If Vic Fangio or Zimmer- here's our Defense

AKATheRake · Jan 25, 2022

Doomsday101 said:
I will say that in the case of Zimmer he has ran both 3-4 and 4-3. What I would would want to know in an interview with any potential hire is have him look at the personnel and how he would intend on using them. What Quinn did was adjust things he has done before based on the players he had to work with. Parson I think was a big reason for him looking to adjust his schemes.

For me more than scheme is the ability to put the pieces in situations where they can excel.

Post of the day.

Walker · Jan 25, 2022

1) Fangio 2) Flores 3) Zimmer

Cowboyny · Jan 25, 2022

texbumthelife said:
Why do we want that? I’d rather have a guy who does such a great job with the defense that everyone wants him.

Do you want to have to hire a DC every year?

Cowboyny · Jan 25, 2022

quickccc said:
if DLaw is on the edge, then where is Parsons in this 3 man ? .. On the same outside edges as DLaw and Gregory ?

I could imagine, multiple fronts, hands in the dirt in nickel rush packages, but base, gaps, goal line,? ... i guess i have to get a image picture of it. ..

3-4 would just be the base package against the run, which Quinn was already doing this year. Parsons would still be the mike LB, but in the nickel is where you could move him around.

Gaede · Jan 25, 2022

stilltheguru said:
What's wrong with George Edward's?

Nothing. Ppl want a name.

Edwards has the track record as a DC, is well liked by the players, and would likely keep the same system intact. Ppl love to say it was all Zimmer in Minnesota, and yet Zimms defense cratered after Edwards left

quickccc · Jan 25, 2022

Cowboyny said:
3-4 would just be the base package against the run, which Quinn was already doing this year. Parsons would still be the mike LB, but in the nickel is where you could move him around.

Which would be different manner than what a previous poster was suggesting Parson in a 3-4.
Which would've been a TJ Watt full time edge role.

Me ? Parsons works and at his best when he is coming from ALL angles and directions, not just on the outside edge.

quickccc · Jan 25, 2022

Gaede said:
Nothing. Ppl want a name.

Edwards has the track record as a DC, is well liked by the players, and would likely keep the same system intact. Ppl love to say it was all Zimmer in Minnesota, and yet Zimms defense cratered after Edwards left

Yet even Joe Whitt Jr. seems to be getting more interest and attention as a possible DC in NFL hire workings than Edwards..

MajesticRey · Jan 25, 2022

quickccc said:
..so then where would DLaw be in that Cowboys 3-4 defense ??

He’d be DE. The problem is we don’t have a legendary NT.

khiladi · Jan 25, 2022

Fangio is a better option even if Quinn was still here.

Aven8 · Jan 25, 2022

If you have Parsons anything is possible

khiladi · Jan 25, 2022

Fangio coached Willis and Bowman. He also coached Khalil Mack. These are not just great defensive players, these are a legends. I mean it sounds like a no brainer if you are looking to maximize Micah Parsons.

But Bears fans want him back too. I bet you he’s got so many options, he can choose what he wants.

Gaede · Jan 25, 2022

quickccc said:
Yet even Joe Whitt Jr. seems to be getting more interest and attention as a possible DC in NFL hire workings than Edwards..

This is the same league that kept giving Adam Gase chances.

I don't put a lot of stock into who is and who isn't 'hot'

quickccc · Jan 25, 2022

MajesticRey said:
He’d be DE. The problem is we don’t have a legendary NT.

So DLaw would be the DE in a 3 man front on a full time basis,.. while Parsons would be the Watt edge OLB - on a full time basis?
which probably adds to the issues with suspect run defense.

Even with Quinn's hybrid approach, we still had issues vs run.

These 3 and 4 man fronts are gonna vary with these DCs' and schemes... one gap, two gaps, hybrid's,..
but i'm not fond of demanding 260 DE pounders to go inside and one gap, two gap vs the run on a down to down basis. .

I can understand and be more ease with Hybrids' in most nickel pass rush paks - especially on 3rd and long downs.
But on a down to down basis, ..i think we'll get challenged and tested by the teams capable of effectively running the ball.

Gaede · Jan 25, 2022

khiladi said:
Fangio coached Willis and Bowman. He also coached Khalil Mack. These are not just great defensive players, these are a legends. I mean it sounds like a no brainer if you are looking to maximize Micah Parsons.

But Bears fans want him back too. I bet you he’s got so many options, he can choose what he wants.

Fangio killed this team this year. Like, destroyed our season. He would be an excellent choice.

quickccc · Jan 25, 2022

khiladi said:
Fangio is a better option even if Quinn was still here.

Given Fangio's player personnel, he's been known to take offenses out of what they prefer to do...and forcing to counter-adjust or struggle.
i love those kind of defensive minds.

He's been known for how to blitz-pak and his team seems to maintain discipline - But i also do not recall his unit struggling mightly vs the run
i'd wonder if Vic could turnaround the issues with penalty and flags on the defensive side (ala Diggs, Brown, Lewis) and what coverage scheme he'd implement.

Cowboyny · Jan 25, 2022

quickccc said:
Which would be different manner than what a previous poster was suggesting Parson in a 3-4.
Which would've been a TJ Watt full time edge role.

Me ? Parsons works and at his best when he is coming from ALL angles and directions, not just on the outside edge.

Parsons is still going to used as a traditional off the ball linebacker against the run, but they will move him all over the place against the pass, depending on matchups. Yes, he could play some edge, but why just there?

quickccc · Jan 25, 2022

Cowboyny said:
Parsons is still going to used as a traditional off the ball linebacker against the run, but they will move him all over the place against the pass, depending on matchups. Yes, he could play some edge, but why just there?

that's why it depends so heavily and important who'd be the DC and scheme - post-Quinn.

MajesticRey · Jan 25, 2022

quickccc said:
So DLaw would be the DE in a 3 man front on a full time basis,.. while Parsons would be the Watt edge OLB - on a full time basis?
which probably adds to the issues with suspect run defense.

Even with Quinn's hybrid approach, we still had issues vs run.

These 3 and 4 man fronts are gonna vary with these DCs' and schemes... one gap, two gaps, hybrid's,..
but i'm not fond of demanding 260 DE pounders to go inside and one gap, two gap vs the run on a down to down basis. .

I can understand and be more ease with Hybrids' in most nickel pass rush paks - especially on 3rd and long downs.
But on a down to down basis, ..i think we'll get challenged and tested by the teams capable of effectively running the ball.

DLaw is a decent run defender. Gregory, not so much.

We could stand to gain a disciplined DE to replace Gregory as well as the aforementioned NT to plug the middle.

We also need speedy LBs to contain and stop any interior runs. LVE aint gonna cut it.

I hear good things about Cox but that remains to be proven on the field.

TheCoolFan · Jan 25, 2022

With Payton, I think Zimmer could be a realistic option next year given their relationship. Saints probably keep Dennis Allen and make him the next HC now.

DC Cowboy · Jan 25, 2022

quickccc said:
If Vic Fangio becomes our new DC (strongly assuming Quinn departs to be HC)
Here could be a possible look at his starting front seven lineup in his 3-4 scheme:

RDE – Gallimore
NT – Watkins ?
LDE – Osa

OLB – Dlaw
MLB- Parson
MLB- ?
OLB – Gregory
_______________________

If Mike Zimmer becomes our new DC
Here could be a possible look at his front seven lineup: in his 4-3 scheme:

LDE - Dlaw
1 tech - Watkins
3 tech – Gallimore
RDE - Gregory

OLB - Cox ?
MLB – Parsons
OLB - ?

I will take Zimmerman and LB from Ga. in the draft.

If Vic Fangio or Zimmer- here's our Defense

Well-Known Member

Texas Ranger

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member