Just a thought....4-3 for us?

[fgssand]

This is about the friendliest place I've been to since accidentally stumbling across the Black Panther's website. Lighten the hell up people. Ripping people for their posts especially when they're football related is just tacky.

There is some bad kool aid floatin around these parts lately....thx Huskeralk.

I agree, chill out everyone - it's a football group and my post was all about football related matters. I did not see the BB quote anywhere or the Crennell article, both of which I thought worthy of posting.

The 4-3 comment was a direct result of the trouble teams are now having finding players for the 3-4 given that so many teams have moved in that direction as discussed by BB & RAC.

 

[T-ShirtDynasty]

There is some bad kool aid floatin around these parts lately....thx Huskeralk.

Indeed, this seems to be the time of year that PFARC (Post Football Affected Resentive Condition, pronounced with the typical New England accent as 'faaahk') claims the greatest numbers from our ranks.

Symptoms of PFARC vary widely from individual to individual, so early detection and intervention can be tough. However, most of those suffering with PFARC will, eventually, at one time or another, display the tell-tale 'snappishness' which is usually the final confirmation that we're dealing with a PFARCer.

The bad news is that PFARC is highly contagious, and research into possible treatments is lagging far behind the growing need for a cure. The good news is that most PFARCers see a miraculous (though temporary) recovery, usually right around the time of training camp.

 

[CrazyDave]

Gee, while this subject has indeed been discussed extensively here, it's still a good post. The 3-4 / 4-3 personell issues are one of the more interesting things about this team. I'm surprised you guys slammed this guy so quickly.
That said, I just want to know how the 4-3 affects jersey # tightness.
Are certain numbers tighter for 3-4 ends, while others are tight for 4-3 ends?

 

[arrellbee]

fgssand -

It's not a bad question, but, as has been commented on ad nauseum, it's been hashed around over and over again.

What I find interesting is that, with all of the threads and discussions, they rarely get to the fundamental bottom line - which would be the answer to your question.

What defense the Patriots use is determined by what Belichick thinks, with all of his years of experience and astute analysis, is the most effective defense for the particular opposing team and game situation. Period. Period. Period.

So, to determine what Belichick thinks is the most effective defense for a particular opposing team and game situation, you simply have to observe what he uses.

It turns out, with observation, that the preponderance of the time, he feels that the 3-4 is the most effective.

So the answer to your query is that it is most very likely that he will continue to use the 3-4 this year for the majority of the plays - because he apparently feels it is the most effective.

Any observation of how Belichick organizes a team will quickly convince you that he coaches players to be effective in the schemes that he feels are the most effective. He doesn't tailor schemes to fit the players - he tailors players to fit the scheme. It is also very obvious and has been commented on many times in many threads that he drafts for coachable talent and flexible skills so that he has the kind of players that can be tailored to fit whatever schemes he wants to implement.

To phrase it a different way, no matter what particular players 'happen' to be on the roster, that will NOT determine what defensive scheme he uses.

To go along with that perspective, if you are really interested in how Belichick crafts and uses various defensive schemes, you have to observe that, while the 3-4 is used the majority of the downs, it is not at all uncommon to see a 4-3 and, at times, even such schemes as a 2-5 or even one where there are no down linemen. Also, I haven't seen it commented on (altho I may have just missed it), that if you observe the downs where there are 3 down linemen, there is not just one vanilla 3 DL set - you will see the 3 DL in various alignments versus the OL. One example - the NT is not always over the center but may be shifted over so that you end up with a 'strong' side and a 'weak' side of the DL.

As to whether there are 'enough' 3-4 players in the draft to go around - I wouldn't worry about it. Somehow or another Belichick and Pioli seem to be pretty good at finding players that other teams overlook that are really solid, smart, flexible starting players. And if you have watched the drafts, even when the Pats pick low in the round, there always seem to be solid players that drop to them for whatever reason the other teams where drafting as they did. They will find solid players that Belichick can tailor to the schemes he feels are most effective.

 

[dryheat44]

There is some bad kool aid floatin around these parts lately....thx Huskeralk.

I agree, chill out everyone - it's a football group and my post was all about football related matters. I did not see the BB quote anywhere or the Crennell article, both of which I thought worthy of posting.

The 4-3 comment was a direct result of the trouble teams are now having finding players for the 3-4 given that so many teams have moved in that direction as discussed by BB & RAC.

The simple answer is that while the 3-4 teams have grown, there's still many, many more who play the 4-3, so we're still competing with fewer teams.