Quote:
Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis
This assumes that 4-3 players and 3-4 players are perfectly interchangeable.Essentially, your saying a lot of the guys here can't play football at all. However, Rocky Mac and Andre Carter have proven themselves as capable of playing in a 4-3 but have struggled in the 3-4. The secondary is not much different outside of Landry, but thanks to Landry, they have actually improved.
The players in the front 7 are a misfit for the 3-4 for the most and that's why this D has sucked. The 3-4 requires its Dlinemen LB to have a specific mental and physical skillsets or else face "Swiss cheese" syndrome.
To start, not having a nose tackle is death for a 3-4 because the O-linemen who gets to block a LB have a huge advantage in their favor. Our NT is inconsistent and thus our LBs have suffered.
The other 3-4 Dlinemen all have to be big powerful space eaters. Carriker fits, but Golston did not. Golston is not very good, but being a filler run stuffer suits him better than being a guy trying to emulate Haloti Ngata and "control" the olineman l. His mediocre play has been turned into horrid play because of the switch to the 3-4.
And AH drew more than enough double teams last season. He also played 70% of his snaps, which was more than the 60% of snaps in Tennessee.
|
No it doesn't. I'm saying -- and I thought I made this pretty clear -- that whether we're in the 3-4 or 4-3, the players we have just aren't that good. That whatever success we've had in the past was bound to start going downhill. That no matter what sort of alignment they're in or what scheme or system that's in place, we'd be in just about the same shitty statistical situation.
Again, people seem to believe that all we have to do is fire Jim Haslett and go back to the 4-3 and everything will be fine. I just don't buy it.