Was thrown this nugget

[Hostile]

Frankly, I could care less what defense we line up in (4-3, 3-4 which is really an old high school 5-2).

The bottom line is that we are sooo far from having the personel to run a 3-4 it's not even on the horizon. We don't even have a DT who can do his job in the 1 or 2 gap at a high level, so who's going to be a nose-tackle? We don't have 1 single guy on the team who's played DE in a 3-4 scheme...Maybe Ellis could do it, maybe, but most of the other guys can't even play well in the 4-3....they certainly aren't stout enough to play in the 3-4....even Glover is too small for that job...he may not even have a position.

LB's??? Maybe Brady, Maybe Thornton....none of our other guys can shed blocks on the inside, and you can't just take a guy like DAt and move him outside.

Roy couldn't handle playing LB...he's not tough enough or strong enough...he's a guy who puts big hits on WR's and RB's, but he's not a guy who's going to take on linemen and FB's and HB's consistently and hold up...he's a safety, a SS, not to be confused with a guy who is a big, strong, mean OLB in a 3-4...I don't see why we even keep talking about this...it would take 2-3 years of a major overhaul of personel to get to that point.

That is without a doubt the best post in the entire thread. I have been trying for over a year now to get Nors to realize that. It's like talking to a wall.

I personally love the 3-4 defensive scheme. I can't seem to make him understand that. We do not have the people to run it. We just don't.

He is so enamored with it that when he reads about the 46 defense the Bears ran under Buddy Ryan he proclaims it a version of the 3-4. I pointed out the names of the 4 d-linemen and 3 LBs who ran that defense and he still maintains it is a version.

I don't care what scheme we run on defense. I really don't. I just want to get sacks, turnovers, and hold teams to very few points scored. You don't do that with the guys we have out there right now unless they are playing like we did last year. You don't do it by playing guys out of their natural position. You certainly don't do it by playing guys just because their size fits a scheme.

Put the best 11 defenders out there on the field and let them do their jobs.

 

[Nors]

That is without a doubt the best post in the entire thread. I have been trying for over a year now to get Nors to realize that. It's like talking to a wall.

I personally love the 3-4 defensive scheme. I can't seem to make him understand that. We do not have the people to run it. We just don't.

He is so enamored with it that when he reads about the 46 defense the Bears ran under Buddy Ryan he proclaims it a version of the 3-4. I pointed out the names of the 4 d-linemen and 3 LBs who ran that defense and he still maintains it is a version.

I don't care what scheme we run on defense. I really don't. I just want to get sacks, turnovers, and hold teams to very few points scored. You don't do that with the guys we have out there right now unless they are playing like we did last year. You don't do it by playing guys out of their natural position. You certainly don't do it by playing guys just because their size fits a scheme.

Put the best 11 defenders out there on the field and let them do their jobs.

And how they move players around. The 4-6 moves the DE/SS/LB's all over the place and creates a lot of confusion and adjustments to an offense. It is a 4 man front - but has 3-4 attributes in that it puts players "up". It is a very aggressive D.

Something our Wus deep cover 2 is not this year. We are pissing away Roys best attributes and losing to boot.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Some nice posts in this thread by Hos, Wayne, Blind, Junk and RW... but I've seen these before... many times before.

Nors being the experienced defensive coordinator he is knows full well that we can use the 3-4 to create far more turnovers than what we currently are (forgetting of course that a more aggressive style of defense leaves you open to big plays also... but that argument we can leave for another thread) getting and will not alter his views one iota no matter how many verifiable facts you lay on his doorstep.

 

[Hostile]

And how they move players around. The 4-6 moves the DE/SS/LB's all over the place and creates a lot of confusion and adjustments to an offense. It is a 4 man front - but has 3-4 attributes in that it puts players "up". It is a very aggressive D.

Something our Wus deep cover 2 is not this year. We are pissing away Roys best attributes and losing to boot.

It does not have 3-4 attributes, sorry you are simply way off base there. What it does have is the results you magically see in a 3-4 scheme.

