Did Belichick Just Complete a Switch to a 4-3 Defense

[maverick4]

Consider the roster changes since last December. Is is possible that Belichick is moving to an exclusive 4-3? Did he decide on this switch even before the draft?

It makes sense that he would switch to a 4-3, since disciples McDaniels, Mangini, Pioli have all switched to a 3-4 defense and compete for the same players. There may now be better value for BB to go after 4-3 players.

We traded for Burgess, drafted Brace, signed Banta Cain, and kept Jarvis with his 5M cap hit. Wilfork is/was a beast as a 4-3 DT in college.

With Seymour now gone (a brilliant move by the way, if the future CBA sets low fixed salaries for top draft picks), and on top of Bruschi and Harrison retiring, I'm not even sure if the Patriots have the personnel to play 3-4 anymore.

It's looking like we'll be using Jarvis, Burgess, Banta Bain, and Warren at DE, with Wilfork, Brace, Wright, Pryor at DT. We have three fast LB's in Mayo, Adalius, and Guyton. By the way, for those worried about missing Seymour, the Pats went 8-0 without Richard Seymour in 2007.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Yes. It was pretty obvious they were going to a 4-3 because they didin't have enough at LB and were more talented at DL. However, the so called "smart people" on this board blew it off as usual and believed the Pats had what it took at ILB and OLB. It looks at though Green or Burgess will take Seymour's spot.

 

[ElReyDeLosReyes]

Yes, this defense is now a base 4-3. Until Bill drafts Suk next year.

 

[maverick4]

Belichick must have hated what he saw on tape during the off-season.
He has gotten rid of Vrabel, Hobbs, Bruschi, Harrison, and now Seymour.

The defense is completely reshaped, and he did it almost in a cloaked chess-game-like fashion, where nobody could see the final design until the biggest piece was moved.

 

[Ian]

TestRest reply 10 chars

 

[makoute]

Yes. It was pretty obvious they were going to a 4-3 because they didin't have enough at LB and were more talented at DL. However, the so called "smart people" on this board blew it off as usual and believed the Pats had what it took at ILB and OLB. It looks at though Green or Burgess will take Seymour's spot.

Base on that, it could also mean that they traded him just because they have so much talent at DL. You can only have 4 DLs in the game at any given time for the most part, so why not trade one especially for a 1st rounder and save some money?

 

[crowell33]

TestRest reply 10 chars

I agree strongly.

 

[BradyFixesEverything]

Peppers is next.

 

[PatsBoy12]

Belichick must have hated what he saw on tape during the off-season.
He has gotten rid of Vrabel, Hobbs, Bruschi, Harrison, and now Seymour.

The defense is completely reshaped, and he did it almost in a cloaked chess-game-like fashion, where nobody could see the final design until the biggest piece was moved.

Did I miss something?

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Did I miss something?

I think he means that we'll never know whether the retirements were entirely voluntary and one sided or whether there was a helping hand letting them know that their roles would be reduced significantly this year and retirement allows them to exit gracefully..............

I'm not trying to put words in Maverick's mouth but I think he nailed it
wrt the overall grand scheme.....

 

[Canada's #1 Pats Fan]

Peppers is next.

I'd be OK with that. It would be fitting for BB's genius wouldn't it?

 

[mtbykr]

Let's not forget that although BB loves the 3-4, he isn't opposed to going 4-3. In 2001 he switched to a base 4-3 because of personel about 4 games into the season and stayed that way throughout.

 

[Pats726]

We might never know exactly how this evolved..but certainly a MORE 4-3 is what they are into now..ONLY time will tell if it's a TOTAL shift..or such...I do think the 3-4 as well as many hybrid defenses will be part of their defensive package..tea,s may NOT know what type of D they have planned..I think a bit of both..but definitely leaning for the 4-3 more..I agree with Maverick..slowly done..whether by design or it started to happen or maybe teh pieces just fit in...maybe he thought with Mayo a 4-3 could be possible..

 

[Canada's #1 Pats Fan]

Maybe because of the questions with the secondary, BB feels that more of a pass rush can/and will be generated by a 4-3 with his current personnel than the personnel he has for a 3-4.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I think he means that we'll never know whether the retirements were entirely voluntary and one sided or whether there was a helping hand letting them know that their roles would be reduced significantly this year and retirement allows them to exit gracefully..............

I'm not trying to put words in Maverick's mouth but I think he nailed it
wrt the overall grand scheme.....

Thanks. I thought the same thing, but I still had to question it.

 

[maverick4]

I think he means that we'll never know whether the retirements were entirely voluntary and one sided or whether there was a helping hand letting them know that their roles would be reduced significantly this year and retirement allows them to exit gracefully..............

I'm not trying to put words in Maverick's mouth but I think he nailed it
with the overall grand scheme.....

That is what I meant, thank you for the clarification PFPhilly

 

[JoeShmoe]

Of course he is

Said this on the defense thread the other day (and got laughed at) but we have the personnel now to play 4-3 (probably still a 2 gap 4-3) with faster DE's like Burgess

Seymour is a 3-4 DE and so he's been traded. I still think we will see some 3-4 but its just like Bill that while everyone else goes to 3-4 he goes to 4-3

 

[maverick4]

Let's not forget that although BB loves the 3-4, he isn't opposed to going 4-3. In 2001 he switched to a base 4-3 because of personnel about 4 games into the season and stayed that way throughout.

This is a great point. Our Cinderella run in 2001 was in a 4-3 defense!

 

[Metaphors]

Of course he is

Said this on the defense thread the other day (and got laughed at) but we have the personnel now to play 4-3 (probably still a 2 gap 4-3) with faster DE's like Burgess

Seymour is a 3-4 DE and so he's been traded. I still think we will see some 3-4 but its just like Bill that while everyone else goes to 3-4 he goes to 4-3

The technique is more important than the number of players with their hands on the ground. If the Pats go to a 1-gap penetrating defense, that will be a huge transition. I'll assume (like you) that they stay 2-gap.

That means there will either be someone lining up over the center (Wilfork, Brace) or two tackles lining up over the guards (any number of candidates for this). Outside of Mayo and Sanders, whose responsibilities stay the same regardless, the rest of the defense keys off the tackle(s). The Pats will be in nickel/dime half the time anyway, so there won't even be a "front seven" for a majority of game snaps anyway.

So what technique will the tackles be playing next Monday? I have no idea. Neither do the Bills. Even when the Pats show a formation, I expect them to change it from game-to-game, half-to-half or even series-to-series.

 

[mgteich]

The defense had been rebuilt over the past three seasons. Let's see how many survived: Warren, Wilfork, Green, Wright, and Thomas.

Yes, I do think we'll be a base 4-3 2-gap. We will still go into the 3-4 on occasion.

The bottom line is that Belichick was NOT happy with the defenses of the last 2-3 years, no matter what the stats said.

This is a very, very young defense.