Notice that we played the 4-3 almost the whole game?

[diehard2294]

Yes I did, and it was very affective. They were pushing Tre Thomas around like a rag doll,and he's one big boy

 

[junk]

I think it's because the Eagles are a 3-wide team. We've had our heads handed to us repeatedly while staying in a 3-4. Going to a 4-2-5 makes perfect sense... we should have done it weeks ago. Our linebackers are the weakest part of our team.

Can't do that against a run heavy offense. It'd be a disaster.

We'll see more 3-4 next week.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Can't do that against a run heavy offense. It'd be a disaster.

We'll see more 3-4 next week.

I don't disagree with that. I'm just saying get out of the 3-4 when other teams go 3-wide .

 

[50cent]

we actually played more nickle per se than actual 4-3.

 

[TheSkaven]

Exactly......

Hey CBZ, I am out on my porch enjoying my last Montecristo #2 Cuban cigar. No more for me unless I get another business trip to Europe. Hope you are enjoying one as well!

 

[PullMyFinger]

Did it ever occur to you Nors that this year's defense could be better than last year's because... now put that bag of cheese puffs on the floor and put away that Sam's Club orange soda you drink... that we have better players this year?

OMG MW thats got to be the post of the week.......

 

[AbeBeta]

we actually played more nickle per se than actual 4-3.

What? If you have a 3-4 base you run 4 DL out there in the nickel? And sometimes you even mix in a few regular 4-3 looks?

Since this is about the 50th time we've been over this I've decided to choose to ignore all that we've learned about the 3-4 since the off season and make crazy claims about how we should never have switched to a base 3-4.

After all, we need something to wring our hands over this week.

 

[TruBlueCowboy]

we actually played more nickle per se than actual 4-3.

I think the main point everyone is making, and was made throughout the offseason, is we would rather see a 4 man line, and the linemen who are built to run it. Ware doesn't play any better as a linebacker, Glover is better in a 4 man line with Fergy alongside him, Coleman and Spears don't do as much for us as Ellis and Canty, too many young inexperienced linebackers for a 3-4, etc., etc..... Maybe that 3-4 unit will get better as the season goes on.

 

[bags]

I don't recall ever hearing Parcells say we "switched" to a 3-4. In fact, he always maintained that the players we drafted and signed were added to provide the flexibility to play a number of different defenses, depending on our opponent. I don't need a label to feel good about what we're capable of doing with our personnel.

:thankyou::clap2:

 

[50cent]

I think the main point everyone is making, and was made throughout the offseason, is we would rather see a 4 man line, and the linemen who are built to run it. Ware doesn't play any better as a linebacker, Glover is better in a 4 man line with Fergy alongside him, Coleman and Spears don't do as much for us as Ellis and Canty, too many young inexperienced linebackers for a 3-4, etc., etc..... Maybe that 3-4 unit will get better as the season goes on.

I wont argue that. I would say it is wise to mix it up as well. My point is, by looking at the game book, A. Glenn actually started. That means we came out in our nickle package. 4 man front or 3 man front, BP has stated over and over, the only assignment that changes is Ware. The other 3 lineman keep their 3-4 principles. Whatever BP did, it through the Eagles for a loop and worked. Or should I say Zimmer?

 

[50cent]

During Bps post game comments, he even admitted we played mostly nickle because of their formations. This is not directed toward TruBlue, but its funny how some of you don't post anymore when your theories are damaged!! I guess some of you heard the post game comments too, and decided to tuck and hide.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

During Bps post game comments, he even admitted we played mostly nickle because of their formations. This is not directed toward TruBlue, but its funny how some of you don't post anymore when your theories are damaged!! I guess some of you heard the post game comments too, and decided to tuck and hide.

I know I'm not running and hiding. I'm one of the ones right along that has suggested that staying in the 3-4 while the other teams went 3-wide was getting us killed... and it was. IMHO we play the 4-2-5 far better than we do the 3-4-4.

 

[50cent]

I know I'm not running and hiding. I'm one of the ones right along that has suggested that staying in the 3-4 while the other teams went 3-wide was getting us killed... and it was. IMHO we play the 4-2-5 far better than we do the 3-4-4.

Im glad you at least chimed in, but it wasn't directed toward you either. Just to those that refuse to admit we don't run the 4-3. The 4-2-5 is not the 4-3. The 3-3-5 is not the 4-3, and we as BP stated didn't run it today. When will some of you, and not you Mike, admit that a 4 man front isn't the 4-3?

 

[junk]

Im glad you at least chimed in, but it wasn't directed toward you either. Just to those that refuse to admit we don't run the 4-3. The 4-2-5 is not the 4-3. The 3-3-5 is not the 4-3, and we as BP stated didn't run it today. When will some of you, and not you Mike, admit that a 4 man front isn't the 4-3?

Half the posters on here don't have a clue about defensive formations. I agree that too many people try to classify the nickel as 4-3. The funny thing is, its both people that support and dislike the 4-3.

The team has run 4-3 over/under type schemes however. The Washington game in particular and they also ran it in short yardage situations against Oakland.

I am a huge fan of getting 4 defensive lineman on the field. The team is far more talented and far deeper on the defensive line. The linebackers are one of the weakest areas on the team, IMO.

 

[50cent]

Half the posters on here don't have a clue about defensive formations. I agree that too many people try to classify the nickel as 4-3. The funny thing is, its both people that support and dislike the 4-3.

The team has run 4-3 over/under type schemes however. The Washington game in particular and they also ran it in short yardage situations against Oakland.

I am a huge fan of getting 4 defensive lineman on the field. The team is far more talented and far deeper on the defensive line. The linebackers are one of the weakest areas on the team, IMO.

Well if we just draft, Brooks, Hawk, or Carpenter, or Howard, then or LB core will be okay, but I'm starting to jump on the Vince Young bandwagon. It would be the perfect time to grab him, and let him sit behind Bledsoe for a couple of years and.....oh don't get me started.

 

[junk]

Well if we just draft, Brooks, Hawk, or Carpenter, or Howard, then or LB core will be okay, but I'm starting to jump on the Vince Young bandwagon. It would be the perfect time to grab him, and let him sit behind Bledsoe for a couple of years and.....oh don't get me started.

I am really like Bobby Carpenter. Interesting tidbit on Carpenter, his dad, Rob, played for Parcells on the Giants in the 80s.

If the team drafted Carpenter, Burnett bulked up and moved inside and the team resigned Fujita for depth, I would feel a bit more comfortable about the LBing corps.

 

[50cent]

I am really like Bobby Carpenter. Interesting tidbit on Carpenter, his dad, Rob, played for Parcells on the Giants in the 80s.

If the team drafted Carpenter, Burnett bulked up and moved inside and the team resigned Fujita for depth, I would feel a bit more comfortable about the LBing corps.

You and me both! I was amazed at the speed of the OSU LB core this weekend. They lost, but they are players. Young in the first and Carpenter in the second would suit me just fine. Hey, I can dream right?

 

[junk]

You and me both! I was amazed at the speed of the OSU LB core this weekend. They lost, but they are players. Young in the first and Carpenter in the second would suit me just fine. Hey, I can dream right?

I'll agree with you on Carpenter. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him in the second.

There are a few linebackers ahead of him right now, but that could easily change. Its only October.

 

[50cent]

I'll agree with you on Carpenter. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him in the second.

There are a few linebackers ahead of him right now, but that could easily change. Its only October.

I think I even saw OSU run some 3-4 last night. He would be a perfect fit, I just don't know if well draft a LB or sign one in FA.

 

[VACowboy]

50cent, I am so on board with you. I've always been a huge Bobby Carpenter fan. I saw Young play a couple of times last year and wasn't impressed with him as an NFL QB prospect, but he's come a long, long way. People who say he'll be a WR at the next level are nuts IMHO. But... He won't be leaving Austin, and Parcells isn't picking a QB on the first day anyway. Nice to dream, though.