The Competition for Aaron Donald

[speedkilz88]

Chicago says that they're going to use a hybrid defense, but the D-Coordinator, DL coach and LB coach have primarily been in 3-4 defenses.

Which basically means a 3-4 base and nickel 4-3 pass rush and possibly throwing in some other 4-3 packages. Wouldn't be a fit for Donald at his size. Melton even looks like a bad fit. I sure wouldn't want to return if I were him.

 

[Pessimist_cowboy]

My wildcard is the Rams @ 1/13. Can you imagine a line of...

LDE- C. Long
LDT- A. Donald
RDT- Brockers
RDE- R. Quinn

Sure would bring the heat......And that is the in vogue thing right now..

Yep I agree I see him fitting in well there .

 

[DuDa]

Well of course he's going to say that while the coaches he's currently paying are still here. Another 8-8 season and terrible defense could change that time real quick.

And Seattle doesn't run the Tampa 2, not even close. I'd love to run Seattle's hybrid front 7 and press man style.

Seattle primarily runs a cover 1 and cover 3 scheme--not much man coverage. The CB's press at the line and then drop into a zone underneath or press then drop back deep. They are pretty vanilla when it comes to their secondary assignments. Where they get creative is with their front 7. They use a bunch of different formations with a blend of powerful run stoppers and explosive pass rushers. Their front 7 and Earl Thomas is really what the strength of their defense is. Earl Thomas patrols the deep part of the field and allows Chancellor to roam free and destroy people. If we want to run that scheme then we better find an Earl Thomas and a dominant defensive line quickly

 

[Verdict]

The fact that he is not for most teams points to my one dimensional comment. He's not a versatile player. I'd like to think that sometime soon we'll abort this 4-3 nonsense and go back to a 3-4. Donald has no position in that defense. So I'd rather pass on him.

We didn't have great success running the 3-4, but I think it is much easier to find players to fit the 3-4 as opposed to the 4-3. We tried for years to find good 4-3 defensive ends and whiffed and missed several times. 3-4 ends are much easier to find. The 3-4 also seems more schematically more versatile.

The problem we had with the 3-4 is that we never invested in the space eating run stuffing nose tackle that the scheme requires. We valued sacks from the NT position more than double teams and ability to collapse the pocket that most teams want from the 3-4 NT. I think it is much easier to invest ONE premium pick on a stud NT than it is TWO 4-3 defensive ends, who don't grow on trees anyway.

 

[Risen Star]

We didn't have great success running the 3-4, but I think it is much easier to find players to fit the 3-4 as opposed to the 4-3. We tried for years to find good 4-3 defensive ends and whiffed and missed several times. 3-4 ends are much easier to find. The 3-4 also seems more schematically more versatile.

The problem we had with the 3-4 is that we never invested in the space eating run stuffing nose tackle that the scheme requires. We valued sacks from the NT position more than double teams and ability to collapse the pocket that most teams want from the 3-4 NT. I think it is much easier to invest ONE premium pick on a stud NT than it is TWO 4-3 defensive ends, who don't grow on trees anyway.

Great post. It's easier to find a quality rush LB than it is a down DE capable of getting to the QB while also being stout enough to handle the run game.

 

[xwalker]

We didn't have great success running the 3-4, but I think it is much easier to find players to fit the 3-4 as opposed to the 4-3. We tried for years to find good 4-3 defensive ends and whiffed and missed several times. 3-4 ends are much easier to find. The 3-4 also seems more schematically more versatile.

The problem we had with the 3-4 is that we never invested in the space eating run stuffing nose tackle that the scheme requires. We valued sacks from the NT position more than double teams and ability to collapse the pocket that most teams want from the 3-4 NT. I think it is much easier to invest ONE premium pick on a stud NT than it is TWO 4-3 defensive ends, who don't grow on trees anyway.

That's what I originally thought, but after years of watching the Cowboys run the 3-4, I now disagree.

The 3-4 OLB, especially the Strong Side OLB, is a difficult position to play. I requires a 3 tool guy that can play coverage, rush the passer and be strong against the run. That's a difficult combination to find.

The 3-4 DEs are usually a minimum of 6-4, 295. If you take out all of the DL in this draft that don't fit that criteria, then you remove about 3/4ths of the players.

It's hard to find ILBs that are big enough to take on OGs consistently and also have any amount of coverage ability.

The 4-3 under that Marinelli primary uses, seems like the easiest to find player to fit. The WDE can be a smaller guy and you don't have to try to find a guy that is both big and super quick guy like you need in the Giants 4-3. The 3-tech DT can be a smaller guy than is desired for other 4-3s and for 3-4s. The 1-tech does not have to be a super big player like a 3-4 NT. The SDE does not have to cover like a 3-4 SOLB an therefore it is easier to find a guy that can stop the run and rush the passer without also having to play coverage.

 

[Verdict]

That's what I originally thought, but after years of watching the Cowboys run the 3-4, I now disagree.

The 3-4 OLB, especially the Strong Side OLB, is a difficult position to play. I requires a 3 tool guy that can play coverage, rush the passer and be strong against the run. That's a difficult combination to find.

The 3-4 DEs are usually a minimum of 6-4, 295. If you take out all of the DL in this draft that don't fit that criteria, then you remove about 3/4ths of the players.

It's hard to find ILBs that are big enough to take on OGs consistently and also have any amount of coverage ability.

The 4-3 under that Marinelli primary uses, seems like the easiest to find player to fit. The WDE can be a smaller guy and you don't have to try to find a guy that is both big and super quick guy like you need in the Giants 4-3. The 3-tech DT can be a smaller guy than is desired for other 4-3s and for 3-4s. The 1-tech does not have to be a super big player like a 3-4 NT. The SDE does not have to cover like a 3-4 SOLB an therefore it is easier to find a guy that can stop the run and rush the passer without also having to play coverage.

Interesting observations. I respect your opinion. However, I'm not sure that the draft weight of a player is all that much of an excluding factor since many players will bulk up some (especially linemen) when once they are devoting full time to professional football.

I realize that 3-4 linebackers tend to be larger than 4-3 linebackers, and their responsibilities are different. But if you have a guy who commands double teams at the nose (like the 3-4 is designed to do) then the inside linebackers are free to flow and make plays. I think that is why our 3-4 was not as successful as it should have been. Ratliff was concerned about jumping the gap allowing the guards/center to get to the second level on our linebackers.

 

[xwalker]

Interesting observations. I respect your opinion. However, I'm not sure that the draft weight of a player is all that much of an excluding factor since many players will bulk up some (especially linemen) when once they are devoting full time to professional football.

I realize that 3-4 linebackers tend to be larger than 4-3 linebackers, and their responsibilities are different. But if you have a guy who commands double teams at the nose (like the 3-4 is designed to do) then the inside linebackers are free to flow and make plays. I think that is why our 3-4 was not as successful as it should have been. Ratliff was concerned about jumping the gap allowing the guards/center to get to the second level on our linebackers.

Take out all of the linemen under 6-4. Then take out the ones that don't project to be able to play at 295+ which will be most of the college 4-3 DEs. What is remaining? Tuitt, Hageman who else?

They also like them to have long arms. It was reported that one reason that they never moved Ratliff to DE in the 3-4 was because he had short arms despite being 6-4.

ILBs in the 3-4 take on Guards more than 4-3 LBs. That's why they had guys like Bradie James. They're referred to as stack-and-shed LBs in the 3-4; whereas, they are usually considered as run-and-hit types in the 4-3. Dexter Coakley would not have been a 3-4 LB.

NTs are usually big because the 3-4 uses 3 linemen instead of 4.

 

[Verdict]

Take out all of the linemen under 6-4. Then take out the ones that don't project to be able to play at 295+ which will be most of the college 4-3 DEs. What is remaining? Tuitt, Hageman who else?

They also like them to have long arms. It was reported that one reason that they never moved Ratliff to DE in the 3-4 was because he had short arms despite being 6-4.

ILBs in the 3-4 take on Guards more than 4-3 LBs. That's why they had guys like Bradie James. They're referred to as stack-and-shed LBs in the 3-4; whereas, they are usually considered as run-and-hit types in the 4-3. Dexter Coakley would not have been a 3-4 LB.

NTs are usually big because the 3-4 uses 3 linemen instead of 4.

All I know is that we used several premium picks on 4-3 defensive ends in players like Greg Ellis, Kavika Pittman and Shante' Carver. Ellis was a pretty solid, if unspectacular pick, but the others obviously underwhelmed. But the bust rate on 4-3 defensive ends .... for us at least ..... appears historically pretty high.

 

[xwalker]

All I know is that we used several premium picks on 4-3 defensive ends in players like Greg Ellis, Kavika Pittman and Shante' Carver. Ellis was a pretty solid, if unspectacular pick, but the others obviously underwhelmed. But the bust rate on 4-3 defensive ends .... for us at least ..... appears historically pretty high.

It's not as if they've drafted a bunch of successful 3-4 OLBs. Ware would have been great in any system and Spencer has just been ok for a first round pick.

I think they were just reaching for pass rushers with Carver and Pittman and probably would have screwed that up regardless of what system they were using. They've had plenty of busts that were not DEs.