Jeremy Thompson

[wist43]

I don't see Thompson, Mongomery, Hunter, or Kampman at LB... none of 'em.

I've been wanting to switch to a 3-4, but with what I'm hearing out of the front office, I'm looking at it like a case of "be careful what you wish for".

The Packers have exactly zero 3-4 LB's... maybe Poppinga, Hawk could be pedestrian in a 3-4. None of the other DL/LB fit. Next year could be a mess, unless TT stands up and admits he doesn't have the right personnel... and even if he does, the transition will take at least a couple 2-3 years.

They're starting with nothing.

[Gunakor]

I'm baffled at the theories I see in the forum. The change in scheme will turn Kampman into a bum, and J. Thompson and J. Hunter are going to be gangbusters.

I get it, there are obviously differences between being an upright rush linebacker and a defensive end. But its still football, and they are generally matched up against the same offensive players. Poppinga was not much better when they put him in a three point stance than he performed as a blitzer.

I don't believe being a DE in a 3-4 is drastically different from the responsibilities of a 4-3 DE. The experts here are greatly exaggerating a small kernel of truth.

3-4 DE's are not pass rushers. They are more like 4-3 DT's meant to clog holes and eat blocks than 4-3 DE's meant to pressure the QB. This isn't to say that Kampy couldn't do it, but it's a different job than a 4-3 DE. I think Kampy would be a better OLB in a 3-4 than a DE, yet I still have my doubts about him as a linebacker. He's the one I worry about the most in this transition, but I'm sure a guy like Dom Capers will find a way to use him effectively.

[Fritz]

I don't see Thompson, Mongomery, Hunter, or Kampman at LB... none of 'em.

I've been wanting to switch to a 3-4, but with what I'm hearing out of the front office, I'm looking at it like a case of "be careful what you wish for".

The Packers have exactly zero 3-4 LB's... maybe Poppinga, Hawk could be pedestrian in a 3-4. None of the other DL/LB fit. Next year could be a mess, unless TT stands up and admits he doesn't have the right personnel... and even if he does, the transition will take at least a couple 2-3 years.

They're starting with nothing.

Wist, maybe you could use a picture of Eeyore as your avatar! You got what you wanted....but you'renot happy.

[Lurker64]

Wist-

You can't hang the "we don't have the personnel for the 3-4" thing on Thompson. Which coaches get hired, and which schemes are implemented are the decisions of the coaches, not the general manager. If we switch to the 3-4, it's because McCarthy and Capers wanted to and they thought we had the personnel in place to do so. If we don't, it's because McCarthy and Capers are wrong and they're hanging the responsibility to correct their mistake on Thompson.

But, like Capers said in the press conference yesterday, this team is not run by abject morons. They're not going to run any particular variant of the 3-4 that is inappropriate to the personnel, and what the personnel can do will, to a large extent, dictate what they run.

That being said, however, it's not as though there's one true kind of 3-4 linebacker. Some variants of the 3-4 scheme have different responsibilities for the LBs than others, just like how some variants of the 4-3 scheme have different demands for their LBs. You wouldn't want to take an average tampa 2 MLB and move him to the Bates system where the MLB is the key part of the defense.

[wist43]

Wist-

You can't hang the "we don't have the personnel for the 3-4" thing on Thompson. Which coaches get hired, and which schemes are implemented are the decisions of the coaches, not the general manager. If we switch to the 3-4, it's because McCarthy and Capers wanted to and they thought we had the personnel in place to do so. If we don't, it's because McCarthy and Capers are wrong and they're hanging the responsibility to correct their mistake on Thompson.

But, like Capers said in the press conference yesterday, this team is not run by abject morons. They're not going to run any particular variant of the 3-4 that is inappropriate to the personnel, and what the personnel can do will, to a large extent, dictate what they run.

That being said, however, it's not as though there's one true kind of 3-4 linebacker. Some variants of the 3-4 scheme have different responsibilities for the LBs than others, just like how some variants of the 4-3 scheme have different demands for their LBs. You wouldn't want to take an average tampa 2 MLB and move him to the Bates system where the MLB is the key part of the defense.

What concerns me is I hear a lot of rhetoric to the effect that they are going to take their mediocre 4-3 personnel, and mistcast them in a 3-4.

Unless TT acknowledges that he doesn't have the players needed to run a 3-4, then they are doomed in the short term. Even best case scenario I think they're going to have a lot of problems in the short term.

If that is the case, and there is a lot of pressure to produce, and there will be... I can easily see the "hybrid" 4-3/3-4 very quickly morphing right back into a 4-3 b/c that is what the personnel is best suited to.

With their current personnel, I can't see them effectively running a 3-4, they simply don't have the talent at LB. This is a huge off season for TT, and I'm skeptical that he will sell out to outfit the defense with 3-4 personnel.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

With their current personnel, I can't see them effectively running a 3-4, they simply don't have the talent at LB. This is a huge off season for TT, and I'm skeptical that he will sell out to outfit the defense with 3-4 personnel.

This also concerns me the most and is the reason I want an overhaul on the front seven. Am still concerned about Barnett and the OLB positions. Am ok with Hawk inside and Kampman outside, but what to see a couple more dominate linebackers to make the system work the best it can. This looks like a good year to get free agent help. I also hope TT doesn't just think that our personal completely fits the 3-4.

[mraynrand]

You wouldn't want to take an average tampa 2 MLB and move him to the Bates system where the MLB is the key part of the defense.

Could you expand on this? How do the roles of the MLB differ exactly between the Bates defense and the Tampa 2?

[Zool]

You wouldn't want to take an average tampa 2 MLB and move him to the Bates system where the MLB is the key part of the defense.

Could you expand on this? How do the roles of the MLB differ exactly between the Bates defense and the Tampa 2?

I might be wrong on this so let me know, but in a 2 deep zone I think the MLB has more coverage responsibility than the Bates scheme.

The Bates MLB is a read and react position. Running plays the OLB's funnel the RB's back to the middle towards the MLB. On passing downs the MLB reads the QB and has RB responsibility in the flats.

In the Tampa 2 the OLB's are the stars. In the Bates scheme its the MLB who is the star.

[Lurker64]

What concerns me is I hear a lot of rhetoric to the effect that they are going to take their mediocre 4-3 personnel, and mistcast them in a 3-4.

Unless TT acknowledges that he doesn't have the players needed to run a 3-4, then they are doomed in the short term. Even best case scenario I think they're going to have a lot of problems in the short term.

If that is the case, and there is a lot of pressure to produce, and there will be... I can easily see the "hybrid" 4-3/3-4 very quickly morphing right back into a 4-3 b/c that is what the personnel is best suited to.

With their current personnel, I can't see them effectively running a 3-4, they simply don't have the talent at LB. This is a huge off season for TT, and I'm skeptical that he will sell out to outfit the defense with 3-4 personnel.

I think what's concerning you is that you assume that they're going to be running a variant of the 3-4 for which their personnel are miscast, when there exist variants of the 3-4 for which their personnel are not miscast.

There are basically two versions of the 3-4 defense:
1) The Fairbanks-Bullough 3-4 system.
2) The Phillips 3-4 system.

In the Fairbanks-Bullough 3-4 defense (so named for Chuck Fairbanks and Hank Bullough), each of the defensive linemen is responsible for the two gaps on each side of the man in front of them. This defense requires your DL to be especially stout, capable of holding the point in order to allow the linebackers to make plays. This defense is the most flexible version of the 3-4, but also the most conservative as it tends to emphasize discipline and physicality over mobility and playmaking. As such, it tends towards large ILBs who are exceptionally physical, and smart quick OLBs, in addition to requiring some outstanding defensive linemen. This is essentially the 3-4 equivalent of the "bend but don't break defense". The Patriots, Browns, and Jets use this system.

In the Phillips 3-4 defense (so named for Bum Phillips). In the Phillips 3-4, the defensive linemen are responsible for only one gap in the offensive line (just like most 4-3 linemen are). The defensive linemen for the Phillips 3-4 need to be more agile, and aggressive than the Fairbanks-Bullough 3-4, since the defense gives more support by the LBs at the line of scrimmage. This defense requires more aggressive, athletic, and mobile players inside to provide a variety of slants, gap charges, and loops designed to get directly to the QB or other ballcarrier. This defense requires smart, quick, attacking ILBs unlike the physicality and discipline the Fairbanks-Bullough needs. By contrast, the Phillips 3-4 requires somewhat stouter OLBs than the alternative. In modern times, the Phillips 3-4 has basically enveloped the 3-4 Zone Blitz that Dick LeBeau created, and tends to be the more aggressive, attacking 3-4 defense (which will both force more plays, and give up more plays). This is the 3-4 defense that teams like Dallas, and San Diego run, and Pittsburgh runs a similar version more directly evolved from the LeBeau Zone Blitz "Blitzburgh" 3-4.

So I think it would be fair to say that the Packers have woefully inadequate personnel for the Fairbanks-Bullough system (though none of the three teams running it, did particularly well on defense in 2008), but we're not many players (but a lot of reps) away from having the personnel to run a Phillips or LeBeau 3-4 defense. Basically, we need some DL helps, and we basically already have the LBs, but we knew that going into the offseason (when we didn't expect the 3-4.)

So we can't play New England's version of the 3-4, but with a few draft picks and a few Free Agents, we can probably run Dallas's or Pittsburgh's. (Baltimore and San Francisco, notable among 3-4 teams not mentioned, run a hybrid 3-4/4-3).

[swede]

The experts here are greatly exaggerating a small kernel of truth.

Leave Al Gore out of this.

[Waldo]

One thing about San Fran's defense that was noted was after the firing of Nolan (while intrigued by the 3-4, I did NOT want him) the defense drastically improved. Nolan was running a hybrid thing also using a lot of big nickel (3 S's, 2 CB's), and calling a widely varied huge playbook. When Singletary took over, he greatly simplified it and stuck to a basic one gap 3-4 and varied the LB blitzing. SF went from having one of the worst defenses in the league to one of the best overnight with the simple change of playcaller.

One thing about the Lebeau zone blitz 3-4, Capers developed a lot of the early concepts with Mora. When he took over as DC in Pittsburgh, the full zone blitz 3-4 was developed by the team of Cowher (HC), Capers (DC), and Lebeau (Secondary Coach). Lebeau however has continued its evolution over the last decade since Capers left. While Lebeau widely gets the credit for it nowadays, Mora, Capers, and Cowher also played pivotal roles in its development.

[Waldo]

The way I see it, a 1 gap 3-4 is quite similar to a 4-3. The main personnel differences being that the SLB and DE are essentially the same type of player, a combination of both, a pass rusher that dabbles in in-space linebacker play and is more stout against the run than the average 4-3 SLB. Other than that, though the presnap alignement is different, once the line executes the slant into the gap it looks exactly like a 4-3 with the SLB lined up over the TE.

Basically a 4-3 that doesn't declare the direction of alignment of its line until after the snap.

[vince]

Waldo and Lurker,

I presume you guys see Pickett at NT, Jenkins at DE, and Kampy at SOLB... Given current personnel, who do you see stepping in at the WOLB and other DE spots?

[Waldo]

With current personnel only I would suspect Jolly or Harrell mans the other DE position, Kampman is the WOLB, and Pops or Thompson is the SOLB. Kamp at SOLB and Thompson at WOLB would not surprise me either, though right now Kamp is our best rusher thus best suited to WOLB.

IMO we are going to try to snag a WOLB in the top 2 rounds of the draft (or Suggs), putting Kamp at SOLB (even though he's a DE, though limited he does have more pro coverage experience and field/play awareness than a rookie would), and will try to target one of the DE's available in FA to start over Jolly. There are two FA 3-4 DE's coming up, both are expected to hit FA, and most 3-4 teams have little money or aren't big shoppers. I think us and Denver, plus maybe a handful of 4-3 teams will primarily be competing for Canty and Olshanky, we've got a good shot of landing one if TT wants to, a good add if we want at least 1 person in our starting front 7 to have experience playing in a 3-4, a valuable resource for teammates and coaches.

[rbaloha1]

The gap assignments are essentially the same.

Its the responsibilities that differ greatly. For example des and the ngs are required to drop back into coverage sometimes during zone blitzes.

Again, the current personnel imo does not fit the zone blitzing 3-4 scheme. Requiring some of the current personnel to drop back into coverage is scary.

However the draft and free agency are filled with players fitting Caper's scheme.

The 64 million dollar question is how quickly will the current players mesh with the newcomers to create a dominant 3-4 zone blitz scheme.