#42 we trade away (plus Dat) for Howard

[Alexander]

When I look at our team, I believe we are better suited to a 43 but obviously, opinions vary.

Our old personnel (Ellis, Glover, Nguyen, Carson, Singleton) were better suited to the 4-3.

Our "new" personnel (Ware, Spears, Canty, Ratliff, Burnett, Ferguson) are better suited to the 3-4.

This is a changing of the guard.

But if anyone thinks were are going to the 3-4 every single down, they are full of it and themselves. And if Coach Parcells tries to do this (which I really doubt), then he is compromising the effectiveness of our personnel.

The Patriots have used the base defense 3-4 for only last season. Before that they mixed it up because they lacked the true NT to make it work. Once they drafted Wilfork and added Keith Traylor, they used it as a base. They ran BOTH defenses for years, and this includes when Coach Parcells was on board before.

We will probably do the same thing until we have the right personnel. We will look to draft a 3-4 end to replace Ellis (if Ratliff is not a solution) and also obtain NT depth to replace Glover. Until then, we will probably use both schemes.

I don't know why there is this controversy about that, other than someone trying to win a pissing contest and this comes from both "camps". All it ends up doing is looking foolish and detracts away from serious discussion.

I don't know why this is so confusing and such a source of debate. It gets pretty annoying after the 1,000,000 thread.

 

[Hostile]

Our old personnel (Ellis, Glover, Nguyen, Carson, Singleton) were better suited to the 4-3.

Our "new" personnel (Ware, Spears, Canty, Ratliff, Burnett, Ferguson) are better suited to the 3-4.

This is a changing of the guard.

But if anyone thinks were are going to the 3-4 every single down, they are full of it and themselves. And if Coach Parcells tries to do this (which I really doubt), then he is compromising the effectiveness of our personnel.

The Patriots have used the base defense 3-4 for only last season. Before that they mixed it up because they lacked the true NT to make it work. Once they drafted Wilfork and added Keith Traylor, they used it as a base. They ran BOTH defenses for years, and this includes when Coach Parcells was on board before.

We will probably do the same thing until we have the right personnel. We will look to draft a 3-4 end to replace Ellis (if Ratliff is not a solution) and also obtain NT depth to replace Glover. Until then, we will probably use both schemes.

I don't know why there is this controversy about that, other than someone trying to win a pissing contest and this comes from both "camps". All it ends up doing is looking foolish and detracts away from serious discussion.

I don't know why this is so confusing and such a source of debate. It gets pretty annoying after the 1,000,000 thread.

Post of the day in a runaway.

 

[bsheeern]

On Spears, I think he'll wind up bigger than he is now. I bet he settles in aroun310. He looks to have the frame for it. I see him being big, fast and dominate in a 34 in a year or two. But your points are well taken.

Actually Bill wanted him to loose weight and play somewhere around the 290's range.
This is from DC.Com
"After coming in a bit heavy for the first mini-camp, in late April, Spears playfully took the ribbing from Parcells, who doled out nicknames such as "Fats Domino" and "Chubby Checker." While Spears, who played around 305 pounds at LSU, took the jokes in stride, he came back for the late-May mini-camp weighing around 293 pounds."

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Our old personnel (Ellis, Glover, Nguyen, Carson, Singleton) were better suited to the 4-3.

Our "new" personnel (Ware, Spears, Canty, Ratliff, Burnett, Ferguson) are better suited to the 3-4.

This is a changing of the guard.

But if anyone thinks were are going to the 3-4 every single down, they are full of it and themselves. And if Coach Parcells tries to do this (which I really doubt), then he is compromising the effectiveness of our personnel.

The Patriots have used the base defense 3-4 for only last season. Before that they mixed it up because they lacked the true NT to make it work. Once they drafted Wilfork and added Keith Traylor, they used it as a base. They ran BOTH defenses for years, and this includes when Coach Parcells was on board before.

We will probably do the same thing until we have the right personnel. We will look to draft a 3-4 end to replace Ellis (if Ratliff is not a solution) and also obtain NT depth to replace Glover. Until then, we will probably use both schemes.

I don't know why there is this controversy about that, other than someone trying to win a pissing contest and this comes from both "camps". All it ends up doing is looking foolish and detracts away from serious discussion.

I don't know why this is so confusing and such a source of debate. It gets pretty annoying after the 1,000,000 thread.

I am not so sure. I think our eventual defensive scheme might have more to do with how Spears plays out for us.

I say this because I believe that Ware and Canty will be able to play well in either scheme. Spears is the kicker to me. If he turns into a Reggie White kind of player, then I don't see him being used in a 34 much and I don't see him not being played. If he does turn into the kind of player his physical ability allows him to be, then I can only see us in a 43. That would allow all our young players to be on the field, at the same time, effecting play in the most effective manner possible.

 

[Alexander]

If he turns into a Reggie White kind of player, then I don't see him being used in a 34 much and I don't see him not being played. If he does turn into the kind of player his physical ability allows him to be, then I can only see us in a 43. That would allow all our young players to be on the field, at the same time, effecting play in the most effective manner possible.

If Spears is a Reggie White kind of player the last thing we need to worry about is what scheme we use him in.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If Spears is a Reggie White kind of player the last thing we need to worry about is what scheme we use him in.

Point well taken but you do see where I'm going here?

 

[bsheeern]

ray2:

If Spears is a Reggie White kind of player the last thing we need to worry about is what scheme we use him in.

ray2:

 

[Alexander]

Point well taken but you do see where I'm going here?

Yes, I do agree Spears is key. But I don't think he will be a Reggie White type, as they don't come around often.

As for Canty, I disagree completely. He would be a poor RDE in a 4-3 as he is not strong enough as a pass rusher. If you put him at the left side and flopped Spears, we still would not have a strong pass rush. Then we have Ware languishing and being wasted at OLB.

I don't think there is any doubt that the players we drafted fit the 3-4 better. You can cling to the idea that they "might" dictate where we go from here, but I really don't. We are going 3-4 eventually. This draft practically married us to it or at the very least, put the engagement ring on.

 

[AsthmaField]

As for Canty, I disagree completely. He would be a poor RDE in a 4-3 as he is not strong enough as a pass rusher. If you put him at the left side and flopped Spears, we still would not have a strong pass rush. Then we have Ware languishing and being wasted at OLB.

I don't think there is any doubt that the players we drafted fit the 3-4 better. You can cling to the idea that they "might" dictate where we go from here, but I really don't. We are going 3-4 eventually. This draft practically married us to it or at the very least, put the engagement ring on.

I 100% agree with this.

Ware would be wasted as a 4-3 OLB. The only way I could see our draftees all working in a 4-3 is:

Spears at LDE
Canty at DT
Ware at RDE

And I don't think Canty is cut out to play 4-3 DT.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yes, I do agree Spears is key. But I don't think he will be a Reggie White type, as they don't come around often.

As for Canty, I disagree completely. He would be a poor RDE in a 4-3 as he is not strong enough as a pass rusher. If you put him at the left side and flopped Spears, we still would not have a strong pass rush. Then we have Ware languishing and being wasted at OLB.

I don't think there is any doubt that the players we drafted fit the 3-4 better. You can cling to the idea that they "might" dictate where we go from here, but I really don't. We are going 3-4 eventually. This draft practically married us to it or at the very least, put the engagement ring on.

I think Spears has the potential to be that kind of player. I do not think he's as naturally strong as Reggie White but he will probably not be far off.

At far as Canty is concerned, I do not agree. Canty would be an excellent LDE IMO. He has the size and strength to play there IMO. As far as his pass rushing skills, I think it's hard to say he doesn't have any when he's played in a 34 for most of his college career. His agility numbers are not bad. His height to weight ratio suggest that he can probably put more weight on as he gets older. His wing span is impressive. He has decent speed and quickness so I think his lack of sack totals is more a result of the 34 then his actual ability.

