About the status of ILB and the 3-4 defense...

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

O.K. I know the 3-4 is a staple in this defense but if our current ILB position is the way it is starting the season with very little depth and experience ,if the starting inside guys get hurt for any length of time like Bruschi,Seau (if he comes back) or whoever fills the position, could you see BB cleverly turning this D into a 4-3 scheme?

Come on now what would make a better defensive front for us - Jarvis Green,Richard Seymour,Ty Warren and Vince Wilfork up front with 3 LBs in back or would you rather have the normal front regular 3 (Seymour,Warren,Wilfork) with Izzo,Mays,Alexander ect: guarding one of the spots on the inside/middle of the D?

If there was an injury or 2 to the ILB area and there is a choice of having to go to a 4-3 and put Green on the front line or putting Izzo (right now is Bruschis replacement) or Mays or Alexander I think its a no brainer- you go to a 4-3 and use Green,arguably the best backup DE in this league.

Agree or not - With the ILB core the way it is,if an injury does occur to mainly Bruschi who is the most important player in that position,I certainly think its possible the NE D becomes a temporary 4-3 in 2007.

 

[Pats726]

O.K. I know the 3-4 is a staple in this defense but if our current ILB position is the way it is starting the season ith very little depth and if the starting inside guys get hurt for any length of time like Bruschi,Seau (if he comes back) or whoever fills the position, could you see BB cleverly turning this D into a 4-3 scheme?

Come on now what would make a better defensive front for us - Jarvis Green,Richard Seymour,Ty Warren and Vince Wilfork up front with 3 LBs in back or would you rather have the normal front regular 3 (Seymour,Warren,Wilfork) with Izzo,Mays,Alexander ect: guarding one of the spots on the inside/middle of the D?

If there was an injury or 2 to the ILB area and there is a choice of having to go to a 4-3 and put Green on the front line or putting Izzo (right now is Bruschis replacement) or Mays or Alexander I think its a no brainer- you go to a 4-3 and use Green,arguably the best backup DE in this league.

Agree or not - With the ILB core the way it is,if an injury does occur to mainly Bruschi who is the most important player in that position,I certainly think its possible the NE D becomes a temporary 4-3 in 2007.

All of the front 7 are basically geared for a 3-4 D...I really doubt that they would make a major change in that and move players a bit out os position. That does NOT mean that the team may not play more 4-3, but I still see (injury or not) a 3-4 base that will play some 4-3 at times and other formations when needed. The no brainer is that it stays in 3-4 and not shifting a lot of players into a new base scheme. It's quite a lot easier to replace 2 players than to shift so many players and a new base D. That does not mean in a particular game they might not use the 4-3 more, but the base as it stands will be the 3-4..period.

 

[patsox23]

could you see BB cleverly turning this D into a 4-3 scheme?

NO. for the last time, NO. This comes up EVERY YEAR, I am genuinely shocked that a poster like you, whose stuff I've liked over the years, went to this place. The Patriots play a 2-gap scheme that is a hybrid of 3-4/4-3 but most definitely is a 3-4 more than it's a 4-3. THEY WILL NOT SWITCH TO 4-3.

I don't mean to be a Jauron about this, but it's ridiculous that we have to have this conversation every year. We're not switching.

 

[satz]

Full time 4-3 require faster and a little smaller LB .We have big 261 lb in vrabel , thomas at 270 all misfits in a classical 4-3 as in 4-3 their is more coverage and range required .

thomas is fast for a 270lbs but please do not clock him next to say cato june.
also we do not have 1 super jump DE who can trap QB`s.Green is fast but do not compart to peppers or freeney.

SO i do not see running a scheme fulltime that we do not have personal for.Also , our DE are between 4-3 DT and DE.

 

[Pats726]

NO. for the last time, NO. This comes up EVERY YEAR, I am genuinely shocked that a poster like you, whose stuff I've liked over the years, went to this place. The Patriots play a 2-gap scheme that is a hybrid of 3-4/4-3 but most definitely is a 3-4 more than it's a 4-3. THEY WILL NOT SWITCH TO 4-3.

I don't mean to be a Jauron about this, but it's ridiculous that we have to have this conversation every year. We're not switching.

I think this thread should be saved..so that when the next one in the future brings it up later in teh summer, next year, teh year after, it can be referenced as it always comes up AND teh answer is always teh same....NO!!!!
And the reasons for it are so so important!! A good thread that should be kept....

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

NO. for the last time, NO. This comes up EVERY YEAR, I am genuinely shocked that a poster like you, whose stuff I've liked over the years, went to this place. The Patriots play a 2-gap scheme that is a hybrid of 3-4/4-3 but most definitely is a 3-4 more than it's a 4-3. THEY WILL NOT SWITCH TO 4-3.

I don't mean to be a Jauron about this, but it's ridiculous that we have to have this conversation every year. We're not switching.

I am not a fan of the 4-3 myself but for the past 3 or so years we had a younger more active Bruschi and had a bit more depth at the position,Thats why I brought this up.

I just don't think Izzo,Mays,Woods or Alexander is an answer if Bruschi gets injured - If Bruschi stays healthy,albeit he is an aging slower player,we should be o.k.,But if he is not we may be in a quandry at the inside unless we can grab an available veteran ILB player out of some discarded roster sometime soon for just a bit more insurance and experience which is lacking beyond Bruschi .

BTW: This topic came straight from a conversation on Sirius NFL Radio today and Kirwin said he would not be surprised if this happened sometime in the 2007 season knowing how sneaky BB can be in game plans or situations

 

[Wotan_the_Wanderer]

A switch to a base 43 I think would depend more on the state of the DLine rather than the LB corp. And though I cannot rule out such a switch entirely, both Wilfork and Wright would have to be lost to injury for an extended period of time at the nose, Santonio, LeKevin or Kareem would have proven incapable of playing NT and there were no aged wide bodies like Traylor hanging around looking to latch on to a team. Even this set of extreme circumstances, however, might still not be enough and the team might also have to suffer further injury to either Warren or Seymour and even one of two of the LBs.

I'm raising the above scenerio given that a switch to a base 43 was seen in the early half of the 2003 season when Big Ted broke his leg against the Jets and neither Warren, Klecko or Lyle were up to the task of playing the nose. It also didn't help matters that the defense lost Vrabel, Ted Johnson, Willie and obviously Colvin for a game or two if not for the entire season. But even under such severe injury depleted conditions to the front seven, BB still chose to play a lot more base 34 in the win over the Giants. So, it's obvious that he really has a strong preference for the base 34.

Again, I really wouldn't rule out a switch to the 43 entirely, but I also think you'd have better odds at hitting the lottery than to see the above set of circumstances reoccur.

 

[PatsSteve1]

Every year since they've used a base 3-4 D this idea pops up and every year the Patriots stick with the 3-4 base D. There's little reason to think it'll be any different this year, IMO.