3-4 or 4-3

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ooooh, cyber bully, I'm scared.

You imply I'm stupid not once but twice, you use terms like nonsense and tell me to shut up and I'm the one picking a fight?

What you fail to acknowledge is we have 3 good LBs, and two are rookies. We have the depth up front to rotate all the starters to keep them fresh. It's not my fault your comprehension skills are not good enough to see I have no problem with spelling Glover, or Ellis, Spears, Ferguson for that matter, if we are spelling them with a player that can get the job done.

IMO, I don't think we have the LBs to do that and have a solid defense. No matter who plays RDE we will be undersized there in a 3-4. Ferguson is light for a NT. Burnett/Singleton are lighter than Parcells likes for the strongside. Dat, and Shanle are both under 240, James flat out sucked last year.

Get it now?

Bully? Your the one telling me to kiss your backside and when i tell you to stop with the tripe or ill fight fire with fire. I was asking you to stop the flaming before i responded in kind.

A bully is not reactive they instigate.

Notice the difference?

And im sorry that you mistake my disdain for your repeating the same tired lines over and over again for me saying that your stupid. And I asked if you would shut up if I provided the evidence.

But I digress.

You go to your dream 4-3 and there is no depth.

Ware becomes a reserve true but at the same time, you start giving Carson and Claybrooks on the field for at least 40% if not more depending on how much Ferguson is out there.

Spears is on the field every down.

Your way creates the same problems as last year with guys wearing down at the end of games. Especially at DT.

And i love the James analysis. Truly insightful.

I did see him over pursue on some plays but in the middle he doesnt have those issues and he def phsical enough to make plays inside. Shanle looked good when he started.

Your repeated failure to look past starters is scary.

Ferguson is not too small to play the nose in a 3-4. Hes done it before. Actually so has Glover and Ngyuen but lets not let empirical evidence get in the way.

Bsically you want a starting defense and no reserves. That was the problem last year.

Im willing to wait and see how Shanle/James works out and I bet itll be better than 'they suck.'

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Quotes out of context, nice.

It kind of changes the meaning when you leave out the, "I played a lot of positions in New Orleans," that lead into the quote you highlighted.

You don't work for Fox News do you.

If it werent for the previous quote you would have a point but the two go hand in hand.

What we know:

A) Glover is going to play multiple positions ie more than 2.
B) Glover has successfully played both NT and DE in the 3-4.
C) Despite your little dig you are still completely wrong in your assertion that Glover will only play NT.

Lets not divert attention away from this. You said:

One BIG problem with your little breakdown, Glover ain't playing DE in either scheme. Not one source has put him at DE, that includes Parcells by the way, so for him to play 65-70% of the snaps would require either sticking him at NT in the base defense or playing a lot more 4-3 than some would want to admit.

YOU WERE WRONG.

Actually you were trying to misguide people which imo is worse.

Your crusade previously was that the players arent buying into it but both these articles clearly state that the players are revitalized. I guess you were wrong then too.

 

[blindzebra]

Bully? Your the one telling me to kiss your backside and when i tell you to stop with the tripe or ill fight fire with fire. I was asking you to stop the flaming before i responded in kind.

A bully is not reactive they instigate.

Notice the difference?

And im sorry that you mistake my disdain for your repeating the same tired lines over and over again for me saying that your stupid. And I asked if you would shut up if I provided the evidence.

But I digress.

You go to your dream 4-3 and there is no depth.

Ware becomes a reserve true but at the same time, you start giving Carson and Claybrooks on the field for at least 40% if not more depending on how much Ferguson is out there.

Spears is on the field every down.

Your way creates the same problems as last year with guys wearing down at the end of games. Especially at DT.

And i love the James analysis. Truly insightful.

I did see him over pursue on some plays but in the middle he doesnt have those issues and he def phsical enough to make plays inside. Shanle looked good when he started.

Your repeated failure to look past starters is scary.

Ferguson is not too small to play the nose in a 3-4. Hes done it before. Actually so has Glover and Ngyuen but lets not let empirical evidence get in the way.

Bsically you want a starting defense and no reserves. That was the problem last year.

Im willing to wait and see how Shanle/James works out and I bet itll be better than 'they suck.'

I gave you an entire rotation, your repeated failure to comprehend is what is scary. So I'll spell it out for you.

Starters:

Spears, Ferguson, Glover, Ellis. That is 3 proven 4-3 players and a first round pick.

Reserves:

Canty, Ratliff, Carson, Coleman/Ogbogu, Ware. That is a first round pick, a player with a first round grade before he got hurt, a starter last season, two players that played a lot last year, and a DE/DT from the top defense in college football.

Yep there is no depth up front to run a 4-3 and get the starters some rest.

Starters at LB:

Burnett, Nguyen, Ware. A proven leader in the middle and two high draft picks.

Reserves:

Singleton, Fowler, James, Shanle, O'Neil/Goolsby/Cooper. Last year's starter, two contributers, and some solid special team players.

 

[blindzebra]

If it werent for the previous quote you would have a point but the two go hand in hand.

What we know:

A) Glover is going to play multiple positions ie more than 2.
B) Glover has successfully played both NT and DE in the 3-4.
C) Despite your little dig you are still completely wrong in your assertion that Glover will only play NT.

Lets not divert attention away from this. You said:



YOU WERE WRONG.

Actually you were trying to misguide people which imo is worse.

Your crusade previously was that the players arent buying into it but both these articles clearly state that the players are revitalized. I guess you were wrong then too.

BS, total BS.

Where in all of this did I say Glover would only play NT? I said he was not going to play DE, big difference. The quote you supplied does not say that, or do I need to explain what the words either and or mean?

Glover is quoted as saying, "I"ll be unhappy if I'm not starting and finishing games." Hmmm.

Ellis gets into a screaming match with Parcells. Hmmm.

Coakley made some comments on his way out. Hmmm.

Williams said last year that there were players not buying into Parcells changes on defense. Hmmm.

Yep, I'm misguiding people and EVERYONE is a happy camper.

Care to twist anything else?

Or are you just going to ignore everything and keep harping Glover/Shanle?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I gave you an entire rotation, your repeated failure to comprehend is what is scary. So I'll spell it out for you.

Starters:

Spears, Ferguson, Glover, Ellis. That is 3 proven 4-3 players and a first round pick.

Reserves:

Canty, Ratliff, Carson, Coleman/Ogbogu, Ware. That is a first round pick, a player with a first round grade before he got hurt, a starter last season, two players that played a lot last year, and a DE/DT from the top defense in college football.

Yep there is no depth up front to run a 4-3 and get the starters some rest.

Starters at LB:

Burnett, Nguyen, Ware. A proven leader in the middle and two high draft picks.

Reserves:

Singleton, Fowler, James, Shanle, O'Neil/Goolsby/Cooper. Last year's starter, two contributers, and some solid special team players.

This is truly funny. WARE IS NOT A 4-3 OLB. Even if he was you would remove his primary strength which is rushing the passer cause hes going to be asked to go into coverage on every passing down.

And how can Ware start at LB and be a reserve for the defensive line?

You come with that after asserting that Glover wont play end. Fantasy land.

Your DT reserves are Carson and Ratliff.

Carson clearly didnt get the job done last year and Ratliff is a 7th round draft pick who might not make the roster.

At best tackle depth is thin. Problem is that beyond Glover and Ferguson we have no talent at DT.

We have plenty of DE which is a good thing cause well need them for either defense but tackle is clearly a problem.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

BS, total BS.

Where in all of this did I say Glover would only play NT? I said he was not going to play DE, big difference. The quote you supplied does not say that, or do I need to explain what the words either and or mean?

Glover is quoted as saying, "I"ll be unhappy if I'm not starting and finishing games." Hmmm.

Ellis gets into a screaming match with Parcells. Hmmm.

Coakley made some comments on his way out. Hmmm.

Williams said last year that there were players not buying into Parcells changes on defense. Hmmm.

Yep, I'm misguiding people and EVERYONE is a happy camper.

Care to twist anything else?

Or are you just going to ignore everything and keep harping Glover/Shanle?

Coakley said what exactly. Quit making stuff up. If he had the press would have been all over it and rehashing it esp JJT. Fabricating to prove your point will be called out.

Prove that Coakley said anything. Im calling complete and utter BS on this one.

And the Williams thing proves what? That Wiley wasnt happy.

At the same time I dont remember reading anything alluding to that either and I check Cowboys news 365 a year. Wiley was on the team. Then again that was last year and seeing how the changes happened this year im kind of at a loss as to how it applies.

Glover said that he wanted to start. Oh hes obviously unhappy.

Actually Glover also said this

"From the standpoint of our fourth quarter production, I think it will help us out, being able to make plays in the fourth quarter," Glover said. "It will help out to get a rest, get a blow. I obviously want to be a part of the first-team defense and in when the game is on the line. That's the way I'm going to approach that."

That sounds like a man that is on board. Seeing how the way the coaches are doing things will help the team.

Ellis is the only thing you have to your players versus Parcells theory and even thats weak.

Like Ellis isnt going to give 110%.

Finally Glover said that in this defense he is going to have to play multiple positions.

What other positions are there other than tackle in the 3-4. Hopefully I dont have to explain to you the obvious conclusion.

What evidence to you present corroborating that Glover will not play DE?

Oh wait thats right: NONE.

 

[junk]

One of Glover, Ellis, and Ferguson would have been sitting out any way.

So instead of your Glover versus Shanle garbage, the reality is that we are now talking about keeping a Claybrooks or a Carson or Coleman off the field..

I don't want to mess up your lover's quarrel with BZ, but I don't know how your figure this.

In any four man fronts, I expect to see Ellis, Glover, Ferguson, Spears/Ware. One of those three would only sit in a 3 man front and even then it probably wouldn't be all of the time.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think there are two issues here.

While I acknowledge the articles posted, I too recall an interview or article where BP said Glover will not be playing DE but rather DT or NT.

Perhaps it would be helpful if that article were also posted. At this point, only Glover, to my knowledge, has indicated he would play DE. I tend to agree with Zebra here. I don't believe that Glover will do well at DE in the 34. Either way, it won't be long now and all of this will be settled.

 

[blindzebra]

This is truly funny. WARE IS NOT A 4-3 OLB. Even if he was you would remove his primary strength which is rushing the passer cause hes going to be asked to go into coverage on every passing down.

And how can Ware start at LB and be a reserve for the defensive line?

You come with that after asserting that Glover wont play end. Fantasy land.

Your DT reserves are Carson and Ratliff.

Carson clearly didnt get the job done last year and Ratliff is a 7th round draft pick who might not make the roster.

At best tackle depth is thin. Problem is that beyond Glover and Ferguson we have no talent at DT.

We have plenty of DE which is a good thing cause well need them for either defense but tackle is clearly a problem.

Ware has said several times he will play some DE in the 4-3. He actually said DE too, not several postions, or talking about playing different positions nearly 10 years ago.

Parcells said we will see Ware at DE, but he does not want him there going against an OT 70 plays a game.

Yes, DT is thin especially 3-4 NT. Ferguson goes down and we will get killed versus the run in a 3-4. I actually think we will have problem against the run with a healthy Ferguson.

Worst case we can move Spears inside, he has a Leon Lett build, and play Canty or Coleman at LDE.

Nice try at deflecting the issue. Which unit has more proven talent DL or LB?
Which unit has better depth?

You take quotes out of context, then accuse me of fabricating to prove a point, nice. I do love irony.

I also love debating someone who won't stay on topic, avoids points, continues harping about one thing 10 posts after it has been clarified, and starts the personal stuff than calls the other guy the aggressor.:jerk:

 

[BIGDen]

It all comes down to who is better Glover or Shanle, James, Fowler, O'Neil or Goolsby?

Not a tough question IMO.

That 4-3 unit is bigger and just as fast as last year, and would hold up much better against the run than that 3-4 unit. I also think we'd get after the QB just as easily, and probably better with that 4-3 unit too.

Amen brother! You need to be careful being so logical around these parts....

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I don't want to mess up your lover's quarrel with BZ, but I don't know how your figure this.

In any four man fronts, I expect to see Ellis, Glover, Ferguson, Spears/Ware. One of those three would only sit in a 3 man front and even then it probably wouldn't be all of the time.

That is my point brah.

BZ keeps on fixating on that his idea of an ideal starting front 7 wont be out there.

I say rotationwise Id like to see Spears, Ellis, Ferguson, Glover, and Canty being the primary men in the rotation.

In a 4-3 Carson and Coleman suddenly start getting a lot of snaps or you just dont rotate..

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I think there are two issues here.

While I acknowledge the articles posted, I too recall an interview or article where BP said Glover will not be playing DE but rather DT or NT.

Perhaps it would be helpful if that article were also posted. At this point, only Glover, to my knowledge, has indicated he would play DE. I tend to agree with Zebra here. I don't believe that Glover will do well at DE in the 34. Either way, it won't be long now and all of this will be settled.

Provide a link cause my evidence clearly counters this assertion.

Glover specifically says he is having to learn various positions in this defense whereas before he only had to learn one.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Quick, which group of ours has more good, proven players: linebackers or linemen?

End of story.

Except that Parcells wants to run his 3-4, so that's what he's going to do.

As for this idea that Glover is going to play everywhere and be a primary backup at all positions, how does that allow for the reduction in snaps Parcells says he's going to get?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Quick, which group of ours has more good, proven players: linebackers or linemen?

End of story.

Except that Parcells wants to run his 3-4, so that's what he's going to do.

As for this idea that Glover is going to play everywhere and be a primary backup at all positions, how does that allow for the reduction in snaps Parcells says he's going to get?

We have no defensive tackle depth especially in a 4-3.

Carson get big minutes.

At LB 2 of one of Shanle/James/Singleton/Burnett are depth in either scheme.

WE HAVE 2 QUALITY DT ON THE ROSTER.

You 4-3 goobs would keep them on the field the whole game.

If Glover is the primary back up along the line doesnt mean hes going to play every snap.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

We have no defensive tackle depth especially in a 4-3.

Carson get big minutes.

At LB 2 of one of Shanle/James/Singleton/Burnett are depth in either scheme.

WE HAVE 2 QUALITY DT ON THE ROSTER.

You 4-3 goobs would keep them on the field the whole game.

If Glover is the primary back up along the line doesnt mean hes going to play every snap.

"4-3 goob"? Not sure what a goob is exactly, but it sounds very Norsian.

The truth is, I don't give a rat's butt how we arrange the front seven or even all 11 guys out there as long as we play good defense. The 3-4 is fine by me. I was just addressing some of the things you had to say, and one of them was Glover playing basically four positions. I doubt very seriously that happens.

And as for not having any DT depth... Last year we had Glover. This year we have those two plus Ratliff, and we could definitely use Spears and probably even Canty at a three technique tackle. That's a lot more than we had last year.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ware has said several times he will play some DE in the 4-3. He actually said DE too, not several postions, or talking about playing different positions nearly 10 years ago.

I was responding to you r assertion that Ware would be a OLB in the 4-3 which is wrong. Wow, Im glad you figured out that Ware would play DE in the 4-3.

I didnt want to do this but Im going to have to explain to you how if in a 3-4 defense Glover is having to learn multiple positions he is going to be playing DE. Its really simple and Ill answer the obvious counterargument which is what I was hoping youd come up with.

Lets look at the quote:

"I'll be playing a lot of different positions, so you've got to learn," said Glover, who is going into his 10th NFL season. "Before you only had to learn one position, now you have to learn three, and maybe more if we do some different schemes."

First of all this quote was from this minicamp not a reference to 6 years ago.

Now he states that if he only has to learn the one scheme he has to play 3 different positions. Now hmmm I wonder what those three positions could be?

Could it be OLB? Nah I doubt it. How about ILB? Nah. That leaves CB, S and DE in the 3-4.

Which one could it be?

The other quote you bring up is just a demonstration that in the past Glover was successfulas both NT and DE in the 3-4. Which is also a response to this next quote.

Parcells said we will see Ware at DE, but he does not want him there going against an OT 70 plays a game.

Yes, DT is thin especially 3-4 NT. Ferguson goes down and we will get killed versus the run in a 3-4. I actually think we will have problem against the run with a healthy Ferguson.

Worst case we can move Spears inside, he has a Leon Lett build, and play Canty or Coleman at LDE.

Nice try at deflecting the issue. Which unit has more proven talent DL or LB?
Which unit has better depth?

You take quotes out of context, then accuse me of fabricating to prove a point, nice. I do love irony.

I also love debating someone who won't stay on topic, avoids points, continues harping about one thing 10 posts after it has been clarified, and starts the personal stuff than calls the other guy the aggressor.:jerk:

First of all what one thing do I keep harping on that has been 'clarified?' Also give an example of how I started the agression. You told me to go kiss your ***. Ive responded to every issue out there.

In a 4-3 DT has no depth other than Carson who was terrible.