In a 43, I would actually invision Canty playing LDE, Spears in the 3 technique, Ferguson, or someone yet to be aquired, playing the 2 and Ware at the RDE position. As time goes on, I can see Spears moving over to play any one of three different positions in much the same way White or Seymour did/do. It would create miss matches all along the LOS.

IMO, this could be a very potent DL indeed.

 

[Alexander]

At far as Canty is concerned, I do not agree. Canty would be an excellent LDE IMO. He has the size and strength to play there IMO.

Spears is a natural strongside DE. Canty has always played the right side and mostly in a 3-4, which is theoretically a 4-3 DT. There is the rub if we try to go back to the 4-3 with the two of them as our only ends. Each is an odd fit. I don't see Spears being the pass rusher you need from the weakside, and neither is Canty. Both are better suited for the strongside.

As far as his pass rushing skills, I think it's hard to say he doesn't have any when he's played in a 34 for most of his college career. His agility numbers are not bad. His height to weight ratio suggest that he can probably put more weight on as he gets older. His wing span is impressive. He has decent speed and quickness so I think his lack of sack totals is more a result of the 34 then his actual ability.

If either were going to play on the right side, they would have to lose weight IMO.

In a 43, I would actually invision Canty playing LDE, Spears in the 3 technique, Ferguson, or someone yet to be aquired, playing the 2 and Ware at the RDE position. As time goes on, I can see Spears moving over to play any one of three different positions in much the same way White or Seymour did/do. It would create miss matches all along the LOS.

I agree with this scenario. One would have to move inside to tackle.

IMO, this could be a very potent DL indeed.

If you move Ware to end, place either Spears or Canty inside and the other at LDE, then you are right.

 

[Alexander]

And I don't think Canty is cut out to play 4-3 DT.

Theoretically that is what a 3-4 end does anyways, control gaps. I don't see the problem.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Spears is a natural strongside DE. Canty has always played the right side and mostly in a 3-4, which is theoretically a 4-3 DT. There is the rub if we try to go back to the 4-3 with the two of them as our only ends. Each is an odd fit. I don't see Spears being the pass rusher you need from the weakside, and neither is Canty. Both are better suited for the strongside.



If either were going to play on the right side, they would have to lose weight IMO.



I agree with this scenario. One would have to move inside to tackle.



If you move Ware to end, place either Spears or Canty inside and the other at LDE, then you are right.

Spears actually played both DT and DE while at LSU. I think he can be very effective at the 3 technique, in a 43. I think he can also be very effective as a LDE in a 43, which is why I see him as a pivital player in our long term defensive plans. Canty would make an excellent LDE in a 43, I think. Having said that, many actually believed that Canty would eventually be a DT in a 43, once he came into the NFL. Bottom line on both of these players...... It seems like a waste of talent, to me, to play them as 34 DEs. Neither are best suited to being the 2Technique DT and that's essentially what they would be in a 34 IMO. Each has good to excellent mobility for there size. I think they would fit well in a 43. I believe that they could play a 34 and would be good as DEs in that scheme but I think it would be a waste of talent. I think each could do more.

I really like the DL talent we drafted this year. I just see so many options with them in a 43. Not so much in a 34.

 

[Alexander]

I really like the DL talent we drafted this year. I just see so many options with them in a 43. Not so much in a 34.

There is not the option of inside or outside in the 3-4. You are either one or the other. The LDE is a 4-3 can be a rush stopper, provided you have disruption in the middle.

I see Spears is a natural 3-4 end and he could play inside or outside in a 4-3, either as a penetrator inside or a run stuffer outside, he is that versatile.

Canty is especially a good fit for the 3-4 as that is what he has done practically his whole career at Virginia. He is not, however, a good fit for the 4-3 unless it is inside.

 

[Hostile]

If Spears is a Reggie White kind of player the last thing we need to worry about is what scheme we use him in.

If he were anywhere close to Reggie I think my wife would never walk again.

