Saints, Vikes, Colts, and Eagles don't run a 3-4

[BuffaloBlitz83]

Some of you guys seem to believe 3-4 is far better than 4-3 or cover 2. And a 3-4 automatically makes you better. Those are arguably the top 4 teams in the NFL and they run the 4-3 and 2 of them run a lot of cover 2. It isn't the defense. It is the players and coaching. 4-3<3-4, Players can make the system, neither is better.

I think a lot of you are in for a rude awakening thinking it is a guarantee we switch and a guarantee a switch improves the team automatically.

[ddaryl]

Some of you guys seem to believe 3-4 is far better than 4-3 or cover 2. And a 3-4 automatically makes you better. Those are arguably the top 4 teams in the NFL and they run the 4-3 and 2 of them run a lot of cover 2. It isn't the defense. It is the players and coaching. 4-3<3-4, Players can make the system, neither is better.

I think a lot of you are in for a rude awakening thinking it is a guarantee we switch and a guarantee a switch improves the team automatically.


I justl like the 3-4 over the 4-3. I prefer the felxibility of 4 LB's over 4 DL....

[EDS]

Some of you guys seem to believe 3-4 is far better than 4-3 or cover 2. And a 3-4 automatically makes you better. Those are arguably the top 4 teams in the NFL and they run the 4-3 and 2 of them run a lot of cover 2. It isn't the defense. It is the players and coaching. 4-3<3-4, Players can make the system, neither is better.

I think a lot of you are in for a rude awakening thinking it is a guarantee we switch and a guarantee a switch improves the team automatically.

The cover 2 is a great defense if you have the right personnel (see super bowl Tampa Bay defense) or can play with a lead (see Indy defense in the Manning era). The Bills have neither the right personnel nor a capable offense. As such, I strongly believe the team needs to build a defense that can stop the run and dictate terms (since the offense seems light years away from doing so).

The "bend but don't break" defense the Bills currently have will only work if they have an offense that can get into the endzone.

[Mr. Pink]

People always seem to forget that the Steel Curtain was the "tampa 2" style of defense.

That's where Dungy learned it. And that's the defensive style he took with him to Tampa.

Any defensive scheme is only as good as the personnel.

[BuffaloBlitz83]

We don't have the personal for a good cover 2 4-3, I agree.

But we have even less personal for a good 3-4!

[OpIv37]

Some of you guys seem to believe 3-4 is far better than 4-3 or cover 2. And a 3-4 automatically makes you better. Those are arguably the top 4 teams in the NFL and they run the 4-3 and 2 of them run a lot of cover 2. It isn't the defense. It is the players and coaching. 4-3<3-4, Players can make the system, neither is better.

I think a lot of you are in for a rude awakening thinking it is a guarantee we switch and a guarantee a switch improves the team automatically.

If we switch, it's pretty much a guarantee that we WON'T improve immediately. We don't really have the right personnel for the C2, but we're much closer than we are to a traditional 4-3 or a 3-4. If we switch, we're 2-3 years away personnel wise, and the D will take a step or two back before it improves (if it improves).

[billistic]

When over the last five years, the only starter on the front four that your team drafted was a 5th rounder (Kyle Williams), and of your linebackers, the only ones drafted were a 2nd round pick (Posluszny) and a 6th rounder (Ellison), you've got no right to fuss over scheme.

Just suck it up. This is the Bills, here.

[TheBrownBear]

I like any scheme that's coached by smart coaches and manned by good players.

[baalworship]

The time to switch to a 3-4 was several years ago. Now that all these teams run the 3-4 the ability to get 3-4 specialists that dropped because other teams couldn't use them is also gone.

Even the Pats switched back to a 4-3.

[billistic]

Even the Pats switched back to a 4-3.

The Patriots couldn't close a re-up with Richard Seymour, and are probably also going to lose Vince Wilfork.

They don't really have any choice.

[BillsWin]

The key to the 4-3 is pass rush. At times this season the 4-3 worked well because we got pressure on the QB. But now we are so injury riddled that what had potential to be a pretty good defense turned into a "at least we try hard while we letup 200 rushing yards" defense.

We need some new d-line depth, better linebackers and a healthy secondary.

I would like to switch to the 3-4 for my own reasons. I played in it, and feel it is a better system.

I think the 4-3 can be a good defense with upgrades on the d-line and at linebacker. Everyone needs to come back healthy and this defense isn't that bad, but they could use some help.

[FlyingDutchman]

i dont mind the 4-3, i just want to ax the cover 2 or get players who are capable of executing it. it requires pressure from the front 4 to be effective and we've clearly shown over the past few years that we cannot get to the quarterback. derrel revis here and champ bailey and they would still get beat if were not getting to the quarterback

[trapezeus]

3 of the 4 listed defenses aren't all that.

[Mahdi]

Some of you guys seem to believe 3-4 is far better than 4-3 or cover 2. And a 3-4 automatically makes you better. Those are arguably the top 4 teams in the NFL and they run the 4-3 and 2 of them run a lot of cover 2. It isn't the defense. It is the players and coaching. 4-3<3-4, Players can make the system, neither is better.

I think a lot of you are in for a rude awakening thinking it is a guarantee we switch and a guarantee a switch improves the team automatically.
I dont care what we run as long as we bring in some pass rushers.

Its not scheme, its players and execution that make a defense great.

[Mahdi]

3 of the 4 listed defenses aren't all that.
All of those defenses are solid. Colts have the top pass defense, Vikings top run defense, Saints are a good unit and the Eagles are always among the best.

[Bill Cody]

It depends what the HC wants to do and what he's experinced succes with. Parcells switched Dallas and Miami to the 3-4. He's comfortable with bigger players on his defense. If we got Cowher I bet he'd want to make the move and I would support it. But the people that say it's about talent are right. You need playmakers. You need a stout front 7. If an impact defender is staring us in the face at #8 I say grab him. You can snare recievers or Ol later than impact defenders. You just can't whiff on them (Maybin).:puke:

[k-oneputt]

Brees, Farve, Manning, McNabb

Any defense is good when you are always playing with the lead and getting the opposition one dimensional.

[Mr. Pink]

I want to run the 46 instead.

[k-oneputt]

I want a qb and try playing with the lead every week like the Colts and saints do.

[Jaybird]

most of you probably don't even understand the difference between 4-3 or 3-4

[The Juice Is Loose]

If we switch, it's pretty much a guarantee that we WON'T improve immediately. We don't really have the right personnel for the C2, but we're much closer than we are to a traditional 4-3 or a 3-4. If we switch, we're 2-3 years away personnel wise, and the D will take a step or two back before it improves (if it improves).

Green Bay switched and improved right away. I understand that Woodson is doing more than any player we have could, but they really only added Raji and Matthews in the draft, and we could add 2 similar players.

[trapezeus]

All of those defenses are solid. Colts have the top pass defense, Vikings top run defense, Saints are a good unit and the Eagles are always among the best.

minnesota is the only lights out defense. the saints have been in more shootouts as is the case with the eagles.

The colts are an average defense.

All those teams have good QB's leading very good offenses. that changes the dynamic bigtime.

If we had a halfway capable offense, maybe some of the games we've played we'd win with what we'd got. but i also know if we were better that our defense wouldn't be very dependable in close games with playoff implication. too small and too soft.

the personnel here blows.

[billistic]

most of you probably don't even understand the difference between 4-3 or 3-4

There's no excuse for ignorance:

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2009/09bramel_idpguide.php

Read up, you mofos...

[Akhippo]

What is easier to get these days? Four lineman that can rush the passer. or three lineman that can hold a point of attach. Also the olbs for a 3-4 are undersized DE in college and there seems to be alot ot them.

Two good 4-3 DT or 1 massive 3-4 DT.
A good pass rushing DE or 2 good pass rushing OLBs
A quick middle backer or 2 stout middle backers.

Either way we have to get players that can stand up against an offense without having to gimmick.

[Mahdi]

Brees, Farve, Manning, McNabb

Any defense is good when you are always playing with the lead and getting the opposition one dimensional.
Pretty sure the Vikings defense was good before Favre. And the Saints defense was only good this year.

[k-oneputt]

Draft Cody. Backup Williams, Left end Stroud, Right end S. Johnson/Denney

Olbers - Maybin, Schobel
Ilbers - Poz, Mitchell

One pick you have the beginning of 3-4.

[BillsFanCupp38]

I also think running a 4-3 requires to have an exceptionally talented middle line backer who can get his butt back in coverage during passing situations. I do not think Poz is that kind of player. Simply isnt fast enough to do it effectively. Fletch was ok but he was a little too short.

[justasportsfan]

3 of the 4 listed defenses aren't all that.
yeah. top 5 defenses are jets ,packers,broncos,steelers and bengals. Vikes come in 6

[methos4ever]

When you look at top defenses, while the television announcers will mention someone as a top 3 or number 1 or whatever, they go by yards. Ask any coach and the real metric is points allowed and 3rd down %. Then you'll see things even out a bit.

Of the top 10 in scoring, 4 are 4-3. In the top ten of 3rd down percentage, 5 are 4-3. So that just goes to show it's not so much the xs and os as it is the johnny's and joes, as my old hs coach was wont to say...
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?offensiveStatisticCategory=null&archive=false&seasonType=REG&defensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&d-447263-o=1&conference=null&d-447263-s=DOWN_3RD_PERCENTAGE&d-447263-n=1&season=2009&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=2&role=OPP&d-447263-p=1

[Throne Logic]

Some of you guys seem to believe 3-4 is far better than 4-3 or cover 2. And a 3-4 automatically makes you better. Those are arguably the top 4 teams in the NFL and they run the 4-3 and 2 of them run a lot of cover 2. It isn't the defense. It is the players and coaching. 4-3<3-4, Players can make the system, neither is better.

I think a lot of you are in for a rude awakening thinking it is a guarantee we switch and a guarantee a switch improves the team automatically.

It's no coincidence that you listed top offensive teams. Nothing helps a defense better than an offense that scores high and keeps the ball for multiple sustained drives. Especially, NO and Indy where the R's are built to attack.

[Preacher]

Coming from a fan of the team with probably the best 3-4 scheme architect in LeBeau, there are a couple of things about the 3-4 that needs to be remembered.

1. Someone else said it. Your nose tackle had to be MASSIVE and STRONG. He has two gap coverage responsibilities on the run.

2. Your DE's also have to be big and strong, but they also have to have some speed.

3. The D Line is about 2 things. Stopping the run and occupying blockers. If they are not big enough and strong enough to demand double teams, a 3-4 will be ugly.

4. LB's. Your Outside LB's have to be FAST and get to the QB. That means they have to have some moves . . . or a bull-rush like Harrison.

5. ILB's have to be able to stop the run, and have pretty dang good coverage skills. That RB or TE (or, Lord Forbid a slot receiver on a mismatch) will eat up the ILB all day if he can't cover.

6. Scheming. 3-4 is more about schemes than a 4-3. LeBeau's fireblitz schemes are great, but there has to be a lot of talent for that. Look what has happened to us with Troy and Aaron out of the lineup. We are still a top tier defense, but there are definite holes now.

7. and Finally... You can run a cover-2 behind a 3-4 or 4-3. But your CB's are on an island for about 10-20 yards every time. It is about keeping everything in front of you. When it works, it is suffocating, see our defense last year. When it doesn't, you go down in flames, see our defense in the last 3 minutes of games this year.





:blowup:

[X-Era]

Some of you guys seem to believe 3-4 is far better than 4-3 or cover 2. And a 3-4 automatically makes you better. Those are arguably the top 4 teams in the NFL and they run the 4-3 and 2 of them run a lot of cover 2. It isn't the defense. It is the players and coaching. 4-3<3-4, Players can make the system, neither is better.

I think a lot of you are in for a rude awakening thinking it is a guarantee we switch and a guarantee a switch improves the team automatically.

You could be right.

I simply have watched too many bad trends while the Cover 2 has been here:

1) WR's are easily finding the seems between the CB and S's for 10 yarders or more. A 3-4 may have another LB available in those seems to cover that.

2) Our smaller, faster, DE's are getting manhandled at the line of scrimmage and cant get consistent pressure. 3-4 DE's usually have better size and strength to win those battles.

3) Short routes in a 3 or 4 wide set require a DE to cover a WR, RB, or even quicker TE's underneath since we only have 3 LB'ers. Thats often a mismatch. In a 3-4, you have an extra LB'er to cover that guy.

4) Our smaller DE's cant get off blocks as well and cant get as many stops on run plays. Again, a 3-4 DE has better size and strength to get off blocks to make the tackle.

That said,

I think your right in that we have had to put way too many guys with little or no experience on the field, who then make mistakes (coaching and FO).

That our players are mediocre, especially at LB'er where they have been consistently manhandled, and walled off, at the point of attack in run plays.

And that the reason intermediate routes tend to be so open, in the seem between the CB and S is because someone screwed up (coaching).

The other factor you allude to is that our talent isnt good enough. Ive said that for years. Too many UDFA's or late rounders as primary backups or even starters. Not enough stars, and not enough solid vets as starters or backups.

[X-Era]

Draft Cody. Backup Williams, Left end Stroud, Right end S. Johnson/Denney

Olbers - Maybin, Schobel
Ilbers - Poz, Mitchell

One pick you have the beginning of 3-4.

Schobel doesn't have the speed to play OLB. We need a LB as well. That said, going to the 3-4 will give us the flexibility to go with a ILB or OLB and may make it easier to get one in later rounds or even through FA.

Id rather sign a FA DT that can man the middle like Barry Coefield, and then draft Derrick Morgan to play opposite Marcus Stroud at DE.

Maybe Schobel has trade value and we could get a 3rd or 4th which could parlay into a trade back into late 1 or for another 2nd rounder and then go for a LT or QB.