43 Defense in 2008?

[Patjew]

All yours, Chuck. Don't burn me. :nono:

 

[BradyToMoss]

If Dorsey or Ellis falls to us at #7, that just might be the case.

 

[chuckdoucette]

Thank you.
I think that BB is working toward a major emphasis to the 43 Defense this year.
#1 I think our personnel is geared more toward a 43 this year. Our strength is our D line. We could line up Seymore and Warren on the ends, with Wilfork and either Smith or Wright in the middle. Jarvis Green can fill in.
#2 There are more and more teams moving to a 34 D so that leaves alot of good 43 players out there. We could probably get a better player for the money on the FA market and in the draft.
#3 The top of this years draft features 2 awsome DL Dorsey and Ellis and 1 may drop to number 7
#4 Our D is smart enough to make the switch since they run the 43 about 20% of the time now (this is a guess)
#5 Our LB situation would go from an area of need to an area of strength. Bruschi in the middle of Thomas and Vrable would be sweet and if we go after Briggs that would be equitable to the Moss move last year.
#6 We could spend the 2008 draft letting Capers build his secondary.

 

[chuckdoucette]

I appreciate it Patjew

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

How bout converting Jarvis Green to LB,???

 

[Patjew]

I appreciate it Patjew

No sweat.......

 

[GostkowSKI]

Who would our 3 linebackers be? Bruschi would be a below average 4-3 MLB. If it was AD at MLB, then who is the OLB other than Vrabel?

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

not buying it, at least as the main scheme.

Everyone says that BB is the very best at disguising defensive assignments, and that the 3-4 allows so much more possibilities for hiding what you plan to do and also opportunities for making in-game adjustments, so I don't see BB giving up one of his principle advantages unless forced to do so by having inadequate personnel available to stay 3-4.

 

[chuckdoucette]

Who would our 3 linebackers be? Bruschi would be a below average 4-3 MLB. If it was AD at MLB, then who is the OLB other than Vrabel?

It is easier to field 3 Quality LB's than 4. and I believe that there are alot more 43 LB's in FA than 34 LB's. We need (2) 34 LB's Now. If we go to 43 we need 1 fast guy in the middle

 

[Watson's IQ]

I expect they'll continue to run both, but it's not impossible they would shift to some more 4-3 next year. I think it's probably best to wait to see how free agency and the draft shake out before trying to see how the guys brought in will fit into the scheme. It's mostly academic at this point until we know who will be here.

 

[mdhprime]

I have actually been thinking about this a lot lately. BB has always played to the team's strengths, which in recent years has been the number of quality linebackers on the roster. Now, with Seymour, Warren, Wilfork, Green, Wright, and Smith in the fold, plus whoever they might draft or pick up in free agency, it seems as if the tables have turned to the lineman side when discussing depth and talent. I am very curious to see how this turns out, particularly since the team has just lost Colvin, one of the best pass rushers on the team.

 

[Ring 6]

We've spend 8 years acquiring players who best fit the 3-4. Why would we take those players and put them in a 4-3?
What player in our front 7 is better suited for a 4-3? I see NONE.

 

[Pats726]

Don't we have this discussion every year?? And after a long thread people realize we do NOT have the players for a base of a 4-3 and that the ones we have a FAR better suited in a 3-4??? Maybe the team WILL run more 4-3...but the 3-4 is the base...and will be this year as well..

 

[mdhprime]

We've spend 8 years acquiring players who best fit the 3-4. Why would we take those players and put them in a 4-3?
What player in our front 7 is better suited for a 4-3? I see NONE.

I understand what you are saying but they play 4-3 sometimes anyway, usually to good effect. Also, in 2001 I seem to remember players like Seymour, Bruschi, and Vrabel playing in the 4-3 pretty effectively. The loss of Colvin as an OLB pass rusher works into this as well. I just think it may be an option, I am not making a real case for it or a solid prediction, just wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Ring 6]

I understand what you are saying but they play 4-3 sometimes anyway, usually to good effect. Also, in 2001 I seem to remember players like Seymour, Bruschi, and Vrabel playing in the 4-3 pretty effectively. The loss of Colvin as an OLB pass rusher works into this as well. I just think it may be an option, I am not making a real case for it or a solid prediction, just wouldn't surprise me.

Well, we will always line up in a 43 in certain situations, but the post was about changing our defense. And every player on the front 7 is better suited to a 3-4.
Our DEs are DTs in the 43, our OLBs are DEs in the 43. If we went to a 4-3, we would have (using everyone at their best spot) Warren, Seymour and Wilfork at DT, Thomas and Vrabel at DE, and no one to play OLb.

 

[Rob0729]

It is very, very doubtful the Patriots will move to a 4-3. When we lost Colvin last year, we didn't move to a 4-3. We have the same LB corp sans Seau from then under contract. The Pats are likely to sign/draft a LB or two or three in the upcoming months.

Why would we add Capers if we are moving towards a 4-3? The guy is a 3-4 guy.

Personally, I have seen absolutely no evidence that tells me we are moving towards a 4-3 fulltime or even as the base defense.

 

[Pat the Pats Fan]

Don't see it happening as our base defense. We might do it more than previously, but only under the guise of the base 34.

IMHO, we will be adding one or two LBs, MLB and / or OLB through free agency. Remember Vrabel was primarily a defensive end at Pittsburgh before coming here as a free agent. So the potential new LBs might not have been LBs in the recent past.

 

[JackBauer]

This is absolutely absurd.

First of all, we fattened up Wilfork and basically fashioned him into a prototypical 3-4 NT. If we move back to a base 4-3, I think we'll squander a lot of his talent.

Second, we have no 4-3 DEs, guys who are fast and can put pressure on the QB.

Third, who is going to be our MIKE? One person suggested Bruschi. That would be a recipe for disaster. Bruschi is marginal at this point as a 3-4 ILB, and now you want to give him the entire middle of the field?

Fourth, our OLBs (Vrabel moreso than Thomas) aren't really suited to a 4-3 (mostly due to a lack of speed and range).

 

[RoughingthePasser]

Thank you.
I think that BB is working toward a major emphasis to the 43 Defense this year.
#1 I think our personnel is geared more toward a 43 this year. Our strength is our D line. We could line up Seymore and Warren on the ends, with Wilfork and either Smith or Wright in the middle. Jarvis Green can fill in.
#2 There are more and more teams moving to a 34 D so that leaves alot of good 43 players out there. We could probably get a better player for the money on the FA market and in the draft.
#3 The top of this years draft features 2 awsome DL Dorsey and Ellis and 1 may drop to number 7
#4 Our D is smart enough to make the switch since they run the 43 about 20% of the time now (this is a guess)
#5 Our LB situation would go from an area of need to an area of strength. Bruschi in the middle of Thomas and Vrable would be sweet and if we go after Briggs that would be equitable to the Moss move last year.
#6 We could spend the 2008 draft letting Capers build his secondary.

Awesome points....sounds pretty accurate

 

[JackBauer]

Awesome points....sounds pretty accurate

Accurate? Ty Warren as a 4-3 DE? Bruschi as an MLB? Drafting more DL with the first pick?

The mind reels...