Im gonna ask...Is this a Super Bowl team?

[eduncan22]

What ya think?

I watched the preseason. Our Defense rocks.

If they can stay "injury free...."

 

[Rack]

No one can make that determination at this point. We'll find out in january.

 

[Little Jr]

What ya think?

I watched the preseason. Our Defense rocks.

If they can stay "injury free...."

I think we have just as good as shot as any other team.

 

[Billy Bullocks]

We have about the same chances as any team in the NFC, and NFL for that matter.

Within the division, Washington, Philly, and NY all have their own concerns, just like us. Each team has 1 or 2 things that they need to have swing in their favor in order to get there.

Most of the teams have some positions where they just cannot afford an injury.

But in the NFC, I can't see why us, or any of the other teams for that matter (Carolina, Wash, NY, Philly even, Atlanta, Tampa, Seattle) cant compete

 

[Eddie]

Our OL is sub-par.

That's going to be the difference AGAIN this season. Shoot me now. :bang2:

 

[bbgun]

No. The o-line and kicking game will continue to be our undoing. Plus, we're still counting on linebackers to get sacks. Fergy and Spears are runstuffers at best.

 

[Little Jr]

No. The o-line and kicking game will continue to be our undoing. Plus, we're still counting on linebackers to get sacks. Fergy and Spears are runstuffers at best.

It's the 3-4. Thats who gets the sacks in the 3-4.

 

[CM Duck]

i will answer this question as soon as the NFC championship game is over...

 

[BlueStar22]

we have as good a shot as anyone else. I think we'll get better as the year moves along. If we're playing well after thanksgiving and early december, I like our chances.

 

[The30YardSlant]

IMO, No

 

[Billy Bullocks]

No. The o-line and kicking game will continue to be our undoing. Plus, we're still counting on linebackers to get sacks. Fergy and Spears are runstuffers at best.

Yeah, because last time I checked we are running the 3-4, you know, where the LB's are supposed to get alot of sacks.

Pittsburgh Steelers...Haggans and Porter combine for 19.5 sacks...no one on the DL gets more than 3.5(van Olhoffen)

NE Pats...no DL has more than 4 (seymour)

San Diego...Castillo and Scott have 3.5 and 4 sacks each. Not alot.

We rotated alot more than thsoe teams, and Glover and Spears came up with about the same amount of sacks as these other 3-4 teams I listed.

So your second point is absolutely garbage.

 

[DipChit]

Well at least you can talk about the chance of it from a realistic perspective. Otherwise you wouldnt have Madden and Mort or any other stooges talking like that.

Woulda never happened until now that more of the pieces are in place.

Didnt hear anybody talkin like that when the likes of Carter and Hambrick and 30 other assorted stiffs were roaming the sidelines. Parcells or no Parcells.

 

[Kangaroo]

No. The o-line and kicking game will continue to be our undoing. Plus, we're still counting on linebackers to get sacks. Fergy and Spears are runstuffers at best.

That is what LBers are suppose to do in a 3-4 and dlinemen are suppose to be run stuffer and eat up linemen :bang2:

Lets see Pittsburg a 3-4 defense got 47 team sacks the two players with the most sacks where

Porter 10.5 and haggans 9 both where LB's

The next highest was 3.5 DE

Then we had 5 players that tied at 3 sacks here is the break down by poistions
1. Lb
2. SS
3. DB
4. LB
5. DE

So the Superbowl defense had just as many sacks from their secondary as their dline

So would you like to withdraw your statement

 

[JonCJG]

We have a great chance.

When you take out all of the weak teams in the NFC............
NFC West- Hawks, and the usual suspects in the NFC....... Eagles, Falcons, Vikings, Saints, Lions, ect. our chances are good.

Our only comp IMO are the hawks, Bears, Panthers and anyone in our division - eagles. That's what 5 teams? 1/5 chance to make the bowl? I like those odds.

I'm not joking

 

[DallasDomination]

Even With this QB and Oline I think our chances are pretty good. If we had a tom Brady I can see Dynasty Easy.

To bad we dont

 

[Billy Bullocks]

I think the Falcons and Vikings might be a bit better than you think. Not saying they are top 5, but they aren't bad.

And I wouldn't be THAT quick to dismiss Philly. They got better on defense, weather you want to admit it or not, but Howard gives them a real good defense end pairing.

They were a team hit hard by injuries. I think the NFC East has overtaken them, but I wouldn't go as far as to say they are a pushover team, which it seems you are doing.

 

[bbgun]

Yeah, because last time I checked we are running the 3-4, you know, where the LB's are supposed to get alot of sacks.

Correct, and outside of Ware, we don't have 'em.

Pittsburgh Steelers...Haggans and Porter combine for 19.5 sacks...no one on the DL gets more than 3.5(van Olhoffen)

\

Correct, and our LBs don't begin to compare until they prove it.

NE Pats...no DL has more than 4 (seymour)

San Diego...Castillo and Scott have 3.5 and 4 sacks each. Not alot.

We rotated alot more than thsoe teams, and Glover and Spears came up with about the same amount of sacks as these other 3-4 teams I listed.

So your second point is absolutely garbage.

What I'm lobbying for is a return to the 4-3. When you rely on linebackers for sacks instead of four guys who are much closer to the qb, you're in trouble. The Minnesota game was evidence of that. Nor is Zimmer a master at designing blitzes. How is it we got tons of 4-3 sacks under Landry and Jimmy, but none out of Tuna? Ware should play with his hand on the ground on every snap. No more pass coverage for him. Hopefully, when Tuna departs, so will the 3-4.

 

[JonCJG]

When was the last time a Philly Team won anything?

 

[AsthmaField]

That is what LBers are suppose to do in a 3-4 and dlinemen are suppose to be run stuffer and eat up linemen :bang2:

Lets see Pittsburg a 3-4 defense got 47 team sacks the two players with the most sacks where

Porter 10.5 and haggans 9 both where LB's

The next highest was 3.5 DE

Then we had 5 players that tied at 3 sacks here is the break down by poistions
1. Lb
2. SS
3. DB
4. LB
5. DE

So the Superbowl defense had just as many sacks from their secondary as their dline

So would you like to withdraw your statement

Well done, K-roo

:clap2:

And very, very true. Y'know, it only takes a casual NFL fan to know that the majority of the sacks in a 3-4 defense comes from the LB's, and that very few come from the DL. Think of all the 3-4 defenses the last couple of decades and who made the sacks:

Kevin Green
Greg Lloyd
Lamar Lathon
Joey Porter
Pat Swilling
Ricky Jackson
Lawrence Taylor
Carl Banks

All of them LB's. I can't even think of a 3-4 DE that has ever had very many sacks. It's almost comical to hear someone say that we're still relying on LB's to get our sacks when we're a 3-4 team. Canty and Spears are exactly what we need... and they probably won't get 8 sacks combined.

 

[Billy Bullocks]

Correct, and outside of Ware, we don't have 'em.

Yes we do. Greg Ellis. He was moved to OLB, and with it, is taking 8 sacks with him. Between the 2 of them, that gives us 16. Also, the jury is out on Carpenter. Another thing of note, his is YEAR TWO in the 3-4. That means, guys like Ware are much more instinctual out there (he had to re-learn the position), and Zimmer is more familiar with it.

Correct, and our LBs don't begin to compare until they prove it.

Well, that I would have to agree with. Just remember, Ware had 8 last year, learning a new position. Ellis is a proven pass rusher, and he will be coming form the other side. So that should ease your mind a little bit more.

What I'm lobbying for is a return to the 4-3. When you rely on linebackers for sacks instead of four guys who are much closer to the qb, you're in trouble. The Minnesota game was evidence of that. Nor is Zimmer a master at designing blitzes. How is it we got tons of 4-3 sacks under Landry and Jimmy, but none out of Tuna? Ware should play with his hand on the ground on every snap. No more pass coverage for him. Hopefully, when Tuna departs, so will the 3-4.

Well, Ware isn't really ideal to be playing DE at this level all the time. And his talent in the open has been seen already this pre season.

You seem to be watching a different game than I am, because when I watch the 3-4, I see the OLBs lined up on the edge of the tackles. Well, I guess that they are techincally a little bit further form the QB than a 4-3 end, but not really that much.

I can give you a good reason why we couldn't get 4-3 sacks under the Tuna, because we couldn't do it for a while before. See it wasn't BP and his idea to move to the 3-4 that caused a fall off in that department, it was a lack of succesful DEs drafted.

We can gladly go back to the 4-3, but we would probably still be searching for a guy to get to the QB opposite of Ellis. So, if you want more Kavika Pittman's, Peppi Zellners, and Ebanezer Ekuban's, you'll probably get it.

As it's been said, and proven, it's easier to find a tweener than a 4-3 DE. And in todays NFL where you have little room for error high profile/high round players (that's where you usually get the good DE's at), it makes alot of sense why you would move to the 3-4.

Not to mention, Bill Parcells, who has 2 more Superbowls than you do probably knows a thing or two about running a defense. Whereas you are citing examples of past that have no relevance to the current situation.

Find me Charles Haley type player and then we can talk 4-3. Jerry couldn't do it. So what makes you think that you can?