3-4 or 4-3?

[Agent of Orange]

Poll to follow.

I realize a lot of people will say Doom had his best year in the 3-4. Was that because he was in the 3-4 or was it because he played under a quality defensive coordinator in Nolan? A quality 4-3 defensive coordinator might also get as much out of him. Rushing the passer is what he's good at.

[hotcarl]

when you finish with the defensive ranking we had, i dont think it matters much... just get the most out of the talent we have and draft well

[Agent of Orange]

when you finish with the defensive ranking we had, i dont think it matters much... just get the most out of the talent we have and draft well

I agree.

[The Experience]

I think that the 4-3 will bring the best out of our current players. Ayers played 4-3 DE in college. Woodyard was also a beast in the 4-3.

[Ravage!!!]

I don't think we have what it takes to make a strong 34, and believe the top prospects in the draft are better suited for the 43. I also believe its easier to build a 43.

[broncofaninfla]

I want to stay at 3/4 and add some talent. As for Doom, Doom is best at OLB in a 3/4, he also has WAY more value at OLB than a DE in a 4/3. If Denver makes the change to 4/3 then I would advocate for Doom being traded for a high pick or equal value vet at a position of need.

[Agent of Orange]

I want to stay at 3/4 and add some talent. As for Doom, Doom is best at OLB in a 3/4, he also has WAY more value at OLB than a DE in a 4/3. If Denver makes the change to 4/3 then I would advocate for Doom being traded for a high pick or equal value vet at a position of need.

I dont see a reason to trade Doom in either case. In the 3-4 he's not especially great at pass coverage. But, in the 4-3 he's not exactly stout against the run. The two kind of offset each other, save the times when they run at Doom in the 3-4. Doom's asset is a tremendous one to have. In the NFL, because they've made it so hard to play pass defense, it's all about getting pressure and stopping the run. Doom is one of the few elite pass rushers in the NFL, which is too important of a commodity to trade. His strength is so valuable, it far exceeds his weaknesses.

[hotcarl]

I dont see a reason to trade Doom in either case. In the 3-4 he's not especially great at pass coverage. But, in the 4-3 he's not exactly stout against the run. The two kind of offset each other, save the times when they run at Doom in the 3-4. Doom's asset is a tremendous one to have. In the NFL, because they've made it so hard to play pass defense, it's all about getting pressure and stopping the run. Doom is one of the few elite pass rushers in the NFL, which is too important of a commodity to trade. His strength is so valuable, it far exceeds his weaknesses.

i agree, he will get his sacks no matter what or create other opportunities because he is one of very few players we have that cause matchup problems for OCs

[Montana Battlin Bear]

I would like them to go to 4-3.
1. Doom can also play a very good pass rusher in a 4-3
2. DJ is a much better fit as a WLB
3. This draft has a lot more prospects that fit with a 4-3 than a 3-4 Including Fairley and
Bowers.
4. Woodyard can play at a much higher rate as a 4-3 OLB.
5. It's Fox's system, why not run the system that he had the most success with.

[dogfish]

the truly dominant, elite defenses in this league are 3-4s. . . that's who i want to try to be-- not the eagles who get pushed around when it counts. . .

[Ravage!!!]

Just as many teams have one using the 43 as the 34. The 34 isn't any better than the 43. It alllll comes down to personnel.

[SpringsBroncoFan]

It's got to be what Fox & the DC want to go with and stick with, whatever that is...

The biggest factor has to be whether or not they feel they can get what it takes at NT, if not... then we should go back to the 4-3 if that's what they feel they can build on...

With 13 teams all looking for the best NT's, which are short in supply, I'd have no problem going back...

I'd be perfectly happy with Dareus or Fairley anchoring our DLine, Doom providing our pass rush at DE and getting a run stuffing MLB to let DJ make plays on either side of the defense...

[bcbronc]

where's the 3-3+Doom option?

[Northman]

Poll to follow.

