3-4 Defense may be the best call for the Broncos (Krieger)

[DeusExManning]

Krieger

Now, about that defense.

Yes, the Broncos are 3-0 and scoring points like Air Coryell. Their offense ranks second in the NFL. Everyone except them is amazed. In private, they might even be a little bit amazed.

On the flip side, their defense ranks 28th in points allowed (28 per game) and 30th in yards allowed. Their pass defense ranks 32nd, also known as last. The Saints' Drew Brees passed for more yards (421) than any other NFL quarterback in Week 3.

Generally speaking, teams with defensive rankings like these don't win championships. In fact, Mike Shanahan used to preach the correlation between top-five scoring defenses and Super Bowl champions.

In his team's defense - and it could certainly use one - Shanahan points out it is doing much better against the run (106 yards per game) than it did last year (142.6). After all, if you can stop the run, you can work to improve against the pass. If you can't stop the run, your opponent has no reason to pass.

But it's also worth mentioning that LaDainian Tomlinson and Deuce McAllister were injured when the Chargers and Saints came to town, and that the Broncos took quick leads that required both visitors to switch to comeback mode early. Against comeback mode, the Broncos gave up a lot of ground and a lot of points.

Shanahan again mentioned a new scheme, but it wasn't clear if he was talking about the change at defensive coordinator or the surprising deployment of a 3-4 defense at times Sunday.

For a minute there, I was looking for Barney Chavous, Rubin Carter and Rulon Jones. When an outside linebacker came up to blitz, I thought it might be Tom Jackson.

If Shanahan was referring merely to the change in defensive administrations, it isn't much of an excuse. Bob Slowik basically took over for Jim Bates midway through last season. And it's hard to make the case that during the offseason they can put in a complex passing game - also with a new coordinator - but not a defense.

If it's the 3-4, that's a much more promising problem. For a coach who believes personnel dictates game plans and not the other way around, as Shanahan does, the 3-4 is nothing more than an admission that you have better linebackers than linemen.

This is how the Patriots have generated their pass rush during the Bill Belichick era. It has been six years since a defensive lineman led the Patriots in sacks, and even then Richard Seymour had to share the distinction with linebacker Willie McGinest. For the past five seasons, a linebacker led them every time.

The Broncos frequently deployed upright linebackers on either side of their down linemen when they went 3-4 Sunday. Brees had no trouble negotiating this wrinkle. In fact, the Saints had better luck throwing than running against it. But then, Brees is one of the most capable quarterbacks around and the Broncos were taking their first look at the 3-4 in a game setting.

"Even though it didn't work out, I think it'll pay dividends down the line," Shanahan said Monday.

The disadvantage of a four-man front, as Shanahan pointed out, is its predictability. Except for some exotic zone drops, the opposing offense generally knows that on a pass play, the four linemen are coming. If somebody blitzes to help, he gives away the coverage scheme.

A 3-4 provides more flexibility. The outside 'backers can come, creating a five-man front, or they can drop into coverage and the inside 'backers can come, or any other combination you can think of.

"You've got to feel good about your linebackers to play that," Shanahan said. "Jamie Winborn played exceptionally well against the Raiders and the preseason games when Boss (Bailey) was out, so we do have the luxury now to do some three-man looks, which, maybe in the past, with five linebackers (on the roster), you didn't.

"But we have seven on our team now and we believe it fits some of the things we can do. I'm not going to give you our game plan, but it does give us the ability to change things up a little bit more."

This looks like the best chance the Broncos have to mount some sort of pass rush. For all the changes in scheme and coordinators, their weak link defensively is still up front.

Their first two draft picks of 2007 were supposed to solve this problem. Instead, defensive linemen Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder take turns being inactive on game day and the Broncos have the same defensive ranking that got Bates fired.

Granted, the Chargers and Saints are two of the best offenses in football. The hapless Chiefs should provide considerable statistical relief this week.

Still, when you give up 500 yards of offense to anybody, that's not good.

If it can stay healthy, the Broncos offense will hold up its end this year. The defense is still looking for a way to do the same.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...best-call-for/

[s0phr0syne]

Originally Posted by Krieger

If it's the 3-4, that's a much more promising problem. For a coach who believes personnel dictates game plans and not the other way around, as Shanahan does, the 3-4 is nothing more than an admission that you have better linebackers than linemen.

Man, this is what all n00bs think, and it's dead wrong. I would argue the teams that use the 3-4 successfully are able to do so because their DL is dominant.

[extralife]

Weren't we sold Robertson on the notion that he only sucked because he couldn't play nose in a 3-4? Who the hell else on our line is suited for the job? I could see Ekuban as an okay 3-4 end, I guess, but that's about it.

[footstepsfrom#27]

You need a Jamal Williams or the equivilent to play the 3-4 and you also need 300 pound DE's...neither of which we have. You also need bigger LB's...we don't have them either. The key to changing this mess is to get some actual NFL talent in here on that side of the ball, especially on the front 7 where only DJ has been up to snuff so far. The Chargers were handicapped with LT being hurt and missing two starters in their O-line and they still moved at will. New Orleans had an 18 point defecit and they acted like they had the lead. Face the facts...we suck and we're not getting better until and IF we can draft major talent on that side of the ball. We're two years away from that at this point. By that time Champ and Bly are 32...the window's closing fast if we don't have another '06 type draft this time around. At least the horses on the offense will be here for a long time so we can draw some comfort from knowing that time is on our side. Shanny needs to figure out what his defensive philosophy is and stick with it instead of this stupid merry-go-round of DC's we've had in here on almost an annual basis.

