D' men Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Personally I like the 4-3. However my gut feeling is that next year it will be 3-4 defense. Both are good. Here what I think it will be: 3-4 RE Schobel - DT Adams- LE Kelsay/Denney
2003 Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 I think it will be a 3-4. A. Scobel, S. Adams, R. Brock W. Witherspoon, A. Crowell, L. Fletcher, T. Spikes
eball Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 I think it will be a 3-4. A. Scobel, S. Adams, R. Brock W. Witherspoon, A. Crowell, L. Fletcher, T. Spikes 587275[/snapback] We should be so lucky to have Witherspoon on Marv's and Modrak's radar. He would be a great addition.
D' men Posted January 29, 2006 Author Posted January 29, 2006 We should be so lucky to have Witherspoon on Marv's and Modrak's radar. He would be a great addition. 587279[/snapback] Witherspoon will be a free agent??????? I didn't know that! Alright lets get him.
BADOLBILZ Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 I think it will be a 3-4. A. Scobel, S. Adams, R. Brock W. Witherspoon, A. Crowell, L. Fletcher, T. Spikes 587275[/snapback] If there is a way to finish 33rd in the league in run defense I believe you have found it.
d_wag Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 it will be a 4-3 -- we do not have the NT required to play a 3-4 AND both schobel and kesley are 4-3 ends.......
The Dean Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 I believe I've stated this in another thread. I prefer the 5-2. Five lineman, two LBs.
WVUFootball29 Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Quoted from my post the other day As for the 3-4...I'm a major advocate of this style of defense. I think our LB core of Spikes-Crowell-Fletcher-Posey could be a bigtime threat. Posey, who has been incorrectly used in our past 4-3 defenses would get the chance to prove why he was picked up from the Texans where he flourished in the 3-4. Crowell is a playmaker who would definately compliment and support Spikes coming off his injury. The only problem I have with the 3-4 and this team is I dont believe our DL could handle it. The lack of size in our defensive front would get swallowed up quickly by opposing OLs...just like we saw this year with a 4 man front. Sam Adams is a bit too slow to be really productive as a NT, but I have a feeling his days are numbered in Buffalo anyways. If the Bills are serious about making the switch to the 3-4, I would highly recommend that we take Mario Williams or Haloti Ngata with the first pick. Williams has the size and speed to still be an effective pass rusher out of the 3-4 and Ngata has played NT throughout his college career. Also, an alternative to the 3-4 that I wouldn't mind seeing or at least experimenting with during training camp is the 3-3-5 bandit defense. While it is similar to the 3-4, instead of having 4 established LBs on the field there are 3 set LBs 4 set DBs and a roving bandit which is typically a SS or a very fast LB. the bandits job is typically to blitz or provide cover for another blitzing player. I think Milloy would fill the position of bandit nicely. Just a thought of mine. I also think Coy Wire would be a good bandit player as the position plays more to his strengths(with that said, let the cruifixition begin).
IndyMark Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 Formation wanting to be seen? How about any friggin formation that can stop a 3rd down conversion. 6-1,1-6, 5-2, 2-5, 0-7, 7-0, who cares let's just field a defense that can stop even the most limp offense - period. That said, to an earlier poster who has inserted Raheem Brock in the DL. For our purposes I would target Larry Triplett over Brock. But that is just me - Triplett brings a complement to Sam Adams whereas, while maybe a slight upgrade against the pass, Brock would not bring as much as an upgrade - though that is purely speculation.
Buftex Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 They have been talking about this very topic, on FOX SPORTS Radio today. They have been asking various offensive players around the leauge, which defense is harder to play against. To a man (including our very own Kelly Holcomb) all said the 3-4 is harder to play against, because it seems to offer the defense a lot more coverage options, and is harder for the offensive line to read. Also, the assumption seems to be that a 3-4 usually indicates that there are a greater number of athletic players on the field. Interistingly, the feeling seems to be that the Seahawks, who have only played the 3-4 once all season (vs the Cowboys) have the bigger adjustments to make, playing against the Steelers 3-4!
D' men Posted January 30, 2006 Author Posted January 30, 2006 it will be a 4-3 -- we do not have the NT required to play a 3-4 AND both schobel and kesley are 4-3 ends....... 587426[/snapback] ADAMS is a good NT. He's getting older but he's still good. Kelsay will not start next year at DE.
truth on hold Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 Personally I like the 4-3. However my gut feeling is that next year it will be 3-4 defense. Both are good. Here what I think it will be: 3-4 RE Schobel - DT Adams- LE Kelsay/Denney 587267[/snapback] at the right time, the bellicheck 2 - 11, where they only rush 2 guys and 9 guys drop back in coverage. that always seems to confuse the offense
d_wag Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 ADAMS is a good NT. He's getting older but he's still good. Kelsay will not start next year at DE. 587693[/snapback] adams cannot play the 2-gap -- he wants to freelance and will not stay at home, which is required of a 3-4 NT..........beyond that, who else do we have to throw out at a 3-4 NT? it's not like the starter would take all the snaps........the steelers have hampton AND hoke at NT, and both are very good fits for that defense....... i'm not ready to write off kelsay.......we have more pressing needs then DE going into this off-season........
D' men Posted January 30, 2006 Author Posted January 30, 2006 we have more pressing needs then DE going into this off-season........ 587707[/snapback] obviously... We need to address the following positions: LT, LG, C, DT, CB. DE?
FeelThePede Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 It depends how draft day goes. If AJ Hawk is there, he could fit right next to Fletcher in the 3-4. If Ngata is there, he would fit next to Adams in the 4-3. I'm partial to the 3-4, however. I think it gives the defense a lot of flexibility.
FeelThePede Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 obviously... We need to address the following positions: LT, LG, C, DT, CB. DE? 587726[/snapback] We should probably add S on there. I don't know if Vincent will be a Bill for 2006. There are some safeties in the draft that would fit the bill.
dib Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 given our inability to stop the run a 5-2 might be in order.
The Dean Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 given our inability to stop the run a 5-2 might be in order. 587929[/snapback] Precisely my point.
tennesseeboy Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 Next year? 4-3. We could go for a 3-4 the next year, but with existing personnel and the limited amount we CAN do in the draft I think we would be wise looking at getting a quality DT and going 4-3. We don't have the right amount of quality linebackers right now for a 3-4 and I don't think our present defensive ends would make it work either.
Fan in San Diego Posted January 30, 2006 Posted January 30, 2006 A successful one ! If we draft Ngata maybe we can run the 3 - 4 base defense. Personally, why not practice both ways and use the formation that fits the scenerio and the opponent.
Recommended Posts