Defensive scheme

[CountDorkula]

I've notice in the past month the re-occuring theme of switchign defense. What do you guys feel and why?

 

I could care less what defense we run, as long as we can become contenders again.

[KD in CA]

Why not let the existing good players and the best players available in the draft/FA dictate what scheme to use, rather than hiring some idiot coach who only knows how to coach one way and then having to blow up the team yet again because they don't have the 'right personnel'.

[Cotton Fitzsimmons]

I'd like to implement YE OLE' 5-2 defense, similar to what Tampa Bay ran in the late 80's/early 90's.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

All that matters is that they find a good defensive coordinator and provide him with the players he needs to make the system work.

[Cotton Fitzsimmons]

The reason the 5-2 would be successful:

 

Offensive Formation: Split backs/1 TE

Offensive Play: Ye Ole' Quick Pitch

 

OR

 

Offensive Play: Ye Ole' Play Action/Goin Yard

 

Defensively, we align 3 DT's, 2 DE's, 2 LB's, and our standard 4 man secondary.

The NOSE TACKLE lines up directly over Center, guards are left open, but LB's line up in their gap 4 yards from LOS, 2 DT's line up directly over tackles, 1 DE lines up over TE, 1 DE lines up uncovered.

 

Result: Buffalo Bills Win

[BillsfaninFl]

Why not let the existing good players and the best players available in the draft/FA dictate what scheme to use, rather than hiring some idiot coach who only knows how to coach one way and then having to blow up the team yet again because they don't have the 'right personnel'.

 

Because for the Bills to be successful, they must have a defensive scheme that will work well against the teams in our division: the six most important games on our schedule. The 3-4 is what works best against all three of our division rivals, although not for the same reasons. The other ingredients must be players that are bigger than ours and a pass rush that is formidable. The Bills were close to having the right personnel when they had Pat Williams and Ted Washington on the defensive line. At that time, they were only a couple of players away from having an awesome defense that could run the 3-4 succesfully against our foes. But they blew it by not realizing what they had and what could be done with it. The rest is history.

[Orton's Arm]

I voted for the 3-4!!

 

With a 3-4, you have the three down linemen who rush the passer pretty much every pass play. But then you normally send in a fourth guy--one of your linebackers. But the linebacker you're sending in will vary from play to play. That unpredictability will cause confusion within the offense about who's supposed to block whom.

 

With a 4-3, your standard package involves rushing four down linemen. If you want to create unpredictability, you need to rush a fifth guy, or you need to drop one of your down linemen into coverage to take the place of a blitzer. Either option leaves you more vulnerable to big pass plays than a four man rush/3-4 would be.

 

The inherent unpredictability advantage of a 3-4 is why you can have a good, solid defense without necessarily having top-tier athletes at every position. As long as you have very good players at the four key positions--NT, RDE, rushing OLB, and primary CB--you can get by with lesser players at the other seven positions.

 

In contrast, the system we have in place now can work, but you need dominant athletes at a lot of positions. Your front four have to dominate the other team's OL, as Tampa's DL did back in its Super Bowl win. You apparently need a dominant secondary, which would explain why the front office threw so many high draft picks at it while Jauron was the head coach. I also remember Tampa having one or more dominant LBs back when it won that Super Bowl.

[bills_fan_in_raleigh]

I voted 3 - 4 however major concerned we dont have the players for that scheme. Maybe Maybin and Kelsey on outside with schobel playing DT however need a 1 GAP guy and dont see that on roster right now, Plus Poz inst tough enough for middle of 3 - 4. Just my opinion

[JJBuffalo]

I voted for the 3-4!!

 

With a 3-4, you have the three down linemen who rush the passer pretty much every pass play. But then you normally send in a fourth guy--one of your linebackers. But the linebacker you're sending in will vary from play to play. That unpredictability will cause confusion within the offense about who's supposed to block whom.

 

With a 4-3, your standard package involves rushing four down linemen. If you want to create unpredictability, you need to rush a fifth guy, or you need to drop one of your down linemen into coverage to take the place of a blitzer. Either option leaves you more vulnerable to big pass plays than a four man rush/3-4 would be.

 

The inherent unpredictability advantage of a 3-4 is why you can have a good, solid defense without necessarily having top-tier athletes at every position. As long as you have very good players at the four key positions--NT, RDE, rushing OLB, and primary CB--you can get by with lesser players at the other seven positions.

 

In contrast, the system we have in place now can work, but you need dominant athletes at a lot of positions. Your front four have to dominate the other team's OL, as Tampa's DL did back in its Super Bowl win. You apparently need a dominant secondary, which would explain why the front office threw so many high draft picks at it while Jauron was the head coach. I also remember Tampa having one or more dominant LBs back when it won that Super Bowl.

 

Great Post. I agree 100%

[Pirate Angel]

as long as it stops the offense any r fine with me

[evilbuffalobob]

I love the 3-4, however, it is the en vogue defense now, just as the Tampa-2 was when we hopped on that bandwagon. My point = when you're hopping on a wagon, it's already too late.

 

We need to be innovative. The 5-2... why the hell not?

 

Or a well-conceived version of the Confusion-D, constantly switching-up the 3-4 and the 4-3. Something that's not copying catting, please.

[Cotton Fitzsimmons]

We need to be innovative. The 5-2... why the hell not?

 

Tampa Bay straight up busted that 5-2 in the late 80's/early 90's. Twas the shizzle.

 

You need the personnel to do it, but, if you have it you can really create problems for the offense because you match up man to man across the line and doesn't allow for any double teams. Every single O-lineman has to be able to hold their ground man up, if they cannot... the play is busted. Even if they can maintain a hat on a hat, it's impossible to leak a guard out to take out a backer.

 

Tampa did not have quality personnel when they ran this, but I feel the right grouping of personnel could pull this off. Assuming you got a Suh in the draft and pair him with a Marcus Stroud type DT, you could put in a Kyle Williams (or ideally a Ted Washington type NT) on the center and now the guards have to man up with Stroud and Suh. On an every down basis, how many guards are going to be able to hold their own one on one with Stroud or a player who could (I stress potentially, but he sure looks like the real deal) potentially be as dominant as Suh? Now everytime a guard doesn't stand these guys up one on one, there's pressure right up the gut and a busted play for the offense.

[fansince61]

as long as it stops the offense any r fine with me

 

Bingo! That is the only correct answer. At the beginning of this year a few more teams switched to the 3-4. But there are two undefeated teams playing with a 4-3 base defense. Look for the trend to fluctuate back as it always has. IMHO just run the defense that matches your:

a. divisional opponents offensive strengths; and

b. own team's personnel.