Do you know why all teams don't run the 46? Holy cow, personnel needed to run that scheme too.

It's like an echo.

Playing people out of position is the fastest way to less defensive production. You talk about confusion. The last thing we want to do is confuse our own defenders.

You really need to take out this anger on Parcells instead of me. I have no decision on how or who we play. Just an informed opinion as opposed to a flawed theory. He needs to hear your anger. You might be the voice of change to wake him up.

I promise you, he does not read this forum. If he did, I would know it.

You're preaching to an empty congregation becuse no one accepts you as the defensive savior.

 

[Hostile]

Some nice posts in this thread by Hos, Wayne, Blind, Junk and RW... but I've seen these before... many times before.

Nors being the experienced defensive coordinator he is knows full well that we can use the 3-4 to create far more turnovers than what we currently are (forgetting of course that a more aggressive style of defense leaves you open to big plays also... but that argument we can leave for another thread) getting and will not alter his views one iota no matter how many verifiable facts you lay on his doorstep.

Good post Dr. Freud.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Good post Dr. Freud.

Just had to get my 2 cents in since I missed all the fun last night.

 

[Hostile]

Just had to get my 2 cents in since I missed all the fun last night.

Hey, I will say this. This thread may be flawed in logic, but it is infinitly better than the one he posted about what would be the record for a whole season under 4 different QBs.

That was nothing more than a thinly disguised "we still need the Jet" agenda thread.

There was no way any consensus could be achieved. Why not? Because it was entirely theory as opposed to any basis in fact. It is impossible to play all 4 guys for all 16 games, especially when one left his membership to the fraternity in a sample bottle.

Without a doubt, that was the silliest thread I have ever seen on this forum.

This one at least has some fat to chew on.

 

[Waffle]

And how they move players around. The 4-6 moves the DE/SS/LB's all over the place and creates a lot of confusion and adjustments to an offense. It is a 4 man front - but has 3-4 attributes in that it puts players "up". It is a very aggressive D.

Looks like I missed out on all the fun here!! I listened to the PC and did not hear Bill say anything about Roy playing LB. Nors, are you for real? I think you post some of your "Nors Nuggets" just to conjer up 3 pages worth of responses.

Here's the deal...The 46 wasn't a 3-4 "hybrid" or whatever you want to call it. Roy's not playing LB. Now he may play closer to the line of scrimmage, but he won't be changing his jersey number to 57 or something in the next three weeks. We don't have the personnel to play a 3-4. There is no proof that a 3-4 defense is in any way superior to a 4-3. Most teams run 4-3 defenses right now. Atlanta tried to run a 3-4 last year and they ended up dead last in Defense. This year, they are running a 4-3 and lead the league in turnovers and sacks.

Now I would like to see more sacks, turnovers, etc. Nors, would you please just get out of this anti-Dexter/Singleton, pro-Roy at LB, 3-4 obsession?? I am worried about you man!

P.S. For the record, I am not a member of GROZ. However I do think the proposed logos are hilarious!

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It's also a verb: to flail is basically to swing around wildly and erratically in a desperate attempt to either hit or grab onto something.

So in a way, it is a bit fitting for Nors.

LOL!! Ayeah, I would have to agree.


The difference between throwing out a nugget and pitching rocks at one can sometimes be difficult to discerne.

Keep at it Nors.

 

[Tio]

And how they move players around. The 4-6 moves the DE/SS/LB's all over the place and creates a lot of confusion and adjustments to an offense. It is a 4 man front - but has 3-4 attributes in that it puts players "up". It is a very aggressive D.

Yes, and we all know the 3-4 is the first and only D that is agressive, and all other succesful agressive defenses are just versions of it

 

[jimmy40]

World hears, "We want to get Roy more involved by putting him in the box." World takes this to mean a SAFETY playing up.

Nors hears, " Roy at LB, 3-4, Roy at LB."

Maybe that nugget hit him in the head.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Maybe that nugget hit him in the head.

LOL!

Bet it doesn't hurt!

 

[Hollywood Henderson]

Actually some good posts on both sides of the fence...

One thing we can agree on, is...we aren't playing well, nor are we playing to our players strengths...So that my friends & fellow Cowboy fans is VERY ANTI zimmy (wuss)...

Roy is NOT playing where he should...Its a fact that he is wasted by playing far away from the LOS...

It does sound like Parcells is inclined to take more of a role on D as he should...

Favre will put the ball where it could & should be picked 3-5 times a game...Will we actually get picks or not...WE do, we win, we don't, we won't...

If we were to win in GB it could turn around our season...

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Actually some good posts on both sides of the fence...

One thing we can agree on, is...we aren't playing well, nor are we playing to our players strengths...So that my friends & fellow Cowboy fans is VERY ANTI zimmy (wuss)...

Roy is NOT playing where he should...Its a fact that he is wasted by playing far away from the LOS...

It does sound like Parcells is inclined to take more of a role on D as he should...

Favre will put the ball where it could & should be picked 3-5 times a game...Will we actually get picks or not...WE do, we win, we don't, we won't...

If we were to win in GB it could turn around our season...

This is where I have to give Parcells the benefit of the doubt and ask respectfully, "Do you honestly think Bill Parcells would allow Mike Zimmer to run the defense in a manner that he did not 100% fully support? And that includes the use of Roy Williams, the use of the 3-4 or what not."

Now that is not to say that some of the decisions they've made so far this season haven't ended up being wrong but do you honestly think Zimmer runs the defense and Parcells sits there and stews about bad decisions being made by Zim and does nothing about it?

 

[junk]

And how they move players around. The 4-6 moves the DE/SS/LB's all over the place and creates a lot of confusion and adjustments to an offense. It is a 4 man front - but has 3-4 attributes in that it puts players "up". It is a very aggressive D.

Something our Wus deep cover 2 is not this year. We are pissing away Roys best attributes and losing to boot.

For all this talk of wussy 2 deep, there was only really one safety back deep last game. It was either Dixon or Williams and they were helping on Tyrone Williams' side. Newman was pretty much alone with no safety help.

And guess what? A 4-3 defense can line up in different looks too. Like, I don't know, a safety lining up to blitz.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

And guess what? A 4-3 defense can line up in different looks too. Like, I don't know, a safety lining up to blitz.

NO!

You're ****ting us aren't you Junk?

 

[Juke99]

Some nice posts in this thread by Hos, Wayne, Blind, Junk and RW... but I've seen these before... many times before.

Nors being the experienced defensive coordinator he is knows full well that we can use the 3-4 to create far more turnovers than what we currently are (forgetting of course that a more aggressive style of defense leaves you open to big plays also... but that argument we can leave for another thread) getting and will not alter his views one iota no matter how many verifiable facts you lay on his doorstep.

Yeah, what he said.

 

[TheHustler]

BP said earlier he wanted Roy in the Box. Never mentioned a thing about being a LB though.

 

[junk]

NO!

You're ****ting us aren't you Junk?

I **** you not.

 

[Nors]

This is where I have to give Parcells the benefit of the doubt and ask respectfully, "Do you honestly think Bill Parcells would allow Mike Zimmer to run the defense in a manner that he did not 100% fully support? And that includes the use of Roy Williams, the use of the 3-4 or what not."

Now that is not to say that some of the decisions they've made so far this season haven't ended up being wrong but do you honestly think Zimmer runs the defense and Parcells sits there and stews about bad decisions being made by Zim and does nothing about it?

May be more ready than you believe to shake this wuss cover D up. He was adament about being more aggressive and the Word Roy and LB came up right after that. And he finished it by saying he needed to det him in that situation more.

Its time to get our Big LB's Thornton, Shanle, Fowler on the field more. Our smurf LB's are not producing and are loking AARP............And time to get Roy closer to the line more - thats all.