C.Biscuit97 Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 I think people are way overrating the transition from a 4-3 to 3-4. 1) We were one of the worst run defenses ever in a 4-3. We finished 2nd last. So they only way it could get worse is if we finished dead last. i'm a betting man and I would take my chances that we improve. 2) The best part of defense, the secondary, doesn't really have their assignments change. And in fact, they are adding a super talented 1st round corner who missed 14 games to the mix. 3) We upgraded the front 7's size big time. This would add to the believe we will be much better against the run. 4) The majority of the guys on our team have experience with a 3-4. Andra Davis, Edwards, Mitchell all have played in the 3-4 previously. The rookies we drafted are a clean slate and some have played in a 3-4 all ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jethro_tull Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 no one is over rating anything, especially the merits of the 3-4 defense the article from RF365 just mentioned that out of three teams that used it for the first time last year, one had modest improvement in the defense statistically and two had outstanding improvement. there are many pieces of the puzzle that make a defense successful but the point of the article seemed to be that a switch to the 3-4 scheme is not necessarily a step backward that the defense must recover from and to cancel the idea that a horrible season for the Bills in 2010 is a given because of all of the changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpl6876 Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 11-5 and on our way to a playoff birth...Go Bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Those teams had rosters that were set up really well for the switch to the 3 - 4. We have been working from the Tampa Two, a defense which relies on speed and requires small quick guys in the front seven. Now we're switching to a defense which requires huge powerful guys in the front seven. In Green Bay's first year as a 3 - 4, they had 340 pound (well, that's what he's listed as, but seriously it's probably more like 355) Ryan Pickett, with lots of experience at NT and still picked 337 pound B.J. Raji to back him up, and Raji ended up playing quite a bit at DE. We have no NT with experience. Our starter weighs 306. We did draft a guy who weighs 314, but that's still too small, and rookie DTs don't generally amount to much anyway, once you get outside the top ten or so anyway. NT is the crucial position in the run defense in a 3 -4. Green Bay was ready at NT. We're not. The second-most important position in a 3 - 4 is ROLB, the sack specialist in this defense. Green Bay knew they didn't have anybody to fill that position, so they picked Clay Mathews in the first round. Bingo. Ten sacks. Buffalo also knows they don't have anybody (several maybe possiblys, but not one guy we know is good), and so in the first they drafted .... a running back. Is it any surprise Green Bay was good? They treated those two positions as key needs and filled them. We haven't. If we had somehow done that, who knows, maybe our defense would have been good this year. As it is, it's hurry up and wait for 2012. no one is over rating anything, especially the merits of the 3-4 defense the article from RF365 just mentioned that out of three teams that used it for the first time last year, one had modest improvement in the defense statistically and two had outstanding improvement. there are many pieces of the puzzle that make a defense successful but the point of the article seemed to be that a switch to the 3-4 scheme is not necessarily a step backward that the defense must recover from and to cancel the idea that a horrible season for the Bills in 2010 is a given because of all of the changes. NONE of the three teams that switched to the 3 - 4 last year were coming from the Tampa Two. The Tampa Two is a defense which requires completely different body types (small and fast) and completely different skill sets (penetration into gaps) than the 3 - 4 does. That is why the Bills will have a great deal more trouble than those three teams. Their rosters were much better set up for the transitions. The Pack already had Pickett, for Pete's sake. Denver had Dumervil, who is the perfect ROLB, and proved it by leading the league in sacks. Denver was terrific at pass defense, but it wasn't a coincidence that with 315 pound Ronald Fields at NT, they looked great early in the year and wore down and looked terrible late at run defense. Denver was 27th in the league at defensive yards per carry, allowing 4.5 yards per carry. 26th in the league at rushing yardage allowed. Denver went 8 - 8 last year and the run defense was a lot of the reason they didn't do much better. Maybe they should have done much better with such a terrific pass defense. As long as being lousy at run defense is something that we can overcome, it shouldn't be too much of a problem that our players either don't fit the requirements of the 3 - 4 (Kyle Williams, among others), or are too young to expect much out of this year (Troup, among others). If we had a Dumervil or a Ryan Pickett, things would look much better. We don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpl6876 Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Thurman, I am a former gloom and doomer now trying to be an optimist. Perhaps, I am in denial. Reluctantly, I agree with your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxelRipper Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Everyone says that we arent setup to stop the run... but is there any possible way that we will be a worse run D than last year? If we are any better than the 31st ranked run D then we've made progress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Those teams had rosters that were set up really well for the switch to the 3 - 4. We have been working from the Tampa Two, a defense which relies on speed and requires small quick guys in the front seven. Now we're switching to a defense which requires huge powerful guys in the front seven. Way to throw cold water on the optimists. Fine post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts