Jump to content

go back to the 4-3.. what have they got to lose?


gg

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

At this point I don't even think going back to a 4-3 will help.

They are caught in between right now. If you stay 3-4 you lose Vilma, Robertson, Ellis. If you go 4-3 you lose Thomas. Barton and Hobson we are finding out are very slow. Harris was drafted as a 3-4 linebacker so right now they are a mess.

Dyson was healthy scratch for whatever reason.

Eric Smith was benched during the game.

Barrett continues to go for the strip instead of the tackle. (Although his hit on TJ was nice. He should be doing that all the time).

Revis has been a dissapoinment so far

Rhodes has been a HUGE dissapointment

Right now the CS has to go out sort out the bodies of this wreck and find out who wants to play and who doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point I don't even think going back to a 4-3 will help.

They are caught in between right now. If you stay 3-4 you lose Vilma, Robertson, Ellis. If you go 4-3 you lose Thomas. Barton and Hobson we are finding out are very slow. Harris was drafted as a 3-4 linebacker so right now they are a mess.

Dyson was healthy scratch for whatever reason.

Eric Smith was benched during the game.

Barrett continues to go for the strip instead of the tackle. (Although his hit on TJ was nice. He should be doing that all the time).

Revis has been a dissapoinment so far

Rhodes has been a HUGE dissapointment

Right now the CS has to go out sort out the bodies of this wreck and find out who wants to play and who doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

really.. at this point... why wouldnt they?

the 3-4 isnt working.

Could not agree with you more, why not go back to the 4-3 they have nothing to lose unless he belives that he is going to get the personnel he needs to make that defense work next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

really.. at this point... why wouldnt they?

the 3-4 isnt working.

Could not agree with you more, why not go back to the 4-3 they have nothing to lose unless he belives that he is going to get the personnel he needs to make that defense work next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The 4-3 does not give them the best chance to win."

I don't know but it seems like that would be a quote from Mangini or a his thought at this point.

You are basing that on what? We obviously do not have 3-4 personnel so how does the 4-3 not give us the best chance to win?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The 4-3 does not give them the best chance to win."

I don't know but it seems like that would be a quote from Mangini or a his thought at this point.

You are basing that on what? We obviously do not have 3-4 personnel so how does the 4-3 not give us the best chance to win?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

really.. at this point... why wouldnt they?

the 3-4 isnt working.

either that or they can hope for a players strike and start a new,

OY! :shock:

because that would mean that Mangini made a wrong choice in his philosophy-which I don't see him admitting to GG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

really.. at this point... why wouldnt they?

the 3-4 isnt working.

either that or they can hope for a players strike and start a new,

OY! :shock:

because that would mean that Mangini made a wrong choice in his philosophy-which I don't see him admitting to GG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

really.. at this point... why wouldnt they?

the 3-4 isnt working.

either that or they can hope for a players strike and start a new,

OY! :shock:

Well, i would say we have all the progress we have made in the new system to lose by switching back, but, ummmmm, there hasn't been any made in the last season and a half. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

really.. at this point... why wouldnt they?

the 3-4 isnt working.

either that or they can hope for a players strike and start a new,

OY! :shock:

Well, i would say we have all the progress we have made in the new system to lose by switching back, but, ummmmm, there hasn't been any made in the last season and a half. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The players would need to learn a new 4-3 system... not every system is the same...

Also... they dont have the right personnel for a 4-3 either... no pass rushing DE... Bryan Thomas sucked at DE... Drob was never great either... Vilma will still be too small...

There is no looking back now... its 3-4 or bust

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The players would need to learn a new 4-3 system... not every system is the same...

Also... they dont have the right personnel for a 4-3 either... no pass rushing DE... Bryan Thomas sucked at DE... Drob was never great either... Vilma will still be too small...

There is no looking back now... its 3-4 or bust

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elam started IIRC.

I thought he started, too.

Neither Dyson nor Smith (who missed the tackle on the TD last week) got PT.

Typical of this CS. Make a mistake and they treat you like garbage, unless your name is Chad Pennington.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would the 4-3 be any better?

First answer that before you make these threads.

Without being able to go back in time and see how it would have turned out, it is impossible to know for sure.

But, a few things are clear:

-there isnt enough beef on the DL, and having 4 down linemen instead of three would help.

-having 4 DL would help prevent the OL from getting to the next level every play. Did you see how the Cinn OL were firing out directly at the LBs???? It weas pathetic!! The LBs have no chance when they are immediately encountering OL who collapse a weak as sh1t DL.

- Vilma would be playing better in a 4-3. He clearly isnt a good fit for the 3-4 and has basically quit on the system since it plays to his weaknesses and takes away his strengths.

-They could shuffle Mosle, D-Rob, DeVito and Pouha in at DT and have beef in the middle of the line.

-Hicks and Kenyon wouldnt be playing any worse in the 4-3. I dont know about Ellis.

-The constant shifting from the 4-3 to a hybrid 3-4 is B.S. and has proven to be counter-productive, except for those who want to give it lip service by saying, "well we do some 43 at times". it is disruptive to what the players are trying to get used to.

While i think that at this point it doesnt matter what they play, as the D has quit on Sutton, I am making the argument for gg's supposition that it wouldnt hurt to play a 4-3, since the 3-4 w/o a bona fide NT has blown up in mangini's face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without being able to go back in time and see how it would have turned out, it is impossible to know for sure.

But, a few things are clear:

-there isnt enough beef on the DL, and having 4 down linemen instead of three would help.

-having 4 DL would help prevent the OL from getting to the next level every play. Did you see how the Cinn OL were firing out directly at the LBs???? It weas pathetic!! The LBs have no chance when they are immediately encountering OL who collapse a weak as sh1t DL.

