PDA

View Full Version : Broncos would have to tackle more work if they switch back to the 4-3 defense



TXBRONC
01-05-2011, 09:01 AM
Analysis: Broncos would have to tackle more work if they switch back to the 4-3 defense
By Jeff Legwold
The Denver Post
Posted: 01/05/2011 01:00:00 AM MST

What the Broncos do to fix their defense may depend on whether they simply pull off the Band-Aid in one big move.

Scrapping the 3-4 defense and returning to the 4-3 would require a far bigger roster overhaul, especially since the Broncos have almost no defensive linemen who would easily adapt to the 4-3.

A review of game video over the last two seasons and discussions with NFL personnel executives reveal more holes on the Denver roster that will require plenty of attention if the new coaching staff wants to go to the 4-3.

It's one of the biggest decisions facing the new regime. And it's absolutely necessary that the Broncos, who were 4-12 in 2010, begin to rebuild with an aggressive plan on defense.

If they keep the 3-4, they likely will keep Kevin Vickerson, Ryan McBean and Jamal Williams in the defensive line. They aren't considered top-tier players, but the Broncos would have a starting point.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_17009856

I've been hoping we would stick with a 3-4 scheme. I'm not really sure that guys like McBean, Vickerson, and J. Williams give us much of a starting point. They do from the stand point of having played in a 3-4 but that's as far as the starting point goes.

BigDaddyBronco
01-05-2011, 09:37 AM
I think this is one of the issue about drafting Bowers or Fairly. Those guys are better suited for the 4-3 and might be able to make a good switch to a 3-4 DE or maybe OLB in Bowers case. Dareus is a perfect fit for a 3-4 DE as he played that position well in Alabama's defense.

Another big issue about switching back to a 4-3 is Doom is a much better OLB than a DE in the 4-3. His run defense can be protected somewhat in the 3-4, but is a glaring weakness in the 4-3. He would be a pretty expensive situational pass rusher.

TXBRONC
01-05-2011, 09:43 AM
I think this is one of the issue about drafting Bowers or Fairly. Those guys are better suited for the 4-3 and might be able to make a good switch to a 3-4 DE or maybe OLB in Bowers case. Dareus is a perfect fit for a 3-4 DE as he played that position well in Alabama's defense.

Another big issue about switching back to a 4-3 is Doom is a much better OLB than a DE in the 4-3. His run defense can be protected somewhat in the 3-4, but is a glaring weakness in the 4-3. He would be a pretty expensive situational pass rusher.

I admit could be wrong but it seems to me Fairley might have easier time adjusting to a 3-4 defense than Bowers because a 3-4 defensive end is more like playing defensive tackle than have to adjust to a new position altogether.

BigDaddyBronco
01-05-2011, 10:08 AM
I admit could be wrong but it seems to me Fairley might have easier time adjusting to a 3-4 defense than Bowers because a 3-4 defensive end is more like playing defensive tackle than have to adjust to a new position altogether.
No I think you are right, my only point is that Dareus is already there and is a beast. If we could trade down a few spots and get him and an extra 2nd rounder, it would make sense IMO. It's not like Fairley is a Suh-type talent.

TXBRONC
01-05-2011, 10:19 AM
No I think you are right, my only point is that Dareus is already there and is a beast. If we could trade down a few spots and get him and an extra 2nd rounder, it would make sense IMO. It's not like Fairley is a Suh-type talent.

No I wasn't challenging at all I just throwing that out there for the halibut.

Nomad
01-05-2011, 10:22 AM
No I wasn't challenging at all I just throwing that out there for the halibut.

I'll be fishing for halibut this summer!!:happy:

TXBRONC
01-05-2011, 10:42 AM
I'll be fishing for halibut this summer!!:happy:

Sounds fun, what kind of bait do you use when fishing for halibut?

BigDaddyBronco
01-05-2011, 10:42 AM
I'll be fishing for halibut this summer!!:happy:

That is some good eating!

