Results 1 to 20 of 341

Thread: The Defense - Again, the Defense :(

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Skeptical Rat HOFer wist43's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    11,777
    Quote Originally Posted by pbmax View Post
    Not sure how wide you mean by your wide, but yes it changes things.

    Its dependent on alignment (and I still haven't reviewed the game) but if that player is attacking the LOS and with no coverage responsibilities (unless zone blitz) then yes, he is behaving like a lineman. The stance might be an issue, but its less of an issue wide.

    Remember the argument against the 2-4 nickel and dime is that its vulnerable to the run in the middle due to size. Replacing Matthews and Perry with Neal and Peppers is a size increase that offsets the lost size of a NT. Each guy wist wanted to put on the field in his 3-3 nickel was a 280-285 pound guy so that you could have beef and a little pass rush.
    If you're going to go to a nickel in an either/or, down/distance situation - the jumbo nickel is idiotic, and it didn't stop either the run or the pass - for very logical reasons. Logical reasons that were completely lost on dunderdummy.

    As for my dreamed of 3-3, I don't want any of the down linemen lined up outside the tackles, I think the alignment is best served with those down linemen lined up inside the tackles - there may be exceptions to that of course, depending on opponent, but for the most part it makes the most sense to have a stout, gap penetrating presence on the LOS.

    That's probably dunderdummy's biggest flaw - he cares nothing about controlling the LOS, and it shows as we repeatedly get run over, and rarely generate pressure up the middle.

    You can do a lot from that alignment. You can have your OLB's playing outside the T's and providing outside pass rush and setting the edge against the run, while roaming another guy along the line, be it Matthews, Neal, or Mulumba; or you can run a wide variety of stunts, blitizes, drops, and zone blitzes out of that alignment.

    Call it exotic but sound - what Capers does is exotic and unsound; very, very unsound.

    It affords a lot more flexibility, and offers better size/mobility/athleticism in your front. You can play a much more penetrating style, as opposed anything dunderdummy has been throwing out there for the past 3+ years.

    And as an added bonus?? It gets either Hawk or Jones off the field - or both of them off the field!!!
    wist

  2. #2
    Hands-to-the-face Rat HOFer 3irty1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    7,853
    Quote Originally Posted by wist43 View Post
    If you're going to go to a nickel in an either/or, down/distance situation - the jumbo nickel is idiotic, and it didn't stop either the run or the pass - for very logical reasons. Logical reasons that were completely lost on dunderdummy.

    As for my dreamed of 3-3, I don't want any of the down linemen lined up outside the tackles, I think the alignment is best served with those down linemen lined up inside the tackles - there may be exceptions to that of course, depending on opponent, but for the most part it makes the most sense to have a stout, gap penetrating presence on the LOS.

    That's probably dunderdummy's biggest flaw - he cares nothing about controlling the LOS, and it shows as we repeatedly get run over, and rarely generate pressure up the middle.

    You can do a lot from that alignment. You can have your OLB's playing outside the T's and providing outside pass rush and setting the edge against the run, while roaming another guy along the line, be it Matthews, Neal, or Mulumba; or you can run a wide variety of stunts, blitizes, drops, and zone blitzes out of that alignment.

    Call it exotic but sound - what Capers does is exotic and unsound; very, very unsound.

    It affords a lot more flexibility, and offers better size/mobility/athleticism in your front. You can play a much more penetrating style, as opposed anything dunderdummy has been throwing out there for the past 3+ years.

    And as an added bonus?? It gets either Hawk or Jones off the field - or both of them off the field!!!
    Most 3-3's I've seen would keep the equivalent of Hawk and Jones on the field since those positions are still read and react type roles. If the tradeoff is ultimately to take Matthews off the edge in order to get Hawk or Jones off the field then you can do that from a 2-4 or 4-2 as well especially with all the OLB/DE types we've got. So why specifically the 3-3?
    70% of the Earth is covered by water. The rest is covered by Al Harris.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •