PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Offense/Defense (Philosophy based)


Sorter
11-13-2012, 09:45 PM
We've done several "If you were the GM/HC etc." threads here. However, I'm curious to see what kind of base offensive or defensive philosophies you would choose to try and design the Chiefs with. I know a majority will and should chose to utilize a 1-ga principle defensively but am curious as to the other aspects.

Personally, I would hire coaches to install a 1-gap Phillips based 3-4. While I love the fire-zone philosophies, I think that they require even more athletic players than we have currently to run at an elite level constantly and would prefer man-coverage rather than zone on downs/scenarios that dictate a pass. In the future, I would love to be able to incorporate these concepts once personnel has been adjusted accordingly.

Offensively, it would depend on the QB we draft. If Barkley, I'm hiring an OC who is based in the WCO and a HC that understands (generally) those philosophies, even if it is a defensive minded coach. Additionally, I would want him to emphasize YAC and back shoulder throws consistently.

If Smith or Wilson, I would likely hire someone who continues with a zone-based blocking system (as I feel it fits our smaller, athletic OL better and our backs in Charles/Cyrus better in a 1-cut philosophy). The OC would also utilize PA consistently (via bootlegs off of our stretch play) and would encourage a deeper approach in terms of route concepts, specifically attacking the seams off of motion with our WRs/TEs and and the corners of the field (corners/deep outs, back shoulder throws).


I'm curious to see what you all would like to have as there are several talented minds here, IMO.

cyborgtable
11-14-2012, 06:06 AM
Offensively I want an aggressive Erhardt-Perkins offense similar to what the saints run. Defensively I want to mimic Seattle's take on the over/under tampa 2 from that Monte ran in Tampa

DaKCMan AP
11-14-2012, 06:06 AM
I want an offense that scores lots of points and a defense that stops the other team from scoring points.

theelusiveeightrop
11-14-2012, 06:08 AM
Don't care if we win 3-0 or 37-34.

bevischief
11-14-2012, 06:16 AM
I want an offense that scores lots of points and a defense that stops the other team from scoring points.

This.

Aspengc8
11-14-2012, 06:26 AM
We've done several "If you were the GM/HC etc." threads here. However, I'm curious to see what kind of base offensive or defensive philosophies you would choose to try and design the Chiefs with. I know a majority will and should chose to utilize a 1-ga principle defensively but am curious as to the other aspects.

Personally, I would hire coaches to install a 1-gap Phillips based 3-4. While I love the fire-zone philosophies, I think that they require even more athletic players than we have currently to run at an elite level constantly and would prefer man-coverage rather than zone on downs/scenarios that dictate a pass. In the future, I would love to be able to incorporate these concepts once personnel has been adjusted accordingly.

Offensively, it would depend on the QB we draft. If Barkley, I'm hiring an OC who is based in the WCO and a HC that understands (generally) those philosophies, even if it is a defensive minded coach. Additionally, I would want him to emphasize YAC and back shoulder throws consistently.

If Smith or Wilson, I would likely hire someone who continues with a zone-based blocking system (as I feel it fits our smaller, athletic OL better and our backs in Charles/Cyrus better in a 1-cut philosophy). The OC would also utilize PA consistently (via bootlegs off of our stretch play) and would encourage a deeper approach in terms of route concepts, specifically attacking the seams off of motion with our WRs/TEs and and the corners of the field (corners/deep outs, back shoulder throws).


I'm curious to see what you all would like to have as there are several talented minds here, IMO.

They don't strictly play 2-gap every play. They mix in 1-gap over/under philosophies as well as fire-zone. I personally don't think they are aggressive enough and should blitz more often. Dropping guys like Belcher and Houston into zone coverage is a huge mistake. Shit, I've seen them dropping Tamba into coverage and my mind is blown.

On offense we just need a more consistent QB. 90% of our runs are outside zone, and just this past game we started to really run the waggle off of it. The pick in overtime was Cassel proving he can't make reads. That play was a classic WCO curl/flat, and he stared down the curl the whole time. If you watch the replay he could have hit the flat for 4+, which is what you take with the WCO. Short passes = long hand off, which is what you want on something like 2nd and 6 (which I think it was).

Woodchuck
11-14-2012, 07:02 AM
This is based on the personnel we currently have.

On defense, I would like to run an attacking style 3-4 defense similar to what Capers ran in Green Bay in 2010. It would be a 3-4 defense that uses the one gap and two gap. The guy that made Caper's defense go that year was Cullen Jenkins playing DE. When they lost him in 2011, their pass rush and the entire defense took a big hit.

To run this defense, I think we would want to use Poe in the same role the Pack used Jenkins. He would move around from RE to LE in the two gap and he would strictly play RE in the one gap. Ultimately, this would make Poe and the OLBs the focal point of the defense. The idea would be to really generate a pass rush around Poe or use him as a decoy to generate a pass rush elsewhere. Baltimore also does this with Ngata. The middle linebackers would mostly be used in zone coverage and gap closing roles with the occassional blitz. I can see us drafting Te'o (in addition to a QB). He and DJ would make a nice combination in this defense.

Unlike Green Bay, I think we better run a zone defense with the corners we have. Flowers is one of the best zone corners in the NFL and could end up like Ty Law if we would quit putting him in man coverage. Arenas is also better suited for zone. Berry needs to simply play strong safety and we need to just leave him back there. We need to stop being cute with him and he will make more plays. I think we have seen that the last couple of weeks. We need to get better at free safety. If we are going to run a blitz happy offense, we better have a free safety who can cover and tackle. We have to be solid back there.

I am not opposed to throwing in the occassional 2-3-6 defense to confuse QBs like Capers did in 2010. I just want to see it once every two weeks instead of ten times a game. We just need to simplify things imo. I can't see us moving someone around like Caper's did Charles Woodson but, Caper's base defensive foundation would be a good fit. Last, I'd like to give Kevin Green, Packers LB Coach, a chance to be the DC. I think he will be a great DC and put the smash mouth in the defense.

On offense, I would initially run the zone blocking scheme because we have a bunch of young linemen who are good at it. I would prefer bigger linemen who just bully people and wear them down but, we don't have the horses. I would slowly transition to that style of o-line. I would try and run an old fashioned Raiders offense. The #1 receiver is a possession guy, the #2 receiver is a burner, and a fast playmaking running back. The running game would be the focal point of the offense and the play action pass would be devistating. I would try and sign Mike Wallace and another free agent receiver with good hands until we can find a true possession receiver. McCluster will be perfect in the slot and the deep guy would open the middle up for him all day. A strong armed QB is a must and I guess that's the wildcard in all of this. I think Tyler Wilson is the guy we need. He doesn't hang the ball on the deep pass like the others. The key to this offense is the deep threat. If the opposition has to worry about Wallace, it helps Charles and everyone else. Last, I would get a true old school blocking FB to pave the way for Charles. We struggle at running the ball up the guy because we don't have this. I am so tired of not having a FB. I'd like to hire Tom Cable to be the OC. Like Green, he is also a smash mouth guy. I think he would do a great job as the OC and help in transitioning the zone blockers into maulers.

I think this would be the fastest way to success. I am still pretty open minded about a HC. I would prefer someone who has been in the league for a while instead of a college guy. He doesn't have to have had HC experience.

scott free
11-14-2012, 07:15 AM
I want a one gap, attacking 3-4, its gotta be 3-4, i like the versatility of an extra LB.

On offense - strong running game, throw for chunks off play action - why we dont do more PA i'll never understand (ok i do, the qb sucks at it), the threat of Charles should make that effective all game long.

ChiefMojo
11-14-2012, 08:25 AM
Personally I would run a attacking 1-Gap 3-4 defense and a offense based off of Shanahan/Kubiak's zone blocking, boot-leg, play action offense.

the Talking Can
11-14-2012, 08:48 AM
Offensively, it would depend on the QB we draft. If Barkley, I'm hiring an OC who is based in the WCO and a HC that understands (generally) those philosophies, even if it is a defensive minded coach. Additionally, I would want him to emphasize YAC and back shoulder throws consistently.

If Smith or Wilson, I would likely hire someone who continues with a zone-based blocking system (as I feel it fits our smaller, athletic OL better and our backs in Charles/Cyrus better in a 1-cut philosophy). The OC would also utilize PA consistently (via bootlegs off of our stretch play) and would encourage a deeper approach in terms of route concepts, specifically attacking the seams off of motion with our WRs/TEs and and the corners of the field (corners/deep outs, back shoulder throws).


cosign

we really need to get the staff right, and then trust they can identify and develop the right QB...I'm less wedded to a QB at this point then I am the idea of the right fit between QB and staff

defense..eh, whatever version of the 3-4 that sucks less than our current one...

Chris Meck
11-14-2012, 08:56 AM
attacking one gap 3-4 as we almost have the personnel for it. Finally. I think you leave Poe at NT, let Dorsey walk, and let Bailey, Pit, Smith, and Jackson rotate at DE. Powe can spell Poe for a breather, just spotting a 'w'. Nyuck, nyuck.
We need a corner, and a better (healthy) option at FS.
I like the Pittsburgh style zone blitz; but you need LB's that can cover. The Wade Phillips style 3-4 would seem to fit the personnel better. I'm quite happy with Poe's progress and I think we can build the line around him going forward.

Offensively it depends on a few variables, namely who we hire as HC, OC, and who we draft to play QB. I think there are a few systems that have proven themselves at the NFL level and whichever suits the talents of the QB is good with me. For instance, if we hire Jay Gruden to HC, that would probably mean we draft Barkley and run the WCO. It's a good fit. If it were to be Chip Kelly, I think maybe you're looking at Geno Smith and Kelly's Oregon system...It kind of looks like half of the old Dallas system but I have no idea what the terminology, etc. is.

T-post Tom
11-14-2012, 09:08 AM
They don't strictly play 2-gap every play. They mix in 1-gap over/under philosophies as well as fire-zone. I personally don't think they are aggressive enough and should blitz more often. Dropping guys like Belcher and Houston into zone coverage is a huge mistake. Shit, I've seen them dropping Tamba into coverage and my mind is blown.

On offense we just need a more consistent QB. 90% of our runs are outside zone, and just this past game we started to really run the waggle off of it. The pick in overtime was Cassel proving he can't make reads. That play was a classic WCO curl/flat, and he stared down the curl the whole time. If you watch the replay he could have hit the flat for 4+, which is what you take with the WCO. Short passes = long hand off, which is what you want on something like 2nd and 6 (which I think it was).

Some of us old-timers remember Dan Saleamua dropping back in coverage. Now that was messed up.

T-post Tom
11-14-2012, 09:12 AM
I like the EMP defense & endorse the cut-Cassel offense.

Mr. Laz
11-14-2012, 09:15 AM
We have passive schemes on both sides of the ball ... just is a bad idea.

You have to dictate/attack/create somewhere

DaKCMan AP
11-14-2012, 09:25 AM
“Now, that I’m not exactly sure" /RAC

bobbything
11-14-2012, 09:43 AM
Offensively, I would honestly incorporate many elements of the Run and Shoot. Specifically utilizing the choice routes and pre-snap motions. I would find the best-suited QB for this and essentially allow him to run the offense. Ideally, I'd like a big RB, but this isn't completely necessary.

Since this requires an extremely intelligent quarterback who must be in constant harmony with his receivers, I can immediately eliminate Matt Cassel from my search.

Aspengc8
11-14-2012, 12:13 PM
Offensively, I would honestly incorporate many elements of the Run and Shoot. Specifically utilizing the choice routes and pre-snap motions. I would find the best-suited QB for this and essentially allow him to run the offense. Ideally, I'd like a big RB, but this isn't completely necessary.

Since this requires an extremely intelligent quarterback who must be in constant harmony with his receivers, I can immediately eliminate Matt Cassel from my search.

They've tried all that already. The problem is Cassel. He makes the wrong reads and his balls don't get out in time and have no zip. Did you see how many 12-15yd deep outs where almost picked vs the steelers?

bobbything
11-14-2012, 12:44 PM
They've tried all that already. The problem is Cassel. He makes the wrong reads and his balls don't get out in time and have no zip. Did you see how many 12-15yd deep outs where almost picked vs the steelers?
Oh, I'm not talking about doing it with this Chiefs team. I thought this was a hypothetical moving forward. As I said, you need a smart, accurate quarterback. This doesn't really describe Matt Cassel.

whoman69
11-14-2012, 01:13 PM
I would have a more balanced philosophy that would include ball control to keep my defense fresh. I would have both shotgun and under the center available for the QB. I would mix play action passes in with straight passing situations. I incorporate both 2 TE and fullback sets.

Defensively I would be more aggressive in getting the other teams to 3 and out situations with a 3-4 base defense. I would have at least 4 pass rushers on every passing down.

Aspengc8
11-14-2012, 01:40 PM
Oh, I'm not talking about doing it with this Chiefs team. I thought this was a hypothetical moving forward. As I said, you need a smart, accurate quarterback. This doesn't really describe Matt Cassel.

Teams nowadays take the best from all those offensive philosophies. This holds true for KC, as most of us have seen Cassel botch simple passing route combo reads. Most of our passing attack is west coast based.. most of the time no read. Cassel is notorious for being locked in to a receiver once he see's the defense pre snap alignment.

Sweet Daddy Hate
11-14-2012, 01:49 PM
Well, I'd take whatever Marty/Cowher were doing back in the day defensively, and attach the dink and dunk WCO to the nearest tree, burn it with a nuclear-powered flamethrower, and nevar look back.

Also, any time the HC called a screen, I would incorporate a device similar to a dog shock collar which would be attached to his balls, and operated remotely from the stands by a midget in a little red and gold leprachaun outfit who would simulataneously dance a happy little jig while pushing the button repeatedly.

Hope that helps.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 02:09 PM
Oh, I'm not talking about doing it with this Chiefs team. I thought this was a hypothetical moving forward. As I said, you need a smart, accurate quarterback. This doesn't really describe Matt Cassel.

It most certainly is.

Dayze
11-14-2012, 03:36 PM
Deadly Offense.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 03:40 PM
Deadly Offense.

What about Ninja Offense?

http://legacy-cdn.smosh.com/smosh-pit/032011/ninja-fat.gif

Dayze
11-14-2012, 03:41 PM
I'd take it.

keg in kc
11-14-2012, 04:09 PM
I want aggressive on both sides of the ball. I don't really care what the specific system is on offense, but I want a scheme that utilizes motions and shifting to create mismatches and is balanced in terms of never knowing what's coming re: run and pass. Although, technically, by "balanced" I mean throws a bit more than runs. I do NOT want a run-based offense. Defensively I'd stay 3-4, but move out of the passive philosophy and have an attacking front seven. The risk means more potential for mistakes and big plays, but I'll take that as opposed to getting nickel and dimed to death by patient offenses. And we've been giving up big plays for years anyway.

I'm just sick of passive football, in general. We need to take it to other teams, rather than react to what they do.

petegz28
11-14-2012, 04:23 PM
Vermeil offense...Marty defense

Dayze
11-14-2012, 05:49 PM
I truly hate the 3-4.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 05:55 PM
]They don't strictly play 2-gap every play. They mix in 1-gap over/under philosophies as well as fire-zone. [/B]I personally don't think they are aggressive enough and should blitz more often. Dropping guys like Belcher and Houston into zone coverage is a huge mistake. Shit, I've seen them dropping Tamba into coverage and my mind is blown.



Actually, the Chiefs are one of the few teams that rarely switch to an over/under in their base front. Additionally, fire-zone concepts are not typically used. When Crennel does decide to send more than 4, we are typically playing man-coverage.

Everything else though I agree with.

scott free
11-14-2012, 08:05 PM
Actually, the Chiefs are one of the few teams that rarely switch to an over/under in their base front. Additionally, fire-zone concepts are not typically used. When Crennel does decide to send more than 4, we are typically playing man-coverage.

Everything else though I agree with.

Honest question...

How in the blue hell did a girl your age ever become so football intelligent?

Its been bugging the shit out of me for days, i've never seen a girl with such informed takes.

You need to apply for a pr job with some college or pro team.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 08:07 PM
Honest question...

How in the blue hell did a girl your age ever become so football intelligent?

Its been bugging the shit out of me for days, i've never seen a girl with such informed takes.

You need to apply for a pr job with some college or pro team.

WTF. Why just PR? You're a sexist asshole. You don't think personnel would be a good fit?

This kind of close-minded thinking is exactly why the Chiefs suck.



LMAO

scott free
11-14-2012, 08:20 PM
WTF. Why just PR? You're a sexist asshole. You don't think personnel would be a good fit?

This kind of close-minded thinking is exactly why the Chiefs suck.



LMAO

ROFL I Honestly Swear on my Grandfather, that exact thought hit my mind about 1 minute after that post.

My bad, you go!

petegz28
11-14-2012, 08:24 PM
I truly hate the 3-4.

I personally like the 3-4 when it is more attacking. I don't like the version of the 3-4 we run.

Mr. Laz
11-14-2012, 08:33 PM
I truly hate the 3-4.

I personally like the 3-4 when it is more attacking. I don't like the version of the 3-4 we run.
If we would just run a hybrid 3-4 system i think we would be fine.

1-gap/2-gap

Right now the offense knows exactly what our Dline is going to do. If we were to switch it up and run 1-gap some too, opposing offense would have to play more honestly in their blocking assignments.

It would also help with motivation along the Dline imo. It's got to be boring as shit to 'engage' the Oline but not be allow to attack. Being a human punching bag has to suck.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 08:34 PM
I truly hate the 3-4.

Care to elaborate? I value your opinion honestly. Do you truly hate it, or would prefer to see a 4-3 that utilizes a sub package consisting of 4 true DEs like the NYGs?

From a personal viewpoint, I think that while the 3-4 (1-gap or fire-zone based) requires moredifficult players to obtain that are effective but the payoff is greater. There are far more athletic LBs who can play in a 4-3, as well as pure-pass rushing DE's (240-270lbs that only focus on rushing the passer as opposed to 270-310 DEs who can rush the passer, play the run well and could occasionally drop depending on the blitz designed).


Just one person's opinion. I think the 4-3 is fantastic but doesn't provide as much variability. To me, it is more of a "we'll line up, show what we've got and try to fucking beat us" front, typically. You can utilize some zone-blitz concepts effectively as the Eagles used to do, but to me it seems more difficult to incorporate effectively.

chiefzilla1501
11-14-2012, 08:35 PM
I know I'm going to get destroyed for this, but I want to run an old-school Whisenhunt offense. It's basically run-heavy, dink and dunk, but take a lot of shots downfield. I think it's a great system to develop a young pocket QB. In 2-3 years, I then want to open that offense up. Lots of young guys developed in this kind of system. Matt Ryan, Flacco, Big Ben, Brady, Eli... they didn't begin as pass-first offenses. Then open up the offense in 2-3 years when the QB is settled.

On defense, it has to be a 1-gap. I'd love to extend Dorsey a year and see if he can adapt. I'd cut Tyson Jackson as he's not 1-gap material. I still like Gus Bradley/Pete Carroll's "under" scheme in Seattle and think it would be a pretty easy transition. Also really like Horton's 3-4 in Arizona. And anybody who thinks Poe should move away from NT is crazy. Poe's value is that he could one day be a nose tackle you never have to take off the field. That's a great player to have in a world where your NTs are 2-down guys who get destroyed when offenses go no-huddle.

petegz28
11-14-2012, 08:39 PM
I know I'm going to get destroyed for this, but I want to run an old-school Whisenhunt offense. It's basically run-heavy, dink and dunk, but take a lot of shots downfield. I think it's a great system to develop a young pocket QB. In 2-3 years, I then want to open that offense up. Lots of young guys developed in this kind of system. Matt Ryan, Flacco, Big Ben, Brady, Eli... they didn't begin as pass-first offenses. Then open up the offense in 2-3 years when the QB is settled.

On defense, it has to be a 1-gap. I'd love to extend Dorsey a year and see if he can adapt. I'd cut Tyson Jackson as he's not 1-gap material. I still like Gus Bradley/Pete Carroll's "under" scheme in Seattle and think it would be a pretty easy transition. Also really like Horton's 3-4 in Arizona. And anybody who thinks Poe should move away from NT is crazy. Poe's value is that he could one day be a nose tackle you never have to take off the field. That's a great player to have in a world where your NTs are 2-down guys who get destroyed when offenses go no-huddle.



Dorsey ain't going to cut it in a 3-4.

petegz28
11-14-2012, 08:40 PM
Our offensive and defensive philosophies should be one in the same when you get down to it:

strike first
strike hard
strike last

It's that simple. Attack, attack, attack.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 08:46 PM
I'd love to extend Dorsey a year and see if he can adapt.

Dorsey as displayed throughout his career that he can't provide a pass rush on sub packages in the 3-tech or in a shaded 1. He has played both at different times throughout his tenure here. I don't think he needs to stay.

chiefzilla1501
11-14-2012, 08:46 PM
Dorsey ain't going to cut it in a 3-4.

He hasn't been trained to be a pass rusher. He needs to be coached up big time on technique. But the reason he was highly regarded in college was his explosion off the line of scrimmage. Let's get him back to what he's good at. I don't think he'll be a star, but he could be a solid enough starter. Jackson's the guy I'm convinced is a pure 2-gap player.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 08:49 PM
He hasn't been trained to be a pass rusher. He needs to be coached up big time on technique. But the reason he was highly regarded in college was his explosion off the line of scrimmage. Let's get him back to what he's good at. I don't think he'll be a star, but he could be a solid enough starter. Jackson's the guy I'm convinced is a pure 2-gap player.

Dorsey played quite a few snaps in our sub package, which has 2 DL playing a shaded 1 and a 3-tech. In a Phillips 1-gap, 1 DE typically plays the 5 or 4 tech, with a shaded NT and a DE playing the 3-tech.

Dorsey has gotten several snaps playing a relevant technique and didn't ever display on a consistent basis that he can penetrate and provide an interior pass rush.

petegz28
11-14-2012, 08:53 PM
He hasn't been trained to be a pass rusher. He needs to be coached up big time on technique. But the reason he was highly regarded in college was his explosion off the line of scrimmage. Let's get him back to what he's good at. I don't think he'll be a star, but he could be a solid enough starter. Jackson's the guy I'm convinced is a pure 2-gap player.

Dorsey is not a 3-4 DE, I don't care how much coaching you give him. It's not his game. Joe Phillips was the last 3-4 RDE we had prior to Dorsey, IIRC. He was 6-5, 317. Glen Dorsey is 6-1, 297.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 08:55 PM
Dorsey is not a 3-4 DE, I don't care how much coaching you give him. It's not his game. Joe Phillips was the last 3-4 RDE we had prior to Dorsey, IIRC. He was 6-5, 317. Glen Dorsey is 6-1, 297.

Dorsey's size isn't the problem IMO. Watt is 6'5 295 and Justin SMith is 6'4, 285.

Dorsey just isn't a good pass rusher, period.

petegz28
11-14-2012, 08:57 PM
Dorsey's size isn't the problem IMO. Watt is 6'5 295 and Justin SMith is 6'4, 285.

Dorsey just isn't a good pass rusher, period.

Both have 3-4 inches over Dorsey. Both are natural pass rushers. Dorsey is a 4-3 guy pure and simple.

petegz28
11-14-2012, 08:59 PM
Ok, not saying he is anything as good but it really reinforces my point. Warren Sapp who I think no one would argue was a beast in a 4-3. When he go moved to a 3-4 he sucked and he sucked badly. Some guys are just not cut out to play a 3-4. Dorsey is one of them.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 09:04 PM
Ok, not saying he is anything as good but it really reinforces my point. Warren Sapp who I think no one would argue was a beast in a 4-3. When he go moved to a 3-4 he sucked and he sucked badly. Some guys are just not cut out to play a 3-4. Dorsey is one of them.

Dorsey isn't cut out to be anything but a run-stopper, until he proves otherwise. He had chances here and didn't do anything with them.

chiefzilla1501
11-14-2012, 09:05 PM
Dorsey as displayed throughout his career that he can't provide a pass rush on sub packages in the 3-tech or in a shaded 1. He has played both at different times throughout his tenure here. I don't think he needs to stay.

I trust that. I just don't know that he's been coached it in the way he should. He has been trained primarily to play 2-gap in a read-and-react way. I don't know that he's been trained proper 1-gap attacking technique. I don't know if he can do it. I'd just like to give him a year where this is all that he does.

Sorter
11-14-2012, 09:14 PM
I trust that. I just don't know that he's been coached it in the way he should. He has been trained primarily to play 2-gap in a read-and-react way. I don't know that he's been trained proper 1-gap attacking technique. I don't know if he can do it. I'd just like to give him a year where this is all that he does.

The technique for a 1-gap DE playing the 3-tech is the same as our 3-tech in our sub package. Stunts can provide some variance, but as far as movement,body position, leverage, hand-fighting skills they are relevant. Additionally, Dorsey played the 3-tech his first year here exclusively, IIRC.

Woodchuck
11-15-2012, 07:04 AM
ROFL I Honestly Swear on my Grandfather, that exact thought hit my mind about 1 minute after that post.

My bad, you go!

I seriously thought he was a girl for the first couple of weeks I was here. It's the gifs. I mean yesterday he posted James Vanderbeak and Tom Cruise gifs. What are you supposed to think?

JASONSAUTO
11-15-2012, 07:10 AM
Honest question...

How in the blue hell did a girl your age ever become so football intelligent?

Its been bugging the shit out of me for days, i've never seen a girl with such informed takes.

You need to apply for a pr job with some college or pro team.
her dad coached the titans before denzel
Posted via Mobile Device

JASONSAUTO
11-15-2012, 07:11 AM
I seriously thought he was a girl for the first couple of weeks I was here. It's the gifs. I mean yesterday he posted James Vanderbeak and Tom Cruise gifs. What are you supposed to think?

That you are an idiot that can't understand what he reads...
Posted via Mobile Device

Aspengc8
11-15-2012, 07:25 AM
If we would just run a hybrid 3-4 system i think we would be fine.

1-gap/2-gap

Right now the offense knows exactly what our Dline is going to do. If we were to switch it up and run 1-gap some too, opposing offense would have to play more honestly in their blocking assignments.

It would also help with motivation along the Dline imo. It's got to be boring as shit to 'engage' the Oline but not be allow to attack. Being a human punching bag has to suck.

Not sure where your coming up with some of this stuff, but the line is definitely allowed to attack. Whether they have 1 gap responsibility or 2, you shed the block and make a play. Where the 2 gap system shines, is if your line is successful at reading the play, shedding and making plays, they then require a double team from the o-line. Not sure where this whole 'soak up blockers' mentality is coming from. There not going to get double teamed if it isnt needed.

Dayze
11-15-2012, 08:01 AM
I personally like the 3-4 when it is more attacking. I don't like the version of the 3-4 we run.

I can agree with that.

