Wild speculation
So earlier this week, in Danny O'Neil's weekly chat, a couple of folks raised the question of whether we might move to a 3-4 defense. In the past, I would have laughed this off because we flat-out didn't have the personnel necessary to field a 3-4 team. Danny didn't shoot down this idea, though, and suggested that we might have the personnel necessary (or be a couple of pieces away) from fielding a 3-4.
While I don't believe a 3-4 would magically solve all of our problems on defense, I think it could help in highlighting some of our strength in the LB corps and put more playmakers on the field. There are obvious drawbacks to changing the scheme (growing number of 3-4 teams competing for talent, difficult transitions, etc) which could hurt the team in the short-run, which make me a hesitant to advocate for it, but it seems like interesting idea to bat around while we wait for the next kickoff.
So here's my new position chart based on available personnel:
MLB - Lofa, Heater, Leroy (?), Curry (?)
OLB - Tapp, Reed , Curry (?), Leroy (?), Kerney (probably cut)
NT - Mebane (?), Cole (backup NT in GB), Red (?),
DE- Mebane (?), Red (?), Jackson (DE/DT in a 4-3), Redding (DE/DT in a 4-3, might not be here), Terrill (hopefully cut)
While the LBs may be a little small for a 3-4, I think we'd get a nice mix of pass-rush and pass-coverage out of them (if Tapp and Reed could adapt to playing upright).
I think the biggest question-marks are the guys on the DL. I think one could make a case for Cole (6'1", 330lbs), Red (6'4", 318lbs) or Mebane (6'1", 300lbs) playing NT, while we'd probably want to stick LoJack (6'4", 271lbs), Red/Mebane or Redding (6'4", 292lbs) (if he sticks around) in at DE. The NT is a critical part of the 3-4 defense and very difficult to staff well, but there seems to be pretty good depth at DL in the next draft.
Moving to a 3-4 is a very serious enterprise, which can take years and can result in significant decreases in production from players in the LB and DL corps. This piece shouldn't be read as an advocacy piece, but rather a jumping-off point for wild speculation about whether we could actually field a 3-4 team (give or take a few pieces picked up in the offseason).
A place to bury strangers.
1 recs |
40 comments
Comments
I think the biggest questions are at the DL
I think Cole and Red could probably both play NT, but they wouldn’t be the disruptive force that Mebane would be (even if he was on the small side). Leroy, Lofa and Hawthorne might be giving up too much size as well.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 6, 2009 3:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don't see the advantage of switching to a 3-4.
by John Morgan on Nov 6, 2009 3:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think any benefit
would come from getting more LBs/undersized DEs on the field at the same time. I think these benefits would be immediately undermined if (a) we didn’t have the size up front or in our ILBs or (b) Reed and Tapp weren’t able to make the transition from having a hand in the dirt. Even if we had the personnel, we’d probably have at least a year of transition where players were still learning their new assignments.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 6, 2009 4:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I said it before, and I'll say it again,
the 3-4 is better than the 4-3. But there are only so many guys that can play on the 3-4 line, and the more 3-4 teams there are, the less chance there is of fielding a good 3-4 team.
by LantermanC on Nov 6, 2009 6:16 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Maybe next year...
…as it’s not until 2010 that we’d reap the benefits of having Lofa and Heater both on the field. I question whether a Tapp-Mebane-LoJack front 3 would be enough tho, even as good as those guys are.
by MontanaHawk05 on Nov 6, 2009 6:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Tapp is way too small to play a 3-4 DE
He’s almost too small to be a 4-3 DE. I think he’d have to be a LB in a 3-4.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 6, 2009 6:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think he's plugged in at LB in this format...
Lamar Woodley style
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 7, 2009 2:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
3-4 DEs are roughly the size of 4-3 DTs
They’re mainly to clog up the blockers, allowing the LBs to make the play. I can’t see Tapp and LoJack doing that for us
by rex92 on Nov 9, 2009 11:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LoJack is listed at 6'4" 270lbs
I could see him putting on some weight and playing 3-4 DE. I don’t know how good he’d be at it, but I think it could be an option.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 9, 2009 11:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Phillip Merling was similar to a 4-3 DE in college
but bulked up and is playing 3-4 DE for Miami.
by redwolf75 on Nov 9, 2009 8:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Merling is listed at 6'4" 276 on the Clemson bio
and 295lbs at nfl.com
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 9, 2009 11:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I posted this in another thread as the the D-line in a 3-4.
Looking at Yahoo Depth Charts here are the NTs and the DEs.
SD – Ogemdi Nwagbuo 6’4" 303 (Cesaire and Castillo and 6’2" 295, 6’3" 290) Normally Jamal Williams 6’3" 350.
ARI – Bryan Robinson 6’4" 304 (Campbell and Docket 6’7" 290, 6’4" 285)
BAL – Kelly Greg 6’0 310 (Pryce and Ngata 6’5" 285, 6’4" 340!!)
DAL – Jay Ratliff 6’4" 305 (Spears and Olshanksy 6’4" 310 and 6’6" 315)
DEN – Ronald Fields 6’2" 315 (McBean and Peterson 6’5" 290 63" 300)
GB – Ryan Picket 6’2" 330 backup Raji 6’2" 337 ( Jolly and Jenksin 6’3" 320 6’2" 305)
JAX – Terrance Knighton 6’3" 325 (Henderson and Ellison 6’7" 335 6’3" 320
KC – Ron Edwards 6’3" 315 ( Tyson Jackson Glenn Dorsey LSU 6’4" 295 Buds 6’1" 300) along with Marcus Spears, LSU sure seems to grow some big DEs.
MIA – Jason Ferguson 6’3" 310 (Langford and Starks 6’6" 295 6’3" 305)
NE – Vince Wilfork 6’2" 325 BLATANTLY WRONG ( Warren and Green 6’5" 300 6’3" 285)
NYJ – Sione Pouha 6’3" 325 (Ellis and Douglas (6’5" 285 and 6’2" 290)
PIT – Casey Hampton 6’2" 325 (Kirschke and Keisel 6’3" 300 6’5" 285)
SF – Aubraya Franklin 6’1" 315 (Sopoaga and J. Smith 6’2" 330 6’4" 285)
by LantermanC on Nov 6, 2009 8:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Average NT is 6'2.41666" and weighs 320.25 lbs.
Average DE in a 3-4 is 6’ 5/8" and weights 300.41666 lbs.
Now someone collect the data for a 4-3 line. Then we can add Bench Press, cone drill, 40 time, and squat.
by LantermanC on Nov 6, 2009 8:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Alright so I did some looking up of data.
_x_____x3-4__4-3
I LM H 2.67 2.79
I LM W 317.75 308.11
E LM H 3.46 4.08
E LM W 298.75 273.47
I LB H 1.67 0.79
I LB W 242.54 240.26
E LB H 3.13 1.89
E LB W 258.54 240.11
LM H 3.19 3.43
LM W 305.08 290.79
LB H 2.40 1.53
LB W 250.54 240.16
I stands for Interior.
E stands for Exterior.
LM stands for Lineman.
LB stands for Linebacker.
Height is measured in inches above 6 feet.
So 3-4 lineman are on average a quarter of an inch shorter but 15 pounds heavier.
3-4 linebackers almost an inch taller and 10 pounds on average heavier, but if you look at ILB vs. ELB, they’re both an inch taller, but almost all the weight is in the ELB which is almost 20 lbs heavier.
by LantermanC on Nov 6, 2009 11:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure if people can read this clearly, so I thought I'd run an example.
The first line reads as such:
Interior Lineman For 3-4 they average 6’2.67" and 317 pounds. For 4-3 they average 6’2.79" and 308 pounds.
2nd half’s first line reads:
A 3-4 Lineman averages 6’3.19" and 305 pounds. A 4-3 lineman average 6’3.43" and 291 pounds.
by LantermanC on Nov 9, 2009 12:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and JAX is not a 3-4, I corrected that.
by LantermanC on Nov 6, 2009 11:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They are, but not by choice.
