Welcome to PatsFans.com

Does Sullivan's arrival mean more 4-3?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Brady'sButtBoy, Jun 5, 2006.

  1. Brady'sButtBoy

    Brady'sButtBoy 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,789
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +33 / 4 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    The strength of talent on the D was already focused on the D-Line, with the addition of Sullivan - assuming he doesn't just go in the tank - only makes this more so.

    With McGinest gone and no clear starter next to Bruschi then LB core is really the weakest it has been in years if we're going to play four LB's. But, if we're playing three we look very good with Colvin, Vrabel outside and Bruschi in the middle. Vrabel seems to be a more natural 4-3 OLB since he doesn't have the top end speed you ideally look for in a 3-4 OLB and I believe Colvin played in a 4-3 to start his career.

    With Seymour (and Warren probably too) able to play DE or DT in a 4-3, we'd have a pretty fearsome rotation up front and get more PT for Green, who is getting pretty big bucks to be mostly a backup. Wilfork, Sullivan, Wright inside, with Green, Warren, Hill outside and Seymour playing both - whoa, that would be a tremendous strain on an O-Line to have all those guys rotating regularly. Wilfork is a solid penetrator when allowed to, which is just what you want from a DT ina 4-3, and Hill has been described as more of 4-3 end also but we haven't seen enough to be sure. Either way, our personnel appears to utilized more fully with 4 real (not a LB putting his hand down) D linemen on the field.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2006
  2. zippo59

    zippo59 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    5,072
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    I really don't see BB ever willfully going to a 4-3. The 3-4 is what allows the versatility, disguise, and trickery in his defense. It is the heart and soul of the entire D so I would be shocked if he went away from it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2006
  3. Zuma

    Zuma Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    608
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Sullivan is going to eat his way right into a backup NT position.
     
  4. Remix 6

    Remix 6 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    7,780
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    in a 4-3 i think Seymour and Warren would be better off at DT..we would need a real good pass rusher at DE..a fast guy. We wouldnt rely on blitzing from LBs as much..so answer is NO!
     
  5. holyredeemer

    holyredeemer Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    709
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    I wouldnt be surprised to see more of the 4-3. Not a full switch over, cause BB likes keeping things mixed up. Surely though, the signing of Sullivan could mean so much more in terms of alignments and keeping things different. More depth, means more versatility.
     
  6. patsox23

    patsox23 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,397
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +17 / 1 / -0

    This trade doesn't necessarily have anything to do with a switch to 4-3. The Patriots play out of a base 3-4 and mix in the 4-3. Why would this change? Because we just picked up a high-potential underachiever top 10 pick in exchange for a WR who the coaching staff clearly tried everything to motivate only to have him BARELY play when the WR corps was ravaged by injury?

    The Pats just got a high upside DL for a WR that was possibly going to be jettisoned for no better than a 4th or 5th round pick. I do this deal 24/7 in a NY minute.
     
  7. holyredeemer

    holyredeemer Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    709
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    In pass rushing situations, it's not like BB couldnt line Vrab's or Colvin up at DE. They have both been there and done that before. Also, the thread starter didnt state that we were GOING to go to the 4-3, but merely it's a possibility we will see more of it. BB doesn't give a **** what he runs. It's football, and if you can attack someones weakness by running something different, then he'll do it.....so the odds are, that the answer is........YES!
     
  8. fgssand

    fgssand PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,779
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -1

    #17 Jersey

    You are not allowed to even mention the Patriots & 4-3 here. Certain people here feel that to even think about it makes you stupid and ill informed.
     
  9. Snapper

    Snapper On the Roster

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2004
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    People thinking that acquiring an overweight, lazy bust would force the Pats to switch to a 4-3? That might make me inclined to consider those people ill-informed, yes.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 14, 2005
  10. fgssand

    fgssand PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,779
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -1

    #17 Jersey

    I am sure that is exactly why BB & SP traded for him, so we could cut him because there is no hope for him. Yes, Snapper, you must be right, I wish they had called you before making the trade. I am so glad you know so much, thanks,
     
  11. Snapper

    Snapper On the Roster

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2004
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Yeah, let's not go overboard or anything.

    They traded an underachiever for another underachiever. Both teams hope to salvage something from their initial draft investments. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. But there's nothing from Sullivan's three years in the league that can possibly make you think that THIS will be the move that forces the Pats to go 4-3. The only thing Sullivan's got going for him is what he did in college, and his connection to Seymour.
     
  12. fgssand

    fgssand PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,779
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -1

    #17 Jersey


    Oh I agree - Bethel Johnson had four stinkin catches last year when we needed help, so no real loss there. Sully has been nothing but a bust as well. What could save Sullivan's carrer is being reunited with Seymour and introduced to a system that if he learns his responsibilities and does his job, he can contribute. I do not think he was ever tought the pro game very wel in New Orleans.

    However, I do NOT think this puts us into 4-3 and never said it does, only that it could.

    Anyway - as stated in two other posts:




    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Flying Fungi
    the hardest thing for people to wrap there heads around appears to be that the Patriots aren't a 3-4 or a 4-3 team. They are a Belichick Zone team (for lack of a better description). There may be some base formations, but calling it a 3-4 or a 4-3 doesn't make it so.

    So...you are correct...but it isn't anything new...and it has been discussed at great lengths...


    That is very true. I guess this debate is really meaningless, we can call our base "D" 3-4 or 4-3 but it is indeed meaningless. This team will change up on the fly, play after play, series after series, quarter after quarter to whichever defense makes sense at a given moment. The genius that is BB is the ability to draft smart, talented players that will understand and grasp the system and handle their responsibilities. Do thier jobs is all BB ever asks. His schemes and systems take it from there.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 14, 2005
  13. patsox23

    patsox23 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,397
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +17 / 1 / -0

    NO - it couldn't. And that is why there's such a strong reaction. The Patriots don't strictly play a 4-3 or a 3-4. So acquiring a billion limemen will not, nor COULD not, "put us into 4-3." That's not how BB's scheme works. It COULD enable the team to play 4-3 more often (out of the base 3-4), but that's not the same thing.
     
  14. fgssand

    fgssand PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,779
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -1

    #17 Jersey


    I think we are really caught up on semantics now, isn't the chamelion nature of the Pats "D" a given? That what I have been saying, never once did I qualify when and how we would be playing our 4-3..........a 4-3 or a 5-2 or a 6-1 coming out of a 3-4 is still a 4-3. Please, find something else to occupy your brain, other than when a 4-3 is not a 4-3 and when it is a 4-3. Seems to me the only timed a 4-3 is a 4-3, is when you say it is.
     
  15. khayos

    khayos In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,675
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I think we're gunna play more Nickel!

    HAH
     
  16. broadwayjoe

    broadwayjoe In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I agree when I first heard about the trade I was thinking so now are we going to trade one of the defensive lineman for a linebacker down the line but I would go with this trade anyday maybe playing with big Richard can motivate this guy to be a decent player at leasr thats what we are hoping.
     
  17. Brady'sButtBoy

    Brady'sButtBoy 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,789
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +33 / 4 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    My point was that even before the trade the strength of the D was up and the same argument could have been made without Sullivan (does anyone read the full post anymore?:D ).

    BB tried to force personnel into a scheme last year - Brown and Beisel inside - as opposed to fitting his scheme around his talent. The result was poor, and the D struggled while everyone learned or was exposed. Maybe he sees where the pith of D is presently and wants to leverage it - sounds like a BB move to me .....
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>