One reason I don't like it is it seems like you need more playmakers than in the 4-3.
I mean, a huge NT (which, there just aren'[t too many humans alive that fit the bill); a incredibly smart MLB. (though it could be argued you need that regardless); and I think big OLBs that can take on the run AND drop into coverage. Hard to find both traits IMO.

our current "3-4" sucks balls.

Aspengc8
11-15-2012, 09:13 AM
I can agree with that.

One reason I don't like it is it seems like you need more playmakers than in the 4-3.
I mean, a huge NT (which, there just aren'[t too many humans alive that fit the bill); a incredibly smart MLB. (though it could be argued you need that regardless); and I think big OLBs that can take on the run AND drop into coverage. Hard to find both traits IMO.

our current "3-4" sucks balls.

Having a dominant NT, and OLB's that can get to the QB, will anchor a good 3-4. You can always find 'tweener' 4-3 DT's/DE's that can convert to 3-4. Also your ILB's need to be able to shed a block if lineman get to their level. Thank god DJ takes good angles.. him nor belcher shed very well. The other big problem is if we want to bring Houstin & Hali, then belcher is in coverage. Dude is bad in coverage. I really think Powe & Poe need to be on the field when we are in any 3-4 alignment. I'd put smith out there over tjack or any of those other clowns.

rabblerouser
11-15-2012, 09:54 AM
Some of us old-timers remember Dan Saleamua dropping back in coverage. Now that was messed up.

shit, I remember him getting a pick or two, didn't he even return one for a TD??

Rausch
11-15-2012, 09:56 AM
Would prefer a Capers/Cowher 3-4 defense with a power running compliment to Charles and a strong-armed QB...

rabblerouser
11-15-2012, 10:28 AM
Having a dominant NT, and OLB's that can get to the QB, will anchor a good 3-4. You can always find 'tweener' 4-3 DT's/DE's that can convert to 3-4. Also your ILB's need to be able to shed a block if lineman get to their level. Thank god DJ takes good angles.. him nor belcher shed very well. The other big problem is if we want to bring Houstin & Hali, then belcher is in coverage. Dude is bad in coverage. I really think Powe & Poe need to be on the field when we are in any 3-4 alignment. I'd put smith out there over tjack or any of those other clowns.

What it all comes down to is...our D-line SUCKS, for having, what, 3 1st round picks and a 3rd?? it's woeful.

I think that the 2-gap RAC runs is a fine defense, if you have the people to pull it off. Tyson Jackson, Glenn Dorsey, Jovan Belcher, Kendrick Lewis, Javier Arenas...I don't care if Buddy Ryan was running a 46, or if Tony Dungy himself were here putting in the Tampa 2, or if Dick LeBeau came over and put the zone blitz in - the defensive talent here right now is terrible. We have Houston, Hali, DJ, Berry, Flowers, and (maybe) Poe. That's it. That's the only talent on that defense, period.

Improve the talent, and it almost doesn't matter what system you run (though, this roster is ideally suited to the Phillips-esque classic 1-gap.)

As for offense, I'm a big fan of the Coryell/Gillman/Turner tree of attacking offense, going after the Defense through mismatches created by sub packages, shifts and motions, sending 5 receivers, 2 TE/H-back power running, etc. To make that work, there really needs to be an intelligent QB who can make all the throws (guys who have success in that system - Aikman, Fouts, Warner, Green, Jaworski, Theismann, etc. - were all very intelligent QBs, and classic dropback passers. Didn't need to run around much...because they usually didnthe right thing with the ball.)

I think the Coryell offenses really draw elements from every other offense - elements of the WCO and the Run and Shoot are there (timing, QB/WR reads, spot throws, etc), as are elements of the power running game found in the Perkins-Erhardt, which is what we run now.

Bigger fan of the Saunders-variant; Al was a bit more conservative, a bit more balanced than, say, Mike Martz, who was going to get Kurt Warner killed - but Al wasn't as conservative with it as, say, Joe Gibbs. Cam Cameron would be a good choice for OC...but I don't even know where he coaches anymore.

The problem with us using the Coryell is (here it comes) : that offense is so complex, it really does take 3 years to get it down. Alex Smith had some good success with it when Norv was his OC that one year, but Smith had already been in the league a few years when that got thrown at him, and I'm sure Norv 'dumbed it down' some. Idk...whatever happens, it's gonna take a new QB. And a new GM, with a new HC and new coordinators. That's all I really know...

bobbything
11-15-2012, 10:43 AM
As for offense, I'm a big fan of the Coryell/Gillman/Turner tree of attacking offense, going after the Defense through mismatches created by sub packages, shifts and motions, sending 5 receivers, 2 TE/H-back power running, etc. To make that work, there really needs to be an intelligent QB who can make all the throws (guys who have success in that system - Aikman, Fouts, Warner, Green, Jaworski, Theismann, etc. - were all very intelligent QBs, and classic dropback passers. Didn't need to run around much...because they usually didnthe right thing with the ball.)

I think the Coryell offenses really draw elements from every other offense - elements of the WCO and the Run and Shoot are there (timing, QB/WR reads, spot throws, etc), as are elements of the power running game found in the Perkins-Erhardt, which is what we run now.

Bigger fan of the Saunders-variant; Al was a bit more conservative, a bit more balanced than, say, Mike Martz, who was going to get Kurt Warner killed - but Al wasn't as conservative with it as, say, Joe Gibbs. Cam Cameron would be a good choice for OC...but I don't even know where he coaches anymore.

This.

Saunders' version was about as complete as I've seen an offense. You don't see what he did at all in the NFL anymore. All the pre-snap motions and shifts really revealed what the defense was doing and they were able to exploit it.

They'd line Hall, Gonzalez, and Kennison up in the backfield, then have Priest in the slot. Then, they'd shift and you'd see exactly who was covering who, what kind of defense they were running, etc. I loved watching the pre-snap as much as the offense itself because it forced the defense to reveal their intentions (for the most part).

Biggest drawbacks I saw were that with all the motions and formation shifts, it used up nearly all of the playclock. And we used a lot of unnecessary timeouts because of it. Also, the play that was called was the play that was ran. There were multiple reads in this offense, but there was no audible allowed.

It really demonstrated how smart Trent Green was. Rarely did we run a play and wait for someone to get open. We'd throw a pass into a spot where the receiver was supposed to be. Early on, that resulted in lots o' interceptions. But in time, it worked great because it allowed the receivers to adjust their patterns on the fly and Green was in such harmony with everyone on the offense that it worked out very well.

I loved our run blocking scheme too. All the pulls we did to the left were great. Fortunately, we had arguably the best offensive line in the league which allowed that. Holmes was great, but the line did all the heavy lifting.

I'd take Saunders back in a heartbeat. Give him 2 years to implement the system, trade/FA/draft accordingly, and I bet he'd have this offense on a roll by year two.

cyborgtable
11-15-2012, 10:49 AM
I truly hate the 3-4.

