Broncos may stay witht the 3-4

[PAINTERDAVE]

Broncos Staying 3-4 ?
Denver Broncos head coach John Fox said he is not set on changing the team to a 4-3 defense alignment because if would mean more personnel changes to the defense, reports CBSSports.com. "That is something that will be fluid going forward .... Right now, we are just going to be looking to upgrade the talent level," Fox said.



Read more: http://www.kffl.com/team/15/nfl#ixzz1CA0l3iVp

[dogfish]

man, i love hearing that soooooo much. . .


:drool:


it just makes almost flawless sense to me. . . if the labor situation isn't resolved ASAP we very well not have OTAs or any kind of mini-camps this year-- there have been reports that even training camp could be shortened down to as little as two weeks. . .

how the **** are you supposed to install a completely new defense-- with a base front change, no less-- in just a few weeks of camp?

the best, most consistent defenses in the league are 3-4 or hybrid-- we should follow that model. . . apologies to people who don't want to be considered "trendy," but this is pro ****in' football, not a fashion show. . . like it or not it's legitimately referred to as a copycat league-- and while we've got a chance to set the base for our D for years to come, why the hell would you not follow the best model?

besides which, this year's draft is the perfect storm for us-- we have value all over the place with three picks in the top fifty, plus several potential trading chips if the CBA is resolved before the draft. . . add in a draft class with unprecedented depth of quality 30 front line prospects-- then toss in an epically deep free agent class in a year where we'll be flush with space even if a salary cap returns, and we will literally NEVER have a better opportunity to set a foundation for a new defensive identity. . .

i desperately want us to seize that opportunity with both hands, not fritter it away. . . build us a nasty 30 base with some versatile guys that give us a chance to play more hybrid after we spend a few years getting the base down. . .

let's build a physical team that doesn't get pushed around for once, FFS!

[PAINTERDAVE]

And let's keep the DC for 5 years and STOP the merry go round of D C's coming and going.

Consistancy.

[dogfish]

And let's keep the DC for 5 years and STOP the merry go round of D C's coming and going.

Consistancy.

dave, let's talk to T about getting a petition going. . . look at the orange jersey thing, dude gets stuff done. . .


let's DO THIS!



:defense: :elefant: :drinking:

[DenBronx]

Hiring and firing year after year will get you no where.

I'd like to see us stick with the 3-4 and like Fox said "Upgrade the talent level" This will make a world of differance!

Hopefully, they take signing free agents serious this year. We never seem to open up the pocket to sign playmakers.

[gobroncsnv]

Lack of talent has been our biggest problem of late.

[SOCALORADO.]

I like the hybrid idea.
And i like staying at a 3-4, not that it matters that much, but i see why Fox would do that.

[hotcarl]

or not!! i guess we will wait and see! thanks for the thread!!!

[dogfish]

And i like staying at a 3-4, not that it matters that much, but i see why Fox would do that.

no, it matters-- this is important. . . . rally!

[SOCALORADO.]

no, it matters-- this is important. . . . rally!

DENs defense is so bad that i dont think it matters which way they go. Although i do see that simply because the team ran the 3-4 last year and because there will be players from last years team playing this year, that they might stay with it for the sake of familiarity.

[GEM]

When was the last time a Denver Broncos coach really talked De-*******-fense?

:rockon: Haaaaaaappy, happy, Jooooooy, joy!!!! :dance:

[PAINTERDAVE]

DENs defense is so bad that i dont think it matters which way they go. Although i do see that simply because the team ran the 3-4 last year and because there will be players from last years team playing this year, that they might stay with it for the sake of familiarity.

We've been in the 3-4 since Nolan....

Doom had that monster year in the 3-4 under Nolan...

I just want to see them be smart and do what is gonna work...

tailor the system around the talent we do have...
instead of install a new system and then adjust our talent to that.

[Ravage!!!]

The 34 isn't better than the 43, and I'm not convinced we have the personnel to run a 34. LIke someone else said, I get why he said it, but lets see how things develop from here. We are so bad, that no matter what direction we go, its 'rebuilding' the defense. I don't thin the 34 is the end-all that many around here believe it to be, just seems to be the popular one today.

Doesn't matter to me what alignment we choose, as long as we get the playesr to fit the role and the mold. I don't think it will be that big of a transition to go to the 43 if thats the direction that the draft and FA fits

[Lonestar]

Lack of talent has been our biggest problem of late.

We have not had talent on the DL (more than one at a Time) since the super bowl years.

That is unless you count the browncos. Which I do not.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[WARHORSE]

The 34 isn't better than the 43, and I'm not convinced we have the personnel to run a 34. LIke someone else said, I get why he said it, but lets see how things develop from here. We are so bad, that no matter what direction we go, its 'rebuilding' the defense. I don't thin the 34 is the end-all that many around here believe it to be, just seems to be the popular one today.

Doesn't matter to me what alignment we choose, as long as we get the playesr to fit the role and the mold. I don't think it will be that big of a transition to go to the 43 if thats the direction that the draft and FA fits


I would have to say that being flexible is the best, but if getting consistently good means picking one, Id have to take the 34 for us.

A good 43 means you need four very good DLs. We do not have that, nor will we have that after the draft. On top of that, four very good DLs will have to get paid.


The 34 has no names, and can be consistently good. Just take a look at Pittsburg everyone. The three DLs are not these high paid players that suck money out of your team.

Pittsburg has it right in saying learn the defense well, you play well. Get players that fit your scheme.

Since Doom has proven his worth in the 34, AND with the CBA in flux, Id say it would be smart to stick with that.

Problem is, who on the roster has 34 experience as far as coaches go?


The 34 gives us flexibility in the draft too. If we go 43, we almost have to take a Bowers/Quinn/Fairley.

In the 34, we can move down and still get players to make a big difference this year.

[dogfish]

Problem is, who on the roster has 34 experience as far as coaches go?




our defensive coordinator does-- he was on wade's staff for two years in ATL. . . and DL coach wayne nunnely has been a 34 coach for years. . .

[bcbronc]

I just want a top 10 defence in the league. Whether that means 34 or 43 I could care less. I do think dog is overstating the effectiveness of the a 30 front compared to the 40, although I agree that the top D's today are 34. But imo that's more because of brilliant coordinators than how they structure their front 7.

I do love the versatility of the 34 but unless we're going to find a NT somewhere, it won't matter. There are some potential NTs we can get in the 2nd or 3rd, but expecting them to come in and anchor our D as a rook is asking a bit much. A 34 without a dominant nose is completely useless and I'm tired of having defenses that are completely useless.

Imo the best plan is to go 43 shortterm with an eye to evolving into a hybrid type.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[Lonestar]

War. You are correct on so many levels.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[BigSarge87]

Why can't we just hire 5-6 Sumo wrestlers from Japan to take turns at NT? Some of those dudes weigh like 500-600 lbs and they practice firing off the line all day!

I keed, I keed!

[TXBRONC]

Why can't we just hire 5-6 Sumo wrestlers from Japan to take turns at NT? Some of those dudes weigh like 500-600 lbs and they practice firing off the line all day!

I keed, I keed!

Even with five or six rotating in and out they would all keel over dead in that thin air. :lol:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[JDL]

I would have to say that being flexible is the best, but if getting consistently good means picking one, Id have to take the 34 for us.

A good 43 means you need four very good DLs. We do not have that, nor will we have that after the draft. On top of that, four very good DLs will have to get paid.


The 34 has no names, and can be consistently good. Just take a look at Pittsburg everyone. The three DLs are not these high paid players that suck money out of your team.

Pittsburg has it right in saying learn the defense well, you play well. Get players that fit your scheme.

Since Doom has proven his worth in the 34, AND with the CBA in flux, Id say it would be smart to stick with that.

Problem is, who on the roster has 34 experience as far as coaches go?


The 34 gives us flexibility in the draft too. If we go 43, we almost have to take a Bowers/Quinn/Fairley.

In the 34, we can move down and still get players to make a big difference this year.

3-4 is incredibly difficult to learn as it means new positions for nearly everyone in the front 7, new responsibilities... our players STILL don't understand them... almost every player at the NFL level has played a 4-3 front since high school... it is the standard most basic starting point for defenses and would be easier to install. Plus, with so many teams having switched as of late to 3-4s the depth of 4-3 players has dramatically improved, particularly in this draft. Our coaches all are 4-3 traditionalists and it makes the most sense to keep it simple and do what the players know and just try to get better players and coach them up... 3-4 just doesn't make sense because we still don't have ANY of the answers for a 3-4 along the DL, and except for maybe Doom, who is scheme versatile, we don't have ANY LBs who are traditional 3-4 type LBs... We're playing Ayers at LB when he is a natural LDE, Williams is a natural WLB, etc. Just doesn't make any sense with our personnel to stay with the 3-4.

[JDL]

Besides, more 4-3 defenses win Super Bowls. Really only Pittsburgh recently... NE won their last Super Bowl running a 3-4 part time, but prior to that their previous wins were strictly 4-3. Baltimore won its Super Bowl as a 4-3 Defense. In fact, for all the teams now running a 3-4, it is STILL rather rare for them to win a Super Bowl doing it.. there is NOTHING wrong with running a 4-3.

[rcsodak]

And let's keep the DC for 5 years and STOP the merry go round of D C's coming and going.

Consistancy.

Who cares!?!

Xanders says they good players can play eithor/or.... :coffee:

[rcsodak]

The 34 isn't better than the 43, and I'm not convinced we have the personnel to run a 34. LIke someone else said, I get why he said it, but lets see how things develop from here. We are so bad, that no matter what direction we go, its 'rebuilding' the defense. I don't thin the 34 is the end-all that many around here believe it to be, just seems to be the popular one today.

Doesn't matter to me what alignment we choose, as long as we get the playesr to fit the role and the mold. I don't think it will be that big of a transition to go to the 43 if thats the direction that the draft and FA fits

Having the 3-4 downlinemen shift 12" in the same direction, and having the OLB put his hand in the dirt ....walaa! 4-3, leaving the other OLB to do whatever.

It's the players!

I imagine Ngati and or Suh could play in each other's schemes just fine. :coffee:

[cuzz4169]

Having the 3-4 downlinemen shift 12" in the same direction, and having the OLB put his hand in the dirt ....walaa! 4-3, leaving the other OLB to do whatever.

It's the players!

I imagine Ngati and or Suh could play in each other's schemes just fine. :coffee:

Sure they did in college....looks like we will be a 4-3 defense with some 3-4.

[WARHORSE]

3-4 is incredibly difficult to learn as it means new positions for nearly everyone in the front 7, new responsibilities... our players STILL don't understand them... almost every player at the NFL level has played a 4-3 front since high school... it is the standard most basic starting point for defenses and would be easier to install. Plus, with so many teams having switched as of late to 3-4s the depth of 4-3 players has dramatically improved, particularly in this draft. Our coaches all are 4-3 traditionalists and it makes the most sense to keep it simple and do what the players know and just try to get better players and coach them up... 3-4 just doesn't make sense because we still don't have ANY of the answers for a 3-4 along the DL, and except for maybe Doom, who is scheme versatile, we don't have ANY LBs who are traditional 3-4 type LBs... We're playing Ayers at LB when he is a natural LDE, Williams is a natural WLB, etc. Just doesn't make any sense with our personnel to stay with the 3-4.

Fox said he would be running both, but Woody said he would be running a predominant 43, having spoken to him.

The Ravens defense that won the superbowl was a 43. It can be a dominant defense. The defenses that end up being good in this league are the ones who learn their defense like the back of their hand. That comes with repetition, whether 34 or 43.

I like the unpredictability of the 34.

Both superbowl teams are in the 34, and take a look at all the teams that won with a 34.

I prefer the 34 because of the things I mentioned, but I would settle for any scheme as long as it was dominant.

[Cugel]

DENs defense is so bad that i dont think it matters which way they go. Although i do see that simply because the team ran the 3-4 last year and because there will be players from last years team playing this year, that they might stay with it for the sake of familiarity.

This is exactly the point! Fox can use any alignment he likes because the Broncos will need to replace at least 1/2 the players on the roster this off-season. And about another 1/3 of them will be gone NEXT off season.


One exceptional NFL talent scout told me that a Super Bowl-potential team requires Pro Bowl-potential players at 15 positions. He said the Broncos have four on defense, three on offense. They're not halfway. (http://www.denverpost.com/paige/ci_17223372)

At the conclusion of The Lost Season, the Broncos had connections to 70 players — 53 on the active roster, eight on the practice squad and nine on injured reserve.

Half won't be allied with the Broncos next season.

THAT is an accurate assessment. The defense was dead last in the league. Was that Wink Martindale's fault? McDaniels? (Well, McDaniels GOT these players so, yes).

Even the Broncos players have openly admitted that Martindale most often had them in the proper alignment to defense a play, but they simply failed to make the play.

In short, it wasn't the SCHEME, the PLAYERS just sucked!

I'm trying to figure out who the FOUR potential pro-bowlers on defense are the personnel director in that story thinks the Broncos have and for the life of me I can't figure it out! :confused:

Champ, Doom & Dawkins are really it, and Dawkins has already seen his last pro-bowl and Champ is likely gone in FA. By my count that leaves ONE potential pro-bowler -- Doom and he's coming off a season lost to injury.

In short, OF COURSE Fox is saying all the right things about "continuity." But watch and see what happens. He can mold this team into any base defense he wants because he's going to have to replace 1/2 the players this year and probably another 1/3 next year just to get the talent level up to average!

Doom and DJ and Champ can play in a 4-3 no problem. Ayers and Haggan and Thomas might actually be useful in a 4-3. The rest simply don't matter.