Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Possible Defensive Scheme changes
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Pandomonium


Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 3111
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:11 am    Post subject: Possible Defensive Scheme changes Reply with quote

With the niners interviewing guys like Vance Joseph and other possible Defensive minded candidates, could we see a complete change in the base defensive scheme that we gun from a base 3-4 to a base 4-3?

and if so, what would it look like depth chart-wise?
for example would Buckner move inside and guys like Lynch put their hand in the dirt full time?

discuss your thoughts...
_________________
I DON'T BANDWAGON...

RED, BLACK AND GOLD..TIL I'M DEAD BURIED AND COLD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 13625
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've wanted to move back to a 4-3 for a while, especially with the recent success of the hybrid safety/olb role in various spots. We don't have a NT, so having Armstead/Buckner inside, and Lynch and another DE on the outside seems like a solid base line. It would eliminate one extra need (NT) from the books. Either way we'll likely need linebacker/pass rush help.

But, this is a dream we revisit every offseason and it doesn't seem that it will ever happen. Although - this season is when it probably has the best chance with new leadership across the board.
_________________


Future Hall of Famer Frank Gore's Career Rushing List Tracker:

*Currently Ranked 8th All-Time
*Yards needed to pass #7 Eric Dickerson: 194
*Yards needed to pass #6 Jerome Bettis: 597
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Pandomonium


Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 3111
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

y2lamanaki wrote:
I've wanted to move back to a 4-3 for a while, especially with the recent success of the hybrid safety/olb role in various spots. We don't have a NT, so having Armstead/Buckner inside, and Lynch and another DE on the outside seems like a solid base line. It would eliminate one extra need (NT) from the books. Either way we'll likely need linebacker/pass rush help.

But, this is a dream we revisit every offseason and it doesn't seem that it will ever happen. Although - this season is when it probably has the best chance with new leadership across the board.


right,

also I think Guys like Dial and Williams would be very good inside if you aren't asking either one of them to hold the nose down. I also makes for a nice rotation of fresh D-Linemen with Dial, Williams, Dorsey (who really is a 43 DT) Buckner, Armstead (who I don't really know what he is) and Purell.

my question is would guys like Armstrong and Hodges move back outside and let Bow be the mike or would they just become back MLBs?
_________________
I DON'T BANDWAGON...

RED, BLACK AND GOLD..TIL I'M DEAD BURIED AND COLD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 44049
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For the majority of the snaps we will be in the nickel anyways. So if the DC wants to change to a 4-3 base front, that's fine. Doesn't really matter to me.

Better improve the ILB play and get some pass rushers if you want the 4-3 or 3-4 defense to work.
_________________

El ramster on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ninerfanwheelz


Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 15743
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

y2lamanaki wrote:
I've wanted to move back to a 4-3 for a while, especially with the recent success of the hybrid safety/olb role in various spots. We don't have a NT, so having Armstead/Buckner inside, and Lynch and another DE on the outside seems like a solid base line. It would eliminate one extra need (NT) from the books. Either way we'll likely need linebacker/pass rush help.

But, this is a dream we revisit every offseason and it doesn't seem that it will ever happen. Although - this season is when it probably has the best chance with new leadership across the board.


Armstead/Buckner aren't really good fits inside in a 4-3
_________________

BackfieldBlitz wrote:
Let that be a warning to the rest of the NFL
You don't give the ball back to Blaine Gabbert
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sbrown


Joined: 30 Dec 2005
Posts: 10551
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ninerfanwheelz wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
I've wanted to move back to a 4-3 for a while, especially with the recent success of the hybrid safety/olb role in various spots. We don't have a NT, so having Armstead/Buckner inside, and Lynch and another DE on the outside seems like a solid base line. It would eliminate one extra need (NT) from the books. Either way we'll likely need linebacker/pass rush help.

But, this is a dream we revisit every offseason and it doesn't seem that it will ever happen. Although - this season is when it probably has the best chance with new leadership across the board.


