1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

I call for a switch back to the 4-3

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by jblaze2004, Nov 23, 2012.

  1. Shinywalrus

    Shinywalrus Active Member

    1,740 Messages
    8 Likes Received
    Watch tape. We play a ton of 4-3. This debate was meaningful several years ago.
  2. jblaze2004

    jblaze2004 Well-Known Member

    8,644 Messages
    400 Likes Received
    this..
  3. jblaze2004

    jblaze2004 Well-Known Member

    8,644 Messages
    400 Likes Received
    maybe you should look at the tape. We don't play alot of 4-3. People see ware and spencer on the line thinking it is the 4-3 when we are really in our nickle and dime package. We run a ton of 3-4 but we only rush 4 most of the time. Thats still not a 4-3. I rather have spencer rushing the passer than say coleman or spears. Coleman and spears are just warm bodies in the passing game. Against run heavy teams we did use the 2-5 package which had 2 d-lineman and 5 linebackers (3 MLB's). But to say we run a ton of 4-3 is false.
  4. CyberB0b

    CyberB0b Well-Known Member Zone Supporter

    3,822 Messages
    1,759 Likes Received
    The Packers won a bunch with the Packer sweep. That kind of logic is asinine. We have run EVERY flavor of the 3-4 and have failed. That is due to lack of talent and execution, not scheme.
  5. sonnyboy

    sonnyboy Benched

    7,355 Messages
    0 Likes Received

    :lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2: Couldn't have said it better myself. I sometimes feel like I'm dealing with children on this site.
  6. jblaze2004

    jblaze2004 Well-Known Member

    8,644 Messages
    400 Likes Received
    Y laugh what successful 4-3 team would have Coleman or spears at strong side De to rush the passer:lmao2: now that's laughable. The 3-4 and 4-3 aren't really alike. The players that run them are different. If it was that easy a lot of teams would run the 3-4 to change up the look. But guess what if you don't have the players your D will get gashed.
  7. respectdatstar

    respectdatstar Member

    685 Messages
    2 Likes Received
    Funny how you put this. BRUCE LEE? Haha.
  8. respectdatstar

    respectdatstar Member

    685 Messages
    2 Likes Received
    Do you really "watch tape" or do you just watch the games as you see them on TV? Big difference.
  9. Texan_Eph89

    Texan_Eph89 Well-Known Member

    1,054 Messages
    35 Likes Received
    I posted on the draft section of the forum stating that if we were to draft Te'o, we'd have the best LB core so long we move to a 4-3. Lee and Carter are 3 down players and so is Te'o.

    I don't think the 3-4 is an issue, but we have the pieces to field a great 4-3. The LBs in coverage would help our pass defense as well. Besides, DCs know that Ware is rushing 99% of the time. We run a 4-3 with one DE standing up and an offset LB..

    Let Ware do his thing full time, allow Lee and Carter to excel where they can (run stopping and coverage), Rat will benefit with an extra D-lineman, and we could play more press.
  10. rocyaice

    rocyaice Well-Known Member

    6,462 Messages
    823 Likes Received
    So we finally get two DOMINANT inside linebackers and finally get a dominant(or so we think) linebacking core and now you guys want to change to a 4-3? It has nothing to do with the formation. You have to make plays. Our secondary isn't. The 4-3 doesn't hide weaknesses lol.
  11. Texan_Eph89

    Texan_Eph89 Well-Known Member

    1,054 Messages
    35 Likes Received
    Those inside linebackers would be doing the same thing in a 4-3. Non-issue.
  12. rocyaice

    rocyaice Well-Known Member

    6,462 Messages
    823 Likes Received
    Its not really about what they'd be doing. Its about we are a 3-4 team and we are about to spend yet ANOTHER season learning a new defense? Its not about formation for why this defense isn't better. The defense needs better depth especially on the defensive line and it needs to get healthy. Any team with no depth missing Ratliff, Church, Sean Lee, Kenyon Coleman and now Bruce Carter? They're going to struggle.
  13. wileedog

    wileedog Well-Known Member

    10,061 Messages
    767 Likes Received
  14. FiveRings

    FiveRings Well-Known Member

    1,761 Messages
    230 Likes Received
    Doesn't really matter, you can see what you have to on the LoS on a TV broadcast, at least fom a formation stand point
  15. Luckenbach

    Luckenbach Member

    91 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    I like the 4-3 better. Mike Zimmer had us at the top of the league with the 4-3. Sure we 'use' it. But I'd rather use it exclusively. Also with the correct personnel. We'd only need 4-6 players to switch. 4-3 players are much much easier to find these days since everyone started 'running to the 3-4'. Hence why the Patriots are leaning back to the 4-3... they make decisions based on personnel rather than smashing the square peg until it fits in the round hole like us...
  16. MagicMan

    MagicMan Active Member

    794 Messages
    80 Likes Received

    something tells me you are not quite onboard with this idea...LOLLLL. Me neither. :laugh2: get me a big Ngata type of tackle in there and let Ware loose on the QB without worrying about coverage with Mo man to man on their best WR.......and let the chips fall where they may. And oh yeah, DRAFT the best ball hawking safety out there.
  17. rocyaice

    rocyaice Well-Known Member

    6,462 Messages
    823 Likes Received
    Well if we have to wait for a Ngata type of tackle or DE than we would do better off switching to the 4-3 lol. Ngata types don't just fall into your lap. I'd love if they did though.
  18. FiveRings

    FiveRings Well-Known Member

    1,761 Messages
    230 Likes Received
    I'm actually not all for the switch to 4-3, I think it's always easier to look for a switch from 3-4 to 4-3 because it's sexier and draws more sack off the 4 man rush, but really, pressure is the least of our worries on D.

    Plus, a linebacker corp of Lee, Carter, Ware and Spencer can easily challenge the Niners for best in the NFL, thus more freedom to run exotic stunts and get away with them, and if not, send Rob packing.

    All this D has to do is sure up safety and it will be lights out, so sit tight and cross your fingers for Matt Elam
  19. MagicMan

    MagicMan Active Member

    794 Messages
    80 Likes Received
    I agree with that quartet you could run more exotic stunts than at a Gentleman's Club....:D i'll buy that for a dollar.
  20. Texan_Eph89

    Texan_Eph89 Well-Known Member

    1,054 Messages
    35 Likes Received
    While learning a new defense would be a negative, the front seven fit a 4-3 better than a 3-4. Ware rushes on just about every snap. it's essentially the same 4 players rushing at any given time.

    More importantly, with the extra d-lineman up front, Lee and Carter can focus on stopping the run and playing the pass in the open field (their strengths). corners would be able to play press more often since there would be LBs available to cover (Carr's best asset and I think Mo would thrive in that system). We need Safeties either way though, a rangy FS to be exact. Church can play a traditional SS.

    You could also have sub packages with Butler rushing from MLB, his speed would be utilized there. Wilber is a hybrid, but he's more of a LDE. Crawford could be used like Rat as 3 Technique DT or a DE, so could Lissemore for that matter. Hatcher would be a 3 Technique, Brent a 1 or 0 tech. Coleman is probably done, but he could play the 0 or 1. I doubt spears stays, but he could be a 3 tech.

    We could have a great rotation and possibly maximize the players' skillsets. Why not transition back to a 4-3?

Share This Page