Lurker64
08-23-2009, 03:52 AM
A common theme in the offseason ever since the hiring of Dom Capers was "do the Packers have the personnel to run the 3-4 defense". Since the results in the preseason so far have been promising, for now, I think, we can say that this is not going to be a problem.
An interesting thing about the Buffalo game, however, is that the starting defensive lineup contained no players who were not on the roster last year. With as good as our holdover personnel was in the 3-4, and as bad as the defense looked last year, I'd like to pose a question:
"Did we have the wrong defensive personnel for the 4-3 (specifically the Bates 4-3) defense?"
Bear with me a minute. The hallmark of the 3-4 is that it is a defense geared around specialists. You don't expect much in the way pass rush from your defensive lineman, and similarly you don't expect your LBs to be able to regularly fight through blocks from offensive linemen.
The 4-3 defense, however, seems to be a better defense geared around "getting the most out of your superstars." The hallmark of the 4-3 defense was the "superstar defensive end" a titan of a man who is stout enough at the point of attack to stop the run, speedy enough to maintain outside contain, and technique savvy enough to beat the NFL's best pass blockers in order to get to the Quarterback. Anybody who can do this has an impressive resume, and as such people who can do this are few and far between (and are expensive to acquire and keep). Generally, the best pass rushing defensive end plays on the right side (against the left tackle), so as to attack the blind side of the quarterback, while the best run stopping DE plays on the opposite side, expecting more running plays to go his direction. The Bates variant of the 4-3 defense split out the defensive ends very wide in order to help them get more pressure on the QB, as such in order to avoid the middle of the defense being not unlike a sieve, the Bates defense requires not one but two very large defensive tackles capable of playing two gaps. The other notable position of the 4-3 defense is the "superstar linebacker", a man agile enough to run sideline to sideline, quick enough to run with backs and TEs in coverage out of the backfield, technique savvy enough to get off blocks when blitzing, stout enough to not get run over by backs, and smart enough to diagnose plays as soon as they are diagnosable. These players exist, and aren't as rare as your 4-3 DEs (as there are simply more people in the 250 range than in the 270 range), but the problem is that you need to have three of them. Whoever's weakest against the run is going to get run at, and whoever's the worst in coverage is going to get picked on. The Bates defense was particularly bad in terms of this, as the lack of zone coverage meant that linebackers had to cover backs and TEs one on one quite frequently.
So let's look at our personnel historically under the Bates defense, and see if we had the personnel to actually execute it. Most problematically, I think, was the DE situation. We had a great one in Kampman, but he was always most comfortable playing on the quarterback's right side, which is not historically a great place to be a pass rusher (as it's much easier to get out of the way of something when you see it coming). At the other DE spot, we had guys like Cullen Jenkins (certainly stout enough, probably not quick enough to be an elite pass rusher), KGB (certainly quick enough to rush the passer, but not stout enough to stop the run), Mike Montgomery (totally average in every way), and really very little developmental talent behind them.
At the DT spot, we had Pickett who was definitely a big strong, 2 gap defensive tackle like Bates wants, but opposite of him? We had Corey Williams (who could shoot a gap as well as any DT in the league, just don't ask him to play 2), Johnny Jolly (inconsistent), Justin Harrell (injured), Cullen Jenkins (aren't we asking him to play a different position?), and Colin Cole (mostly just big, not actually good), and a bunch of nobodies. For all the vaunted depth we had at DT, on most game days we only had about 3-4 guys active.
At the LB spot, certainly we had some good players. Hawk has great instincts, is always around the ball, is a sure tackler, and is pretty good in coverage. He just can't get off a block to save his life. Poppinga has some of the best run fills you'll ever see from a LB, but he was a liability in coverage against many backs and TEs, and he was never all that good about switching gaps. Barnett was a pretty good player all around.
So by my count, to run the 4-3 we were using we needed 2 superstar DEs (we had one), 2 DTs capable of 2-gapping (we had one), and 3 complete players at LB (we had one.)
So just as a hypothesis, our defense played great in 2007 when Jenkins was playing very well, as was Jolly. With both those guys stepping up, we had the DEs we needed and the DTs we needed, and the defense worked well. In 2008, however, Jenkins got hurt, Barnett got hurt, and Jolly regressed and suddenly of the 7 complete players we needed, we were down to 2 or 3.
So am I crazy? Is it possible that we had better personnel for the 3-4 than the 4-3 even before we made the switch, and we were just skeptical because the 4-3 was so familiar?
An interesting thing about the Buffalo game, however, is that the starting defensive lineup contained no players who were not on the roster last year. With as good as our holdover personnel was in the 3-4, and as bad as the defense looked last year, I'd like to pose a question:
"Did we have the wrong defensive personnel for the 4-3 (specifically the Bates 4-3) defense?"
Bear with me a minute. The hallmark of the 3-4 is that it is a defense geared around specialists. You don't expect much in the way pass rush from your defensive lineman, and similarly you don't expect your LBs to be able to regularly fight through blocks from offensive linemen.
The 4-3 defense, however, seems to be a better defense geared around "getting the most out of your superstars." The hallmark of the 4-3 defense was the "superstar defensive end" a titan of a man who is stout enough at the point of attack to stop the run, speedy enough to maintain outside contain, and technique savvy enough to beat the NFL's best pass blockers in order to get to the Quarterback. Anybody who can do this has an impressive resume, and as such people who can do this are few and far between (and are expensive to acquire and keep). Generally, the best pass rushing defensive end plays on the right side (against the left tackle), so as to attack the blind side of the quarterback, while the best run stopping DE plays on the opposite side, expecting more running plays to go his direction. The Bates variant of the 4-3 defense split out the defensive ends very wide in order to help them get more pressure on the QB, as such in order to avoid the middle of the defense being not unlike a sieve, the Bates defense requires not one but two very large defensive tackles capable of playing two gaps. The other notable position of the 4-3 defense is the "superstar linebacker", a man agile enough to run sideline to sideline, quick enough to run with backs and TEs in coverage out of the backfield, technique savvy enough to get off blocks when blitzing, stout enough to not get run over by backs, and smart enough to diagnose plays as soon as they are diagnosable. These players exist, and aren't as rare as your 4-3 DEs (as there are simply more people in the 250 range than in the 270 range), but the problem is that you need to have three of them. Whoever's weakest against the run is going to get run at, and whoever's the worst in coverage is going to get picked on. The Bates defense was particularly bad in terms of this, as the lack of zone coverage meant that linebackers had to cover backs and TEs one on one quite frequently.
So let's look at our personnel historically under the Bates defense, and see if we had the personnel to actually execute it. Most problematically, I think, was the DE situation. We had a great one in Kampman, but he was always most comfortable playing on the quarterback's right side, which is not historically a great place to be a pass rusher (as it's much easier to get out of the way of something when you see it coming). At the other DE spot, we had guys like Cullen Jenkins (certainly stout enough, probably not quick enough to be an elite pass rusher), KGB (certainly quick enough to rush the passer, but not stout enough to stop the run), Mike Montgomery (totally average in every way), and really very little developmental talent behind them.
At the DT spot, we had Pickett who was definitely a big strong, 2 gap defensive tackle like Bates wants, but opposite of him? We had Corey Williams (who could shoot a gap as well as any DT in the league, just don't ask him to play 2), Johnny Jolly (inconsistent), Justin Harrell (injured), Cullen Jenkins (aren't we asking him to play a different position?), and Colin Cole (mostly just big, not actually good), and a bunch of nobodies. For all the vaunted depth we had at DT, on most game days we only had about 3-4 guys active.
At the LB spot, certainly we had some good players. Hawk has great instincts, is always around the ball, is a sure tackler, and is pretty good in coverage. He just can't get off a block to save his life. Poppinga has some of the best run fills you'll ever see from a LB, but he was a liability in coverage against many backs and TEs, and he was never all that good about switching gaps. Barnett was a pretty good player all around.
So by my count, to run the 4-3 we were using we needed 2 superstar DEs (we had one), 2 DTs capable of 2-gapping (we had one), and 3 complete players at LB (we had one.)
So just as a hypothesis, our defense played great in 2007 when Jenkins was playing very well, as was Jolly. With both those guys stepping up, we had the DEs we needed and the DTs we needed, and the defense worked well. In 2008, however, Jenkins got hurt, Barnett got hurt, and Jolly regressed and suddenly of the 7 complete players we needed, we were down to 2 or 3.
So am I crazy? Is it possible that we had better personnel for the 3-4 than the 4-3 even before we made the switch, and we were just skeptical because the 4-3 was so familiar?