CNNSI.com Take on Switch to 3-4

[sharpe1027]

I tend to agree with chewy about Kamp... I see him as strictly a 4-3 end, and since he is the best player on the defense, I don't see how they can better utilize him as a LB. It just isn't a good fit for Kamp.

Same can be said for Hawk and Barnett... just not good fits for a 3-4 scheme.

So those are 3 of your highest paid, highest drafted guys on that side of the ball, and to make them fit a 3-4, you have to apologize all day long... so, given that they have announced that they will be running a hybrid, as I've said, I can easily see where that "hybrid" morphs right back into a base 4-3, simply b/c that's where the Packers are invested.

Square pegs in round holes... Unless TT throws caution to the wind and sells out in an attempt to acquire true 3-4 personnel... which of course, he's not going to do.

Add it all up, and I'm expecting a lot more 4-3, than 3-4.

I agree that you don't force players fit a scheme that they are not capable of succeeding in. You design your schemes with your players in mind. That, however, doesn't necessarily mean a 4-3. I am pretty sure that there plenty of adjustments that they can make within a 3-4 to account for their personnel.

[Harlan Huckleby]

It's always interesting to listen to former players' comments. Some know what they are talking about, some just seem to want to talk. I haven't heard enough of Chmura to know where he falls, but from what little I have heard, he seems to always be negative about the Packers. What do you think, HH? Do you hear him often?

I hear him often, he's a very down-to-earth, smart guy. I suppose overall he is a little negative towards the packers, although not like Harry Sydney.

Will Kampman be worse than Poppinga as a linebacker in a 3-4? I'm not sure. Poppinga is a D-lineman converted to linebacker.

I think the thing for Kampman is to lose 10 pounds in the offseason so he can play linebacker. IF that doesn't work in minicamp, he needs to gain-back 30 pounds so they can try him over the tackle. Have the bags of reeses cups and frozen custard ready-to-go just in case.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Most of the coaches (even retired ones) say there are more players available overall for a 3-4 than for a 4-3, so how does the fact that 11 of 32 teams will be running the 3-4 hurt the Packers? They would still seem to be better off than having to look for players in a 4-3, if the coaches are to be believed.

maybe this is true. But it has to be easier to acquire big DEs when the 3-4 is rare.

[Patler]

Most of the coaches (even retired ones) say there are more players available overall for a 3-4 than for a 4-3, so how does the fact that 11 of 32 teams will be running the 3-4 hurt the Packers? They would still seem to be better off than having to look for players in a 4-3, if the coaches are to be believed.

maybe this is true. But it has to be easier to acquire big DEs when the 3-4 is rare.

It has been interesting hearing and reading what the coaches have to say about it. For the 3-4 DEs they all say you can use the DTs that many teams have who are decent but not great in a 4-3, and for the OLBs you use the "tweeners" that are so abundant, too big and/or too slow for 4-3 linebackers and too small for 4-3 DEs. The rank and file won't be all pros, but at least serviceable. So many of the 3-4 proponents say it uses the players that are common, whereas the 4-3 uses too many that are uncommon. I don't know, but sometimes they make sense.

I have heard/read a lot of comments from coaches that the hardest position to fill is the 4-3 DE. There just aren't a lot of good ones available. Interestingly, GB had at least one in Kampman, and maybe one in Jenkins; so maybe now wasn't the time to switch if they had players for the two hardest positions to fill????

[Waldo]

Most of the coaches (even retired ones) say there are more players available overall for a 3-4 than for a 4-3, so how does the fact that 11 of 32 teams will be running the 3-4 hurt the Packers? They would still seem to be better off than having to look for players in a 4-3, if the coaches are to be believed.

maybe this is true. But it has to be easier to acquire big DEs when the 3-4 is rare.

It has been interesting hearing and reading what the coaches have to say about it. For the 3-4 DEs they all say you can use the DTs that many teams have who are decent but not great in a 4-3, and for the OLBs you use the "tweeners" that are so abundant, too big and/or too slow for 4-3 linebackers and too small for 4-3 DEs. The rank and file won't be all pros, but at least serviceable. So many of the 3-4 proponents say it uses the players that are common, whereas the 4-3 uses too many that are uncommon. I don't know, but sometimes they make sense.

I have heard/read a lot of comments from coaches that the hardest position to fill is the 4-3 DE. There just aren't a lot of good ones available. Interestingly, GB had at least one in Kampman, and maybe one in Jenkins; so maybe now wasn't the time to switch if they had players for the two hardest positions to fill????

To use an analogy from the other side of the ball, a 4-3 is a lot like Dallas' offense, it needs stars to work at a high level, a 3-4 is a lot like MM's offense, a conglomeration of a wide variety of utility players makes it run at a high level, the more varied the utility players, the better.

The 4-3 needs all in one wonders. DE's that are studs against the run and pass, tackles that are stout at the POA, take on double teams, and can get to the passer. Linebackers that are thumpers that can cover. The one gap 3-4 can utilize a wider variety of players because it doesn't need all in one players. That is why it is called a specialists defense. 1 cover LB (WILB), 1 thumper LB (SILB), one pass rusher (WOLB), one pass rusher that can cover a bit (SOLB), one big blocker (NT), and 2 DE's that are stout in 1 on 1 blocking, but can bring a pass rush. Most players are better at one of these skills than the others, so they naturally align with one of the positions. The 4-3 needs guys that are good at everything, they are much harder to find. 3-4 guys don't need to be good at all skills, just excel at one and be acceptable at others. When you read draft scouting reports, it never says "4-3 player only" whereas you always see "bit of a tweener, better off in a 3-4".

[DonHutson]

If Capers can't find a way to use Kampman we hired the wrong guy. Capers and McCarthy talked defensive philosophy and personnel for two days before any job offer was made. If Capers take on the team after those two days was that none of the personnel would work in his scheme, then A) McCarthy probably wouldn't have hired him, and B) Capers likely wouldn't have taken the job.

How many LB's in the NFL are great at everything? Blitzing, shedding blocks, reading plays, tackling, dropping into coverage? If there's any you could count them on one hand. The rest, the defensive coaches scheme to augment their strengths and limit their weaknesses. If Capers is good at his job, players won't regularly be asked to do jobs they can't perform.

Kampman has done nothing but bust his ass to do whatever was asked of him. He's always performed at a high level. I'm not worried about him at all.

As for the scheme, frankly I'm getting sick of hearing about it. The D didn't suck last year because of the scheme. It sucked because nobody could execute the scheme with any consistency. I didn't want Sanders gone because he used a 4-3. I wanted him gone because three years into his regime, players were still dazed and confused regarding their assignments.

Capers runs a 3-4? Great, whatever. If it's going to work, it will work because he and his staff are effective teachers who can get the players to do their jobs. You can win with a 4-3. You can win with a 3-4. You can't win with a bunch of veteren players running around like headless chickens because they don't know what the hell to do.

[Farley Face]

[quote="DonHutson"]If Capers can't find a way to use Kampman we hired the wrong guy.

Agreed.

[Harlan Huckleby]

If Capers can't find a way to use Kampman we hired the wrong guy.

Agreed.

But what if Kampman is just OK at linebacker, and just OK playing straight-up on the tackle? That is entirely possible. He would be worth more to the team in a trade. A trade of one player is not the end of the world.

I don't understand your thinking at all. I suppose you are just expressing your fan attachment to Aaron Kampman.

To those of you who are convinced that if Kampman can't fit-in it isn't due to Kampman's limitations: which position do you forsee Kampman playing?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think he's saying that Kampman will find a way to be more than just ok.

[steve823]

Dont forgot our Lbs will be better. Im confident that Green will bring the intensity that they need and will help them develop.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think he's saying that Kampman will find a way to be more than just ok.

OK, the people who believe so strongly that Kampman can succeed in 3-4 ought to at least be able to name a position! It might even help Aaron out, he needs to know now whether he should be gaining or losing weight.

I think Leoroy Butler is a valid comparison. He was a hall of fame player at safety (well, GBHF, at least ) I don't think he would be any more than good had he stayed at CB his whole career. The S position maximized his unique talents.

I was totally on the "don't worry, be happy" bandwagon at first, just because Kampman improved so much in his time in the NFL, perhaps he can adapt to this challenge. But after thinking about Chewy's explanation, Kampman won't be as good in 3-4, that's for sure, its only a matter of how much the drop off will be. Trade him.

[wist43]

I understand the mindset which says, "let's put lipstick on this pig"... but you guys are really reaching to say that the current personnel will excel in a 3-4.

They were average to below average in a 4-3, which is the base defense they were drafted for... almost to a man, none of them are a good fit for a 3-4.

Which brings me to my point about Kampman and Capers... no, I don't think Capers is an idiot, and he will lineup with what he thinks gives him the best chance to succeed... given the current personnel, that has to be a 4-3, with Kampman's hand on the ground; unless, as i said, TT sells out and turns over the defensive side of the ball at warp speed - which I don't think he will do.

If the Packers stand pat on defense, which is possible, they may enjoy some initial success at the beginning of next season, but as teams get more film of how Capers is employing the 3-4, I would expect that teams will eventually begin to put up big numbers and them, and Capers will be forced to go back to what the personnel are best suited for, i.e. a 4-3.

[BZnDallas]

If Capers can't find a way to use Kampman we hired the wrong guy. Capers and McCarthy talked defensive philosophy and personnel for two days before any job offer was made. If Capers take on the team after those two days was that none of the personnel would work in his scheme, then A) McCarthy probably wouldn't have hired him, and B) Capers likely wouldn't have taken the job.

How many LB's in the NFL are great at everything? Blitzing, shedding blocks, reading plays, tackling, dropping into coverage? If there's any you could count them on one hand. The rest, the defensive coaches scheme to augment their strengths and limit their weaknesses. If Capers is good at his job, players won't regularly be asked to do jobs they can't perform.

Kampman has done nothing but bust his ass to do whatever was asked of him. He's always performed at a high level. I'm not worried about him at all.

As for the scheme, frankly I'm getting sick of hearing about it. The D didn't suck last year because of the scheme. It sucked because nobody could execute the scheme with any consistency. I didn't want Sanders gone because he used a 4-3. I wanted him gone because three years into his regime, players were still dazed and confused regarding their assignments.

Capers runs a 3-4? Great, whatever. If it's going to work, it will work because he and his staff are effective teachers who can get the players to do their jobs. You can win with a 4-3. You can win with a 3-4. You can't win with a bunch of veteren players running around like headless chickens because they don't know what the hell to do.

HERE HERE!!!!

[sharpe1027]

I understand the mindset which says, "let's put lipstick on this pig"... but you guys are really reaching to say that the current personnel will excel in a 3-4.

They were average to below average in a 4-3, which is the base defense they were drafted for... almost to a man, none of them are a good fit for a 3-4.

Which brings me to my point about Kampman and Capers... no, I don't think Capers is an idiot, and he will lineup with what he thinks gives him the best chance to succeed... given the current personnel, that has to be a 4-3, with Kampman's hand on the ground; unless, as i said, TT sells out and turns over the defensive side of the ball at warp speed - which I don't think he will do.

If the Packers stand pat on defense, which is possible, they may enjoy some initial success at the beginning of next season, but as teams get more film of how Capers is employing the 3-4, I would expect that teams will eventually begin to put up big numbers and them, and Capers will be forced to go back to what the personnel are best suited for, i.e. a 4-3.

Wow, that is a pessimistic view of things. Ever consider that some of those players are actually suited better for 3-4? Not to mention that the differences between the schemes causes much of what is perceived to be different skill-set requirements. If a player is allowed to cut loose and rush off the edge most of the time in a first scheme (4-3), that player is going to appear to be a better pass-rusher than a player that is asked to take occupy a lineman first and foremost. The same exact player will appear to have two different skill sets.

[Zool]

I understand the mindset which says, "let's put lipstick on this pig"... but you guys are really reaching to say that the current personnel will excel in a 3-4.

They were average to below average in a 4-3, which is the base defense they were drafted for... almost to a man, none of them are a good fit for a 3-4.

Which brings me to my point about Kampman and Capers... no, I don't think Capers is an idiot, and he will lineup with what he thinks gives him the best chance to succeed... given the current personnel, that has to be a 4-3, with Kampman's hand on the ground; unless, as i said, TT sells out and turns over the defensive side of the ball at warp speed - which I don't think he will do.

If the Packers stand pat on defense, which is possible, they may enjoy some initial success at the beginning of next season, but as teams get more film of how Capers is employing the 3-4, I would expect that teams will eventually begin to put up big numbers and them, and Capers will be forced to go back to what the personnel are best suited for, i.e. a 4-3.

Wow, that is a pessimistic view of things. Ever consider that some of those players are actually suited better for 3-4? Not to mention that the differences between the schemes causes much of what is perceived to be different skill-set requirements. If a player is allowed to cut loose and rush off the edge most of the time in a first scheme (4-3), that player is going to appear to be a better pass-rusher than a player that is asked to take occupy a lineman first and foremost. The same exact player will appear to have two different skill sets.

First time reading a Wist post?