Armstead/Buckner aren't really good fits inside in a 4-3


I actually think both can play outside, They can crowd passing lanes with their height. Buck has shown he has pass rush moves. WE could have Dial play inside. This would also drive someone like Demarcus Walker up the draft boards for us as a DT.

Lynch could also play DE and move Buck inside, and I would keep Brooks as SLB who can blitz.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pandomonium


Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 3111
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sbrown wrote:
ninerfanwheelz wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
I've wanted to move back to a 4-3 for a while, especially with the recent success of the hybrid safety/olb role in various spots. We don't have a NT, so having Armstead/Buckner inside, and Lynch and another DE on the outside seems like a solid base line. It would eliminate one extra need (NT) from the books. Either way we'll likely need linebacker/pass rush help.

But, this is a dream we revisit every offseason and it doesn't seem that it will ever happen. Although - this season is when it probably has the best chance with new leadership across the board.


Armstead/Buckner aren't really good fits inside in a 4-3


I actually think both can play outside, They can crowd passing lanes with their height. Buck has shown he has pass rush moves. WE could have Dial play inside. This would also drive someone like Demarcus Walker up the draft boards for us as a DT.

Lynch could also play DE and move Buck inside, and I would keep Brooks as SLB who can blitz.


I actually agree with this

my question is who would be our LB/Safety hybrid in this scheme? are they on the roster currently or would we have to draft this guy?
_________________
I DON'T BANDWAGON...

RED, BLACK AND GOLD..TIL I'M DEAD BURIED AND COLD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 16672
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the twin towers (Buckner and Armstead) could play both inside and outside. I don't think they're the best fit at either position, but their potential versatility could add a special dimension to the defense, and we could tailor it to our opponents. If we face Drew Brees or Russell Wilson, I think these two 6'7" might really annoy them right down the middle, especially if they get good push. Then you need guys to contain Wilson on the outside, and we have the beginning of a gameplan. We do need a more powerful and explosive pass rusher to complete the group. Then we have interesting rotational guys, like Ronald Blair, who seems to be a tweener in both the 3-4 and 4-3. I think he also could play inside and outside on the line (is he still at the 284lbs he weighed in at at the combine?). I think that Buckner could do a lot from the DE spot, really. He has the size of a DT, but he moves very very well for such a big man. We rarely see 300 pounders look so lean and run so well, so I'm sure he'd bring a lot of pressure from a 4-3 DE spot. But that's the beauty, we don't have to pidgeon-hole him at one position. Move him around, adjust his role according to the opponent. Find creative ways to use personnel.

I personally don't care about the label of our base defense. 3-4 or 4-3, I honestly don't give a whoopty doo. I believe in creating personnel groupings on a game-to-game basis to counter what the opposing offense likes to do. If it means a certain alignment with certain players, then so be it. We don't exactly have players with the traditional skillset for a 4-3, and some other players don't have the traditional skillset for a 3-4. Let's just be creative and put the best players on the field and find ways to use them, whatever the label of it would be. That's how the 3-4 came to be. The coach saw that he had more good LBs than he had good DLs, so he figured, let's play 3 down linemen and have 4 LBs. That's how the hybrid S/LB also came to be, I guess. The guy was too good to sit on the bench, yet wasn't the best S available on the roster, but could very be more effective than an extra LB would. People invented a label for it afterwards, as it didn't necessarily conform to a preconceived notion of what a defense should look like (although there were 4-2-5 defenses before that, that probably resembled that quite a bit). So, I don't care to make it official that we're a 4-3 or a 3-4. I've always been a proponent of "multiple" defenses. You don't have to be one or the other, you can just be both.

But yeah, either way, we need to add an impact pass rusher and a LB (inside for a 3-4, outside for a 4-3, but really just one and the same, if possible).
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
sbrown


Joined: 30 Dec 2005
Posts: 10551
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pandomonium wrote:
sbrown wrote:
ninerfanwheelz wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
I've wanted to move back to a 4-3 for a while, especially with the recent success of the hybrid safety/olb role in various spots. We don't have a NT, so having Armstead/Buckner inside, and Lynch and another DE on the outside seems like a solid base line. It would eliminate one extra need (NT) from the books. Either way we'll likely need linebacker/pass rush help.

