I think our defensive personnel fit the 4-3 better than the 3-4.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I think its pointless to talk about the front 7, when the biggest problem we had last season was corner coverage.

One of the biggest disappointments had to be the play of Henry and Glenn.

These guys are paid a combined 13.6 million, but neither one of them can cover.

i think it was readily apparent that Henry was injured if healthy he could have taken that pick to the hoiuse but it is true that everyone not named Newman had consistent coverage issues.

That still doesnt mitigate the fact that our pass rush was abysmal.

Put the two together and you get what you saw.

 

[superpunk]

FWIW - the Ravens DO play a 4-6 - make no mistake. The Ravens official website does not say a 3-4, it just lists the positions of the 4-6, which generally employs 6 men on the LOS - a NT, two DEs, Two LBs, and a rush end. A LB plays behind them, the corners man up, and there is a deep safety, and a safety down with the second-tier LB. You can almost think about it as 6 down linemen and 2 LBs.

That is the Ravens defense. The distinctions on the website just describe the players. Suggs and Thomas alternate as the rush ends and OLB, Lewis is the linebacker and Scott plays the other OLB position.

 

[The Realist]

We didn't know how to run a 34 before we did it two seasons ago. If it was so much easier to stock with players, it wouldn't matter. Teams would move to it. In the NFL, it's a copy cat league if they believe that what your doing will work. That's not a valid reason as to why more teams don't do it.

Currently, we have Ware who could really play either DE or OLB. We have Singletary (FA not drafted)who was here before we ever went to the 34. We have Carpenter who will probably end up good in a 34 or a 43. We have James who we drafted and will probably not be good in either scheme. We have Ayodele who we signed as an FA (not a drafted player). We have Burnett who will not work in a 34 who we drafted, we have Glymph and Fowler (not drafted) who are nothing special. We also have Hoyte who is now a FB.

In short, we have two guys IMO that we can say we drafted that would probably work. Having said that, one of those guys is going to be good as an OLB or a DE and the other is going to be good as a 34 LB or 43 LB. By the way, we spent 1st round picks on both those guys. The idea, I thought, was to find OLBs for a 34 that would be easier and cheaper to find.

If your going to say that Lacewell and Jerruh drafted guys for 10 years that never worked, that's not entirely true. They did draft some good DEs in that time but that's here nor there. We could say in a 34 and Jerruh and Lacewell could do the same masterful job of drafting for the 34 they did for a 43 DE. It's the people drafting not the available talent in that deal.

Wait, if it was a copy cat league there would be more 3-4 teams than there were 3 to 4 years ago.

Oh wait, there are.

Spin that.

We drafted some good DE's with Jerry and Lacewell?

Name 2.

Did we add 2 3-4 OLB's in 2 drafts yes or no?

If you don't understand that's easier and cheaper to find LB's vs DE's no one can help you.

95-02 we were 1 for 15 ish on DL draft picks (Ellis).

Our 3-4 D is 2 players away after 2 offseasons (pass rusher/FS) and both may already be on the roster.

How long did it take for SD to overhaul their floundering D?

 

[TEK2000]

FWIW - the Ravens DO play a 4-6 - make no mistake. The Ravens official website does not say a 3-4, it just lists the positions of the 4-6, which generally employs 6 men on the LOS - a NT, two DEs, Two LBs, and a rush end. A LB plays behind them, the corners man up, and there is a deep safety, and a safety down with the second-tier LB. You can almost think about it as 6 down linemen and 2 LBs.

That is the Ravens defense. The distinctions on the website just describe the players. Suggs and Thomas alternate as the rush ends and OLB, Lewis is the linebacker and Scott plays the other OLB position.

That's pretty much what you see throughout their game against the Colts. 3 down linemen, a stand up end, 2 LBers roaming around the line of scrimmage.

But against the Colts I believe they had both of their safeties back deep... especially Ed Reed when everyone was just going ridiculously crazy comparing Roy and Ed.

 

[smarta5150]

That's pretty much what you see throughout their game against the Colts. 3 down linemen, a stand up end, 2 LBers roaming around the line of scrimmage.

But against the Colts I believe they had both of their safeties back deep... especially Ed Reed when everyone was just going ridiculously crazy comparing Roy and Ed.

That was great.

I never typed FREE and STRONG so many times in a 20 minute span.

 

[BigDFan5]

I think its pointless to talk about the front 7, when the biggest problem we had last season was corner coverage.

One of the biggest disappointments had to be the play of Henry and Glenn.

These guys are paid a combined 13.6 million, but neither one of them can cover.

12 more to go, better hurry!

 

[superpunk]

That's pretty much what you see throughout their game against the Colts. 3 down linemen, a stand up end, 2 LBers roaming around the line of scrimmage.

But against the Colts I believe they had both of their safeties back deep... especially Ed Reed when everyone was just going ridiculously crazy comparing Roy and Ed.

Mostly they dropped both safeties in that game - but I don't think that safety is meant exclusively to play in the box in the 4-6.

 

[theogt]

I can't believe people still think they ran a 46 in that playoff game.

 

[smarta5150]

They definitely had 2 safeties deep ALL game.

 

[superpunk]

I can't believe people still think they ran a 46 in that playoff game.

I can't believe you still stubbornly refuse to acknowledge what a 4-6 is.

In any case, it doesn't matter what they ran, or how much of it they ran, against Indy. Their base is a 4-6.

 

[smarta5150]

Someone needs to just ask on the Ravens forum... I think they would know for sure.

 

[theogt]

I can't believe you still stubbornly refuse to acknowledge what a 4-6 is.

In any case, it doesn't matter what they ran, or how much of it they ran, against Indy. Their base is a 4-6.

I definitely know what the 46 is, and I didn't see it at all in that game. I watched the entire defense 3 times through.

 

[theogt]

Maybe Rick Gosselin doesn't understand what the 46 is either...

http://www.***BANNED-URL***/sharedc...elin/stories/011307dnspogosselin.32b0b83.html

 

[Rack]

I can't believe people still think they ran a 46 in that playoff game.

They did. Not my fault you don't know what you're looking at.


And their base is a 46.

 

[smarta5150]

The 3-4 is here and is staying.

Thank you JJ for bringing in Wade!

 

[theogt]

The 3-4 is here and is staying.

Thank you JJ for bringing in Wade!

 

[theogt]

They did. Not my fault you don't know what you're looking at.


And their base is a 46.

You really have no idea what the 46 is. You heard that they ran it in 2005 and just assumed it was still their base. It never was their base. They're a very agressive defense that runs 4-3 and 3-4 fronts. The agressive blitzing and bringing the LBs close to the line of scrimmage resembles the 46 but it's not anywhere close. Seriously, this is hilarious how wrong you are.

 

[Rack]

The 3-4 is here and is staying.

Thank you JJ for bringing in Wade!

I have no problem with the 3-4. I've merely tried to point out the fact that we DO have the players to play a 4-3.

I've even stated previously that I prefer we stick with the 3-4 (although I'd like to mix in some 4-3 too).

 

[Rack]

You really have no idea what the 46 is.

Says the person that has no idea what the 46 is.

 

[smarta5150]

I have no problem with the 3-4. I've merely tried to point out the fact that we DO have the players to play a 4-3.

I've even stated previously that I prefer we stick with the 3-4 (although I'd like to mix in some 4-3 too).

I am all for giving different looks.

Just I'd rather have the 3-4 as a base though over the 4-3.