BuffaloBillsForever Posted February 16, 2012 Posted February 16, 2012 (edited) Bob McCown just had a segment with Dave Wannstedt. Wannstedt basically went over that we were in a 43 base defense the majority of the time last year. He likes the 43 in terms of what you can do with defensive backs in the secondary as opposed to linebackers in coverage. It will be a heavy 43 hybrid. The team has 5 positional needs and if they can get the best player in the draft at the position it will improve the team drastically. He's been doing stuff at the combine, evaluating talent and even makes suggestions to Gailey and Nix on who he likes. GO BILLS! Edited February 16, 2012 by BuffaloBillsForever
BringBackFlutie Posted February 16, 2012 Posted February 16, 2012 I'm just so torn on whether or not the fact that we were in 4-3 all last year and sucked is a good thing.
DrDawkinstein Posted February 16, 2012 Posted February 16, 2012 I'm just so torn on whether or not the fact that we were in 4-3 all last year and sucked is a good thing. Good point, but Id more point out that towards the end of the year, when Edwards was put in the backseat and Wanny took over, our Defense played much better. I think it's more coaching than scheme or talent. Not saying we dont need to add talent though.
BuffaloBillsForever Posted February 16, 2012 Author Posted February 16, 2012 (edited) I'm just so torn on whether or not the fact that we were in 4-3 all last year and sucked is a good thing. Wansteedt believes the 43 is going to be better for our young defensive guys like Sheppard, Searcy and Dareus and how NFL offenses are evolving in general. His background is obviously a "43 guy". He was talking about how 3wr sets were the most common in the NFL. His 43 will simplify things for personnel, minimizing mismatches. One mismatch he talked about were linebackers in coverage getting matched to a WR. Edited February 16, 2012 by BuffaloBillsForever
KollegeStudnet Posted February 16, 2012 Posted February 16, 2012 From everyone who has played under or coached with, they say great things about the 'stache'! He could be one of the better defensive coordinators we've had in along time. I wish him luck and hope we get the best overall player
BuffaloBillsForever Posted February 16, 2012 Author Posted February 16, 2012 (edited) From everyone who has played under or coached with, they say great things about the 'stache'! He could be one of the better defensive coordinators we've had in along time. I wish him luck and hope we get the best overall player There are 5 "best player in draft" positions that they are after for their first round selection. What those positions are he didn't say (but we can guess) nor the pecking order. I like the fact that I got the impression that the Stache, Gailey and Nix all seem to be on the same page about what they want to do. Edited February 16, 2012 by BuffaloBillsForever
BuffaloBillsForever Posted February 16, 2012 Author Posted February 16, 2012 I wonder which 5 he sees as needs? My guesses in pecking order - LB, DE, WR, CB, OL
BADOLBILZ Posted February 16, 2012 Posted February 16, 2012 I wonder which 5 he sees as needs? The question is which way it is weighted.......3 runnin' bax and 2 D' bax or other way round.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 16, 2012 Posted February 16, 2012 I'm just so torn on whether or not the fact that we were in 4-3 all last year and sucked is a good thing. It's really a misnomer. Basically, Nix originally used the number that we ran a four man front about 56% of the time (or whatever he specifically said) to downplay the idea this was a big change or they were scrapping his original plan and drafting of 3-4 players. But all he really said, in the same conversation, was that teams passed a lot against us and this is a passing league and a lot of teams run out of a three or four WR set, which means we were in our nickel defense a lot, which is a four man front. Even when Merriman was still in there, a LB in a 3-4, on passing downs he was lined up along a 4 man front and rushed the passer, which is what he has done his entire career. We still had the same players out there as the 3-4 (with the possible exception of swapping an LB for a DB) but there were four guys on the line rushing the passer. We did play a bunch of 3-4 and a bunch of 4-3 on run downs, but on passing downs, plus against a lot of teams that run a basic three WR (or one RB offense like New England), we're almost always going to be in a 4-3.
NoSaint Posted February 16, 2012 Posted February 16, 2012 Wansteedt believes the 43 is going to be better for our young defensive guys like Sheppard, Searcy and Dareus and how NFL offenses are evolving in general. His background is obviously a "43 guy". He was talking about how 3wr sets were the most common in the NFL. His 43 will simplify things for personnel, minimizing mismatches. One mismatch he talked about were linebackers in coverage getting matched to a WR. Truly the LB vs WR shouldn't matter much 43 vs 34 as much as just general coaching philosophy. Whether a guy is hand up or hand down, your secondary assignments don't have to change, you can just as easily bring in a nickel or dime from either base. If anything having 4 lbs instead of 4 DL should help coverage not hurt unless there's scheme or personnel issues.
BuffaloBillsForever Posted February 16, 2012 Author Posted February 16, 2012 (edited) Truly the LB vs WR shouldn't matter much 43 vs 34 as much as just general coaching philosophy. Whether a guy is hand up or hand down, your secondary assignments don't have to change, you can just as easily bring in a nickel or dime from either base. If anything having 4 lbs instead of 4 DL should help coverage not hurt unless there's scheme or personnel issues. It's mostly personnel why the 34 scheme didn't work and I think he mentioned less substitions as most offensive sets are wr heavy in the NFL today. The linebacker mismatch was most obvious last year. They got picked on every week, no matter a rb, te or wr. It's certainly our biggest need. Edited February 16, 2012 by BuffaloBillsForever
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 16, 2012 Posted February 16, 2012 Wansteedt believes the 43 is going to be better for our young defensive guys like Sheppard, Searcy and Dareus and how NFL offenses are evolving in general. His background is obviously a "43 guy". He was talking about how 3wr sets were the most common in the NFL. His 43 will simplify things for personnel, minimizing mismatches. One mismatch he talked about were linebackers in coverage getting matched to a WR. I can see 3-2-6 or 4-1-6 becoming the news base defense, there goes my smashmouth league, although it has been gone for awhile
BuffaloBillsForever Posted February 16, 2012 Author Posted February 16, 2012 (edited) I can see 3-2-6 or 4-1-6 becoming the news base defense, there goes my smashmouth league, although it has been gone for awhile Hopefully we can expect smashmouth football from our front 4. His defensive schemes start with them making plays. I wouldn't even be surprised if we go DE first round. Edited February 16, 2012 by BuffaloBillsForever
atlbillsfan1975 Posted February 17, 2012 Posted February 17, 2012 I can see 3-2-6 or 4-1-6 becoming the news base defense, there goes my smashmouth league, although it has been gone for awhile I think you are right on that point. I think teams are also going to look at how the Giants are not afraid to basically use 4 DE on obvious passing downs. The rules now are such that you need quick Dline man, holding is hardly ever called...you need guys that have pass rushing skills that will not allow them to be engaged w oline man.
HuSeYiN1978 Posted February 17, 2012 Posted February 17, 2012 Good point, but Id more point out that towards the end of the year, when Edwards was put in the backseat and Wanny took over, our Defense played much better. I think it's more coaching than scheme or talent. Not saying we dont need to add talent though. When did Edwards take a back seat approach and when did Wannstedt play a bigger role last year? Can you provide a link that provides truth to what you said please? That's an article I MUST read...
UConn James Posted February 17, 2012 Posted February 17, 2012 Wansteedt believes the 43 is going to be better for our young defensive guys like Sheppard, Searcy and Dareus and how NFL offenses are evolving in general. His background is obviously a "43 guy". He was talking about how 3wr sets were the most common in the NFL. His 43 will simplify things for personnel, minimizing mismatches. One mismatch he talked about were linebackers in coverage getting matched to a WR. What about a DE/DT, being used as a LB, covering a WR? Because Spencer Johnson and Carrington did that several times in Edwards' system. That just... boggled the mind.
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 17, 2012 Posted February 17, 2012 Hopefully we can expect smashmouth football from our front 4. His defensive schemes start with them making plays. I wouldn't even be surprised if we go DE first round. Hope we do too, Ingram.
Mr. WEO Posted February 17, 2012 Posted February 17, 2012 Good point, but Id more point out that towards the end of the year, when Edwards was put in the backseat and Wanny took over, our Defense played much better. I think it's more coaching than scheme or talent. Not saying we dont need to add talent though. When, exactly, was that? In the last 4 games, we gave up 37, 30, 14 and 49 points. I missed the improvement.
DanInUticaTampa Posted February 17, 2012 Posted February 17, 2012 When, exactly, was that? In the last 4 games, we gave up 37, 30, 14 and 49 points. I missed the improvement. The defense looked more organized but they still sucked. But I don't think Edwards took a backseat. The bills said Edwards still called the plays, and gailey and nix might not be the best, but they don't seem to lie
Recommended Posts