I wish that tard was a Chief, but now he is going to haunt us for many years to come.

+1.

A lot of the football morons on this board think that the odd front lineman are all about 'eating up blockers'.. which is vastly confused with 'demanding a double team'. We aren't running a 2-gap scheme like Crennel tried, which was read and react. Our lineman are lining up in techniques to attack the gaps, either penetrating or requiring a double team, which is what your really want. Double teamed DL = no OL to second level = free LB's

He is our new 5head Manning, God created him so he could take over where Manning left off.

When John Elway retired we got 5head and now that 5head is getting close to the end of his career we get Andy Luck. We're truly blessed :shake:

As to the bolded part, sadly I believe I've stopped growing vertically. There may indeed come a time in which that changes, however I'm ever doubtful.



Now, to your inquiry. In a 3-4, there are essentially 2 schools of thought. 1-gap vs. 2-gap. You can then break these off into even smaller divisions by segregating from those 2 that prefer man (Wade Phillips/Bob Sutton), those who prefer zone (Crennel/Belichick although he's fairly versatile, Mike Nolan), and those who prefer fire-zones (LeBeau/Capers/Haslett) and those that do it all (Vic Fangio/Pagano/Pettine/Rex/Rob/Marvin Lewis).

Incidentally, the majority of the 2-gap teams play zone.


As to your question to the responsibilities of our DEs in Sutton's 3-4. Since we play a scheme that quite front versatile, the responsibilities change. In our base 3-4 odd (Nose and Ends heads up on the Center and Tackles), we 2-gap or slant. We also run under, over, over-ed, and reduce fronts, which combine typically 2 and 1-gap responsibilities. Therefore, on every down in our base 3-4 personnel, our DEs aren't expected to simply 2-gap or slant and not get upfield.


If you'd like, I can go more in-depth about how this relates to our sub-packages and the personnel groupings we use with it. I hope this was somewhat helpful and can/would include diagrams if you'd like.

I do wish you'd post more.

that's a little over 4 runs per quarter..cmon now.

Thanks, I am not an expert, and never claimed to be, just been watching this team for 45 years. Here is the post, one of many that I was referencing that helped me understand the 3-4 when the switch was being made. There were endless posts about it, but this is the first one I found from a man that I respect his opinion. [/QUOTE]


Yeah, that game vaulted him into infamy, like he wasn't already going to get there anyway.

I am going to have to chew on that a while Sorter, thanks for going to the trouble. Seriously!

Durrrrrrr...

i was hoping for more fire zone concept after our man to man was getting trashed...circa week 9+.

I mean ****, we did it in quite a few games early (Giants, Cowboys).

I just don't ****ing understand what made Sutton go into a shell. I really don't.

Just make Eric Berry a Linebacker. He pretty much already is anyway. . He isnt very good at covering and essentially used like a LB already

htismaqe was right in that 2009 post. The Crennel scheme required ends to do that. Sutton's 3-4, any Ryan-based 3-4, and Phillips-based 3-4, etc. that are one gap don't need the ends to function in that way.

I agree. Dude has, like, 6 posts on this site and I can still tell he knows a shit ton about football.

The obvious explanation on post playoff loss CP is that DJ is on the take and is in on the fix