3-4 or 4-3

[shawn306]

It seems like we have gone through this since Herm first showed up and tried changing Parcells 3-4 into a 4-3.

So the question is this. With guys like Vilma, Robertson, Ellis, Hobson, B. Thomas would you have kept the defense as a 4-3 or do you rebuild it into a 3-4 ?

Robertson does not seem to be your big prototypical nose tackle. Vilma looks at times lost in it and these are guys that the Jets were building their future on.

I have always felt that you build an offense or a defense around the talent you have. That is why it was driving me nuts that Herm and Hackett were taking a vertical passer like Vinny and trying to make him into a sideline to sideline passer.

Same thing with the D. We all saw in 2001,2002, 2003, 2005 how badly the Jets did stopping the run in early season and now it is happening again now that they are switching back to the 3-4.

I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong in that way. But it seems to me the Jets are wasting guys like Vilma and Robertson trying to play a defense that they are not suited for.

Maybe the Jets are missing John Abraham more then they though they would.

Thoughts ?

[4HCrew]

This is starting to become the million dollar question..Mangini is supposed to a defensive mind so one would think he would use the system that best fits his players and not force feed a system that they are not effective in. I guess the jury is still out

[gang_green03]

I disagree to an extent. Yes you should do your best to build around the talent but when its a new coach and his expertise is the 3-4, than you have to go with that. Not to mention its a better defense when done right, so its the better long term answer. The only main guys that are poor fits for the defense are Vilma and Robertson, especially Robertson. I don't think its wise to cater the defense to a couple guys and D-Rob wasn't even that great in the 4-3.

[JetCane]

D-Rob is not a NT. The NT is the key piece in the 3-4, and this CS made a committment to change the defense in spite of not having the proper personnel to do it. The CS is stubborn (see how they handled the LG situation this summer) and at fault for not devising a better base scheme for their personnel, and they failed to upgrade THE KEY spot (NT) to accompany their committment to the 3-4. The only LBs who looked worse than Vilma yesterday were Hobson and Barton, which tells you how bad they were.

The defensive strategy to keep 6 to 8 players back in coverage yesterday failed. It's a given that NFL QBs will shred defenses if you give them enough time. This especially applies to a QB of brady's caliber.

What happens when you cant generate a pass rush? Miller looked awful, Barrett was pathetic, and Coleman was pretty weak in coverage, too.

IF YOU WANT TO MAKEOVER THE D, THEN MAKE A COMMITTMENT TO GET THE RIGHT PERSONNEL IN THERE

[Bugg]

I think you guys are overthinking all this. Again, you can line things up any which way you like. If they're going to get manhandled and abused as they did yesterday, you can run the 5-2 or put 9 guys across the line and it wouldn't matter. We have a front 7 that seems long on supposed greatness yet NONE OF THEM make any plays, blow up anything or win man-to-man trench battles. THEY DON'T MAKE PLAYS. Whether they lined up in a 3-4 or 4-3 wouldn't make a damn bit of difference the way they were pushed around and abused.

Brady had 10 seconds to throw.

Maroney had holes an old lady could get through.

How they line up doesn't change the fact that we have some very well-paid DL and LB guys who simply aren't very physical not very good.

[Sperm Edwards]

I think you guys are overthinking all this. Again, you can line things up any which way you like. If they're going to get manhandled and abused as they did yesterday, you can run the 5-2 or put 9 guys across the line and it wouldn't matter. We have a front 7 that seems long on supposed greatness yet NONE OF THEM make any plays, blow up anything or win man-to-man trench battles. THEY DON'T MAKE PLAYS. Whether they lined up in a 3-4 or 4-3 wouldn't make a damn bit of difference the way they were pushed around and abused.

Brady had 10 seconds to throw.

Maroney had holes an old lady could get through.

How they line up doesn't change the fact that we have some very well-paid DL and LB guys who simply aren't very physical not very good.

[JetCane]

It isnt about overthinking this. It is a thread about which scheme would be more effective given the personnel that is currently on the team. The matchups, strategy and gap coverage is different in different schemes.

Coaches should put their players in the best position to win- not weaken them by having them play a scheme that is ill-suited to their strengths.

[Gibbon]

D-Rob is not a NT. The NT is the key piece in the 3-4, and this CS made a committment to change the defense in spite of not having the proper personnel to do it. The CS is stubborn (see how they handled the LG situation this summer) and at fault for not devising a better base scheme for their personnel, and they failed to upgrade THE KEY spot (NT) to accompany their committment to the 3-4. The only LBs who looked worse than Vilma yesterday were Hobson and Barton, which tells you how bad they were.

The defensive strategy to keep 6 to 8 players back in coverage yesterday failed. It's a given that NFL QBs will shred defenses if you give them enough time. This especially applies to a QB of brady's caliber.

What happens when you cant generate a pass rush? Miller looked awful, Barrett was pathetic, and Coleman was pretty weak in coverage, too.

IF YOU WANT TO MAKEOVER THE D, THEN MAKE A COMMITTMENT TO GET THE RIGHT PERSONNEL IN THERE

The 3-4 can work. Its a good system and its the one Mangini understands best. There is no going back now. The Jet drafted a 3-4 LB, signed a 3-4 D lineman, signed B. Thomas to 5 year extension based on his success in the 3-4, and signed David Bowens to play in the 3-4. Right now the team is in transition to become a 3-4 team, its going to be rough sometimes.

I agree with everything you said above Jetcane.

Those blaming the D line for a lack of pressure and poor run stopping are, I think, placing the blame on the wrong shoulders. By my count the Jets nose guards made 9 solo tackles yesterday. That's alot in one game for that position. And, here's the other thing. A 3/ 4 man line will hardly ever be able to pressure a good Oline by themselves because they are out numbered. The LBs have to contribute. Look at the sacks the Pats had yesterday and you'll see that most came as a result of LB pressure. We dont get that LB pressure. Which brings me to the point that the weakness of this D is the part that on paper seems to be its strength and that's LB play.

Vilma is not big or physical enough for the system. That's it. Thats the bottom line. He cant fight off blocks and make plays. He cant take on blockers and stuff running lanes. He is so worried about getting caught up by blockers that he plays way too far behind the line. He cant be an effective run stopper back there. If I was a QB everytime I saw him back there I'd audible to a run right at him. This guy is a great athlete and LB but he is out of place. He should have been traded already for picks that we could have used to get a bigger NT and move DROB to end.

Barton is a mean physical guy, but he cant hold up the middle by himself. When they run at him he does ok in filling his gap, but Vilma rarely gets there to make the tackle. His range and speed are slipping and he is being asked to do too much.

Harris seems like the answer. I thought he looked a little overwhelmed yesterday, but he is a rookie in his first NFL game facing Tom Brady and the Pats, so that's understandable. He plays close to the line and is not afraid of taking on blockers. He looks like he can make the tough tackles in the whole. The sooner he is ready the better the run D will get, but only if he replaces Vilma.

The personel issue just gets worse in my opinion after this season. This is Barton's last year (I think). Vilma will want out and not listen seriously to the Jets offers. And, I think Hobson is in his last year as well. Bottom line the Jets end up drafting LBs for the next two seasons minimum.

[#27TheDominator]

It isnt about overthinking this. It is a thread about which scheme would be more effective given the personnel that is currently on the team. The matchups, strategy and gap coverage is different in different schemes.

Coaches should put their players in the best position to win- not weaken them by having them play a scheme that is ill-suited to their strengths.

I agree with this completely, however, this is basically a crappy team. They were 4-12 in '05 and I think the CS had a free reign to do whatever they wanted. By tasting the playoffs so soon now everybody is looking and thinking why don't they just do what they can with the personnel they have. I don't think they can swap back and forth as easily as some, and I think that the Jets strengths in the 4-3 (read Vilma) are vastly overrated. Abraham would have been an absolute beast at 3-4 OLB, but he's gone. The 3-4 is here to stay. To me the real dissapointment is that in two years they have added so few permanent answers on the defensive side of the ball.

[JetCane]

By my count the Jets nose guards made 9 solo tackles yesterday.

It isnt about the number of tackles- the Pats ran for 135, the D got no sacks and very little pressure on Brady. Vilma led the team in tackles last year but that doesnt mean he fits into the scheme.

The Pats DL got sacks, so it isnt about the DL not getting sacks in the 3-4.

With all the problems the Jets had last year stopping the run and establishing the run, the FO made TWO changes on the 8 lineman spots: adding Kenyon, and replacing Kendall with Clark. Thats a poor job by them.

[Gibbon]

It isnt about the number of tackles- the Pats ran for 135, the D got no sacks and very little pressure on Brady. Vilma led the team in tackles last year but that doesnt mean he fits into the scheme.

The Pats DL got sacks, so it isnt about the DL not getting sacks in the 3-4.

With all the problems the Jets had last year stopping the run and establishing the run, the FO made TWO changes on the 8 lineman spots: adding Kenyon, and replacing Kendall with Clark. Thats a poor job by them.

