ESPND: Move to 4-3 opens up scouts' possibilities

[WoodysGirl]

Jan 11
2:30
PM CT
By Todd Archer | ESPNDallas.com

IRVING, Texas – When the Cowboys moved from the 4-3 defense to the 3-4 in 2005, they had to adapt their scouting philosophy.

Defensive ends had to be tall with long wingspan. Nose tackles had to be stout and compact. (Yes, Jay Ratliff did not fit that mold.) The linebackers had to be tall and athletic with strength to take on bigger players at the point of attack.

Now that the Cowboys will return to the 4-3 under Monte Kiffin, the scouts will have to adjust again, and perhaps have a larger pool of players to pick from because the height, weight, speed requirements are different than a 3-4.

Before a draftee might have his grade fall because he did not fit for a 3-4. In a 4-3, there can be more flexibility all along the front seven.

Read more: http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowbo...ibilities-some

[Pottsville Maroons]

The biggest change will come at linebacker......Where it could help a lot is on special teams. With smaller, faster linebackers, the coverage teams should have more speed and more bodies.

I'm not too keen on tying up draft resources on Linebackers when we need serious help on the OL and DL, but if this move helps both Defense and Special Teams, then I can get on board with it.

I'm happy we're going back to a 4-3. I just wish our OL weren't in shambles when we decided to make the change.

[jrumann59]

The one thing that may help is the 4-3 allows the LB to make the plays without having to fight off OL. Sean Lee should benefit, since his durability seems to be in question.

[LeonDixson]

Originally Posted by Pottsville Maroons

I'm not too keen on tying up draft resources on Linebackers when we need serious help on the OL and DL, but if this move helps both Defense and Special Teams, then I can get on board with it.

I'm happy we're going back to a 4-3. I just wish our OL weren't in shambles when we decided to make the change.

I agree; we absolutely need to fix the O-line. But the special teams aspect was one I hadn't seen discussed prior to reading this article

Where it could help a lot is on special teams. With smaller, faster linebackers, the coverage teams should have more speed and more bodies.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by jrumann59

The one thing that may help is the 4-3 allows the LB to make the plays without having to fight off OL. Sean Lee should benefit, since his durability seems to be in question.

This gets stated a lot but is totally dependent on the scheme in front of them.

Will this team use DT's that soak up blockers? If so that helps the LBs but if we have Ratliff. Ware and Spencer along the DL we will actually do LESS eating blockers.

Dallas hasn't had a great 2 gap technician in a good while. Josh Brent was the best we had at that role.

[MichaelWinicki]

Originally Posted by jterrell

This gets stated a lot but is totally dependent on the scheme in front of them.

Will this team use DT's that soak up blockers? If so that helps the LBs but if we have Ratliff. Ware and Spencer along the DL we will actually do LESS eating blockers.

Dallas hasn't had a great 2 gap technician in a good while. Josh Brent was the best we had at that role.

But is Kiffin's scheme based on the 2-gap?

I thought it was more 1 gap... at least with 3 of the 4 defensive lineman. I could see one of the DT's playing 2-gap.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Originally Posted by Pottsville Maroons

I'm not too keen on tying up draft resources on Linebackers when we need serious help on the OL and DL, but if this move helps both Defense and Special Teams, then I can get on board with it.

I'm happy we're going back to a 4-3. I just wish our OL weren't in shambles when we decided to make the change.

I am not to keen on starting Albright at OLB.

[ABQcowboyJR]

Originally Posted by MichaelWinicki

But is Kiffin's scheme based on the 2-gap?

I thought it was more 1 gap... at least with 3 of the 4 defensive lineman. I could see one of the DT's playing 2-gap.

I thought.when you played 1 tech you could 2 gap. But I agree with your point. From my understanding the 43 is mostly a one gap defense on the d line.