[maher_tyler]

Originally Posted by extralife

Weren't we sold Robertson on the notion that he only sucked because he couldn't play nose in a 3-4? Who the hell else on our line is suited for the job? I could see Ekuban as an okay 3-4 end, I guess, but that's about it.

I don't think it was an every down thing..just on obvious passing downs..and it makes sense imo.

[Popps]

"Jamie Winborn played exceptionally well against the Raiders and the preseason games when Boss (Bailey) was out

Shanahan doesn't throw around praise like that lightly. Winborn has been a nice surprise and certainly has shown more than Boss Bailey thus far.

[Raidersbane]

Originally Posted by maher_tyler

I don't think it was an every down thing..just on obvious passing downs..and it makes sense imo.

What didn't make sense to me is when we only rushed the three down linemen and the Saints tight end still had nobody near him for like eight fricken yards......on a third and long no less. We are blowing assingments way too often. And we also seemed to get burned on a lot of dump offs to the back. Hell Drew Brees was lookin for Bush as his primary rather than any down field receivers....

[Odysseus]

Originally Posted by s0phr0syne

Man, this is what all n00bs think, and it's dead wrong. I would argue the teams that use the 3-4 successfully are able to do so because their DL is dominant.

Agreed. Doesn't your defensive coach need to like...um..teach defense to the players in order for any change in defensive strategy to work?

Bring on the next sacred cow.

[Killericon]

Usually, I'm anti-3-4, but we might as well switch. It's not like the 4-3 was working.

We should sign Colvin.

[Taco John]

I'm not sure what the point of the switch would be. What's the difference between finishing at the bottom of the league in defense using a 4-3 and finishing at the bottom of the league in defense using a 3-4?

You don't just wave a magic wand and "switch" to a 3-4 defense in the middle of the year - especially in the pros. It's an embarassing admission of guilt for a coaching staff to go through training camp and preseason in a 4-3, and then waffle before September is out and switch to a 3-4. This is the kind of move that a team gears up for - not snaps a finger and say, "aw shucks, why not just give it a shot?"

[rovolution]

D-Rob trade would have been worthless then.

[fontaine]

I don't think we're switching to the 3-4 as a permanent thing, it's just a change up to show something different.

The same thing has happened over the years every time the defense fall to sh*t. The schemes start to change up during the season (zero blitz, Moss standing up at the line of scrimmage, going 3-4 looks last year, changing Bates scheme) but the personnel is the same crap.

Some people have the point that we need to draft more defensive talent.

I DISAGREE.

In order to draft/bring in better D talent you need to have the right talent evaluators in the first place.

We don't. It shows in free agency, it shows in the draft (the guys we bring and just as importantly the guys we DON'T).

We could spend three drafts in a row dedicated to defense and still come up with bottom sucking crap because I have no faith in the FO's ability when it comes to judging, evaluating, scouting defensive talent.

Dumervil and DJ are the only ones we've drafted that show something. The rest of the guys we've drafted, brought in etc are full of FAIL.

[DeusExManning]

Originally Posted by Taco John

I'm not sure what the point of the switch would be. What's the difference between finishing at the bottom of the league in defense using a 4-3 and finishing at the bottom of the league in defense using a 3-4?

You don't just wave a magic wand and "switch" to a 3-4 defense in the middle of the year - especially in the pros. It's an embarassing admission of guilt for a coaching staff to go through training camp and preseason in a 4-3, and then waffle before September is out and switch to a 3-4. This is the kind of move that a team gears up for - not snaps a finger and say, "aw shucks, why not just give it a shot?"

Jarvis Moss and Dumervil can be turned into outside linebackers and we can rush 4 to 5 with totally different schemes.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by DeusExShanahan

Jarvis Moss and Dumervil can be turned into outside linebackers and we can rush 4 to 5 with totally different schemes.

DJ Williams can be turned into a Sam and a Mike in subsequent years, too. The point isn't about what they can be turned into. The point is the results of it - not to mention the unlikelyhood of such a switch ever taking place in mid-season. When is the last time a team switched to a 3-4 mid season?

[fontaine]

Let's put aside the question of how to improve the defense for the moment.

The real problem with the defense has it's roots going back three years.

Back then under Coyer we had a solid run defense but were weak against top flite passing offenses. We had a DL that were all built to stop the run from Warren/Ekuban/Browncos etc coupled with DJ/Wilson and Lynch along with good run support from our CBs.

The scheme was to stop the run first because we had that personnel and Wilson/Lynch were superb against the run and knew their assignments inside out. Wilson in particular was invalueable because he rarely blew his assignments as a coverage LB too and we were one of the best teams against TEs.

We were close with that defense, REAL close. All we needed were two top flite DEs (guys like Darren Howard, Jared Allen, Pryce etc) who were three down defenders who could stop the run and rush the QB.

Then came the biggest mistake we've made on defense in years. We got rid of Larry Coyer for the mistakes the FO made in failing to bring in genuine DEs which is all we really needed. Had the FO been more decisive we could have ended up with some high quality DL free agents but time and time again they chose to go the cheaper route in a never ending parade of crapped out DL like Luther Ellis, Holland, etc etc.

Since then this defense is a rudder less ship. We draft guys like Moss who are pure pass rushers, and age catches up to some of our best run stopping players in Lynch/Wilson/Pryce and now we have to replace those guys along with finding real DEs.

And in reality we lost a whole season worth of development with Bates because we brought in guys in the front four suited to his scheme. Don't even get me started with how we tried to get scrubs along the DT position (Adams, etc).

So now we're BACK to where we were three years ago with Coyer except we're missing Al Wilson/Lynch/Pryce/Warren/Myers/Brown and the players we DID HAVE that were good to great against the run while we're twiddling our thumbs waiting for Moss to get stronger and Crowder to well, do anything, while Engleberger is forced to start.

And yes, we are running a gimmick defense. I'm not talking about the 3-4 but the extra safety in the box constantly just to look decent against the run even though we've played high octane passing offenses. And the stats in the Pass D reflect this. Any decent QB can look the coverage safety OFF his intended target and get one on one matchup against any of the our CBs on the long/intermediate ball. That's not on Paymah/Bly/Champ but an indictment on this sorry ass front 7 and the FO that has built this crap over the last three years.

The problems on this defense WON'T be fixed by gimmicks or scheme changes. We need to hope Crowder/Thomas/Moss pan out and go out and invest major resources in FA/Draft to the DL.

It's not all bad, the FA class of safeties looks to be good, and run stopping DL are always available. Then draft another DT and two way DE and hope for that bit of extra draft luck on the DL.

In the mean time our Offense is going to have to hold the fort.

[Don Flamenco]

Yeah I wonder what Dewayne Robertson thinks?

Don't you need linebackers that can rush the passer to do this or is the article suggesting we line up Dumerville on the outside or something?

Hmm, I wanna see us try this the whole game while the opposing offense attack our DE play after play. Back to the 4-3 after that.

[watermock]

Originally Posted by DeusExShanahan

Jarvis Moss and Dumervil can be turned into outside linebackers and we can rush 4 to 5 with totally different schemes.

That's where I'm art, especially because we have 6 lB's that can play. But dont have the LB's 15 yards dowfield, bit in the PASSING lanes.

[Kaylore]

We really don't have the personnel to run a 3-4. You need a big guy at nose and two big guys at both end positions. Then you need big physical linebackers on the outside. We're not running a "true" 3-4. They're basically putting three linemen out there so they can put four linebackers on the field. Honestly it's a bit like what my BYU Cougars run. It's designed to get more speed on the back end. Having said that, if you don't have the physical presence up front none of the above will work at all.

Personally I hope we stick with the 4-3 and just commit to one system and sink or swim with it. Our offense will be their training wheels for a time while we try to fix it. Either way we'll have to try and fix the holes in our defense during the '09 draft.

[TheReverend]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

We really don't have the personnel to run a 3-4. You need a big guy at nose and two big guys at both end positions. Then you need big physical linebackers on the outside. We're not running a "true" 3-4. They're basically putting three linemen out there so they can put four linebackers on the field. Honestly it's a bit like what my BYU Cougars run. It's designed to get more speed on the back end. Having said that, if you don't have the physical presence up front none of the above will work at all.

Personally I hope we stick with the 4-3 and just commit to one system and sink or swim with it. Our offense will be their training wheels for a time while we try to fix it. Either way we'll have to try and fix the holes in our defense during the '09 draft.

It's always going to be a 52 in my eyes.

A nose, 2 5 tech DTs (pretty similar to the 3 technique), and 2 "hybrid" LBs... glorified DEs.

[Smiling Assassin27]

Maybe we can get Warren back for a song and a dance. He and Robertson/Thomas would be a nice mix.

[want2bAbronco2]

I say we just draft 6-7 Def players next year (Mike, S, DE x2, DT) and sign Nasaihavenoidea CB from the Raiders! He is young and can replace Bly and move him to slot/nick.

[TheReverend]

Originally Posted by want2bAbronco2

I say we just draft 6-7 Def players next year (Mike, S, DE x2, DT) and sign Nasaihavenoidea CB from the Raiders! He is young and can replace Bly and move him to slot/nick.

Interesting. That way we could have over 50% of our allotted defensive cap spending all used on the corners.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by TheReverend

Interesting. That way we could have over 50% of our allotted defensive cap spending all used on the corners.

I'll bet they're not that far off already.

[want2bAbronco2]

Originally Posted by TheReverend

Interesting. That way we could have over 50% of our allotted defensive cap spending all used on the corners.

Yea, I was going with history there! You know, since in the past 6-8yrs we have payed CB but no DL! Might as well continue!

[montrose]

Kahn's dream as come true! The Broncos using a 3-4 and.... crap.