Me too. The kind of players needed for it are just so rare, the kind of versatility if offers is good but so much harder to find the players required for it to work properly.

Rausch
11-15-2012, 10:55 AM
I'd take Saunders back in a heartbeat. Give him 2 years to implement the system, trade/FA/draft accordingly, and I bet he'd have this offense on a roll by year two.

He had Kennison and Morton for 2 years and fielded a top 5 offense.

That alone is amazing.

He took what he had and made something of it.

You always heard how big an azzhole he was but nothing other than that.

Haley was a spittle spewing tirade monster and dreams of having the output Saunders managed...

Aspengc8
11-15-2012, 11:02 AM
What it all comes down to is...our D-line SUCKS, for having, what, 3 1st round picks and a 3rd?? it's woeful.


Nail, meet hammer.

bobbything
11-15-2012, 11:03 AM
He had Kennison and Morton for 2 years and fielded a top 5 offense.

That alone is amazing.

He took what he had and made something of it.

You always heard how big an azzhole he was but nothing other than that.

Haley was a spittle spewing tirade monster and dreams of having the output Saunders managed...
Not only top 5, they were #1 in the league in points scored in 2002, 2003...#2 in 2004, and #6 in 2005. We were also top 5 in the league during his tenure in time of possession. And our defense still sucked.

I don't remember ever hearing that Saunders was an asshole. In fact, I always heard he was one of the nicest people on the staff. I could be wrong though.

He didn't do well in Washington. He was fired after two years but was saddled with Jason Campbell.

If he were allowed to draft who he wanted, and spend on FA, I bet we'd have a top 10 offense by 2015. But I'd want a HC in here who would focus on defense too. Vermeil put too much emphasis on offense. Though, we didn't ask much of our defense. Only, "don't give up 30 points per game".

Chris Meck
11-15-2012, 11:07 AM
hate the 3-4? All variants? That's weird. That's like saying, "I hate the 4-3".

Huh?

If you mean, I hate the read-and-react 2-gap 3-4, then I get you, and I feel the same way.

I like the one gap, fuck-you-here-we-come-just-try-and-stop-us 3-4. Blow up the line of scrimmage and make plays in the backfield, disrupt blocking schemes, stunts and blitzes from anywhere at any time.

The one key to any 3-4 is having a true NT, which might be the rarest beast of all, but it appears we've finally got one so I say we stick with the 3-4.

Woodchuck
11-15-2012, 11:50 AM
Good analysis driving wheel. I agree about the talent problem. So many people think that a coach, gm, and qb will fix everything and all of our problems will magically go away. That really isn't the case. We are along way off imo. We are about to be rebuilding. Not as much as last time but, it's going to happen imo.

As for the offense. The offense you want to run is a longshot imo. You practically have to have a bad ass HOF QB to run it. Also, our o-line has already gotten two QBs killed this year. Imagine what it would be like if we ran 5 WR sets?

I am not against this type of offense but, it requires having a ton of talent on that side of the ball on the o-line, WR position, and especially the QB.

I think that is why it's so rare.

I think success will come the fastest if we keep things as simple as possible.

cyborgtable
11-15-2012, 12:04 PM
hate the 3-4? All variants? That's weird. That's like saying, "I hate the 4-3".

Huh?

If you mean, I hate the read-and-react 2-gap 3-4, then I get you, and I feel the same way.

I like the one gap, ****-you-here-we-come-just-try-and-stop-us 3-4. Blow up the line of scrimmage and make plays in the backfield, disrupt blocking schemes, stunts and blitzes from anywhere at any time.

The one key to any 3-4 is having a true NT, which might be the rarest beast of all, but it appears we've finally got one so I say we stick with the 3-4.

I can agree with the sentiment but its so hard to find a true NT anymore. If I had to chose a 3-4 it would be Wade Phillips version which is closer to a 5-2 anyway, and started as a group of players built for the tampa-2

rabblerouser
11-15-2012, 12:07 PM
This.

Saunders' version was about as complete as I've seen an offense. You don't see what he did at all in the NFL anymore. All the pre-snap motions and shifts really revealed what the defense was doing and they were able to exploit it.

They'd line Hall, Gonzalez, and Kennison up in the backfield, then have Priest in the slot. Then, they'd shift and you'd see exactly who was covering who, what kind of defense they were running, etc. I loved watching the pre-snap as much as the offense itself because it forced the defense to reveal their intentions (for the most part).

Biggest drawbacks I saw were that with all the motions and formation shifts, it used up nearly all of the playclock. And we used a lot of unnecessary timeouts because of it. Also, the play that was called was the play that was ran. There were multiple reads in this offense, but there was no audible allowed.

It really demonstrated how smart Trent Green was. Rarely did we run a play and wait for someone to get open. We'd throw a pass into a spot where the receiver was supposed to be. Early on, that resulted in lots o' interceptions. But in time, it worked great because it allowed the receivers to adjust their patterns on the fly and Green was in such harmony with everyone on the offense that it worked out very well.

I loved our run blocking scheme too. All the pulls we did to the left were great. Fortunately, we had arguably the best offensive line in the league which allowed that. Holmes was great, but the line did all the heavy lifting.

I'd take Saunders back in a heartbeat. Give him 2 years to implement the system, trade/FA/draft accordingly, and I bet he'd have this offense on a roll by year two.

Those Al Saunders/Trent Green offenses were artistic masterpieces, as perfect and assured as a Monet or a fucking Rembrandt.

Roaf, Shields. Weigman, Roaf, and Tait, kicking out on the screen as Trent baits the defenders just long enough for Preist to fake a block and slip behind the big guys, then Trent flips the ball over to him perfectly...

*sigh* They made every screen beautiful, every sweep, every toss. Power 90 O ISO was perfect...every single time.

Those pre-snap motions and adjustments would give Belichick and the Ryans FITS, because it would reveal the defense's true intentions - it took away what is really the defense's biggest advantage.

We lost 1 fumble in 2003, iirc...one. One fumble lost. Or maybe it was one fumble TOTAL and NONE lost..

Point is, it was explosive AND ball control...conservative AND aggressive. We could control the clock and run the ball, OR run a fast-break down the field to score quick. We used the ENTIRE field, always. Outside, the seam, the flats - nothing was off limits.

That was a GREAT offense...but we had the players to pull it off. We had the QB...

Woodchuck
11-15-2012, 12:10 PM
I can agree with the sentiment but its so hard to find a true NT anymore. If I had to chose a 3-4 it would be Wade Phillips version which is closer to a 5-2 anyway, and started as a group of players built for the tampa-2

I hear you. What is funny is that we looked for a real NT for years and this year there will be one that will probably go in the top #15. John Jenkins from UGA is 6'3" 351 lbs. and has played NT in the 3-4 his entire college career.