In a 3-4 Glover is the backup NT the position he was a probowler at with the Saints. You keep asserting that he cant. A trip to Hawaii is so much more compelling truth than your assertions.

Linebacker clearly has better depth than DT. Ypur scenario has a rookie, Spears, playing 2 or 3 positions which is not the recipe for success. Let the guy learn one position.

The bottomline is that while you back your points up with assertions most notable the Glover cant play DE or NT in the 3-4 and that the players are mutiny with nothing or my favorite that Ware would be a starting LB in the 3-4.

That last one I really like. if we were to go 3/4 it would look like

Ware Ngyuen James Burnett
Ellis Ferguson Spears

4-3 looks like

James Ngyuen Burnett
Ellis Glover Ferguson Spears

Its Glover or Ware not Glover or James/Shanle

You keep saying that its James/Spears because otherwise your assertions look even less compelling.

Ive answered your points but what I would like to see is one link that backs up your following assertions:

A) Glover cant play NT in the 3-4
B) Glover wont be playing in the DE rotation in the 3-4.
c) And players not named Greg Ellis are balking at the switch
D) Ware would/could play as an OLB in the 4-3

You make stuff up and rely on hyperbole to make your points. I want something factual or logical not Zebraspeak

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

"4-3 goob"? Not sure what a goob is exactly, but it sounds very Norsian.

The truth is, I don't give a rat's butt how we arrange the front seven or even all 11 guys out there as long as we play good defense. The 3-4 is fine by me. I was just addressing some of the things you had to say, and one of them was Glover playing basically four positions. I doubt very seriously that happens.

And as for not having any DT depth... Last year we had Glover. This year we have those two plus Ratliff, and we could definitely use Spears and probably even Canty at a three technique tackle. That's a lot more than we had last year.

Ratliff is a 7th round choice. Lets see him make the roster before we call him quality depth.

Spears and Canty need to learn one position in this defense before we start asking them to play another.

WEE play the 4-3 CArson is going to get significant playing time. Everyone harps on how bad Wiley was but Carson was just as bad if not worse last season.

We play 3-4 and Shanle/James gets more playing time.

Fact is that Glover/Ellis/Ferguson are going to see the same number of snaps no matter what defense we play

 

[blindzebra]

I was responding to you r assertion that Ware would be a OLB in the 4-3 which is wrong. Wow, Im glad you figured out that Ware would play DE in the 4-3.

I didnt want to do this but Im going to have to explain to you how if in a 3-4 defense Glover is having to learn multiple positions he is going to be playing DE. Its really simple and Ill answer the obvious counterargument which is what I was hoping youd come up with.

Lets look at the quote:



First of all this quote was from this minicamp not a reference to 6 years ago.

Now he states that if he only has to learn the one scheme he has to play 3 different positions. Now hmmm I wonder what those three positions could be?

Could it be OLB? Nah I doubt it. How about ILB? Nah. That leaves CB, S and DE in the 3-4.

Which one could it be?

The other quote you bring up is just a demonstration that in the past Glover was successfulas both NT and DE in the 3-4. Which is also a response to this next quote.



First of all what one thing do I keep harping on that has been 'clarified?' Also give an example of how I started the agression. You told me to go kiss your ***. Ive responded to every issue out there.

In a 4-3 DT has no depth other than Carson who was terrible.

In a 3-4 Glover is the backup NT the position he was a probowler at with the Saints. You keep asserting that he cant. A trip to Hawaii is so much more compelling truth than your assertions.

Linebacker clearly has better depth than DT. Ypur scenario has a rookie, Spears, playing 2 or 3 positions which is not the recipe for success. Let the guy learn one position.

The bottomline is that while you back your points up with assertions most notable the Glover cant play DE or NT in the 3-4 and that the players are mutiny with nothing or my favorite that Ware would be a starting LB in the 3-4.

That last one I really like. if we were to go 3/4 it would look like

Ware Ngyuen James Burnett
Ellis Ferguson Spears

4-3 looks like

James Ngyuen Burnett
Ellis Glover Ferguson Spears

Its Glover or Ware not Glover or James/Shanle

You keep saying that its James/Spears because otherwise your assertions look even less compelling.

Ive answered your points but what I would like to see is one link that backs up your following assertions:

A) Glover cant play NT in the 3-4
B) Glover wont be playing in the DE rotation in the 3-4.
c) And players not named Greg Ellis are balking at the switch
D) Ware would/could play as an OLB in the 4-3

You make stuff up and rely on hyperbole to make your points. I want something factual or logical not Zebraspeak

Comprehension skills of a rock.

Yep that clearly said he's playing 3-4 DE.

Several, lets see:

1. 3 tech DT in 4-3

2. NT in 3-4 base.

3. DT in 4 man line pass situations.

4. NT in 3 man line pass situations.

5. DT in any 46 looks we may run.

Does 5 equal several?

That would be 5 different positions WITHOUT PLAYING A DOWN AT DE!

What year did Glover make the pro bowl playing every down NT, in a full time 3-4?

Let's see we have a 300 pound NT, backed up by a 280 pound NT, backed up by Carson...yep I'm loving that depth.

We should have added another big NT if we are going 3-4.

You love our depth at DE and LB and gush on rookies, but than crap on the idea of last year's starter getting a few snaps, or rookies taking a few snaps inside. Keep in mind Ellis and Coleman have both played situational DT too.

I see a DL that is deep and versatile, sure there is some drop off, but you will rarely if ever have all the starters off the field at once. That is why it's called a rotation. When starters become back ups, and back ups will struggle to make the team it's a GOOD THING.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Comprehension skills of a rock.

Yep that clearly said he's playing 3-4 DE.

Several, lets see:

1. 3 tech DT in 4-3

2. NT in 3-4 base.

3. DT in 4 man line pass situations.

4. NT in 3 man line pass situations.

5. DT in any 46 looks we may run.

Does 5 equal several?

That would be 5 different positions WITHOUT PLAYING A DOWN AT DE!

What year did Glover make the pro bowl playing every down NT, in a full time 3-4?

Let's see we have a 300 pound NT, backed up by a 280 pound NT, backed up by Carson...yep I'm loving that depth.

We should have added another big NT if we are going 3-4.

You love our depth at DE and LB and gush on rookies, but than crap on the idea of last year's starter getting a few snaps, or rookies taking a few snaps inside. Keep in mind Ellis and Coleman have both played situational DT too.

I see a DL that is deep and versatile, sure there is some drop off, but you will rarely if ever have all the starters off the field at once. That is why it's called a rotation. When starters become back ups, and back ups will struggle to make the team it's a GOOD THING.

WRONG READ THE QUOTE.

Lets look at it again so you canr read it AGAIN.

"I'll be playing a lot of different positions, so you've got to learn," said Glover, who is going into his 10th NFL season. "Before you only had to learn one position, now you have to learn three, and maybe more if we do some different schemes."

There are two reasons why your other scenarios dont work in context of the quote

A) He specifically mentions that he would have to learn more than if he were to play another scheme

now you have to learn three, and maybe more if we do some different schemes

B) That he only had to learn one position before

Before you only had to learn one position

Now in part A Glover clearly is talking about one scheme, the 3-4. Hes saying in the 3-4 im having to learn all the line positions and if we play more schemes Ill have to know even more.

This clearly shows that your examples of the 4-3 nickel and 46 do not apply.

BTW I really wish that you would quit asserting baseless drivel like the 46 garbage. THERE IS NOT ONE SHRED OF PROOF THAT WE WILL RUN THE 46.

But just to make sure Ive brought up point B. Why?

Well before he was saying he only needed to learn one position, 3 technique, and now he is being asked to learn 3.

Didnt we play nickel before? Why yes we did.

What Glover is saying is that beofre all he had to do is learn 3 technique in the 4-3 and now hes having to learn all 3 positions in the 3-4.

Your examples do not meet up to the standards of

A) Not being a position he played before as well as
B) Only applying to one scheme

BTW I would like some proof of Glover not playing DE, anyone other than Ellis being unhappy, Coakley badmouthing the team or us having any intentions of playing some 46.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Amen brother! You need to be careful being so logical around these parts....

Logic?

Ware would be taken off the field and would backup Ellis in the 4-3. Sorry hes not goping to play OLB in the 4-3 no matter how much you guys repeat it.

Then it becomes Glover versus Ware and all of a sudden your taking a first round draft pick off the field.

Not to mention to cut down on Glovers snaps you have Carson on the field for almost half the plays.

Yeah real good logic.