Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Calling all D-line gurus

  1. #11
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,188
    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    I thought McClendon looked good in the preseason against Philly and then last week against Philly. I think it has to do with their OLine.

    Other times I've seen him in the game, I've seen him getting blocked by 1 guy and controlled. That can't work in a 3-4. We need a beast of an NT. He seems better suited to be a 4-3 DT. I really like McClendon, but I think we're trying square peg, round hole a couple of these guys.

    Even Keisel's not perfect for the 3-4. People used to get on him when he became a starter to better control his gaps and play the run better without getting washed out. He's gotten stronger and is a solid 3-4 DE. But he had a freakish size/speed combo and he could really get after a QB when he was a 3rd down replacement for Kimo. I really think Keisel could have been the Levon Kirkland of 3-4 OLBs. But we bulked him up to control the gap better.
    I agree with your assessment---all of our DL except for maybe Heyward (I think he could be an excellent 4-3 DE) are better suited for the 4-3. That is been my argument over the past couple of seasons. Hampton is washed up so essentially we don't have the critical NT you need in a 3-4 and they are very, very difficult to find. It is getting too hard to find guys who fit our 3-4 and then take the additional time to train them up (I would argue we "train out" what got them to the NFL). That is why we get to the point where we are forced to hang onto players who are near or past their "sell by" dates.
    Playing Fantasy Football does not qualify you to be the in the front office or on the coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are professionals and you are not!

  2. #12
    Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Inside Your Head
    Posts
    10,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    I agree with your assessment---all of our DL except for maybe Heyward (I think he could be an excellent 4-3 DE) are better suited for the 4-3. That is been my argument over the past couple of seasons. Hampton is washed up so essentially we don't have the critical NT you need in a 3-4 and they are very, very difficult to find. It is getting too hard to find guys who fit our 3-4 and then take the additional time to train them up (I would argue we "train out" what got them to the NFL). That is why we get to the point where we are forced to hang onto players who are near or past their "sell by" dates.
    The other problem is I wouldn't use a 1st round pick on DL given that we need to re-train. It seems the risk/reward is too high. Just draft a couple of these guys later in the draft and see who can make the transition in 3 or 4 years. Taking DL early in the draft seems like a reach in our system.

  3. #13
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,188
    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    The other problem is I wouldn't use a 1st round pick on DL given that we need to re-train. It seems the risk/reward is too high. Just draft a couple of these guys later in the draft and see who can make the transition in 3 or 4 years. Taking DL early in the draft seems like a reach in our system.
    Current system. There is always hope!!!!
    Playing Fantasy Football does not qualify you to be the in the front office or on the coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are professionals and you are not!

  4. #14
    Legend RuthlessBurgher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Where the Rubber Meets the Road (in NEPA)
    Posts
    21,108
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    Current system. There is always hope!!!!
    Of the teams currently ranked in the top 5 in overall team defense, only one of them (Seattle) runs a 4-3 defense. The other 4 (San Francisco, Houston, Dallas, and Pittsburgh...yes, doom-and-gloomers...we are ranked 5th at the present time) all run a 3-4 defense.

  5. #15
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,188
    Quote Originally Posted by RuthlessBurgher View Post
    Of the teams currently ranked in the top 5 in overall team defense, only one of them (Seattle) runs a 4-3 defense. The other 4 (San Francisco, Houston, Dallas, and Pittsburgh...yes, doom-and-gloomers...we are ranked 5th at the present time) all run a 3-4 defense.
    And the team that won the Super Bowl last year ran a 4-3. Not sure that matter either given that the two Super Bowl participants had terrible defenses last year. I think #30 and #31 or thereabouts.
    Playing Fantasy Football does not qualify you to be the in the front office or on the coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers. They are professionals and you are not!

  6. #16
    Hall of Famer SidSmythe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western NY (south of Rochester, NY)
    Posts
    2,525
    so what exactly is it that makes a 4-3 superior to the 3-4???
    Here We Go Steelers, Here We Go...
    Here We Go Steelers, Here We Go...
    Here We Go Steelers, Here We Go...!!!

  7. #17
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    And the team that won the Super Bowl last year ran a 4-3. Not sure that matter either given that the two Super Bowl participants had terrible defenses last year. I think #30 and #31 or thereabouts.
    Close. NYG were 27th in total D. Pats 31. I think NY's ranking was deceptive. They certainly had a better D than 27th in the league, when it counts. That DL can flat out get after QBs.

    http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorysta...1&d-447263-n=1

  8. #18
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,026
    Quote Originally Posted by SidSmythe View Post
    so what exactly is it that makes a 4-3 superior to the 3-4???
    It's not superior; it can be - all depends on if you have the right players. But I will say this: with the 4-3 you can draft players who already play the position you need them for, not having to retrain so many players - that's what sucks about the 3-4. Also, you must find a stud NT or the whole thing fails, and we are beginning to see that with Hampton out of his prime. Once you lose a true 3-4 NT, the whole thing collapses.

  9. #19
    Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Inside Your Head
    Posts
    10,368
    I'm not concerned about a 3-4 vs 4-3. I just want to see consistent pressure like we did on Sunday. I'd also like to see more aggressive play in our backfield. Irregardless of where we rank, we're not opportunistic. We don't attack the ball to create turnovers. I hate to say it, but outside of James Harrison and Ryan Clark, we sometimes look soft.

    Some teams have this knack for tacking balls away. Teams like Chicago and NE come to mind. They may not be ranked as even good defenses, but any time I watch them play, all 11 guys are constantly going after the ball to try to create a turnover.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    Even Keisel's not perfect for the 3-4. People used to get on him when he became a starter to better control his gaps and play the run better without getting washed out. He's gotten stronger and is a solid 3-4 DE. But he had a freakish size/speed combo and he could really get after a QB when he was a 3rd down replacement for Kimo. I really think Keisel could have been the Levon Kirkland of 3-4 OLBs. But we bulked him up to control the gap better.
    I never get this stuff about BK.

    He had a grand total of 3 sacks during three years backing up Kimo.

    It aint just that the 3/4 is a bad fit. He was a 4/3 DE in college, and was no phenom there.
    I follow the Mountain West and WAC, and BYU for decades.
    BK was not a beast by ANY STRETCH. Dude was an "honorable mention" all MWC player ONCE.

    In other words there were SIX DEFENSIVE ENDS in the weak defense MWC better than BK.
    Two years as a starter and he get SEVEN sacks total in two seasons. He wasnt even the best DE on that team. Ryan Denney was a beast on the other side.

    At 6'5" and 269 he had the prototype size for a 4/3 DE, which is what he played at BYU.

    An athletic freak at that size in that conference would dominate.

    IMHO a bulked up BK in a 3/4 is the only way he starts in this league. He is good not great.

    He is right where he needs to be.
    Last edited by Captain Lemming; 10-11-2012 at 03:31 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •