Read This, Be Smarter: Switch to 4-3 Under and the Elephant

[pbmax]

If you have been paying attention to PackerRats draft posts, you have noticed that some of Dom Capers new toys do not look the same as the previous models. Are the Packers importing Pete Carrol's defense from USC? Would you feel better about that possibility if you knew that defense has its roots with Monte Kiffin and George Seifert? How about Belicheck using some of the ideas in his hybrid? How about Charles Haley being imported as elephant coach?

Read this article to find out. And do be misled about the article's bright line between the Packer 3-4 and the new positions of the D line in this 4-3. The Packers Eagle defense, used for the past two years, aligns the DLine in the same manner.

http://www.packernet.com/blog/2012/05/01/4-3-under-and-the-elephant-rusher/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[mraynrand]

How about Charles Haley being imported as elephant coach?

http://capitolcommentary.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/0_21_nuke_blast1.jpg


Some of those elephant trainers can be a little nuts

http://www.filmoa.com/img/person/christophwaltz_big.jpg

[smuggler]

Charles Haley is too insane to coach.

[pbmax]

Charles Haley is too insane to coach.

I think he is a coach on the Cowboys, isn't he?

Edit: Apparently not anymore, just 2001-02. He is currently being treated for being bipolar. Not exactly surprised by that.

[pbmax]

My concern with this theoretical switch is depth. If Perry were to be unavailable, who would be the elephant? Or do you switch back to the base 3-4?

And who, if you need two Perry types, would backup Pickett and Raji? That might eliminate the ability to carry 3 bodies at NT/1 gap due to the need to still have a 5 tech. I never realized how much I liked having Howard Green around. Though JSO's Silverstein wrote that Worthy might be able to take a few snaps in the middle.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Thanks for bringing up the elephant in the room pb

[Fritz]

So Chuck Haley is bi-polar...doesn't that qualify him perfectly to be a coach?

On the one hand, Ilike that Dom is not standing still - he's trying to adjust to the "new" NFL, the pass-happy offenses. And I also like that defensive linemen will no longer be asked to simply take up space. I have a nightmare reel of linemen taking up their blocker or two, then AJ Hawk getting stoned by one blocker as he charges up the middle, and CMIII being blocked, successively, by three different players - a tight end, a tackle, a running back. Ugh. So on the one hand I like this move.

On the other hand, I am afeared that we now have defensive guys on the roster who don't fit the new mold, and that the whole thing won't fit together correctly.

[Upnorth]

My concern with this theoretical switch is depth. If Perry were to be unavailable, who would be the elephant? Or do you switch back to the base 3-4?

And who, if you need two Perry types, would backup Pickett and Raji? That might eliminate the ability to carry 3 bodies at NT/1 gap due to the need to still have a 5 tech. I never realized how much I liked having Howard Green around. Though JSO's Silverstein wrote that Worthy might be able to take a few snaps in the middle.

HOwever Capers likes to throw wrinkles at QB's to make them think more. After how effective 09 and 10 were everyone studied his D in the offseason and found ways of defeating it. IF he were to role this out for a handful of snaps a game it will force the QB's to think about one more alignment and how to play it. So now there is 3-4, 2-4-5 3-3-5 and add to it some 4-3 (and a uncommon variant of it) and that equals an off balance QB.

[Lurker64]

If Perry were to be unavailable, who would be the elephant?.

So'oto. Similar body types, and the same style of pass rush will work for both of them. So'oto is just the poor man's Perry.

[3irty1]

This is essentially exactly what the Wade Phillips 3-4 has been. A 3-4 that turns into a 4-3 right after the snap. He typically has a stand-up type DE at OLB like DeMarcus Ware or Mario Williams and a tiny NT like Jay Ratliff.

[woodbuck27]

So Chuck Haley is bi-polar...doesn't that qualify him perfectly to be a coach?

On the one hand, Ilike that Dom is not standing still - he's trying to adjust to the "new" NFL, the pass-happy offenses. And I also like that defensive linemen will no longer be asked to simply take up space. I have a nightmare reel of linemen taking up their blocker or two, then AJ Hawk getting stoned by one blocker as he charges up the middle, and CMIII being blocked, successively, by three different players - a tight end, a tackle, a running back. Ugh. So on the one hand I like this move.

On the other hand, I am afeared that we now have defensive guys on the roster who don't fit the new mold, and that the whole thing won't fit together correctly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Haley

" Haley's supporters, who included the late Bill Walsh, believe his personal accomplishments, especially his record five Super Bowl rings, make him worthy of induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

However, his history of obscene, violent, and mutinous behavior during his playing days has not helped his candidacy. He was one of the fifteen finalists in 2010 and 2011; however, he was not selected.

He was inducted into the Virginia Sports Hall of Fame in 2006.

He was inducted into the College Football Hall of Fame in 2011.

On August 19, 2011, Jerry Jones, owner of the Dallas Cowboys announced that Haley will be enshrined into the prestigious Dallas Cowboys Ring of Honor on November 11, 2011. " Wikipedia

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/dallas/headlines/20100102-With-therapy-grit-ex-4630.ece

http://jmusportsblog.com/?p=157

[pbmax]

HOwever Capers likes to throw wrinkles at QB's to make them think more. After how effective 09 and 10 were everyone studied his D in the offseason and found ways of defeating it. IF he were to role this out for a handful of snaps a game it will force the QB's to think about one more alignment and how to play it. So now there is 3-4, 2-4-5 3-3-5 and add to it some 4-3 (and a uncommon variant of it) and that equals an off balance QB.

Yes and last year he was getting predictable, several teams QBs said what they would do was no surprise, you just had to beat the players. I think he had to scale back with injuries and ineffectiveness.

[pbmax]

This is essentially exactly what the Wade Phillips 3-4 has been. A 3-4 that turns into a 4-3 right after the snap. He typically has a stand-up type DE at OLB like DeMarcus Ware or Mario Williams and a tiny NT like Jay Ratliff.

Does Ware stand up much? Because if that guy does, you can run even more options off it. My memory has Ware's hand on the ground. With an two-point elephant, you can rush from any lane and, like Ware, occasionally jump back to coverage.

[mraynrand]

So'oto. Similar body types, and the same style of pass rush will work for both of them. So'oto is just the poor man's Perry.


Good call. But does So'oto make the squad?

[RashanGary]

I don't consider us a 4-3 under team. We're a hybrid team. 4-2-5 against the run, 2-4-5 against the pass.


THE RUN

We can play anything from goal-line, 3-4, our most used 2-4-5, maybe some extra 3-3-5 and whatever version of dime Capers dreams up. Depending on situation, various packages will be implemented. Pickett is a pure specialty player (run.) Hargrove and Daniels are pure specialty players (pass.) It's the NFL. Teams are multi dimensional with scheme and personnel. The Packers seem to be going that route more on defense (a little more unusual than offense.)

For the sake of time, we'll just look at our highest percentage defense. Against the run, I agree, it's similar to a 4-3 under team. We can mix and match inside players depending on situation. We can be anywhere from really small, to really big inside. Outside, we're small. Perry and Matthews are our DE's. They are going to be asked to set the edge like a DE would. So we're a small, hybrid 4-3 team when it comes to the run. We have so much quickness inside and speed on the edges, there is some advantages, even against the run, but we're giving up size for athleticism.


THE PASS

Here is where I disagree with us being a 4-3 under hybrid team. For one, it would be more like 4-2, but regardless, it's not a 4 man line. Matthews is excellent at covering. Perry is going to be trained in all aspects of OLB. Against the pass, we are extremely versatile and dangerous IMO. Bishop can rush the passer well. Perry should be able to. Our inside guys are being picked based on their pass rush, and Matthews is a stud. If we flush the QB outside, we're so fast on the edges, it's going to be a disaster. We can put Matthews and/or Perry on all out blitzes. We can put Raji and/or whoever else is inside on all out blitzes. We can drop our outside guys, drop our ILBs, play contain with our inside DL and open up some of our ILB blitzes by having more threatening lineman and Perry.

In this way, we're really nothing like a 4-3 team and nothing like a 4-2 nickle team. We're a defense designed to destroy the pass game. Our OLBs are OLBs and they're assignments are very unpredictable. We have a couple studs (52 and 90.) We have some guys with some quickness inside. We have an extra DB (and that extra DB is Woodson who plays a hybrid role.) We're a team build on pass rush, pass coverage and confusion.


Summary

I guess we're a hybrid 4-2/2-4 defense (depending on if it's a run or pass) Woodson is a wrinkle. We're built on speed and quickness. McCarthy has suggested the level of play on offense had some trickle down on how offenses had to attack our defense. It appears to me, the Packers are building their team as a high flying, high scoring offense, damn good ST's, and a defense that causes turnovers and eliminates big plays (making sure teams can't match points with our high flying offense.) Oh, and their built to create turnovers and negative plays on defense above all else.