But, this is a dream we revisit every offseason and it doesn't seem that it will ever happen. Although - this season is when it probably has the best chance with new leadership across the board.


Armstead/Buckner aren't really good fits inside in a 4-3


I actually think both can play outside, They can crowd passing lanes with their height. Buck has shown he has pass rush moves. WE could have Dial play inside. This would also drive someone like Demarcus Walker up the draft boards for us as a DT.

Lynch could also play DE and move Buck inside, and I would keep Brooks as SLB who can blitz.


I actually agree with this

my question is who would be our LB/Safety hybrid in this scheme? are they on the roster currently or would we have to draft this guy?


We dont have to use that position.

Arik,Buck,Dial,Lynch

Brooks,bowman,ray ray

brock, reid, ward, robinson

I like ward at safety more than Tart, this gives us a solid pass rushing defense as well as a rangy secondary.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 13625
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ninerfanwheelz wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
I've wanted to move back to a 4-3 for a while, especially with the recent success of the hybrid safety/olb role in various spots. We don't have a NT, so having Armstead/Buckner inside, and Lynch and another DE on the outside seems like a solid base line. It would eliminate one extra need (NT) from the books. Either way we'll likely need linebacker/pass rush help.

But, this is a dream we revisit every offseason and it doesn't seem that it will ever happen. Although - this season is when it probably has the best chance with new leadership across the board.


Armstead/Buckner aren't really good fits inside in a 4-3


Eh, they weren't supposed to be good fits in a 3-4 either according to their height. They already play inside in the nickel defense. Some think Buckner could even have been a 4-3 end. Could it be that he doesn't fair well in a 4-3? Sure. But I don't believe it would be prohibitive.
_________________


Future Hall of Famer Frank Gore's Career Rushing List Tracker:

*Currently Ranked 8th All-Time
*Yards needed to pass #7 Eric Dickerson: 194
*Yards needed to pass #6 Jerome Bettis: 597
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Pandomonium


Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 3111
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sbrown wrote:
Pandomonium wrote:
sbrown wrote:
ninerfanwheelz wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
I've wanted to move back to a 4-3 for a while, especially with the recent success of the hybrid safety/olb role in various spots. We don't have a NT, so having Armstead/Buckner inside, and Lynch and another DE on the outside seems like a solid base line. It would eliminate one extra need (NT) from the books. Either way we'll likely need linebacker/pass rush help.

But, this is a dream we revisit every offseason and it doesn't seem that it will ever happen. Although - this season is when it probably has the best chance with new leadership across the board.


Armstead/Buckner aren't really good fits inside in a 4-3


I actually think both can play outside, They can crowd passing lanes with their height. Buck has shown he has pass rush moves. WE could have Dial play inside. This would also drive someone like Demarcus Walker up the draft boards for us as a DT.

Lynch could also play DE and move Buck inside, and I would keep Brooks as SLB who can blitz.


I actually agree with this

my question is who would be our LB/Safety hybrid in this scheme? are they on the roster currently or would we have to draft this guy?


We dont have to use that position.

Arik,Buck,Dial,Lynch

Brooks,bowman,ray ray

brock, reid, ward, robinson

I like ward at safety more than Tart, this gives us a solid pass rushing defense as well as a rangy secondary.


I can dig it
_________________
I DON'T BANDWAGON...

RED, BLACK AND GOLD..TIL I'M DEAD BURIED AND COLD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 44049
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sbrown wrote:
We dont have to use that position.

Arik,Buck,Dial,Lynch

Brooks,bowman,ray ray

brock, reid, ward, robinson

I like ward at safety more than Tart, this gives us a solid pass rushing defense as well as a rangy secondary.


That would be a very slow front 7. Bowman after his Achilles no clue where he will be and Brooks at OLB at this point of his career? Good luck with that, and then Armstead at DE? Sorry, not really digging it Laughing.
_________________

El ramster on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 16672
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J-ALL-DAY wrote:
sbrown wrote:
We dont have to use that position.

Arik,Buck,Dial,Lynch

Brooks,bowman,ray ray

brock, reid, ward, robinson

I like ward at safety more than Tart, this gives us a solid pass rushing defense as well as a rangy secondary.


That would be a very slow front 7. Bowman after his Achilles no clue where he will be and Brooks at OLB at this point of his career? Good luck with that, and then Armstead at DE? Sorry, not really digging it Laughing.



Switch Arik and Buck for me, cut 34 year old Brooks because he'll be 34 year old, sign a free agent at LB, draft a young promising pass rusher that either starts or gets eased in, and I'm in.
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
sbrown


Joined: 30 Dec 2005
Posts: 10551
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J-ALL-DAY wrote:
sbrown wrote:
We dont have to use that position.

Arik,Buck,Dial,Lynch

Brooks,bowman,ray ray

brock, reid, ward, robinson

I like ward at safety more than Tart, this gives us a solid pass rushing defense as well as a rangy secondary.


That would be a very slow front 7. Bowman after his Achilles no clue where he will be and Brooks at OLB at this point of his career? Good luck with that, and then Armstead at DE? Sorry, not really digging it Laughing.


This is before free agency or draft. Just as we currently sit. I would add Barnett or Garrett at DE, I would look to one of the ILB. I would add Tj Watt to OLB. Based off of my mock draft.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 19198
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rudyZ wrote:
I think the twin towers (Buckner and Armstead) could play both inside and outside. I don't think they're the best fit at either position, but their potential versatility could add a special dimension to the defense, and we could tailor it to our opponents. If we face Drew Brees or Russell Wilson, I think these two 6'7" might really annoy them right down the middle, especially if they get good push. Then you need guys to contain Wilson on the outside, and we have the beginning of a gameplan. We do need a more powerful and explosive pass rusher to complete the group. Then we have interesting rotational guys, like Ronald Blair, who seems to be a tweener in both the 3-4 and 4-3. I think he also could play inside and outside on the line (is he still at the 284lbs he weighed in at at the combine?). I think that Buckner could do a lot from the DE spot, really. He has the size of a DT, but he moves very very well for such a big man. We rarely see 300 pounders look so lean and run so well, so I'm sure he'd bring a lot of pressure from a 4-3 DE spot. But that's the beauty, we don't have to pidgeon-hole him at one position. Move him around, adjust his role according to the opponent. Find creative ways to use personnel.

I personally don't care about the label of our base defense. 3-4 or 4-3, I honestly don't give a whoopty doo. I believe in creating personnel groupings on a game-to-game basis to counter what the opposing offense likes to do. If it means a certain alignment with certain players, then so be it. We don't exactly have players with the traditional skillset for a 4-3, and some other players don't have the traditional skillset for a 3-4. Let's just be creative and put the best players on the field and find ways to use them, whatever the label of it would be. That's how the 3-4 came to be. The coach saw that he had more good LBs than he had good DLs, so he figured, let's play 3 down linemen and have 4 LBs. That's how the hybrid S/LB also came to be, I guess. The guy was too good to sit on the bench, yet wasn't the best S available on the roster, but could very be more effective than an extra LB would. People invented a label for it afterwards, as it didn't necessarily conform to a preconceived notion of what a defense should look like (although there were 4-2-5 defenses before that, that probably resembled that quite a bit). So, I don't care to make it official that we're a 4-3 or a 3-4. I've always been a proponent of "multiple" defenses. You don't have to be one or the other, you can just be both.

But yeah, either way, we need to add an impact pass rusher and a LB (inside for a 3-4, outside for a 4-3, but really just one and the same, if possible).


Ahhh. A post I can completely agree with.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group