Jenkins was a 3T DT in CAR and Ellis is best as a 4-3 DE. We really have half the pieces for either defense, no reason to commit to one or the other. The real issue is who are we gonna draft, people for which scheme? One good draft could put us over the top for either scheme.
We suck at the 3-4 in case you havent noticed and you might aswell try Gholston from the DE position he's atleast played for 4 years , He never really played OLB untill coming to the Jets which proved he would of probally been better suited at Punter rather then 3-4 OLB. What was it a whopping 12 tackles this season for the 6th overall pick ?
'spags will bring the house, be a pressure defense' actually, spags only rushed his 4 d-linemen against the pats all game and crushed brady 5 times. when you got 4 horses up front that can dominate, you will look good. how would spags look if he had NO horses up front (jets) and had to apply pressure through game planning and exotic blitz packages? just asking. if spags is our coach, we will run as many 4-3 alignments as 3-4. kinda like the pats do.
I totally agree--After 3 years of the 3-4 I still think we have better 4-3 personnel and our 3-4 stunk last year. Maybe we could also get rid of invisible Bryan Thomas if we played a 4-3.
The way i see it, if we stay at 3-4 we have 2 or 3 holes to fill, max If we switch to a 4-3 we have 3 or 4 holes to fill, and harris is proven in a 3-4, if we switch to a 4-3, we might have just lost one of our bright young stars AGAIN *cough* Vilma *cough* This is why we should stay in the 3-4 alignment
Seems like a very lame reason to not make a change, if you're talking about maybe having to replace only one or two more players. Plus, you couldn't be more wrong about Harris. Michigan played a 4-3 the entire time when he was there, and he flourished.
Barton is a 4-3 OLB. He was brought in by Edwards to pay OLB in the 4-3 and had a great year in 2004. He has also played well the past two seasons. I don't understand why every offseason he tops the fans' list for players who should go. Do people actually watch the games?
Yeah he was brought in as an OLB in 2004 which is going to be 5 years ago now. I don't think Barton would succeed anymore as a weakside backer. I'm not sure about Pace. I don't see why he wouldn't be able to play a SLB position well, especially if he was used alot as a blitzer. Harris would be OK in the middle but also would fare better as more of a strong side coverage LB. We'd need a very fast weakside backer, almost safety like. I'm not sure about Gholston as weakside DE in a 4-3. He'd be a little more responsible against the run and would be required to read and react a little more. Unfortunately he may wind up only being a passing down situational player which would be fine if he wasn't a top 6 pick last year. As for the rest of the line Jenkins would be fine as would Ellis. We'd once again be looking for a DT next to Jenkins and adding another DE who is a little better against the run would be important. Bryan Thomas and Kenyon Coleman would be less talented versions of Gholston and Ellis and would be cut.
Actually, I think it wouldn't be that big of a deal. In terms of the Lb's: Will: Barton Mike: Harris Sam: Pace Pace has proven to be more than just a pass rusher and is very good at run defense. Then as far as d-line, I think it would do wonders for Gholston and for the rest of the players would not be much of a transition. Jenkins, Pouha and Ellis would fill the rest of the line and all those players have experience in the 4-3.
Not to mention that Bryan Thomas would cease to be an every-down player, a benefit in and of itself. Though he might be a cap casualty anyway.
pace has also proven to be HORRENDUS in coverage and he would have to do alot of it at 4-3 OLB being a 4-3 MIKE you need to have great lateral movement, see vilma and Willis and im not sure harris has enough, he was brought because of his size and his run stuffing ability in the 3-4 As you all know, college is alot different than pro, saying that Harris and Gholston played in the 4-3 in college, does not make them a fit for the PRO 4-3
Agreed Jenkins would be fine. Coleman could be moved inside to play DT. Pace could revert back to DE or stay as an OLB. He has the tools to do both and oten was a down lineman in our nickle and dime sets. It could help Gholston, but I have no Idea if he will ever come alive in the NFL. I have hope for him even though that rookie season was VERY quiet. Barton could be an OLB in the 4-3. He was for us before Mangini. He is getting up there and will need replaced sometime in the near future no matter what set we play. How is Harris not suited for the 4-3? He was a very good 4-3 MLB for Michigan. He has range. He would be fine. Barton - Harris - Pace could be a 4-3 Linebacker set and do well. I don't see a transition back ot a 4-3 as hard as the one to 3-4. The 3-4 requires massive D linemen. Big, Strong, Athletic NT's are hard to come by for the 3-4 and it makes switching to this set full time porblematic unless you have a Jenkins type already around. Also, adding OLB's that are demons as pass rushers is a must. We have yet to find a guy who is consistant at that job and its killing us in the passing game. I wold rather stick to the 3-4, but we need coaches who know how to run it if we stay. Our Blitz packages were awful in the last half of the seaon and our pass rush was almost non existant.
I took this from another thread I wrote about the same subject. I'm against a 4-3 switch. I'd take Rex over Spags for several reasons. He has been running a better D than Spags for a longer time. Before the Giants improbable SB run, was he high on anyones list?He also had 2 of the best 4-3 DE's in football and their backup was unknown but in the top 5. Too flavor of the month, and our personnel doesn't fit his scheme.. We have a ton of money and picks invested in 3-4 specific players, not even including Jenkins who can play either. Bryan Thomas(too small for a 4-3 end as we already witnessed), Harris,Pace and Ellis(not a 4-3 DT at this stage) are all 3-4 specific players. Let's not even talk about Gholston who is one of the highest paid players on the team and lost a season learning to be a 3-4 OLB. I think we can do what the Ravens do on D and be better on O. I'm a big proponent of the 3-4, especially when you spend so much time and money creating that look. Pitt, NE and Balt are dangerous nearly every year in the 3-4. Here is some further backup. http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=090...s&confirm=true
And teams like Tampa Bay have been top notch defenses for years because of the 4-3. No system guaruntees you a good defense. It's a matter of having the personell and the coaching staff in place.
We HAVe the personell. That is the point. We DONT have 4-3 personell. Tampa Bay? Soft for years. Find me one 4-3 D that has been as good as long as the Steelers, Balt and NE. The closest thing is Tampa or Philly and neither is in that league.
