View Full Version : Defending Seattle, use a 3-4?

10-24-2000, 05:04 AM
Given our D-line injuries and Seattle's RBs plus West Coast offense, I'd seriously consider using a 3-4 defense. I realize we wouldn't get much pressure on the passer that way, but how much does Holmgren trust Kitna? Their O-line is awful, but they have some very special RBs. With an extra LB out there we could shut down the screens and dump passes they've been living on. Put the 4-3 in for passing downs or blitz regularly from the 3-4.

Normally I'm not a proponent of the 3-4, as an extra player at the LOS can do so much for you. In our case we have big injuries on the D-line and plenty of LB depth. Plus, I'd love to see Maz out there more. Whaddya think?

[This message has been edited by KC Jones (edited 10-24-2000).]

10-24-2000, 05:55 AM
Have they worked on the 3-4 at all? Big risk playing a "D" that you have shelved. Putting Stills on a OT is just asking for trouble. I say play the "bear" and put then in long yardage. Score a wad of points and take the running game out of the mix.

10-24-2000, 06:45 AM
I think Oxford has the right of it.

Score early and often. Use Edwards as a spy on Waters (or Alexander), have the D Line maintain their lanes (except on passing downs), and cause their QB to spend more time horizontal than vertical (who's starting for them this week anyway?).

I think this is a perfect opportunity for the 'Super Chiefs' to show that they were not a one game wonder.

we should collect lots of turnovers and lots of points...

10-24-2000, 07:51 AM
Oh no, I would by no means change our offensive philosophy. Unless of course they come out in a 4-1-6 like we did against the Rams. Speaking of which, I doubt we practiced the 4-1-6 that much before Rams week. I'm not sure playing a 3-4 would be that big a change compared to all the defensive looks we gave the Rams.

Baby Lee
10-24-2000, 07:53 AM
I think first and foremost we have to take their RB's out. They are the biggest playmakers on the team. Plus, the QB's are a little banged up.

10-24-2000, 09:04 AM
Okay, I think so much of this idea I emailed Greag Hall at Sportswaves. Here's his reply:

Not a bad plan. I know the Chiefs have been trying to get Maslowski more snaps and that might be the answer. Seattle is in the dumper right now and the Chiefs need to go up there and step on their neck.

Not a ringing endorsement, but It's a start. I'm offically starting the 3-4 against Seattle movement. It just makes too much sense to me. Against there O-line we can still get some D-line havoc, but we have an extra LB to cut off the cutback lanes, cove the screen, shut down the dump off route, and blitz for some downs.

Just imagine Bush and Patton both in the middle with the speedsters Maslowski and Edwards outside. Don't tell me Mas is slow either, he's almost always the first guy down in punt and kickoff coverage. That guy can fly!

10-24-2000, 09:13 AM

I would normally say that the 3-4 would be an excellent choice against the Hawks, but I just think it takes an element of aggressiveness out of our Defense, which we can ill-afford. I liked the "we're going to take it to you" attitude that we displayed on both sides of the ball on Sunday. I would hate to lose any momentum that we gained from that game.

10-24-2000, 10:29 AM

As the one who predicted the chiefs should use a 4-1-6 a couple weeks ago against the Rams, think your idea has merit.

My biggest concern is that if Chester is out we don't have a defensive lineman who can play nose tackle. Also it is easier to change defensive back coverages and responsiblities than it is for the defensive line. You are correct, in this game it will be critical to stop the run, slant, dump, and screen passes. Plays that have given us trouble in the past.

Send our front four hard at Kitna every play, and let our linebackers key on their backs at all times. (no dropping back into coverages) if their RB swings out in the flat the LB on that side has to come up IMMEDIATELY to make the play. Count on our DBs and Safeties to stop the slant patterns. First game played a lot of deep zone allowing their blocking to set up on screen plays. MAKE that our LBs first responsiblity to break it up before it develops. Who knows, I could be wrong.

[This message has been edited by Red Till Dead (edited 10-24-2000).]

10-24-2000, 10:39 AM
I personally think ej is on the right track with this....
It's not that big of an adjustment for players....
I don't think I'd play Bush inside though... his lateral speed doesn't impress me much.
That Maslowski nut would be my choice... (anybody with ski at the end of his name has to play inside LB)

As RTD pointed out, it depends on your nose guard... If you have a guy who's good at slipping blocks (Chet isn't anymore) then its a go.