The fact that they actually evaluated what's here and decided which defense is the best fit instead of just going with what they've done in the past is good to hear.

I take it as, we are keeping the 3-4 but switching gaps.

Yeah, this. Using the talent here in the best way possible may seem simple but plenty of coaches go the other route. I really don't think this D is that far away if they just get the Dline to do something, anything. With our cap and spot in the draft, we should be able to fix the CB/S spots, probably ILB as well. Enough at least, that I don't think drastic steps in changing the entire defensive scheme was needed.

Over simplified mon frere, but yes.

That's essentially what his scheme was asked to do under Mangini and what our scheme did under Romeo.

So yes, saying he wants to attack is a strong statement and one that should make people happy.

I like the words. Hopefully I'll like the results.

I guess it means the "Bend/Don't Break" will be back. This doesn't really thrill me.

Will this thrill me?

Sutton was in the two gap that we run under Mangini. Then they switched to Rex's 1 gap attacking 3-4 and got a lot better. He is bringing the version he learned under Rex, not the one he was in under Mangini that Crennel runs.

He is experienced in both, on top of several other types including Herms Tampa-2 Lol.

This is his first time running a defense, he had the title of DC under Mangini, but he wasn't running it or had a say in what defense the Jets ran. The Jets also didn't have the pieces in place to even run it.

Thx, man. I always have a hard time keeping track of those terminologies. I googled it and got this:

"The one-gap lineman is only responsible for the one gap in the offensive linemen and he typically lines up directly in this gap on the defensive line. The two-gap lineman is technically responsible for the gap on either side of the offensive lineman that he is lined up across from. The main purpose of the one-gap technique is for the defensive lineman to get past the offensive lineman and either sack the quarterback or tackle the ball carrier behind the line of scrimmage. On the other hand, the main purpose of the two-gap technique is for the defensive line to "clog" the line of scrimmage which allows for the more athletic linebackers to make plays on the outside of the play or gives them time to support in case of a run up the middle."

I guess this means a more attacking style of 34. Happiness meter pointing up again.

I think the new practice restrictions, which has made pass blocking much worse league wide, certainly encourages 1 gap defenses where everyone is trying to get in the backfield.

At the same time there is no defense that 'attacks' like Gunther Cunningham. That's why you can gain 20 yards every time you run a draw play against Detroit. They attack with no responsibility... and that's Gunther's defense.

So yeah... guys need to attack, but I've seen defenses that 'attack' without a brain and it's ugly.

THIS.

This.

Based on this, I would think that we would want the 2 gap system. It frees up our pass rushets, Halo and Houston. A one gap has the dline rushing. Our dline sucks at rushing the passer.

Well, you've got to have smart physical inside LB's to make the 1 gap style work or you will give up big plays up the middle.

I defer to Ray Lewis' statements on Rex's 34 defense -- something to the effect of constantly getting mauled by linemen.

If your DL take the right gap to the ball, you did good. If they take the wrong gap, your backers had better man up.

Ditto.