PDA

View Full Version : Expanded use of the 4-3...beefy


mkporter
08-06-2010, 12:06 PM
4. In the wake of Dumervilís injury, McDaniels said the defense would incorporate some 4-3 looks into its package, and a glimpse was offered Friday, with a four-lineman formation that included nose tackles Ronald Fields and Jamal Williams on the inside. Williams made his training camp debut Sunday, while Fields practiced for the first time in four days. The duo threw their combined 662 pounds around effectively, squelching the run game during the periods they worked together.

http://maxdenver.com/blog1/2010/08/06/five-observations-aug-6-morning-practice/

Now that's some beef in the middle. Losing Doom still sucks, but I like the sound of a package with these two in the middle.

Requiem
08-06-2010, 12:12 PM
Very beefy. BEEFCAKE.

http://static.open.salon.com/files/cartman_beefcake1219035580.jpg

Kaylore
08-06-2010, 12:34 PM
At least they're working on their short yardage situations. We got killed both ways with that.

lostknight
08-06-2010, 12:40 PM
http://maxdenver.com/blog1/2010/08/06/five-observations-aug-6-morning-practice/

Now that's some beef in the middle. Losing Doom still sucks, but I like the sound of a package with these two in the middle.

I like the combo a lot.

bfoflcommish
08-06-2010, 12:41 PM
At least they're working on their short yardage situations. We got killed both ways with that.

so incorrect, from what I hear these coaches have no clue what thier doing.

lostknight
08-06-2010, 12:42 PM
Ouch. According to Sirius, there was absolutely no pass rush with the 4-3 today. Erk.

Chris
08-06-2010, 12:53 PM
We will be okay. The season is not lost on one player.

diehardbroncosfan
08-06-2010, 01:12 PM
A 4-3 could actually look pretty good

LDE- Bannon, Mcbean
DT1- Fields, Baker
DT2- Williams, Thomas
RDE-Ayers, Green

WOLB- Woodyard
MLB- Williams
SOLB- Haggan

Try running on that.

Hogan11
08-06-2010, 01:16 PM
So much for sticking with one system

azbroncfan
08-06-2010, 01:18 PM
A 4-3 could actually look pretty good

LDE- Bannon, Mcbean
DT1- Fields, Baker
DT2- Williams, Thomas
RDE-Ayers, Green

WOLB- Woodyard
MLB- Williams
SOLB- Haggan

Try running on that.

That would be easy to expose by spreading them out and passing the ball.

Mogulseeker
08-06-2010, 01:19 PM
A 4-3 could actually look pretty good

LDE- Bannon, Mcbean
DT1- Fields, Baker
DT2- Williams, Thomas
RDE-Ayers, Green

WOLB- Woodyard
MLB- Williams
SOLB- Haggan

Try running on that.

Hear, hear.

I really like that front seven... would Ayers have to change his number again though?

I think Ayers is better suited as a 4-3 RDE than a SOLB anyway.

Mogulseeker
08-06-2010, 01:20 PM
That would be easy to expose by spreading them out and passing the ball.

I don't know, man... maybe switch Woodyard so SOLB and Haggan to WOLB. Woodyard is decent in coverage... in fact, he's so decent that if I were Shanahan I would have moved Woodyard to SS his rookie season.

azbroncfan
08-06-2010, 01:22 PM
I don't know, man... maybe switch Woodyard so SOLB and Haggan to WOLB. Woodyard is decent in coverage... in fact, he's so decent that if I were Shanahan I would have moved Woodyard to SS his rookie season.

Well they better play good coverage because there will be no pressure with that line up.

diehardbroncosfan
08-06-2010, 01:34 PM
Well they better play good coverage because there will be no pressure with that line up.

Ayers, Green and Williams could bring some pressure.

skunk
08-06-2010, 01:37 PM
its going to be awsesome when we are 4-12 , NOT !Booya!

skunk
08-06-2010, 01:38 PM
they are implementing the 4-12 defense

PRBronco
08-06-2010, 01:39 PM
its going to be awsesome when we are 4-12 , NOT !Booya!

Wtf? I always thought you were a Raiders troll.

MABroncoFan
08-06-2010, 01:40 PM
If Schobel wants to play in a 4-3 defense, tell him we'll be running some of that this year and bring him in as a pass rusher for the 4-3 alignment. Also, bring him in on passing downs when playing the 3-4, so he can get plenty of action w/o having to learn to cover as a 3-4 OLB.

skunk
08-06-2010, 01:41 PM
Wtf? I always thought you were a Raiders troll.

no im a broncos troll

PRBronco
08-06-2010, 01:42 PM
no im a broncos troll

In that case: ^5

jhns
08-06-2010, 01:46 PM
Why are some making a big deal about using the 4-3? Doesn't every 3-4 team use a lot of 4-3?

skunk
08-06-2010, 01:49 PM
Why are some making a big deal about using the 4-3? Doesn't every 3-4 team use a lot of 4-3?

yeah **** you

Mogulseeker
08-06-2010, 02:10 PM
Well they better play good coverage because there will be no pressure with that line up.

