New defense

[#56fanatic]

What is everyones thought of the Redskins switching to a 3-4 defense the majority of the time. How is it going to hold up the weekend against the G-Men and their pretty explosive offense?

I believe it puts better atheletes on the field, we can hide our blitzes better, and we get a better pass rush from Marcus or LaVar. What do you guys think!

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I'll say this about the Giants and their explosive offense. They do have a great turnover ratio which leads to them having shorter fields to work with, hence the reason their offense "ranks" around the middle. It's easy to be explosive when you don't have to drive very far. Also, they have the top return man in the NFL at this second...

[#56fanatic]

The G-men have a pretty potent offense, and alot of good weapons. Toomer, Burress, Shockey, Tiki, and Eli manning is a stud. He drove his team down the field last week, he certainly didn't look like a 2nd year QB. I hope we can pressure him into making some mistakes. I believe our Offense will move the ball well, we just need to keep their Offense off the field.

[MTK]

I'm not sure what the original question is, are you saying the Skins are switching to the 3-4? Because that's not true, it's a formation they use from time to time but they're not making a switch from their base 4-3.

GW uses multiple formations and packages and the 3-4 is just one of the many tricks he has up his sleeve.

[firstdown]

I think we are using the 3/4 alittle more because our front four are not able to put constant presure on the QB. He uses the 3/4 to hide were the blitz will be coming from.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I think we are using the 3/4 alittle more because our front four are not able to put constant presure on the QB. He uses the 3/4 to hide were the blitz will be coming from.

Thank you for explaining that. I didn't say we were switching to the 3/4 all the time. It is new to the defense because we have not used it at all for the last few years. I believe we will be using it more than the 4/3 agianst the G-Men to apply more pressure and try to confuse Eli some. if that is possible. I always have liked the 3/4, Baltimore has used it very well the past how many years. Its hard to pick up blitzes and hard for O-lineman to pick someone to block on running plays. I also believe we have better LBs than Lineman, and it gives us the chance to have better playmakers on the field.

[MTK]

We've used the 3-4 a little more this year, but I'm pretty sure we saw it here and there last year too.

[FRPLG]

We used it on occasion last year for basically the same reasons we are using it now. I am guessing GW thinks our LBs are better as a group than the front four so he does what he can to get them on the field. The main problem I see is that our LBs are faster types and not the big hole pluggers that are sometimes needed for a 3-4. Lavar should benefit from it as he is essentially a DE playing LB in terms of size. Maybe the working in of Lavar is where the genensis of the increased use is. Either way it seemed to work against the sisters of the poor last week so maybe they'll keep using it. I like unpredictability.

[Southpaw]

The 3-4 is a tricky formation if it is not run to perfection. The main problem is it gives the running back a better chance to reach the second level. The Ravens are able to use it effectively because they have a very good linebacking core, and arguably the best open field tackler in the league, Ray Lewis(when he is healthy). Not to say that Washingtons linebacking core isn't very good, but having not used the 3-4 very much, Tiki could cause them some trouble if they try to use it a lot. I don't think it'll be used much this week except on obvious passing situations.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

The 3-4 is a tricky formation if it is not run to perfection. The main problem is it gives the running back a better chance to reach the second level.

pretty much exactly that. when Williams talked about 'packages' LaVar wasn't in, i think he was referring to 3-4 type defenses that weren't right to use against heavy running teams like Denver and KC. when he saw the anemic 9ers coming, he didn't feel threatened enough by the running game and instead chose to welcome Alex Smith to the NFL by throwing LaVar in the 3-4 at him.

3-4 against a good running team isn't the best idea especially if it's not your base and most practiced defense. the general feeling is LaVar lacks coverage skills which is vital in Williams defense. you never see Holdman in the backfield, he's out covering TEs and FBs and in our defense that's important.

i think the best use of him today would just be to replace Daniels as DE on non-short-yardage situations. and teach him the Dwight Freeney spin. until we get true pass rush threats on our Dline, we need excellent coverage all around.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by illdefined

pretty much exactly that. when Williams talked about 'packages' LaVar wasn't in, i think he was referring to 3-4 type defenses that weren't right to use against heavy running teams like Denver and KC. when he saw the anemic 9ers coming, he didn't feel threatened enough by the running game and instead chose to welcome Alex Smith to the NFL by throwing LaVar in the 3-4 at him.

3-4 against a good running team isn't the best idea especially if it's not your base and most practiced defense. the general feeling is LaVar lacks coverage skills which is vital in Williams defense. you never see Holdman in the backfield, he's out covering TEs and FBs and in our defense that's important.

i think the best use of him today would just be to replace Daniels as DE on non-short-yardage situations. and teach him the Dwight Freeney spin. until we get true pass rush threats on our Dline, we need excellent coverage all around.

I dont generally dispute someones posts, but I have to in regards to this. Holdman plays the weakside, marcus the strong. The strong side LB is the one who covers the TEs and backs. The weakside is generally the pass rusher and is a little more free to rome and make plays on the backs. Out of the two(arrington and Holdman) arrington is far better in coverage than holdman. He definately has more speed and athletic ability when it comes to coverage. He(arrington) is also stonger in pass rush. This weekend we will mostly see Taylor covering shockey and Marcus on few occasions. Marcus will probably be more responsable for the RB and FB coming out of the back field. If we are in the 3-4 this weekend, LaVar will be used mostly as the 4th rusher, or 5th blitzer. I generally think if a team runs the 3-4 correctly it is more difficult to run against. with the style of offense the Giants have been running, I think the 3-4 may be bennificial to us. More playmakers on the field and more speed to match up with the Giants.

[illdefined]

Marcus does play weakside, but TE's very often go in motion, and the LB's assignment just switches, they don't follow their 'man'. this year you've seen Marcus in the backfield and making sacks (like the fumble last game), not Holdman. i haven't seen Holdman in the backfield at all really, i think Williams uses him almost like another DB and covering the flats.

yeah there's no question who's better athletically between LaVar and Holdman. the knock on LaVar is that he tries to anticipates plays and blow them up early and will abandon his assignment too easily. he bites a lot on play action is the best example of this.

yeah i think the 3-4 would be great for us personally, it would probably end the long runs on the outside we've been giving up this year but it's just not our base defense. with our personnel talent where it is now, i think it should be. i'd love to see LaVar out there full time, i just think Williams' priority is stop the run up the middle first and foremost and then get creative.

[Big C]

we used the 3-4 more cuz we had no depth at tackle for the game, and salave'a was playing hurt. just an assumption really.

[Duffman003]

Originally Posted by Big C

we used the 3-4 more cuz we had no depth at tackle for the game, and salave'a was playing hurt. just an assumption really.

I'm pretty sure that's true because Griffen got hurt that game and we only have a few DTs.

[dblanch66]

Originally Posted by Duffman003

I'm pretty sure that's true because Griffen got hurt that game and we only have a few DTs.

I think you're right. They pretty much say so in the article from the WP that Matty posted here.