H2o Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Over the last few years I've been considering this. I've always liked a 3-4 set with the breed of LB's it calls for. Look at the Pats*, Chargers(with Merriman), Steelers, and Ravens(of years past). It allows for a broader variety of blitz packages. It seems to be more confusing to an offense. I think that if there was ever a year to make this move, it's now with the FA's available. It would call for a serious revamping of our defensive unit though. I'm going to put out a scenario of FA moves coupled with draft picks that could transition into this new scheme. Let's start with who we should keep. Stroud, Mitchell, Posluzsny, Greer, McGee, Youboty, McKelvin, Corner, Simpson, Whitner, and Ellis. I think Stroud could add some weight in the offseason and be "the guy" in the middle of the line in our 3-4 defense, I think Mitchell could play one of the ILB positions and play it well, I see Poz as being the LOLB because he's a pretty good run defender that could use his speed in coming off of the edge, our secondary is young and has a ton of potential, and I don't think that we've had time to figure out anything about Ellis yet. Everyone else....................Don't let the door hit you on the way out of OBD. Schoebel's been a solid guy for this organization so I'd consider keeping him, but he'd have to bulk up to play in this defense. It doesn't really suit his game though because he's never really played well against the run and DE's in the 3-4 have to play well against the run. More than likely, take what you can get for the guy in a trade. Might be only a 5th or 6th, but it's something. FA moves we should make. The biggest push should be for Terrel Suggs. He would be the ROLB that would be our biggest pass rushing threat. The guy is fast enough to drop into coverage as well. Perfect fit. Then we could go after a guy like Chris Canty who's familiar with the system to play one of the DE spots. He hasn't been a standout in Dallas, but I think he plays well enough and a change of scenery would serve him well. Victor Adeyanju, from St. Louis, is another guy we could go after to serve at DE. He would take the field on a rotational basis being one of the guys we have for depth, but he plays well enough that he could end up being a surprise starter. Gabe Watson from Arizona could be a guy we go after for depth at DT. Bart Scott is the second Baltimore Raven we should make a run at. He already knows the 3-4 well and is a SOLID player. He would play one of the OLB positions, probably playing the LOLB position in a rotation with Poz. He will be 30 next season though and that is something that should be considered. Michael Boley and Leroy Hill are options, but they are too undersized for this defensive scheme IMO. I don't think they would be a good fit though they are good players. I think that we should make a hard run at Sean Jones from Cleveland to play SS so we can move Whitner to FS. That would be one of THE BEST Safety tandems in the league. The rest of the needs will be addressed in the draft. Say we get the players I named in the FA market for the most part, here's a list of the players I think we should be going after in the 2009 NFL Draft to play in our new defense. The main thing would be the second ILB position to play beside Mitchell. Who we get would depend on our draft position of course and this is total speculation right now, just like the rest of the post . Say we lose against Cleveland, I think we end up 7-9 again. Let's just say that is pick #10. Rey Maualuga is the guy that would be our ILB for the next 8-10 years. He is a Pro Bowl waiting to happen once he steps foot on an NFL field. The bad thing is we will win too many games to be able to select him first unless we trade up. PLEASE GOD HELP US!!! After Rey, alot of people will be calling for Laurinaitis. I'd rather have Brandon Spikes from Florida. I think we trade down a couple of spots in the 1st and take Tyson Jackson. Jackson could be our version of Richard Seymour. That would get us another 2nd round pick and a 4th or 5th as well. In the 2nd round we could get Clint Sintim from UVA with our first and Spikes with our second selection. Sintim is a GOOD LB that would be our starter at OLB before it's all said and done while Spikes could immediately start at the ILB position. I think we could also pick up Ron Brace from BC in the 5th or 6th round for depth at the DT position. His partner in crime B.J. Raji would be great to have, but he'll be gone EARLY in round 1. We'll have to wait and see who slips through the cracks to be gotten in the later rounds. If Egboh from Stanford slips, I think we should take a later round chance on the guy for a DE. Maybe a guy like Mitch King from Iowa as a DE if he would happen to fall also. If the 1st 3 picks played out like I stated and the free agent moves also, our defense would be ready to go in '09. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 I don't know about all of the draft ideas, but I agree with the 3-4 D. However, I think that it would take too much personel changes and take a few years to get where it needs to be. I think a 4-6 would make more sense for us in the immediate future and gives other teams the same problems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Ok, in the past ten years we have shifted from 3-4 Wade to 4-3/3-4 hybrid (wade) to 4-6/4-3 D under greggo to 4-3 (Greggo/Mularkey) to Tampa 2. Everytime you shift scheme like this, you have to get a ton of a new personnel. The problem with our D is lack of depth, which is exposed every time we have a large number of injuries. You put a lot of thought into something that could quite possibly set the team back another couple years. I can agree with the personell that we have, that a 4-6 may be work for now, as both Scott and Whitner are agressive SS's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Ok, in the past ten years we have shifted from 3-4 Wade to 4-3/3-4 hybrid (wade) to 4-6/4-3 D under greggo to 4-3 (Greggo/Mularkey) to Tampa 2. Everytime you shift scheme like this, you have to get a ton of a new personnel. The problem with our D is lack of depth, which is exposed every time we have a large number of injuries. You put a lot of thought into something that could quite possibly set the team back another couple years. I can agree with the personell that we have, that a 4-6 may be work for now, as both Scott and Whitner are agressive SS's I don't know if there is anything wrong with a 4-3. When you have a strong tendency to rush 4 guys who aren't that effective at pressuring the qb and have youR LBs dropping back and everyone covering to "keep it in front of you", you're making it easy for the opposition to run a ball control offense against you and not generating turnovers. Kinda odd that the Bills play defense exactly as they'd like their opposition to play defense against their offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Yeah let's change schemes YET again when we don't even have the proper personnel to run the scheme we have. I really don't understand the love affair on this board with the 3-4. It takes some special players to run that defense successfully. It takes a huge NT, big and fast DEs, big LBs that play the run well and blitz the QB effectively. Now which of these personnel do we have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPicc2114 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 sorry.. Stroud is going to be an old man sooner rather than later.. Our defensive ends are too undersized to play in a 3-4 and .. Oh ya... didnt we try this about 10 years ago??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WellDressed Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Where to go.....what to do.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Mike1 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 sorry.. Stroud is going to be an old man sooner rather than later.. Our defensive ends are too undersized to play in a 3-4 and .. Oh ya... didnt we try this about 10 years ago??? Didn't we go to 4 Superbowls with a 3-4..... It's all personnel- Jesus, I got blown out of here in the pre-season because I said the Jets made the moves to be contenders. Whatever defense you play you have to have bad ass lineman. All teams have to do is double team Stroud and the other light weights get blown off the line. If our idiot front office does not cut Kelsay, and replace with a stud, add 1 more good tackle AND a stud OLB, this problem will always be there :lol: :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPicc2114 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 The key to a 3-4 is a big athletic outside LB, a beast fat nose tackle, a couple 300 pound DEs, and middle linebackers who love to smash people's faces in. This defense really sucks if you dont have the personel for it. Jauron runs a cover 2 to compensate for some weak players at key positions. The cover 2 right now is probably the most logical choice for a defense on this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 It's not a scheme problem. The Tampa-2 is an effective defense when run correctly, the problem is we run it like sh--. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted November 16, 2008 Author Share Posted November 16, 2008 The players are out there in FA this year if we were to make a commitment to change. To all of the nay sayers I say "YES WE CAN!" and we should, along with replacing a majority of the coaching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Too many changes in personnel to become effective immediately. We need pass rush from DE's and better depth at LB not to mention upgrades on O-line. If the Bills want to improve the O-line and D- line must be priorities in the off season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills44 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 I'll be happy with any scheme other than the Tampa Cover 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 I'll be happy with any scheme other than the Tampa Cover 2 Or at least run the cover 2, but don't slavishly follow the players "needed" to run it. I bet a 350 lbs. DT can operate effectively in a cover 2 just like I'll bet bigger DEs and LBs would work just fine as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubj04 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 It's not a scheme problem. The Tampa-2 is an effective defense when run correctly, the problem is we run it like sh--. Without a pass rush, teams will continue to play pitch and catch and move the ball at will. If a scheme change isn't the answer we need some blitz packages or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Without a pass rush, teams will continue to play pitch and catch and move the ball at will. If a scheme change isn't the answer we need some blitz packages or something. Without a pass rush from your down linemen, it doesn't matter what scheme you play. Every good defense in the league gets pressure with four rushers. It's the definition of a successful defense. And it doesn't matter if they're four DLs (4-3/Tampa-2), three and an LB (3-4) or some combination (zone blitz) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts