what about 3-4??

Facing-The-Giant · #1 (**permalink**) -24-03-2007

just think about it. we can have james hall, la'roi glover, and leonard little as our 3 down lineman. then have chillar, draft, spoon, and pisa as our backers, with tye hill and fahkir brown as the corners, with OJ at FS, and corey at SS. ofcourse if we draft another DT, Preferably Amobi Okoye, then this would never work, just an interesting thought.

*Bar-bq* · #2 (**permalink**) -24-03-2007

No. Not right now.

Little would be best suited as an outside backer in the 3-4. I guarantee you there is nobody big enough in our system to play the NT. We need ends that can stop the run and free up our LBs to make plays. We'd have a huge hole at DT, and aditionally a big one at LDE, and possibly RDE. Adeyanju is unproven, and raw at best. His strength is against the run, but how does he develop?

Basically, we need a huge anchor for the 3-4 to be successful. Look at where it's worked. Dallas got rid of La'Roi glover for not being able to play the NT in the 3-4. Pittsburgh has a giant DT. The Patriots have Seymour at DE and Vincent Wilfork at NT. We have noobody whose size or skill compares right now, so it's not a hugely viablle option, in my books.

Facing-The-Giant · #3 (**permalink**) -24-03-2007

I realize all of that, but it was just an idea, besides amobi okoye or alan branch could fix that problem.

*andy82* · #4 (**permalink**) -24-03-2007

Adam Carriker or even the Tank would go a long way

*CRAZYHORNS* · #5 (**permalink**) -24-03-2007

Okoye and Branch can fix the problem. Are you sure just like Lewis, Pickett, Kennedy did?

I'm not a big fan of drafting Defensive Or Offensive Lineman in the 1st round unless you think you have a phenom like Pace etc.....

*keith m. klink* · #6 (**permalink**) -24-03-2007

WOW, you have quite the imagination, yea , let's just do that, now we are a 3-4 team. poof, everything is all better. wow, we should have done this years ago. look how simple it was. and now the defense is all fixed. man , you got all the answers. what were we thinking on this site about the people we want to be drafted. it sure would seem we were all wrong again. good job kid.

Facing-The-Giant · #7 (**permalink**) -24-03-2007

3-4 is better against the run. I understand that we don't have the right players for it, but A little 3-4 during the season would be ok.

*Brain Daddy* · #8 (**permalink**) -24-03-2007

Maybe here and there, but not as your base defense.

You don't have a NT. This is pretty much the keystone of 3-4. If you don't have that NT eating up at least 2 blockers, you're going to have Olinemen on your 'backers, eliminating advantages of the 3-4. Carriker and Okoye would both be DEs in the 3-4. Branch has the size to play NT, but he's a bit of a risk. That's assuming any one of them is there at #13.

Glover would more than likely be a DE, but the other DE spot would be a question mark. Leonard Little is too small to be a DE and would more than likely be an OLB. Hall might be able to play the other DE, he's a bit on the smallish side.

If you thought your defense was bad against the run last year, it would be even worse if your coaching staff up and switched. You don't have the personnel for it , and it might take 1 or 2 years to make the shift.

Facing-The-Giant · #9 (**permalink**) -24-03-2007

didint we play a little 3-4 here and there last year?? I think i remember jim saying we would show a 3-4 look every once and a while. i agree that this would take years to change, and in the end it may not be worth it, I just want to get better on defense, and I don't care how we do it as long as we do. I think you will all agree on that.

*Bar-bq* · #10 (**permalink**) -25-03-2007

I still don't think the 3-4 is the answer. We don't have the massive NT required to even dabble in the 3-4 allignment. We'd get absolutely torched.

As for getting better on defense- tally ho!

**Nick** · #11 (**permalink**) -25-03-2007

We can't even find a nose tackle for the 4-3, let alone for a 3-4.

It's curious that people like this defensive scheme as much as they do. For the Rams in the near, I don't see it being anything more than an occasional alignment at best.

Facing-The-Giant · #12 (**permalink**) -25-03-2007

I remember when we played the seahawks last year in seattle, we played 3-4 for 2 plays. looked ok, but not spectacular.

*81~BIG-GAME* · #13 (**permalink**) -25-03-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Facing-The-Giant

I remember when we played the seahawks last year in seattle, we played 3-4 for 2 plays. looked ok, but not spectacular.

Well there you go Einstein,forget about 3-4..

Facing-The-Giant · #14 (**permalink**) -26-03-2007

It just seems to work so well for the chargers. but then again they have a massive NT too.

*Goldenfleece* · #15 (**permalink**) -26-03-2007

Any scheme's success is going to rely largely on how well it fits the personnel you have. The Chargers, Patriots, and Steelers have all had top defenses in recent years using the 3-4, so I can see why it would be popular, but I don't think it would suit our strengths at the moment. Dallas let Glover go because he didn't really fit into their 3-4 scheme that well, and the outside 'backers in a 3-4 have to be strong enough to take on blockers if necessary because a main part of their job is rushing off the edge. Little could be one of our outside linebackers, but it would be an adjustment for him and I'm not convinced that Tinoisamoa or Chillar would do as well in that scheme.