Nomad
01-05-2011, 10:50 AM
Sounds fun, what kind of bait do you use when fishing for halibut?

No clue...never been!! You guys will have to come up and find out!!

Juriga72
01-05-2011, 10:53 AM
WHO cares.... We had statistically one of the worst ever defenses and yet people are saying...
"We cant change it!!!!!"

SR
01-05-2011, 11:00 AM
That article couldn't have been written at a better time. There is about 20 active threads on BC that are about Denver switching back to the 4-3 and I've been saying Denver doesn't have the people for it right now. Thank you, Denver Post, for proving my point.

Ravage!!!
01-05-2011, 11:02 AM
'm not convinced Williams would even stick around on the next roster, and surprised he hasn't retired.

I'm not sure I agree with the article, and the only reason I say that is because its MUCH easier to find players to fill the 43 role than the 34. So the three mediocre players they listed could EASILY be replaced with a 100 other guys that could play the 43, imo.

I personally don't have anything against the 43, at all. I don't think the 34 is a superior defense, and honestly feel that building a defense that is easier to build is the way to go. I don't have any objection at all to the 34, and if the new coaching staff comes in and wants to keep it, I'm good with that also.

TXBRONC
01-05-2011, 11:07 AM
'm not convinced Williams would even stick around on the next roster, and surprised he hasn't retired.

I'm not sure I agree with the article, and the only reason I say that is because its MUCH easier to find players to fill the 43 role than the 34. So the three mediocre players they listed could EASILY be replaced with a 100 other guys that could play the 43, imo.

I personally don't have anything against the 43, at all. I don't think the 34 is a superior defense, and honestly feel that building a defense that is easier to build is the way to go. I don't have any objection at all to the 34, and if the new coaching staff comes in and wants to keep it, I'm good with that also.

I heard it's the other way around, that is easier to find players to fit a 3-4 than it to find players for 4-3 and less expensive to build.

slim
01-05-2011, 11:11 AM
3-3-5...it is the future.

Ravage!!!
01-05-2011, 11:12 AM
I heard it's the other way around, that is easier to find players to fit a 3-4 than it to find players for 4-3 and less expensive to build.

Really? Is that because more teams in the NFL are using the 43?

SR
01-05-2011, 11:14 AM
Four out of the five top defenses this year were 3-4. It's a damn good thing when you have the people for it. The 4-3 is better suited for run-happy teams because you've got another body on the line. However, this NFL gets more pass happy every year. Look at stats for QBs in the 80s compared to the 2000s. In the 80s, they had like 10 QBs in the whole decade throw for 4k yards. Last year there were, without checking, six that did it. The 3-4 is better against passing teams, which are becoming more abundant every year.

SR
01-05-2011, 11:15 AM
Really? Is that because more teams in the NFL are using the 43?

More teams are, but the best defenses aren't. Quality vs quantity hombre.

OrangeHoof
01-05-2011, 11:34 AM
I'd like the Broncos to tackle more...period. That would be a good start.

Lancane
01-05-2011, 02:15 PM
Four out of the five top defenses this year were 3-4. It's a damn good thing when you have the people for it. The 4-3 is better suited for run-happy teams because you've got another body on the line. However, this NFL gets more pass happy every year. Look at stats for QBs in the 80s compared to the 2000s. In the 80s, they had like 10 QBs in the whole decade throw for 4k yards. Last year there were, without checking, six that did it. The 3-4 is better against passing teams, which are becoming more abundant every year.

That can misconceptive though Red, the better question is how many 3-4 defense are actually going to see the post-season? Six of them are running the 4-3 as their base defense and six are running the 3-4 as their base defense. And only six of the top ten defenses actually made it to the playoffs, and only eight of the top fifteen defenses actually made the post-season. At the same time only eight of the top fifteen offenses made the post season either, if anything that proves that balance is still the key component to winning in this league, not defensive strength or offensive strength. Hell, the number one offensive and defensive units didn't even make the playoffs, even though they were the same team...Chargers (Ehemmmm).

It's easier to field a 4-3 defense, but that doesn't make it the best, the problem is the nose tackle position, it is literally the most important position when utilizing the 3-4, this year there are three maybe four solid nose tackle prospects in the draft, few can be found in the league via free agency, so it can be difficult to field a solid unit. Problem is that Denver hasn't drafted smart the last two years in regards to the defense, Ayers is a true 4-3 defensive end, Matthews would have been a better pick. I love Tebow, but we could have used a solid nose tackle and would have had this year to fill the quarterback position. There is a lot of work to do and little time do it.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-05-2011, 02:26 PM
I think the article is complete horseshit because we did switch back to a predominantly 4-3 alignment after Ayers broke his foot and our defense was actually better during that time.

This guy hasn't really done his homework. Other than J Wall, McBean, and Fields, every other guy on the front 7 has played in a 4-3 before the Broncos. Doom was a DE here and in college (and got the majority of his sacks last year rushing from the 3 point stance - not standing up), Ayers a DE in college, Hunter a DE, Vickerson a DT, Thomas a DT, Bannan a DT in Baltimore, Haggan both LB and DE, DJ - every LB position, Woodyard at WLB, Mays a MLB...

Who's left? We're actually better suited to run a real 4-3 than we are to run this pseudo/bastardized 3-4 that we run with DEs with no stand-up experience playing OLB.

This article sucks and is baseless.

Lancane
01-05-2011, 02:51 PM
I think the article is complete horseshit because we did switch back to a predominantly 4-3 alignment after Ayers broke his foot and our defense was actually better during that time.

This guy hasn't really done his homework. Other than J Wall, McBean, and Fields, every other guy on the front 7 has played in a 4-3 before the Broncos. Doom was a DE here and in college (and got the majority of his sacks last year rushing from the 3 point stance - not standing up), Ayers a DE in college, Hunter a DE, Vickerson a DT, Thomas a DT, Bannan a DT in Baltimore, Haggan both LB and DE, DJ - every LB position, Woodyard at WLB, Mays a MLB...

Who's left? We're actually better suited to run a real 4-3 than we are to run this pseudo/bastardized 3-4 that we run with DEs with no stand-up experience playing OLB.

This article sucks and is baseless.

Dumervil did play in a 4-3 in college and in the 4-3 under Shanahan, but he's now 246lbs. soaking wet, a little small for the position, so I would see what he could do in different looks at the linebacker positions, maybe as a blitz specialist on the edge next to a defensive end. Ayers, Hunter and Haggan are all better suited to be 4-3 defensive ends, Haggan is 265lbs. now, Ayers is still ideal weight and size and so is Hunter, so we would need to add an end somewhere or two. Veikune is 257lbs. and has decent height, we could possibly move him to defensive end and see what he could do as well.

We will need to add linebacker help, with Mays, Williams, Dumervil and Woodyard the only ones of ideal size to play the positions, we would have to focus on adding some depth and maybe a starter, I think Mays would be solid inside at the mike position, have Williams in the sam spot and use Woodyard in the will position. The question is Dumervil, I think he'd be a great mike linebacker, but his rushing ability is too good to let waste, so moving him into different blitz packages from will to sam would probably be best.

It will not do much to our cover package, except that we need to get the defensive backs to be more cover orientated without relying on defenders to pressure the quarterback. We also need an upgrade at safety, but we've needed that for some time now.

I don't think it would be hard to go 4-3 as nearly as much as getting a good 3-4 into place, we still lack talent to piece together a good 3-4 unit as much if not more then the 4-3, so I have to agree that the article is opinionative and utter horseshit.

Juriga72
01-05-2011, 03:31 PM
More teams are, but the best defenses aren't. Quality vs quantity hombre.

Uh..... Lets give the right credit.....

The VERY good defensive teams have VERY good defensive coaching.... No matter who is on your team, if you have crappy coaching you are going to suck.