Injuries on their line forced them into it :(
The Yankees suck-a-doodle-doo!
by JamMasterJesus on Nov 7, 2009 6:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was wondering what happened.
I could’ve sworn it was on my research from a week ago and then I looked again and it was different.
by LantermanC on Nov 7, 2009 10:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What about a hybrid?
We could use the 3-4 set as a WILDCAT type of play. Say we have all the personel we have now but use the second string guys etc in a 3-4. I would say maybe a 70-30 hybrid 4-3/3-4.
Might confuse enough offenses, but might also confuse our defense.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 7:10 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
If we could draft/sign the right personnel,
I like the idea. It would make a possible transition later easier. But it would also give us two different looks. Seems win-win to me.
by LantermanC on Nov 9, 2009 8:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We do this occasionally already.
Just not a 70/30 split.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 9, 2009 10:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A question for those against the 3-4.
Is it our personnel, the 3-4 scheme, or what that you’re hesitant about?
I think even if we cut Hill, we can still pull it off.
The 4 LBs could be Tapp – Hawthorne – Lofa – Curry (very impressive in my mind)
Hawthorne and Lofa are both about 240ish, which apparently doesn’t matter for 4-3 or 3-4 scheme since both have 240ish weights. I think both are good enough that they would succeed in any scheme, but I don’t see much of a difference between a 3-4 ILB and a 4-3 MLB.
Curry and Tapp are 255 and 270, which is in line with the 260 average weight (yes I realize weight is not the only thing, but I think Curry can fit any scheme, and Tapp has shown great coverage skills when needed (for a lineman anyway)). So I don’t think the LBs are the problem.
The average weight of a 3-4 lineman is 305, and when I think of a 3-4, I think of the big cogs in the middle such as Vince Wilfork, Jamal Williams, Ngata, etc. Could Red Bryant be that guy? Possibly, but I wouldn’t bet a whole scheme on it. Lawrence Jackson is 270, which is a way under the exterior lineman average of 298 (Marcus Spears, Tyson Jackson, Richard Seymour). Jackson could gain some more weight, but I don’t know how that would affect him. Mebane and Redding I think could both play DEs in the 3-4 scheme, though I don’t know if they fit the schemes well.
If we really do decide to go 3-4, then I think we’d have to draft a 3-4 NT like Terrance Cody, but I don’t think Ruskell decides on that, since I’m not sure he’s been building his team in that direction, or else he wouldn’t have drafted LoJack (Unless LoJack gains a good 10-15 pounds).
I think, and correct me if I’m wrong, that in a 3-4, the lineman’s job is to occupy their guys, maybe be a little disruptive, but mainly do what they have to do to allow the LBs to make plays.
by LantermanC on Nov 9, 2009 8:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I have a couple of reservations
First, the transition from 4-3 to 3-4 can be hard on guys. 4-3 DEs can have hard time going to 3-4 LB and vice versa. The team would also be changing schemes for the second time in two years and it might take some time to get everyone on the same page. Mebane seems to have had trouble in his move between 1-tech and 3-tech DT; if wonder how much trouble he may have if forced to move to a 3-4 DL.
Second, our personnel might not fit. While I think we’d have plenty of talent at the 3-4 LB (maybe too much), those are the easiest postions to fill (in the 3-4) and the key cog in the 3-4 defense is the NT. We need a big fat guy that’s going to demand double-teams, overpower undersized C’s and stop the run. Mebane may be that guy, but he’s undersized. Cole and Red are big enough to do the job, but I question their ability squish the pocket and demand double-teams. They almost might be liabilities against the run. Redding and LoJack might be good fits at 3-4 DE, but I’m not too certain.
To be safe, I think we’d need to draft a couple of new DL. 2010 seems like a good year for DL, but we’d probably have to use one or both of our 1st-rounders to get the job done. I question whether that should be a priority when we’ve got more pressing issues on the offense (at QB, LT and RB).
