If Marinelli leaves, switch to 3-4?

[Cowboy Brian]

Don't jump down my throat just yet..

If we lose Marinelli, which seems like a very large possibility between the Lovie Smith rumors and now all these HC positions he is being connected to, we may be best off switching to a 3-4. This is an idea that popped into my head while listening to the Lunchbreak on DC.com today as they discussed our LBing situation. We would be able to get Hitchens - Lee - McClain and Durant all on the field, and if we brought back Carter coming in for relief we'd have a pretty darn sick LBing group.

Maybe this wouldn't work, but our draft + cap situation would, in theory, allow us to bring in all the parts necessary on the d-line.

This would serve to help our secondary where they have seemed to struggle most - intermediate and short coverage, and then getting burnt deep.

 

[zrinkill]

 

[Tabascocat]

Hurdle that bridge when the time comes.

 

[Stryker44]

HC? Doubtful imo - not after he went 0-16.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Why when we have went through the process and have found that there are larger number of 4-3 DCs than good 3-4 DCs available.

That was the problem I was having when we still had the 3-4. We went through Tuna, Wade and Rob...there are only a very small amount of decent 3-4 DCs out there left ...we would be limiting our self in that area.

Frankly I also don't think the team (jerry and ginger) are going to turn right back around and switch back to the 3-4.

Just seems pretty silly at this point.

 

[Cowboy Brian]

Look who has popped up.

 

[BAZ]

Great idea, I hear Jim Haslett is free.

 

[jrumann59]

Yes lets switch back just when we have pretty much finished the switch to 4-3 and take out rookie DE in DLaw and make him lose a little weight to be a stand up OLB.

 

[Cowboy Brian]

Why when we have went through the process and have found that there are larger number of 4-3 DCs than good 3-4 DCs available.

That was the problem I was having when we still had the 3-4. We went through Tuna, Wade and Rob...there are only a very small amount of decent 3-4 DCs out there left ...we would be limiting our self in that area.

Frankly I also don't think the team (jerry and ginger) are going to turn right back around and switch back to the 3-4.

Just seems pretty silly at this point.

I concede it is completely unlikely, and perhaps completely unfeasible, but I was attempting to make the point that our personnel better suits the 3-4 at this point, less than actually condoning the idea.

 

[TwentyOne]

Don't jump down my throat just yet..

If we lose Marinelli, which seems like a very large possibility between the Lovie Smith rumors and now all these HC positions he is being connected to, we may be best off switching to a 3-4. This is an idea that popped into my head while listening to the Lunchbreak on DC.com today as they discussed our LBing situation. We would be able to get Hitchens - Lee - McClain and Durant all on the field, and if we brought back Carter coming in for relief we'd have a pretty darn sick LBing group.

Maybe this wouldn't work, but our draft + cap situation would, in theory, allow us to bring in all the parts necessary on the d-line.

This would serve to help our secondary where they have seemed to struggle most - intermediate and short coverage, and then getting burnt deep.

Losing Marinelli does not seem like a big possibility. Just because some mediots report it it does not make it more possible.

Please stop those threads.

 

[GermanJohn]

Did you see who we're possibly losing on the offensive side of the ball? Free, Parnell, Murray, Dez, Harris, Leary, Beasley, Dunbar... etc. Durant, Carter, and McClain we could lose defensively as well, but I think there are a lot more weapons to potentially be lost offensively.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I concede it is completely unlikely, and perhaps completely unfeasible, but I was attempting to make the point that our personnel better suits the 3-4 at this point, less than actually condoning the idea.

The only thing that MIGHT fit better is that we have a number of decent LBs...what you, or the others, are failing to consider is that we can not keep this group of LBs healthy enough to run a 4-3 let alone a 3-4.

 

[guag]

I concede it is completely unlikely, and perhaps completely unfeasible, but I was attempting to make the point that our personnel better suits the 3-4 at this point, less than actually condoning the idea.

With the type of linebackers we currently have? I'm not seeing it.

 

[Gameover]

Never again

 

[ColeBeasley11]

I think all the LBers you mentioned would be MLB's in a 3-4, D Law would probly be our best bet for 3-4 OLB. It could potentially help Brent and Crwaford tho. But it doesn't make sense especially if we retain some or all of our backers this offseason.

 

[Cowboy Brian]

Did you see who we're possibly losing on the offensive side of the ball? Free, Parnell, Murray, Dez, Harris, Leary, Beasley, Dunbar... etc. Durant, Carter, and McClain we could lose defensively as well, but I think there are a lot more weapons to potentially be lost offensively.

If we lose Beasley we are getting away like bandits since he is a RFA... We are not going to lose Dez under any circumstance, and I seriously doubt we lose Murray. Don't rule out the possibility of a long-term deal with Dez and then Murray being franchised.

We have cap room, so we can keep a few of these pieces.

 

[Gameover]

Did you see who we're possibly losing on the offensive side of the ball? Free, Parnell, Murray, Dez, Harris, Leary, Beasley, Dunbar... etc. Durant, Carter, and McClain we could lose defensively as well, but I think there are a lot more weapons to potentially be lost offensively.

Been saying for years they should extend Beaseley's contract.

He's a weapon

Bryant and Parnell will be back. Murray if he doesn't out price himself.

 

[jrumann59]

I concede it is completely unlikely, and perhaps completely unfeasible, but I was attempting to make the point that our personnel better suits the 3-4 at this point, less than actually condoning the idea.

Having the positional players does not mean you have the correct personnel. 3-4 LB are usually bigger and the DL is usually bigger. LB in 3-4 are usually in the 240-260 range, DL is usually in the 290-320 range. You would take someone like Crawford who is good at disruption and make him take on and read. Brent is the only guy that can play the NT on the DL.

 

[The Natural]

lets just try investing premium draft picks on the defensive line and we should be fine..no need to switch the scheme. I dont think we have a single 3-4 OLB on the roster

 

[GermanJohn]

Any of you guys hope/think any of the big names will surprise us by Bradying and sacrificing a little in their contracts to benefit the team? Or is it just a pipedream?