What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense? - New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard
Men's Apparel Jerseys Hats Novelties Throwback Women's Youth
 
REGISTER FOR PATSFANS.COM

Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!


Go Back   New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard > PatsFans.com Forums > PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum > Patriots Draft Talk
Forgot Password? Join PatsFans.com!
Register Blogs FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read Chat Room

WELCOME TO OUR FORUM HERE AT PATSFANS.COM!
ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW

Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-05-2010, 01:45 PM   #1
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,895
My Mood: Pensive
Default What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

As per the BuffaloRumblings blog, WRT the announcement by new DC, George Edwards, of moving the defense toward a base 3-4 . . . starting out with a hybrid 3-4 "look" similar to the "3-4 Over" run by Arizona and Dallas . . .

Quote:
"The beauty of this scheme is that you don't need the massive, two-gap, blubbery nose tackle in the middle to make it work. The alignment focuses on employing lighter, quicker, one-gap linemen and bigger, faster linebackers behind them to make it work, as illustrated in the photo above the fold. Players would be asked to beat blockers to spots and maintain gaps, rather than overcome multiple blockers via brute strength and bulk."
The theory is that it can be easier to disguise the pass rush/be more creative with it, especially important if it isn't overwhelmingly powerful to begin with . . . an edge-rushing OLB can put his hand on the ground on passing downs (or not) . . .

Quote:
"You'll see Buffalo's secondary play a bit more matchup football and a significant amount of man coverage. There's nothing wrong with that, so long as the pass rush gets home and Jairus Byrd is still playing centerfield to eat up those poorly thrown passes. This is a scheme that you can run zone behind as well, and obviously, Buffalo's linebackers and defensive backs are used to that.

Where Buffalo would lack, first and foremost, would be depth. The Bills will need a ton of depth brought in. They'd need to bring in prospects along the defensive line, at linebacker, and pass rushing specialists."
---------

This sounds to me a lot like where BB may be taking the Pats defense - to the "3-4 Over" - but coming from the other direction. My admittedly weak justification for thinking this is plausible:
- BB drafted THREE DTs last year (mostly one-gap guys, it seems to me) and brought three more into camp and at least one more was on the roster for a time during the regular season.
- He traded Seymour, who fits a classic base 3-4, but not so much for the 3-4 Over (and, yes, there were other reasons for trading Seymour at the time).
- He moved Wright and Wilfork around into one-gap positions way more than in the past.
- He picked up TBC, Burgess and Ninkovich and used them as specialists or OLB/DE tweeners.

STOP RIGHT HERE: If you prefer to argue against this "move to a 3-4 Over" happening at all (or merely being a temporary situation), please start your own thread. I'd like this thread to be exclusively devoted, as much as possible, to exploring this "what if" scenario. Thanks.


The point being that, IF this is true (MAJOR CAVEAT), then it may significantly change the way we project how BB will move in FA and the Draft.

My guesses:

- Wilfork will be Franchised and traded.
- Jarvis Green will be allowed to walk.
- Bodden and TBC will be high-priority FA retentions on the defense.

- Classic 3-4 DEs (6'5"+, 290+ lbs) will not be a priority acquisition goal.
- A classic 3-4 NT to replace Wilfork will not be a priority acquisition goal.
- One-gap DTs may become a higher-priority acquisition goal.
- DE/OLB tweeners (6'1"-6'3", 260-275 lbs) with speed and good gap/edge discipline, rather than coverage skills, WILL become a higher priority acquisition. Similar requirements may also apply to ILB acquisitions.
- Another good "coverage" safety may become a higher priority acquisition (and Brandon McGowan may be traded/cut).

So - for the sake of discussion, let's say this "move to (something like) a 3-4 Over" is actually transpiring.

What other player characteristics/types of players (beyond those I've mentioned above might be required?

What players currently on the roster fit this scheme/these specs best (including, possibly, Wilfork)? Fit worst (or not at all)?
What potential FAs would fit best? Worst? Not at all?
What potential draft picks fit best? Worst? Not at all?

Also, what/who might the Pats get in trade or Wilfork and, if draft picks, how might they be used?

Again, if you prefer to argue against the possibility of this "move to a 3-4 Over" happening at all, please refrain from doing so here. If you have ideas about how this would work and/or who the Pats might try to acquire to make it work, have at it.
MaineMan is offline  
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!

Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account
including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.

NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98

Updated 07/08/11

Help Us Reach Our Goal!

Old 02-05-2010, 02:17 PM   #2
PatsFans.com Supporter
 
Box_O_Rocks's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 20,550
Default Re: What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

"- BB drafted THREE DTs last year (mostly one-gap guys, it seems to me) and brought three more into camp and at least one more was on the roster for a time during the regular season."

Brace is a classic NT in any scheme, over, under, 1-gap, or two his sole purpose in college was to eat space (blockers).
Pryor is indeed from a one-gap system and is a good penetrator, but he's also technically sound and has demonstrated two-gap capability - which jumped him ahead of Brace who is relearning technique.
Richard came from a two-gap system (Georgia Tech), similar to LeKevin Smith and Adams before him (Nebraska).
Grady is the one true anomoly in my mind when he was signed to the P-Squad, but he was also the first one cut when space was needed so it could just be BB is trying to develop him as a two-gap player.

Arizona derives it's 3-4 from the Pittsburgh model. Dallas gets theirs from a similar school. NE experimented with more one-gap playing style last season, but went back to two-gap when they wanted to stabilize things.

Regardless of Coach Edward's comments on DL size, NE's DL are the same size or smaller then their counterparts in Arizona and Dallas. The 4-3 speculation last year proved true, but in the end, not that effective, I'm expecting NE to draft for talent and technique, and adapt whomever they bring in into the standard NE base 3-4 multiple defense BB's always used.
__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Box_O_Rocks is offline  
Old 02-05-2010, 02:42 PM   #3
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,895
My Mood: Pensive
Default Re: What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Box_O_Rocks View Post
"- BB drafted THREE DTs last year (mostly one-gap guys, it seems to me) and brought three more into camp and at least one more was on the roster for a time during the regular season."

Brace is a classic NT in any scheme, over, under, 1-gap, or two his sole purpose in college was to eat space (blockers).
Pryor is indeed from a one-gap system and is a good penetrator, but he's also technically sound and has demonstrated two-gap capability - which jumped him ahead of Brace who is relearning technique.
Richard came from a two-gap system (Georgia Tech), similar to LeKevin Smith and Adams before him (Nebraska).
Grady is the one true anomoly in my mind when he was signed to the P-Squad, but he was also the first one cut when space was needed so it could just be BB is trying to develop him as a two-gap player.

Arizona derives it's 3-4 from the Pittsburgh model. Dallas gets theirs from a similar school. NE experimented with more one-gap playing style last season, but went back to two-gap when they wanted to stabilize things.

Regardless of Coach Edward's comments on DL size, NE's DL are the same size or smaller then their counterparts in Arizona and Dallas. The 4-3 speculation last year proved true, but in the end, not that effective, I'm expecting NE to draft for talent and technique, and adapt whomever they bring in into the standard NE base 3-4 multiple defense BB's always used.
So, should I simply delete this thread? Since it couldn't possibly be true - and, obviously I'm way off base for even thinking so - then there's no point in exploring the "what if", is there?
MaineMan is offline  
Old 02-05-2010, 02:57 PM   #4
PatsFans.com Supporter
 
Box_O_Rocks's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 20,550
Default Re: What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

Explore all you want, your speculation is fine, but I don't see the moves to indicate that's the case.
__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Box_O_Rocks is offline  
Old 02-05-2010, 03:54 PM   #5
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,895
My Mood: Pensive
Default Re: What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Box_O_Rocks View Post
Explore all you want, your speculation is fine, but I don't see the moves to indicate that's the case.
Then, I'm not sure I understand . . .

My purpose for this thread was to discuss the "what if?", as in "if this was the case, then what?" My hypothesis was that exploring this "what if" as a "given" (however fantastic it may seem to some) might be a healthy way for some of us to gain a more rounded perspective on the team and on prospective players - a mental exercise. I was hoping, therefore, to exclude debate on whether this "given" was reasonable/justifiable, etc. and I politely (I think) requested that commenters refrain from doing so. Twice.

If this is somehow inappropriate or unreasonable, then please tell me how I go about deleting the thread and I'll do so.
MaineMan is offline  
Old 02-05-2010, 04:10 PM   #6
Practice Squad
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 102
Default Re: What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

Well, you could talk about what prospects might make sense for each position.

Who would make a good nose tackle in this scheme out of the top 60 prospects?
Charles Barwin is offline  
Old 02-05-2010, 05:06 PM   #7
PatsFans.com Supporter
 
Box_O_Rocks's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 20,550
Default Re: What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaineMan View Post
Then, I'm not sure I understand . . .

My purpose for this thread was to discuss the "what if?", as in "if this was the case, then what?" My hypothesis was that exploring this "what if" as a "given" (however fantastic it may seem to some) might be a healthy way for some of us to gain a more rounded perspective on the team and on prospective players - a mental exercise. I was hoping, therefore, to exclude debate on whether this "given" was reasonable/justifiable, etc. and I politely (I think) requested that commenters refrain from doing so. Twice.

If this is somehow inappropriate or unreasonable, then please tell me how I go about deleting the thread and I'll do so.
I do beg your pardon, I misunderstood your purpose.

As to "what if;" we'd probably see more one or two dimensional OLB acquisitions, strong pass rushers, weak minors in run defense, limited to no coverage skills - think Merriman.
__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Box_O_Rocks is offline  
Old 02-05-2010, 05:22 PM   #8
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,895
My Mood: Pensive
Default Re: What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Barwin View Post
Well, you could talk about what prospects might make sense for each position.

