Any chance we are making a scheme shift?

[X-Era]

Maybe to a 3-4?

Its pure speculation on my part, but heres what Im adding up:

Comments that we want to get bigger on the DL
Cutting a smallish Tripplett
Singing a LB who has played ILB

I wouldnt think they will do that, but maybe?

[raphael120]

Maybe to a 3-4?

Its pure speculation on my part, but heres what Im adding up:

Comments that we want to get bigger on the DL
Cutting a smallish Tripplett
Singing a LB who has played ILB

I wouldnt think they will do that, but maybe?

Yeah, no.

Fewell is not a 3-4 dude.

[LifetimeBillsFan]

I think that they are making a scheme shift, but not to a 3-4.

I think that they are going to incorporate some of the scheme that the NY Giants run which is a sort-of hybrid: it isn't the all-out blitzing scheme of J.Johnson, although it incorporates a lot of those concepts, and it isn't a Tampa 2 scheme, although it has some T-2 concepts as well, and it isn't the kind of Titans 46 that the Bills ran under G.Williams/J.Gray and that Washington has been running, although there are some elements of that in the scheme as well.

Up until now, P.Fewell's scheme has been pretty much a vanilla version of the Tampa 2 scheme (he admitted as much to the Buffalo press more than once) that T.Dungy has been running in Indy, which is just a little different than the scheme that L.Smith has run in Chicago (initially Smith's scheme incorporated a bunch of sophisticated blitzes, but a couple of years ago they went away from those blitzes and, for a time, ony had two blitz schemes in their whole package) and the one that Dungy used to run when he was with Tampa Bay.

I think that the Bills have recognized that they needed to make some changes in that scheme and, after seeing what the NY Giants were able to do against the Pats in their two games against them last year, may be looking to add some of what the Giants were doing last year to their own scheme.

[colin]

if we blitz more it doesn't require or imply a scheme change.

it just means we are taking more risk.

we started blitzing more late in the year, and it got to the qb fairly well too.

we tend to blitz either the safety off the edge from the slot, or the LBs when they line up right over their gaps. good because it makes it hard to figure out who is coming, even without having to zone blitz.

[colin]

if we blitz more it doesn't require or imply a scheme change.

it just means we are taking more risk.

we started blitzing more late in the year, and it got to the qb fairly well too.

we tend to blitz either the safety off the edge from the slot, or the LBs when they line up right over their gaps. good because it makes it hard to figure out who is coming, even without having to zone blitz.

[Mahdi]

Maybe to a 3-4?

Its pure speculation on my part, but heres what Im adding up:

Comments that we want to get bigger on the DL
Cutting a smallish Tripplett
Singing a LB who has played ILB

I wouldnt think they will do that, but maybe?
No chance.... Stroud is a 4-3 DT. Why would Jauron go and switch schemes when he knows we were only 1-2 players away from being a solid defense? The D will be set with the addition of Stroud and another pass rusher.

[ParanoidAndroid]

I don't know about a total scheme shift, but a little modifying to the Tampa-2 and you could have something similar to the defense that stopped the Patriots in the Super Bowl. You know the entire AFC East is watching that tape over and over and over......