He has the size similarity to Reggie. Will he have the ability? If so then he is the steal of the draft because DEs like Reggie White with that combination of speed, power, and instincts is a one in a million player.

 

[AsthmaField]

Here’s my take on the personnel we have on defense:

(Please keep in mind that this is merely my opinion. I realize it is and that I may not be correct in my thinking on some players.)

Marcus Spears - He's a huge DE. He's a little slow off the edge in a 4-3 but he has teriffic athleticism. Several places I've read say he is an ideal 3-4 DE but a tad big and slow for a 4-3 DE. I agree, although I think he'd be good in either scheme. Reggie White would’ve had the same knocks on him coming out and he did quite well in a 4-3.



Jason Ferguson - I think he'd be a very good, solid run plugger in either scheme. He's a good guy to have and will play a big part in our defense no matter which scheme we're in. He'll be great in either.



La'Roi Glover - Obviously a 4-3 guy. I do think he'll be effective from the nose in passing situations, but clearly, he's suited for a 4-3 defense. Either scheme we play... LaRoi needs a lot more rest than he got last year.



Greg Ellis - Another player who is clearly a 4-3 guy. I do think he will be effective as a 3-4 DE, particularly if he gets some rest, but he's a very good DE in a 4-3.



Chris Canty - A 3-4 DE all the way. He's ideal for that scheme and he played it in college and excelled there. In a 4-3 he's a bit slow and big for DE and too light and high-cut for DT. Yes, I know there have been some effective DT's who were tall, but I just don't think Canty would do too well there. He's going to be dynamite as part of a 3-4 DE rotation.



Jay Ratliff - another guy who's just a little too big and slow for 4-3 DE and a little too small for DT. That's why he didn't have an outstanding college career and why he didn't go higher in the draft. He has a lot going for him though: Athleticism, tenacity, drive, work ethic, smarts. In college he didn't have the right build though... but in the pro's he's going to have the perfect size for a 3-4 DE and could surprise a lot of people. He's perfect for a 3-4 DE.



Eric Ogbogu - Definately a 4-3 end... but nothing special in any scheme. He'll very likely be a casualty of all the new DL talent.



Kenyon Coleman - At 6-5, 284 he's built more for a 3-4 than a 4-3. He just didn't have the quickness to be anything else than a run clogger in a 4-3. Again, either way, he isn't overflowing with talent and could find himself out of the picture. He does have the size going for him in a 3-4 however and until training camp we just won't know if he'll make it or not.



Leo Carson - He's built more like Glover than Ferguson and should be more effective as a 4-3 DT than a 3-4 NT. He may have a hard time making it on the team because a player like Ratliff who could play DT or NT in a pinch but has real value as a DE probably will push him off the roster.



Linebackers:



Demarcus Ware - Although he would be a very good pass rush specialist from 4-3 DE (and will be), he's a little undersized for that position and would have trouble against the run. Like Parcells said, you wouldn't want him lining up against a tackle 60 times a game. He wouldn't play OLB in a 4-3 because he isn't ideally suited for that position. As a rush LB in a 3-4 he is ideal. We knew he had the athleticism to do it and the pass rush skills... the only question was his coverage. In minicamp everyone was surprised at how well he was able to cover and so with that question at least partially answered, he looks like a prototype pass rushing 3-4 OLB.



Dat Nguyen - He did play as a 3-4 ILB at Texas A&M and should do fine there in the pro's. He is a little smaller than Parcells would like there and his size is a little less of a factor in a 4-3... so, although I think he'll be fine in a 3-4, I'd have to say he's more suited to play MLB in a 4-3.



Kevin Burnett - As we've all read numerous times, he could play in either scheme. He'll put on some more weight and has absolutely wonderful athletic skills. He'll be fine either way and was a great pick by Parcells.



Bradie James - I've read a few times that he should be better as an ILB in a 3-4 than he was as an OLB in a 4-3. I agree with that and think he could silence some of his critics this season.



