Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Would this defense be better off as a 3-4? « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3

Zsnore

User is on moderator watch listWatched
*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1108
Offline
#15 : May 08, 2013, 04:01:15 PM

i expect to see more 46 defense

This is what I think about the Glazers being cheap...

JC5100

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 8303
Offline
#16 : May 08, 2013, 04:09:02 PM

Before they invested a #2 in David they were.

yuccaneers

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 2466
Offline
#17 : May 09, 2013, 07:17:14 AM

Better Off?  Probably not.   Although compared to the team a few years ago - we've gotten a lot bigger and stronger in our front seven (which is the key)

They could probably pull it off with some bigger linebackers.   Our current group (although talented) are hardly a fit for a 3-4 base.   I'd be curious what Yucc thinks about this one.

Actually, as long as the Bucs did not play a traditional two-gap 3-4 and played a Wade Phillips  one-gap penetrating 3-4 it could be done with the current players on the roster.

DE Gholston DT McCoy DE Clayborn would be the teams starting down linemen
OLB Steven Means ILB Foster ILB David OLB Bowers

As long as it was a one gap scheme the above would get the teams 7 best pass rushers on the field at the same time. And essentially the team could play cover 7 behind it. Leaving Foster and David to play the flats, curls and underneath coverage, Revis to play on an island in man-to-man, Wright in the slot with inside out help from a S, Banks could play off man with help underneath from LB and other S could defend deep middle. 
: May 09, 2013, 07:25:36 AM yuccaneers


BTownBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5831
Online
#18 : May 09, 2013, 07:26:50 AM

No.  We MIGHT have a few personnel that could run it a couple times a game, but not with any consistency.

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
#19 : May 09, 2013, 08:06:39 AM

Before they invested a #2 in David they were.

Why do you say that?


tatmanfish

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 7662
Offline
#20 : May 09, 2013, 10:23:57 AM

Better Off?  Probably not.   Although compared to the team a few years ago - we've gotten a lot bigger and stronger in our front seven (which is the key)

They could probably pull it off with some bigger linebackers.   Our current group (although talented) are hardly a fit for a 3-4 base.   I'd be curious what Yucc thinks about this one.

Actually, as long as the Bucs did not play a traditional two-gap 3-4 and played a Wade Phillips  one-gap penetrating 3-4 it could be done with the current players on the roster.

DE Gholston DT McCoy DE Clayborn would be the teams starting down linemen
OLB Steven Means ILB Foster ILB David OLB Bowers

As long as it was a one gap scheme the above would get the teams 7 best pass rushers on the field at the same time. And essentially the team could play cover 7 behind it. Leaving Foster and David to play the flats, curls and underneath coverage, Revis to play on an island in man-to-man, Wright in the slot with inside out help from a S, Banks could play off man with help underneath from LB and other S could defend deep middle.

Mccoy at nt would be worthless. It would waste his talents and likely make it a weak spot on the d. Hed be more suited for de and even then hed likely be less productive.

Its ok to say its a bad idea. No need to pretend like it would work with this personnel.



Quote from: Illuminator
You were simply too smart for me.

yuccaneers

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 2466
Offline
#21 : May 09, 2013, 10:42:52 AM

tatmanfish - You might want to reread it. The team would not employ a two-gap 3-4 but rather a Wade Phillips one-gap penetrating 3-4 which would allow the team to use McCoy  in a  similar fashion to what he is currently being utilized.


acacius

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4983
Offline
#22 : May 09, 2013, 10:48:25 AM

That'd be putting an awful lot of faith in Gholston and Means right off the bat.

JC5100

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 8303
Offline
#23 : May 09, 2013, 12:16:40 PM

Mccoy at nt would be worthless. It would waste his talents and likely make it a weak spot on the d. Hed be more suited for de and even then hed likely be less productive.


BucNY

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 7895
Offline
#24 : May 09, 2013, 02:38:56 PM

So is this defensive scheme flawed then?

No, we couldn't cover anyone and we could sack very few. If you have the talent you can run any scheme and the good ones run the scheme their players fit best into. Either way the 4-3 is the best fit right now.

I don't see a 3-4 NT, we don't have a second MLB suited. We don't have 1, say nothing about two OLB who can rush the passer and you could make an argument our ends are to small.

\\\\\\\"This forum needs a poster like BucNY now more than ever\\\\\\\"
      - Everyone

Feel Real Good

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27795
Offline
#25 : May 09, 2013, 03:38:00 PM

The team doesn't have a reliable edge rusher for either defense.

FRG is the most logical poster on this board.  You guys just don\'t like where the logical conclusions take you.

CalcuttaRain

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 20252
Offline
#26 : May 09, 2013, 03:54:30 PM

The team doesn't have a reliable edge rusher for either defense.

because past selectively = future

Show the bravest of the brave kids that you have their back.  Go to http://www.childrenscancercenter.org/

Just check out the site or maybe like them on Facebook . .  or Share the site on Facebook, re-tweet one of their tweets.  Not everyone can give money to support this great cause, but its easy to give 10 seconds of your time to help spread the word about The Children\\\\\\\'s Cancer Center

bucsbum

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2447
Offline
#27 : May 09, 2013, 03:54:42 PM

LOL 3-4 we do not have the personnel for a 3-4. the best player on the d line plays the 3 technique. There is no 3 technique in the 3-4. second of all you need a huge great nose tackle we do not have that eithor. you also need to interior LB we barely have 1

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
#28 : May 09, 2013, 05:23:16 PM

People always say 3-4 linebackers are so much bigger, but not really. Look at the best 3-4 defense of the past decade...the Pittsburgh Steelers. Farrior, Foote, Harrison, Timmons.....all 6ft even to 6'1" and all 235lbs to 240lbs.

Their best DE has been Brett Keisel and he is the same size as Clayborn and Bowers.

All we would really need is a real nose tackle.


Kodiak

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 3872
Offline
#29 : May 09, 2013, 05:30:50 PM

We don't have the players for the 3-4. We don't have another ILB and our DEs aren't athletic enough to play OLB (can't cover). They also aren't big enough to play DE in a 3-4. We also don't have a big physical enough DT to play nose. In our front 7...only 2 people would easily fit into a 3-4 scheme. McCoy could move to DE and Foster could play one of the MLB positions. As good as David is...he's small and undersized to rush the passer on a consistent basis. Switching to a 3-4 would take a few years and you'd have to replace some people. There's nothing wrong with the 4-3 and I'd rather add one DE and a LB to what we have than have to add 4-5 more people to do a 3-4.

Whoa...shiver me ****in timbers!

Page: 1 2 3
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Would this defense be better off as a 3-4? « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools