The DEATH of the TAMPA 2

[ddaryl]

This is a great article and it pretty much says what most of us have been saying... the TAMPA 2 SUCKS. Bend don't break don't cut it

The article is written by former Bills S Matt Bowen

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/01/the-death-of-the-tampa-2/

more to the article so click the link


I think the Tampa 2 defense is being phased out of the NFL.
Think about it. More important, think about it as you watch the championship games on Sunday between bowls of Texas chili and cold bottles of Miller High Life. There will be no Tampa 2, no undersized linebackers dropping to a spot and no safeties playing close to 20 yards off the line of scrimmage. No rushing the passer with your front four on third downs and playing coverage behind it, and no middle linebacker running down the middle of the field trying to keep up with a slot receiver who runs a 4.3 in the 40.


Think about the teams who run the Tampa 2 scheme as their No. 1 call: Chicago, Minnesota, Buffalo, Tampa, Indianapolis and Detroit. Where are they now? At home, watching these four defenses go after quarterbacks, challenge receivers and create turnovers — instead of waiting for them to fall in their laps because of a bad decision by the quarterback.
the article does a good job of pointing out why the tampa 2 is no longer a bonafide D for NFL teams

[justasportsfan]

What does Bowen know? Dick is smarter .

[Pinkerton Security]

What does Bowen know? Dick is smarter .

im assuming you're sorta joking, but....

ya dick is smarter than most, but that doesnt make him a good coach.

[OpIv37]

hmmm..... I could swear I said the same thing a long ass time ago and everyone jumped all over me for it.

It's a D that ALWAYS has holes in the zone, and relies on pressure from the front four. First, it's very difficult to get consistent pressure from the front four. Second, even with pressure the D is vulnerable to the quick slant. Third, the holes in the zone are almost always in the SAME spots, so it's easier to exploit.

Contrast this with the Ravens' or Eagles' D, which is always blitzing. Blitzing creates holes but the offense never knows where they will be, plus the blitz creates a more effective pass rush.

Screw the Tampa 2. I'm so sick of this D that plays back on it's heels and is undersized at every single position.

[ddaryl]

You have my vote agianst the Tampa 2 OP... I've hated the bend don't break scheme for a long time. I remember being called out about it by others myself.

Tampa 2 almost requires you have 2 probowl caliber pass rushers on the DL. If you cannot generate consistent pressure by the front 4 the scheme is soft and gets exposed by quality teams

[justasportsfan]

im assuming you're sorta joking, but....

ya dick is smarter than most, but that doesnt make him a good coach.

I was being sarcastic.

Dick is dumb when it comes to picking OC's. I could give his defensive decisions his entire career the benefit of the doubt , but his O is a failure.

[Ingtar33]

the Tampa-2 worked in Tampa for a pretty simple reason.

Rice, Sapp, Brooks, Barber and Lynch

they could pressure up the middle and at the edge and run stop without blitzing. They had playmakers who were turnover machines.

This was a defense that was designed to stop a WCO, by forcing the WCO to go on 10 or 12 play drives. By design it's a bend but don't break defense. When done right it can feast on poor offenses, especially offenses that don't run well.

part of the reason I've begged the team to dump the 4-3 front since we got it, was because both gimmicky schemes we ran (46 and Tampa2) were based off a strategy that needed dominant pro bowl players to make work.

Frankly, as an Offensive coach, i always found the 3-4 to be a harder defense to plan against when manned with average talent then the 4-3. You can scheme a pass rush with a 3-4. you don't need to get a lot of sacks to disrupt an offense. get in the QB's face enough and you'll see turnovers even if you're not getting sacks. Getting in the QB's face is what the 3-4 does best.

The trick is, you need good defensive coaches. and you need players who can play 2-gap scheme. You got that and you can play good defense with a 3-4 without amazing talent.

[Mr. Pink]

:rofl:

I guess that the Steelers lucked out winning 4 superbowls in the 70s with the defense!

The defense doesn't work when you can't pressure the QB and don't have a playmaking safety.

There are teams that run the 3-4 that are staying home too!

That must mean the 3-4 isn't good enough either.

Wait, there's 4-3 teams staying home too...must not be good enough.

NO DEFENSE is good enough when the personnel you have is second rate.

But I love how people love to sit and blame the scheme not the personnel.

[colin]

it ain't the x's and o's as much as it is the willies and the joes

[Ingtar33]

it ain't the x's and o's as much as it is the willies and the joes


Not entirely true. Yes good players help. and i don't know a coach who wouldn't want them. But if you have a good staff. and do a good job implementing your playbook; and call a smart game, you can win with mediocre talent (maybe not a national title game... or a superbowl, but you should be able to get to the playoffs, or a bowl game; look at miami)

[Mr. Pink]

Not entirely true. Yes good players help. and i don't know a coach who wouldn't want them. But if you have a good staff. and do a good job implementing your playbook; and call a smart game, you can win with mediocre talent (maybe not a national title game... or a superbowl, but you should be able to get to the playoffs, or a bowl game)


We do win about as many games as we should with the talent base.

We're a mediocre to average team from the top all the way down....

We get mediocre to average results year after year.

[OpIv37]

the Tampa-2 worked in Tampa for a pretty simple reason.

Rice, Sapp, Brooks, Barber and Lynch

they could pressure up the middle and at the edge and run stop without blitzing. They had playmakers who were turnover machines.

This was a defense that was designed to stop a WCO, by forcing the WCO to go on 10 or 12 play drives. By design it's a bend but don't break defense. When done right it can feast on poor offenses, especially offenses that don't run well.

part of the reason I've begged the team to dump the 4-3 front since we got it, was because both gimmicky schemes we ran (46 and Tampa2) were based off a strategy that needed dominant pro bowl players to make work.

Frankly, as an Offensive coach, i always found the 3-4 to be a harder defense to plan against when manned with average talent then the 4-3. You can scheme a pass rush with a 3-4. you don't need to get a lot of sacks to disrupt an offense. get in the QB's face enough and you'll see turnovers even if you're not getting sacks. Getting in the QB's face is what the 3-4 does best.

The trick is, you need good defensive coaches. and you need players who can play 2-gap scheme. You got that and you can play good defense with a 3-4 without amazing talent.

but but but... I thought the whole reason we went to the Tampa 2 in the first place was because it doesn't require amazing talent!

:rolleyes:

Several people on this board, myself included, saw this coming, despite having significantly less football knowledge than you do. And while coaching at the college level is impressive and gives you more football knowledge than anyone else on this board, it's not the same as being at the NFL level. Please understand that I do NOT mean that as an insult at all- I'm just so frustrated that so many people with less football knowledge and experience than our supposedly professional coaching staff can see this coming, but they can't.

[ddaryl]

funtimes

the article pretty much says that you need to generate pass rush from the front 4, which is something the Bills have never been able to do. SO yes personell is important. We all know we need an upgrade on our DL. However it is very hard to maintain multiple probowl caliber DL to make the scheme work and to keep it working. The fact remains that the Tampa 2 is a bend don't break D scheme, and I for one don't respect that style of play in any aspect of the game.

I have no idea what the Steelers did for thier D scheme in the 1970's but most schemes ran in the 1970's are useless today. The NFL is ever evolving, and the Tamap 2 has been exposed, and good teams and coaches easily find ways to expose it regularly. What the Steelers did with it in the 1970's is completely irrelevant in how it works today IMO.

The majority of the NFL plays a 3-4 D, why is that ???? Probably has to do with the fact that the more successul teams of the past few years use it. It also is the reason why the other 3-4 teams are staying home, only 12 teams make it to dance.

[ddaryl]

it ain't the x's and o's as much as it is the willies and the joes

BS... then why does New England stay on top even through many years where most every expert said they did so with sub-par talent.. It was the Bellicheck factor.

Why do teams shell out huge monies to experienced winning coaches. Bottom line is no team in this league is stacked top to bottom with great talent. Its the coaches that turn many of these average players into star player by the way they coach and prepare them.