Scott Shanle - Parcells likes him and thinks he'll play very good as a 3-4 ILB. I agree with that also. He's a hardnosed guy who can add even more weight and could flourish in the new scheme. I think he's better suited for that than 4-3 OLB or MLB.



Kalen Thornton - He's definately one of Parcells 3-4 peices and might surprise a few people as a 3-4 OLB. There's no question that he's more suited to a 3-4 than a 4-3... he doesn't have the right size or speed for a 4-3 OLB.



Al Singleton - Definately a 4-3 player. He just doesn't have the size for the 3-4. He might have a difficult time making the squad because of that and his salary. Still, he has the mind of a Parcells player and is a salty veteran, so he might just stick around another year.



Keith O'Neil - Probably about as valuble in either scheme... which is to say special teams is how he'll make the roster.



Ryan Fowler - At 6-3, 243 he has some size and is a big hitter as he showed last year on special teams. He's more physical than fast which I would think makes him a better player for a 3-4 than a 4-3.



Mike Goolsby - Parcells definatley brought him in with the 3-4 ILB position in mind. Hardnosed and should be able to take on a guard at the next level.







So, by my count, here is the breakdown of who is more suited to play in which scheme:



DL better suited for 3-4:

Marcus Spears

Chris Canty

Jay Ratliff

Kenyon Coleman



DL better suited for 4-3:

La'Roi Glover

Greg Ellis

Eric Ogbogu

Leo Carson



DL that will be the same in either:

Jason Ferguson



LB better suited for 3-4:

Demarcus Ware

Brady James

Scott Shanle

Kalen Thornton

Ryan Fowler

Mike Goolsby



LB better suited for 4-3:

Dat Nguyen

Al Singleton



LB that will be the same in either:

Kevin Burnett

Keith O'Neil





So we have:

4 DL better in a 3-4

4 DL better in a 4-3

1 DL same in either



6 LB better in a 3-4

2 LB better in a 4-3

2 LB same in either



or:



10 front seven guys best in a 3-4

6 front seven guys best in a 4-3

3 guys suited for either scheme



It isn't that easy though. We all know that those guys don't have equal value to the team. Some are stars, some are role players and some are fringe players. Some have a ton of upside and some are about as good as they'll get or are even on the downside. Some are a mixture of more than one of those types.



So, there really isn't a good way to break it down like this, but I'm trying it as best I can. It's the offseason, so I'm just killing time anyway.



Of the players who are best suited for a 4-3, there are three who I would consider to be important players (in bold above): Glover, Ellis, and Nguyen. The other three, Ogbogu, Carson, and Singleton aren't the types of players you would consider when thinking which scheme to run. Of those three important guys, Glover is the only one who lost a starting position. Ellis and Nguyen will be starters.



Of the players who are best suited for a 3-4, there are four who I would consider to be important players (in bold above): Spears, Canty, Ware, and James (I do have high hopes for Ratliff too, but didn't include him). Those guys are our future on defense, or at least part of it. Spears and Ware were first rounders and Canty could've been. James has a lot of physical potential and if the light comes on, will be a star at ILB.



What does all of that mean? I'm not sure. I do think that you can't necessarily say we have better personnel for the 4-3 than we do for the 3-4. We have quite a few guys who are better suited for a 3-4 and should excel in that scheme.



Does that mean we are better suited for a 3-4 than a 4-3? No, I don't think that either.



I think Hos said it best when he mentioned that we're in a transition year on defense. This is going to be a work in process and there are going to be times that we’re in a 4-3 and should be… and times we’re in a 3-4 and should be.



The coaches will study the opponent and know the situation before they put the defense in any particular scheme. If we’re playing a team with a weak center for instance, Parcells might want Ferguson and Glover head up on him for most of the game… so we’d run the 3-4 most of the time.



A team with two weak tackles? We might line up 4-3 for most of the game. If we can’t get pressure on the passer, we’d probably switch to some 3-4 looks.



3-4 getting run on a lot? Presto, back into the 4-3 and lock down the run.



Frankly, I couldn’t be more excited about what we’re doing and the personnel we’ve acquired. I think we’re going to be a handful for any offense and it’s going to be very difficult to prepare for the Cowboy defense.



Who will the center be facing? Will the tackle have to watch for Ellis off of the edge, or Ware? What are the guards assignments on each particular run play? Nguyen or Glover? Will Ware be a pass rush DE or will he be an every down Rush LB? Can your fat Guard move well enough to find Bradie James and block him? Where is Spears and his incredible first step coming from? Who should pick him up? Do they double Ellis, Glover, Ferguson, Spears or Ware? When your tackle is tired in the 4th quarter, can he block a fresh Canty coming off the bench? Your small athletic guard is great at getting to LB’s… what if he has to get Ferguson instead?



It’s easy to see the problems offenses will face when preparing for our multiple scheme defense.



If you could put a number to a defense that runs both the 3-4 and the 4-3, we would all be in agreement on the scheme. Call it at 34-43 and we’d never argue about it.



We shouldn’t be now. We all know Parcells is going to run both and as good as he is at in-game adjustments, I don’t know why anyone would be anything except excited about the prospects of running both. I know I am.



We’re going to be a handful.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

There is not the option of inside or outside in the 3-4. You are either one or the other. The LDE is a 4-3 can be a rush stopper, provided you have disruption in the middle.

I see Spears is a natural 3-4 end and he could play inside or outside in a 4-3, either as a penetrator inside or a run stuffer outside, he is that versatile.

Canty is especially a good fit for the 3-4 as that is what he has done practically his whole career at Virginia. He is not, however, a good fit for the 4-3 unless it is inside.

As I said earlier, it really is a matter of how you view each players skills. My view of Canty and Spears is different from many. I look at spears and I see Seymour. I look at Canty and I see Gaptooth. I look at Ware and I see Haley.

Of course, none of them have played a down of pro ball so I can certainly say that I have not one iota of proof for my opinions. Only that I see simularities in abilities.

I love the off season.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Here’s my take on the personnel we have on defense:

(Please keep in mind that this is merely my opinion. I realize it is and that I may not be correct in my thinking on some players.)

Marcus Spears - He's a huge DE. He's a little slow off the edge in a 4-3 but he has teriffic athleticism. Several places I've read say he is an ideal 3-4 DE but a tad big and slow for a 4-3 DE. I agree, although I think he'd be good in either scheme. Reggie White would’ve had the same knocks on him coming out and he did quite well in a 4-3.



Jason Ferguson - I think he'd be a very good, solid run plugger in either scheme. He's a good guy to have and will play a big part in our defense no matter which scheme we're in. He'll be great in either.



La'Roi Glover - Obviously a 4-3 guy. I do think he'll be effective from the nose in passing situations, but clearly, he's suited for a 4-3 defense. Either scheme we play... LaRoi needs a lot more rest than he got last year.



Greg Ellis - Another player who is clearly a 4-3 guy. I do think he will be effective as a 3-4 DE, particularly if he gets some rest, but he's a very good DE in a 4-3.



Chris Canty - A 3-4 DE all the way. He's ideal for that scheme and he played it in college and excelled there. In a 4-3 he's a bit slow and big for DE and too light and high-cut for DT. Yes, I know there have been some effective DT's who were tall, but I just don't think Canty would do too well there. He's going to be dynamite as part of a 3-4 DE rotation.



Jay Ratliff - another guy who's just a little too big and slow for 4-3 DE and a little too small for DT. That's why he didn't have an outstanding college career and why he didn't go higher in the draft. He has a lot going for him though: Athleticism, tenacity, drive, work ethic, smarts. In college he didn't have the right build though... but in the pro's he's going to have the perfect size for a 3-4 DE and could surprise a lot of people. He's perfect for a 3-4 DE.



Eric Ogbogu - Definately a 4-3 end... but nothing special in any scheme. He'll very likely be a casualty of all the new DL talent.



