Tank and Rat next to each other

[Iago33]

What was the alignment that had Tank and Ratliff on the inside? Was that the 46?

 

[TheCount]

What was the alignment that had Tank and Ratliff on the inside? Was that the 46?

It was a goal line play wasn't it?

 

[Iago33]

Yes. Just a heavy package?

I'm curious if it is something that will be worked in a bit more.

 

[DasTex]

thats the 4-6 we've been showing

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Not sure, but I think that might have been our goal line defense we put in because they were so backed up we assumed they'd try to run it out.

The series before that, though, when Spencer had the quick sack (and then Ware did, and then the punt block), Bradie walked up next to him on the line and he slid in a little. Not sure, but that might have been it because we then had six guys on the line and five of them rushed. (I think Ware dropped off into coverage).

Maybe that wasn't exactly what Vela wrote about, but it still got the rushers singled up on blockers and made it easy pickings for Spencer.

 

[Yeagermeister]

It's the lets put Tank in with Rat so he doesn't completely suck package.

 

[Juke99]

I'd still love to see a select few plays with Ellis back at DE and Ware outside of him.

 

[Juke99]

It's the lets put Tank in with Rat so he doesn't completely suck package.

:laugh2: Is there an Acronym for that?

 

[Yeagermeister]

:laugh2: Is there an Acronym for that?

PTIWRSHCS

 

[Juke99]

PTIWRSHCS

Thanks..that was helpful.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Thanks..that was helpful.

Your welcome

 

[Hostile]

What was the alignment that had Tank and Ratliff on the inside? Was that the 46?

Do you have a still of the alignment?

 

[AbeBeta]

It's the lets put Tank in with Rat so he doesn't completely suck package.

must have worked -- Tank had a pretty good game. A few nice run stops, a QB hurry. The roughing the passer penalty was just bad luck

 

[CF74]

46 or 4-3, we need to line up like that more. Those two in the middle at the same time is impenetrable...

 

[TD-33]

must have worked -- Tank had a pretty good game. A few nice run stops, a QB hurry. The roughing the passer penalty was just bad luck

Agreed, Tank definitely had Hill's attention on that series. I thought he did a good job.

 

[LarryCanadian]

I don't know how often they were in together, but Tank did seem to be significantly more disruptive. When he gets a hand on you, you are toast it seems. It's just that he hasn't been getting a hand on RB's too often this season. Tank wasn't a 3-4 Nose guard in Chicago was he. I think he is a 4-3 guy that is being played in the wrong position. I wouldn't mind seeing us mix in more 4-3 to confuse offenses etc. I like the 3-4 but prefer a style where the lb'ers are nasty (Pittsburgh) and the corners play far less soft. We are getting sacks, but at times our defensive scheme still makes me ill when we play soft soft soft and end up tackling guys from behind rather than running up and filling a gap with a smack!

I think Tank is out of place, and as effective as Rat is, he ain't a space eater, he's a Leon Lett type agile guy. Even at 300 pounds (doesn't look at all fat, does the Rat?) he isn't a guy to eat space and take on double teams. Rat is an attacking type that will win on motor, quickness, and agility, even if he's strong. He's not a 350 pound widebody that fills holes.

LarryCanadian