We are playing a 3-4 Defense

[SteamRoller67]

Tyson Jackson is a freak and not a typical DE. He is built like Reggie White, a rarety at the DE position. Most DEs are less power, more quickness, like a schobel, or (prototypically) Bruce Smith.

 

Schobel at OLB would be HORRIBLE. Teams would run spread offenses, forcing Schobel into coverage against, for example, Dallas Clark. how do you think that would work out?

 

Even Maybin, the greek statue he is, is not quite athletic enough to be a bona fide outside linebacker.

 

If we switch to 3-4 we would put Kelsay and Maybin on the ends (assuming Schobel is retiring) and we'd need a massive body in the middle, which we don't have right now. Wilfork would be a f/a option. Then we'd need an ILB to go with Poz. Mitchell and Nic Harris could play outside, but that is a pretty weak linebacking corp if we don't reinforce it via free agency or draft. This would be a pretty mighty overhaul.

 

You have no idea what a 3-4 is, do you? The idea is pressure from all angles, not dropping 4 LBers in coverage.

Spread offense? The Bills don't play Florida or Michigan in 2010.

Maybin could never, I repeat, never play DE in a 3-4. He would get smoked by double teams... gaurd/tackle or tackle/TE. 275-280 pounds is the bare minimum to play 3-4 DE.

[nostyle126]

very true about TE's, but not out of spreads

 

 

Williams & Stroud would be better 3-4 ends than Kelsay & Maybin

A spread is a dramatic example of how an offense could force the defense into an uncomfortable formation that would put Schobel in space against a receiver. Advantage: offense. Of course there are other situation in which TEs would create mismatches without being in a spread offense.

 

As for Stroud and Williams, neither is ideal for a DE in a 3-4. If you want an example of a prototypical 3-4 DE it's Richard Seymour. That's the kind of athleticism/build you're looking for.

[nostyle126]

You have no idea what a 3-4 is, do you? The idea is pressure from all angles, not dropping 4 LBers in coverage.

Spread offense? The Bills don't play Florida or Michigan in 2010.

Maybin could never, I repeat, never play DE in a 3-4. He would get smoked by double teams... gaurd/tackle or tackle/TE. 275-280 pounds is the bare minimum to play 3-4 DE.

Lining up in a 3-4 doesn't instantly mean you're sending pressure. You can still only rush 3 if you want. Send another man and you're still only at 4 rushers...that's not even considered a blitz yet. If the goal is to get "pressure from all angles" this can easily be achieved in a 4-3. Some of you seem to think that the 3-4 is a magic want for pressure. You're oversimplifying things.

 

And here's a newsflash for you regarding Maybin. If he's ever as good as we expect him to be (as a first round draft pick) he WILL get double teamed, whether he's in a 3-4 or a 4-3. Maybin needs to put on mass regardless. A 250-pound DE is going to struggle in a 4-3 as well as a 3-4. But he can become, say, a Derrick Burgess type (260 lbs) and rush the edge in a 3-4. I can see that. I said we'd play him at DE out of lack of bodies as much as anything else. If schobel sticks around we'd have him and Kelsay at DE and push Maybin out to OLB so he could rush the edge.

 

Again, none of this is ideal for our personnel. Bills nation is simply demanding 3-4 for the sake of "change" much like this nation voted for Obama for the sake of "change"...but sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for.

[nostyle126]

You have no idea what a 3-4 is, do you? The idea is pressure from all angles, not dropping 4 LBers in coverage.

Spread offense? The Bills don't play Florida or Michigan in 2010.

Maybin could never, I repeat, never play DE in a 3-4. He would get smoked by double teams... gaurd/tackle or tackle/TE. 275-280 pounds is the bare minimum to play 3-4 DE.

and as for the spread offense comment, just wait until the Pats line up three WRs to schobel's side and he's supposed to somehow chase Welker around in space.

[Orton's Arm]

Again, none of this is ideal for our personnel. Bills nation is simply demanding 3-4 for the sake of "change" much like this nation voted for Obama for the sake of "change"...but sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for.

I disagree with your last comment. The Bills' 3-4 defense of the mid- to late '90s was clearly superior to any of the variants we've seen of the 4-3 since then. This past year's defense faced a lot of lousy quarterbacks (Derek Anderson, Sanchez twice, etc.), which means that it was not quite as good against the pass as its statistics would seem to suggest.

 

With a 3-4, you can have a very good defense if you get good players at the four key positions: NT, RDE, rushing OLB, and #1 CB. The Tampa-2, along with other 4-3 variants, generally requires a significantly higher level of player talent than the late '90s Bills defenses had in order to achieve the same results.

 

I agree that there's a price to be paid for switching, in terms of players who'd fit better in the 4-3 than the 3-4. But how many good, reasonably young players do we have in our front 7, for whom we couldn't find a spot in the 3-4? Off the top of my head it's hard to think of any. Kyle Williams could be a LDE in a 3-4, Poz could probably be an ILB. Even Maybin (who hasn't proven anything yet) would likely be a better fit as an OLB in a 3-4 than a DE in a 4-3. Is there any good, relatively young front 7 player I'm missing?

 

The Bills are a rebuilding team. While it's important for our defensive system to fit our good, young players, building it around aging veterans who will be retired or backup-level in just a year or two doesn't make sense. In the long run those guys are gone either way, so why worry about whether the defense is or isn't a good fit for them?

[nostyle126]

I disagree with your last comment. The Bills' 3-4 defense of the mid- to late '90s was clearly superior to any of the variants we've seen of the 4-3 since then.

Simply not true. Our 3-4 defense was the team's achilles heal for a long time. It was actually a lot like the Saints' defense of this year, which looks great when playing with the lead but is exposed in tight games. We went to the 4-3 with Ted Washington and Pat Williams in the middle and had an outstanding defense for a while.

 

This past year's defense faced a lot of lousy quarterbacks (Derek Anderson, Sanchez twice, etc.), which means that it was not quite as good against the pass as its statistics would seem to suggest.

 

I agree with you there. Lousy QBs and teams that were not pressed to throw the ball because we rarely had the lead. While I admit that our passing D numbers are inflated, I still think we have a good bit of talent in the secondary.

 

With a 3-4, you can have a very good defense if you get good players at the four key positions: NT, RDE, rushing OLB, and #1 CB. The Tampa-2, along with other 4-3 variants, generally requires a significantly higher level of player talent than the late '90s Bills defenses had in order to achieve the same results.

That's debatable. I agree with you about the 3-4, but a 4-3 can be solid so long as the front four is dominant. Look, there is a very simple point to be made here...regardless of formation, YOU MUST PRESSURE THE QB. If your front four can't get that done, then it doesn't matter if you have 7 guys in zone behind it. SOMEONE WILL EVENTUALLY GET OPEN. So whether we go 4-3 or switch to a 3-4, what matters is that we admit that our D cannot get pressure without blitzing! Time to put more pressure on our secondary by blitzing more frequently. That's my take.

 

I agree that there's a price to be paid for switching, in terms of players who'd fit better in the 4-3 than the 3-4. But how many good, reasonably young players do we have in our front 7, for whom we couldn't find a spot in the 3-4? Off the top of my head it's hard to think of any. Kyle Williams could be a LDE in a 3-4, Poz could probably be an ILB. Even Maybin (who hasn't proven anything yet) would likely be a better fit as an OLB in a 3-4 than a DE in a 4-3. Is there any good, relatively young front 7 player I'm missing?

It's not that you're missing guys on the roster, it's that the roster is missing guys for the 3-4. The switch would require the addition of a NT and at least one more linebacker, if not two.

[Thoner7]

You have no idea what a 3-4 is, do you? The idea is pressure from all angles, not dropping 4 LBers in coverage.

Spread offense? The Bills don't play Florida or Michigan in 2010.

Maybin could never, I repeat, never play DE in a 3-4. He would get smoked by double teams... gaurd/tackle or tackle/TE. 275-280 pounds is the bare minimum to play 3-4 DE.

 

Maybin gets smoked by single teams made up of the other teams 2nd or 3rd string TE.

[Orton's Arm]

The Bills' 3-4 defense of the mid- to late '90s was clearly superior to any of the variants we've seen of the 4-3 since then.

Simply not true. Our 3-4 defense was the team's achilles heal for a long time. It was actually a lot like the Saints' defense of this year, which looks great when playing with the lead but is exposed in tight games. We went to the 4-3 with Ted Washington and Pat Williams in the middle and had an outstanding defense for a while.

I have the feeling that we're not going to reach consensus here, but let's see. During the Flutie/Johnson controversy, the team's defense was clearly superior to its offense. That defense carried the team into the playoffs, and (had it not been for the Music City Miracle) could potentially have carried the team all the way to the Super Bowl. A few years earlier--when we had both Bruce Smith and Bryce Paup--the defense was also better than anything we've seen in the 2000s.

 

At no point did the Bills use Ted Washington and Pat Williams in a 4-3 defense on a regular basis. Ted Washington left after the 2000 season, and the 4-3 was implemented in 2001. You may be thinking of "the package" that was implemented on certain downs, which had both players on the field. But if memory serves, "the package" was 3-4, with one of those guys at NT, and the other at DE.

 

While I admit that our passing D numbers are inflated, I still think we have a good bit of talent in the secondary.

No argument there!

That's debatable. I agree with you about the 3-4, but a 4-3 can be solid so long as the front four is dominant. Look, there is a very simple point to be made here...regardless of formation, YOU MUST PRESSURE THE QB. If your front four can't get that done, then it doesn't matter if you have 7 guys in zone behind it.

 

With the 4-3, you pretty much have to send in your front four on every play (dropping some DL into pass coverage is a little silly). So if you want to create unpredictability and keep the offense off balance, you pretty much have to blitz. With the 3-4, the offense knows you're sending your down linemen. But you can create unpredictability for them by sending in guy #4--some LB. And you vary which LB you send from one play to the next. That gives you unpredictability without the risks associated with blitzing.

 

It's not that you're missing guys on the roster, it's that the roster is missing guys for the 3-4. The switch would require the addition of a NT and at least one more linebacker, if not two.

 

I'll grant that. But we only have one good, reasonably young DL: Kyle Williams. We only have one proven, reasonably good LB: Poz. Admittedly, those gaps can be hidden in the short run by using older players or guys who are only marginally good. But sooner or later, something will have to be done about all that.

 

When you're thinking in rebuilding terms, it's good to have a two to three year time horizon. With this being year one. By the end of year three, the Bills will probably need five new starting players in their front seven. The 3-4/4-3 question probably doesn't impact that long-term need situation at all: it's five players either way.

[nostyle126]

I misspoke with Ted Washington. I mean Sam Adams and Pat Williams.

 

I really don't disagree with you that much. The 3-4 is more versatile in that you have a more athletic LB on the field instead of a less athletic DL. That allows you to more successfully zone dog without being exposed (like when we've seen Ryan Denney in pass coverage, for example). I get that.

 

But the 3-4 is only as effective as the guy running it. Just lining up in a 3-4 is not a magical fix for this team, and I get the feeling too many people on this board think that a switch to the 3-4 is all we need to do. Even once we have the ideal personnel for a 3-4, we still gotta have a brain running it the right way.

[frogger]

why do people assume that if you are a base 3-4 team you stick to it all the time. a zone blitz 3-4, that on passing downs switch to a 2-4-5 or a 4-2-5, by moving stroud inside with the nose and either schobel or Maybin put there hand down. No one is going to ask Harrison to cover dallas clark, no one is going to see Pace or thomas cover him this weekend. It is a safety or zone. if the offense spreads the d out, you counter with more DBs.

 

The main goal of the DL is to take up the OL, which frees up the LBs to make plays. the problem I saw this year is that the DL did not know their assignments and took themselves out of the play. I feel strongly that Schobel, Kelsey, and Maybin can make the switch to OLB in a 3-4. all three were viewed highly coming out of college as OLB for the 3-4.

 

Stroud can play LE, and Johnson can also play End. Williams might not be the answer to NT, if Hampton is availible (which the steelers rarely re-sign their vets) get him and out him at NT.

 

If we are able to move into the 1st for a 2nd pick, and still keep the 2nd...trade 2 3rds and a 2011 first to move into the later picks in the 1st to get a LT after getting a QB at 9. the 2nd best ILB in the draft Brandon Spikes is Ideal for the ILB in a 3-4. Spikes and Poz, with Schobel and Maybin outside...Mitchell, Harris (passing downs) backing up inside, and Kelsey and Mitchell (he can both) backing up Outside

[Steely Dan]

LDE-Stroud

NT-Williams(adds 10lbs) baltimore has Gregg(6' 315)

RDE- Johnson

 

not sure at lb; some combination of Poz,Mitchell,Maybin someone on roster( Ellison,Palmer,Harris),FA and Draft pick

Think Schobel retires

 

I'd rather go 4-3. That's not a viable 3-4 line in my opinion. If the guy coming in hasn't run the 3-4 much then they should stay 4-3. The 3-4 is not some magic formation that automatically makes things better. You need the right players to make it work. The Bills aren't there yet.

 

 

 

This makes no sense what so ever. As a matter of "fact", any comments that attempt to put the Bills into some "offense" first tailspin come draft time is absolute nonsense. You have to look at this upcoming season as a "rebuilding" season, in doing so, you move components around (players) like they were pieces on a chess board.

 

The perfect example of this is the 90 to 94 Bills, it took the team 3 years to build to the 90 squad and the following seasons individual positional components were added.

The first thing on this team that should be addressed draft day should be the LB position with McClain, there is no strong top 10 pick franchise QB's. I would take Lefevour with the 41st pick (the up and coming Frank Reich for the Bills?) and wait to see whats available next draft class or FA period. I would not bring in McNabb or Vick, waste of money IMO.

 

As for the OT position, look to FA this off season or trade up and grab one in the draft (Campbell, Maryland?)

There is no reason why the Bills couldn't have a core of Veteran players with young talent by the end of FA in 2011.

 

OT's are not easy to come by. That's why Philly was happy to give up a lot of crap for Peters. Once a team gets an outstanding OT they rarely let them go. JMO

 

 

Didn't Warren Sapp try being a 3-4 end in Oakland? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that experiment was a failure for him, and he ended up switching back to his 3-technique position of a 4-3 Tackle.

 

Yeah, I seem to recall that too.

[nostyle126]

OT's are not easy to come by. That's why Philly was happy to give up a lot of crap for Peters. Once a team gets an outstanding OT they rarely let them go. JMO

You're making way too much sense for obd.

[Orton's Arm]

I misspoke with Ted Washington. I mean Sam Adams and Pat Williams.

 

I really don't disagree with you that much. The 3-4 is more versatile in that you have a more athletic LB on the field instead of a less athletic DL. That allows you to more successfully zone dog without being exposed (like when we've seen Ryan Denney in pass coverage, for example). I get that.

 

But the 3-4 is only as effective as the guy running it. Just lining up in a 3-4 is not a magical fix for this team, and I get the feeling too many people on this board think that a switch to the 3-4 is all we need to do. Even once we have the ideal personnel for a 3-4, we still gotta have a brain running it the right way.

I agree with your post. For a 3-4 defense to work in Buffalo, we need a smart, innovative defensive coordinator, and we need the right players. We can (hopefully!) acquire the first of those things over the next week or so. As for getting the right players: making the switch to a 3-4, now, would allow the team to focus on acquiring defensive players suited for that scheme. (As well as on offensive players, of course!) The goal isn't to have all the right players in place at the start of the 2010 season, but you want to at least come close to that for the start of 2011. And to be close to finished with the rebuilding effort by 2012.