Ayers will bring decent pressure.

jhns
08-06-2010, 02:11 PM
yeah **** you

LOL

Good response.

LongDongJohnson
08-06-2010, 02:14 PM
thats the 1 good thing about being a 3-4 team. its easier for a 3-4 team to be versatile and run a 4-3. but most 4-3 teams cant run a 3-4 because they dont have the players.

the patriots did this a lot last season. they ran 4-3 pretty much the entire game against us if i remember correctly.

Popps
08-06-2010, 02:17 PM
We'll use both, and won't have much of a choice in the matter until Elvis returns.

Or... someone steps up and surprises and fills his shoes.

Lolad
08-06-2010, 02:18 PM
I don't know, man... maybe switch Woodyard so SOLB and Haggan to WOLB. Woodyard is decent in coverage... in fact, he's so decent that if I were Shanahan I would have moved Woodyard to SS his rookie season.

I can remember many of games where Woodyard was in coverage against a teams TE and giving up huge plays. Colts and Eagles games come to mind, he is terrible in coverage IMO

What I find strange is that several of the posters calling the move to switch to a 4-3 ok, when they chewed Shanny about it when he tried it.

Kaylore
08-06-2010, 02:18 PM
yeah **** you

Rep!

LongDongJohnson
08-06-2010, 02:22 PM
I can remember many of games where Woodyard was in coverage against a teams TE and giving up huge plays. Colts and Eagles games come to mind, he is terrible in coverage IMO

What I find strange is that several of the posters calling the move to switch to a 4-3 ok, when they chewed Shanny about it when he tried it.

shanny always ran a 4-3 here. what are you talking about.

Lolad
08-06-2010, 02:28 PM
shanny always ran a 4-3 here. what are you talking about.

when he mixed both schemes 3-4 and 4-3 in

lostknight
08-06-2010, 02:29 PM
thats the 1 good thing about being a 3-4 team. its easier for a 3-4 team to be versatile and run a 4-3. but most 4-3 teams cant run a 3-4 because they dont have the players.

the patriots did this a lot last season. they ran 4-3 pretty much the entire game against us if i remember correctly.

Given that a lot of teams are migrating from a 3-4 back to a 4-3, I wonder if the backs are just getting too attuned to it.

Mogulseeker
08-06-2010, 02:31 PM
I can remember many of games where Woodyard was in coverage against a teams TE and giving up huge plays. Colts and Eagles games come to mind, he is terrible in coverage IMO

What I find strange is that several of the posters calling the move to switch to a 4-3 ok, when they chewed Shanny about it when he tried it.

Shanny almost always used the 4-3. I loved it when he tried 3-4 (wasn't it 2005?) and wished we would have stayed. Overall, we're set up now to play 3-4 with tackles like Baker, Fields and Williams, with ends like Bannan, Reid, Smith, and Green, and linebackers like Hagan, Doom and Ayers. (Williams seems like he can play any LB position in any alignment).

With Doom out the players that are really going to have to step it up are Moss and Ayers, who seem better suited rushing from RDE anyway... or, I can see Ayers playing LDE, too, in a 4-3 alignment.

I can see using the 3-4 with Ayers or Moss at WOLB and moving Hagan from the inside to SOLB, Williams at SAM and putting someone like Larsen, Griesen, or Atkins at WILB, but that won't best utilize the talent we have - maybe, if we kept Andra Davis.

So moving to the 4-3 on occasion seems likely - with Woodyard (SOLB), D.Williams (ILB) and Haggan (WOLB) ... and a heavy rotation on the line with Fields/J.Williams/Smith/Reid/Bannan at DT and Ayers/Moss/Green/McBean and maybe Garland at the DE positions.

Mogulseeker
08-06-2010, 02:32 PM
thats the 1 good thing about being a 3-4 team. its easier for a 3-4 team to be versatile and run a 4-3. but most 4-3 teams cant run a 3-4 because they dont have the players.

the patriots did this a lot last season. they ran 4-3 pretty much the entire game against us if i remember correctly.

I agree with this whole post.

And... that Pats have moved back to more of a 4-3 last year after Seymour left.

