We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    I've been thinking about the 4-2-5 package and it makes sense when you set it up with the extra "heavy" S playing close to the box. Basically it's a 3 player hybrid system with Cunningham as the 4th DL but also flanked out to the OLB position, McGowan the 5th DB but placed closer to the box. 2 DL played 2 Gap (Wilfork, Haynesworth) and 1 playing 1 gap (Wright/Harris), and 1 ILB who also covers the OLB role (Mayo) He's how I see it being setup on the field
    Posted by PatsEng


    Interesting...This is close to how I imagine it as well...I think your missing an offensive player on your diagram.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    I've been thinking about the 4-2-5 package and it makes sense when you set it up with the extra "heavy" S playing close to the box. Basically it's a 3 player hybrid system with Cunningham as the 4th DL but also flanked out to the OLB position, McGowan the 5th DB but placed closer to the box. 2 DL played 2 Gap (Wilfork, Haynesworth) and 1 playing 1 gap (Wright/Harris), and 1 ILB who also covers the OLB role (Mayo) He's how I see it being setup on the field
    Posted by PatsEng

    I like it except Spikes should not be in there on third down, he is too slow.  But we have similar ideas.  I went with Moore to put his hand down you have Cunningham.  It could go either way.  Also, I went with an extra corner in Dowling where you went extra S.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense : Interesting...This is close to how I imagine it as well...I think your missing an offensive player on your diagram.
    Posted by PatsLifer


    You're right toss an extra RB in split formation or a slot receiver but the basic setup is the same for D
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    Eng - I don't care how the pats line up.  If they get to play 11 vs. 10 as your diagram indicates, they are winning all day, every day, and Belichick is the genius for getting one of the opposition backs redcarded. 
    Posted by UD6


    I forgot 1 O player forgive me just toss in the extra slot or RB in a split but the D remains the same
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense : I like it except Spikes should not be in there on third down, he is too slow.  But we have similar ideas.  I went with Moore to put his hand down you have Cunningham.  It could go either way.  Also, I went with an extra corner in Dowling where you went extra S.
    Posted by Faucetman


    I was thinking 2nd and short 3rd down heavy packages. If it was a 3rd and +4 you'd replace Cunning with Moore for the larger 4 man rush, Mayo would replace Spikes, Guyton would take over for Mayo, and Ras would come in for McGowan.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    Am I the only one seeing this?  Our D roster at the moment is set up for base 4-3 with plenty of sub package, nickel 4-2-5, and dime sets options in terms of personnel.  To be a base 3-4, LBs are the key, especially outside rush LBs.  We don't have any!!  Our roster right now is heavy on the DL, heavy in the secondary but very thin at LB, especially classic 3-4 OLBs. Take a look. DEFENSE 26 Players DE   29 Wright '12 25 Pryor '12 25 Love '11 NT 29 Wilfork '14 24 Brace '12   DE 30 Haynesworth '12 24 Deaderick '13 30 E Moore '11 OLB 23 Cunningham '13     ILB 25 Mayo '12 25 Fletcher '12 30 White '11 ILB 24 B Spikes '13 25 Guyton '11   OLB 27 Ninkovich '11     LCB 24 McCourty '14 23 Dowling '14 27 Wilhite '11 RCB 31 Bodden '13 25 Arrington '11 25 Butler '12 SS 27 Meriweather '11 24 Chung '12 B McGowan '11 FS 27 Sanders '11 26 Page '10   In a 3-4 set at OLB we have just Cunningham and Ninkovich, neither are speed guys and there isn't any depth behind them.  In fact I count just 6 quality LBs on the roster while we have 8 DL types.  We have 11 DBs at the moment which is plenty for any sub package so I see either Butler, Page or McGowan getting cut.  The roster above is already over budget by 1 meaning someone is getting hidden on the PUP (likely a DL or DB type), or released.  This tells me we are focusing on our sub packages and we will see more 4 man fronts this year unless more moves are coming to address 3-4 OLBs.  We cannot possibly be heading into the season as a 3-4 base team with this personnel grouping.  Guyton and Fletcher could both line up at OLB but Guyton is undersized. Let's just assume we are becoming more of a 4-3 base team (we will always still run 3-4 and other sets as BB will always keep the offense guessing), now our roster makes more sense. DEFENSE 26 Players DE   29 Wright '12 23 Cunningham '13   DT 29 Wilfork '14 24 Brace '12   DT 30 Haynesworth '12 24 Deaderick '13 25 Love '11 DE 30 E Moore '11 25 Pryor '12   OLB 25 Guyton '11 27 Ninkovich '11   MLB 24 B Spikes '13 30 White '11   OLB 25 Mayo '12 25 Fletcher '12   LCB 24 McCourty '14 23 Dowling '14 27 Wilhite '11 RCB 31 Bodden '13 25 Arrington '11 25 Butler '12 SS 27 Meriweather '11 24 Chung '12 B McGowan '11 FS 27 Sanders '11 26 Page '10   Unless more moves are coming, this makes the most sense.  I think we are really set now in nickel packages, 4-2-5, to better get off the field on 3rd down, an area where we were dead last in the NFL last year.  We simply take Spikes out and bring in an extra DB, Dowling perhaps.  Guyton and Mayo are among the fastest LBs in all of football or if we want a little more beef, Fletcher, who has decent speed, replaces Guyton in nickel sets.
    Posted by Faucetman


    You make a perfectly logical arugument and one I am in agreement with. I think a lot of folks on this board are in agreement. I think Z and USMC pointed something out, which is 4-3/3-4 is just a term used to define a static grouping. In reality, things change on the fly, and having players that can switch from hand down to standing up, or having a big Safety that can move closer to the line is a good thing. I think we have all of these things, without having to do mass substitutions like we did with TBC, etc.
    I also said our secondary is the deepest and strongest unit on this defense. Play to our strength, which migh suggest as you said, more 4-2-5 type looks. We can play big or fast back there, by using Barrett, Page, McGowan...or fast if you bring in Dowling. I like our flexibilty in the defensive backfield. Lets use it.
    I agree with you Faucet about the quality of our 3-4 LB's. I just don't see it, and I don't see any depth. Same for me in terms of 3-4 DE to an extent.

    I think when you consider our defensive roster as a whole, and where our strengths are, the ideas posed by Faucet and PatsEng tend to make a ton of sense.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from KyleCleric2. Show KyleCleric2's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    Wright and Pryor aren't 4-3 DEs.  Moore and Cunningham are the only 4-3 DE fits with Nink a marginal option.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense : I was thinking 2nd and short 3rd down heavy packages. If it was a 3rd and +4 you'd replace Cunning with Moore for the larger 4 man rush, Mayo would replace Spikes, Guyton would take over for Mayo, and Ras would come in for McGowan.
    Posted by PatsEng


    Got it.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from triplestix. Show triplestix's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    I think this move towards getting bigger DL comes from the fact that consistently the pats were not able to do one of two things. First, they very rarely were able to stop the run on a short distance down. Getting bigger at the 3 DL spots helps anchor the point of attack (both Willfork and Haynesworth will required double teams) and allows the LB's to be free to make the tackle. Second, is very similar. Getting bigger ( and better) at the DL position allows the outside LB's to be more free to aid in the pass rush. The Pats are not moving from a base 3-4 they are simpily making the DL better to help out with the rush. They have had rushers... but when your DLineman only take up 1 OL (except vince) then there are more to block the LB's. By getting better on the line the LB's will be more productive.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188. Show Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    Role players with specific jobs in certain sub-packages

    Haynesworth and Wilfork stuff the run

    Haynesworth and Tommie Harris could also stay on the field on passing downs

    Myron Pryor and Mike Wright especially specialize as pass rush defensive linemen

    Ninkovich sets the edge on rushing downs and is serviceable in coverage

    Cunningham is your only true edge pass-rushing threat right now and top-flight athlete

    I'm interested to see how Eric Moore, Markell Carter, and that other kid compete to be the athletic edge rusher opposite Cunnigham

    Mayo is obviously your every-down linebacker, while I view Spikes as more of a run-stopper

    Guyton is your pass-defense linebacker, especially for teams with pass-catching runningbacks.  He's not great against the run, though

    Jarrad Page and Brandon McGowan are both good at that SS/OLB hybrid role and can be brought into the game as pseudo-linebackers

    .
    .
    .

    Point being that our personell can be moved around.  I could see some 2-5, 1-5, 3-3 with various personnel.

    .

    You guys are obsessing over Tommie Harris and Albert Haynesworth.  The guy I want to see come back is Jarrad Page.  I'm starting to see why Belichick was so in love with the SS/OLB hybrid idea.  It really creates possibilities in terms of defensive packages as long as the SS/OLB is capable of filling the gap and holding position against a blocker.

    So Sanders and Chung deep, with your nickel cornerback set (McCourty, Bodden, and Arrington/Dowling), Page/McGowan/Cunningham, Mayo, Spikes/Guyton, and the three linemen of your choice for the situation

    You could go on forever.  Belichick likes to mix it up, and I think the wide range of personnel he has gives him those possibilities, while keeping everyone fresh and not requiring McGinnest/Bruschi/Vrabel type versatility from starters from play to play
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    Wright and Pryor aren't 4-3 DEs.  Moore and Cunningham are the only 4-3 DE fits with Nink a marginal option.
    Posted by KyleCleric2

    I agree on Pryor, meant to have him as a DT on my chart.  Wright, I think can line up as a 43 DE and it makes sense because he was our best pass rusher last year.  His presence also allows us to move from 34 to 43 at the snap.  He is a little big at 6-4, 295 but not overly so.  Consider we had VW lined up as a 34 DE quite a bit last year so BB doesn't always fall into a mold. 

    I can see a lot of flexibility in the personnel groupings we have given the down, distance and opposition match-ups.  But what I don't see is a strong base 34 team that plans to be in the classic 34 set a lot this year.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from wlbpatriotsfan. Show wlbpatriotsfan's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    Umenyiura given permission to seek a trade by the Giants.  Should Pats be interested?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from LB34. Show LB34's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    I for one would be happy to see the base D change to a 4-3.  Never been a big fan of the 3-4.  The biggest reason is the player personnel part.  Finding NT is hard enough but it seems impossible to find the "ideal" 3-4 OLB for this system.  Therefore, if finding players to fit the system is like finding a needle in a haystack then the smart thing is find a system that allows you to consider more players and not be so limited.

    To finish the 4-3 conversion, trade a 1st rounder for Osi and sign him to a 3yr deal.

    Furthermore, I wonder how much of this potential change in base D is a reflection of the new CBA?  Now that rookie contracts are shorter it gives teams less time to develop them.  Pats can no longer hook guys for 6 yrs like in the past.  Therefore, draft picks need to make impacts very quickly because if it take a player 2-3yrs to develop in your intricate system, you run the risk of losing them soon after.  Makes sense to get draft picks making an impact on the field sooner rather than later. 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    I think this move towards getting bigger DL comes from the fact that consistently the pats were not able to do one of two things. First, they very rarely were able to stop the run on a short distance down. Getting bigger at the 3 DL spots helps anchor the point of attack (both Willfork and Haynesworth will required double teams) and allows the LB's to be free to make the tackle. Second, is very similar. Getting bigger ( and better) at the DL position allows the outside LB's to be more free to aid in the pass rush. The Pats are not moving from a base 3-4 they are simpily making the DL better to help out with the rush. They have had rushers... but when your DLineman only take up 1 OL (except vince) then there are more to block the LB's. By getting better on the line the LB's will be more productive.
    Posted by triplestix


    The argument I have with this is, you bring in a d lineman that historically doesn't play the 34. Today you bring in another (for a tryout) that never plays the 34. You cut your starting 34 defensive lineman (ty Warren) and you cut your best 34 pass rushing outside linebacker (Banta Cain). Now granted neither are great players any longer, but you get rid of two guys that really fit into your 34? And you don't draft any 34 front seven players this year...when we greatly needed them?

    A report from camp yesterday:
    The Patriots now have 13 defensive lineman. That's a ridiculously large number for "a 3-4 team." After we saw more four-man fronts for the first time yesterday -- and I'm not saying if it was base, nickel or dime, or what the personnel was because that trends towards strategy -- it's safe to say the Patriots are no longer a 3-4 team. They are a hybrid, at the least. Started moving that way last year with all the sub packages teams now play. I wouldn't rule out seeing more two-man lines in the nickel, which Packers defensive coordinator Dom Capers has featured the past two seasons with great success in this copycat league.

    We are maybe one guy away from being a good 43 team (defensive end). We are 4 guys away from being a good 34 team (2 defensive ends and 2 outside linebackers). Mayo will play any and I'm sure all the linebacker spots. Spikes could easily be subbed in situationally. Guyton is better made for the 43. Cunningham can play end, Moore is an end, Fletcher has 43 size. Either way it would be a work in progress...43 or 34. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    I've been thinking about the 4-2-5 package and it makes sense when you set it up with the extra "heavy" S playing close to the box. Basically it's a 3 player hybrid system with Cunningham as the 4th DL but also flanked out to the OLB position, McGowan the 5th DB but placed closer to the box. 2 DL played 2 Gap (Wilfork, Haynesworth) and 1 playing 1 gap (Wright/Harris), and 1 ILB who also covers the OLB role (Mayo) He's how I see it being setup on the field
    Posted by PatsEng


    McGowan is and has been used like this before, but he gets hurt a lot and hasn't played in a year. The strong side looks weak to me (although Spikes on that side helps). I doubt Haynesworth would want to play over there.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    Not...

    What we don't have is 4/3 defensive ends, unless of course you think we're building this defense around Eric Moore.  We have plenty of 3/4 outside linebackers beginning with our starters Cunningham and Nincovich, Murrell, Fletcher and this new kid Markell Carter provide depth.  

    Sorry but 6'2" tall 250 pounds doesn't make you defensive end just becuse they've labeled you as such on the roster page at Patriots.com.  I suggest you look at the depth chart and tell me what formation the D is set in... I'll kill the suspense; 3/4.  

    What I want to know is what the f is the facination with the 4/3 defense about? It's antiquated, easy to defend and just easier for smaller coaching minds to wrap their heads around I guess.  Since we're trasitioning back to a 4/3 why don't we go back to leather helmets also?

    Please lets not mention a transition to a 4/3 ever again; Mayo, Spikes, Cunningham and Nincovich are made for a 3/4.  If any defensive line prospects are coming in it's because BB thinks they can play end in the 3/4 or provide pass rushing in sub packages that's all...
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from raptor64d. Show raptor64d's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    I think we will see the defense that best suits the players the Pats end up with on the roster. Bill mixes it up anyway but in the end if we have bettter 4-3 players then 3-4 I would think Bill is smart enough (and last time I checked he is prettty smart in the football world) he will paly the D that will win games!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    If we switch to a 4/3 it will be out of necessity because our linebacking core has been wracked with injury...
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    Not... What we don't have is 4/3 defensive ends, unless of course you think we're building this defense around Eric Moore.  We have plenty of 3/4 outside linebackers beginning with our starters Cunningham and Nincovich, Murrell, Fletcher and this new kid Markell Carter provide depth.   Sorry but 6'2" tall 250 pounds doesn't make you defensive end just becuse they've labeled you as such on the roster page at Patriots.com.  I suggest you look at the depth chart and tell me what formation the D is set in... I'll kill the suspense; 3/4.   What I want to know is what the f is the facination with the 4/3 defense about? It's antiquated, easy to defend and just easier for smaller coaching minds to wrap their heads around I guess.  Since we're trasitioning back to a 4/3 why don't we go back to leather helmets also? Please lets not mention a transition to a 4/3 ever again; Mayo, Spikes, Cunningham and Nincovich are made for a 3/4.  If any defensive line prospects are coming in it's because BB thinks they can play end in the 3/4 or provide pass rushing in sub packages that's all...
    Posted by wozzy


    So our super stellar group of outside linebackers are why we must stay with the 34? Lets build the defense around Nincovich or Cunningham. Name a defensive lineman on our roster that plays 34 defensive end well...Brace? Pryor? Wright? Deadrick. We were signing guys off the street to play in the jets playoff game..we even made nice with Deadrick (after he was suspended) so he could play. We don't have Seymore or Warren any longer. Christ! Are you going to stay with the 34 because of Spikes? He got suspended for drugs and was in a video where he was waving his tool around like a baseball bat...lets put our cards on him.

    Mayo can play in any defense, Spikes is good for the 34 (although you can sub him into a 43). You can take the rest of our linebacker core and they would be lucky to be backups on the Steelers. Cunningham could play end in a 43, all the time? No, but on third downs or obvious passing downs, same for Moore. You telling me Moore is built for a 34 at linebacker...what's he weigh 280?

