The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



View Poll Results: Which Defensive System do you want to see in Denver next year?
4-3 37 47.44%
3-4 33 42.31%
Tampa 2 8 10.26%
Voters: 78. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-10-2009, 01:18 PM   #1
Killericon
Front 7, Please
 
Killericon's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Alberta
Posts: 7,653

Adopt-a-Bronco:
watermock
Default What Defensive Scheme Do You Want?

Be it Spags with his 4-3, Dom Capers with his 3-4 or Raheem Morris with his Tampa 2, it's clear that there'll be a different system in Denver next year. NOT based on who will be coaching the defense, I wanna know which system you guys prefer.
Killericon is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 01-10-2009, 01:20 PM   #2
broncsyanks
Broncos kick a$$!!!
 
broncsyanks's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Nyc, NY
Posts: 917
Default

one that works
broncsyanks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 01:21 PM   #3
LonghornBronco
Ring of Famer
 
Hook'em Horns

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,409

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Rahim Moore
Default

I say the Tampa two, because that is what our personel could adapt to immediatly. We could have a big improvement without having to tear the whole thing down. Larry Coyer did the best job of the people we have had in here and he ran the Tampa 2
LonghornBronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 01:26 PM   #4
Hallside
Solid Starter
 
Hallside's Avatar
 
John Fox is Stupid

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 165
Default

I voted 3-4 since that's likely what McDaniels and Capers/Crennel will bring and I'm optimistic we can adapt quickly to it and succeed.

I'd also be fine with a PHI/NYG/Spag style 4-3.

Not a fan of the Tampa 2.
Hallside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 01:27 PM   #5
broncosteven
Kranz Dictum
 
broncosteven's Avatar
 
Gene helping John figure out FA

Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tranquility Base
Posts: 34,329

Adopt-a-Bronco:
They'r all bums
Default

Stay with 4-3, new DC to weed out those not cutting it and bring his guys in.

3-4 will take too long to get personel

Tampa 2 has run it's course, Neither Tampa nor Chicago can run it anymore Teams know how to gameplan it. Plus you need talent at Safety which we do not have.
broncosteven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 01:30 PM   #6
Bronco LB 59
Ring of Famer
 
Bronco LB 59's Avatar
 
Keep your head up dog

Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Leucadia CA
Posts: 6,044
Default

46 or bust
Bronco LB 59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:27 PM   #7
Rock Chalk
Cheeky Bastards
 
Rock Chalk's Avatar
 
Laus Deo

Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: The Backside of the Internet
Posts: 29,749

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Chris Harris
Default

Any one that works.
Rock Chalk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:28 PM   #8
NFLBRONCO
Ring of Famer
 
NFLBRONCO's Avatar
 
Go Nuggets Go Lakers

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lafayette Colorado
Posts: 8,004
Default

I don't care just as long CB's don't play 10 yds off WR's every game.

I think I'd wet my pants if we had a D that forced one 3 and out in each half.

Last edited by NFLBRONCO; 01-10-2009 at 02:30 PM..
NFLBRONCO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:32 PM   #9
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,491
Default

Let's talk just a little but about terminology. A cover 2 can be ran from either a 4-3 or a 3-4. 4-3 and 3-4 are referring to the front 7 alignment and not how you play the safety's. Cover 2 is a coverage scheme not a front 7 alignment.

True most cover 2 is ran from a 4-3, but really 4-3 is a more popular defensive front. 3-4 is becoming popular because it disguises things and is versatile.

IMO though either alignment of the front 7 can work in the NFL with good players.

I don't care what defense or coverage scheme we employ but if it's cover 2 I hope we play our corners tighter to the LOS and bump wr off the line.

If we go 3-4 I sure hope we look for some bigger inside linebackers and a bigger NT otherwise we still get pushed around.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:41 PM   #10
Hallside
Solid Starter
 
Hallside's Avatar
 
John Fox is Stupid

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 165
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Let's talk just a little but about terminology. A cover 2 can be ran from either a 4-3 or a 3-4. 4-3 and 3-4 are referring to the front 7 alignment and not how you play the safety's. Cover 2 is a coverage scheme not a front 7 alignment.

True most cover 2 is ran from a 4-3, but really 4-3 is a more popular defensive front. 3-4 is becoming popular because it disguises things and is versatile.

IMO though either alignment of the front 7 can work in the NFL with good players.

I don't care what defense or coverage scheme we employ but if it's cover 2 I hope we play our corners tighter to the LOS and bump wr off the line.

If we go 3-4 I sure hope we look for some bigger inside linebackers and a bigger NT otherwise we still get pushed around.
Ok. But you're the first one to use the term "cover 2" in this thread. We've been referring to the "Tampa 2" which is more specific.

To put a finer point on it, I think the specific purpose of the thread is to compare the various defenses that Spags ("4-3"), McDaniels & Capers/Crennel (3-4), and Morris and Frazier ("Tampa 2") would bring.

Last edited by Hallside; 01-10-2009 at 02:46 PM.. Reason: split infinitive
Hallside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:47 PM   #11
Drek
Ring of Famer
 
Drek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,368
Default

I'd prefer a 3-4 where we bring in Romeo Crennel to run the show. Moss could adjust to a full time 3-4 OLB in short order, DJ moves inside. Thomas moves out to DE. Dumervil takes on the situational OLB who sometimes stands up, sometimes puts a hand in the dirt a la Willie McGinest. Fits what little talent we have in the front seven pretty well and I just prefer the 3-4.

But I wouldn't have a problem with any of them really, just as long as we get some better talent across the board.
Drek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:50 PM   #12
~Crash~
My new dog
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,579

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Kuper
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LonghornBronco View Post
I say the Tampa two, because that is what our personel could adapt to immediatly. We could have a big improvement without having to tear the whole thing down. Larry Coyer did the best job of the people we have had in here and he ran the Tampa 2

that is our personel yes I agree but 3-4 can be done just as easy !
~Crash~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:51 PM   #13
Broncosfreak_56
Concrete Cyanide
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Lakewood
Posts: 1,552

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Knowshon Moreno
Default

IF we go 3-4, Terrell Suggs becomes the number 1 FA.
Broncosfreak_56 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:54 PM   #14
kdissette
Seasoned Veteran
 
kdissette's Avatar
 
IN VON WE TRUST!!!

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FARGO, ND
Posts: 497

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Von Miller
Default

I think the Tampa 2 is a better option for our current personel situation. I mean that would even open us up to trade champ if he wants to do more man, but he is always in the box anyway so he would work. IF we do go Tampa2 it is vital that we get some quality Dlineman in teh offseason.
kdissette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:55 PM   #15
SureShot
Hurry! Hurry!
 
SureShot's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 5,947

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Matt Russell
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by broncsyanks View Post
one that works
This
SureShot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 02:58 PM   #16
~Crash~
My new dog
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,579

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Kuper
Default

3-4

we would need a NT

we would need one MLB because Larsen would make the NT ILB

Huge Need for FS in the system

4-3

we need a NT

Need a MLB

FS not as imoptant but still got to get a FS that tackles well

IMO got the rest

3-4

you cut Williams and all LBers not named or try to use him as a way to move up a couple spots in draft .

Cut DT Robetson

Trade Bailey .
~Crash~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 03:00 PM   #17
~Crash~
My new dog
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,579

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Kuper
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broncosfreak_56 View Post
IF we go 3-4, Terrell Suggs becomes the number 1 FA.
why ? LBers are easy to come by in this system hell we already got 2 OLBer for the system on the team .
~Crash~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 03:02 PM   #18
PRBronco
_never forget_
 
PRBronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2004
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,240

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Vathquezth
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broncosfreak_56 View Post
IF we go 3-4, Terrell Suggs becomes the number 1 FA.
Chris Canty would be a nice pick up too.
PRBronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 03:15 PM   #19
watermock
"Hoodie Jr"
 
watermock's Avatar
 
"Hug me!"

Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah
Posts: 76,813
Default

Throw away the 07 draft if we go 3-4.
watermock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 05:03 PM   #20
Rock Chalk
Cheeky Bastards
 
Rock Chalk's Avatar
 
Laus Deo

Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: The Backside of the Internet
Posts: 29,749

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Chris Harris
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 56crash View Post
that is our personel yes I agree but 3-4 can be done just as easy !
No.

I dont know why people think its that easy to convert to a 3-4 when you have full on 4-3 personell. Not one team in the last 20 years has made an easy conversion from a 4-3 to a 3-4 in less than 2 years.

You need a big, dominant NT, which are harder and harder to find.

You need to big nasty DE's which are more like DTs but with DE speed, again, harder to find.

You need 4 big ass linebackers, all of which need to be able to blitz otherwise there is no point because the 3-4's biggest advantage is blitz disguising.

Also with the LBs, you need smart players and we have none. They have to all be able to maintain their assignments without error because the moment there is an error, there is a big play in the 3-4.

We have none of the personell required. Our best LB is DJ and he is not a 3-4 LB, not an ILB or OLB. Too small. IN fact, Boss is probably the only LB big enough to be in a 3-4 on our team and he cant stay healthy. I suppose you could move Doom and Moss to the OLB position in a 3-4, but that still leaves you with a glaring weakness of DEs, not one of them we have capable of playing ina a 3-4.

We would be best suited staying in a 4-3 unless Bowlen and company want to wait 3 or 4 years while we acquire the personnel to fit the scheme instead of making the scheme fit the personnel.
Rock Chalk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 05:06 PM   #21
loborugger
lost in the ether
 
loborugger's Avatar
 
Did we finally get a FB???

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The 'cuse
Posts: 5,709

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Hillis
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 56crash View Post
3-4

we would need a NT

we would need one MLB because Larsen would make the NT ILB

Huge Need for FS in the system

4-3

we need a NT

Need a MLB

FS not as imoptant but still got to get a FS that tackles well

IMO got the rest

3-4

you cut Williams and all LBers not named or try to use him as a way to move up a couple spots in draft .

Cut DT Robetson

Trade Bailey .
I dont think we would get anything for him, lets just waive him. He's a bum, anyways.
loborugger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 05:13 PM   #22
Popps
TEAM FIRST.
 
Popps's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 29,799
Default

I picked 3-4, only because I think it may be easier to staff from the ground up, which is basically what we're doing. Dominant, big DEs are difficult to find. Seems to me that there are always a ton of "tweeners" coming out of school that we have to pass on. It also seems like the 3-4 provides a little more flexibility.

But, I really don't care much. Just get some ****ing talent in here and run whatever system you want.
Popps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 05:16 PM   #23
Bronx33
lets go partner
 
Bronx33's Avatar
 
Rumpson Rocks

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lakewood,Colo
Posts: 40,525

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Woodyard
Default

3-4 IF we can get a pass rush going and the right personell to have it function as a unit.
Bronx33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 05:17 PM   #24
Rock Chalk
Cheeky Bastards
 
Rock Chalk's Avatar
 
Laus Deo

Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: The Backside of the Internet
Posts: 29,749

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Chris Harris
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronx33 View Post
3-4 IF we can get a pass rush going and the right personell to have it function as a unit.
Well ****, a 4-3 will work IF we get that going for us.
Rock Chalk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 05:19 PM   #25
Bronx33
lets go partner
 
Bronx33's Avatar
 
Rumpson Rocks

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lakewood,Colo
Posts: 40,525

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Woodyard
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rock Chalk View Post
Well ****, a 4-3 will work IF we get that going for us.


I just like the idea of having extra support mid field.
Bronx33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:25 AM.


Denver Broncos