[Philagape]

It needs great personnel more than other schemes do.
And one hole can hurt the whole D more than in other schemes.
And even if that's covered, it still allows long drives, which makes the offense cold and the defense tired. Therefore it depends on the offense for help to make the other team play catch-up.
How many times have we wanted a certain player only to be told "he doesn't fit our scheme"? This scheme greatly limits the talent pool from which to choose. It's because of this scheme that we took Whitner eighth overall.
That's too many cons, and too much has to go right for it to work. :down:

[justasportsfan]

But I love how people love to sit and blame the scheme not the personnel.
who do you think decided to retain Kelsay and give Aaron more money? Who do you think decided to draft McCargo? The very same people who decided to go with the scheme.

If the personnel does not fit the scheme then you have to question the brains behind these decisions. IT'S BEEN 3 YEARS . Don't tell me that the coaches have nothing to do with the draft either. They are at the combine.

[bigbub2352]

3-4 is were we need to go, It is obvious that the players coming out of college are more suited to be in a 3-4 Defense, alot of the DEs coming out now are more tweeners, yes there are a few exceptions but i truly believe that the 3-4 is a more effective defense,
TIme for a change
look at our record vs 3-4 defenses
Cover 2 is a joke
Also we have players here that were drafted and signed after Fewell implemented his Defense Poz and Mitchell are not Cover 2 LBers
Stroud is not a DT for a cover 2
Our DEs dont fit in any scheme
Time for a change

[colin]

Not entirely true. Yes good players help. and i don't know a coach who wouldn't want them. But if you have a good staff. and do a good job implementing your playbook; and call a smart game, you can win with mediocre talent (maybe not a national title game... or a superbowl, but you should be able to get to the playoffs, or a bowl game; look at miami)

so you don't think players are more important than schemes and coaches at the nfl level?

that's absurd on it's face. coaches are important, but you sir are talking your book -- you are a coach and thus overvalue the importance of coaching. the players matter much much more.

miami won because they were the best team in nfl history at taking care of the ball, +14 i think it was. they also have a good oline, veteran qb who played most of the season at a very high level, and as soft of a schedule as we did. a young qb running their team wouldn't have gotten them 7 wins.

now i agree that coaches make a big impact, but you've said 35% and that's just too much.


ddaryl, new england won their first superbowl with sick talent on D, bruschi, ted johnson, cox, and vrabel at lb were a very very good squad, and the rookie richard seymore (who may be headed for the hall of fame and certainly would be if he didn't get hurt).

our scheme isn't that big of a deal, it's the plays we call and the guys who execute them. we blitz, have zone coverage, have zone blitzes, and sometimes have man coverage too. if aaron didn't get hurt he would have added 10 more sacks and we would have been top 10 in the nfl on d instead of 14.

changing to 34 wouldn't help us, and philly and the giants have small fast fronts just like we do, and they run 43s. if we add crow, a good de (peppers from nc or berry for zona) and maybe another line backer we'd have a pretty kick ass D

[Ingtar33]

- I'm just so frustrated that so many people with less football knowledge and experience than our supposedly professional coaching staff can see this coming, but they can't.

What makes you think a football coach is smarter then you?

They have specialized knowledge/skills, but i've met a lot of dumbassed people coaching football.

One of the most common things you'll come across is people wedded to strategies. DJ likes the Tampa-2. So that's the system he'll win or die with.

I like the 3-4, but if i don't have the players for it I'll have my team play a 4-3. Does that make me a better football coach then DJ? I'd like to think it makes me a better gameday coach, I'd like to think it makes me a better coach in general. But for all i know, in the pro-game i might have went 5-11 with this roster. I don't know.

the Bills have the personnel for a 4-3 defense. It's not great personnel, but if i was asked to come in and coach this team after week 1, I'd play a 4-3 to the end of the season, and try to see about changing personnel in the offseason. If I had to, even with a full offseason I'd play both a 4-3 and 3-4 in my first year in, because there is no way I'd have the right personnel after one offseason to make the full switch. I'd use both systems to complicate the OC/QB/Center's jobs on every team i face.

Part of what i dislike when i watch the Bills play is the unwillingness to gain any sort of strategic or tactical advantage over their opposition. Simply put, when you don't have the horses, you have to use smoke and mirrors. This staff doesn't do that.

When i watch the Bills defense, it's so painfully easy to read we make every QB we face, job easier. We don't mix coverage. we don't Zone Blitz. We don't press cover. We rarely mix in any type of man to man. we run 3 or 4 different zone coverages. It's child's play to gameplan for us, because there isn't much variation, and what variation there is, can be discerned in the first 3 steps of a drop-back, or with a little motion.

When i watch the Patriots by comparison, I'm constantly guessing what the coverage is, how it will be mixed... where the blitz is coming from. Sure, that's an extreme team to talk about, but really, their defensive coaching is top notch. Their coaching has turned an above average to middle of the road (talent wise) defense into one of the best defenses year after year. that's smoke and mirrors and bubblegum. It's what good coaching is all about.

[Ingtar33]

so you don't think players are more important than schemes and coaches at the nfl level?


i don't think i said that.

I said that coaching can take mediocre talent and make a good product. nothing championship quality. but good enough to get you to the playoffs.

I said mediocre, not poor.

there is a difference



I honestly believe good coaching is worth around 35% improvement over talent level. We have mediocre talent on this team, and average coaching. The result is a mediocre football team. I don't think the coaching does a lot for our final record.

[colin]

i don't think i said that.

I said that coaching can take mediocre talent and make a good product. nothing championship quality. but good enough to get you to the playoffs.

I said mediocre, not poor.

there is a difference



I honestly believe good coaching is worth around 35% improvement over talent level. We have mediocre talent on this team, and average coaching. The result is a mediocre football team. I don't think the coaching does a lot for our final record.

i said players counted more than coaching and you disagreed.

and the point i'm making here is if we hit a late FG against cleveland, jp didn't play at all, and lynch stayed healthy we might have won 3 more games and made the playoffs, knocking miami out. very very small differences in players and how they play make huge differences in a season.

[acehole]

I call it the tampon 2.



This is a great article and it pretty much says what most of us have been saying... the TAMPA 2 SUCKS. Bend don't break don't cut it

The article is written by former Bills S Matt Bowen

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/01/the-death-of-the-tampa-2/

more to the article so click the link




the article does a good job of pointing out why the tampa 2 is no longer a bonafide D for NFL teams

[Ingtar33]

i said players counted more than coaching and you disagreed.

and the point i'm making here is if we hit a late FG against cleveland, jp didn't play at all, and lynch stayed healthy we might have won 3 more games and made the playoffs, knocking miami out. very very small differences in players and how they play make huge differences in a season.

A coach being a 35% improvement/hindrance over the players is not insignificant. but i don't think it means the coach is more important then the players. the coach doesn't run, block or tackle. He can improve the ability of the team to do those things, but in the end the players have to execute.

The coach is not the most important thing. he's important, yes. but he's not the end all be all. Look at Barry Switzer. He somehow managed to only win 1 superbowl while he had the most talented team in the league for his 4 seasons as coach. That team should have won at least 5 superbowls during the 90's. Sure, he got one, but a baboon could have coached that team to 1 superbowl.

[Mr. Pink]

funtimes

the article pretty much says that you need to generate pass rush from the front 4, which is something the Bills have never been able to do. SO yes personell is important. We all know we need an upgrade on our DL. However it is very hard to maintain multiple probowl caliber DL to make the scheme work and to keep it working. The fact remains that the Tampa 2 is a bend don't break D scheme, and I for one don't respect that style of play in any aspect of the game.

I have no idea what the Steelers did for thier D scheme in the 1970's but most schemes ran in the 1970's are useless today. The NFL is ever evolving, and the Tamap 2 has been exposed, and good teams and coaches easily find ways to expose it regularly. What the Steelers did with it in the 1970's is completely irrelevant in how it works today IMO.

The majority of the NFL plays a 3-4 D, why is that ???? Probably has to do with the fact that the more successul teams of the past few years use it. It also is the reason why the other 3-4 teams are staying home, only 12 teams make it to dance.

Most scheme's used in the 70's are useless? The 3-4 and 4-3 were both defenses that were run then. Nickel too for that matter. So, are those useless too?

Baltimore runs a variation of the 46 and 3-4...only one team other than them has ever run the 46 effectively...the 1980's Bears. Is that scheme useless?

The majority of the league is still 4-3 but it's shifting back to the 3-4 which is the defense most teams used in the mid 80's to early 90's.

There are just as many teams with each scheme staying home...all it says is that without the proper personnel any scheme is broken and won't work.

I've asked this question a million times and no one ever answers...I'll even reference a team in it...The Browns have been trying to install a 3-4 now for 4 years...their defense is still atrocious. What happens in 3 or so years and the defense still blows? Do you all sit around and say the 3-4 sucks? Do you say the 3-4 is dying? Do you say that it's time to scrape the system?

Rome wasn't built in a day. And it takes time to acquire the proper pieces to effectively run any scheme.

[Mr. Pink]

who do you think decided to retain Kelsay and give Aaron more money? Who do you think decided to draft McCargo? The very same people who decided to go with the scheme.

If the personnel does not fit the scheme then you have to question the brains behind these decisions. IT'S BEEN 3 YEARS . Don't tell me that the coaches have nothing to do with the draft either. They are at the combine.


The front office decided to retain the personnel. Ultimately, it is their call to decide who gets a contract and who doesn't. As much as you hate Dick, he doesn't negotiate contracts.

The front office decides which players to bring in that think best fits the scheme that coach wants to employ. Be a talent scout, director of pro personnel, draft guru.

[lukabrossi]

bend, but don't break defense?.......i call it the bend over and take it defense.

[Night Train]

I can understand some people holding up examples of successful NFL Cover 2 D's as to why the Bills continue to employ it.

I hold up the example of $$ poorly spent on 2 DE's who are horribly overpaid with minimal return, due to their supposed fit for this D. How's that working out in the Won/Loss column ?

Look how far the LB's play off the LOS. Look at the deep drops by the secondary, getting burned in slants and most everything underneath.

It may have worked for other teams in the past but it's a titanic failure here. Perry Fewell is probably a decent fellow but we need a new DC who employs the 4-3 in the worst way.

[Typ0]

DJ won't scrap the D he's trying to build. And RW won't can him and pay him...so I guess it's three more years of crap.

[OpIv37]

What makes you think a football coach is smarter then you?


I have degrees from SUNY Fredonia and George Mason, and I work a tech job that's very common in this area.

I would hope, no, I would expect that the Ivy League-educated full-time professional coach who makes $2.5 million a year to bring victories to my football team would be smarter than me, especially when it comes to football basics. That may be idealistic, but it doesn't seem so unreasonable. If you can sit there and dissect the defense on every play and I can call out the offensive plays 80% of the time from my couch, the man has no business being in that position. If he can't fool us, how's he going to fool Bill Bellicheck or even Mike Singletary in his second game as head coach?

[Jeff1220]

Schemes are cyclical. As offensive schemes change to overcome a particularly tough defense, the defenses change to keep tough against the evolving offenses, so the offenses change to (or back to) something else, so the defense has to evolve into (or back into) some thing else, causing the offense to....

It just seems that the Bills are always one of the last teams to realize when those changes in the schemes need to be made. We jumped on the 46 hybrid bandwagon w/Gregg Williams at a time when teams seemed to be moving toward the Tampa2, then we moved to the Tampa2 when most teams were changing to the 3-4.
Our offense is the same way. Clements brought in the west coast O, after it started to become more figured out by defensive coordinators league wide. It just seems that this team always tries to jump on a schematic bandwagon after the bandwagon has already left town.
I dream of a day when we have a coach who successfully innovates something new. The last time that happened was when Marchibroda developed the K-gun.

[jamze132]

Most of us on here think the T2 sucks. Fewell sucks and Dick sucks for sticking with this clown and his ******ed defense.

[ddaryl]

the only way our 4-3 D will get any better is if we throw cash to cap out the window and sign one of the top DE in FA and OLB's then go ahead and hopefuly pick up another top DE or OLB in the draft at #11.