I get this impression listening to MM and Capers. Preventing big plays and getting after the QB are the 1a and 1b themes from them. Teams attacking differently to keep score is another theme from them. For years, the way to dominant on defense has been to take away the run and get teams one dimensional. It seems like the Packers are using their offenses, 2nd leading scoring team of all time, talent to take away the run, and using that as a way to force teams into one dimensional play. If we can tackle well and get after the passer, this looks like a unique recipe for big-time success.


MM and Capers are both considered among the more creative coaches of our era. To me, this looks like a different build than we've ever seen. It's similar to this, similar to that, but it's unique.

[wist43]

My concern with this theoretical switch is depth. If Perry were to be unavailable, who would be the elephant? Or do you switch back to the base 3-4?

And who, if you need two Perry types, would backup Pickett and Raji? That might eliminate the ability to carry 3 bodies at NT/1 gap due to the need to still have a 5 tech. I never realized how much I liked having Howard Green around. Though JSO's Silverstein wrote that Worthy might be able to take a few snaps in the middle.

Where I think we're at now in building our front seven, is that we have a foundation to build upon. We still need more talent, especially at LB, but guys we were counting on to eat up snaps last year, likely won't even be on the team this year.

If you're going to count on Worthy and Pickett outside, I'd like one more fat guy to spell the nose, and keep Raji fresh.

I think the number of DL kept on the roster for an attacking 3-4 should be 7; maybe 6, but that takes flexibility away, and adds to snaps of everyone else; LB's 7-8 - depending ST's needs; subpackages; development; etc...

Since Dom isn't locked in to a static base philosophy, the scheme and packages put on the field, can remain constantly flexible. I think TT did a great job of giving Dom some players that possess differing strenth's, but can all contribute to base packages - even if not ideally. Would much rather see Daniels on the field at end, than endless snaps of Raji, Matthews, 3 other LB's, and 6 DB's.

As you're talking about the 4-3... sure, we could run some base 4-3. Wouldn't want to see it on the field a whole hell of a lot, but if we have the talent to pressure the QB, it makes it tough on opposing offenses. Scheming for the Packers last year was easy business... find Matthews and Raji, double them up, and move the chains and flip the scoreboard.

We still need more talent in our front seven... but this draft at least provided us a foundation to build on.

I just found this McCarthy quote on CBS...

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/teams/page/GB/green-bay-packers

McCarthy says defensive draftees will give Packers more options
by James Carlton, CBSSports.com

Coach Mike McCarthy on how the six defensive players drafted last weekend can help the Packers: "It will give us more versatility in terms of the different defensive personnel groups; playing more people than in the past. ... The ability to get more athletic and the ability to have the pass rush from inside and outside was a focus.

[RashanGary]

Face it guys, we're not a 3-4 team. We're a 2-4 team. We're the new breed of defense that counters the new breed of offense where the QB wears a red shirt and CB's can't touch receivers.

You can say we're a base 3-4 team, but that's assuming 2 WRs are on the field. Reality is, there are usually 3 WR's on the field. Base offense is no longer what base offense has been for 30+ years. Base offense is now 3 WR sets or 2 WRs and a star pass catching TE. You're more likely to see 4 WR's than you are a traditional offensive package. Shit, 3-4 is becoming a sub package in run situations, and that's it.

The defense we play most is nickle. That's our new base. You can call things whatever you want, but the reality is, the defense we start the game with, the defense we play most throughout the game and the defense we finish the game with is 2-4. Our base defense is nickle. Fact. If you call it anything else, you're stuck in the past and unable to realize the football world has changed.

[mraynrand]

Face it guys, we're not a 3-4 team. We're a 2-4 team. We're the new breed of defense that counters the new breed of offense where the QB wears a red shirt and CB's can't touch receivers.

You can say we're a base 3-4 team, but that's assuming 2 WRs are on the field. Reality is, there are usually 3 WR's on the field. Base offense is no longer what base offense has been for 30+ years. Base offense is now 3 WR sets or 2 WRs and a star pass catching TE. You're more likely to see 4 WR's than you are a traditional offensive package. Shit, 3-4 is becoming a sub package in run situations, and that's it.

The defense we play most is nickle. That's our new base. You can call things whatever you want, but the reality is, the defense we start the game with, the defense we play most throughout the game and the defense we finish the game with is 2-4. Our base defense is nickle. Fact. If you call it anything else, you're stuck in the past and unable to realize the football world has changed.


Now that I'm fully awake, I feel prepared to face the modern world.

