PDA

View Full Version : 3-4 to a 4-3?


WokeUpWithaWoodley
01-19-2013, 06:02 AM
Here's a good article about the possibility to switch to a 4-3
http://steelblitz.com/should-the-steelers-switch-back-to-the-4-3-defense/2479/2013/01/18

Although I love the 3-4 defense and love having 4 linebackers on the field I'd have to say I wouldn't be mad if they made the switch.

We have the players for it and it would perhaps cut down on some team needs like linebacker and nt ( I don't think it's a need but some people do ) like the article states we would have heyward hood McClendon and Woodley on the line witha combination of Timmons spence and worlids or slyvester.

Most of these players if it all played in a 4-3 in college. Woodley at end heyward at end hood was a very good dt in 4-3. Timmons was a outside linebacker in a 4-3 and spence was a very good middle linebacker in a 4-3. I don't know if this was planned to eventually switch once key guys left cause of age but it looks like a very good defense playing in a 4-3

Hood and heyward are still learning the 3-4 but look uncomfortable playing it and would do much better in a 4-3 especially hood. Maybe Woodley put o weight to make the switch but it would allow him to rush every down and not cover.

With Timmons and spence and whoever else we would have a ton of speed on the linebackers.

Maybe it's time maybe not. Any thoughts.

Kingmagyar
01-19-2013, 09:03 AM
Always thought about a switch to a 4-3 but there are some credibility issues with how it is laid out in the article.

For one Jason Worilds was a DE in college and would play there in a 4-3 defense. In no way is he up for the almost constant pass coverage required of a 4-3 OLB.

Timmons however did in fact play ouside in a 4-3 and would be a perfect fit there.

Woodley also would fit perfectly in a 4-3 and would excell more there pass rushing all the time. We would still need a probable upgrade at the other DE unless Worilds could excell there too.

Heyward did not play end in a 4-3 at Ohio State but a 3-4 most of the time. He would not be what you want in a 4-3 end. (Think Dwight Freeney, Robert Mathis etc.) So that leaves Heyward, Hood, McClendon, Ta'amu, on the inside with Hood being the best of the lot.

Spence I thought was a OLB at Miami then maybe moved inside. It is very debatable his ability to be the man in a 4-3 defense and the inside linebacker does need to be the man. So a likely draft upgrade there would likely be needed.

So a good 4-3 end, a tall lanky coverage OLB, and a really good ILB really is what is currently preventing this team from switching to a 4-3. I personally would like to see a hybrid where both can be played week to week and even in game if possible. The Steelers do a little of that now and the Patriots did a lot of it when they were cheating (I mean winning) Super Bowls.

Also teams playing 4-3 must really stockpile those Defensive Lineman and be two deep accross the board meaning less linebackers and less viable special team players to make tackles. The trouble is if Woodley is injured say for the year there really is no viable replacement for him on the roster. Free agent signings and lots of drafting would be needed to create that depth.

However being a number one defense last year may make the old adage "If it ain't broke don't fix it" the Steelers way of thinking.

FrancoLambert
01-19-2013, 10:36 AM
The 3-4 is becoming a dinosaur. Soon to be extinct.
Can't generate enough of a push from a 3 man line in today's NFL which is a necessity.
You need pass rushing machines with relentless motors.
How to deal with exotic blitzes from 3-4 linebackers has been pretty much figured out.

pete74
01-19-2013, 11:26 AM
Actually the 3-4 is becoming more popular but personally I like the 4-3.i like the way the giants played it last year rushing only your four lineman most times. Regardless of your type of defense without the proper players and defensive coordinator you won't excel. I prefer the 4-3 because our 4 lineman can rush instead of holding up offensive lineman for the linebackers

SteelersCanada
01-19-2013, 11:43 AM
We'd have to draft a completely new defensive line. Heyward, Hood and McLendon don't have the speed or pass rushing ability to generate interior and outside-the-tackles pressure that would be required. I'm seeing some guys saying they like the Giants and their defensive scheme which is a great one, I'll acknowledge that. But, you have to look at who's on their roster, too.

Their line is anchored by JPP and Justin Tuck. JPP is an absolute freak and probably the best 4-3 DLinemen in the NFL. Our guys just aren't fast enough or possess the right skillset for us to make the switch. If we're going to change, we'd have to draft Jordan or Mingo in the first round, and then someone like Montgomery in the second and revamp our defensive throughout the draft. We could throw Woodley and Worilds on the line as well, but then we're seriously lacking at LB.

If we transition, we'd have to go...

Jordan - Heyward / Hood (DT? They're too small) - McLendon (can he generate pressure at DT?) - Woodley

and we have problems. First and foremost, who's playing DT? If we do end up drafting Jordan and Montgomery, then we're playing an attacking 4-3 which I guess could work, but he's small to play in the interior. It could work, but it'd be pressing it a little bit. I do like the idea of Woodley and Jordan being edge rushers, though, and I think that would work beautifully.

If we were to transition to the 4-3, our draft would have to look something like ...

R1. Dion Jordan
R2. John Jenkins / Kawann Short
R3. Nico Johnson
R4. Robert Lester
R5. William Gholston

and that's best case scenario. A couple things you look at there, no WRs or RBs.

This isn't the year to transition to a 4-3. When LeBeau leaves and we bring in another defensive mind, maybe, but there's too many other holes to fill on this roster and ultimately, we don't have the guys to play a 4-3. Heyward and Hood don't possess the skillset to play in a 4-3 as they lack speed and true pass rushing ability.

I'd love to transition to it in 2014 but that transition would have to start this year. Drafting Dion Jordan and a legitimate DT to play in a 4-3 would be required in this draft while picking up another DT to play in the interior as well either in the draft or free agency. I do like the idea of it though.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-19-2013, 12:05 PM
This thread has been coming up every year for the past 10 years on Steeler fan message boards. Believe it when I see it. Something tells me if LeBeau retires and Butler takes over......it still stays a 3-4.

VaDave
01-19-2013, 01:15 PM
We'd have to draft a completely new defensive line. Heyward, Hood and McLendon don't have the speed or pass rushing ability to generate interior and outside-the-tackles pressure that would be required. I'm seeing some guys saying they like the Giants and their defensive scheme which is a great one, I'll acknowledge that. But, you have to look at who's on their roster, too.

Their line is anchored by JPP and Justin Tuck. JPP is an absolute freak and probably the best 4-3 DLinemen in the NFL. Our guys just aren't fast enough or possess the right skillset for us to make the switch. If we're going to change, we'd have to draft Jordan or Mingo in the first round, and then someone like Montgomery in the second and revamp our defensive throughout the draft. We could throw Woodley and Worilds on the line as well, but then we're seriously lacking at LB.

If we transition, we'd have to go...

Jordan - Heyward / Hood (DT? They're too small) - McLendon (can he generate pressure at DT?) - Woodley

and we have problems. First and foremost, who's playing DT? If we do end up drafting Jordan and Montgomery, then we're playing an attacking 4-3 which I guess could work, but he's small to play in the interior. It could work, but it'd be pressing it a little bit. I do like the idea of Woodley and Jordan being edge rushers, though, and I think that would work beautifully.

If we were to transition to the 4-3, our draft would have to look something like ...

R1. Dion Jordan
R2. John Jenkins / Kawann Short
R3. Nico Johnson
R4. Robert Lester
R5. William Gholston

and that's best case scenario. A couple things you look at there, no WRs or RBs.

This isn't the year to transition to a 4-3. When LeBeau leaves and we bring in another defensive mind, maybe, but there's too many other holes to fill on this roster and ultimately, we don't have the guys to play a 4-3. Heyward and Hood don't possess the skillset to play in a 4-3 as they lack speed and true pass rushing ability.

I'd love to transition to it in 2014 but that transition would have to start this year. Drafting Dion Jordan and a legitimate DT to play in a 4-3 would be required in this draft while picking up another DT to play in the interior as well either in the draft or free agency. I do like the idea of it though.


Just asking but didn't our crap OLINE rip that all powerful Giant DL a new one?

Hawaii 5-0
01-19-2013, 01:29 PM
This thread has been coming up every year for the past 10 years on Steeler fan message boards. Believe it when I see it. Something tells me if LeBeau retires and Butler takes over......it still stays a 3-4.

I'm pretty sure that as long as the architect of the 3-4 defense is still the DC of our team that we'll be running the 3-4 defense...

kan_t
01-19-2013, 01:34 PM
I'm pretty sure that as long as the architect of the 3-4 defense is still the DC of our team that we'll be running the 3-4 defense...
And if Butler becomes his successor (which is likely the case), the team will still be running the 3-4 defense.

desertsteel
01-19-2013, 02:42 PM
Just asking but didn't our crap OLINE rip that all powerful Giant DL a new one?

Lol

MasterOfPuppets
01-19-2013, 03:41 PM
This thread has been coming up every year for the past 10 years on Steeler fan message boards. Believe it when I see it. Something tells me if LeBeau retires and Butler takes over......it still stays a 3-4.
every year ? this is probably the 10th thread started on this subject in the past year alone...:doh:
you'd think the defense was finishing in the bottom 10 every year instead of the top 10.
the problem is everybody thinks theres other teams playing great D every week. well who are those teams ? what 4-3 defense gives these guys such a chub that they feel the steelers need to emulate ?

MACH1
01-19-2013, 04:01 PM
every year ? this is probably the 10th thread started on this subject in the past year alone...:doh:
you'd think the defense was finishing in the bottom 10 every year instead of the top 10.
the problem is everybody thinks theres other teams playing great D every week. well who are those teams ? what 4-3 defense gives these guys such a chub that they feel the steelers need to emulate ?

Que the "we should be more like -fill in the blank- because they won the super bowl" threads.

SteelersCanada
01-19-2013, 04:07 PM
every year ? this is probably the 10th thread started on this subject in the past year alone...:doh:
you'd think the defense was finishing in the bottom 10 every year instead of the top 10.
the problem is everybody thinks theres other teams playing great D every week. well who are those teams ? what 4-3 defense gives these guys such a chub that they feel the steelers need to emulate ?

I agree with you, but the Giants run a 4-3 and they have a ridiculous front 7. The Pats and Bears run a 4-3 and they were creating turnovers with no problem and in fact, the Bears tied the NFL record with 8 defensive TDs. The Bengals run a 4-3 and they lead the league in sacks.

There is an argument to be made to switch to the 4-3, but we just don't have the personnel to do so, so at this time it's really a moot point. We'd have to draft a new interior defensive line with high picks when we could address WR, RB and S in the same rounds.

kent
01-19-2013, 04:21 PM
Dont fix what isnt broken. Some players may need replaced but not the scheme. Why change a defense that was top 5 in the league the last 6 years. In 4 of those years they were the #1 D in the league.

austinfrench76
01-19-2013, 05:03 PM
I'm not sure why you change the style of defense we play when we have a top 5 D every year. Oh, and #1 last year. Not saying anyone is pushing for it but I don't know why we would want to change.

Hawaii 5-0
01-19-2013, 05:11 PM
every year ? this is probably the 10th thread started on this subject in the past year alone...:doh:


hey, you can never have enough 3-4/4-3 or Mike Wallace threads...:chuckle:

steelfury02
01-19-2013, 05:32 PM
I'm not for switching to a 4-3

However

Neither am I for believing in our defensive rankings the past 2 years. When you don't get turnovers from pressure, sacks, INTs - you don't advance. Please - the Steelers don't give up yards, but they aren't wreaking havoc either. Let's be real about those rankings.

Steelers5895
01-19-2013, 07:33 PM
There is nothing wrong with the 3-4 scheme. the issue is we have players who are underperforming in it. no pass rush from Woodley all year, Harrison non existant until week 13, the D line isnot able to do much and one ILB has speed.

when the OLB's are generating a pass rush it enables the ILB and Troy to blitz more effectively and it also means more turnovers.

Steeler7BR
01-19-2013, 11:06 PM
There is nothing wrong with the 3-4 scheme. the issue is we have players who are underperforming in it. no pass rush from Woodley all year, Harrison non existant until week 13, the D line isnot able to do much and one ILB has speed.

when the OLB's are generating a pass rush it enables the ILB and Troy to blitz more effectively and it also means more turnovers.

Did you close your eyes while you watch the games? In your statement almost all of the Steelers front 7 underperformed. But we were only the #1 defense in the country and the 5th best Run Defense. Harrison was very solid since the 2nd half of the season. He was one big reasons we looked so good as Ben was injured. And I don't know if you only consider pressure here by the D-Line or their whole game because they looked very straight in the Run game. The pressure in a 3-4 Defense should be normally created by OLBs. And of course in Lebeaus offense by the guys who're blitzing. So I don't your problem here at all.

MasterOfPuppets
01-20-2013, 01:53 AM
I agree with you, but the Giants run a 4-3 and they have a ridiculous front 7. The Pats and Bears run a 4-3 and they were creating turnovers with no problem and in fact, the Bears tied the NFL record with 8 defensive TDs. The Bengals run a 4-3 and they lead the league in sacks.

There is an argument to be made to switch to the 4-3, but we just don't have the personnel to do so, so at this time it's really a moot point. We'd have to draft a new interior defensive line with high picks when we could address WR, RB and S in the same rounds.
here's the "ridiculous " G-men front 7...
demarco murray - 131 yds
leshawn mccoy - 123 yds
alfred morris - 120 yds
isaac redman - 147 yds
alfred morris - 124 yds
bernard pierce - 123 yds
33 sacks .....:rolleyes: ...pittsburgh had a down year in sacks and still had 37

the pats D gave up an average of almost 100 yds a game more than pittsburgh

was anyone talking about the great 4-3 bears D last year ? the year before ?

how many times in the last 10 years have the 4-3 bengals D led the league in sacks ?

your cherry pickin stats to make your case . show me a CONSISTENT 4-3 defense ...not a bunch of one hit wonders.

and by consistent defense , i mean one that's in the top 10 in the league every year..... oh wait...that'd be dick lebeau's 3-4.

now go ahead and make your case for switching ....i'll be waiting.

WokeUpWithaWoodley
01-20-2013, 03:09 AM
here's the "ridiculous " G-men front 7...
demarco murray - 131 yds
leshawn mccoy - 123 yds
alfred morris - 120 yds
isaac redman - 147 yds
alfred morris - 124 yds
bernard pierce - 123 yds
33 sacks .....:rolleyes: ...pittsburgh had a down year in sacks and still had 37

the pats D gave up an average of almost 100 yds a game more than pittsburgh

was anyone talking about the great 4-3 bears D last year ? the year before ?

how many times in the last 10 years have the 4-3 bengals D led the league in sacks ?

your cherry pickin stats to make your case . show me a CONSISTENT 4-3 defense ...not a bunch of one hit wonders.

and by consistent defense , i mean one that's in the top 10 in the league every year..... oh wait...that'd be dick lebeau's 3-4.

now go ahead and make your case for switching ....i'll be waiting.

A top ten d and still 8-8. Being the number one d is based on yards per game and if you didnt notice due to our lack of offense and terrible punting teams would normally start at the 40 or 50. Teams against us this year never had far to travel against us. So the whole number one thing is very misleading.

You woulnd want the bears d?! They produced the most points and that would of at least won us a few more games.

You cant always say we had the number defense to make a argument because it is very misleading our d did not look like the number 1 d at all this year.

steeltheone
01-20-2013, 08:10 AM
Did you close your eyes while you watch the games? In your statement almost all of the Steelers front 7 underperformed. But we were only the #1 defense in the country and the 5th best Run Defense. Harrison was very solid since the 2nd half of the season. He was one big reasons we looked so good as Ben was injured. And I don't know if you only consider pressure here by the D-Line or their whole game because they looked very straight in the Run game. The pressure in a 3-4 Defense should be normally created by OLBs. And of course in Lebeaus offense by the guys who're blitzing. So I don't your problem here at all.

Harrison was average with flashes of good....He makes to much mola to play average.

steeltheone
01-20-2013, 08:19 AM
Did you close your eyes while you watch the games? In your statement almost all of the Steelers front 7 underperformed. But we were only the #1 defense in the country and the 5th best Run Defense. Harrison was very solid since the 2nd half of the season. He was one big reasons we looked so good as Ben was injured. And I don't know if you only consider pressure here by the D-Line or their whole game because they looked very straight in the Run game. The pressure in a 3-4 Defense should be normally created by OLBs. And of course in Lebeaus offense by the guys who're blitzing. So I don't your problem here at all.

Harrison was average with flashes of good....He makes to much mola to play average.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-20-2013, 11:01 AM
You woulnd want the bears d?! They produced the most points and that would of at least won us a few more games.

You cant always say we had the number defense to make a argument because it is very misleading our d did not look like the number 1 d at all this year.

Do you want to have a worse defense for 2 years while the Steelers transition to a 4-3 Cover 2 defense? I think the Vikings run a Tampa 2....are they instantly great because they run that schem??

Do you think that running a 4-3 guarantees turnovers? Maybe its athletes with a nose for the football like Tillman, Urlacher, Briggs, Peppers, etc that create turnovers...not the scheme.

Its an old arguement. Almost older than "we need a big RB, Draft Ron Dayne, Brandon Jacobs, etc"

teegre
01-20-2013, 12:17 PM
hey, you can never have enough 3-4/4-3 or Mike Wallace threads...:chuckle:

Fire Haley
Fire Tomlin
LeBeau is old
Switch to the 4-3
Draft Jerome Bettis, part II
Trade BB
Anything at all pertaining to Wallace

(repeat)

MasterOfPuppets
01-20-2013, 12:19 PM
A top ten d and still 8-8. Being the number one d is based on yards per game and if you didnt notice due to our lack of offense and terrible punting teams would normally start at the 40 or 50. Teams against us this year never had far to travel against us. So the whole number one thing is very misleading.

You woulnd want the bears d?! They produced the most points and that would of at least won us a few more games.

You cant always say we had the number defense to make a argument because it is very misleading our d did not look like the number 1 d at all this year.
i highlighted the relevant parts of your post.
the defenses job is to
A - stop the opposing offense from scoring
B - limit the opposing offense to as little yardage as possible and force them to punt
the steelers were # 6 on part A, and # 1 in the league on part B
you guys are acting as if teams were putting up 35 points on the D every week.
the bottom line is the offense ONCE AGAIN failed to hold up their end of the game by NOT scoring enough points. like i said in another thread , if the steelers offense averaged 35 points a game like the patriots did , they'd be undefeated right now and nobody would be bashing the defense.

once again i'll ask..where has that great bears 4-3 D been the last few years ? they run a 4-3 so they have to be good every year right?

steelfury02
01-20-2013, 12:46 PM
i highlighted the relevant parts of your post.
the defenses job is to
A - stop the opposing offense from scoring
B - limit the opposing offense to as little yardage as possible and force them to punt
the steelers were # 6 on part A, and # 1 in the league on part B
you guys are acting as if teams were putting up 35 points on the D every week.
the bottom line is the offense ONCE AGAIN failed to hold up their end of the game by NOT scoring enough points. like i said in another thread , if the steelers offense averaged 35 points a game like the patriots did , they'd be undefeated right now and nobody would be bashing the defense.

once again i'll ask..where has that great bears 4-3 D been the last few years ? they run a 4-3 so they have to be good every year right?

I totally agree with you - the offense didn't hold up its part - and that was even more exposed as the defense had a terrible year in terms of wreaking havoc - forcing turnovers means extra possessions and better field position. You're right - the defense cannot be dominant every single season - just don't rely on rankings - lack of turnovers took this team down another notch and helped shine some light on an offense - especially as the year went on and we were more banged up. This is not an O that can consistently march the field over the course of the Arians era. I'd argue they were showing promise going into the KC game. Just some food for thought - Not saying its the D's fault - but, it heightened everyone's awareness to what it really takes to win a SB - if you aren't creating turnovers - its that much harder on a struggling O.

MasterOfPuppets
01-20-2013, 06:09 PM
I totally agree with you - the offense didn't hold up its part - and that was even more exposed as the defense had a terrible year in terms of wreaking havoc - forcing turnovers means extra possessions and better field position. You're right - the defense cannot be dominant every single season - just don't rely on rankings - lack of turnovers took this team down another notch and helped shine some light on an offense - especially as the year went on and we were more banged up. This is not an O that can consistently march the field over the course of the Arians era. I'd argue they were showing promise going into the KC game. Just some food for thought - Not saying its the D's fault - but, it heightened everyone's awareness to what it really takes to win a SB - if you aren't creating turnovers - its that much harder on a struggling O.
so would running a 4-3 create more turnovers ? would ike taylors stonehands magically transform into venus fly traps ? remember the argument here is switching to the 4-3.
how many missed opportunties for turnovers and even pick sixes were there ? i recall several.
my point is the players failed the scheme, the scheme didn't fail the players.
the bears ran the same D they did last year but nobody was using them as an example to switch to the 4-3 , so why now just because the ball bounced there way more than usual are they the poster child for switching to a 4-3 D ?
could the players have had anything to do with their new found success ?

WokeUpWithaWoodley
01-20-2013, 06:30 PM
Do you want to have a worse defense for 2 years while the Steelers transition to a 4-3 Cover 2 defense? I think the Vikings run a Tampa 2....are they instantly great because they run that schem??

Do you think that running a 4-3 guarantees turnovers? Maybe its athletes with a nose for the football like Tillman, Urlacher, Briggs, Peppers, etc that create turnovers...not the scheme.

Its an old arguement. Almost older than "we need a big RB, Draft Ron Dayne, Brandon Jacobs, etc"

I never said I wanted a Tampa two what I meant was you guys wouldn't want a d that had 8tds last year. And it can be cause of a 4-3 because most of the Time you only rush 4. A and have 7 in coverage. 6teams in the top 8 in int ran 4-3 defenses.

Again it's not an old arguement its a strong possibility after dick leaves. We have more guys that played in a 4-3 than we do a 3-4. The 3-4 relies on the 3 down lineman to hold of blockers to let the linebackers do there thing. Hood and heyward and mccllendon most likely wont be as good as hampton smith Brett. Hood was also credited to the reason Woodley didn't have a great year his play was poor and teams targeted him and ran right at his side.

Like I said I love the 3-4 I think it's the best d when it's working. But we don't have the personal anymore. It's a possibility and everyone should be aware of that.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-20-2013, 10:03 PM
I never said I wanted a Tampa two what I meant was you guys wouldn't want a d that had 8tds last year. And it can be cause of a 4-3 because most of the Time you only rush 4. A and have 7 in coverage. 6teams in the top 8 in int ran 4-3 defenses.

Again it's not an old arguement its a strong possibility after dick leaves. We have more guys that played in a 4-3 than we do a 3-4. The 3-4 relies on the 3 down lineman to hold of blockers to let the linebackers do there thing. Hood and heyward and mccllendon most likely wont be as good as hampton smith Brett. Hood was also credited to the reason Woodley didn't have a great year his play was poor and teams targeted him and ran right at his side.

Like I said I love the 3-4 I think it's the best d when it's working. But we don't have the personal anymore. It's a possibility and everyone should be aware of that.

We dont have the personell for anything other than a 3-4 right now. Nobody on the squad is a pass rushing DE...not Keisel, not Woodley. Both Timmons and Spence are better WILL LB's.

Besides, your arguement that teams only rush 4 in a 4-3 isnt much different than a 3-4. Generally on passing downs the NT comes out and the teams rush 4, or sometimes blitz. 4-3 teams blitz also. You are putting out a suggestion for the wrong reasons and wrong rationale......but go ahead. Its mildly amusing/entertaining, because it happens every year. :coffee:

WokeUpWithaWoodley
01-20-2013, 10:24 PM
We dont have the personell for anything other than a 3-4 right now. Nobody on the squad is a pass rushing DE...not Keisel, not Woodley. Both Timmons and Spence are better WILL LB's.


Kiesel won't be back next season. Woodley would be a good de he's at 270 already. He can rush every down and not worry about coverage. When he rushes now in the 3-4 he goes against the tackle which would be the same with him at de. McClendon and hood would be dominate in the middle making the oline decided between those two who to double block. So you would have Woodley alone against the tackle most of time and ill take that any day. You don't need a giants style 4-3 your basing your argument of how the giants run and use the 4-3 with wide 9 technique edge rushers.

Not sure what you mean by better will linebackers if your making a arguement for a 3-4 because those are positions in 4-3. You have mack and buck in 3-4 so learn your positions in each defense

Timmons was a outside linebacker in 4-3 in college and would be better suited for that in the nfl. He's come around as a 3-4 middle linebacker but his skill set is better suited for a 4-3. That has been the knock on him by this board for so long now. Spence would be a very good middle linebacker in the 4-3 he's very fast and covers a lot of ground, and he would not be best suited in the 3-4 very undersized. So your assessment of our players not being suited for a 4-3 is very wrong. So keep going its very assuming and entertaining :coffee:

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-20-2013, 10:38 PM
Kiesel won't be back next season. Woodley would be a good de he's at 270 already. He can rush every down and not worry about coverage. When he rushes now in the 3-4 he goes against the tackle which would be the same with him at de. McClendon and hood would be dominate in the middle making the oline decided between those two who to double block. So you would have Woodley alone against the tackle most of time and ill take that any day. You don't need a giants style 4-3 your basing your argument of how the giants run and use the 4-3 with wide 9 technique edge rushers.

Not sure what you mean by better will linebackers if your making a arguement for a 3-4 because those are positions in 4-3. You have mack and buck in 3-4 so learn your positions in each defense

Timmons was a outside linebacker in 4-3 in college and would be better suited for that in the nfl. He's come around as a 3-4 middle linebacker but his skill set is better suited for a 4-3. That has been the knock on him by this board for so long now. Spence would be a very good middle linebacker in the 4-3 he's very fast and covers a lot of ground, and he would not be best suited in the 3-4 very undersized. So your assessment of our players not being suited for a 4-3 is very wrong. So keep going its very assuming and entertaining :coffee:

Thanks, but I coach football and have for several years, so I know the schemes. I also know that Timmons was ideally suited as a WILL LB in a 4-3 coming out of college, as is Spence. Woodley does not have the quickness or first step of a decent DE and would not be a great DE in a 4-3.

So basically, we would need to put Timmons and Spence at the Mike and Will. Find a Sam LB, use Hood and Heyward at DT and need to find 2 DE's that can play in a 4-3. Then coach up the entire defense on the new schemes and coverages.

You want to overhaul a top 5 defense so that it can get a few pick 6es? Kind of like a guy that wanted to dump Cindy Crawford so he could find a girl without that mole on her lip. :doh:

WokeUpWithaWoodley
01-20-2013, 11:04 PM
Thanks, but I coach football and have for several years, so I know the schemes. I also know that Timmons was ideally suited as a WILL LB in a 4-3 coming out of college, as is Spence. Woodley does not have the quickness or first step of a decent DE and would not be a great DE in a 4-3.

So basically, we would need to put Timmons and Spence at the Mike and Will. Find a Sam LB, use Hood and Heyward at DT and need to find 2 DE's that can play in a 4-3. Then coach up the entire defense on the new schemes and coverages.

You want to overhaul a top 5 defense so that it can get a few pick 6es? Kind of like a guy that wanted to dump Cindy Crawford so he could find a girl without that mole on her lip. :doh:

Sorry coach

You would have heyward ( and i know most of you think he wouldnt be good as a 4-3 de but the man has pass rushing ablilty but the 3-4 dosnt allow him to show case it) hood McClendon Woodley you would only need a Sam linebacker.

And I have never said I want and we need to switch all I did was present a article and make the point that a maybe we should of shouldn't switch with dick leaves. Or at the very least have packages for both and use them.

You do realize that top 5 d got lit up by the titans raiders and chargers.

Again I've said I love the 3-4 and thinks its great but you have to play to what you have on your team. And most of the great 3-4 guys we had left or are there way out like smith kiesel hampton foote Harrison farrior. In recent drafts we have drafted 4-3 guys you can't argue that it's a fact.

And if you remember we used a big nickel defense a little this year with four down lineman in kiesel Hampton heyward and hood not a ideal line but they got pressure and stopped the run effectively when used.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-21-2013, 10:12 AM
Switch to a 4-3!! Its the greatest defense and will put the Steelers back in the super bowl!!

We can all await the same thread being started 1.just before training camp and 2. the same time next season.