Was the switch to 3-4 worth it?

[Bob Sacamano]

So you are telling me that we only had 2 guys in our whole front 7 when we were running the 4-3 that are any good?

Upgrade the DE opposite Ellis, and that D would have been real solid, and maybe either a DT or OLB.

yes, only Ellis and Glover, and Ellis was average

 

[Deep_Freeze]

yes, only Ellis and Glover, and Ellis was average

Oh goodness, James would been on that D, guess he sucks. Coakley, probowler, yeah he sucked too.

We replaced everyone on our front 7 except Ellis and James, course since you think James sucks, he doesn't count. The other 5 were sent to us by god and are our savior from the horrible D we had before.

*end sarcasm*

 

[Clove]

cost us what exactly?

Time.. But who's in a hurry right?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Oh goodness, James would been on that D, guess he sucks. Coakley, probowler, yeah he sucked too.

We replaced everyone on our front 7 except Ellis and James, course since you think James sucks, he doesn't count. The other 5 were sent to us by god and are our savior from the horrible D we had before.

*end sarcasm*

uh, James fits better in the 3-4, his and Parcells' own words

not saying anyone sucked, just we had solid players, noone to build a D around, except for Roy and Newman, and they're still here

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Time.. But who's in a hurry right?

yeah, hurry the process of being in the same position we are now

 

[Billy Bullocks]

Of course they needed to upgrade, but the question is was it worth having to let good players go and start over having to focus so much of our draft and free agent attention on converting to 3-4 when perhaps we could have just kept the 4-3, picked up a few players needed to put that scheme on track .....

We certainly wouldn't have needed to draft or otherwise acquire 11 D-linemen and LB's if we had stayed in the 4-3. Maybe 4-5 D-linemen and LB's would have done the trick, and we could have had the resources needed to upgrade the O-line and FS positions as well.

In other words, don't look at it just from the standpoint of needing to upgrade the defense either way, but also from the standpoint of what, if anything, it cost us in the overall picture.

Only problem with that is that of those 4-5 DL, what's the chance we got that stud DE. You need that to run a good 4-3. Ellis is a good complement DE, but he played the Strong Side. We didn't have that guy who was lights out coming off the weak edge.

We wasted more drafts trying to play the 4-3 (with the 1st rounders spent on DE's) than we did going to the 3-4.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

We wasted more drafts trying to play the 4-3 (with the 1st rounders spent on DE's) than we did going to the 3-4.

I'm just wondering what the hub-bub is all about, BP knows the 3-4 better than anyone, and look at all the pieces he's found for it in the front 7, I'm not sure he could have found the same pieces for the 4-3

 

[Clove]

yeah, hurry the process of being in the same position we are now

How do you know we'd be in the same position? Are you God?

 

[Deep_Freeze]

uh, James fits better in the 3-4, his and Parcells' own words

not saying anyone sucked, just we had solid players, noone to build a D around, except for Roy and Newman, and they're still here

Plain and simple, we would have had to use much less picks and resources (FA signings), if we had stayed with the 4-3. We could have used those picks and resources elsewhere if we had did that.

I think that is simple, and rather obvious summer.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

How do you know we'd be in the same position? Are you God?

all I know is that we would still have a fairly young team, young players aren't automatic, it takes time

I just highly doubt we would have been making a SUper Bowl run in '04 or '05

 

[Deep_Freeze]

How do you know we'd be in the same position? Are you God?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Plain and simple, we would have had to use much less picks and resources (FA signings), if we had stayed with the 4-3. We could have used those picks and resources elsewhere if we had did that.

I think that is simple, and rather obvious summer.

we would still need to draft or sign a QB, which we have, sign or draft a WR, or 2, which we have, sign or draft a RCB, which we have, sign or draft a FS, which we have, sign or draft an Olineman, or 2, or 3, which we have, sign a NT, which we have

I don't see where the switch has impeded us in bringing in players that were much needed elsewhere

 

[DCBoysfan]

The 3-4 is growing on me, I like the moves we have made.

 

[Deep_Freeze]

all I know is that we would still have a fairly young team, young players aren't automatic, it takes time

I just highly doubt we would have been making a SUper Bowl run in '04 or '05

I don't think you can predict 04 and 05, unless you have a crystal ball.........question, did you read all of this thrend?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I don't think you can predict 04 and 05, unless you have a crystal ball.........question, did you read all of this thrend?

I'm not predicting anything, I don't see the pieces we could have signed in '04 and '05, or drafted, that would have taken us much further than where we're at, and yes, I read the whole thread, it's ridiculous

 

[Clove]

all I know is that we would still have a fairly young team, young players aren't automatic, it takes time

I just highly doubt we would have been making a SUper Bowl run in '04 or '05

Without getting into a big debate about it, I think that if you have a philosophy, you install that philosophy as soon as possible. Let's be honest -- Parcells didn't like the small LBs and his scheme was and is the 3-4.

Jones basically seduced Parcells' into retaining Zimmer, I don't think Parcells would've kept him at that time.

Parcells did nothing to introduce the 3-4 to this team. Amazingly, we made it to the playoffs and our Defense (I think ) was #1 in the league.

IMO, Parcells let that #1 defense crap scramble his mind. So he stuck with Zimmers 4-3 "D" for another year, until it was obvious it wasn't working for Parcells, so Parcells finally pulls the trigger in 2004.

Had he broke down the Defesnse at that point, we could've pulled off a trade for Ellis/Coakley/Glover and the list goes on. Yeah we would've sucked for a year or 2, but by last year, we would've been 3 years into the 3-4, and who knows where we'd be..

Having said all of that, I don't care because we're in the 3-4 and it's looking good.. So I'm all about what's going on right now...

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Without getting into a big debate about it, I think that if you have a philosophy, you install that philosophy as soon as possible.

I know all that, but look who was available, that fit the 3-4 in the '03 and '04 offseasons

not much

we made the switch when the glut of 3-4 OLBs and DEs were coming out, and again, it was as strong class for 3-4 personnel in '05 draft and free agency

 

[Clove]

I know all that, but look who was available, that fit the 3-4 in the '03 and '04 offseasons

not much

we made the switch when the glut of 3-4 OLBs and DEs were coming out, and again, it was as strong class for 3-4 personnel in '05 draft and free agency

I'll end my part of the debate with this. Didn't mean we had to draft OLBrs that 1st year, but we could've started with NT. Then ILB/DE/ and so on. By year 3, we would've been in perfect position to get Ware or whomever.

Parcells' knew he made a mistake in sticking with the 4-3 in 2004, and that's why after the season was over, he basically said that he knew what he needed to do, and he didn't want to hear anything from Zimmer about he doesn't know about the 3-4... He wasted 2 years IMO, and now he's getting back on track. *You can have the debate from here* :

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I'll end my part of the debate with this. Didn't mean we had to draft OLBrs that 1st year, but we could've started with NT.

WHO?? damnit, what NT was available in '03, or '04, worth a ****? *sorry, I hate it when people say we should have done this and that, but don't go into specifics, like what player* and that's insane, you want to start the 3-4 despite not needing to draft OLBs to play in it, what's the point? the only way a team learns the 3-4 is by assimilation, so the OLBs we would have drafted later would be behind everyone else, and our D would suck before that, because we wouldn't have had the personnel at OLB to make it work, I don't see how that would speed up the team's curb

 

[Bob Sacamano]

btw, you have to think about depth at LB

that takes 2 years to find both adequate starters, and depth to be successful running the 3-4