We are just that desperate. We need that much talent influx immediately otherwise will be bending and breaking again next season

[billogic99]

hmmm..... I could swear I said the same thing a long ass time ago and everyone jumped all over me for it.

It's a D that ALWAYS has holes in the zone, and relies on pressure from the front four. First, it's very difficult to get consistent pressure from the front four. Second, even with pressure the D is vulnerable to the quick slant. Third, the holes in the zone are almost always in the SAME spots, so it's easier to exploit.

Contrast this with the Ravens' or Eagles' D, which is always blitzing. Blitzing creates holes but the offense never knows where they will be, plus the blitz creates a more effective pass rush.

Screw the Tampa 2. I'm so sick of this D that plays back on it's heels and is undersized at every single position.

Well Gruden and Dungy are avalible, there's still hope!! (sarcasm)

[PECKERWOOD]

I want to see us run a variation of the 3-4 and 4-3 like Pittsburgh and Baltimore. The Tampa 2 is good for warm weather or controlled climate teams. i.e. Indy, Minny and TB. Let's face it, teams aren't going to be throwing the ball against you late in the year at RWS, they will be trying to run the ball which is the Tampa 2's achilles heel, it just doesn't make sense. Trying to make the Tampa 2 work in Buffalo goes directly against using common sense.

[Typ0]

Ingtar, I'm having trouble grasping what you are arguing here. I get that players are more important than coaching. But still, you are putting a 35% factor on coaching. Does that mean that a .500 team will get 10 or 11 wins from good coaching? Are you one of those people saying NE & Brady aren't really that good? They are just getting a 35% increase in production from BB?

[yordad]

My point is that the NFL is cyclical
What does that mean? Literally, what does that mean? :idunno:

Schemes are cyclical. As offensive schemes change to overcome a particularly tough defense, the defenses change to keep tough against the evolving offenses, so the offenses change to (or back to) something else, so the defense has to evolve into (or back into) some thing else, causing the offense to....
Well, I think you took it as "these things go in cycles". Anyways, if Bowen meant to say "these things go in cycles", then why did he follow the sentence "In fact, you may never see it again" with the sentance "My point is that the NFL is cyclical". It doesn't make sense, and has me scratching my head.

Jeff, the Bills are always a step behind, and if it is going to come back around, maybe they ought to stop chasing it and wait. I dunno. Your right, by the time we fully transition to a zone blitzing 3-4, it will probably be on its way being phased out. :idunno:

[Jeff1220]

the only way our 4-3 D will get any better is if we throw cash to cap out the window and sign one of the top DE in FA and OLB's then go ahead and hopefuly pick up another top DE or OLB in the draft at #11.

We are just that desperate. We need that much talent influx immediately otherwise will be bending and breaking again next season

CB hinted at making a move for Bart Scott...we can dream...a little
http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2009/01/16/fan-friday-1-16/

The reason I don’t think the Bills will be able to compete for Suggs is there will be a number of teams competing for him on the free agent market if he gets there. The Bills historically don’t like to get into bidding wars for players, and there will be numerous bidders for Suggs. I’d be very happy with Bart Scott though to upgrade the linebacking unit.

[Jeff1220]

cyclical: 1 a: of, relating to, or being a cycle b: moving in cycles

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cyclical

Dude, I'm an English teacher. Don't doubt the vocab skills. lol.

[yordad]

cyclical: 1 a: of, relating to, or being a cycle b: moving in cycles

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cyclical

Dude, I'm an English teacher. Don't doubt the vocab skills. lol.Lol, touché. But what do you make of his direct contridiction?

[Jeff1220]

Lol, touché. But what do you make of his direct contridiction?

That's contradiction.

[yordad]

That's contradiction.So.... you make nothing of it?

For the record, I never said I was a friggin english major homes. I asked the friggin question because my understanding may have been a little different. Somehow you felt attacked(?). Now your going to go be the grammer nazi?

Ok, stick to your english, and not address the football question. Not sure I noticed a noticable display of football knowledge from ya anyways so I don't know why I asked you. No offense, some other people just stand out.

Sooo I'll skip to my point.....

