PDA

View Full Version : 3-4 Schematics: Who stays, who goes, who struggles?



Requiem / The Dagda
01-12-2009, 11:43 AM
Just thought I'd flip this out there, I've discussed this in a few areas on the board and elsewhere. Who stays? Who goes? Who stays, but struggles? (Example: Will DJ Williams be an effective WILB in this defense, or will he struggle mentally as he has in other adjustments?)

Rex
01-12-2009, 11:44 AM
My guess is Clay struggles.......with life.


But what is new?

Requiem / The Dagda
01-12-2009, 11:51 AM
Well, when he reads "3-4 Schematics" -- he's trying to think of what number comes up after four. Well, it is five -- but since he can't get that high it looks like the contributions he'll give to this thread are minimal. :smile:

Haha, seriously guys. Back on track. C-WEASEL, behave.

Rex
01-12-2009, 11:54 AM
Well, when he reads "3-4 Schematics" -- he's trying to think of what number comes up after four. Well, it is five -- but since he can't get that high it looks like the contributions he'll give to this thread are minimal. :smile:

Haha, seriously guys. Back on track. C-WEASEL, behave.

Clay saw 3-4 in the title of the thread and said "you cant subtract 4 from 3, there aint enuff numbers there"

claymore
01-12-2009, 11:57 AM
Clay saw 3-4 in the title of the thread and said "you cant subtract 4 from 3, there aint enuff numbers there"

Its -1 dipshit. :hi5:

Requiem / The Dagda
01-12-2009, 11:58 AM
I just wonder how Robertson feels about this now. . . hm.

dogfish
01-12-2009, 12:08 PM
if we go 3-4, everybody goes. . . . :wave:

broncofaninfla
01-12-2009, 12:09 PM
D Line- Honestly I'm not sure who can cut it there. Probably best to trade Moss and Doom and use those picks to help build a new line. Kenny Peterson might be a good for depth at DE the rest don't really seem like they fit in the 3/4 scheme. Thomas doesn't seem big enough for DT and not sure if he is skilled enough to play DE.
LB- I think Larsen and DJ would be a solid force in the middle. The odd man out might be one of my favorite players in Woodyard. Trying to remember how he faired when we played the 3/4 this season.
CB- I have been in favor of cutting Bly but in looking at just how many people we'll need at the other postions on defense it might be best to keep him for one more year. I'd try to keep this group intact as much as possible and would expect thier play to improve with an improvement (hopefully) with our pass rush.
S- We'll need at least two new players here regardless of the scheme. Keep Barrett and give WW a chance but bring in some new talent.

Requiem / The Dagda
01-12-2009, 12:13 PM
if we go 3-4, everybody goes. . . . :wave:

No way in Hell.

MOtorboat
01-12-2009, 12:14 PM
No way in Hell.

D.J. will stay.

TXBRONC
01-12-2009, 12:19 PM
D.J, and Champ for sure. I could see us keeping Larsen, Barrett, Jack Williams, Thomas, and Moss and Crowder.

Ziggy
01-12-2009, 12:19 PM
DT- We have no Nose tackle on the roster at the current time that is suited for a 3-4 defense.

DE- Marcus Thomas and Kenny Peterson have the proper size, strength at the point of attack, and quickness to play the end. Ekuban, Engleberger and Crowder can be serviceable backups.


ILB- DJ Williams, Boss Bailey, and Spencer Larsen will do, but an ILB upgrade is still needed.

OLB- The current outside LB's that we have now are either too small or need to be moved inside in a 3-4. (DJ, and Boss) The question here is, can Moss and Doom play the OLB positions? I'm not sure.

S- The safeties currently at the spot should compete with Woodyard, and any free agents, draftees, brought in.

CB- status quo, with a healthy Champ

LRtagger
01-12-2009, 12:19 PM
I actually think Moss and Doom might do better rushing the passer in a 3-4...the question is, can they drop back into coverage?

Not only that but trading those guys for picks? What kind of picks can we get for Moss? I doubt we could even get a 7th for him....Doom might get us a 5th or 6th maybe. Can we replace those two guys with late round picks or would we be better off trying them out at OLB?

We definitely need a NT and probably a 3-4 DE. I think Webster does not get signed here and I thin we draft a linebacker early.

That yields Moss - DJ - Rook - Doom at LB

Bly and Champ start again for us. I dont even think we draft CB this year.

Safety is a must draft. Barrett starts for us...although I think Manuel signed a 3-year deal...i hope he does not see the field ever.

Winborn will probably be a backup. Doubt he gets released.

Who else's contracts are up? Isnt Ekuban's contract up? I doubt we resign him...

Actually, I doubt we resign any of our UFAs to be honest.

I hope we draft a 3-4 OLB to take over for Moss or Doom because it is inevitable that one (if not both) of them will not work out in a 3-4. I'll take Barwin please.

Its hard to say with the front 3. I like to think Thomas can play DE, maybe NT. I dont know if Robertson could hold up as a NT for 2 more years.

I hate to say it, but the defense will probably be pretty bad again next year unless we just hit it out of the park in the draft and our current guys feel more natural in a 3-4. I a really hoping Moss can turn it around as a OLB because if not, I have no hope for him and hope to see him gone after this year. Maybe he will thrive in the 3-4 and wind up being worth the #17 pick.

It's so hard to tell how a team will transition between two completely different defensive philosophies. This isnt like just switching a scheme like we have the past couple of years. This is a complete change in everything.

underrated29
01-12-2009, 12:21 PM
doom will probably be gone, thomas might strait up ask for a release, webster is gone no matter what scheme we use.

TXBRONC
01-12-2009, 12:27 PM
doom will probably be gone, thomas might strait up ask for a release, webster is gone no matter what scheme we use.

I wouldn't be surprised if Thomas is still here when everything is said and done. Webster I agree with you he should be out no matter what.

muse
01-12-2009, 12:27 PM
We're not necessarily moving to the 3-4 as Nolan has run 4-3s as well. I hope we stay in a 4-3 personally, but I guess we'll find out in due course.

MOtorboat
01-12-2009, 12:29 PM
We're not necessarily moving to the 3-4 as Nolan has run 4-3s as well. I hope we stay in a 4-3 personally, but I guess we'll find out in due course.

I saw that tidbit a few minutes ago. Where did he run a 4-3 at?

And, I asked myself this question this weekend...Baltimore was in a 4-3 when it won the Super Bowl, and now its in a 3-4...so when did they make the switch, or am I losing it?

broncofaninfla
01-12-2009, 12:34 PM
In watching how Doom and Moss played the run I'd say neither could cut it at the OLB postion.

muse
01-12-2009, 12:38 PM
I saw that tidbit a few minutes ago. Where did he run a 4-3 at?

And, I asked myself this question this weekend...Baltimore was in a 4-3 when it won the Super Bowl, and now its in a 3-4...so when did they make the switch, or am I losing it?

Balti's a hybrid in any case. They've got the guys to run both whenever they feel like it, the lucky ********.

AFAIK, he changed from the 3-4 he inherited to a 4-3 for the Giants and also used a 4-3 in Washington. It's up to him to decide whether we're closer to a good 4-3 and whether it's worth stripping everything down and rebuilding. IMO, we're relatively close to a passable 4-3 and a long way from a passable 3-4, so I'd stick with a 4-3. But I'm not Mike Nolan. Or am I?

underrated29
01-12-2009, 12:40 PM
sorry guys i meant D-Rob not thomas. Thomas will stay- he is a keeper.

Tned
01-12-2009, 12:46 PM
Assuming we get a nose tackle, then we could go with:

Thomas, Robertson (he could be gone), Ekuban at ends. If we don't get a nose tackle, the Thomas and Robertson would likely rotate at that spot.

Doom could either be used as a pass rushing end, or an OLB in pass rushing situations.

I assume we will pick up either an end or NT in free agency or early in the draft, but assuming we don't, it would go something like:

Ekuban
Robertson
Thomas

Moss
DJ
Boss
Dumervil

TXBRONC
01-12-2009, 12:47 PM
I saw that tidbit a few minutes ago. Where did he run a 4-3 at?

And, I asked myself this question this weekend...Baltimore was in a 4-3 when it won the Super Bowl, and now its in a 3-4...so when did they make the switch, or am I losing it?

Someone wrote down that Nolan has run a 3-4 defense for most of his career.

Requiem / The Dagda
01-12-2009, 12:49 PM
I don't like Boss Bailey in a 3-4 at all, especially on the inside.

dogfish
01-12-2009, 12:55 PM
if we're going to switch to a 3-4, we should target gabe watson and chris canty in free agency-- and preferably karlos dansby as well. . . .

broncofaninfla
01-12-2009, 12:58 PM
Sure would LOVE to draft BJ Raji from Boston College at NT. Put him in at NT and Larsen and DJ at the ILB spots and we have the middle of the field locked down.

CoachChaz
01-12-2009, 01:06 PM
if we're going to switch to a 3-4, we should target gabe watson and chris canty in free agency-- and preferably karlos dansby as well. . . .

I love watching Canty in Dallas. He's a big reason that Ware gets free off the right side so much

TXBRONC
01-12-2009, 01:42 PM
We're not necessarily moving to the 3-4 as Nolan has run 4-3s as well. I hope we stay in a 4-3 personally, but I guess we'll find out in due course.

According to what I have read Nolan has ran 3-4 most of his career.

WARHORSE
01-12-2009, 01:52 PM
Nolan wont necessarily bring the 3-4 here to Denver.

But as it is right now, we could go either way I imagine, and alot of that would depend on who is available in FAgency, as well as the draft. There are a number of good prospects for OLB in the draft, and BJ Raji is a perfect 3-4 NT in the mold of Vince Wilfork.

Can Dumerville stand up? Moss? DJ in the 3-4? More than that, can they THINK?

Curry, Brown Orakpo are all built for the OLB in a 3-4.

TXBRONC
01-12-2009, 01:58 PM
Nolan wont necessarily bring the 3-4 here to Denver.

But as it is right now, we could go either way I imagine, and alot of that would depend on who is available in FAgency, as well as the draft. There are a number of good prospects for OLB in the draft, and BJ Raji is a perfect 3-4 NT in the mold of Vince Wilfork.

Can Dumerville stand up? Moss? DJ in the 3-4? More than that, can they THINK?

Curry, Brown Orakpo are all built for the OLB in a 3-4.

Since Nolan has worked with both a 3-4 base and 4-3 we might not necessarily go with the 3-4. However, the 3-4 is what he hasworked with for the majority of his career.

broncofaninfla
01-12-2009, 02:05 PM
I say that if Nolan prefers the 3/4 then we go with the 3/4. We build a defense around his system and stick with it.

Traveler
01-12-2009, 02:05 PM
Besides looking for obvious improvement on defense, I'll be especially focusing on our 4 young DLineman to see if Burney & Johnson were as bad as some, me included, think they were.

sanluis
01-12-2009, 02:17 PM
if we go 3-4, everybody goes. . . . :wave:

I think almost everyone. I would keep Champ, Doom and move him to OLB and maybe Roberson at DE.

You would need a real nose tackle in the 320-340lb range and another huge DE to eat up blockers so your linebackers can run free. Without a great nose and fast OLBs to bring the pressure you can't run an effective 3-4 .


So go for it! :lol:

Requiem / The Dagda
01-12-2009, 02:17 PM
Orakpo isn't a good 3-4 fit at OLB in my eyes. I'd replace his names with Cushing and Sintim, both of whom would be fantastic in a 3-4. Especially Sintim.

CoachChaz
01-12-2009, 02:31 PM
Orakpo isn't a good 3-4 fit at OLB in my eyes. I'd replace his names with Cushing and Sintim, both of whom would be fantastic in a 3-4. Especially Sintim.

Disagree. From the draft, I would take (in order)...Orakpo...Brown...Johnson...then Sintim.

Requiem / The Dagda
01-12-2009, 02:33 PM
Orakpo is garbage. Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane.

Ziggy
01-12-2009, 02:53 PM
I think Marcus Thomas is a great fit at De in a 3-4. If we do switch to that scheme, Raji has just moved up on my wishlist for the draft. 12 may be a little high for him, but you can't run a good 3-4 D without a stout anchor in the middle of the Dline. Anyone know of any good 3-4 NT's in Fa off the top of thier heads? I'll start some research on that.

dogfish
01-12-2009, 02:58 PM
anybody think we should try to trade dj if we go 3-4?

broncofaninfla
01-12-2009, 03:01 PM
anybody think we should try to trade dj if we go 3-4?

Depends on what we can get for him. A second round or higher, maybe even a high 3rd, heck yeah. I doubt we could get anything in that range though.

MOtorboat
01-12-2009, 03:03 PM
anybody think we should try to trade dj if we go 3-4?

No.

He's the only legitimate NFL linebacker we have.

Medford Bronco
01-12-2009, 05:22 PM
doom will probably be gone, thomas might strait up ask for a release, webster is gone no matter what scheme we use.

Webster should get a card from Tatum Bells former Cell Phone company as there is where he would be effective, he would just have to make sure not to overrun the customers when they come in the door :lol:

Medford Bronco
01-12-2009, 05:23 PM
Isnt Jarvis Moss going to be an OLB in the 3-4 defense where we could utilize his
speed?

TXBRONC
01-12-2009, 05:27 PM
Isnt Jarvis Moss going to be an OLB in the 3-4 defense where we could utilize his
speed?

I suppose its possible, but we'll have to wait and see what Nolan thinks.

shank
01-12-2009, 05:28 PM
jarvis isn't really that fast and runs stiff as hell. i don't see a place for him in a 3-4 to be honest.

Lonestar
01-12-2009, 05:35 PM
jarvis isn't really that fast and runs stiff as hell. i don't see a place for him in a 3-4 to be honest.

if that is the case get the ax out cause he sure as hell has not shown anything on the DL..

just some more mikey cap cuts that need to be absorbed..

SmilinAssasSin27
01-12-2009, 05:48 PM
My Opinion...


Beef up the DLine in 2009 to set up the playmaking LBs we land in 2010.

Sign Canty from Dallas..HUGE necessity. After that, draft Tyson Jackson of LSU and/or Kyle Moore of USC. Either go after Gabe Watson in FA or draft a hog. Marcus Thomas and Peterson can fill out the Dline.

FOR NOW, we can make the LBs work. Among DJ, Larsen, Boss, Elvis, Moss and Crowder, we have enough options to at least field a LB corps. We should also draft a LB, but after day 1 in this draft, the LBs are a bit smallish. I LOVE the So Carolina LB, but he is quite injury prone.

We'll find our crazy talented blitzing LBs in the 2010 draft.

elsid13
01-12-2009, 05:48 PM
I saw that tidbit a few minutes ago. Where did he run a 4-3 at?

And, I asked myself this question this weekend...Baltimore was in a 4-3 when it won the Super Bowl, and now its in a 3-4...so when did they make the switch, or am I losing it?

Baltimore slowly shifted when Nolan followed Lewis as DC. He played a lot of mixed coverage and fronts as they moved over, and Ray Lewis hated it. The Defense the Ravens runs now is a lot more flexible then what Nolan left them with.

topscribe
01-12-2009, 05:50 PM
I stole this from the Freak, who stole it, apparently, from some Raiders fan.
A great basic analysis (thanks Harkov):


This is taken from the site of a Raiders' fan (ugh..sorry). Regardless, the information is pretty decent, though dated. With all the talk of 3-4 personnel, and a possible scheme change with Nolan (allegedly) headed to town, I thought this would be neat to re-post:

Original Link (http://www.geocities.com/epark/raiders/football-101-3-4-defense.html)

With the recent success of AFC playoff teams such as the New England Patriots, the Pittsburgh Steelers, and the San Diego Chargers, the 3-4 D has come back in style. In 2005, 5 NFL teams (the Broncos, Browns, Cowboys, Dolphins, and Niners) may switch to the 3-4 as their base defense, bringing the total to 10 teams (including the Chargers, Patriots, Raiders, Steelers, and Texans) who favor the system. So what is the 3-4 D? This article discusses:


How the 3-4 defense differs from the 4-3 defense
What are the personnel requirements for the 3-4 defense
What are the advantages of the 3-4 defense


How the 3-4 defense differs from the 4-3 defense

The 4-3 D has the following characteristics:


There are 4 defensive lineman (DL) and 3 linebackers (LBs)
On plays where a LB or DB does not blitz, the pass rush is generated by the defensive linemen. The DEs in particular must be able to get pressure on the QB. The best/fastest pass rushing DE typically plays at RDE and is referred to as the "rush end". The LDE is referred to as the "base end" and must be solid against the run, because teams often run strong-side, which is the side where the TE is, and the TE often lines up next to the RT. The DEs play from a 3-point stance, so they have a hand on the ground
The SLB (strong-side LB) matches up against the TE. SLBs typically range from 240-250 and are on the taller side for a LB. The MLB (middle LB) plays the middle of the field and provides run support. MLBs typically range from 240-255, although some teams get away with an undersized MLB (e.g. the Jets' Jonathan Vilma) by protecting him with beefy DTs. The WLB (weak-side LB) often plays in space, has the freedom to flow to the ball, and must have good range. WLBs are often undersized compared to the other LBs.


The 3-4 D has the following characteristics:


There are 3 defensive lineman (DL) and 4 linebackers (LBs)
The primary function of the DL is to protect the LBs and play the run. Each defensive lineman is responsible for 2 gaps
The pass rush is generated by the 3-4 OLBs. On almost every play, 1 of the OLBs will rush the QB. The OLBs play from a 2-point stance, so they're standing up


http://www.geocities.com/epark/raiders/images/3-4-defense.png

What are the personnel requirements for the 3-4 defense

The front 7 players in the 3-4 D are significantly different from their counterparts in the 4-3. In a nutshell, the DL in the 3-4 are bigger than the DL in the 4-3. The 3-4 OLBs are bigger than 4-3 OLBs because they have to match up against OTs.

3-4 NT is the toughest position to fill. The NT is head-up on the OC and is responsible for defending both A gaps in the running game. He faces constant double-teams and takes a pounding. He must have size, mental and physical toughness, stamina, durability, lateral quickness, and good technique in terms of playing with leverage. If the NT can not hold his ground, the defense is very vulnerable to runs between the tackles. The prototypical 3-4 NT is the Raiders' Ted Washington, who is a massive 6-5 365. Washington was the key to the Patriots win over the Panthers in the 2004 Super Bowl. Stephen Davis ran for a meager 19 yards on his first 9 carries, because Washington effectively stuffed the middle of the line. Other quality NTs include the Steelers' Casey Hampton (6-1 320) and the Chargers' Jamal Williams (6-2 348)

3-4 OLBs are the playmakers of the D. They get the glory of picking up sacks on the QB. They must have strong pass rush skills and be able to drop into coverage. If the 3-4 OLBs are unable to consistently apply pressure on the QB, the D is very vulnerable in the passing game. They tend to weigh around 245-270, and many are former 4-3 DE/OLB "tweeners". Many 4-3 DEs are not suited to playing 3-4 OLB because they lack the ability to play in space. The more agile 4-3 RDEs, such as the Jets' John Abraham (6-4 256), are able to play both 4-3 DE and 3-4 OLB. Many 4-3 OLBs are not suited to playing 3-4 OLB because they lack the pass rush skills and the ability to go toe-to-toe with an OT. Examples of solid 3-4 OLBs are the Patriots' Willie McGinest (6-5 270) and the Steelers' Joey Porter (6-2 248)

3-4 DEs tend to weigh around 290-310, and many are former 4-3 DT/DE "tweeners". They must be able to play the run well. The 3-4 DE is responsible for the B and C gaps in the running game and lines up in the 5-technique position, so he is head-up on the OT. It's tough for a 3-4 DE to pick up as many sacks as a 4-3 DE, because a 3-4 DE doesn't have the freedom to go willy nilly upfield. He has to protect the LBs in order for the 3-4 to work. Panthers' 4-3 DE Julius Peppers said that he didn't like playing 3-4 DE, because he felt like he was essentially a DT. Unlike Peppers (6-6 290), most 4-3 DEs are not suited to playing 3-4 DE, because they lack the size and ability to hold up against the run. Examples of solid 3-4 DEs are the Patriots' Richard Seymour (6-6 310), the Steelers' Aaron Smith (6-5 300), and the Raiders' Bobby Hamilton (6-5 285)

3-4 ILBs must be stout in run support. Because there are only 3 DL to match up against 5 OL, they must be able to stack and shed an unblocked offensive lineman in the running game. How hard is it to play 3-4 ILB? Check out this telling quote by All-Pro Ray Lewis, who is glad to be finished playing 3-4 ILB (the Ravens are switching from the 3-4 to the 4-3 and 46 for the 2005 season):

"We're in the 46 defense now, and finally, finally again, I get to play football," said Lewis. "My job is not to take on offensive linemen, but to make running backs not want to play against me"

Examples of solid 3-4 ILBs are the former Ravens' Ed Hartwell (6-1 250) and the Raiders' Danny Clark (6-2 245)

What are the advantages of the 3-4 defense

The offense does not know which of the 2 OLBs is going to rush the QB, as both of the OLBs are in a 2-point stance. This creates the following advantages:


It's harder for the offensive linemen to correctly determine their blocking assignments before the snap and execute
It puts more mental pressure on the QB. E.g. the Patriots did a masterful job in disguising their D against 2004 MVP Peyton Manning in the 2005 playoffs. Manning came unglued mentally, and his frustration seemed to affect his performance.


With the growing number of defenses running the 3-4 D, it will be interesting to see whether its effectiveness decreases as offenses get used to facing it.

-----

sanluis
01-12-2009, 05:51 PM
Isnt Jarvis Moss going to be an OLB in the 3-4 defense where we could utilize his
speed?

I forgot about Moss. He might be a good fit on the outside. He would have to be able to cover at times as well. If he can't play OLB then he is probably gone if you guys try to switch to the 3-4 IMO.

elsid13
01-12-2009, 05:52 PM
I think Marcus Thomas is a great fit at De in a 3-4. If we do switch to that scheme, Raji has just moved up on my wishlist for the draft. 12 may be a little high for him, but you can't run a good 3-4 D without a stout anchor in the middle of the Dline. Anyone know of any good 3-4 NT's in Fa off the top of thier heads? I'll start some research on that.

Fields from SF, is young NT that was starting to come to his own. He is FA and has two young signed NT in front him in SF. I would also think that Brace from BC comes in critical part in the draft.

topscribe
01-12-2009, 05:53 PM
I forgot about Moss. He might be a good fit on the outside. He would have to be able to cover at times as well. If he can't play OLB then he is probably gone if you guys try to switch to the 3-4 IMO.

I would think it would depend on what kind of burst he has because his straight-
line 40 time was not in the OLB class . . . but then he apparently had a staff
infection during the Combine period, so that might not have done him justice.

-----

elsid13
01-12-2009, 05:54 PM
I forgot about Moss. He might be a good fit on the outside. He would have to be able to cover at times as well. If he can't play OLB then he is probably gone if you guys try to switch to the 3-4 IMO.

Remember there is strong need for nickle and dime coverage currently in the NFL. WW, Moss and Doom can play on those passing down when Denver moves to 4 man front.

MOtorboat
01-12-2009, 06:00 PM
Isnt Jarvis Moss going to be an OLB in the 3-4 defense where we could utilize his speed?

Sure. If he pulls his head out of his ass, and if we get someone who can even remotely coach the kid.

sanluis
01-12-2009, 06:06 PM
Remember there is strong need for nickle and dime coverage currently in the NFL. WW, Moss and Doom can play on those passing down when Denver moves to 4 man front.

Sure, If they give you time to sub your personnel. Or in the 3-4 you could rush five with both Doom and Moss coming from the edges.




OLB Doomer, DE Robertson , NT to be named, DE Thomas, OLB Moss



ILB Larson ILB DJ
The key to make that work is the nose!!!

DenverBronkHoes
01-12-2009, 06:48 PM
3-4 defense 101? .... lol

pretty simple..... 80% of our D goes.... keep DJ, keep Champ, keep Dumervil...

woodyard barrett bly maybe ekuban......

sorry but moss blows, and u can toss crowder to the curb too

marcus thomas CAN be the fatty we need in the middle, but he needs to get ALOT meaner and tougher.....

I would like to see Dumervil fill a Joey Porter type role.... I wanna see him blitz the edge from his feet....

We will need to pick up big tough guys to fill the cuts... 3-4 defense can be very favorable with the right personell...

It will be an interesting offseason.... We will be losing some guys that a few of us wont want to say bye too... nature of the business....

like bowlen says "i want a superbowl"

DenverBronkHoes
01-12-2009, 06:51 PM
no doubt the 3-4 starts with the guy playing the nose.... Thomas is the closest thing we got.... he doesnt exactly require 2 Olinemen blocking him...

gee wish these guys were still around:
bert berry
reggie hayward
trevor pryce
garrard warren

TXBRONC
01-12-2009, 06:56 PM
no doubt the 3-4 starts with the guy playing the nose.... Thomas is the closest thing we got.... he doesnt exactly require 2 Olinemen blocking him...

gee wish these guys were still around:
bert berry
reggie hayward
trevor pryce
garrard warren

I don't think any of them would be a good fit for a 3-4 defense.

MOtorboat
01-12-2009, 06:57 PM
I don't think any of them would be a good fit for a 3-4 defense.

Pryce maybe, but he's getting too old...I know he looks good in Baltimore...but I'm not buying that that's not because he has three pro bowlers that line up right next to him. One to his right, one to his left and one right behind him.

TXBRONC
01-12-2009, 07:00 PM
Pryce maybe, but he's getting too old...I know he looks good in Baltimore...but I'm not buying that that's not because he has three pro bowlers that line up right next to him. One to his right, one to his left and one right behind him.

Where do you put Pryce in 3-4 defense?

I don't think he is suited to play 2-gap.

DenverBronkHoes
01-12-2009, 07:00 PM
I don't think any of them would be a good fit for a 3-4 defense.

it wasnt really a comment about us and the 3-4 now.... It was more about Shanny getting rid of those guys who could have been good enough now.... i might even go furthur and say that if they were around still, Shanny may also be around and we would have more playoff games.....

but yea pryce is old..... Ill take a Hayward or a Berry right now.. not together... 1 or the other along with Elvis and a fatty in the middle.... It can work...

Warren could play NT today in the league i believe..... u can prolly find better......

elsid13
01-12-2009, 07:24 PM
Where do you put Pryce in 3-4 defense?

I don't think he is suited to play 2-gap.

In Baltimore Pryce shift between the DT and DE spot depending on the formation. He play hybrid role like Seymor for NE.

Thomas and Robinson will need to shift out to DE postion and Peterson needs to be resigned because he is the perfect DE in 3/4.

bcbronc
01-12-2009, 07:26 PM
after some thought and reading this thread, with a little luck we might not be as far away from a 3-4 as it looks at first glance. we won't be Pittsburgh, but we could be almost decent.

DE: Thomas, Peterson, Crowder, and Robertson should be at least an acceptable rotation for a transition year. we won't be able to fill all the holes in one offseason, so I'm okay signing an Ekuban-level UFA that's played 3-4 DE and then seeing if this crap can make applesauce.

NT: nothing on the roster. if we go to 3-4 this has to be priority #1 in both UFA and the draft. I'll leave who to draft up to the draftniks, but we still need to sign a solid NT vet; can't expect a rook to hold down the middle.

OLB: Moss and Doom are the only potential candidates imo, and they're long shots. but every year theres a couple OLB studs in the draft, so one UFA signing and a couple good drafts will hopefully get us some pieces.

ILB: we're okay here. about the same as DE-not perfect, but not top priority either. Between DJ, Larsen, and Woodyard, we should be able to find an adequate duo. Woodyard is comparable to Donnie Edwards as far as size and athletic ability goes, and DE had a good career on the inside. as long as DJ or Larsen can handle the traffic, WWIII can be free to fly around and make plays.

also need to add a safety in there somewhere.

I probably keep a couple lower end DTs like Powell for those short-yardage situations, but everyone else can be scrapped.

SmilinAssasSin27
01-12-2009, 08:03 PM
after some thought and reading this thread, with a little luck we might not be as far away from a 3-4 as it looks at first glance. we won't be Pittsburgh, but we could be almost decent.



NT: nothing on the roster. if we go to 3-4 this has to be priority #1 in both UFA and the draft. I'll leave who to draft up to the draftniks, but we still need to sign a solid NT vet; can't expect a rook to hold down the middle.



I probably keep a couple lower end DTs like Powell for those short-yardage situations, but everyone else can be scrapped.

Outside of BJ Raji:

Ron Brace, DT, Boston College....6'3" 324.....day 1
Dorrell Sctt, DT, Clemson...........6'4" 320.....mid rounds
Sammie Lee Hil, DT, Stillman.......6'4" 328.....rd 6 or 7

There are others, but these are the 3 that intrigues me

BroncoAV06
01-12-2009, 08:08 PM
Well first off I know we need turnover on defense but how many players can you trade away and replace with rookies and expect to be beter? Anything we do will take time so enough with the trade DJ, who just signed and would be an nice cap hit and Moss you have to give him a shot at least.

Doom and Moss "if" we switch to a 3-4 should be givien an off season to see if they can adjust to stand up OLB. Might not be full time options but all you have to do is rush the passer at times and they could both be good at that. Ware is not exactly the greatest cover LB but he gets it done. He did run around a 4.56 compaired to Doom and Moss who ran in the 4.7 range but people questioned if Ware could stand up out of college and it sure has worked. I am not saying either are going to be like that but have to give palyers a shot instead of just trying to trade like most want, so your telling me you want a 5th-7th rounder instead of Doom? OK...

In either case if we do switch it will again be a long year for the defense with palyers learning an absolutly whole new scheme and trying to fit into new roles.

As for FA Ekuban is a player I wouldn't mind keeping. As for what FA could be out there, Canty has been mentioned not many other names at the moment that stand out at DE for a 3-4 scheme but that is sure to change as the off season rolls on.

DT of course the top prize will be Albert, Watson has been mentioned, Tank Johnson played in it in Dallas, J. Haye, R. Bernard?

LB's- Bart Scott would be one heck of a pick up beside DJ, Crowder knows the 3-4, Eric Barton, Andrea Davis, Haggins a vet played in it with Pitt servicable for depth.

Just a bunch of really early names in any case if we look to add some players for a 3-4 "if' that were to happen.

Draft: Raji of course stands out as any 3-4 needs an anchor, Rey M. has been said to be a solid fit in the middle for a 3-4, Spikes, Orakpo, Sintim, (reaches at 12?).
Late round 1 early round 2, Larry English, Chusing(Can he hold up in the NFL?), just a few off the top of the head but of course there is still so much to process on the path to the draft.

Dean
01-12-2009, 08:26 PM
When McDaniels talked about looking at the personnel and scheme he said that he would do it looking at what he head for the short term and where they wanted to be long term. I interpreted that to mean they would go 4-3 because those are the players we presently have but working toward the 3-4 for long term.

We'll have to wait and see.

Navyblue22
01-12-2009, 10:47 PM
mmmm, I played defense-lineman. I know at the line of scrimage, the offense lineman movement and hand(s) movement tell you the play-formation. Sometimes you can tell by their eyes focus, but hey... I'm deaf (so don't bother me talkin' to me in the scrimmage, 'cause I can't hear *smile*). Playin' 3-4, your first 3 d-linemen must be tough. Like a BULL. Defense linemen in 3-4 formations must take 2 guards & a backfield to work with. Yeah, that means 3 players vs. 1 player. The last "4" linebackers core must be like a "RHINO". Yep, run-n-stop. The best of it, the linebackers "lock-n-load" on the scene. I loves defense. Playin' against offense linemen was fun. Sackin' QBs. Good old days. The "key" player, what is your strengths & weaknesses. I think what kind of players you have. You needs to work with them. I like how Bill W. 49ers coaches his players. He had his players, he works with them. No 3-4 or 4-4 or something. He make it works. For me, my DEFENSE formation is MULTI-formations. Same with the OFFENSE. I do MULTI-formations, I-form far-set near set pro-set shotgun "T"-form "W"ishbone. I can play all those kinds. As for the players we have at Denver BRONCOS, it's the 4-3/4-4

Shazam!
01-12-2009, 10:52 PM
It sounds like you play(ed) a lot of Madden.

Gamechanger
01-12-2009, 10:52 PM
I'd think McDaniels will do like Whisenhunt did in AZ, which is use the 4-3 scheme as the main scheme right now but also hybrid in 3-4 looks also as an experiment

that would work for the personell you have at the moment

Shazam!
01-12-2009, 10:57 PM
Another team in a Coaching transition... Although the Colts won't be going through as big a change.

Dungy looks super old without the hat.

Gamechanger
01-12-2009, 11:04 PM
Another team in a Coaching transition... Although the Colts won't be going through as big a change.

Dungy looks super old without the hat.

the thing is I have faith in Caldwell as he is now apart of the Dungy coaching tree and all of them (except Marinelli, who got a raw deal imo) are proven winners, i'm just afraid of both high expectations and complacency for us as a whole if Caldwell starts to win games

and yea, he does and man he scared me sometimes with his stare when he was pissed

Superchop 7
01-13-2009, 12:27 AM
2010 first round draft pick.....Terrance Cody

lex
01-13-2009, 01:04 AM
When McDaniels talked about looking at the personnel and scheme he said that he would do it looking at what he head for the short term and where they wanted to be long term. I interpreted that to mean they would go 4-3 because those are the players we presently have but working toward the 3-4 for long term.

We'll have to wait and see.

He also said he wants consistency.

PatricktheDookie
01-13-2009, 01:23 AM
I want to go to a 2-5. But they all call me crazy. =(

muse
01-13-2009, 04:38 AM
I'd think McDaniels will do like Whisenhunt did in AZ, which is use the 4-3 scheme as the main scheme right now but also hybrid in 3-4 looks also as an experiment

that would work for the personell you have at the moment

Bob Slowik tried that last year resulting in epic fail. That said, Slowik is a raving incompetent. Whisenhunt isn't.

broncofaninfla
01-13-2009, 09:33 AM
I think McD will make the call to switch to a 3/4. We have 4/3 scheme players now but most of them suck so being we have to get rid of that many players they might as well switch to the scheme Nolan feels most comfortable in and build to that scheme. Good thing is this is a GREAT year to switch to a 3/4. The draft is FULL of 3/4 players.

TXBRONC
01-13-2009, 10:07 AM
I think McD will make the call to switch to a 3/4. We have 4/3 scheme players now but most of them suck so being we have to get rid of that many players they might as well switch to the scheme Nolan feels most comfortable in and build to that scheme. Good thing is this is a GREAT year to switch to a 3/4. The draft is FULL of 3/4 players.

There is a strong possibility considering candidates being considered to run the defense. However, if Nolan is the guy then he has enough of a background in 4-3 to revamp the current scheme and it probably be done much quicker than switching to a different scheme altogether.

G_Money
01-13-2009, 10:33 AM
People keep talking about how much we’ll have to work to re-vamp for the 3-4.

Why?

Right now for the 4-3 we have the following starters:

Zero defensive ends.
Two acceptable-but-not-great DTs
One LB (DJ)

For a 3-4 we have:

Several players who can play DE
Zero full-time NTs
Two LBs (DJ & Larsen)

How is that worse?

We’ll have to change our backups, but seriously, we can’t switch to a 3-4 because Louis Green is too small to play LB in it?

We’ll need a NT to play the 3-4, and we’ll need fully functional DEs to play a 4-3. We don’t have either right now, so what does it matter what we switch to?

~G

broncofaninfla
01-13-2009, 10:44 AM
People keep talking about how much we値l have to work to re-vamp for the 3-4.

Why?

Right now for the 4-3 we have the following starters:

Zero defensive ends.
Two acceptable-but-not-great DTs
One LB (DJ)

For a 3-4 we have:

Several players who can play DE
Zero full-time NTs
Two LBs (DJ & Larsen)

How is that worse?

We値l have to change our backups, but seriously, we can稚 switch to a 3-4 because Louis Green is too small to play LB in it?

We値l need a NT to play the 3-4, and we値l need fully functional DEs to play a 4-3. We don稚 have either right now, so what does it matter what we switch to?

~G

My point exactly but like usual you said it better! This defense is getting an overhaul anyway, might as well overhaul it to meet Nolan and perhaps Capers preference.

TXBRONC
01-13-2009, 11:46 AM
People keep talking about how much we値l have to work to re-vamp for the 3-4.

Why?

Right now for the 4-3 we have the following starters:

Zero defensive ends.
Two acceptable-but-not-great DTs
One LB (DJ)

For a 3-4 we have:

Several players who can play DE
Zero full-time NTs
Two LBs (DJ & Larsen)

How is that worse?

We値l have to change our backups, but seriously, we can稚 switch to a 3-4 because Louis Green is too small to play LB in it?

We値l need a NT to play the 3-4, and we値l need fully functional DEs to play a 4-3. We don稚 have either right now, so what does it matter what we switch to?

~G

As devil's advocate here is where I think could be wrong.

4-3:

First I think we have at least one defensive end that is suited and has previously played well in the 4-3 in Elvis Dumervil. Maybe Moss could still develop he is only in his second season.

I'll give you that our defensive tackles were not great this year. However, Thomas like Moss is young and it does take time to develop defensive tackles. One our biggest problems on defense was an inability to tackle which is correctable.

Linebacker we do have more than one can play well in 4-3 defense. We have three in view. Williams, Larsen, Woodyard all played well for us and you could possibly throw Winborn in there as well.

3-4:

You say we have several player that who could play defensive end in a 3-4 but I don't who that could. All of the natural defensive ends don't seem to be suited for it because of size issues and which of them has ever played two-gap. If you're speaking of DT moving there same applies them as well. If they are not suited playing two-gap in 4-3 how can play it in a 3-4? So at best in my opinion it's a maybe.

NTs you absolutely right, were going to need a couple.

Linebacker I agree there two that have the measurables that fit. (Larsen and and Williams)

While I think there is possibly more turnover to switching the base defense to a 3-4 I'm not against it.

MOtorboat
01-13-2009, 12:05 PM
3-4:

You say we have several player that who could play defensive end in a 3-4 but I don't who that could. All of the natural defensive ends don't seem to be suited for it because of size issues and which of them has ever played two-gap. If you're speaking of DT moving there same applies them as well. If they are not suited playing two-gap in 4-3 how can play it in a 3-4? So at best in my opinion it's a maybe.

Thomas certainly has the athleticism to play 3-4 DE, and maybe Robertson, imo.

Nose Tackle is the big hole.

TXBRONC
01-13-2009, 12:13 PM
Thomas certainly has the athleticism to play 3-4 DE, and maybe Robertson, imo.

Nose Tackle is the big hole.

I agree, however, as far as I know he's never played two-gap so it is still maybe in my opinion.

I'm concerned about Robertson whatever direction we go, because he limited by a bad knee.

Fan in Exile
01-13-2009, 12:24 PM
People keep talking about how much we値l have to work to re-vamp for the 3-4.

Why?

Right now for the 4-3 we have the following starters:

Zero defensive ends.
Two acceptable-but-not-great DTs
One LB (DJ)

For a 3-4 we have:

Several players who can play DE
Zero full-time NTs
Two LBs (DJ & Larsen)

How is that worse?

We値l have to change our backups, but seriously, we can稚 switch to a 3-4 because Louis Green is too small to play LB in it?

We値l need a NT to play the 3-4, and we値l need fully functional DEs to play a 4-3. We don稚 have either right now, so what does it matter what we switch to?

~G

I'll take a stab at explaining it. Keep in mind that I would be okay switching to a 3-4, I'm just not sure it's the best use of our guys. I think that a lot of it has to do with the final decision about how much of the cause of last years problems was coaching or scheme.

From your evaluations you are putting more blame on the talent than I would.

For those people who blame coaching, and I lean this way. The thoughts go like this.

1) Thomas is a waste as a 2-gapper teach him and put him in a system he can rush the passer.

2) Let Powell and Robertson alternate so we can stop the run and get pressure.

3) I remember Crowder in the Steelers game in 2007 coach him and put him on the field so he can do that again.

4) We knew Moss was a project coming in so put him in a scheme he can succeed in. Bring someone in to compete and in case he fails. Then if nothing else we have a great rotation.

5) Leave DJ at will, which will let us use Woodyard as a big nickle or something along those lines.

6) Either draft a great MLB or Let Larsen do it. I would be in favor of drafting.

7) Cut ties with Boss, and bring in a SAM.

That's really only 3 spots that we would have to address on the front 7, which gives us the flexibilty to move up and get studs, or draft more than one guy for some spots so that we have a safety net.

Now if we switch to the 3-4

1) We need a NT, none of the guys on the team can do it. However the bust rate here is pretty high, and it's such a key piece that the guy coming in doesn't really have time to learn, he must hit the ground running. So you have to draft or get in FA at least one starter and one back up. Problem is there isn't really anyone in FA which means drafting.

2) DE we really are looking for two gappers here. Robertson has come out and said that he doesn't like playing a two gap system. Some of the guys that we have may or may not work as 3-4 DE so you have to bring in at least one starter and at least one back up. Because all we have on our team is maybe one starter and one back-up. I would like Canty here so maybe we only have to draft one.

3) OLB they have to be bigger to take on the o-line and they have to be able to rush the passer and drop into coverage. I'm thinking at best we have Dumerville. I barely think that Moss will be able to make it as a 4-3 DE. That means bringing in at least 3 guys, and hoping that Doom can make the switch. This is one of the places that we would really be hurting with the switch to the 3-4. IMO

4) ILB I think that we could pull off two starters here with DJ and Larsen. However we would still need two back-ups. However there is still the possibility that one of those may fail so you would have to have guys who would be competing for the starter position as well.

So by switching to the 3-4 you're looking at bringing in about 9 guys a lot of whom are going to have to come from the draft. That doesn't leave many guys to bring in to help the secondary, so we better hope that Woodyard and Barret can nail that down. We should also draft a Guard or a Center.

All of this means that we would go into the draft hoping that all three fifth round picks pan out, which is pretty unrealistic in my opinion. As well as counting on two drafted NT to pan out because we don't have a serviceable back up.

I think the key IMO is that lack of NTs that are out there. If we could bring in a guy and be able to say that he'll be the back-up and if the draft fails he can be serviceable I would be okay with it. As it is though I think we would have to commit way too much to scheme that isn't inherently better than the 4-3. It just doesn't have a good risk/reward ratio to me.

TXBRONC
01-13-2009, 12:40 PM
I'll take a stab at explaining it. Keep in mind that I would be okay switching to a 3-4, I'm just not sure it's the best use of our guys. I think that a lot of it has to do with the final decision about how much of the cause of last years problems was coaching or scheme.

From your evaluations you are putting more blame on the talent than I would.

For those people who blame coaching, and I lean this way. The thoughts go like this.

1) Thomas is a waste as a 2-gapper teach him and put him in a system he can rush the passer.

2) Let Powell and Robertson alternate so we can stop the run and get pressure.

3) I remember Crowder in the Steelers game in 2007 coach him and put him on the field so he can do that again.

4) We knew Moss was a project coming in so put him in a scheme he can succeed in. Bring someone in to compete and in case he fails. Then if nothing else we have a great rotation.

5) Leave DJ at will, which will let us use Woodyard as a big nickle or something along those lines.

6) Either draft a great MLB or Let Larsen do it. I would be in favor of drafting.

7) Cut ties with Boss, and bring in a SAM.

That's really only 3 spots that we would have to address on the front 7, which gives us the flexibilty to move up and get studs, or draft more than one guy for some spots so that we have a safety net.

Now if we switch to the 3-4

1) We need a NT, none of the guys on the team can do it. However the bust rate here is pretty high, and it's such a key piece that the guy coming in doesn't really have time to learn, he must hit the ground running. So you have to draft or get in FA at least one starter and one back up. Problem is there isn't really anyone in FA which means drafting.

2) DE we really are looking for two gappers here. Robertson has come out and said that he doesn't like playing a two gap system. Some of the guys that we have may or may not work as 3-4 DE so you have to bring in at least one starter and at least one back up. Because all we have on our team is maybe one starter and one back-up. I would like Canty here so maybe we only have to draft one.

3) OLB they have to be bigger to take on the o-line and they have to be able to rush the passer and drop into coverage. I'm thinking at best we have Dumerville. I barely think that Moss will be able to make it as a 4-3 DE. That means bringing in at least 3 guys, and hoping that Doom can make the switch. This is one of the places that we would really be hurting with the switch to the 3-4. IMO

4) ILB I think that we could pull off two starters here with DJ and Larsen. However we would still need two back-ups. However there is still the possibility that one of those may fail so you would have to have guys who would be competing for the starter position as well.

So by switching to the 3-4 you're looking at bringing in about 9 guys a lot of whom are going to have to come from the draft. That doesn't leave many guys to bring in to help the secondary, so we better hope that Woodyard and Barret can nail that down. We should also draft a Guard or a Center.

All of this means that we would go into the draft hoping that all three fifth round picks pan out, which is pretty unrealistic in my opinion. As well as counting on two drafted NT to pan out because we don't have a serviceable back up.

I think the key IMO is that lack of NTs that are out there. If we could bring in a guy and be able to say that he'll be the back-up and if the draft fails he can be serviceable I would be okay with it. As it is though I think we would have to commit way too much to scheme that isn't inherently better than the 4-3. It just doesn't have a good risk/reward ratio to me.

Same here I'm not anyway against switching over to a 3-4 but I think it will take large turnover personnel to get the job done.

dogfish
01-13-2009, 01:30 PM
this may be a minor point, but i think it's worth making nonetheless. . . IMO, thomas, and certainly robertson, are a bit squatty for 3-4 DEs-- maybe it doesn't matter that much, but neither of them is exactly a prototype. . . their weight is in the right range, but they're both on the short side. . . when you look at the best 3-4 DEs, they're all 6'5" or better-- thomas is 6'3", and robertson is only 6'1". . .

richard seymour - 6'6"

ty warren - 6'5"

aaron smith - 6'5"

trevor pryce - 6'5"

chris canty - 6'7"

darnell dockett - 6'4"

shaun ellis - 6'5"

the guys that parcells just drafted to hold the ends for miami are kendall langford (6'5") and phillip merling (6'4"). . . luis castillo (6'3") is the only real quality 3-4 end i can find that's under 6'4". . . does it make a difference? i would always say that desire, technique and overall ability are more important than size, but i do think it's a factor. . . maybe someone like dean can correct me if i'm wrong, but i would imagine that an ideal 5-technique should have a big wingspan to help control those outside gaps and match up with towering OTs. . . short guys may be more effective inside where leverage is paramount, but a guy like robertson at 6'1" is awfully short compared to almost all of the other 5-techs in the league, and there's probably a reason for that. . .

besides, TX is right-- robertson wasn't all that successful as a two-gapper in new york, and while i think thomas might have a better chance of it, it really doesn't seem to play into his innate strengths. . . we may be able to get by with them as transitional/rotational players, but long term i'm thinking we'd be better off letting looking for more prototypical two-gap ends if we want to go with the 3-4 as a fulltime base defense and make it work right. . . can ekuban, crowder or peterson transition to the 5-tech? enh. . . who knows? given that ek and KP are free agents, i'd say we'd be a lot better going hard after canty than bringing either of 'em back to find out. . .

similarly, i hardly think that taking on blockers at the point of attack is a strength of dj's game-- isn't that why they wanted to move him back to WILL in the first place? i would think the same goes for boss and winborn-- let's face it, most of our LBs were chosen for speed and athleticism and the 3-4 requires a somewhat different skillset of its 'backers. . . does that mean that those guys absolutely can't play the system? no, but i suspect it does mean that they aren't going to be all that effective, which we got a taste of with this past year's abortion of a 3-4 experiment. . . larsen, OTOH, looks like a guy that might actually be better suited to the 3-4 than the 4-3. . .

whether doom or moss can be effective standing up is mostly projection, although i'm not opposed to finding out. . . i love the thought of elvis matched up with TEs and running backs off the edge instead of going up against OTs every down! i don't know if he can drop into coverage effectively or not, but i can see him potentially being a lamarr woodley-type force rushing the passer from a 2-point stance, and he may not be quite the liability against the run from the OLB position that he is as a fulltime down lineman. . . we'll see. . . i kinda hate messing with moss just when he's finally starting to get some playing time at end, but i suppose his production doesn't justify being too concerened about moving him. . . i don't think woodyard has any business whatsoever lining up at LB in the 3-4-- if we switch, IMO it's safety or bust for him, at least as a starter/position player-- i hate to not have his ferocity and reliable tackling on the field in some capacity, but i suppose there are worse things than getting a damn fine special teamer and reserve out of a UDFA. . . shame not to maximize his potential, though. . .


of course, we also have to ask whether any of the aforementioned players are really so strong in the 4-3 that going in another direction gives you pause. . . my gut answer to that would be "no". . . i do think we're closer to a functional 4-3 than a 3-4, but probably not close enough to stop us from making the switch if that's the direction we want to go long term. . . G's right, if we're going to do it there's no better time than now to get started, and i think we can all agree that finding a quality nosetackle is the essential first step. . . there's no reason that we can't run some form of hybrid and looks from both as long as we retain some of our current 4-3 personnel, but i wouldn't bother bringing anyone in (or back) that doesn't have a long term future in the 3-4 if that's the base we want to play going forward. . .

given that our biggest problem continues to be lack of a pass rush, and given that recently it seems both easier and cheaper to find solid pass rushing OLBs in the draft than true every-down 4-3 DEs, it probably makes sense for us. . . ultimately i'm okay with either choice-- my personal preference would have been to bring in mcdermott and go with a jim johnson style of attacking 4-3, and a strong DL coach to see what we can get out of the young guys we already have, but if they want to go 3-4 and maybe draft some guys like orakpo, everette brown, larry english or connor barwin, i'm fine with that too. . . i just hope that if we do go 3-4, we make a decisive move and don't half-ass it trying to pound square pegs into round holes with a lot of our current personnel. . . .

TXBRONC
01-13-2009, 01:49 PM
this may be a minor point, but i think it's worth making nonetheless. . . IMO, thomas, and certainly robertson, are a bit squatty for 3-4 DEs-- maybe it doesn't matter that much, but neither of them is exactly a prototype. . . their weight is in the right range, but they're both on the short side. . . when you look at the best 3-4 DEs, they're all 6'5" or better-- thomas is 6'3", and robertson is only 6'1". . .

richard seymour - 6'6"

ty warren - 6'5"

aaron smith - 6'5"

trevor pryce - 6'5"

chris canty - 6'7"

darnell dockett - 6'4"

shaun ellis - 6'5"

the guys that parcells just drafted to hold the ends for miami are kendall langford (6'5") and phillip merling (6'4"). . . luis castillo (6'3") is the only real quality 3-4 end i can find that's under 6'4". . . does it make a difference? i would always say that desire, technique and overall ability are more important than size, but i do think it's a factor. . . maybe someone like dean can correct me if i'm wrong, but i would imagine that an ideal 5-technique should have a big wingspan to help control those outside gaps and match up with towering OTs. . . short guys may be more effective inside where leverage is paramount, but a guy like robertson at 6'1" is awfully short compared to almost all of the other 5-techs in the league, and there's probably a reason for that. . .

besides, TX is right-- robertson wasn't all that successful as a two-gapper in new york, and while i think thomas might have a better chance of it, it really doesn't seem to play into his innate strengths. . . we may be able to get by with them as transitional/rotational players, but long term i'm thinking we'd be better off letting looking for more prototypical two-gap ends if we want to go with the 3-4 as a fulltime base defense and make it work right. . . can ekuban, crowder or peterson transition to the 5-tech? enh. . . who knows? given that ek and KP are free agents, i'd say we'd be a lot better going hard after canty than bringing either of 'em back to find out. . .

similarly, i hardly think that taking on blockers at the point of attack is a strength of dj's game-- isn't that why they wanted to move him back to WILL in the first place? i would think the same goes for boss and winborn-- let's face it, most of our LBs were chosen for speed and athleticism and the 3-4 requires a somewhat different skillset of its 'backers. . . does that mean that those guys absolutely can't play the system? no, but i suspect it does mean that they aren't going to be all that effective, which we got a taste of with this past year's abortion of a 3-4 experiment. . . larsen, OTOH, looks like a guy that might actually be better suited to the 3-4 than the 4-3. . .

whether doom or moss can be effective standing up is mostly projection, although i'm not opposed to finding out. . . i love the thought of elvis matched up with TEs and running backs off the edge instead of going up against OTs every down! i don't know if he can drop into coverage effectively or not, but i can see him potentially being a lamarr woodley-type force rushing the passer from a 2-point stance, and he may not be quite the liability against the run from the OLB position that he is as a fulltime down lineman. . . we'll see. . . i kinda hate messing with moss just when he's finally starting to get some playing time at end, but i suppose his production doesn't justify being too concerened about moving him. . . i don't think woodyard has any business whatsoever lining up at LB in the 3-4-- if we switch, IMO it's safety or bust for him, at least as a starter/position player-- i hate to not have his ferocity and reliable tackling on the field in some capacity, but i suppose there are worse things than getting a damn fine special teamer and reserve out of a UDFA. . . shame not to maximize his potential, though. . .


of course, we also have to ask whether any of the aforementioned players are really so strong in the 4-3 that going in another direction gives you pause. . . my gut answer to that would be "no". . . i do think we're closer to a functional 4-3 than a 3-4, but probably not close enough to stop us from making the switch if that's the direction we want to go long term. . . G's right, if we're going to do it there's no better time than now to get started, and i think we can all agree that finding a quality nosetackle is the essential first step. . . there's no reason that we can't run some form of hybrid and looks from both as long as we retain some of our current 4-3 personnel, but i wouldn't bother bringing anyone in (or back) that doesn't have a long term future in the 3-4 if that's the base we want to play going forward. . .

given that our biggest problem continues to be lack of a pass rush, and given that recently it seems both easier and cheaper to find solid pass rushing OLBs in the draft than true every-down 4-3 DEs, it probably makes sense for us. . . ultimately i'm okay with either choice-- my personal preference would have been to bring in mcdermott and go with a jim johnson style of attacking 4-3, and a strong DL coach to see what we can get out of the young guys we already have, but if they want to go 3-4 and maybe draft some guys like orakpo, everette brown, larry english or connor barwin, i'm fine with that too. . . i just hope that if we do go 3-4, we make a decisive move and don't half-ass it trying to pound square pegs into round holes with a lot of our current personnel. . . .

I don't dislike Robertson but regardless of scheme the guy is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest.

DenBronx
01-13-2009, 01:51 PM
when all else fails, TRADE ...TRADE....and TRADE some more.

seriously, why can't we trade off some of these guys? we don't even need draft picks it can just be player for player. if we need a nose tackle why not trade dume or moss for one?

dogfish
01-13-2009, 01:51 PM
I don't dislike Robertson but regardless of scheme the guy is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest.

yea, i don't think he's a guy we can count on much going forward. . . a potential switch to the 3-4 just makes the decision to acquire him instead of shaun rogers or kris jenkins look that much worse. . . .


:frusty:

Medford Bronco
01-13-2009, 01:54 PM
Thomas certainly has the athleticism to play 3-4 DE, and maybe Robertson, imo.

Nose Tackle is the big hole.

Maybe I was mixing Moss up with Thomas on my thoughts for OLB.

Anyways I would hope that we salvage at least one of them
for our D.

Holes can be filled. The Pats in 2000 were putrid. Over a year Bellicheck
brought in Roman Phipher and Mike Vrabel as FA and they won the Super Bowl in year 2 with the new players.

It is hard but can be done. Heck anyone who can actually tackle and not
overrun plays. (See most 2008 LBS that means you Nate) can be an upgrade for us.

Fan in Exile
01-13-2009, 02:05 PM
Maybe I was mixing Moss up with Thomas on my thoughts for OLB.

Anyways I would hope that we salvage at least one of them
for our D.

Holes can be filled. The Pats in 2000 were putrid. Over a year Bellicheck
brought in Roman Phipher and Mike Vrabel as FA and they won the Super Bowl in year 2 with the new players.

It is hard but can be done. Heck anyone who can actually tackle and not
overrun plays. (See most 2008 LBS that means you Nate) can be an upgrade for us.

It can be done, I think the question we should be asking ourselves is why should we? I don't see the 3-4 as having any significant advantages over the 4-3. At least none that are worth giving up on next year to pursue.

Medford Bronco
01-13-2009, 02:12 PM
It can be done, I think the question we should be asking ourselves is why should we? I don't see the 3-4 as having any significant advantages over the 4-3. At least none that are worth giving up on next year to pursue.

I think in the long run it is a better defense and more confusing to QBs. Just my humble opinon.

broncofaninfla
01-13-2009, 02:26 PM
I can see having a certain level of attachment to some of the players on our team, heck they are Broncos, but we all want to win even more. Regardless of what scheme McD and Nolan employ, we have to cut ties with some of these guys as they just don't have the talent to get the job done in ANY system. Other guys might have the talent or frame to succeed in the 4/3 but not in the 3/4. We should trade who we can out of this group and cut ties with the rest. We have a slew of picks this year in the draft (a draft rich in 3/4 talent), some cap space for FA and The Goodman team has shown it can find some rookie free agent gems as well. Nolan's forte is the 3/4. That is the scheme we need to build to and the sooner the better.

TXBRONC
01-13-2009, 02:39 PM
I think in the long run it is a better defense and more confusing to QBs. Just my humble opinon.

I don't mind either scheme. However I agree with that a 3-4 can be more confusing for quarterbacks because you can disguise where the rush is going to come from.

Fan in Exile
01-13-2009, 02:42 PM
I can see having a certain level of attachment to some of the players on our team, heck they are Broncos, but we all want to win even more. Regardless of what scheme McD and Nolan employ, we have to cut ties with some of these guys as they just don't have the talent to get the job done in ANY system. Other guys might have the talent or frame to succeed in the 4/3 but not in the 3/4. We should trade who we can out of this group and cut ties with the rest. We have a slew of picks this year in the draft (a draft rich in 3/4 talent), some cap space for FA and The Goodman team has shown it can find some rookie free agent gems as well. Nolan's forte is the 3/4. That is the scheme we need to build to and the sooner the better.

I think this is the scheme that we will end up building towards however I don't think that we need to. Both have been successful, and both will be in the future.

I also think that trading is almost totally out of the question. Especially trading for anything good. We just aren't going to get any kind of value for the guys that we have because there are too many question marks.

There aren't FA at the crucial NT position either. We would have to draft one and that's a big risk.

Ultimately I think the biggest thing that we are giving up is time, and that means that it better be worth it down the road.

broncosinindy
01-14-2009, 11:40 AM
I really hate switching schemes but i think it would be a good thing to do long term. Essentially we would have to get a good defensive line. Linebackers in the 3-4 are a dime a dozen so it might be better money wise to go that way.

It really depends. I think Doom could make it in a 3-4 provided that we were blitz happy. and asked our LB's to drop back and play zone he could most likely do it. I think Jarvis would probably be the better LB in the scheme, and it was suggested he go to a 3-4 team when he was drafted. Man though 2-3 years of asking a guy to do one thing(and struggle as moss has)and then change it up and ask him to essentially change it up. thats tough. gonna have to be some good coaches.

I think it would also wise to give C Powell a look at 3-4 LDE if it truely what we are looking to do. Is a noteable run stopper. I question his ability to play 5 Tech though. we'll have to see.

Marcus Thomas is a pretty bad 2 gapper from what i have seen. i dont know how salvageable he would be.

I dont know how wise it would be to get rid of DJ. I question his leadership and intellegance. He is not good for the 3-4 but its hard to get rid of him at his salary.

S Larsen. i think is a ideal fit for the 3-4 from everything i have read. seemed to play well this year. not a Sideline to Sideline guy but i could see him as a Vrabel.

TXBRONC
01-14-2009, 01:35 PM
I really hate switching schemes but i think it would be a good thing to do long term. Essentially we would have to get a good defensive line. Linebackers in the 3-4 are a dime a dozen so it might be better money wise to go that way.

It really depends. I think Doom could make it in a 3-4 provided that we were blitz happy. and asked our LB's to drop back and play zone he could most likely do it. I think Jarvis would probably be the better LB in the scheme, and it was suggested he go to a 3-4 team when he was drafted. Man though 2-3 years of asking a guy to do one thing(and struggle as moss has)and then change it up and ask him to essentially change it up. thats tough. gonna have to be some good coaches.

I think it would also wise to give C Powell a look at 3-4 LDE if it truely what we are looking to do. Is a noteable run stopper. I question his ability to play 5 Tech though. we'll have to see.

Marcus Thomas is a pretty bad 2 gapper from what i have seen. i dont know how salvageable he would be.

I dont know how wise it would be to get rid of DJ. I question his leadership and intellegance. He is not good for the 3-4 but its hard to get rid of him at his salary.

S Larsen. i think is a ideal fit for the 3-4 from everything i have read. seemed to play well this year. not a Sideline to Sideline guy but i could see him as a Vrabel.

I think D.J. is good fit for a 3-4. I thought he was playing exceptionally well after being moved back to his natural position. As far as leadership concerned, not everyone has the ability to lead. That being said I have no idea if teammates fill the same way.