If a new coach brought back the 3-4, how would you feel?

[TNCowboy]

We basically have a defense playing at the level of one with replacement players. The scheme isn't going to make a huge difference.

 

[StarBoyz83]

You need really good lbs and safties to run 4-3. We dont have that besides church and lee when he plays. I want to go back to 3-4.

 

[jterrell]

all 4-3 schemes run some variance of the tampa 2. Anytime a 4-3 is running a cover 3 with the mlb running down the middle, that's a tampa-2.

I'm actually more intrigued with seattle's single high safety looks and how that enables them to run multiple defensive fronts

essentially, the only position that's really vital for them to run that scheme is an earl thomas patrolling centerfield. Kam chancellor is allowed to drop in as an in the box safety/ convering intermediate zone, essentially acting as an extra linebacker. And you can flex the LEO (LB/OLB) hybrid depending on either side of the offensive line has the better blocking.

EDIT: I should also say, this fits some of our guys better (like ware, carr and claiborne, for instance) because Ware can fall back into a rush OLB role while claiborne and carr complain a lot about playing off-man/like to bill themselves as press cbs.

That is a 4-3 over or basically a 3-4 defense.
Really no difference.
As you note what makes it work is a good single high safety and we lack that.

 

[NJ22]

I like the 4-3, we just don't have the personnel for the Tampa. We need to address the Dline in the offseason. Our secondary would look a lot better when we have a Dline that can push the line and create pressure.

Even when we had the 3-4, we weren't too successful. I still see the same problem; not making 3rd down stops.

Agree 100%. All the talk about 4-3 personnel, did we ever have the right 3-4 personnel? The 3-4's that are good either have a huge NT like Wilfork or Nata or Hampton OR a freak DE like Campbell or Watt. We never had either. I like the idea of all 4 guys going after the passer and not just taking on blockers for the LB's. With Ware's decline we really only have 1 difference maker in Hatcher and he will probably be gone due to our cap issues. Need to focus on D line first and foremost in this draft. Not much we can do in free agency.

 

[NJ22]

That is a 4-3 over or basically a 3-4 defense.
Really no difference.
As you note what makes it work is a good single high safety and we lack that.

I am not sure why a team that was lucky enough to have Woodson for all of those years has so little respect for that position. If we good get close to Seattle's D that would be fantastic.

 

[khiladi]

Who cares as long as we get the Garrett stench out of here. It runs way too deep right now.

 

[jterrell]

I am not sure why a team that was lucky enough to have Woodson for all of those years has so little respect for that position. If we good get close to Seattle's D that would be fantastic.

woodson would probably be our best safety if he padded up today.
he looks in great shape still and we arent exactly deep there....

i think the league basically outlawing rw31 from playing football soured dallas on committing money to the position.

 

[cowboyschmps3]

Whatever the new coach wants too do it's his thing, whatever he brings I'll be good with just please if it is a 3-4 get the BIG Mamooth in the middle that we never had.

 

[jterrell]

Agree 100%. All the talk about 4-3 personnel, did we ever have the right 3-4 personnel? The 3-4's that are good either have a huge NT like Wilfork or Nata or Hampton OR a freak DE like Campbell or Watt. We never had either. I like the idea of all 4 guys going after the passer and not just taking on blockers for the LB's. With Ware's decline we really only have 1 difference maker in Hatcher and he will probably be gone due to our cap issues. Need to focus on D line first and foremost in this draft. Not much we can do in free agency.

ratliff was a freak of freaks there and did a good job.
they had the space eater in josh brent then he ruined that.

we suffered in the 3-4 with injuries same as in this 4-3 and the lack of depth and lack of safeties has been pretty consistent.

 

[AKATheRake]

We know Spencer won't be here and I'm more than certain Ware won't be here at $12 million either so he's gonna have to take a pay cut or get shipped.

In saying that who would be our 3-4 OLB's in that case?

The 3-4 scheme is predicated on the outside backers creating pressure and that's the real issue with this defense. No current pressure on the oppositions QB.

No, we should stay 4-3 and rebuild the d- line so we can play more man coverage utilizing consistent pressure.

If Kiffin isn't a dependable enough DC I can assure you Marinelli is. I can assure you the scheme isn't the problem either because Marinelli has had recent dominating success with it.

The problem is the d-line personnel and safety.

 

[Picksix]

People around here massively overrated the virtues of switching to the 4-3 despite numerous warnings that the alignment isn't a cure all.

To answer the question, I would not care as it would be cosmetic for the most part, just pretending that is a solution.

Well, I lie. I would care if we did like we did this year and depend on aging overpaid players that should be gone to be considered vital pieces of the new defense and bring in some old man that just got finished having a horrible tenure in college to run it.

All in all, it would only matter if we were committed to getting the pieces (right young pieces) to run it again. And no, it would not be the magic potion to revive Ware's career before anyone gets any bright ideas.

I didn't like our 3-4, because of two things. One, it had Ware and Spencer backing up into coverage too often, and two, we never had a dominating 5 technique like most of your really good 3-4's. I liked the change to the 4-3, because I felt it was a better fit overall. But I always felt going in, that it really didn't matter what the scheme was. If you don't have the players to make it work, it won't work. And especially with this defense, which is basically a glorified scout defense right now. Had everyone we were counting on been around to contribute, it would have been more successful. Regardless of scheme, we were always at least one good safety away from being really good. They knew it. That's why Vaccarro was one of the guys they were targeting. Could have taken Cyrpien later, but they felt to OL was more important, which is tough to argue against.

 

[TINGS21]

3-4/4-3 doesn't matter to me. If a 3-4 means Carter returns to last half of 2012 season form I'd probably lean in that directions but part of me thinks its more the person than the scheme. No matter what scheme they go with we need younger DL and better Safetys
What I care to see is having a plan on how they want the def to look and put guys in their that fit that system. It seems like the boys do a terrible job at that. To often they put players in a position to fail instead of meshing skill sets and getting the best out of every guy. I'll agree injuries definitely haven't helped in achieving this.

 

[DCBoysfan]

That is a 4-3 over or basically a 3-4 defense.
Really no difference.
As you note what makes it work is a good single high safety and we lack that.

They have Earl Thomas and they have a pass rush with multiple pass rushing DL they shuttle in and out.

 

[big dog cowboy]

The 4-3 without the Tampa 2 and I'm good.

winner winner chicken dinner

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

I'd feel like I am a fan of a Jerry Jones owned team.

 

[jobberone]

There are some differences but like some above posts its the types of players in the schemes. Most teams run many looks and it doesn't matter that much excepting some exceptions like above. If we can get healthy then I would like to see what Kiffin had in mind for us assuming we have a good safety, some LBs that can cover and tackle, enough pass rushers and corners that can tackle without getting hurt.

 

[john van brocklin]

For starters, let's not post in the thread, just to say "I'll feel great if there's a new coach...period...."

But I just think it's a long shot for Monte Kiffen to return. For starters, we have to win the next two games, and I'd put our chances, some where between slim and none. If we don't, Garrett is likely gone, and no coach is going to look at the defense and keep going in this direction. If we do some how win both games, thus saving Garrett's job, I think there's at least a 50/50 chance Garrett goes in a new direction. He may be tempted to stick with Kiffen, due to him being still somewhat on the hot seat and not wanting dramatic changes, but we're really bad on defense and likely need a scheme that better fits our players.

And I'm not even saying the 3-4 is the best fit for our players, but we really don't have cover 2 corners, nor a playmaker at the safety spot what so ever.

So my question is, how would you guys feel about the 3-4 coming back? For me, a NT would be a must, but if we could get one, I'd be for it. Either way, unless we are going to do a lengthy rebuild, we really need to abandon this defense.

I feel like our defense would improve, we don't have the personel to run the Tampa 2.

 

[punchnjudy]

I don't know what they should run, but I can't see Dallas running a Tampa 2 if Ware, Hatcher, and Spencer exit in addition to Jay.

 

[Sasquatch]

All in all, it would only matter if we were committed to getting the pieces (right young pieces) to run it again. .

This is what I was thinking as I was making my way through the thread. The inability to acquire the right pieces impeded the implementation of any scheme.

 

[Alexander]

This is what I was thinking as I was making my way through the threablows The inability to acquire the right pieces impeded the implementation of any scheme.

Anytime you make a scheme change--you better be able to evaluate the talent on hand.

The reliance on Ratliff still blows my mind.