Based on Personnel, we should play a 4-3

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • SidSmythe
    Hall of Famer
    • Sep 2008
    • 4708

    #16
    our 3-4 personnel does NOT have a true 4-3 DE other than WOODLEY (maybe Worilds). Heyward, Hood & McClendon are all 3 Techniques
    Here We Go Steelers, Here We Go...
    Here We Go Steelers, Here We Go...
    Here We Go Steelers, Here We Go...!!!

    Comment

    • Oviedo
      Legend
      • May 2008
      • 23824

      #17
      Originally posted by SidSmythe
      our 3-4 personnel does NOT have a true 4-3 DE other than WOODLEY (maybe Worilds). Heyward, Hood & McClendon are all 3 Techniques
      McLendon and especially Hood would be DT in the 4-3 not DE, you would also have Fangupo and Woods. Woodley and Worilds both played DE in college so its not like they couldn't do it again as part of a three or four man rotation, add to that Arnfeldt and Nick Williams (Could be DT or DE).

      Clearly going to the 4-3 would require that pieces need to be added, but don't we also need to add pieces now just to stay with the 3-4? Isn't that why some are praying we use 90% of this draft on defense? The difference is we wouldn't have to draft 2 year conversions projects and hope they work out. That is the benefit of the 4-3. A more natural transition from college to the NFL because you are staying in position. That is how we could keep the pump primed versus continually missing on DE to OLB conversion projects.
      "My team, may they always be right, but right or wrong...MY TEAM!"

      Comment

      • Slapstick
        Rookie
        • May 2008
        • 0

        #18
        Originally posted by SidSmythe
        our 3-4 personnel does NOT have a true 4-3 DE other than WOODLEY (maybe Worilds). Heyward, Hood & McClendon are all 3 Techniques
        Heyward could be a 4-3 DE...
        Actually, my post was NOT about you...but, if the shoe fits, feel free to lace that &!+€# up and wear it.

        Comment

        • Slapstick
          Rookie
          • May 2008
          • 0

          #19
          Originally posted by Oviedo
          McLendon and especially Hood would be DT in the 4-3 not DE, you would also have Fangupo and Woods. Woodley and Worilds both played DE in college so its not like they couldn't do it again as part of a three or four man rotation, add to that Arnfeldt and Nick Williams (Could be DT or DE).

          Clearly going to the 4-3 would require that pieces need to be added, but don't we also need to add pieces now just to stay with the 3-4? Isn't that why some are praying we use 90% of this draft on defense? The difference is we wouldn't have to draft 2 year conversions projects and hope they work out. That is the benefit of the 4-3. A more natural transition from college to the NFL because you are staying in position. That is how we could keep the pump primed versus continually missing on DE to OLB conversion projects.
          Except 4-3 players need to acclimate to the NFL as well....
          Actually, my post was NOT about you...but, if the shoe fits, feel free to lace that &!+€# up and wear it.

          Comment

          • phillyesq
            Legend
            • May 2008
            • 7568

            #20
            Originally posted by Slapstick
            Except 4-3 players need to acclimate to the NFL as well....
            Yup. Throughout the league, regardless of team, position, system or side of the ball, one constant that you see is that it generally takes rookies time to adjust to the NFL. Most young players don't excel until their third seasons.

            Comment

            • K Train
              Hall of Famer
              • Jan 2014
              • 3685

              #21
              We absolutely do not have a DE to play in a 43.

              Heyward could play DE on early downs, but hes primarily a DT in a 43 and would easily be our best dlineman for it.

              Timmons would be incredible in a 43 and I think Jarvis would be very good, but the dline isnt even close to where it would need to be

              Comment

              • Slapstick
                Rookie
                • May 2008
                • 0

                #22
                Heyward already plays a 5 technique and is good against the run while getting good pressure on the QB...

                He would be fine playing a 5 tech on a 4 man D-Line...
                Actually, my post was NOT about you...but, if the shoe fits, feel free to lace that &!+€# up and wear it.

                Comment

                Working...