Was switching to the 4-3 a mistake?

[Cowboy Brian]

Sure, we're getting the interceptions and flashy defensive plays but our defense is atrocious relative to the past few seasons. So, was it a mistake?

 

[17yearsandcounting]

unprecedented.

The most foolish thing the Garrett family, Lacewell, and Jones ever collaborated on. That is saying something.

 

[Direwolf63]

Yes it was.

That being said, we don't have the talent on defense to play either scheme effectively.

 

[jterrell]

Yes.
And it's because we knew what we had with Lee/Carter/Ware/Spencer in a 3-4.

The move was a gamble with regards to your best players.

But honestly the 3-4 or 4-3 of this modern era is interchangeable.

We ran tons of 4 man lines with Ryan and Seattle does the same.
The 4-3 over or under is pretty much 3-4.

The only stupid thing we've done is believe we could successfully run a Cover 2 defense.
We don't have the LBs for it, the Safeties for it or the CBs for it.

 

[snapper]

Yes. Depending on old talent (for the d-line) to execute it was a bigger mistake.

Other than Brent, Dallas had no proven d-lineman under the age of 26 that was a proven player.

 

[HeavyBarrel]

Yes it was.

That being said, we don't have the talent on defense to play either scheme effectively.

Another guy who gets it, regardless of scheme the defense simply isn't talented enough to compete with quality offenses......You have a safety that runs a 4.69 according to the combine and another safety who came from Saginaw Valley State.....A DL that is vastly undermanned/old/injured.......We need better players, we all know that.

 

[Alexander]

Not in theory. But in practice, we did not have the interior rushers or the safeties to make this particular variant work.

The most amazing thing to have actually witnessed was the addition of not a single solitary young DL to make that switch work. Not even a single undrafted free agent. Nothing.

Just inane talk about meeting rooms being too full. It was truly the miscalculation that has defined this season. No question about it. Seems like we have that one little thing every year that you can point to.

 

[foofighters]

No it wasn't. What was a mistake was thinking that switching to the 4-3 was going to solve our nonexistent pass rush from the middle. For years, I have seen Dware come off the edge and almost get to the QB. All the QB does is step up and burn us. If we had been able to get consistent pressure from the middle, that QB couldn't step up and Dware would be the greatest pass rusher of all time. Doesn't matter what D we utilize, if we can't get to the QB we are toast.

 

[Ren]

doesnt matter we dont have the personel to run a 3-4 either

 

[CATCH17]

The 4-3 is not the problem it's how we run the 4-3 that is the problem.

Kiffen is clearly more comfortable calling zone coverages and the league has evolved and is making him do things he is not comfortable with.

With all of the spread formations we were just asking to get sliced and diced.

Our goal was to create more turnovers. We have done that. But our offense plays with such a lack of urgency that we have not really taken advantage of the only thing our defense has provided.

 

[Future]

Eh, I've always preferred the 43 anyways.

The problem was asking Carr, Claiborne and Scandrick, who are all man-to-man guys, to play zone concepts.

 

[Pessimist_cowboy]

No we just need better personnel . Ware is the one that hurt the most . He isn't doing well .

 

[Wood]

Not in theory. But in practice, we did not have the interior rushers or the safeties to make this particular variant work.

The most amazing thing to have actually witnessed was the addition of not a single solitary young DL to make that switch work. Not even a single undrafted free agent. Nothing.

Just inane talk about meeting rooms being too full. It was truly the miscalculation that has defined this season. No question about it. Seems like we have that one little thing every year that you can point to.

Its beyond human comprehension that Dallas didn't take DL in draft.

 

[jobberone]

I voted yes but only because we don't have the personnel to run it. And I thought we would run variants of it and mix it up.

 

[Crown Royal]

if we had not switched and made the exact same personnel moves we made in the offseason, the defense would be just as bad. Not having spencer has hurt us, not having Crawford has likely hurt us, and Hatcher is a great DT but easily double teamed.

Whether moving to a 4-3 or not is a good idea really is something that will be answered in a few years. It depends on your ability to acquire the players necessary for it.

 

[17yearsandcounting]

Let's be real, Kiffin went from having the worst defense in the history of USC and getting fired by his own son, to having the worst defense in the history of the Dallas Cowboys.

This utter destruction was blatantly coming.

 

[jobberone]

Its beyond human comprehension that Dallas didn't take DL in draft.

I don't see that as reasonable. We lost Spencer, Bass and Crawford early on and after the draft.

 

[Alexander]

Eh, I've always preferred the 43 anyways.

The problem was asking Carr, Claiborne and Scandrick, who are all man-to-man guys, to play zone concepts.

We are playing a lot more man than people want to admit and we are still not very good at it. We are not really running a Tampa 2. We are just not covering anyone very well.

 

[TwoDeep3]

we don't have the talent on defense to play either scheme effectively.

This is the answer to every Dallas defensive question. There is no other.

This team does not have the front seven talent to put the opposing quarterback in a position to be uncomfortable and to throw when he is not ready. Neither does this front seven have the ability to force him away from the point where he throws from am optimum position.

That is the answer. Yesterday, today and until they fix the front end of this defense.

And then even with that, you still have the problem with smallish defenders facing large or swift receivers.

But cure the front end and the back end gets better.

 

[Alexander]

I don't see that as reasonable. We lost Spencer, Bass and Crawford early on and after the draft.

So depending on a one year and out franchise designee, an undrafted free agent that really was not that great to begin with and an unproven player like Crawford was reasonable?

It still was a decision based on faith, which as we know is a huge flaw of this front office. The biggest miscalculation was Ratliff, which is why we heard Jerry Jones lamenting his absence just as recently as Sunday.