- Vilma would be playing better in a 4-3. He clearly isnt a good fit for the 3-4 and has basically quit on the system since it plays to his weaknesses and takes away his strengths.

-They could shuffle Mosle, D-Rob, DeVito and Pouha in at DT and have beef in the middle of the line.

-Hicks and Kenyon wouldnt be playing any worse in the 4-3. I dont know about Ellis.

-The constant shifting from the 4-3 to a hybrid 3-4 is B.S. and has proven to be counter-productive, except for those who want to give it lip service by saying, "well we do some 43 at times". it is disruptive to what the players are trying to get used to.

While i think that at this point it doesnt matter what they play, as the D has quit on Sutton, I am making the argument for gg's supposition that it wouldnt hurt to play a 4-3, since the 3-4 w/o a bona fide NT has blown up in mangini's face.

The middle of our DL sucks either way...

And since neither Coleman or Hicks are pass rushers, Ellis is at best avg and Hobson and BT would both be terrible in the 4-3...We'd have just as bad if not a worse pass rush.

As for eating up blockers...The point of the 4-3 DL isnt to eat up blockers, as their are only 3 LBS, 1 has to guard the TE, one the RB, leaving only one blitzer. Therefore, the DL ina 4-3 has to be able to generate a pass rush by itself, without the LB help, not concern itself with eating up blockers.

Sorry, I just dont think we have the players to make it work either way. Its not Mangini's or Sutton's fault imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would the 4-3 be any better?

First answer that before you make these threads.

lol... so i am not allowed to post a thread without having an answer. oy! thanks for the clarification on posting ;)

see jetcane's answer below... i always thought of the 4-3 as a fast aggressive defense and i think that vilma would come alive in it and might help to rev up the others even though as shaun306 said .. we got some slow guys in there like barton and hobson..but golly it just cant get worse...

Without being able to go back in time and see how it would have turned out, it is impossible to know for sure.

But, a few things are clear:

-there isnt enough beef on the DL, and having 4 down linemen instead of three would help.

-having 4 DL would help prevent the OL from getting to the next level every play. Did you see how the Cinn OL were firing out directly at the LBs???? It weas pathetic!! The LBs have no chance when they are immediately encountering OL who collapse a weak as sh1t DL.

- Vilma would be playing better in a 4-3. He clearly isnt a good fit for the 3-4 and has basically quit on the system since it plays to his weaknesses and takes away his strengths.

-They could shuffle Mosle, D-Rob, DeVito and Pouha in at DT and have beef in the middle of the line.

-Hicks and Kenyon wouldnt be playing any worse in the 4-3. I dont know about Ellis.

-The constant shifting from the 4-3 to a hybrid 3-4 is B.S. and has proven to be counter-productive, except for those who want to give it lip service by saying, "well we do some 43 at times". it is disruptive to what the players are trying to get used to.

While i think that at this point it doesnt matter what they play, as the D has quit on Sutton, I am making the argument for gg's supposition that it wouldnt hurt to play a 4-3, since the 3-4 w/o a bona fide NT has blown up in mangini's face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The middle of our DL sucks either way...

And since neither Coleman or Hicks are pass rushers, Ellis is at best avg and Hobson and BT would both be terrible in the 4-3...We'd have just as bad if not a worse pass rush.

As for eating up blockers...The point of the 4-3 DL isnt to eat up blockers, as their are only 3 LBS, 1 has to guard the TE, one the RB, leaving only one blitzer. Therefore, the DL ina 4-3 has to be able to generate a pass rush by itself, without the LB help, not concern itself with eating up blockers.

Sorry, I just dont think we have the players to make it work either way. Its not Mangini's or Sutton's fault imo.

Of course it is their fault. THey are responsible for putting players out there.

I dont believe that Hobson would be worse, and BT has svcked this year ever since he signed a new contract, so that isnt a consideration.

Has the FO gotten a pass rusher in two years? How about a NT?

Of course they are at fault! They dont get a pass. There is a 20% personnel turnover on a team every year. They could have 40% new guys if they wanted to, and those are their guys. If they have chosen FAs unwisely, that is on them. And if they decide to change schemes without the most important part in place, that is on them, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The middle of our DL sucks either way...

And since neither Coleman or Hicks are pass rushers, Ellis is at best avg and Hobson and BT would both be terrible in the 4-3...We'd have just as bad if not a worse pass rush.

As for eating up blockers...The point of the 4-3 DL isnt to eat up blockers, as their are only 3 LBS, 1 has to guard the TE, one the RB, leaving only one blitzer. Therefore, the DL ina 4-3 has to be able to generate a pass rush by itself, without the LB help, not concern itself with eating up blockers.

Sorry, I just dont think we have the players to make it work either way. Its not Mangini's or Sutton's fault imo.

Oh it's their fault all right. They are the "geniuses" that thought we could compete with this **** ass D line. I think they did run more 4-3 sets this week. They have run that hybrid 4-3 in the past with BThomas lined up like an end, but I'm pretty sure this week they had Mosley and DRob in together. That would indicate an actual two DT 4-3. They still sucked. Either that or DRob was at end. Either way it was a pitiful experiment and I'm not looking forward to seeing any more of it.

'Cane, I know you like Devito, is that from camp? He's an UDFA that projected as a 3-4 DE. I doubt he'll ever amount to anything if he can't crack this pitiful rotation.Did you see something to make you think otherwise? Looking at pictures of him he looks stoned (allergies?) and he has a couple of chins. Looks like he really needs to be put on an NFL "program".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...