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 9, 2009 10:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I pretty much agree with everythign you said.
Which is why if we wanted to make a move to the 3-4, I think we’d have to draft Terrance Cody or get a guy like him.
I think Tapp can make the transition pretty easily, and I think everyone is assuming (and rightfully so) that Kerney is not in our plans for 2010. If LoJack could play at 285, I could see us moving to the 3-4, but as I said before, I think the 3-4 is superior to the 4-3, but there are only so many guys who can make the 3-4 work, and if too many teams try to use the 3-4, the cost of trying to fit that scheme outweighs the benefits (drafting of Tyson Jackson at the 3rd spot).
by LantermanC on Nov 9, 2009 10:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What I wonder for a 3-4 is, how important is it that one of the guys be absolutely HUGE?
Does it have to be one guy who’s 340 and the other two at 290+, or would a line of 3 315’s be equally effective (and yes I realize I’m giving weight a bit too much of weight here, but I’m assuming players of equal talents).
by LantermanC on Nov 10, 2009 8:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Here's a nice little article on the 3-4, talking about Denver's transition
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2009/jan/23/collier-explains-art-of-3-4-defense/
Its an interview with former Denver DC Joe Collier:
On the NT:
“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.”
“He has to be physically capable of playing the position and mentally tough enough to do it over the long haul. I used to ask Rubin Carter’s son, Andre, all the time where he wanted to play in the NFL and he’d always say, ‘Anywhere but nose tackle, because I saw how my dad walked around the house on Mondays.’
On the DEs:
The two defensive end spots traditionally are filled by players with the body types the Broncos don’t have on their roster. The Steelers and Patriots start defensive ends who are at least 6-foot-5 and at least 285 pounds. New England starts two 300 pounders in Ty Warren and Richard Seymour.
On the ILBs:
Collier said the two inside linebacker spots have to be filled by players who can move well enough to get to both sides of the field. But he added that if the work is done correctly in front of them, those two players often can make the transition the easiest from a 4-3 defense they have played in college or elsewhere in the NFL.
On the OLBs:
The two outside linebacker spots require some work as well. The weak-side linebacker on the outside, who lines up away from the offense’s tight end, usually on the defensive right, is the primary pass rusher.
This often is a former college defensive end. The Steelers feature the NFL’s Defensive Player of the Year in this spot in James Harrison, who is 6-foot, 240 pounds, but is a refined rusher who also can hold up in the run game if necessary
In the other outside linebacker spot – the strong side – the Patriots and Steelers play 260-pound players there. The Steelers line up LaMarr Woodley, another refined pass rusher who played end for two of his four seasons at Michigan and had two sacks in the AFC Championship Game, who checks in at 6-2, 265
.
There’s a lot of really good stuff in that article.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 10, 2009 10:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice, thanks for the link.
Looks like our LBs are a perfect fit. Curry can ply the James Harrison role, our two MLBs, Tatupu and Hawthorne, would make excellent ILBs in my opinion, and Tapp can be the 265, 270 lb guy.
Of course, as the article states, the nose tackle is the most important. Cole clearly cannot play that, and we haven’t seen enough of Red. Perhaps Terrance Cody, as I speculated before, but like any rookie, it would be a risk, and would you risk an entire system on a rookie?
by LantermanC on Nov 11, 2009 8:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You do if you have a quality cast of players to help him learn and grow.
"What is it about good sex that makes me have to crap?"
by durteehawk on Nov 11, 2009 9:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've said from day 1 Tapp would probably be a more valuable player in a 3-4 system...
But that doesn’t absolutely mean I would welcome the change. As a matter of fact, I prefer stacking the line and having 3 quicker backers covering “everything else” as opposed to putting up a weaker middle front. A bad 3-4 is frustrating to watch because you give up 4 yards every single run…
Anyway, I like flexibility anyway, and I hope the “West Coast Defense” evolution includes a smattering of 3-4 with our 4-3.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 11, 2009 10:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
agree but how affective could a defense be if it doesn't have an identity?
WestCoastDefense seems like hogwash to me, but I will play along.
It is definitely better than trying to recreate the Tampa 2. The rest of the NFL knows how to beat that defense now.
"What is it about good sex that makes me have to crap?"
by durteehawk on Nov 11, 2009 10:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dale Brown's LSU hoops teams had a unique D called "The Freak."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1064640/index.htm
The freak is sort of a box-and-one and sort of a matchup zone. “Even we don’t know what we’re doing some of the time,” says the Tigers’ Oliver Brown, who helped Blanton limit Kentucky All-America Kenny Walker to three second-half shots. “So it must confuse them.”
So basically, the identity was misdirection. I’m not so caught up on identity and roles. Everyone thought you had to have a PG, SG, SF, PF, and C. Now you need a couple ball handlers, some wings, some players to cover the post and post up. I’d say the NFL’s whole “Wildcat” thing is a similar adjustment. Now teams aren’t defining QB as the guy who always takes the snap. Who knows where it could lead if teams continue to follow those pathways. But, are all Wildcats “Wildcats” or do some deserve different terms, or should they all be called the same thing?!? See what I mean?
The name doesn’t matter if the quality of the product on the playing surface is top notch and “new.”
But, heheh, don’t know if we can get there or not…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 11, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hmmmmmm
I don’t know, I would say a true “wildcat” is ran by a Running Back.
But the point I was trying to make about our defense and no identity is that just because Mora called it a “West Coast Defense” and it looks like every other 4-3 I have ever seen, doesn’t mean it is different.
bend but don’t break, is that the same concept of those stupid little cable barriers on I-5 that I see broken right where there are skid marks?
"What is it about good sex that makes me have to crap?"
by durteehawk on Nov 11, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the thing, if you look at adjusted DOA for defenses.
The average for a 3-4 is -2.58. The average for a 4-3 is 4.24 (negative being good.)
The bottom ten teams in terms of defense 6 are 4-3 and 4 are 3-4. (JAX is excluded)
4-3
TB 24.8
STL 22.8
Detroit 22.4
TEN 16
HOU 15.3
OAK 11.3
3-4
CLE 17.8
KC 10.5
SD 8.7
DAL 6.9
So besides Cleveland, the 3-4 teams aren’t as horrible as the 4-3 teams.
For the top 10 teams
3-4
DEN -17.4
GB -14
NYJ -13.9
ARI -9.7
SF -9.5
NE -9
BAL -7.6
4-3
PHI -19.8 (best defense)
NO -13.7
WAS -4.3
Obviously it’s probably a matter of coaches and players, but it seems like a pretty big discrepancy (Data is through week 8 of this year, I was a bit lazy)
by LantermanC on Nov 11, 2009 2:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So it could be beneficial to switch to a 3-4
"What is it about good sex that makes me have to crap?"
by durteehawk on Nov 11, 2009 3:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It could, but there are obviously other factors.
If the defensive coach doesn’t know how to use it, that’s not good. If there are only 8 nose tackles capable of playing a good nose, it doesn’t do much good to switch either.
Here’s a point though, if the Steelers switched to 4-3, they would still be good probably (or at least average).
However, look at Denver or the Jets (I think the Jets were 4-3 last year, I’m not sure), they’ve improved a lot this year, though they both have new coaches as well.
by LantermanC on Nov 11, 2009 4:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Jets were 3-4 last year
Our new DL coach was with them last year.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 11, 2009 7:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you are correct sir...
"What is it about good sex that makes me have to crap?"
by durteehawk on Nov 12, 2009 8:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A single season probably isn't enough data...
I’d like to see previous years added into this data set.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 14, 2009 7:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've got a question involving the Field Gulls Unofficial "LB's Don't Make Good Defenses" theory...
Would a 3-4 defense increase the importance of our LB’s (given that we have so much invested into the position)?
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 14, 2009 7:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 
















