Jump to content
KC_Guy

Next year's coaches ...

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, samsel23 said:

It’s very possible to switch to a 4-3 under style in one offseason.  Honestly we run a lot of the same principles already, so it’s not like we’d be doing a complete change.  Tanoh and Jones fit at DE in this scheme, but Jones won’t be playing the edge.  Houston fits as an OLB over Jones.  

The biggest hurdle is your MLB needs to be able to cover a lot of ground.  Ragland has been a lot better than I imagined but I don’t think he has enough speed to handle it.  He could do pretty well in a KJ Wright role though.  

Finding a MLB and depth would be the biggest hurdles while also trying to find a good #2 CB.  

Is there really a point to going 4-3 under, though? It's basically a 3-4 in alignment. Just less two gapping. You may as well stay with the same name and just take away the 2 gap responsibilities, at that point. Go more Wade Phillips style 3-4 than Pete Carroll style 4-3. I do think more 1 gapping would make sense if we let Logan walk. Abandon the big nose concept since it hasn't been working anyway. But other than that you're really lining up the same and just changing the names. Calling Kpass a DE, calling Ragland an OLB, calling RNR or Bailey a DT, etc. Because role wise what Sutton does is functionally identical to the 4-3 under Seattle ran a few years ago (they've since gotten leaner on the DL.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry there Jak. If ok I might just stick to that? Spelling corrected in previous posts

My old age is showing, I meant no disrespect.  :)

Edited by mayanfootball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2017 at 2:17 PM, Jakuvious said:

Is there really a point to going 4-3 under, though? It's basically a 3-4 in alignment. Just less two gapping. You may as well stay with the same name and just take away the 2 gap responsibilities, at that point. Go more Wade Phillips style 3-4 than Pete Carroll style 4-3. I do think more 1 gapping would make sense if we let Logan walk. Abandon the big nose concept since it hasn't been working anyway. But other than that you're really lining up the same and just changing the names. Calling Kpass a DE, calling Ragland an OLB, calling RNR or Bailey a DT, etc. Because role wise what Sutton does is functionally identical to the 4-3 under Seattle ran a few years ago (they've since gotten leaner on the DL.)

No I don’t think it matters what you call it, we are already running a lot of the principles that Seattle, Jacksonville, and Denver run up front and they are viewed as 4-3 teams.  

A straight up 4-3 would take some work, but like people said not very many teams run a straight 4-3 so it might be possible to find some players later than usual.

Personally this is my favorite defensive scheme, and I don’t think we are that far off.  A playmaking ILB, along with continued solid play from the #2 CB would change quite a bit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, samsel23 said:

Because role wise what Sutton does is functionally identical to the 4-3 under Seattle ran a few years ago (they've since gotten leaner on the DL.)

This hysterical praise for Sutton is laughable. This season has seen Sutton deploy as many DB's as ever. Until recently, he's run a 3 man DL mostly and a 2 man DL. You don't recall his "bend but don't break" philosophy that broke us so many games? I sure do.

Edited by mayanfootball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, mayanfootball said:

This hysterical praise for Sutton is laughable. This season has seen Sutton deploy as many DB's as ever. Until recently, he's run a 3 man DL mostly and a 2 man DL. You don't recall his "bend but don't break" philosophy that broke us so many games? I sure do.

I don’t think I praised Sutton at all.

Just said we run a lot of the same principles as teams that are viewed as 4-3 teams.  With the difference being we try to use DBs to hide the fact our ILBs don’t have the versatility that DJ in his prime had.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mayanfootball said:

Because role wise what Sutton does is functionally identical to the 4-3 under Seattle

Praise for being smart. You give him too much credit. Running 2 and 3 man fronts when the game demands otherwise is nonsense. Sutton is an idiot masquerading as our DC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mayanfootball said:

Praise for being smart. You give him too much credit. Running 2 and 3 man fronts when the game demands otherwise is nonsense. Sutton is an idiot masquerading as our DC.

k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×