I think he is the best experienced true 3-4 NT prospect ever.

rabblerouser
11-15-2012, 12:17 PM
I can agree with the sentiment but its so hard to find a true NT anymore. If I had to chose a 3-4 it would be Wade Phillips version which is closer to a 5-2 anyway, and started as a group of players built for the tampa-2

that's a classic 1-gap 3-4 - it's the Bum Phillips defense.

See, really there are 3 basic variants :

zone blitz - Dick LeBeau, Vic Fangio, Dom Capers, etc.

2-gap - Romeo, Mangini, Belichick

1-gap - Bum/Wade Phillips, Parcells (late career; used a 4-3 for a time in NE, as well, iirc)

We simply don't have the horses for the 2 gap - we don't have the D-line nor secondary depth. Or the LB depth.

Same goes for the Zone Blitz.

The best chance for this team to compete is to play more a more 'standard' 1-gap; less exotic bs, and let the young cats go play. They're blowing coverages and plain getting beat because they simply can't cover the zone. Period. Elam, Lewis, Brown, Daniels, Arenas...all liabilities in zone coverage. Best to turn the guys up front loose, because otherwise, opposing QBs can just pick those zones apart. Not to mention, our 3 best pass rushers (Hali, Houston, DJ) are constantly in zone coverage, along with one of our best run defenders (Berry, who is probably better suited for a pure SS role instead of the Polamalu-type tweener thing they've been trying to make him do this year.)

EDIT : that being said, Shaun Smith played some great textbook 2-gap technique on Monday night, and that has been missing from the D-line, probably since he's been gone. Another classic case of Piloi being a dipshit for not listening to his coaches.

cyborgtable
11-15-2012, 12:24 PM
that's a classic 1-gap 3-4 - it's the Bum Phillips defense.

See, really there are 3 basic variants :

zone blitz - Dick LeBeau, Vic Fangio, Dom Capers, etc.

2-gap - Romeo, Mangini, Belichick

1-gap - Bum/Wade Phillips, Parcells (late career; used a 4-3 for a time in NE, as well, iirc)

We simply don't have the horses for the 2 gap - we don't have the D-line nor secondary depth. Or the LB depth.

Same goes for the Zone Blitz.

The best chance for this team to compete is to play more a more 'standard' 1-gap; less exotic bs, and let the young cats go play. They're blowing coverages and plain getting beat because they simply can't cover the zone. Period. Elam, Lewis, Brown, Daniels, Arenas...all liabilities in zone coverage. Best to turn the guys up front loose, because otherwise, opposing QBs can just pick those zones apart. Not to mention, our 3 best pass rushers (Hali, Houston, DJ) are constantly in zone coverage, along with one of our best run defenders (Berry, who is probably better suited for a pure SS role instead of the Polamalu-type tweener thing they've been trying to make him do this year.)


I can see that especially with a 4-3 over or under front having a linebacker sitting on the line of scrimmage acting essentially as another lineman. I started paying attention in the golden age of the Tampa-2 defense and so prefer that over others but only when played with the same aggressiveness that Monte used.

IMO to many teams took the play and not the understanding of why it worked. Being physical at the line of scrimmage with receivers to change the timing of the passing plays. It had its weaknesses but they blitzed more often than those who took the defense with them ala Herm

bobbything
11-15-2012, 12:35 PM
That was a GREAT offense...but we had the players to pull it off. We had the QB...
This is the crux of it all. If you look at the other places Saunders has tried to implement a similar system, it never worked out that well because of the QB or because he wasn't there long enough. Jason Campbell in Washington, Carson Palmer in Oakland. He's been neutered with time or the wrong QB. Hell, he only got one season in St. Louis. I'd kill to have Saunders here with Sam Bradford.

His best season was when he was a consultant for the Ravens. IIRC, Cam Cameron just got there.

I don't know why he doesn't really get a fair shake. Maybe it's because his system is too complex, takes too much time to implement and no team wants to wait 2-3 years for it to get up and running. Maybe he's an ass and doesn't interview well. I don't know. He's been fired or demoted at every job he's had since the Chiefs. Something's not right.

rabblerouser
11-15-2012, 12:36 PM
I can see that especially with a 4-3 over or under front having a linebacker sitting on the line of scrimmage acting essentially as another lineman. I started paying attention in the golden age of the Tampa-2 defense and so prefer that over others but only when played with the same aggressiveness that Monte used.

IMO to many teams took the play and not the understanding of why it worked. Being physical at the line of scrimmage with receivers to change the timing of the passing plays. It had its weaknesses but they blitzed more often than those who took the defense with them ala Herm

the reason that defense worked so well in Tampa was because they had a D-line that had : Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, Regan Upshow, Chris Hovan, et al, Derrick Brooks at LB, John Lynch at SS and Ronde Barber at CB.

With those guys, they got pressure with 4 man fronts so they didn't HAVE to blitz, which made it that much more effective when they did.

We have a poor man's Derrick Brooks in DJ, and a decent Ronde impersonator in Flowers...but are TOTALLY not equipped to do a 4-3 Tampa - we weren't when we were running one.

This team is defensively a 3-4 team, literally for better or for worse. If we lined up with 4 DL, we'd get eaten alive.

rabblerouser
11-15-2012, 12:39 PM
This is the crux of it all. If you look at the other places Saunders has tried to implement a similar system, it never worked out that well because of the QB or because he wasn't there long enough. Jason Campbell in Washington, Carson Palmer in Oakland. He's been neutered with time or the wrong QB. Hell, he only got one season in St. Louis. I'd kill to have Saunders here with Sam Bradford.

His best season was when he was a consultant for the Ravens. IIRC, Cam Cameron just got there.

I don't know why he doesn't really get a fair shake. Maybe it's because his system is too complex, takes too much time to implement and no team wants to wait 2-3 years for it to get up and running. Maybe he's an ass and doesn't interview well. I don't know. He's been fired or demoted at every job he's had since the Chiefs. Something's not right.

I've some things about him, about why he got passed over for the HC job in favor of Herm...about why he hasn't been able to keep a job with anyone not named Marty or Herm...and about why he will never be a HC in the NFL (and this was 6 years ago)

Mr. Laz
11-15-2012, 12:40 PM
Not sure where your coming up with some of this stuff, but the line is definitely allowed to attack. Whether they have 1 gap responsibility or 2, you shed the block and make a play. Where the 2 gap system shines, is if your line is successful at reading the play, shedding and making plays, they then require a double team from the o-line. Not sure where this whole 'soak up blockers' mentality is coming from. There not going to get double teamed if it isnt needed.
disagree

the main weapon of a DLineman is getting a good first step and in a 2-gap system that is neutralized because a 3-4 Dlineman HAS to engage the Olinemand first to protect the linebackers.

A 3-4,2-gap Dlineman is regulated to relying on handfighting,leverage and power to attack and that's only after stopping the Oline's momentum and reading the play.

How 3-4, 2-gaps guys are graded is by how few Olineman they allow through to the second level. Completely different skills used.

shedding to attacks is way harder than penetration to attack

it's also makes the blocking assignments for the Oline easier because the Olineman don't have to worry about quick feet ... just leverage,hands and power. Normally that blocking ease is supposed to be offset by zone blitzes but when you have a DC that doesn't like to blitz ... :(

cyborgtable
11-15-2012, 12:41 PM
the reason that defense worked so well in Tampa was because they had a D-line that had : Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, Regan Upshow, Chris Hovan, et al, Derrick Brooks at LB, John Lynch at SS and Ronde Barber at CB.

With those guys, they got pressure with 4 man fronts so they didn't HAVE to blitz, which made it that much more effective when they did.

We have a poor man's Derrick Brooks in DJ, and a decent Ronde impersonator in Flowers...but are TOTALLY not equipped to do a 4-3 Tampa - we weren't when we were running one.

This team is defensively a 3-4 team, literally for better or for worse. If we lined up with 4 DL, we'd get eaten alive.

I understand that, personal and scheme go hand in hand. If the jets ran that scheme we would have portions of the line needed with Coples and Wilkerson but the linebacking core is to slow to stop the deep area between the safeties and the outside flat areas. Teams could go outside on us all game.

The OP was moving forward and IMO your d-line isn't really built to handle either scheme. A pure 1-gap requires attacking style d-lineman which Pioli has gone out of his way to avoid. The linebacking core is nearly there though so yeah your right.

Edit. Just saw the part about when you were running the defense also. I don't think Herm really understood how to teach it or make it work from anything other than a corners point of view because when he ran the same defense with the Jets it wasn't very good either

Mr. Laz
11-15-2012, 12:50 PM
the reason that defense worked so well in Tampa was because they had a D-line that had : Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, Regan Upshow, Chris Hovan, et al, Derrick Brooks at LB, John Lynch at SS and Ronde Barber at CB.

With those guys, they got pressure with 4 man fronts so they didn't HAVE to blitz, which made it that much more effective when they did.

We have a poor man's Derrick Brooks in DJ, and a decent Ronde impersonator in Flowers...but are TOTALLY not equipped to do a 4-3 Tampa - we weren't when we were running one.

This team is defensively a 3-4 team, literally for better or for worse. If we lined up with 4 DL, we'd get eaten alive.
I don't know about that

Hali,Poe,Powe,Houston

Derrick Johnson at MLB

sort of like the Baltimore Ravens D ... 2 big,fat guys to stuff the run and protect the MLB. Hali and Houston going after the Passer.

Not sure Belcher would have a place but adding to 2 Linebackers in one offseason is not that difficult to do.

Berry playing an in-the-box safety

Kendrick Lewis is still not good enough, so we need a complete free safety imo.

cyborgtable
11-15-2012, 12:52 PM
I don't know about that

Hali,Poe,Powe,Houston

Derrick Johnson at MLB

sort of like the Baltimore Ravens D ... 2 big,fat guys to stuff the run and protect the MLB. Hali and Houston going after the Passer.

Not sure Belcher would have a place but adding to 2 Linebackers in one offseason is not that difficult to do.

Berry playing an in-the-box safety

Kendrick Lewis is still not good enough, so we need a complete free safety imo.

Wasn't Hali drafted to play d-line. I didn't pay much attention to the chiefs then, how was he at it?

rabblerouser
11-15-2012, 01:13 PM
disagree

the main weapon of a DLineman is getting a good first step and in a 2-gap system that is neutralized because a 3-4 Dlineman HAS to engage the Olinemand first to protect the linebackers.

A 3-4,2-gap Dlineman is regulated to relying on handfighting,leverage and power to attack and that's only after stopping the Oline's momentum and reading the play.

How 3-4, 2-gaps guys are graded is by how few Olineman they allow through to the second level. Completely different skills used.

shedding to attacks is way harder than penetration to attack

it's also makes the blocking assignments for the Oline easier because the Olineman don't have to worry about quick feet ... just leverage,hands and power. Normally that blocking ease is supposed to be offset by zone blitzes but when you have a DC that doesn't like to blitz ... :(

Gibbs sure called a few more blitzes Mon than RAC normally did.

rabblerouser
11-15-2012, 01:14 PM
Wasn't Hali drafted to play d-line. I didn't pay much attention to the chiefs then, how was he at it?


He was decent.

He's an All-World 3-4 OLB.

He'd probably be even better in a 1-gap, like old-school LT...

rabblerouser
11-15-2012, 01:18 PM
I don't know about that

Hali,Poe,Powe,Houston

Derrick Johnson at MLB

sort of like the Baltimore Ravens D ... 2 big,fat guys to stuff the run and protect the MLB. Hali and Houston going after the Passer.

Not sure Belcher would have a place but adding to 2 Linebackers in one offseason is not that difficult to do.

Berry playing an in-the-box safety

Kendrick Lewis is still not good enough, so we need a complete free safety imo.

Meh, I'd rather keep Hali and Houston standing, rotate Poe and Powe, and go with a hybrid 1 gap.

Hell, you could conceiveably do both...have a 4-3 package, especially for redzone/goalline situations

Woodchuck
11-15-2012, 02:34 PM
Houston sucked as a DE at UGA. When they switched to the 3-4, he was immediately bad ass. I would never move him. I would even play him at OLB in the 4-3.

Sweet Daddy Hate
11-17-2012, 01:48 PM
I truly hate the 3-4.

Meh. Even with a 4-3 and two top picks who were supposed to be GOD'S at it, it would probably still suck monkey balls.

chiefzilla1501
11-17-2012, 02:02 PM
I don't know about that

Hali,Poe,Powe,Houston

Derrick Johnson at MLB

sort of like the Baltimore Ravens D ... 2 big,fat guys to stuff the run and protect the MLB. Hali and Houston going after the Passer.

Not sure Belcher would have a place but adding to 2 Linebackers in one offseason is not that difficult to do.

Berry playing an in-the-box safety

Kendrick Lewis is still not good enough, so we need a complete free safety imo.

Requires a totally different skill set.

You have to LBs who are versatile at stopping both the run and pass, including stud, smart MLB. You have to have 4 defensive linemen who are very, very good at both stopping the run, but also having the pass rush moves to be in passing situations. Our DEs can handle 3-4 pass rush, but will they succeed in a 4-3 where they will have their hands on the ground every play? Will they succeed when they are likely asked to add weight in order to be more effective in the trenches? Can they be consistent run stoppers when on run situations, they will be asked to be win a lot of battles in the trenches?

Can we find DTs who are big but also have the explosion and arsenal of pass rush moves to get to the QB? I don't believe that we have any of these things. Moving to a 4-3 is going to be an ordeal. We have enough pieces for a 3-4. The only place I believe we'll be light in a 1-gap 3-4 is fighting the right DE, which is not hard to find.