[Smidgeon]

Face it guys, we're not a 3-4 team. We're a 2-4 team. We're the new breed of defense that counters the new breed of offense where the QB wears a red shirt and CB's can't touch receivers.

You can say we're a base 3-4 team, but that's assuming 2 WRs are on the field. Reality is, there are usually 3 WR's on the field. Base offense is no longer what base offense has been for 30+ years. Base offense is now 3 WR sets or 2 WRs and a star pass catching TE. You're more likely to see 4 WR's than you are a traditional offensive package. Shit, 3-4 is becoming a sub package in run situations, and that's it.

The defense we play most is nickle. That's our new base. You can call things whatever you want, but the reality is, the defense we start the game with, the defense we play most throughout the game and the defense we finish the game with is 2-4. Our base defense is nickle. Fact. If you call it anything else, you're stuck in the past and unable to realize the football world has changed.

Yup.

[pbmax]

Face it guys, we're not a 3-4 team. We're a 2-4 team. We're the new breed of defense that counters the new breed of offense where the QB wears a red shirt and CB's can't touch receivers.

You can say we're a base 3-4 team, but that's assuming 2 WRs are on the field. Reality is, there are usually 3 WR's on the field. Base offense is no longer what base offense has been for 30+ years. Base offense is now 3 WR sets or 2 WRs and a star pass catching TE. You're more likely to see 4 WR's than you are a traditional offensive package. Shit, 3-4 is becoming a sub package in run situations, and that's it.

The defense we play most is nickle. That's our new base. You can call things whatever you want, but the reality is, the defense we start the game with, the defense we play most throughout the game and the defense we finish the game with is 2-4. Our base defense is nickle. Fact. If you call it anything else, you're stuck in the past and unable to realize the football world has changed.

I will believe you when they carry 4 D lineman and 12 DBs on the roster. The roster will be built for 3-4 or maybe 4-3 hybrid. 2-4 is still the sub package as far as roster construction is concerned.

[wist43]

I will believe you when they carry 4 D lineman and 12 DBs on the roster. The roster will be built for 3-4 or maybe 4-3 hybrid. 2-4 is still the sub package as far as roster construction is concerned.

You're going to see a lot of rush packages out of a 3 man line... a lot less 2-anything. Opposite Matthews, at least on paper, TT really solidified a pretty decent increase in pressure everywhere else - espcially inside pass rush.

A base nickel pass rush of Matthews, Worthy, Raji, Daniels, and Perry looks pretty good on paper.

[mraynrand]

A base nickel pass rush of Matthews, Worthy, Raji, Daniels, and Perry looks pretty good on paper.

yes it does.

One reason the Packers played so much nickel in the past was to put Woodson on the field. He was good enough to tackle like a LB and cover the slot guy or the TE. He's slipped in both areas - enough that it will be really interesting to see what the hell they do with him. I don't like him at all lining up against other team's #1 or #2 WRs on the edge any more.

[Iron Mike]

IIRC, didn't Tim Harris get an insane amount of sacks in the "Elephant" position???

[3irty1]

You're going to see a lot of rush packages out of a 3 man line... a lot less 2-anything. Opposite Matthews, at least on paper, TT really solidified a pretty decent increase in pressure everywhere else - espcially inside pass rush.

A base nickel pass rush of Matthews, Worthy, Raji, Daniels, and Perry looks pretty good on paper.

So 12 men on the field then?

[Zool]

So 12 men on the field then?

3-3-5

[Pugger]

If properly treated one can function just fine if you have manic depression/bi-polarism. I have a relative with this condition and only rarely does she need to be seen by her doctor if she takes her medication.

[Fritz]

True, true, Pugs. My earlier comment re Charles Haley was aimed more at coaches than at people suffering from the bi-polar condition....

As for the 3-3 thing, couldn't Matthews also operate as the "elephant" if Perry is not in the game? You'd have Matthews, Bishop, and maybe the Manning kid (apparently he can cover) on the field, possibly.

I would think moving Matthews all over would be good for him. And bad for opposing teams.

[sharpe1027]

My take is that rather than try to figure out how to use players in a particular scheme, Dom figures out ways to get his best players on the field as much as possible.

As far as being a 2-4 instead of a 3-4 team, that's probably true of last year, but it's been different every year under Capers. A few years back they trotted out 5 linebackers, but I haven't seen it since. I think the 2-4 may have been more a product of injuries and lack of talent on the DL than anything.

It will be interesting to see what they come up with for this new set of players.

[Scott Campbell]

A few years back they trotted out 5 linebackers, but I haven't seen it since.


Wasn't that the "Psycho" package?

Gimmick. Just like when Shermy used run U-bacon with Kevin Berry as the 6th offensive lineman.

[Fritz]

Gimmicks are changes for novelty's sake. I think Dom is trying to figure out the Brave New World of the offensive NFL.

[sharpe1027]

Wasn't that the "Psycho" package?

Gimmick. Just like when Shermy used run U-bacon with Kevin Berry as the 6th offensive lineman.

Using only 2 down lineman was a gimmick too. Anything that goes against the conventional wisdom can be called a gimmick, until it works and sticks.

[Lurker64]

Using only 2 down lineman was a gimmick too. Anything that goes against the conventional wisdom can be called a gimmick, until it works and sticks.

Well a 2-4-5 nickel from a 3-4 base is really not that different from a 4-2-5 nickel from a 4-3 base when you bring in pass rushing specialists, or your DEs are slightly undersized. In fact, if you allow for zone blitzing, a 2-4-5 nickel is exactly the same as a 4-2-5 nickel with undersized DEs, it's just that the edge rushers line up in a 2 point versus a 3 point stance. But even that's not necessarily the case since in Capers' first year in Green Bay he would run a 3-3-5 nickel where Kampman got to rush with his hand down.

The 1-5-5 defensive package is a little more exotic though, but the Bellichick's defense during the glory years would run it from time to time, and they would even run a 0-6-5. These sorts of packages are effective inversely proportional to the amount you run it, since the whole idea is to promote confusion in the offensive line. So it's not something you want to run more than a handful of downs per game.

[Guiness]

Well a 2-4-5 nickel from a 3-4 base is really not that different from a 4-2-5 nickel from a 4-3 base when you bring in pass rushing specialists, or your DEs are slightly undersized. In fact, if you allow for zone blitzing, a 2-4-5 nickel is exactly the same as a 4-2-5 nickel with undersized DEs, it's just that the edge rushers line up in a 2 point versus a 3 point stance. But even that's not necessarily the case since in Capers' first year in Green Bay he would run a 3-3-5 nickel where Kampman got to rush with his hand down.

The 1-5-5 defensive package is a little more exotic though, but the Bellichick's defense during the glory years would run it from time to time, and they would even run a 0-6-5. These sorts of packages are effective inversely proportional to the amount you run it, since the whole idea is to promote confusion in the offensive line. So it's not something you want to run more than a handful of downs per game.

If that. I remember a game where they used it with Cullen Jenkins, lined up at 1gap. He shot through and got a sack. They used it twice later, and got gashed for long gains on the ground both times.

[sharpe1027]

Well a 2-4-5 nickel from a 3-4 base is really not that different from a 4-2-5 nickel from a 4-3 base when you bring in pass rushing specialists, or your DEs are slightly undersized. In fact, if you allow for zone blitzing, a 2-4-5 nickel is exactly the same as a 4-2-5 nickel with undersized DEs, it's just that the edge rushers line up in a 2 point versus a 3 point stance. But even that's not necessarily the case since in Capers' first year in Green Bay he would run a 3-3-5 nickel where Kampman got to rush with his hand down.

The 1-5-5 defensive package is a little more exotic though, but the Bellichick's defense during the glory years would run it from time to time, and they would even run a 0-6-5. These sorts of packages are effective inversely proportional to the amount you run it, since the whole idea is to promote confusion in the offensive line. So it's not something you want to run more than a handful of downs per game.

You say potato, I say potato. I am not trying to argue that the pyscho package is less or more exotic. My point is that it seems like they come up with schemes to match their players. They ran a ton of 2-4-5 last year, instead of a 3-3-5. Maybe it was as much about drop off after Picket and Raji as anything else.

[pbmax]

yes it does.

One reason the Packers played so much nickel in the past was to put Woodson on the field. He was good enough to tackle like a LB and cover the slot guy or the TE. He's slipped in both areas - enough that it will be really interesting to see what the hell they do with him. I don't like him at all lining up against other team's #1 or #2 WRs on the edge any more.

And thus was Hayward drafted. Though I don't expect to see Charles' snaps decrease, at least not early in the season.

[RashanGary]

They'll get their best 11, but with the multiple WR sets being the base offenses, nickle is going to be the trend of the future I'll bet. Capers is just ahead of the game.

3-3-5
2-4-5

These probably the most prominent.


DL are the rarest, most impactful players on the D. I'll bet the Packers always put a premium on those positions, whether they play mostly nickle or not. Having more just changes the type of nickle we play and situation also dictates.

Regardless, we're a nickle team.