Who would make a good nose tackle in this scheme out of the top 60 prospects?
Exactly. Great example. I mean, right now (assuming Wilfork is gone), we have Pryor, Brace, Mike Wright (sorta) and Darryl Richard. Any of those guys look like they could excel at what would essentially be (maybe) a 4-3 NT spot, AND be capable of handling 3-4 two-gap duties without getting us killed? If not . . . .

Assuming that Suh and Gerald McCoy are out of reach, that leaves us (going by current NFLDRAFTSCOUT.com rankings and projected draft slots):

1st Round
#24 - Dan Williams - 6'2", 329
#29 - Jared Odrick - 6'5", 305 (seems more like a 3-4 DE to me, but who knows?)

2nd Round
#33 - Brian Price - 6'2", 300
#46 - Terrance Cody - 6'4", 370 (that just seems wrong, y'know?

3rd Round
#72 - Tyson Alualu - 6'2", 291
#94 - Cam Thomas - 6'4', 331 (moving up in the rankings quickly now)

4th Round
#106 - Lamarr Houston - 6'3", 302
#107 - Torrell Troup - 6'3", 310
#129 - Arthur Jones - 6'3", 295
#138 - D'Anthony Smith - 6'2", 300

Free Agents:
Casey Hampton, PIT (age 32)
Aubrayo Franklin, SF (age 30)
Ryan Pickett, GB (age 30)

To repeat the question, how would these guys fit in a 3-4/4-3 hybrid defense, playing two-gap at times and one-gap at others? Maybe none of them are perfect, but then, who would best fit the position?
MaineMan is offline  
Old 02-05-2010, 05:29 PM   #9
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,895
My Mood: Pensive
Default Re: What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Box_O_Rocks View Post
I do beg your pardon, I misunderstood your purpose.

As to "what if;" we'd probably see more one or two dimensional OLB acquisitions, strong pass rushers, weak minors in run defense, limited to no coverage skills - think Merriman.
No prob. But, with the day I've been having, I don't really want to "think Merriman" in any way, shape or form, thenkyewverrahmuch!

Seriously, though, what would you think of Brandon Graham under these circumstances? How would this change your personal big board wrt potential Pats LB and D-line draft picks? Does someone like Brian Price now come in to the picture? Or Dan Williams?

And, don't forget, under this specific scenario, we trade Wilfork for a draft pick or two. How much we'd get for him, from who, and how would it help us drafting under this scenario are also open questions. Again, not saying I want to lose Wilfork, just making it one of the constraints built into the scenario.
MaineMan is offline  
Old 02-05-2010, 06:15 PM   #10
PatsFans.com Supporter
 
Box_O_Rocks's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 20,550
Default Re: What if BB is moving to the "3-4 Over" defense?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaineMan View Post
No prob. But, with the day I've been having, I don't really want to "think Merriman" in any way, shape or form, thenkyewverrahmuch!

Seriously, though, what would you think of Brandon Graham under these circumstances? How would this change your personal big board wrt potential Pats LB and D-line draft picks? Does someone like Brian Price now come in to the picture? Or Dan Williams?

And, don't forget, under this specific scenario, we trade Wilfork for a draft pick or two. How much we'd get for him, from who, and how would it help us drafting under this scenario are also open questions. Again, not saying I want to lose Wilfork, just making it one of the constraints built into the scenario.
I had Dan Williams as my #22 pick in PATSNUTMe's drafty game, that wouldn't change because he's the one in this draft getting compared to Wilfork the most. You still want a wide body in the middle and Brace hasn't yet proven he's the answer.

Brandon Graham would be a strong consideration because of his pass rush, but I'm sure BB would still go with DL in the first and perhaps try for Pierre-Paul and/or Lane in the second. Though the more likely move is to target guys like Kampmen, Denney, and Vanden Bosch in Free Agency. Re-signing Burgess and TBC would actually be higher priorities at that point too.
__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Box_O_Rocks is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Sponsored Links



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is it "dove" or "dived"? "Sneaked" or "snuck"? State The PatsFans.com Pub 6 06-11-2009 08:22 AM
"All Access" and Preseason Games moving to WBZ PatriotsDaily.com PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum 0 01-21-2009 12:00 PM
Shula: "Patriots", "Bonds", and "asterisk" in one sentence! --NY Daily News sam PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum 53 11-06-2007 01:15 PM
OK, I'm moving back towards being "cautiously optimistic" Real World Political Discussion 7 11-29-2006 10:47 AM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

© Copyright 2000-2012. PatsFans.com Is a Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.
The opinions posted in this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of our staff at PatsFans.com or USA Today.
We are not affiliated with the New England Patriots™ or the NFL™. The Photo Used In the header was taken by Ian Logue.

This site is owned and operated by I&K Internet Design Enterprises, LLC