Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

vel

4-3 Under, The Leo And The Falcons Multiple Defense

Recommended Posts

Man that is truly a great point, no doubt second round is where we should get our DT, I see Mack Robinson or Matthews at #6 and one of those DTs round 2. I would also like tp pick up another DT perhaps a guy like Zac Kerr around the 6th round.

Walk away from this draft with Tuitt and Hageman in first and second I'll be incredibly happy. Sign Michael Johnson and Linval Joseph I'm sharting myself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is where does Michael Bennett fit in that defense, because I always pictured Clowney being our Michael Bennett.

Bennett plays mostly 3T and LEO. I don't see Clowney in much of a LEO role, more 3T and 5T, but a penetrating JJ Watt 5T, not a "hold the point" 5T like Brett Keisel.

Good explanation. I just say "the LEO" here in order to shorten it and not have to write an article that size...

its called laziness.

I did, however, leave a link once. ph34r.png

Lol you already know how I feel. I just couldn't take it anymore so I decided to just try and clear a ton of things up around here. It makes mocks better and helps understand where players would fit if drafted/signed.

Man that is truly a great point, no doubt second round is where we should get our DT, I see Mack Robinson or Matthews at #6 and one of those DTs round 2. I would also like tp pick up another DT perhaps a guy like Zac Kerr around the 6th round.

That's why I am not concerned with the DT spot. We will get one and if all 5 go in the first round, then a top talent elsewhere falls. I think our first two picks will be home runs. Also, the late round NT depth is good too. My favorite is Carrethers but Kerr is good as well. Even Beau Allen or Mister Cobble can be in the mix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walk away from this draft with Tuitt and Hageman in first and second I'll be incredibly happy. Sign Michael Johnson and Linval Joseph I'm sharting myself

I think that's overkill at the 5T spot with no LEO. Tuitt, Hageman, Johnson and Goodman would be mostly 5Ts. None of them would be ideal LEOs. Change Hageman (who I'm a big fan of) with Trent Murphy or someone and it makes more sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I didn't agree with the Goodman pick until the season started. He is very good in run defense and is a solid interior pass rusher. Adding another player like him would give us depth there vs playing a squatty DT like we had to do. I knew Maponga and Mass were ideal fits as edge rushers, but I didn't think Bartu was an ideal SLB but he fits the description and characteristics.

Also, I think this ends any trade up talk for Clowney if it costs too much. He can only play limited snaps because he can't cover. Kahlil Mack is the ideal Leo at 6 and could even play the SAM. That's also why we would be interested in Barr as well. I think Donald is the perfect 3rd & long 3T in this defense as well. A guy like Cox will be screaming for him if he is there. It's also the perfect draft for DTs because they all won't go in the first. One of the top 5 will be there at our second pick (Nix, Tuitt, Hageman, Jernigan, Donald). I also think this NT class is pretty deep (D. Jones, Carrethers, Ellis) excluding McCullers, who doesn't require double teams despite his size. It's a match made in heaven draft for us.

Great post Vel much like MSalmon's thread also.

I to have done a bit of reading with about how the Hawks Leo and they choose to use 2 big DT's inside to stuff the run.

Your thread has cleared up a bit of confusion for me as how personel works vs what we have and who we'll possibly grab.

It'll be interesting to see how FA works out with regards to o-line pickup's and then they can go crazy with the D in the draft process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's overkill at the 5T spot with no LEO. Tuitt, Hageman, Johnson and Goodman would be mostly 5Ts. None of them would be ideal LEOs. Change Hageman (who I'm a big fan of) with Trent Murphy or someone and it makes more sense.

I'm good with that...but based on Nolan's Miami roster he loaded up on 5 techs. We only have goodman now in that role. Johnson can also stand up. He's done that before. That said, Murphy would be a fine substitute for an extra 5 tech lol

I forgot grab josh Ellis or D'Quan jones or carrethers later for the nose.

Joseph would be a heckuva addition in multiple positions IMO

FYI in Miami Nolan had 4 guys in DL rotation that could also play 5 tech!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bennett plays mostly 3T and LEO. I don't see Clowney in much of a LEO role, more 3T and 5T, but a penetrating JJ Watt 5T, not a "hold the point" 5T like Brett Keisel.

No, Bennett played primarily out of the 5-tech DE role for the Seahawks. That position prioritizes run defending and setting the edge which are Bennett's strengths. That he adds a pretty good pass rush as well is simply bonus. It's the same role Michael Johnson would play here since he has the same strengths and would explain the rumored interest in him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Bennett played primarily out of the 5-tech DE role for the Seahawks. That position prioritizes run defending and setting the edge which are Bennett's strengths. That he adds a pretty good pass rush as well is simply bonus. It's the same role Michael Johnson would play here since he has the same strengths and would explain the rumored interest in him.

Thanks gibbon. Better said than I could say it...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Leo's primary job is to rush the passer above all else with almost reckless abandon, why would Barr not be the perfect fit? I'm not debating Mack or Barr here, but it seems like Barr's athleticism makes him the perfect fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Leo's primary job is to rush the passer above all else with almost reckless abandon, why would Barr not be the perfect fit? I'm not debating Mack or Barr here, but it seems like Barr's athleticism makes him the perfect fit.

Because Barr is just an athlete and a poor football player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post Vel. We don't run this 4-3 Under much though. We still run most of our snaps in a plain vanilla Smitty BBDB 4-3. Regardless we suck monkey balls in both. Can't stop the run, can't rush the passer, can't play red zone defense, just suck as clowns. This looks good in your diagram or when the Seahawks are running it, but awful when we run it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough. So where do Goodman, Massaquoi, and Maponga fit in the Under?

Goodman 5T or 3T

Massaquoi Elephant on the edge.

Maponga much the same as above.

What we are after is that 1,0 tech in the middle and that longer lengthier 5T.

Please correct me if I'm wrong KOG Vel 1 of you guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post Vel. We don't run this 4-3 Under much though. We still run most of our snaps in a plain vanilla Smitty BBDB 4-3. Regardless we suck monkey balls in both. Can't stop the run, can't rush the passer, can't play red zone defense, just suck as clowns. This looks good in your diagram or when the Seahawks are running it, but awful when we run it.

Good post Vel. We don't run this 4-3 Under much though. We still run most of our snaps in a plain vanilla Smitty BBDB 4-3. Regardless we suck monkey balls in both. Can't stop the run, can't rush the passer, can't play red zone defense, just suck as clowns. This looks good in your diagram or when the Seahawks are running it, but awful when we run it.

Personnel, gray beard. Personnel left over from BVG days. Be interesting with all expiring contracts how Nolan's defense looks with new additions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post Vel. We don't run this 4-3 Under much though. We still run most of our snaps in a plain vanilla Smitty BBDB 4-3. Regardless we suck monkey balls in both. Can't stop the run, can't rush the passer, can't play red zone defense, just suck as clowns. This looks good in your diagram or when the Seahawks are running it, but awful when we run it.

As mentioned earlier though we have to change out the players to fit the new scheme the reason for what you explained is that we have fixed the back end first hopefully this is the year they fix the front 7 to run the mentioned scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodman 5T or 3T

Massaquoi Elephant on the edge.

Maponga much the same as above.

What we are after is that 1,0 tech in the middle and that longer lengthier 5T.

Please correct me if I'm wrong KOG Vel 1 of you guys.

Mass can stand up in 34 as well as can Maponga. We don't run exclusively the under either. Nolan runs multiple period. He's a no crapola hybrid guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass can stand up in 34 as well as can Maponga. We don't run exclusively the under either. Nolan runs multiple period. He's a no crapola hybrid guy

Yep got it I just thought the poster was wanting to know where the mentioned guys would be positioned in the LEO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post Vel. We don't run this 4-3 Under much though. We still run most of our snaps in a plain vanilla Smitty BBDB 4-3. Regardless we suck monkey balls in both. Can't stop the run, can't rush the passer, can't play red zone defense, just suck as clowns. This looks good in your diagram or when the Seahawks are running it, but awful when we run it.

This is another point. We seem to run all kinds of sets in this defense, but is it too much? I don't agree with having Smitty's traditional 4-3 Cover 2 outdated defense as our base, but I feel like all of these fronts might be a bit much for all of the players to take in and perhaps that's part of why we struggled. Throw in a bunch of young guys playing key positions and confusion amongst our own defense might be partially to blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Bennett played primarily out of the 5-tech DE role for the Seahawks. That position prioritizes run defending and setting the edge which are Bennett's strengths. That he adds a pretty good pass rush as well is simply bonus. It's the same role Michael Johnson would play here since he has the same strengths and would explain the rumored interest in him.

Per Seahawks.com:

Bennett started at the Leo end position in the base defense. He got some snaps there as well in the nickel defense, where he also moved inside to tackle.

I was surprised too. Check out this link too. They were surprised with what they got in Bennett. Bennett isn't the normal case though.

Good post Vel. We don't run this 4-3 Under much though. We still run most of our snaps in a plain vanilla Smitty BBDB 4-3. Regardless we suck monkey balls in both. Can't stop the run, can't rush the passer, can't play red zone defense, just suck as clowns. This looks good in your diagram or when the Seahawks are running it, but awful when we run it.

We do. BBDB is a defensive philosophy, not a formation. Our defense wasn't ready yet this past season. We were expected to lean on the offense again, like Nolan's first year here. Instead, we lost Biermann, Spoon and Dent early, throwing inexperienced players in the fire early, limiting what we could do and inherently increasing the mistakes. Those three aren't the most talented, but their experience is what separates them from Bartu, Worrilow and Mass. No more though. We have a good secondary when our front 7 is healthy. Given no need in the secondary (other than FS) and no skill position need on offense, we have a lot of resources to not just add talent but depth to the front 7. Don't be surprised if we have a sizable leap on the defense with a top 12 defense in 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned earlier though we have to change out the players to fit the new scheme the reason for what you explained is that we have fixed the back end first hopefully this is the year they fix the front 7 to run the mentioned scheme.

Personnel, gray beard. Personnel left over from BVG days. Be interesting with all expiring contracts how Nolan's defense looks with new additions

Who TF said we are moving to a 4-3 Under? I keep hearing this bush it. Mainly from Gibbon. Where's the link to that announcement? Yeah we run this bush it from time to time, but we primarily still run most of our snaps in a watered down vanilla Smitty basic instinct BBDB 4-3. And again, we suck in both. It's gonna take turning half of the roster over to be decent in any set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodman 5T or 3T

Massaquoi Elephant on the edge.

Maponga much the same as above.

What we are after is that 1,0 tech in the middle and that longer lengthier 5T.

Please correct me if I'm wrong KOG Vel 1 of you guys.

Correct. It just doesn't look right when it's not stocked with personnel. Look at the Seahawks defense back in Carroll's first season vs now. 27th ranked defense in 2010. #1 defense in 2013.

And like KoG said, it's not just 4-3 Under though. But I figured I'd just stick with that in this thread. Maybe explain the 4-3 Over next week and the 5-2 the following week. A series leading up to the FA or something. KoG can do the 46 since he loves it lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who TF said we are moving to a 4-3 Under? I keep hearing this bush it. Mainly from Gibbon. Where's the link to that announcement? Yeah we run this bush it from time to time, but we primarily still run most of our snaps in a watered down vanilla Smitty basic instinct BBDB 4-3. And again, we suck in both. It's gonna take turning half of the roster over to be decent in any set.

Old guy I understand you're frustrated, but look at the picture of the 4-3 Under and then look at some film of our alignments. Not the result of the play, just the alignment. We didn't make a grandiose announcement to the world because it's not needed. Does our defensive alignment look like Chi, Min or even Ten? No. We just didn't have all of the personnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
  • Create New...