Bowen should stick to football. Because if things go in cycles then you do see them again. And if things go in cycles, it doesn't make sense to chase it if your behind, because it is chasing you.

Logic is my thing, not spelling. Spell check can fix my spelling; spell check can't fix logic or your tude, so I'm doing iight in my book bud.

So, onto the next logical question (don't bother Jeff)..... how long is the duration of this cycle, and how long does it take to transition?

[Jeff1220]

So.... you make nothing of it?

For the record, I never said I was a friggin english major homes. I asked the friggin question because my understanding was different. Somehow you felt attacked(?). Now your going to go be the grammer nazi?

Ok, stick to you english, and not address the football question. Not sure I noticed a noticable disaplay of football knowledge from ya anyways so I don't know why I asked you. No offense, some other people just stand out.

Sooo I'll skip to my point.....

Bowen should stick to football. Because if things go in cycles then you do see them again. And if things go in cycles, it doesn't make sense to chase it if your behind, because it is chasing you.

Logic is my thing, not spelling. Spell check can fix my spelling; spell check can't fix logic or your tude, so I'm doing iight in my book bud.

So, onto the next logical question (don't bother Jeff)..... how long is the duration of this cycle, and how long does it take to transition?

Relax man. Who's the one feeling attacked? I was having a little fun with you. Wow.

[yordad]

Relax man. Who's the one feeling attacked? I was having a little fun with you. Wow.I work it what seems to be "the complaint department" and I drank too much coffee today!!

I may be a little pumped, sorry, lol.

[Jeff1220]

I work it what seems to be "the complaint department" and I drank too much coffee today!!

I may be a little pumped, sorry, lol.

:up:

[Jeff1220]

The Bills switched from the 3-4 to the 4-3/46 w/GW in, I think, the 2000 season. The 3-4 was already out of "fashion" when the Bills were still using it, so let's say it was at it's most popular in 1997.
Currently, the 3-4 has been the dominant scheme for, what 2-3 years now. We'll say that it is now at it's peak of popularity for this cycle. So, it would seem, that the 3-4 spent around 10 years as a less-popular scheme before it re-emerged.

[Turbo.GUN.Hawk!]

What the hell is the 4-3 and 46 you are all talking about?

[Jeff1220]

What the hell is the 4-3 and 46 you are all talking about?

Gregg Williams used a sort of hybrid of the 4-3 base w/ the 46 defense. This was where our trend of getting smaller, supposedly quicker, d-linemen started. The 4-3 base uses 4 down linemen and 3 linebackers. The 46 is scheme that lines the players up shifted to one side, and head to head with defenders, intending to create confusion. It is often played with a strong safety up in the box, almost as another linebacker (think Blaine Bishop in Tennessee).

[justasportsfan]

The front office decided to retain the personnel. Ultimately, it is their call to decide who gets a contract and who doesn't. As much as you hate Dick, he doesn't negotiate contracts.

The front office decides which players to bring in that think best fits the scheme that coach wants to employ. Be a talent scout, director of pro personnel, draft guru.
what? Dick wants The tampa 2 which requires a fast DL and thats what he ended up with . They had light players and it failed for 2 years so they brought in Stroud

Puhlease, Dick was backed up by Marv. If Dick thought Kelsay was garbage they wouldn't have overpaid for him. You're reaching.

[Ingtar33]

I have degrees from SUNY Fredonia and George Mason, and I work a tech job that's very common in this area.

I would hope, no, I would expect that the Ivy League-educated full-time professional coach who makes $2.5 million a year to bring victories to my football team would be smarter than me, especially when it comes to football basics.

unless they teach football 101 at ivy league schools now, i fail to see why DJ's education plays any role in his football 101 skills. I'm sure he knows a lot a nuance about football you don't, but frankly that doesn't mean he's smarter, IQ wise, then you are


If you can sit there and dissect the defense on every play and I can call out the offensive plays 80% of the time from my couch

at the end of the year i could tell you 9 plays out of 10 the bills offense was running at the snap. They got far too predictable down the stretch.


the man has no business being in that position. If he can't fool us, how's he going to fool Bill Bellicheck or even Mike Singletary in his second game as head coach?

Good question.