    If Fletcher can play outside linebacker in a 43, then we can line up...Fletcher, Mayo, Spikes?Guyton. At 6'2" I don't want Fletcher being groomed to bulk up and play outside linebacker in a 34, if has 6'4" I'd be fine with it, we have enough "bulked up" short guys trying to play that spot as it is.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    I would trade one of our 2012 1sts for Osi, assuming we can sign him to a cap friendly contract.
    Posted by PatsLifer


    He wants to be paid as a top 5 DE. He's already come out and said that. Do you want to pay a 1st round pick and then have to try to pay him a top 5 DE contract for Osi?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense : He wants to be paid as a top 5 DE. He's already come out and said that. Do you want to pay a 1st round pick and then have to try to pay him a top 5 DE contract for Osi?
    Posted by PatsEng


    I recall my last post on this. Given Osi's age, injury history, I would offer a 2nd, and possibly a later round pick/player if and only if we can sign him to something friendly. I understand he wants to be paid as a top 5 DE, but he's not.
    Assuming he's in the top 20 discussion, what is he worth on a 3 year contract? $20M?
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense : Some fans simply refuse to understand you have to pay these guys who want top dollar, that there is a cap, AND no more than ever draft picks are like GOLD because of the rookie wage scale and the cap being more conservative with the rate hikes. They'll have trouble trading him unless some team is fleeced by Jerry Reese. They also probably want to avoid an NFC team, most likely, so that means only AFC teams wuld be targeted and those teams that run a 4-3 and have to spend to the floor. Would be a great fit in Houston.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing


    I agree with your feelings on an AFC team vs. and NFC team. Houston under wade phillips has switched to a 3-4. i don't think he is a fit there per se unless like us, they wanted to use in him sub-packages.

    Someone posted that he has 2 years, $8M left on this contract. Wants something larger/longer..don't we all....Would 4 years, $20M do the trick, with lets say $10 guranteed?...
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense

    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense:
    In Response to Re: We Are Moving to a 4-3 Defense : So our super stellar group of outside linebackers are why we must stay with the 34? Lets build the defense around Nincovich or Cunningham. Name a defensive lineman on our roster that plays 34 defensive end well...Brace? Pryor? Wright? Deadrick. We were signing guys off the street to play in the jets playoff game..we even made nice with Deadrick (after he was suspended) so he could play. We don't have Seymore or Warren any longer. Christ! Are you going to stay with the 34 because of Spikes? He got suspended for drugs and was in a video where he was waving his tool around like a baseball bat...lets put our cards on him. Mayo can play in any defense, Spikes is good for the 34 (although you can sub him into a 43). You can take the rest of our linebacker core and they would be lucky to be backups on the Steelers. Cunningham could play end in a 43, all the time? No, but on third downs or obvious passing downs, same for Moore. You telling me Moore is built for a 34 at linebacker...what's he weigh 280? If Fletcher can play outside linebacker in a 43, then we can line up...Fletcher, Mayo, Spikes?Guyton. At 6'2" I don't want Fletcher being groomed to bulk up and play outside linebacker in a 34, if has 6'4" I'd be fine with it, we have enough "bulked up" short guys trying to play that spot as it is.
    Posted by mthurl

    We have a young budding group of potential stars with our linebacking core, Cunningham played and started in a position that is notoriously difficult for a rookie to break in.  Nincovich is only 27, played his first season with ten starts at OLB, had 4 sacks, 4 defended passes, 2 INT's, looked good in space and created pressure in pass rushing situations.  Both of them will benefit from a full line in front of them, something we haven't had since Seymour left.  Mayo and Spikes are insanely talented, moreover they compliment one another, Spikes in the Ted Johnson mold and Mayo in the Bruschi position.  Great talent at linebacker...

    Name one defensive lineman who can play end in the 3/4? I'll give a bunch... Vince Wilfork and Haynesworth can play any position along the line, Vince grades out better at Nose Tackle because he is only 6 feet tall and nobody can get under him, Albert grades out better at end because he's tall and can swat passes out of the air and clog passing lanes with his big mitts ala Richard Seymour.  

    Brace if he improves this season has the talent and mass to start at end or back up Vince at Nose, I think your expectations for rookies needs to be tempered, just because Patriot's brass pick these guys doesn't mean they don't need time to mature.  There was a time Lawyer Milloy and Ty Law were rookies and they weren't close to perfect.  If Deadrick gets it together he can be another possible lineman, 6'4" 305 pounds is plenty big enough, but he needs to become more technically sound.  This is also assuming Gerrard Warren retires which he hasn't done yet or the Pats don't pick up another tackle to bring to camp.

    Belichick was the architect of 3/4 defenses that won Super Bowls for the Giants in the late 80's-90's along with Patriots later on.  He doesn't change philosophically as much as make changes out of necessity, the 4/3 is limited, it's for simpletons, the 3/4 and complex nickel sub packages is what BB is known for... someone else said it well, he plays chess while others play checkers.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share