Kenyon Coleman - At 6-5, 284 he's built more for a 3-4 than a 4-3. He just didn't have the quickness to be anything else than a run clogger in a 4-3. Again, either way, he isn't overflowing with talent and could find himself out of the picture. He does have the size going for him in a 3-4 however and until training camp we just won't know if he'll make it or not.



Leo Carson - He's built more like Glover than Ferguson and should be more effective as a 4-3 DT than a 3-4 NT. He may have a hard time making it on the team because a player like Ratliff who could play DT or NT in a pinch but has real value as a DE probably will push him off the roster.



Linebackers:



Demarcus Ware - Although he would be a very good pass rush specialist from 4-3 DE (and will be), he's a little undersized for that position and would have trouble against the run. Like Parcells said, you wouldn't want him lining up against a tackle 60 times a game. He wouldn't play OLB in a 4-3 because he isn't ideally suited for that position. As a rush LB in a 3-4 he is ideal. We knew he had the athleticism to do it and the pass rush skills... the only question was his coverage. In minicamp everyone was surprised at how well he was able to cover and so with that question at least partially answered, he looks like a prototype pass rushing 3-4 OLB.



Dat Nguyen - He did play as a 3-4 ILB at Texas A&M and should do fine there in the pro's. He is a little smaller than Parcells would like there and his size is a little less of a factor in a 4-3... so, although I think he'll be fine in a 3-4, I'd have to say he's more suited to play MLB in a 4-3.



Kevin Burnett - As we've all read numerous times, he could play in either scheme. He'll put on some more weight and has absolutely wonderful athletic skills. He'll be fine either way and was a great pick by Parcells.



Bradie James - I've read a few times that he should be better as an ILB in a 3-4 than he was as an OLB in a 4-3. I agree with that and think he could silence some of his critics this season.



Scott Shanle - Parcells likes him and thinks he'll play very good as a 3-4 ILB. I agree with that also. He's a hardnosed guy who can add even more weight and could flourish in the new scheme. I think he's better suited for that than 4-3 OLB or MLB.



Kalen Thornton - He's definately one of Parcells 3-4 peices and might surprise a few people as a 3-4 OLB. There's no question that he's more suited to a 3-4 than a 4-3... he doesn't have the right size or speed for a 4-3 OLB.



Al Singleton - Definately a 4-3 player. He just doesn't have the size for the 3-4. He might have a difficult time making the squad because of that and his salary. Still, he has the mind of a Parcells player and is a salty veteran, so he might just stick around another year.



Keith O'Neil - Probably about as valuble in either scheme... which is to say special teams is how he'll make the roster.



Ryan Fowler - At 6-3, 243 he has some size and is a big hitter as he showed last year on special teams. He's more physical than fast which I would think makes him a better player for a 3-4 than a 4-3.



Mike Goolsby - Parcells definatley brought him in with the 3-4 ILB position in mind. Hardnosed and should be able to take on a guard at the next level.







So, by my count, here is the breakdown of who is more suited to play in which scheme:



DL better suited for 3-4:

Marcus Spears

Chris Canty

Jay Ratliff

Kenyon Coleman



DL better suited for 4-3:

La'Roi Glover

Greg Ellis

Eric Ogbogu

Leo Carson



DL that will be the same in either:

Jason Ferguson



LB better suited for 3-4:

Demarcus Ware

Brady James

Scott Shanle

Kalen Thornton

Ryan Fowler

Mike Goolsby



LB better suited for 4-3:

Dat Nguyen

Al Singleton



LB that will be the same in either:

Kevin Burnett

Keith O'Neil





So we have:

4 DL better in a 3-4

4 DL better in a 4-3

1 DL same in either



6 LB better in a 3-4

2 LB better in a 4-3

2 LB same in either



or:



10 front seven guys best in a 3-4

6 front seven guys best in a 4-3

3 guys suited for either scheme



It isn't that easy though. We all know that those guys don't have equal value to the team. Some are stars, some are role players and some are fringe players. Some have a ton of upside and some are about as good as they'll get or are even on the downside. Some are a mixture of more than one of those types.



So, there really isn't a good way to break it down like this, but I'm trying it as best I can. It's the offseason, so I'm just killing time anyway.



Of the players who are best suited for a 4-3, there are three who I would consider to be important players (in bold above): Glover, Ellis, and Nguyen. The other three, Ogbogu, Carson, and Singleton aren't the types of players you would consider when thinking which scheme to run. Of those three important guys, Glover is the only one who lost a starting position. Ellis and Nguyen will be starters.



Of the players who are best suited for a 3-4, there are four who I would consider to be important players (in bold above): Spears, Canty, Ware, and James (I do have high hopes for Ratliff too, but didn't include him). Those guys are our future on defense, or at least part of it. Spears and Ware were first rounders and Canty could've been. James has a lot of physical potential and if the light comes on, will be a star at ILB.



What does all of that mean? I'm not sure. I do think that you can't necessarily say we have better personnel for the 4-3 than we do for the 3-4. We have quite a few guys who are better suited for a 3-4 and should excel in that scheme.



Does that mean we are better suited for a 3-4 than a 4-3? No, I don't think that either.



I think Hos said it best when he mentioned that we're in a transition year on defense. This is going to be a work in process and there are going to be times that we’re in a 4-3 and should be… and times we’re in a 3-4 and should be.



The coaches will study the opponent and know the situation before they put the defense in any particular scheme. If we’re playing a team with a weak center for instance, Parcells might want Ferguson and Glover head up on him for most of the game… so we’d run the 3-4 most of the time.



A team with two weak tackles? We might line up 4-3 for most of the game. If we can’t get pressure on the passer, we’d probably switch to some 3-4 looks.



3-4 getting run on a lot? Presto, back into the 4-3 and lock down the run.



Frankly, I couldn’t be more excited about what we’re doing and the personnel we’ve acquired. I think we’re going to be a handful for any offense and it’s going to be very difficult to prepare for the Cowboy defense.



Who will the center be facing? Will the tackle have to watch for Ellis off of the edge, or Ware? What are the guards assignments on each particular run play? Nguyen or Glover? Will Ware be a pass rush DE or will he be an every down Rush LB? Can your fat Guard move well enough to find Bradie James and block him? Where is Spears and his incredible first step coming from? Who should pick him up? Do they double Ellis, Glover, Ferguson, Spears or Ware? When your tackle is tired in the 4th quarter, can he block a fresh Canty coming off the bench? Your small athletic guard is great at getting to LB’s… what if he has to get Ferguson instead?



It’s easy to see the problems offenses will face when preparing for our multiple scheme defense.



If you could put a number to a defense that runs both the 3-4 and the 4-3, we would all be in agreement on the scheme. Call it at 34-43 and we’d never argue about it.



We shouldn’t be now. We all know Parcells is going to run both and as good as he is at in-game adjustments, I don’t know why anyone would be anything except excited about the prospects of running both. I know I am.



We’re going to be a handful.

Now this is a nice post. IMO, this is the post of the day. Really nice effort here. I don't agree with all but I appriciate you taking the time to do the analysis.

 

[Alexander]

As I said earlier, it really is a matter of how you view each players skills. My view of Canty and Spears is different from many. I look at spears and I see Seymour. I look at Canty and I see Gaptooth. I look at Ware and I see Haley.

I think most people think Spears and Seymour relate, same as Ware/Haley. I don't see Canty being anything like Strahan (I guess that is who you mean) as he outweighs him by 15 pounds. Strahan had to put on weight to be a pro. Canty is built like a power forward and is not carrying alot of excess weight.

 

[AsthmaField]

Now this is a nice post. IMO, this is the post of the day. Really nice effort here. I don't agree with all but I appriciate you taking the time to do the analysis.

Thanks ABQ... I actually enjoy that type of analysis.

Like I said, I'm not quite sure what it shows, but those are the numbers I came up with.

I just know that I'm really excited with what we're going to be doing on D this year. I haven't been for the last few years.