Could swithcing to a 4-3 really fix this much?
Just think about it.
Switching to a 4-3 could accomplish the following.
1. Saying good bye to Dick. He's been a fantastic Steeler. But nothing lasts forever. I know it's cute to say "he's in his 70s but shows no sign of slowing down." Well, he's in his 70s. People retire for a reason. Let him go gracefully. His "zone blitz schemes" are no longer "exotic" or "confusing." They once were. And horses were once the best way to get around. Teams are fully aware of where blitzers are coming from. There is nothing so super tricky about his system anymore, and as many have stated here, the fact that it takes players so long to learn the system is no longer acceptable or sustainable. We need to draft players who will be playing the position they have learned all their lives. Teams that succeed today can quickly use their draft picks to contribute. Look at the Colts: from 2-14 to a play off team.
2. If we switched, we would reduce the amount of holes in the D. All of a sudden, MLB would not be such a concern. Timmons would be the man, period. We'd have Harrison and Worilds (who far outperformed Woodley any way) at OLB and then we could let fat boy play DE and stay at his fat pants weight.
3. We would put together a DL of Woodley, Heyward, Hood, McClendon, Woods, T'Amu and a few draft picks. I think it could be fine with that mix of players, using the platoon method, keeping everyone fresh.
4. It would simplify the entire thing, so young players could play immediately. Simple is good. Simple is underrated. To the DL: You guys rush the passer and chase the ball carrier. To the LBs: You guys chase the ball, cover TEs and blitz sometimes. To the CBs: You guys cover receivers. To the safeties: You guys don't let anyone get behind you and help in rush support. It can be that simple. The people telling us it isn't just do so to make them feel smarter.
5. Tomlin knows the Tampa 2. It's very effective. Use it.
6. This would dovetail with this draft class. There are tons of good DL there for the taking. Jon Hankins, DT, OSU; Jon Jenkins, DT, GA; Sheldon Richardson, DT, MI; Sharrif Floyd, DT, UF; Sam Montgomery, DE, LSU; Ezekiel Ansah, DE, BYU; Jackson Jeffcoat, DE, TX; John Simon, DE, OSU.
This really makes the most sense. Will Rooney wake up and make it happen? The 3-4 is no longer the surprise in the punch bowl. Many teams run it and our once-advantage of stealing smallish DEs to make them OLBs no longer exists. So adapt!
LeBeau isn't leaving. Rooney won't do it and Tomlin won't either.
It isn't up to Tomlin, even though they pretend it is. That is just a lie. Even Dick said, "I'll be back if coach Tomlin wants me." That is just a lie. If Tomlin chose his coaches, BA would still be here.
Originally Posted by Crash
Art won't do it. He doesn't like bad PR on himself.
He also apparently doesn't like not getting enough nachos on his plate either.
Three guarantees in life: death, taxes and 4-3 discussions in the offseason.
But in all the off-seasons it's been discussed, it is more relative now more than ever, due to all the aforementioned conditions.
Originally Posted by SteelBucks
All good points I have been stating for going on three years. My primary point for making the switch is that you broaden the potential talent pool that you can dip into. That is vital in an area of a salary cap where could want to restock certain positions and get contributions faster by having players play the positions they have always played and the ones you scouted them playing when you made your talent assessment. It also would help keeping you out of cap situations like we find ourselves because you are forced to retain players longer because of the investment in learning the defense and knowing it.
Originally Posted by lloydroid
I also think our continued decreasing sack numbers and INT numbers indicate that the scheme isn't working to produce the results it was always praised for being able to produce in the past. Think that will change with the same cast doing the same things next year?
Change won't happen though because LeBeau is the "tenured college porfessor" who will stay as long as he wants even if he is teaching out of an outdated textbook and doesn't do leading edge research anymore.
Last edited by Oviedo; 01-10-2013 at 05:39 PM.
I'm sad to say, you are right about everything, including the last point, which is depressing. I am so sick of the talking heads saying, "Pgh is slow to change, and they have the results to prove their patience pays off." Well, that is only true to a point. I am sure the last maker of horse carriages did a bang up job, but that doesn't mean they were wise to stay making horse buggies for as long as they did. Too much of a good thing can end up being bad. Pgh's slow mode to change has served them well, but that doesn't make slow change bullet proof.
Originally Posted by Oviedo
It's not always a good thing.
Sometime change is needed.
I really think going to a 4-3 would solve many problems at this point.
I think the D-linemen we are kind of sour on would actually thrive in a 4-3. I really think a DL of Woodley, Hood, McClendon, T'amu (if he's not in jail), Heyward, Woods and a few rookies could get us off to a good start. Not saying that DL would be instantly a top DL in the league, but it would be good enough to win. And I think getting fat boy at DE and Worilds to the starter at OLB with Harrison, and Timmons in the middle, would do fine. We could go from being thin to having depth.
I am sick of our team having to work miracles in terms of making over players to fit into our system. How many LBs have we swung and missed on to fit as OLB in our system? How hard is it to develop DLmen? It seems almost impossible. Here we have Hood and Heyward who were blue chip prospects, seemingly sucking, according to most of you. We have McClendon, seemingly being a beast, and yet, he barely even sees the field. Something is wrong.
They need to wake up and realize Dick's system is no longer super leading-edge, complex (well, it still might be complex, in a bad way), confusing to the opposition, etc.
How could the D rank #1 4 out of the past 6 year's or something like that if every one know's this Defence so well.
Colt's D ranked 26th Steelers ranked 1
Colt's O ranked 10 Steelers ranked 21
To blame Dick LeBeau is foolish when it was clearly the o's fault.
What Ovi omits, of course, is that there is no empirical evidence (nor even annecdotal evidence) suggesting that teams that play a 4-3 get more of a contribution from young players. Likewise, there is no support for the proposition that it is easier to evaluate and stock lineman in a 4-3 because of the conversion. Just look at the number of defensive ends and defensive tackles drafted in the first round that flop annually. Finally, when mentioning the salary cap, omitted is that defensive ends have the highest franchise tag number after quarterbacks. This is because there is a very limited supply of elite 4-3 DEs - they are rare.