I realize a lot of people will say Doom had his best year in the 3-4. Was that because he was in the 3-4 or was it because he played under a quality defensive coordinator in Nolan? A quality 4-3 defensive coordinator might also get as much out of him. Rushing the passer is what he's good at.

Agreed. Hard to say how he will do with a real cordinator in a 4-3. But even then as some have pointed out most of his sacks in the 3-4 came when he was in a 3 point stance so i do think Nolan was a big part of that. But if they hire another chump for DC or stick with Martindale who sucks than his talent will go to waste.

[Broncolingus]

I voted to stay with the 3-4...

...but, only because Clay voted for the other.

[Dzone]

Didnt vote. It doesnt matter. whatever puts our d in the best position to knock the shyt out of the other team. Im so sick of seeing that defense get gashed again and again for big gains. Its disgusting.

[nevcraw]

saw this on the mane posted by GoBroncos84 - thought it was applicable..

What A John Fox Defense Looks Like
by Ted Bartlett


Throughout Fox’s 9 years in Charlotte, though, there was consistently a 40-front orientation, that favored size and power in the front seven, and sound coverage in the back-end. This is what we should expect from the Broncos in 2011 and beyond, and the good news is that a lot of the necessary personnel is in place right now.


read the rest @

http://onemanfootball.com/2011/01/13/what-a-john-fox-defense-looks-like/

[silkamilkamonico]

What organizations do ya'll think have the most physically imposing and toughest defenses in the NFL?

[SmilinAssasSin27]

I'm torn. The "elite" defenses do seem to run the 3-4...Pitt, Bmore, NYJ (although NYJ is arguable) and most of the remaining playoff defense are 3-4 systems. That said, 2 4-3 teams went to the SB last year and I don't really remember 2 3-4 defenses going head to head in the SB recently.

Moreover, you have to KNOW HOW TO RUN a 3-4 and have the right parts. We don't have the parts. Getting this NT thing has proven harder than some thought since we switched over. Our DEs are system-familiar, but also career backups.Our ILBs aren't made for it, but our OLBs seem to be fine.

Then again, our OLBs, can be soild parts of a rotation if we went back to a 4-3. Ayers can be a sound DE. Doom can rush the hell out of the passer...but should be stapled to the bench on obvious run downs. DJ and Woody are better suited for 4-3, and we would likely have to grab another LB at some point. Problem with both systems as it stand in Denver...DT, be it Nose or straight 4-3 DT.

Which leads us to the draft. TOP HEAVY for 4-3 prospects, but after the top 5, it's a 3-4 coaches dream. There are almost a dozen legit 3-4 DE prospects who could be drafted within the first 3-4 rounds. But only 2 NTs.

Picking at #2, it'd be easy to commit to the 4-3. If Carolina takes Fairley, we get Bowers, and vice versa. I prefer vice versa. Both could probably play some in a 3-4, but their talents would be wasted in a system that is ill-fitting. We then still have to address DLine some more, but it'd be a strong start either way.

If we go 3-4, we need to TRY to trade back a few spots at least. Too many options not to. Names like Dareus, Watt, Heyward, Jordan, Crick, Nevis, Fua, Peae, Clayborne, Bailey, Ballard and McPhee are all options we could draft and play at DE. Powe and Taylor are the only 2 NT prospects worht a shot.

All in all, IF we use Doom correctly and IF Carolina avoids Fairley at #1, I think I'm in favor of going back to 4-3.

[silkamilkamonico]

I'm torn. The "elite" defenses do seem to run the 3-4...Pitt, Bmore, NYJ (although NYJ is arguable) and most of the remaining playoff defense are 3-4 systems.

Yep, which is why I want to stay 3-4 and play with the high rollers. I'll take that chance. IMHO There is just so much more room for a high ceiling with a 3-4.



That said, 2 4-3 teams went to the SB last year and I don't really remember 2 3-4 defenses going head to head in the SB recently.

Agreed, although I would argue that both of those defenses are not even close to being consistent higher end elite defenses season after season like Pitt/Balt/NYY/even SD.

We can be successful with either or, but IMHO trying to work in a mold of a 3-4 defensive scheme is going give us better defenses year after year if we can pull it off.

Chicago has a great 4-3 defense, and last year they were absolutely horrible. When was the last time Pittsburgh/Baltimore/Ryan Jets etc... were horrible?

[Dean]

3-4. . . 4-3. . . a chameleon defense, I hope we play whatever we have the player talent to play well in. :coffee:

[bcbronc]

I voted 43, but it was as much because that's what Fox knows as anything else. that and I agree that our personal and draft slot are better suited to becoming a solid 43 quicker than a 34.

but end of the day all I really care about is that we have a tough defense that brings it every down and gets to the QB. 34/43, just punch someone in the mouth.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

01-15-2011 11:03 PM

markschlereth: @amirhaider Denver personnel is better suited for a 4-3. They don't have the Nose or the Backers for a 3-4

http://twitter.com/markschlereth/statuses/26489758834229249

[tomjonesrocks]

I'd say stick with the 3-4--again, Doom was dominant in a 3-4. Just draft accordingly and stick to the plan.

[Joel]

Just as many teams have one using the 43 as the 34. The 34 isn't any better than the 43. It alllll comes down to personnel.
Define "win". The 4-3 Colts have more regular season wins than any team this decade--and are 1-1 in Super Bowls. On the other hand, 50% more 3-4 teams have won a SB in the same span, and FIVE of those are by just two teams! And I bet 90% of this sites members are betting on one of them to win another this year; unless the Jets can win at Pitt twice in the same season, after tomorrow it'll be CERTAIN one of them's going.

I agree we don't have the personnel to play a 3-4 well--yet.... Of course, we don't really have the personnel to play a 4-3 either, and while it may be true Doom's not much better at pass coverage than he is as a run stuffing DE, 1) as a 3-4 OLB the pass rush and open field tackles are his primary duties, 2) when he does cover it'll mostly be short against backs and receivers who are slower than wide outs and 3) most importantly, as an OLB with mediocre coverage skills he can play every down, but as a blitzing DE he'll only be in for 30-40% of our plays (we'll still PAY him like an every down player though, which will make it that much harder to pay a star MLB).

That's just one example; the bottom line is, without ten quality guys to start and sub in EITHER D we have to acquire them. If this were still the NFL that ran up the gut until it could zing a long fly pattern for a TD I'd say build a 4-3 and crunch those backs with four huge own linemen while your LBs clean up and your MLB head hunts. It's not. This League is increasigly about short passes to many receivers, EXPECTS teams to have one excellent CB on an island while the other is good enough to handle his man most of the time if he has safety help deep, so it wins with backs in the flat and TEs over the middle. The seventh man in a 3-4 has better athleticism and training to provide that coverage, and lines up in a better position to do it. The screen pass was invented to negate blitzes, but the best 3-4s give it trouble, not because a smaller guy farther from the ball makes it blitz even faster, but because half the time the best guy in the front seven LINES UP halfway to where the play is going.

It's not just "blitz till buckle'", guys. That's how bad teams beat other bad teams, and good teams can get wildcards against mediocre competition like that, but it won't win SBs. More and more teams are going 3-4, and not just to fit in with the cool kids. It's because they see how well it works against short passes, turns those short safe West Coast out patterns into pick sixes even when the rotating blitzers don't confuse the offensive line into giving up a sack, how often a back catches a flat pass and gets upended for a 2 yard gain instead of running over a safety for a first down, how often a TE meant to outrun a DE or run over a DB drops the ball when he smacks into a guy as big AND fast as him. That's how modern NFL defenses win, and as more of them bite the bullet and spend a few years taking their lumps to turn 4-3s into 3-4s the OLBs and NTs needed will only become less plentiful. We don't have them? We've got the #2 overall pick, two more in the top 50 and two more in the top 100: GO GET THEM! While we can; they're not going to be any more plentiful if we struggle our way to 7-9 and go back to wondering how many dozen picks we'll have to trade away to get one in the top ten this year, if only because there will be more 3-4 teams looking for the same players.

01-15-2011 11:03 PM

markschlereth: @amirhaider Denver personnel is better suited for a 4-3. They don't have the Nose or the Backers for a 3-4
And they don't have the Mike or the Ends for a 4-3; point...?

[sneakers]

Doesn't matter either way because our defense will still suck.

[cuzz4169]

uhh you don't win just bc you play a 3-4 or 4-3 its personnel and game planning. you guys kill me with this debate.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

Baltimore is NOT a true 3-4 defense... Everyone thinks they are because they sometimes only rush three and sometimes run a hybrid, but in their true base form, they typically play Suggs as a hand in the dirt DE, not at OLB. Typically, their front four is Suggs, Ngata, Gregg, and Cory Redding.

Sometimes, they stand Suggs up to give an OLB look, but he's really just a DE standing up. They do list them as a 3-4 on their depth chart, but if you watch the Ravens regularly, they usually line up in a 4 man front. Often times on passing downs they go more to a 3-3-5 nickle and blitz one or two of the "LBs" who usually includes Suggs.

Personally, I don't care what defense we decide to run, but after seeing our 3-4 defense unable to stop the run, unable to rush the passer without Doom, and rank 32nd in the league in scoring because we don't have the right talent or coach to run it effectively, I'm just as happy to go back to a 4-3 look if it will get us our of the damned basement on defense.

Seriously, would anybody bitch if we had a 4-3 front and could play it like the Giants or Vikings? Folks are acting like all the "elite" defenses play the 3-4, and while that's true this year - of the playoff teams, it's mostly due to Pittsburgh and Green Bay who took the time to hire two of the best 3-4 guys out there and have actually gotten the players required over the years to run it properly. Currently, we have neither. Neither team in the Superbowl last year was a 3-4 team and only 1 of the final 4 was.

I just want to go with something that works and looking at our current roster, I don't think we're anywhere close to having an effective 3-4 personnel set here. The last season proved it. We'd need a complete overhaul. I'll let an expert on defense like John Fox tell us what we're playing, thanks.

[Agent of Orange]

I always love the people who tailor analysis around what others are doing when there is one very important consideration, which is, what makes sense to us. If it makes more sense to us to play a 4-3, we should play a 4-3. If it makes more sense to play a 3-4, we should play a 3-4. And it doesnt really have to do with what Pittsburgh or New England is doing. Unless someone can prove that you can't play good defense in the 4-3, all of this keeping up with the Joneses that are playing 3-4 is kind of pointless.

Here are the past 10 SB winners:

2000- Baltimore 4-3
2001- New England 3-4
2002- Tampa Bay 4-3
2003- New England 3-4
2004- New England 3-4
2005- Pittsburgh 3-4
2006- Indianapolis 4-3
2007- NY Giants 4-3
2008- Pittsburgh 3-4
2009- New Orleans 4-3

As you can see, 4-3s have won half the SBs. The best defense during that time by far was the 2000 Ravens (a 4-3 team). The second best was probably Tampa.

[nh_bronco]

but I'd take any defense that ranks from the 17th or better in NFL rankings...gives Broncos a chance to win more games. Next few days as staff hirings shake out will give us clues as to where HC Fox is thinking. It is interesting that all the staff news has been on the offensive side ( the better part of the 2010 Broncos).

[atwater27]

Baltimore is NOT a true 3-4 defense... Everyone thinks they are because they sometimes only rush three and sometimes run a hybrid, but in their true base form, they typically play Suggs as a hand in the dirt DE, not at OLB. Typically, their front four is Suggs, Ngata, Gregg, and Cory Redding.

Sometimes, they stand Suggs up to give an OLB look, but he's really just a DE standing up. They do list them as a 3-4 on their depth chart, but if you watch the Ravens regularly, they usually line up in a 4 man front. Often times on passing downs they go more to a 3-3-5 nickle and blitz one or two of the "LBs" who usually includes Suggs.

Personally, I don't care what defense we decide to run, but after seeing our 3-4 defense unable to stop the run, unable to rush the passer without Doom, and rank 32nd in the league in scoring because we don't have the right talent or coach to run it effectively, I'm just as happy to go back to a 4-3 look if it will get us our of the damned basement on defense.

Seriously, would anybody bitch if we had a 4-3 front and could play it like the Giants or Vikings? Folks are acting like all the "elite" defenses play the 3-4, and while that's true this year - of the playoff teams, it's mostly due to Pittsburgh and Green Bay who took the time to hire two of the best 3-4 guys out there and have actually gotten the players required over the years to run it properly. Currently, we have neither. Neither team in the Superbowl last year was a 3-4 team and only 1 of the final 4 was.

I just want to go with something that works and looking at our current roster, I don't think we're anywhere close to having an effective 3-4 personnel set here. The last season proved it. We'd need a complete overhaul. I'll let an expert on defense like John Fox tell us what we're playing, thanks.

Yeah. Suggs is really amazing in that he can play just as well at OLB as DE. We had a guy that could play just about every position on defense (except for CB or FS) Name was Mecklenburg.

[atwater27]

I don't think it matters 4-3 0r 3-4 as long as you have the right coaching and personell. I used to think since good DT's were so hard to find in a 4-3, that a 3-4 would be smarter. But then I realized that finding a decent D-lineman at ALL 3 positions of the 3-4 is harder to find. Sure you can find some fatass mountains of meat at DT, but that never works unless they are actually conditioned, tough, and skilled. How hard is it to have a hybrid system? Thats' what Baltimore uses. But again, they also have the personell.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

I don't think it matters 4-3 0r 3-4 as long as you have the right coaching and personell. I used to think since good DT's were so hard to find in a 4-3, that a 3-4 would be smarter. But then I realized that finding a decent D-lineman at ALL 3 positions of the 3-4 is harder to find. Sure you can find some fatass mountains of meat at DT, but that never works unless they are actually conditioned, tough, and skilled. How hard is it to have a hybrid system? Thats' what Baltimore uses. But again, they also have the personell.

Yep. I honestly think the 3-4 in the best defense to run if you have the personnel and coaching staff for it. But... I also think it's the WORST defense to run if you don't (like we did last year) We were absolutely EXPOSED running a 3-4 front with DL and LBs that really weren't suited for it along with a DC that had no damned idea what he was doing out there.

32nd in the league is 32nd in the league. Wink should never work anywhere near Denver, again.

If I can't have a Jets/Pittsburgh 3-4, then I'd rather strive to achive a Giants/Vikings/Bears 4-3 because if you fall short, it's a lot shorter distance to fall.

[BroncoStud]

I don't care if Denver runs the 5-2 as long as it works. Our defense has been an embarrassment for YEARS. First and most importantly, BRING IN TALENT.

[Poet]

Steelers - 3-4 defense. - Locked into AFCCG

Jets - 3-4 defense. - Playing to get into AFCCG

Patriots - 3-4 defense. - Playing to get into AFCCG

Packers -3-4 defense. - locked into NFCCG

Bears - 4-3 defense. - Locked into NFCCG

My dumbass clicked on the 4-3 option because I r stewpid.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

Steelers - 3-4 defense. - Locked into AFCCG

Jets - 3-4 defense. - Playing to get into AFCCG

Patriots - 3-4 defense. - Playing to get into AFCCG

Packers -3-4 defense. - locked into NFCCG

Bears - 4-3 defense. - Locked into NFCCG

My dumbass clicked on the 4-3 option because I r stewpid.

Throw that list up for the playoff teams from last year...

The 4-3 is just as effective if you run it correctly. Two of the teams listed above (NE & GB) are more where they are because of their offenses (QBs) than their defenses. Pittburgh and probably the NYJ would probably be playoff teams no matter who their QBs are. GB and NE? No f'n way.

[Poet]

Throw that list up for the playoff teams from last year...

The 4-3 is just as effective if you run it correctly. Two of the teams listed above (NE & GB) are more where they are because of their offenses (QBs) than their defenses. Pittburgh and probably the NYJ would probably be playoff teams no matter who their QBs are. GB and NE? No f'n way.

The Packers actually have a very good defense if you look at their stats.

The Patriots don't give up a lot of points and aren't that bad on the ground either.

Also, when you look at the teams who won the SB in the last decade that were slanted to the defensive side of the ball, the 3-4 almost doubles them.

Yes, the Saints, Colts and Rams won the SB, but their defenses were put on the back burner and only the Rams had a decent defense. The Giants and the Bucs were 4-3 teams that won the SB who were great defenes.

The Ravens, who admittedly had the best defense maybe ever, were 4-3. Jesus they were soul crushing.

[EMB6903]

I hope Denver takes that 4-3 Tampa 2 approach.

Fairley reminds me of Tommie Harris a lot.I Think he'd fit best in a 4-3 front along with Bowers.

[bcbronc]

Throw that list up for the playoff teams from last year...

The 4-3 is just as effective if you run it correctly. Two of the teams listed above (NE & GB) are more where they are because of their offenses (QBs) than their defenses. Pittburgh and probably the NYJ would probably be playoff teams no matter who their QBs are. GB and NE? No f'n way.

look at NYG, arguably the last "defense" to win the Superbowl, they ran a 43. Look at the past winners since our B2B:

New Orleans - won with offense. Franchise QB.

Pitt x2 - 34, but good balance on both sides, especially for second SB. Franchise QB.

NYG - won with 43 pass rush.

Indy - won with offense. Franchise QB.

NE x3 - 34 and defense huge part. But offense no slouch. Franchise QB.

TB - won with 43 defense. All time great D.

Balt - won with 43 defense. All time great D.

StL - won with offense. Franchise QB.

So basically, all Superbowl teams in the past 11 years that have won the Superbowl have had either a franchise QB, an all time great D, or both (NYG sort of an exception, but their defense was still dominant that year, but not "all time great" level).

like has been said a few times now, it's more about personal and game plan than defensive front. and unless we can find a NT in a hurry, we don't have the personal for a 34, so imo stick with what Fox knows.

[BroncoStud]

The 3-4 is the flavor of the week right now in the NFL. Plenty of teams have won in the postseason with the 4-3 and plenty more will.

Personally I would like to see us go back to the 4-3 but I agree with Fox, it's not really important which system you run as long as you run it well.

[Poet]

The 3-4 is the flavor of the week right now in the NFL. Plenty of teams have won in the postseason with the 4-3 and plenty more will.

Personally I would like to see us go back to the 4-3 but I agree with Fox, it's not really important which system you run as long as you run it well.

How can you call it the 'flavor' when Pittsburgh has been KILLING offenses with it?

It was the right defense then and it's the right defense now - only recently have teams gone to it in numbers.

Look at how the game is played right now. 4-3 teams are basically either holding an elite corner that can thrive in the rule set now (read there's like ten corners good enough to do this) or they spend their Sundays getting nickle and dimed to death.

[silkamilkamonico]

Steelers - 3-4 defense. - Locked into AFCCG

Jets - 3-4 defense. - Playing to get into AFCCG

Patriots - 3-4 defense. - Playing to get into AFCCG

Packers -3-4 defense. - locked into NFCCG

Bears - 4-3 defense. - Locked into NFCCG

My dumbass clicked on the 4-3 option because I r stewpid.

Yep. 3-4 should be the way to go. If you're going to play defense, play some f'n defense.

[EMB6903]

3-4 is the way to go.... if you have an elite NT, which isnt easy to find.

[silkamilkamonico]

3-4 is the way to go.... if you have an elite NT, which isnt easy to find.

I'm not so sure, the Jets looked absolutely stellar today with some guy named Sione Pouha playing NT. I think it's all about execution. Both seasons the Jets best NT in Jenkins has got hurt and placed on IR, and their defense still got better as the year went on.

[spikerman]

If the team moves back to a 4-3 then if Denver can't trade the pick, I wouldn't think Bowers would be the pick. If he is, then either Dumervil or Ayers probably would have to go. No need for three pass rushers when there would be other needs.

[Agent of Orange]

If the team moves back to a 4-3 then if Denver can't trade the pick, I wouldn't think Bowers would be the pick. If he is, then either Dumervil or Ayers probably would have to go. No need for three pass rushers when there would be other needs.

Ayers is a pass rusher?

[spikerman]

Ayers is a pass rusher?

Well, not much of one, but that's what he's been trying to do for two years. I'm assuming that in a 4-3 he would move back to DE.

[dogfish]

If the team moves back to a 4-3 then if Denver can't trade the pick, I wouldn't think Bowers would be the pick. If he is, then either Dumervil or Ayers probably would have to go. No need for three pass rushers when there would be other needs.

as AO pointed out, that's not three NFL pass rushers-- just one. . .

getting bowers would be zero justification for moving doom-- top five picks can still disappear like farts in the wind. . . one-year wonder edge rushers have displayed a particularly vicious tendency to bust over recent years. . . you have a reliable double-digit capable sack artist, you keep the guy-- regardless of pretty much ANY extenuating circumstances that don't involve him being in jail. . .

doesn't matter if he's undersized, has a defined position or not, whether he plays every snap, how much we're paying him, or anything else. . . dude is a kick ass natural pass rusher, one of the best in the league, and the only guy we have who can do it. . . you just don't get rid of him and HOPE a rookie can fill in-- no matter how hyped or talented the rookie. . . what if you just drafted the next gaines adams, jamaal anderson, jarvis moss, ad nauseum?

then you're left with last year's "pass rush"-- and probably the dead last scoring defense that came with it. . . and deservedly so. . .

luckily, i'm pretty sure fox isn't mcdaniels, so whatever he screws up, i feel confident that trading doom won't be on the list. . .

[spikerman]

as AO pointed out, that's not three NFL pass rushers-- just one. . .

getting bowers would be zero justification for moving doom-- top five picks can still disappear like farts in the wind. . . one-year wonder edge rushers have displayed a particularly vicious tendency to bust over recent years. . . you have a reliable double-digit capable sack artist, you keep the guy-- regardless of pretty much ANY extenuating circumstances that don't involve him being in jail. . .

doesn't matter if he's undersized, has a defined position or not, whether he plays every snap, how much we're paying him, or anything else. . . dude is a kick ass natural pass rusher, one of the best in the league, and the only guy we have who can do it. . . you just don't get rid of him and HOPE a rookie can fill in-- no matter how hyped or talented the rookie. . . what if you just drafted the next gaines adams, jamaal anderson, jarvis moss, ad nauseum?

then you're left with last year's "pass rush"-- and probably the dead last scoring defense that came with it. . . and deservedly so. . .

luckily, i'm pretty sure fox isn't mcdaniels, so whatever he screws up, i feel confident that trading doom won't be on the list. . .

I agree with this. I do think one of them would have to go and Dumervil is proven, Ayers is not. Ayers would be my choice to go.

[dogfish]

smart teams stock up on pass rushers, not look to get rid of them. . .

the colts have dwight freeney and roberth mathis, but they spent their first pick this past year on edge rusher jerry hughes. . .

the steelers have the best outside LB pair in the game, james harrison and lamar woodley-- and they spent a second on jason worilds, another rushbacker conversion. . .

the giants have justin tuck, osi umenyiora and mathias kiwanuka, and they still spent their first round pick on pass rusher jason paul-pierre. . .


"You can never have too many good pass rushers."

-Ernie Accorsi

[Dapper Dan]

I choose the 1-2-1-1 Full Court.

[dogfish]

I agree with this. I do think one of them would have to go and Dumervil is proven, Ayers is not. Ayers would be my choice to go.

why would any of them "have to go?"

we gotta have depth, and ayers isn't getting paid a goldmine at a #18 contract. . . there's no rule anywhere that says your depth has to consist of all scrubs. . .

[spikerman]

why would any of them "have to go?"

we gotta have depth, and ayers isn't getting paid a goldmine at a #18 contract. . . there's no rule anywhere that says your depth has to consist of all scrubs. . .

I don't know. I don't think you keep a #18 pick around as a backup and you DEFINITELY don't use a #2 as a backup and Dumervil is proven. I think we saw enough of highly picked DEs riding the bench with Moss. I say move Ayers for picks or another position of need IF Bowers is the pick.

[spikerman]

smart teams stock up on pass rushers, not look to get rid of them. . .

the colts have dwight freeney and roberth mathis, but they spent their first pick this past year on edge rusher jerry hughes. . .

the steelers have the best outside LB pair in the game, james harrison and lamar woodley-- and they spent a second on jason worilds, another rushbacker conversion. . .

the giants have justin tuck, osi umenyiora and mathias kiwanuka, and they still spent their first round pick on pass rusher jason paul-pierre. . .


"You can never have too many good pass rushers."

-Ernie Accorsi

The problem is that right now Denver only has one anyway (Dumervil).

[broncohead]

Nobody knows how ayers will pan out still and doom is only good for rushing the passer. Getting bowers would be a good pick but no need to trade anyone away.

[spikerman]

Meh, it's just a thought. I guess I'm just jaded because I'm VERY unimpressed with Ayers.

[Agent of Orange]

as AO pointed out, that's not three NFL pass rushers-- just one. . .

getting bowers would be zero justification for moving doom-- top five picks can still disappear like farts in the wind. . . one-year wonder edge rushers have displayed a particularly vicious tendency to bust over recent years. . . you have a reliable double-digit capable sack artist, you keep the guy-- regardless of pretty much ANY extenuating circumstances that don't involve him being in jail. . .

doesn't matter if he's undersized, has a defined position or not, whether he plays every snap, how much we're paying him, or anything else. . . dude is a kick ass natural pass rusher, one of the best in the league, and the only guy we have who can do it. . . you just don't get rid of him and HOPE a rookie can fill in-- no matter how hyped or talented the rookie. . . what if you just drafted the next gaines adams, jamaal anderson, jarvis moss, ad nauseum?

then you're left with last year's "pass rush"-- and probably the dead last scoring defense that came with it. . . and deservedly so. . .

luckily, i'm pretty sure fox isn't mcdaniels, so whatever he screws up, i feel confident that trading doom won't be on the list. . .

Yeah, no way can you let Doom go. Its not possible to be more absolute about that,...kind of like you said.

However, Bowers plays LDE. A lot of pass rushers play on the other side in college. If Bowers is worth his salt, having a combination of Doom on the right and Bowers on the left could be absolutely lethal on passing downs. He could be Gaines Adams but he could also be Mario Williams. And for what its worth, I think the guy looks a lot more impressive than Gaines Adams from the standpoint of how he plays. That doesnt mean he'll be more like Williams than Adams though.

I know a lot of people aren't big on Bowers because of the risks you've mentioned but its really easy to talk yourself out of taking practically anyone if you look for the negative hard enough. Barry Sanders was a one year wonder in college.

[rcsodak]

Just as many teams have one using the 43 as the 34. The 34 isn't any better than the 43. It alllll comes down to personnel.
I believe there are more 34's in the AFC than 43's. And 3/4 teams playing this weekend use the 34. The 34 beat rivers/manning/brady/flacco/matty ice/vick....!
The NFL runs in waves, and the 34 is it.
Of course, that also means more teams fighting over the same players in FA and the draft....thusly raising their pay. Denver could have better luck at better/cheaper players, if nothing else, if they change.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[Bosco]

3-4 by a mile. It's a clearly superior defensive set for the current pass happy NFL and the entire football paradigm from every level up to the NFL is shifting to accommodate it.

[broncofaninfla]

Of the four teams left, three play the 3/4.

[spikerman]

I want them to play the defense that Fox is comfortable with.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

Of the four teams left, three play the 3/4.

and in 2009, 3 of the final 4 teams played the 4-3...