Lolad
08-06-2010, 03:27 PM
Shanny almost always used the 4-3. I loved it when he tried 3-4 (wasn't it 2005?) and wished we would have stayed. Overall, we're set up now to play 3-4 with tackles like Baker, Fields and Williams, with ends like Bannan, Reid, Smith, and Green, and linebackers like Hagan, Doom and Ayers. (Williams seems like he can play any LB position in any alignment).

With Doom out the players that are really going to have to step it up are Moss and Ayers, who seem better suited rushing from RDE anyway... or, I can see Ayers play LDE in a 4-3 alignment.

I can see useing the 3-4 with Ayers or Moss at WOLB and moving Hagan from the inside to SOLB, Williams at SAM and putting someone like Larsen, Griesen, or Atkins at WILB, but that won't best utilize the talent we have - maybe, if we kept Andra Davis.

So moving to the 4-3 on occasion seems likely - with Woodyard (SOLB), D.Williams (ILB) and Haggan (WOLB) ... and a heavy rotation on the line with Fields/J.Williams/Smith/Reid/Bannan at DT and Ayers/Moss/Green/McBean and maybe Garland at the DE positions.

I think what will hurt us if we go heavy is teams doing what they always do vs us. Go no huddle and keep them on the field so we can't bring in fresh players. If we do use it I hope it's sparingly to not confuse the players we have on the team.

LongDongJohnson
08-06-2010, 03:29 PM
when he mixed both schemes 3-4 and 4-3 in

he did this in 2008 and it was terrible. we had no 3-4 players.

i think the linebackers were williams, webster, bailey, winborn.

the 3 down linemen were dumervil, robertson, and ekuban or thomas. i dont remember exactly. maybe even engleberger.

now who wouldnt get upset with shanahan trying to run a 3-4 with players like that.

plus i remember him saying they did not even practice the 3-4 defense in training camp. he came up with it on the fly during week 3 of the season.

atleast mcdaniels is getting some 4-3 work in during training camp.

Hogan11
08-06-2010, 04:23 PM
he did this in 2008 and it was terrible. we had no 3-4 players.

Wasn't that against Indy? That was a disaster.

Lolad
08-06-2010, 04:36 PM
Wasn't that against Indy? That was a disaster.

Haha... It actually worked in the 1st quarter then they started running the ball directly up the middle and pushing the small players out of the way. I believe they had a career day on the ground

LongDongJohnson
08-06-2010, 04:52 PM
Wasn't that against Indy? That was a disaster.

well we didnt play indy in 2008. we played them in 2007. did we run a 3-4 against them that year? i cant remember. i do remember having a early 10-0 lead but losing 38-20 at the end. we also gave up well over 200 rushing yards.

in 2008 i think we tried the 3-4 against the saints and jaguars. and maybe even against the bucs. after that, we called it quits if i remember right.

Ambiguous
08-06-2010, 05:09 PM
he did this in 2008 and it was terrible. we had no 3-4 players.

i think the linebackers were williams, webster, bailey, winborn.

the 3 down linemen were dumervil, robertson, and ekuban or thomas. i dont remember exactly. maybe even engleberger.

now who wouldnt get upset with shanahan trying to run a 3-4 with players like that.

plus i remember him saying they did not even practice the 3-4 defense in training camp. he came up with it on the fly during week 3 of the season.

atleast mcdaniels is getting some 4-3 work in during training camp.

Yes, I remember that. It was a total joke an that's why people were so pissed.

Hogan11
08-06-2010, 05:18 PM
well we didnt play indy in 2008. we played them in 2007. did we run a 3-4 against them that year? i cant remember. i do remember having a early 10-0 lead but losing 38-20 at the end. we also gave up well over 200 rushing yards.

in 2008 i think we tried the 3-4 against the saints and jaguars. and maybe even against the bucs. after that, we called it quits if i remember right.

Yes, you're correct...the 2007 game is the one that sticks out most in my mind. Not sure if they ran the 3-4 or not (which is why I asked) All I can remember about it was Shanahan trotted out some sort of weird tweak on defense that got exposed pretty quickly and turned very embarrassing by games end.

Hulamau
08-06-2010, 05:20 PM
We'll use both, and won't have much of a choice in the matter until Elvis returns.

Or... someone steps up and surprises and fills his shoes.

And its called 'situational football' ... Josh's motto ... and will vary based on our personnel ready for each game and the opponent we play and at times change back and forth during given games.

Any team this day and age that is one dimension and shows only one base formation every game is at a real disadvantage with the sophisticated offensive game plans of this era.

Agree, this team is being built for a 3-4 base with the versitility to run 4-3 as well at a moments notice ... I like it. Plus, it really helps for rebounding when crap happens like Doom popping a pec for 4 months.

oubronco
08-06-2010, 05:39 PM
yeah **** you

:rofl: