The decision to go to a 4-3 and our personnel

[jnday]

Originally Posted by Woods

By the way, that is a very important point, imo. It would be suicidal for Garrett and this organization if they thought this was going to be a multi-year rebuilding process on Defense.

Now, they may have gotten the analysis wrong. But you have to think JJ/Garrett had to have thought long and hard about his one. It's not as if Romo, Ware, etc are getting any younger . . . .

They haven't thought too long or too hard about this change. Nothing the organization has done indicates that this change was anything more than a decision that was made in the last two or three months. They certainly had no intentions of changing defense before the season started.

[Yakuza Rich]

I think this team is in FAR better position to run the 4-3 than the 3-4.

In the 3-4, you generally need a pretty good NT. And usually a big one. We went smaller with Ratliff and I was fine with that. But, in the 3-4 he's more apt to take a lot of punishment. We did have Josh Brent, but he's almost all but going to be suspended by the league for next year. That creates a GAPING hole at NT. Go to the 4-3 and now you can put Hatcher, Lissemore (who I think is a great fit) and Crawford at DT. You can put Ratliff at DT in the 1-gap and hopefully that will reduce the punishment as he should be doubled less.

Ware is fine in the 4-3 DE. Sprinters don't start from a 2-point stance for a reason. Applies to DE's. Only difference is that Ware won't likely confuse the O-Line and get say a RB trying to block him. But, he won't be giong in coverage either.

Lee is fine at the MIKE. Kiffin drafted Barrett Ruud and did fine with him and Lee is far better than Ruud. Carter is great here. All we really need is a SAM backer and those are not overly difficult to find.

We need much improved safety play. But, we would need that in either scheme.






YR

[Verdict]

Originally Posted by Yakuza Rich

I think this team is in FAR better position to run the 4-3 than the 3-4.

In the 3-4, you generally need a pretty good NT. And usually a big one. We went smaller with Ratliff and I was fine with that. But, in the 3-4 he's more apt to take a lot of punishment. We did have Josh Brent, but he's almost all but going to be suspended by the league for next year. That creates a GAPING hole at NT. Go to the 4-3 and now you can put Hatcher, Lissemore (who I think is a great fit) and Crawford at DT. You can put Ratliff at DT in the 1-gap and hopefully that will reduce the punishment as he should be doubled less.

Ware is fine in the 4-3 DE. Sprinters don't start from a 2-point stance for a reason. Applies to DE's. Only difference is that Ware won't likely confuse the O-Line and get say a RB trying to block him. But, he won't be giong in coverage either.

[View Full Quote]Lee is fine at the MIKE. Kiffin drafted Barrett Ruud and did fine with him and Lee is far better than Ruud. Carter is great here. All we really need is a SAM backer and those are not overly difficult to find.

We need much improved safety play. But, we would need that in either scheme.



YR

Do you think the Cowboys just stubbornly refused to find a true NT, couldn't find one good enough to draft, let Ratliff dictate where he wanted to play, OR valued Ratliff's sack numbers more than what they would have gotten out of a true NT?

[Yakuza Rich]

Originally Posted by jnday

They haven't thought too long or too hard about this change. Nothing the organization has done indicates that this change was anything more than a decision that was made in the last two or three months. They certainly had no intentions of changing defense before the season started.

IIRC, it was reported that Broaddus and Co. was on the radio and they were really knocking Ryan's defense. This was sometime in the middle of the season. You just have to know that Broaddus caught word of that from people in the organization.

Not sure if they were thinking changing to the 4-3, but they didn't know Kiffin's situation or if he was interested in getting back into coaching.

I think they caught word of that and I think they jumped to firing Ryan and hiring Kiffin.






YR

[AMERICAS_FAN]

Originally Posted by Yakuza Rich

I think this team is in FAR better position to run the 4-3 than the 3-4.

In the 3-4, you generally need a pretty good NT. And usually a big one. We went smaller with Ratliff and I was fine with that. But, in the 3-4 he's more apt to take a lot of punishment. We did have Josh Brent, but he's almost all but going to be suspended by the league for next year. That creates a GAPING hole at NT. Go to the 4-3 and now you can put Hatcher, Lissemore (who I think is a great fit) and Crawford at DT. You can put Ratliff at DT in the 1-gap and hopefully that will reduce the punishment as he should be doubled less.

Ware is fine in the 4-3 DE. Sprinters don't start from a 2-point stance for a reason. Applies to DE's. Only difference is that Ware won't likely confuse the O-Line and get say a RB trying to block him. But, he won't be giong in coverage either.

[View Full Quote]Lee is fine at the MIKE. Kiffin drafted Barrett Ruud and did fine with him and Lee is far better than Ruud. Carter is great here. All we really need is a SAM backer and those are not overly difficult to find.

We need much improved safety play. But, we would need that in either scheme.






YR

Good points YR!

One other point - Spencer will command top dollar as an OLB and Dallas likely cant resign him. If we stay the 3-4 and don't resign him we're done because you can't run the 3-4 without 2 OLBs. So if we stay 3-4 we have to break the bank for Spencer - leaving no more money to address other needs.

But in the 4-3, there's no need to sign Spencer. Even Ratliff can play DE with Ware and we have guys who can okay DT. And in the draft it will be much easier to find depth at DT and DE than OLB.

[Verdict]

Originally Posted by AMERICAS_FAN

Good points YR!

One other point - Spencer will command top dollar as an OLB and Dallas likely cant resign him. If we stay the 3-4 and don't resign him we're done because you can't run the 3-4 without 2 OLBs. So if we stay 3-4 we have to break the bank for Spencer - leaving no more money to address other needs.

But in the 4-3, there's no need to sign Spencer. Even Ratliff can play DE with Ware and we have guys who can okay DT. And in the draft it will be much easier to find depth at DT and DE than OLB.

It sounds like they want to resign Spencer either way. If that is the case, why not stay in the 3-4 and draft a true NT?

[jnday]

[quote=Yakuza Rich;4992677]IIRC, it was reported that Broaddus and Co. was on the radio and they were really knocking Ryan's defense. This was sometime in the middle of the season. You just have to know that Broaddus caught word of that from people in the organization.

Not sure if they were thinking changing to the 4-3, but they didn't know Kiffin's situation or if he was interested in getting back into coaching.

I think they caught word of that and I think they jumped to firing Ryan and hiring Kiffin.

I think mid-season would be about right. It is a short time to get prepared for a change IMO.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by Verdict

It sounds like they want to resign Spencer either way. If that is the case, why not stay in the 3-4 and draft a true NT?

Because they had two 8-8 season with a 6-10 before that. Fans are getting restless and they need some sizzle. Marketing studies have shown that the fan base as a whole prefers the 4-3 as it reminds them of a far happier time when the team would have winning seasons.

[xwalker]

Originally Posted by Verdict

Do you think the Cowboys just stubbornly refused to find a true NT, couldn't find one good enough to draft, let Ratliff dictate where he wanted to play, OR valued Ratliff's sack numbers more than what they would have gotten out of a true NT?

I think that Rob Ryan's 3-4 was very similar to Kiffin's 4-3 in terms of how the DLine plays.

Ryan's 3-4 was not designed around a big 2-gap NT like the 3-4 used by Bill Parcells. In RR's defense, they played a lot of 1-gap technique at the 0-tech or 1-tech position.