What is the next Defensive Evolution?

[Oviedo]

I say it'll be a 4-7.

Beasts like Mean Joe/Suh/Seymore/JPP on the DLine that can't be blocked and can generate serious pressure without the need to blitz.

All of your LBs and FS/SS become hybrids and you try to get as versatile players as you can find like Woodson/Lake/Polamalu.

And that means your corners probably have to be bigger and more athletic.

It's all about D speed, pressure on the QB, being physical, and forcing the QB to make mistakes and/or hold the ball too long.

Totally agree which is why DL needs to let our defensive linemen attack the QB and quit dancing with the OL.

The NFL will more and more mimic the spread we see in college because that is what the talent pool is taught to do and how they are taught to play. Not every team wants to take 2-3 years to "re-educate" their defensive players. Most recognize that is a waste of their time.

[SidSmythe]

Personally if it were me, i'd stick with a 3-4/2-4...technically everything is based on down and distance.
You'll never see the base 3-4 go away b/c you will never see the 2 back/2TE go away.

Teams will still base their fronts off 1st down sets, but you'll see more of a focus on LBs being athletic and able to cover.

As that defenses evolve so will offenses back to the run....once defenses catch up to the passing game their weakness will be defending the run again

[grotonsteel]

Totally agree which is why DL needs to let our defensive linemen attack the QB and quit dancing with the OL.

The NFL will more and more mimic the spread we see in college because that is what the talent pool is taught to do and how they are taught to play. Not every team wants to take 2-3 years to "re-educate" their defensive players. Most recognize that is a waste of their time.

Steelers drafted a pair a 1st Rd D-linemen. Unleash them. We don't need 1st Rd draft picks just to take on the blockers. We need them to collapse the pocket, rush the QB.

Draft in middle rounds for players to take on the blockers.

[RuthlessBurgher]

With the passing game continuing to evolve, base defense may need to be thrown out the window completely. If the rules continue to lead to an increasingly pass-happy league year-after-year, then defenses may be in nickel and dime packages almost exclusively whenever you are playing a team with a semi-competant QB.

Here is an idea of what teams might be looking for:

Start with a 4 man front consisting of a run-stuffing NT, a penetrating 3-technique, a well-rounded strong-side DE who is responsible against the run and pass, and a pure pass-rushing terror as your weak-side DE coming in from the QB's blind side.

A true thumper at MLB, then a couple of "tweeners" along side of him (unlike the DE-OLB tweeners like Jason Worilds, I'm talking about LB-S tweeners like Sean Spence). One guy might have been an undersized LB in college (think Carnell Lake), and the other guy might have been an oversized safety in college (think Brian Urlacher). Guys who are strong enough to hold up against the run, but quick enough to counter multiple TE sets without having to substitute (and, of course, blitzing ability wouldn't hurt either, even though this wouldn't be a primary responsibility on most downs). The ideal would perhaps be guys like Derrick Brooks and Sean Taylor in terms of guys who are equally adept at dropping into coverage zones as well as holding up against the run too.

In the secondary, have two outside corners and a slot corner (since 3-WR base offenses are becoming more prevalent) plus a ball-hawking FS patrolling the deep middle.

In this scenario, you'd always have 4 DL and always have at least 4 DB, and the adjustment from base to nickel to dime would depend on how those two "tweeners" would be lined up and used. If they are both down in the box to function as linebackers, it is more of a base look. If both drop back to function as safeties, it is more of a dime look. And if one functions as a LB and the other as a SS, then it would be more a nickel look.

[RuthlessBurgher]

As teams structure their lineups to compete in a pass first league they are not putting the pieces on their rosters to have a dominant running game. Teams that try to do that usually don't have good QB play and they are usually losing teams.

You don't have to be elite to stop the run but you do need to be elite to stop the pass. I'll settle for being #10 against the run if I can be top 5 against the pass.

Well, last season we were 8th against the rush, but 1st against the pass...

[Oviedo]

With the passing game continuing to evolve, base defense may need to be thrown out the window completely. If the rules continue to lead to an increasingly pass-happy league year-after-year, then defenses may be in nickel and dime packages almost exclusively whenever you are playing a team with a semi-competant QB.

Here is an idea of what teams might be looking for:

Start with a 4 man front consisting of a run-stuffing NT, a penetrating 3-technique, a well-rounded strong-side DE who is responsible against the run and pass, and a pure pass-rushing terror as your weak-side DE coming in from the QB's blind side.

A true thumper at MLB, then a couple of "tweeners" along side of him (unlike the DE-OLB tweeners like Jason Worilds, I'm talking about LB-S tweeners like Sean Spence). One guy might have been an undersized LB in college (think Carnell Lake), and the other guy might have been an oversized safety in college (think Brian Urlacher). Guys who are strong enough to hold up against the run, but quick enough to counter multiple TE sets without having to substitute (and, of course, blitzing ability wouldn't hurt either, even though this wouldn't be a primary responsibility on most downs). The ideal would perhaps be guys like Derrick Brooks and Sean Taylor in terms of guys who are equally adept at dropping into coverage zones as well as holding up against the run too.

In the secondary, have two outside corners and a slot corner (since 3-WR base offenses are becoming more prevalent) plus a ball-hawking FS patrolling the deep middle.

In this scenario, you'd always have 4 DL and always have at least 4 DB, and the adjustment from base to nickel to dime would depend on how those two "tweeners" would be lined up and used. If they are both down in the box to function as linebackers, it is more of a base look. If both drop back to function as safeties, it is more of a dime look. And if one functions as a LB and the other as a SS, then it would be more a nickel look.

Really!!!!! Did you really just advocate a version of the 4-3 that I've been saying for the past two years and getting a rash of sh!t about???????

[Slapstick]

Really!!!!! Did you really just advocate a version of the 4-3 that I've been saying for the past two years and getting a rash of sh!t about???????

It's pretty similar to the passing down Nickel defense that the Steelers have used at times over the last few years...

If it's already part of the defense, what are you calling for?

[Shoe]

The 0-11 defense will be king.


But really, I think fast coverage LBs may become much bigger parts of defenses. Hopefully Timmons and Spence can lead that change.

That's very logical. In previous "eras" of football since I've been watching (as it relates to our 34 defense), the MLB (the Buck?) position was supposed to be manned by a thumper--a guy who could take on big linemen and stuff the inside run. David Little was a prototype for this. Kirkland another. In the past few years, we've manned that post with Farrior at 220 pounds.

I think having fast guys (Sean Spence) is possibly an evolution to our 34. You don't have as much a need to have a thumper in the box.

[RuthlessBurgher]

Really!!!!! Did you really just advocate a version of the 4-3 that I've been saying for the past two years and getting a rash of sh!t about???????

I was answering a general "What's the next defensive evolution?" question in regards to defending against the evolving pass-happy NFL...I wasn't necessarily being Steeler-specific here...our team is built to win now...only minor "tweaks" are required, not wholesale philosophical changes.

But, yeah, in general, if the league continues to lean more and more on aerial attack, we would also need to counter with more nickel and dime specialty defenses (which have always been 4 man fronts...we can run a 3-3-5 nickel, but it's essentially the same as a 4-2-5 nickel except that one of the pass-rushing DE's is in a two-point stance instead of a three-point stance...playing a "joker" type of role). I was merely suggesting how defenses might evolve using LB-S tweeners in order to morph from base to nickel to dime without requiring substitutions, so a team going no huddle will not be able to keep you in a disadvantageous personnel grouping.

Once upon a time, when the 4-3 was prevalent, DE-OLB tweeners had a reduced value (one or two saavy 3-4 teams could find them in mid-to-late rounds with regularity).

Then, when the league evolved and the 3-4 became en vogue, suddenly the value of DE-OLB tweeners shot up (had to use early round picks to get good ones now).

Now, with the league evolving again, I am predicting that LB-S tweeners will gain value moving forward...that's all. Guys who did not have a position in base defense will suddenly be valued because of how they could allow a team to seemlessly transfer from one specialty defense to another even when the other team does not allow you to sub in new bodies. The LB-S tweener will be the answer to the multiple TE trend, which has been causing matchup problems for defenses over the last couple seasons. Don't worry...I'm not becoming a 4-3 man (unless, of course, we find the second comings of Joe Greene, Jack Lambert, Jack Ham, Mel Blount, etc.).

[Oviedo]

I was answering a general "What's the next defensive evolution?" question in regards to defending against the evolving pass-happy NFL...I wasn't necessarily being Steeler-specific here...our team is built to win now...only minor "tweaks" are required, not wholesale philosophical changes.

But, yeah, in general, if the league continues to lean more and more on aerial attack, we would also need to counter with more nickel and dime specialty defenses (which have always been 4 man fronts...we can run a 3-3-5 nickel, but it's essentially the same as a 4-2-5 nickel except that one of the pass-rushing DE's is in a two-point stance instead of a three-point stance...playing a "joker" type of role). I was merely suggesting how defenses might evolve using LB-S tweeners in order to morph from base to nickel to dime without requiring substitutions, so a team going no huddle will not be able to keep you in a disadvantageous personnel grouping.

Once upon a time, when the 4-3 was prevalent, DE-OLB tweeners had a reduced value (one or two saavy 3-4 teams could find them in mid-to-late rounds with regularity).

Then, when the league evolved and the 3-4 became en vogue, suddenly the value of DE-OLB tweeners shot up (had to use early round picks to get good ones now).

Now, with the league evolving again, I am predicting that LB-S tweeners will gain value moving forward...that's all. Guys who did not have a position in base defense will suddenly be valued because of how they could allow a team to seemlessly transfer from one specialty defense to another even when the other team does not allow you to sub in new bodies. The LB-S tweener will be the answer to the multiple TE trend, which has been causing matchup problems for defenses over the last couple seasons. Don't worry...I'm not becoming a 4-3 man (unless, of course, we find the second comings of Joe Greene, Jack Lambert, Jack Ham, Mel Blount, etc.).

You are singing my tune. My point all along has been that as more teams went to the 3-4 the "monopoly" we had finding those tweener DE/OLBs was lost and we therefore lost an advanatage. Coupled at the same time with the league becoming a "pass first and pass often" it only made sense to get more pressure from the DL because LBs were going to be forced into coverage and therefore not putting pressure on the QB. That pressure has to come from the DL.

I don't think you need to be talking a "what if" here. TThis emphasisi on the pass isn't going away so staying with our current scheme just doesn't make sense. Let's be leaders to the next defensive scheme versus hanging on to what we will have to move away from.

This is all being driven by the spread in college so let's not waste 2 years of a players limited NFL career "converting" him and bring him in and use him like he was used in college to stop a offense very similar to what the NFL is becoming more like. I think we need to be looking at how we do it now. Woodley could be a pass rushing DE in a four man front tomorrow.

[steelz09]

I'm in agreement that base defenses may become more obsolete and the nickell may play a much larger role.

However, I still say that if you don't have a ILB that is really strong in run defense, (in a base 3-4).. you are in trouble.

I disagree that the Steelers wouldn't have drafted Hightower. Colbert basically said it after the draft that he was rated very high. That's not a smokescreen. Why would they do a smokescreen after the draft. It was crystal clear that the Steelers rated Hightower very high even though a lot of people on this board can't live with it.

I forgot who said that elite passing teams don't have a solid running attack. Wrong.... New Orleans have some pretty good running backs last time I checked. Houston does as well.