Ok, I have to ask

[CanadianCowboysFan]

All I keep reading is how this DC is a 4-3 guy, the other DC is a 3-4 guy and it is as if the two schemes are Mandarin and English.

As Goldfinger said, Fort Knox is a little better defended and little bigger, but still a bank.

3-4, 4-3, they are different, but still it call comes down to defence, stopping the other team.

I have to act for men and women in my law practice, sometimes that is like English and Mandarin, why is football so different? Seems to me if you are paying a coach 1 million or so per year, he should be able to figure out 3-4 vs 4-3, n'est ce pas?

 

[proline]

Tell that to Zimmer ....

 

[Cochese]

Tell that to Zimmer ....

Stole the words from me.

 

[eduncan22]

You would think.

But, this defense has been built to run the 3-4.

The Cowboys just need to fix the secondary. There is a big problem with Glenn and Henry.

The Defense can be awesome. We just need the missing pieces.....

 

[superpunk]

It's about personnel, more than scheme. Were we to run jim Johnson's 4-3, I think we'd be ok personnel wise, because we could supply the MLB in the Trotter run-stuffing role. We'd need some help up front, another DT, but not too far off.

In the Tampa 2, which is what Rivera has been running, we dont have anyone that can fit that MLB role, playing the deep middle as well as solid in run support, nor do we have the horses to get pressure with the front 4.

It's not about the down linemen. It;s about the Philosophy. We can put 4 down linemen anytime we want, but we can't play like Chicago has with the players we have.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Different point though.

Seems to me it is up to the DC to fit the scheme to the players he has.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Tell that to Zimmer ....

Zimmer had a convenient excuse for failure.

 

[Doomsday]

Tell that to Zimmer ....

Only Zimmer said today on LBOH that the 3-4 had nothing to do with the problems they had on defense. I believe there is a recap in the daily zone of the interview.

 

[sonnyboy]

3-4/4-3 is not the question. It's what type of 3-4/4-3 you want to run.

A lot of 4-3 teams play with a NT. Even if they don't line up someone over the OC, they still usually have a DT and UT. DT being a larger stronger two gap player lining up over a G and attempting to engage that G and play the gap on each side. The UT is usually a Warren Sapp quicker type player attempting to play a gap.

I think 3-4 DE's like Spears, Hatcher, Ratliff and Canty have no trouble converting to UT or LDE in a 4-3.

6-4 257 Ware plays the speed rushing LDE and 6-3 310 Ferguson is our DT/NT.

I think 6-4 298 Spears and 6-4 305 Ratliff would also do well as the DT.

I think 6-7 300lb Canty would be a perfect LDE in a 4-3. Tolbert and Ed Jones come to mind.

4-3 LB's tend to be smaller. Especially the OLB's. In the 4-3 our best fits at OLB are probably Burnett strong side, Roy weakside.
Adoyle and or James could play MLB.

I think Carpenter could play MLB, SLB or RDE.



I do like the idea of switching from 3-4 to 4-3.
In doing that you give Ware more chances to get after the QB as a DE and still not leave him up against a 320lb OT all game.


What I think matters most is how we use Roy.
He's too talented not to be utilized to THE BEST OF HIS ABILITIES.
When we go cover two, we need to do it with two other safties most of the time.
Roy should be used at OLB in our 4-3 alignments.
He should also play Nickle or Dime LB.
In the 3-4 with him playing SS, we should not use much cover two.
Keep him in the box.
Allow him to impact the game. Pass blitz, run blitz. Let him attack.
When he has to cover someone, put him in a position to get his hands on that guy within 5 yards to bang him around.