisible. somehow he racks up a ****load of tackles, so i guess that makes him "good", but hes not a playmaker, sorry. id take Bruschi, Colvin, Vrabel over him in a heartbeat, and thats just players from one team in our division. Vilma is alright, but highly overrated. i mean, when you watch other teams play, a lot of them have a linebacker or defender who you just think is going to make a big play or a big hit or something happen at any moment. Vilma on the other hand is just kind of there, making tackles on running backs 6 yards past the line of scrimmage. and i dont think you have to be a football genius to realize if a player is a true playmaker or not, Vilma simply isnt. forget about even watching his games, just look at the stats, the sacks, the picks, the forced fumbles, all non existent.

While I dont support the statements above about Vilma being invisible, I dont think his numbers support including him in a discussion of elite playmakers. I do think Jets fans have tendency to over value Vilma, but that doesnt mean that he wont/ cant grow into a very good ILB in the 3-4 or that the 3-4 should be abandoned so his tackle numbers go up which is what some seem to be arguing.

I'll take fewer tackles from Vilma in exchange for bigger numbers in the win column any day.

[mangenious420]

While I dont support the statements above about Vilma being invisible, I dont think his numbers support including him in a discussion of elite playmakers. I do think Jets fans have tendency to over value Vilma, but that doesnt mean that he wont/ cant grow into a very good ILB in the 3-4 or that the 3-4 should be abandoned so his tackle numbers go up which is what some seem to be arguing.

I'll take fewer tackles from Vilma in exchange for bigger numbers in the win column any day.

Well one of Vilmas problems is he can't pass rush. He's useless on the blitz.

[drago]

These are Vilma's stats according to NFL.com:

04

107 total tackles

77 solos

30 assists

2 sacks

3 ints

2 passes defended

0 forced fumbles

05

169 total tackles

124 solos

45 assists

.5 sacks

1 interception

5 passes defended

4 forced fumbles

06

113 total tackles

66 solos

47 assists

0 sacks

1 interception

4 passes defended

1 forced fumble

Everyone seems convinced that the 3-4 prevented Vilma from making the impact plays he made in 05, but the numbers dont support that argument. The only impact number that is appreciably different are forced fumbles and I think you could argue that any player making 169 tackles is going to have more opportunities to force fumbles than one making 113. There is a, of course, a significant difference in the total number of tackles and the solo to assist ration, but this can be attributed to improved team defense.

The bottom line to me is that the 3-4 did not negatively Vilma's performance in a way that hurt the team.

To back up your post.

Its BS to only look at tackles. After the 05 season I was looking at the teams tackles. At every position on the field, and i mean EVERY position, we had at least one representative in the top five in the league (at that postion) in tackles. I believe it was this...

MLB Vilma (and led the league with total tackles)

Saftey Coleman

DE Ellis, Abraham

CB LAW, Barrett

DT ROBERTSON

OLB (i can't remember who replaced Barton off hand...)

There may have been a few more. You can't tell me Eric Coleman was one of the top 5 safteies in the league, he just was in the top 5 in tackles. It means nothing.

If it did mean anything, is that our offense was so bad the defense was alwayson the field racking up tackles.

[lancemehl]

To back up your post.

Its BS to only look at tackles. After the 05 season I was looking at the teams tackles. At every position on the field, and i mean EVERY position, we had at least one representative in the top five in the league (at that postion) in tackles. I believe it was this...

MLB Vilma (and led the league with total tackles)

Saftey Coleman

DE Ellis, Abraham

CB LAW, Barrett

DT ROBERTSON

OLB (i can't remember who replaced Barton off hand...)

There may have been a few more. You can't tell me Eric Coleman was one of the top 5 safteies in the league, he just was in the top 5 in tackles. It means nothing.

If it did mean anything, is that our offense was so bad the defense was alwayson the field racking up tackles.

I agree with that.what I'm looking at is teams running all over us and Vilma never being in position to make a big play because he's getting eaten up by a guy 100lbs heavier than him.

[JetCane]

yeah, and then not many backers miss a wide open sack, and no tmany backers give up a TD on a playfake with 10 seconds left when the otehr team has ZERO timeouts, and you know they must pass it. but at least Vilma held them before they gave up the 7, yeah, Vilma is a real all star.

He made a mental mistake by going for the strip instead of smashing the body, and he has admitted as much.

He also was not the coverage guy on that playfake play.

Your agenda is pretty obvious here, and so is your poor analysis.

Dont bother.

[Gibbon]

In the interest of a true evaluation of Vilma at his position I looked up the stats of four other LBs who people often list among the leagues best. Two play in a 4-3 and two play in the 3-4 (I chose Edwards instead of Merriman because of the roids thing that led to Merriman's suspension)

Urlacher

Total -- 141 Solo -- 92 Assist -- 49 Sacks -- 0 Int -- 3 Pass D -- 6 FF -- 1

Lewis (14 Games)

Total -- 103 Solo -- 80 Assist -- 23 Sacks -- 5 Int -- 2 Pass D -- 6 FF -- 1

Bruschi (15 Games)

Total -- 112 Solo -- 54 Assist -- 58 Sacks -- 1.5 Int -- 1 Pass D -- 5 FF -- 0

Edwards

Total -- 141 Solo -- 97 Assist -- 44 Sacks -- 2.5 Int --3 Pass D -- 4 FF --2

Given the fact that Vilma was learning a new D I dont think his numbers look that out of whack.

Also, those of you expecting huge sack numbers from the ILB/MLB position need to be aware that in the NFL this is not a major sack producing position.

[KSJets]

In the interest of a true evaluation of Vilma at his position I looked up the stats of four other LBs who people often list among the leagues best. Two play in a 4-3 and two play in the 3-4 (I chose Edwards instead of Merriman because of the roids thing that led to Merriman's suspension)

Urlacher

Total -- 141 Solo -- 92 Assist -- 49 Sacks -- 0 Int -- 3 Pass D -- 6 FF -- 1

Lewis (14 Games)

Total -- 103 Solo -- 80 Assist -- 23 Sacks -- 5 Int -- 2 Pass D -- 6 FF -- 1

Bruschi (15 Games)

Total -- 112 Solo -- 54 Assist -- 58 Sacks -- 1.5 Int -- 1 Pass D -- 5 FF -- 0

Edwards

Total -- 141 Solo -- 97 Assist -- 44 Sacks -- 2.5 Int --3 Pass D -- 4 FF --2

Given the fact that Vilma was learning a new D I dont think his numbers look that out of whack.

Also, those of you expecting huge sack numbers from the ILB/MLB position need to be aware that in the NFL this is not a major sack producing position.

Also note that Bruschi had more assists than solo tackles

[lancemehl]

In the interest of a true evaluation of Vilma at his position I looked up the stats of four other LBs who people often list among the leagues best. Two play in a 4-3 and two play in the 3-4 (I chose Edwards instead of Merriman because of the roids thing that led to Merriman's suspension)

Urlacher

Total -- 141 Solo -- 92 Assist -- 49 Sacks -- 0 Int -- 3 Pass D -- 6 FF -- 1

Lewis (14 Games)

Total -- 103 Solo -- 80 Assist -- 23 Sacks -- 5 Int -- 2 Pass D -- 6 FF -- 1

Bruschi (15 Games)

Total -- 112 Solo -- 54 Assist -- 58 Sacks -- 1.5 Int -- 1 Pass D -- 5 FF -- 0

Edwards

Total -- 141 Solo -- 97 Assist -- 44 Sacks -- 2.5 Int --3 Pass D -- 4 FF --2

Given the fact that Vilma was learning a new D I dont think his numbers look that out of whack.

Also, those of you expecting huge sack numbers from the ILB/MLB position need to be aware that in the NFL this is not a major sack producing position.

Ohh,I was reading that wrong! lol I thought Bruschi smashed Strahan's recored by 36 sacks!! lol

but,anyway Vilma really destroyed these guys in 05.In the 4-3