Cane:

Wasnt arguing that the 9 tackles equaled good run D, but I would argue they equal good play against the run at the NG position. Because of where they play its safe to assume that when they make a tackle it is at or very near the line of scrimmage and therefor a "winning play" much more so than tackles amassed by LBs 4+ yds downfield.

These guys obviously put no pressure on Brady, but in a 3-4 QB pressure has to be brought by the LBs whether they make the sacks or by their disrupting of the blocking schemes free the DL from double teams. Again, Vilma is simply too small to beat an interior lineman on a blitz -- he can usually be knocked backwards by an RB.

I agree that as of yet the CS/ FO has not done enough to create a good 3-4 line, but I still dont see this as the biggest defensive weakness. They are working on it. If you include the OLB/DE hybrid then technically they brought in two new players Coleman and Bowens (granted that Bowens is a sub of sorts).

On the subject of Bowens, I'd like to see him sub in for Hobson so that he and B. Thomas are on the field at the same time (did that happen yesterday). That would, I think improve our pass rush, without hurting the run D.

In fact I'd like to see the Jets line up with Robetson at DE, Pouha/ Mosely at DT, and Ellis and Coleman switching in and out at the other DE. With B. Thomas and Bowens at OLB, I think this would give us our best chance at an effective pass rush.

[JetCane]

The Pats DL got sacks, so dont psot about the DL not getting sacks in the 3-4.

The DL isnt good enough to draw double teams, so when the Pats went into max protect, there were plenty of extra bodies to handle blitzers. The DL sucks in this scheme.

[PeterNorth09]

The Pats DL got sacks, so dont psot about the DL not getting sacks in the 3-4.

The DL isnt good enough to draw double teams, so when the Pats went into max protect, there were plenty of extra bodies to handle blitzers. The DL sucks in this scheme.

Tell that to Mengenius.

[Barton]

Are you kidding me?

Who on this dline is good enough to the point where we have to say, "We need to switch back to the 4-3!!!" ???

Ellis? Are you kidding me, he's a JAG in either system.

Drob? Same as Ellis.

Coleman? Ditto.

Mosley? Ditto

Hicks? Ditto.

[Boozer76]

I'm going to try to get a bit torrent to watch the output of how we lined up, and the result that ensued. For most of the game we were actually in the 4-3 or a variation of it (goal line, Nickel, Dime) where there are 4 down lineman. The 3-4 was not employed nearly as much as you think.

[Gibbon]

The Pats DL got sacks, so dont psot about the DL not getting sacks in the 3-4.

The DL isnt good enough to draw double teams, so when the Pats went into max protect, there were plenty of extra bodies to handle blitzers. The DL sucks in this scheme.

Easy buddy. I didnt say the DL cant get sacks in the 3-4 I said it required the LBs to be able to bring pressure. Without the LBs its 5,6, or 7 blockers vs. 3/4 D lineman. Even bad D linemen in the 3-4 will get double teamed if there is no one else coming for the O line to block. The Pats D line usually got sacks because their LBs were effectively pressuring the LOS and the QB. All I'm saying is that part of the lack of pressure is a result of poor LB play.

[shawn306]

I'm going to try to get a bit torrent to watch the output of how we lined up, and the result that ensued. For most of the game we were actually in the 4-3 or a variation of it (goal line, Nickel, Dime) where there are 4 down lineman. The 3-4 was not employed nearly as much as you think.

I know on the Moss bomb they had 8 guys on the line. Kinda tough getting pressure on the QB when you have 8 guys blocking against 3, 4 or even 5.

I think that once again BB out planned Mangini.

[124]

I've said it once and I'll say it once again:

The best players on this defense in the front 7 (Shaun Ellis, Dewayne Robertson and Jonathan Vilma) are best suited for the 43 defense. Why Mangini continues to push the 34 is beyond me but we will all have to live with it because it appears he is too stubborn to change it.

[Barton]

I've said it once and I'll say it once again:

The best players on this defense in the front 7 (Shaun Ellis, Dewayne Robertson and Jonathan Vilma) are best suited for the 43 defense. Why Mangini continues to push the 34 is beyond me but we will all have to live with it because it appears he is too stubborn to change it.

Vilma in the 4-3 is a plus, but Thomas in the 4-3 is a negative, so it cancels out.

Ellis and Drob arent good enough to warrant anyone saying we need to switch systems. They are both ridiculously overrated.

JMO

[ThisYearsModel]

How about either one. Right now, it is the turnstile defense.